I built this, and I am the one you will be dealing with
Finance teams at growing companies spend real time every month tracking contract renewals in spreadsheets, calendar reminders, and email threads. Not because they're disorganized — because there's no system that does it for them.
I built LedgerGuard to be that system. Upload a contract PDF. It reads the document and extracts renewal dates, notice windows, and committed spend. You verify each field against the actual clause. Nothing is trusted until your team confirms it.
No black-box scores. No inferred terms presented as fact. Just your contracts, structured, tracked, and auditable.
LedgerGuard is one engineer, not a company with a support tier — which is worth knowing in both directions, and I have set out the trade-off plainly further down this page. I am working directly with early finance teams to make this useful on real portfolios. Put three contracts in the free workspace and judge it yourself, or email support@ledgerguard.io and it comes straight to me.
LedgerGuard helps finance and operations teams see vendor commitments clearly—extracted from contracts, grounded in source pages, and kept auditable.
Who is behind this
My name is Ali Pajand. I am a product engineer in Montreal with nine years of building SaaS, analytics, and marketplace products in React, TypeScript, and Node.
I designed and built LedgerGuard on my own: the product, the API, the data model, the authentication, the billing, and the queue-backed document pipeline that reads your contracts. When you email support, I am the person who reads it.
Why I built it
Finance teams at growing companies lose track of renewals in spreadsheets, calendar reminders, and email threads. Not because they are disorganized, but because nothing is tracking commitments as commitments. A missed auto-renewal is rarely a small mistake; it is a year of spend nobody chose.
The hard part of this product was never the model call. It was making sure probabilistic extraction never becomes confirmed contract data without a person looking at the evidence.
How it is built, and what it will not do
Financial calculations, renewal timelines, and exposure readouts live in a typed API layer that produces the same answer every time and can be audited. That is the deterministic half, and it is the only thing allowed to state a number.
Extraction, classification, and summarization propose structured output with confidence and a link back to the source page. Nothing becomes system of record until your team verifies it against the clause. There are no black-box risk scores, and no inferred term is ever presented as fact.
What it means that this is one person
You should weigh this honestly, so here it is without spin.
In your favour: the person who wrote the extraction pipeline reads your bug report, and fixes usually ship the same week. There is no first-tier queue and no account manager between you and the code. If you need something specific to your contract portfolio, you are asking the person who can build it.
Against: there is no overnight on-call rotation, and LedgerGuard does not hold a SOC 2 report — I will not imply a certification I have not earned. Your contract data exports to CSV whenever you want it, so you are never locked in if you decide this is not the right fit.
If that risk profile does not suit your team right now, that is a reasonable call and I would rather you make it with the real information.
Talking to me
The fastest way to judge whether this is useful is to put three real contracts into the free workspace and see what comes back. If you would rather talk first, email support@ledgerguard.io and it reaches me directly.