Best Hubdoc Alternatives for Xero in 2026

The best Hubdoc alternatives for Xero include Dext (4.8-star rating, automatic bill collection), Datamolino (4.9 stars, pay-per-document), AutoEntry (4.7 stars, Sage-owned), and Invoice Data Extraction (line item extraction, 6,000-file batches). Users switch because Hubdoc lacks line item extraction, has GST rounding errors, and holds the lowest Xero App Store rating at 3.5 stars.

Unlike most comparisons ranking for this topic, this guide is not published by any of the tools it evaluates. Every product listed here, including our own, is assessed against the same criteria: documented feature sets, actual Xero App Store ratings, published pricing, and reported limitations. Below you will find Hubdoc's documented limitations, a side-by-side comparison table, individual tool reviews, practice-type matching, and migration guidance.

Why Xero Users Look Beyond Hubdoc

Hubdoc holds a 3.5-star rating on the Xero App Store, the lowest among major Xero data capture tools. That rating is notable given that Xero acquired Hubdoc in 2018, making it the default document fetching tool bundled with Xero subscriptions. Despite that built-in advantage, persistent functional gaps have pushed many practices to evaluate what else is available for Xero invoice data capture.

Four documented limitations account for most of the dissatisfaction:

No automatic line item extraction. Hubdoc captures header-level data only: vendor name, invoice total, date, and invoice number. Xero has stated they "don't have further developments planned" for line item extraction in Hubdoc. For practices that need line-level detail (product codes, quantities, unit prices, line totals), this is not a minor inconvenience but a fundamental gap. Every invoice that requires itemized coding must be completed manually inside Xero.

GST and tax rounding errors. Hubdoc applies different rounding methods across its calculation sections, producing errors where line item tax amounts do not total to the document tax amount. These mismatches block Xero bill creation outright. Users must then open each flagged bill, identify which line the rounding discrepancy sits on, and manually adjust the amounts before the bill will save. Across a high-volume practice, these corrections add up to hours of unbillable rework each month.

Limited decimal precision. Hubdoc restricts line items to two decimal places, even though Xero itself accepts four. This causes recurring discrepancies for any industry that uses fractional unit pricing, including manufacturing, wholesale, and construction. A supplier invoice priced at $0.0375 per unit, for example, will never reconcile cleanly through Hubdoc without manual intervention on the Xero side.

Performance degradation. Users report that Hubdoc becomes very slow and frequently crashes when working with contacts. For solo practitioners this is an annoyance; for practices managing dozens or hundreds of client entities, it becomes a genuine workflow bottleneck that affects daily throughput.

Xero's announced JAX AI capabilities may eventually address some of these gaps, but as of early 2026 they are not generally available, and no timeline has been confirmed for Hubdoc-specific improvements. Over six years under Xero ownership have passed without resolution of these core issues, and the 3.5-star App Store rating reflects that accumulated frustration. Taken together, these four gaps directly define what any replacement tool must deliver: accurate line item extraction, reliable tax calculations, full decimal precision, and stable performance at scale.

What to Evaluate in a Hubdoc Replacement

Before comparing individual tools, establish the criteria that actually matter for your practice. Not every feature carries equal weight, and the right tool depends on your document volumes, client mix, and workflow preferences. Use the following framework to filter your options systematically.

Line item extraction. Does the tool extract individual line items, including descriptions, quantities, unit prices, and line totals, or does it only capture header-level data like vendor name, invoice total, date, and invoice number? This is the single most common reason practitioners outgrow Hubdoc. If your workflow requires coded line items in Xero for job costing, departmental tracking, or detailed expense reporting, header-only extraction creates manual rework that defeats the purpose of automation.

Accuracy and Xero App Store rating. Self-reported accuracy figures like "99.5%" or "99.9%" are marketing claims that rarely reflect real-world performance across varied document formats and quality levels. A more reliable indicator is the tool's rating on the Xero App Store, which aggregates feedback from actual practitioners processing real documents at scale. Check both the overall rating and the volume of reviews to distinguish proven tools from newer entrants.

Pricing model. Pricing structures vary widely: per document, per client, per user, flat subscription, or freemium with usage caps. The effective cost per document at your actual monthly volume is what matters. A tool that looks affordable at 50 documents per month may become expensive at 500, and vice versa. As a rough reference: a practice processing 600 invoices per month across 30 clients would pay significantly more under a per-client subscription model than under a per-document model, while a free tier (like Hubdoc's or Invoice Data Extraction's 50 pages/month) covers only the first fraction of that volume. Map out your typical monthly volume across all clients before comparing prices.

Batch processing and volume limits. Batch processing limits determine whether a tool can handle your monthly volume in a single upload or forces you to submit documents in smaller batches. Practices handling hundreds or thousands of invoices monthly need tools built for volume, not tools that throttle uploads or queue processing during peak periods. Check whether batch limits apply per job, per day, or per billing cycle.

Multi-language and multi-currency. If your practice serves clients with international suppliers or operations in multiple countries, the best data capture app for Xero must handle documents in languages other than English and process multiple currencies accurately. Tools trained primarily on English-language documents often produce extraction errors on invoices in other languages, particularly those with non-Latin scripts.

Output flexibility. Some tools push extracted data directly into Xero with no intermediate step. Others export to Excel, CSV, or JSON, letting you review and correct data before it reaches your general ledger. If your workflow requires intermediate verification (especially during onboarding or when processing unfamiliar document types), direct-to-Xero tools create a risk of posting errors that require journal corrections later.

Platform breadth. Xero-only tools may offer deeper integration, but practices serving clients on QuickBooks, Sage, or MYOB benefit from a single data capture tool that works across platforms. A cross-platform tool reduces training overhead and means your team does not need to learn a different extraction workflow for each accounting system.

The time recovered by choosing the right tool is measurable. A Stanford and MIT study published by the Journal of Accountancy examined 277 accountants at 79 firms and found that those who used AI-assisted tools reallocated approximately 8.5% of their time from routine data entry toward high-value tasks such as business communication and quality assurance, equivalent to about 3.5 hours in a 40-hour workweek. Selecting the best invoice scanning app for Xero is not a marginal decision; it directly determines how much of your week goes to data entry versus advisory work.

For a broader framework on evaluating invoice scanning software beyond Xero-specific criteria, including factors like security, support responsiveness, and implementation complexity, that guide covers the full evaluation scope.

Xero Data Capture Tools at a Glance

The table below compares every major Hubdoc alternative available to Xero users across the evaluation criteria that matter most in practice. All Xero App Store ratings reflect data as of early 2026, and tools not listed on the Xero App Store are noted accordingly.

Tool	Xero App Store Rating	Line Items	Pricing Model	Key Differentiator
Hubdoc	3.5 stars	No	Free with Xero Business	Bundled with Xero at no extra cost
Dext	4.8 stars	Limited (via Precision)	Per-client subscription	Automatic bill/receipt collection from suppliers
AutoEntry	4.7 stars	Limited	Per-document credits	Predictable per-document pricing
Datamolino	4.9 stars	No	Pay-per-document	Highest-rated Xero data capture tool
EzzyBills	Listed (limited reviews)	Yes	Per-document	Supplier layout learning ("Fingerprint")
BillBjorn	Listed (limited reviews)	OCR-based	Subscription	Direct Xero sync with automatic matching
Nanonets	Not on Xero App Store	Yes	Enterprise pricing	AI/ML platform, 99%+ claimed accuracy
Invoice Data Extraction	Not on Xero App Store	Yes	Free tier + pay-per-page	Batch processing (6,000 files), custom prompts

A few patterns stand out. Hubdoc carries the lowest rating of any tool on the Xero App Store at 3.5 stars, despite being free with every Xero Business subscription. The highest-rated tools (Datamolino at 4.9 stars, Dext at 4.8 stars) offer limited or no line item extraction, which means practices that need full line-level detail from purchase orders or multi-line invoices will find gaps in the most popular options. Meanwhile, tools with full line item extraction (EzzyBills, Nanonets, Invoice Data Extraction) tend to be newer entrants that either lack established Xero App Store ratings or are not listed there at all.

For readers evaluating OCR tools beyond the Xero ecosystem, our broader comparison of invoice OCR software covers additional platforms and use cases.

What Each Hubdoc Alternative Offers

Each tool in this space takes a different approach to document capture and extraction. The mini-reviews below cover what each alternative does well, where it falls short, and which type of practice it fits best.

Dext (Formerly Receipt Bank)

Where most data capture tools wait for you to upload documents, Dext goes and gets them. Its automatic fetching pulls bills and receipts directly from supplier emails, bank portals, and cloud storage, which is why it has become one of the most widely adopted tools across UK and Australian practices. Multi-currency support is strong, and the 4.8-star Xero App Store rating reflects years of daily use by multi-client firms.

The cost of that automation adds up. Dext charges per-client subscription tiers, and practices managing 30 or more clients will feel the pricing escalate. Full line item extraction requires Dext Precision, a separate higher-tier product.

Best for: Multi-client practices that prioritize automatic document collection and need a well-established Xero integration.

AutoEntry

AutoEntry carries a 4.7-star Xero App Store rating and uses a credit-based pricing model that charges per document rather than per client. This makes costs more predictable for practices with variable document volumes. Header-level extraction accuracy is solid for standard invoices and receipts.

Sage acquired AutoEntry in 2021, and since Sage competes directly with Xero, the long-term commitment to Xero integration development remains an open question. Line item extraction capability is limited compared to tools that treat it as a core feature.

Best for: Practices needing header-level extraction at a predictable per-document cost, comfortable with Sage ownership.

Datamolino

Datamolino holds the highest Xero App Store rating at 4.9 stars. It uses pay-per-document pricing with no per-client fees or subscriptions, which keeps costs transparent. A multi-folder organizational structure lets bookkeepers manage multiple clients from a single account without juggling separate logins.

The tool extracts header-level data only and does not support full line item extraction. Its user base and community are smaller than Dext, and there is limited automation for pulling documents from supplier emails or portals automatically.

Best for: Solo bookkeepers or small practices with moderate document volumes who want the highest-rated tool at predictable per-document pricing.

EzzyBills

EzzyBills uses a "fingerprint" layout learning system that improves extraction accuracy for repeat supplier invoices over time. Once the system processes a few invoices from the same supplier, subsequent documents from that supplier extract with higher precision. The tool supports line item extraction, offers automatic account code suggestions, and is built by an Australian company with local support channels.

The tradeoff is that initial per-supplier layout training takes several invoices before accuracy gains materialize. EzzyBills has a smaller ecosystem outside Xero and is less well-known outside Australia and New Zealand.

Best for: Practices with recurring supplier invoices that benefit from layout-specific learning, particularly in Australia and New Zealand.

BillBjorn

BillBjorn focuses on direct Xero synchronization with automatic invoice matching, positioning its OCR-based extraction as "data entry on autopilot." The workflow is straightforward: upload documents, let the OCR process them, and sync the results into Xero with minimal manual steps.

Market presence is smaller than Dext or Datamolino, which means less community feedback and fewer third-party reviews to reference. Feature documentation for complex extraction scenarios, such as multi-line invoices or non-standard layouts, is limited.

Best for: Smaller practices wanting straightforward OCR-to-Xero processing with minimal configuration.

Nanonets

Nanonets is an AI and machine learning extraction platform that claims 99%+ accuracy on structured documents. It provides full line item extraction, configurable extraction templates for different document types, and an API-first architecture designed for custom workflow integration. For practices with development resources, the flexibility is substantial.

Nanonets is not listed on the Xero App Store, so connecting it to Xero requires a custom integration through its API or a CSV import workflow. Pricing is enterprise-oriented, and template configuration has a steeper learning curve than tools designed specifically for accounting practices.

Best for: Enterprise AP departments or tech-forward practices needing highly configurable AI extraction and willing to invest in integration.

Invoice Data Extraction

Invoice Data Extraction takes a different approach from the other tools in this list. Rather than automating a fixed extraction template, it offers AI-powered invoice data extraction for Xero through natural language prompts. You upload documents (PDF, JPG, or PNG), describe what data you need and how to structure the output in plain English, then download the results as Excel, CSV, or JSON. This prompt-based workflow means extraction adapts to unfamiliar invoice layouts without pre-built templates or supplier-specific training.

Full line item extraction is a core capability, not a premium add-on. Batch processing handles up to 6,000 files per job at 1 to 8 seconds per page, which puts it at the high end of the volume spectrum among the tools reviewed here. Multi-language support extends to non-Latin scripts including Cyrillic, Arabic, Hebrew, East Asian, Devanagari, Greek, and Thai. The free tier is permanently free at 50 pages per month with full functionality and no credit card required, and a RESTful API is available for programmatic integration.

The tradeoffs mirror Nanonets: no Xero App Store listing, no automatic document fetching from supplier emails, and a smaller established user base than Dext or AutoEntry. Documents must be uploaded manually or pushed through the API, and the output workflow typically involves reviewing extracted data in Excel or CSV before importing into Xero rather than posting directly.

Best for: Practices that need detailed line item extraction across varied or non-standard document formats, handle high-volume batches, or want the flexibility to define custom extraction rules without waiting for vendor-built templates.

Which Tool Fits Your Practice Type

The right Hubdoc alternative depends on three factors: practice size, document volume, and extraction complexity. A tool that works well for a solo bookkeeper processing a handful of receipts each week may fall short for a multi-client practice handling thousands of invoices across diverse suppliers.

Solo bookkeeper (1-5 clients, under 100 invoices per month)

Cost control and minimal setup time matter most at this scale. Datamolino's pay-per-document pricing and 4.9-star user rating make it a practical fit for low-volume practices that want accurate extraction without a monthly subscription commitment. Hubdoc itself may remain sufficient here if line-item detail is not a requirement, since it comes free with Xero Business. For solo practitioners who do need line items extracted, Invoice Data Extraction's free tier covers up to 50 pages per month at no cost, which is enough for this volume range.

Multi-client practice (10-50+ clients, mixed document types)

At this scale, the priority shifts to automatic document collection and per-client organization. Manually uploading files for dozens of clients is not sustainable. Dext is the established leader in this category, with automatic supplier fetching that pulls invoices directly from supplier portals and email inboxes, plus built-in per-client workspace management. AutoEntry offers a lower-cost alternative for practices that can handle document collection manually and want strong OCR accuracy without paying for the automation layer.

High-volume AP department (500+ invoices per month, complex line items)

Batch processing capacity, line-item accuracy, and integration with existing workflows become non-negotiable at enterprise volume. Nanonets offers enterprise-grade extraction with an API-first architecture suited to teams building custom automation pipelines. Invoice Data Extraction handles up to 6,000 files per batch with custom extraction prompts that adapt to non-standard invoice layouts. EzzyBills is a strong option for teams with recurring suppliers whose document layouts can be trained once and applied automatically to future invoices from the same vendor.

Multi-platform practice (clients on Xero, QuickBooks, and Sage)

Practices managing clients across multiple accounting platforms benefit from tools that work beyond Xero, reducing the number of separate data capture solutions the team needs to learn and maintain. Rather than running one tool for Xero clients and another for QuickBooks clients, a cross-platform solution consolidates training, support, and workflow design. Dext supports QuickBooks and Sage alongside Xero. Invoice Data Extraction exports to Excel, CSV, and JSON, which any accounting platform can import regardless of native integrations. Nanonets, with its API-first architecture, can be connected to virtually any system with development effort. For more detail on this workflow, see how OCR integration across Xero, QuickBooks, and SAP works in practice.

How to Switch from Hubdoc Without Losing Data

Switching data capture tools mid-workflow creates legitimate concern about data loss and disruption. Client records, supplier invoices, and historical documents all sit inside Hubdoc, and a poorly executed transition can leave gaps in your audit trail. A structured approach reduces both risks.

Follow this migration sequence to move from Hubdoc to your replacement tool without losing data or interrupting client work:

Export existing data from Hubdoc. Before disconnecting anything, export all documents and data currently stored in Hubdoc. Hubdoc allows bulk document export, so download everything at once rather than pulling files client by client. Store these exports in a secure, backed-up location separate from either platform.
Run the new tool in parallel for 2-4 weeks. Process a representative sample of new invoices through both Hubdoc and the replacement tool simultaneously. Compare extraction accuracy, output quality, and Xero posting results side by side. This parallel period reveals issues before full commitment and gives your team time to learn the new interface without pressure.
Set up client-specific configurations during the parallel period. Most tools require initial setup per client or supplier. Dext needs supplier email rules configured. EzzyBills needs layout "fingerprints" trained on your common invoice formats. Prompt-based tools need extraction prompts written and tested. Complete this setup while Hubdoc is still active as your safety net, not after cutting over.
Switch the Xero integration. Once confident in the replacement tool's output, disconnect Hubdoc's Xero integration and enable the new tool's connection. Inform team members of the updated workflow and document any process changes. For tools that export to CSV or Excel rather than pushing directly to Xero, ensure the import process is established before going live. See our guide on importing invoice data into Xero via CSV for detailed steps on that workflow.
Maintain Hubdoc access for 3-6 months. Historical documents remain accessible as long as the account exists. Keep access as a reference until all historical data is either migrated or confirmed unnecessary. This overlap period costs little and prevents the scramble of trying to recover documents after an account closure.

Most practices complete the full transition within a single billing cycle once the parallel testing phase confirms accuracy. The key is treating migration as a planned project with defined checkpoints rather than an abrupt cutover.

Choosing Your Next Xero Data Capture Tool

After comparing every major Hubdoc alternative across extraction accuracy, pricing, Xero integration depth, and practitioner feedback, four decision factors stand out above the rest.

Line item extraction is the defining divide. This single capability splits the market in two. Practices that need line-level detail (descriptions, quantities, unit prices) can only get it natively from EzzyBills, Nanonets, and Invoice Data Extraction. Dext offers it through its Precision add-on at additional cost. Hubdoc, Datamolino, and standard AutoEntry do not extract line items at all. If your clients require purchase order matching or inventory reconciliation, this criterion eliminates half the field before you evaluate anything else.

App Store ratings reflect real user experience. Datamolino's 4.9-star rating and Dext's 4.8-star rating on the Xero App Store were earned across years of daily use by accountants and bookkeepers managing real client portfolios. These scores carry more diagnostic weight than feature lists or marketing copy. Newer tools without an established App Store presence need to prove themselves through hands-on testing with your own documents before they earn a spot in your tech stack.

Pricing model matters more than headline price. Per-document pricing works well for practices with low or unpredictable volumes across many clients. Per-client subscription models favor firms processing high document counts within each client entity. Free tiers (Hubdoc bundled with Xero Business, Invoice Data Extraction at 50 pages per month) eliminate financial risk during evaluation entirely. Match the pricing structure to your practice's volume pattern, not the other way around.

Test before committing practice-wide. Every tool covered in this article offers either a free tier or a trial period. Use them. Run a batch of actual invoices, including messy ones, multi-page ones, and ones with line items, through your top two or three candidates side by side. The parallel testing approach from the migration section above works here too: process the same set of documents through each tool and compare the results against what you would have coded manually.

To reach a defensible decision for your practice, apply a three-step filter. First, determine whether line item extraction is a requirement for your client base. If it is, your shortlist drops to four tools. Second, estimate your monthly document volume across all clients and identify which pricing models stay viable at that scale. Third, sign up for free tiers or trials on the remaining candidates and test them with real documents from your most demanding client. That sequence (capability filter, pricing filter, hands-on validation) produces a clear best fit for any Xero practice regardless of size or specialization.