Regnology Helps Nagelmackers Close Regulatory Reporting Data Gaps

Belgian lender Banque Nagelmackers is moving responsibility for accounting logic into its Finance department using Regnology Finance Hub, in a project to improve regulatory reporting data quality and cut manual reconciliation before supervisory deadlines.

The bank adopted the platform as its central environment for accounting rules and financial information, Regnology said in a case study published on October 14, 2026. The aim is for the general ledger and the figures sent to supervisors to come from the same data.

The project matters to compliance, finance and risk teams because supervisors increasingly test whether reported figures can be traced to source transactions. Banks that fix inconsistencies by adjusting numbers at period end carry a recurring control weakness into every submission.

Regulatory reporting data quality was the starting problem

At Nagelmackers, key accounting calculations used to sit in upstream applications rather than with Finance. Financial accounting and regulatory reporting did not always agree.

Staff made manual corrections and reconciled the differences, particularly close to reporting deadlines. Finding a discrepancy meant investigating across separate systems.

The bank chose to address the source of the inconsistencies instead of continuing with end-of-period adjustments. Its priorities were transparency over how transaction data becomes financial information, and direct Finance control over the accounting rules that do the converting.

What Regnology Finance Hub does for the bank

Regnology Finance Hub consolidates balance data and detailed transaction records. That gives financial accounting and regulatory reporting a common foundation.

The platform automates core accounting activities. It also automates the mapping of financial information to reporting frameworks, including FINREP, the harmonized supervisory financial reporting framework that EU banks use alongside COREP for capital data. RegTech Post has a glossary entry on COREP and FINREP.

The solution supports several accounting frameworks, including International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) and Belgian Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP). Nagelmackers can keep multiple accounting views without duplicating the underlying data processes.

The platform captures granular financial information daily. Teams can run validation checks throughout the reporting cycle instead of waiting for the final days. Regnology lists improved auditability, a consolidated view of financial information, shorter closing and reporting cycles and lower total cost of ownership among the expected benefits.

The bank’s chief financial officer described the goal in terms of trust. “For a bank, trust in financial information is non-negotiable,” the executive said. “Regnology Finance Hub has given us a sustainable platform that improves control, reduces operational effort, and helps us adapt to new reporting requirements with greater confidence.”

Regnology’s product page for the platform describes end-to-end data lineage that traces calculations, transformations and postings, plus automated reconciliation tools across accounts, portfolios and systems. The company markets Regnology Finance Hub with components for IFRS 9, expected credit loss, a banking ledger and financial consolidation. The case study does not set out which of those modules Nagelmackers uses.

Why data quality at source matters to supervisors

The wider regulatory pressure is on accuracy, consistency and granularity of what banks submit. A bank that reconciles by hand has to show a supervisor how each adjustment was made and why.

The Basel Committee set the benchmark in its Principles for effective risk data aggregation and risk reporting, issued in January 2013. BCBS 239 has 11 principles for banks, covering governance, data architecture, accuracy and integrity, completeness, timeliness and adaptability. It also expects a bank to aim for a single authoritative source of risk data for each type of risk, which is the idea behind golden source data.

BCBS 239 is written for risk data, and the Nagelmackers project concerns accounting and financial reporting data. The common thread is the same: figures that reach a supervisor should be traceable to transactions through controlled, documented steps. Good data quality at the point where transactions become accounting entries is what makes that tracing possible.

For finance and compliance leaders, the practical test is whether the bank can explain a reported number without a spreadsheet. That is a regulatory reporting data quality question as much as a technology one.

Smaller banks and the cost of fragmented systems

Outdated reporting infrastructure is harder to manage for smaller and mid-sized institutions. Manual reconciliation increases the workload for finance teams and leaves less time for analysis and oversight.

Nagelmackers is a Belgian private bank, and Regnology’s case study describes its work as finance and accounting modernization that builds on earlier validation and FINREP-aligned automation. The bank is treating the ledger and the supervisory report as one data problem rather than two.

This reflects a broader shift in digital regulatory reporting. Banks are looking to strengthen the data quality behind their financial information and regulatory reporting instead of adding reporting tools on top of disconnected systems. That puts weight on data governance, audit trails and the working relationship between Finance and compliance.

The vendor field for regulatory reporting data

Regnology, which RegTech Post profiles on its vendor page, competes with suppliers that also link finance, risk and reporting data. One is OneSumX, which unifies finance, risk and regulatory reporting in one platform.

Banks weighing such systems face third-party risk questions as well as functional ones. RegTech Post’s bank-ready vendor pack sets out the documents a bank typically asks a supplier for during due diligence.

Neither Regnology nor Nagelmackers has published a project timeline, the contract value or a go-live date for each reporting stream. The case study also does not say which National Bank of Belgium returns the bank files through the platform beyond FINREP.

The ECB published a guide on effective risk data aggregation and risk reporting in May 2024, and supervisors in the euro area continue to assess banks against BCBS 239. The next Nagelmackers reporting cycles will show whether the bank needs fewer corrections close to deadline, which is the outcome the project is built to deliver.