Agentic AI Comparison:
Jack by Jenesys vs PageOn AI
vs
Introduction
This report provides a detailed comparison between Jack by Jenesys, an AI-powered bookkeeping agent specialized in automating accounting tasks like invoice extraction, GL code assignment, and bank reconciliations, and PageOn AI, based on available information from credible sources. Metrics evaluated include autonomy, ease of use, flexibility, cost, and popularity, with scores from 1-10 (higher is better). Note: Comprehensive data on PageOn AI is limited in search results, leading to conservative scoring; Jack benefits from detailed coverage.
Overview
Jack by Jenesys
Jack by Jenesys is an AI agent that automates bookkeeping by extracting line-item entries from invoices sent via WhatsApp, Slack, email, or Teams, assigning GL/tax codes, performing reconciliations, ensuring compliance, and learning from transactions for improved accuracy. It supports accountancy firms, SMEs, and startups, with features like fraud detection, document chasing, and transparent reasoning. Jenesys reached $1M ARR, secured $11M funding, and launched general availability in 2025 with SOC II certification.
PageOn AI
PageOn AI (pageon.ai) lacks detailed descriptions in the provided search results. It appears to be an AI tool, potentially related to page or content generation/automation, but no specific features, capabilities, pricing, or adoption metrics are available for evaluation[results note absence].
Metrics Comparison
autonomy
Jack by Jenesys: 8
High autonomy in automating extraction, coding, reconciliations, compliance checks, and fraud detection with minimal intervention; learns from transactions and operates 24/7.
PageOn AI: 3
No specific information on autonomous capabilities; baseline score due to lack of data.
Jack excels in domain-specific autonomy for bookkeeping, far outpacing PageOn AI where no evidence exists.
ease of use
Jack by Jenesys: 9
Seamless integration with everyday tools like WhatsApp, Slack, email; simple submission, validation, and querying of AI decisions; reduces manual review significantly.
PageOn AI: 3
Insufficient data on user interface or integration ease.
Jack's multi-channel accessibility makes it highly user-friendly for non-technical accounting users.
flexibility
Jack by Jenesys: 8
Adapts to various business types (firms, SMEs, startups), client-specific learning, multi-platform support, and scalable without headcount increase; handles pre-processing to technical tasks.
PageOn AI: 3
No details on adaptability, integrations, or use cases available.
Jack demonstrates broad applicability in accounting workflows.
cost
Jack by Jenesys: 7
£21.60/hour in 30-second increments, no minimums/contracts; 3-4x cheaper than outsourcing/in-house, 10x faster.
PageOn AI: 3
No pricing information provided in sources.
Jack offers transparent, flexible, and competitive pricing for its value.
popularity
Jack by Jenesys: 7
$11M pre-seed funding, $1M ARR, media coverage, early adopters to general availability in 2025, niche recognition in accounting.
PageOn AI: 2
No mentions of adoption, funding, revenue, or market traction in results.
Jack shows strong emerging popularity in AI accounting; PageOn AI has negligible visibility here.
Conclusions
Jack by Jenesys outperforms PageOn AI across all metrics based on available data, positioning it as a robust, specialized bookkeeping solution with proven funding, features, and efficiency gains. PageOn AI's low scores stem from absent details in sources, suggesting it may be less established or niche outside accounting. For businesses needing AI bookkeeping, Jack is the clear recommendation; further research on PageOn AI is advised for direct use cases.