That is the whole problem, and it is why abstraction alone does not solve it. Every abstract starts diverging from the paper the moment a new amendment, assignment or estoppel arrives. We maintain the record continuously: new documents are ingested as they arrive, precedence is re-resolved, the governed record updates, and every downstream consumer sees the change. A static abstract is a project. Lease truth is an operation.

It abstracts what it receives, on its own schema, inside its own walls. It does not reconcile against your other systems, does not usually handle amendment chains or the historical backfile, and does not carry governance once the data leaves for diligence, lender reporting or underwriting. And amendments living in email, legal folders and deal rooms never reach it at all.

They solve different problems. Software is a tool you license, staff and run, which means faster work, but the standard, the review discipline and the maintenance stay with you. Conventional outsourcing takes the volume and hands back a file that nobody then maintains. We are a third option: a managed outcome where the record is built on your documents, proven field by field, written into your systems and then operated to SLA, with the schema and rules staying yours.

Vendor figures in this category cluster in the high nineties, but almost none publish a test set, a document mix or a breakdown by field, so they are not comparable to each other. We measure against the source document, field by field, on a held-out set the engine never saw during build: 96.5% verified-correct across the abstract, 97% on critical fields. We publish the protocol and the per-field results, including our weakest fields. If your portfolio scores lower (a 1990s scanned backfile will not score like digitally native forms) we report that, and the contractual remedy applies either way.

Yes, and it is not an add-on. Roughly 4% of extractions route to human review in a tuned system, with the source page open beside the value. Humans stay Above the Loop on the judgment calls:the estoppel that contradicts the second amendment, the assignment that moved the guaranty. Your lease administration team reviews the hard cases rather than all of them, and the split is visible, adjustable and reported next to the accuracy number.

Yes, and the point is that the governed record sits above them rather than inside one of them. We consume what each platform extracts, reconcile conflicts between them, fill the gaps the native tools skip (side letters, ground leases, legacy scans)and publish one trusted record back out. Because the record is independent of any single system, it survives a future platform change.

Nothing you send is used for model training, and nothing leaves your environment. The system runs on your infrastructure or your tenant, under your access controls and inside your security model. The lease stays, and so does everything derived from it. The full deployment and security model is available before any files move.

Published models range from roughly $25 per lease for self-serve export tools to several hundred dollars for managed abstraction with human review. Per-document pricing measures the wrong thing when the requirement is a record that stays correct: a cheap abstract that drifts within a year is re-purchased at the next diligence event, and in the meantime it is feeding your rent roll. We price the maintained outcome. The Drift Check tells us what your documents actually look like, which is what determines the number.