InsERT has served Polish small business for three decades, and Subiekt is one of the few pieces of business software a Polish owner-manager can name without prompting. That is earned. The products are correctly priced, properly localised, updated in step with a tax code that changes constantly, and supported by a partner network that reaches into every voivodeship. They also hold better-structured data than most systems we connect.
At a glance
| System name | InsERT — programy dla firm: Subiekt (sprzedaż i magazyny), Rewizor (pełna księgowość) |
| Vendor | InsERT S.A., Jerzmanowska 2, Wrocław (KRS 0000306888) |
| Markets | Poland only — the products are built to Polish accounting and tax law |
| Category | Function-split business software for small and mid-sized companies; ERP scope reached by combining programs |
| Product lines | InsERT GT (earlier generation) · InsERT nexo · InsERT nexo PRO · InsERT nexo PRO+ · Navireo ERP (separate product) |
| Programs | Subiekt · Rewizor · Rachmistrz · Gratyfikant · Gestor · Biuro nexo · Subiekt Sprint 2 (POS) · Subiekt 123 · vendero · Sello NX · InsERT mobile |
| Database | Microsoft SQL Server on both generations. nexo supports SQL Server 2016–2025; GT supports 2014–2025. A free SQL Server 2019 Express Edition ships with both; the vendor recommends full SQL Server above roughly ten concurrent users or a 10 GB database |
| Deployment | On-premise Windows, or partner-hosted over RDP. One database per accounting entity (podmiot); a Subiekt licence covers one entity, and further entities need further licences |
| Integration | Sfera — the vendor’s programming interface: COM / OLE Automation on GT, and a Sfera module in nexo PRO with an SDK documenting the database structure and object model · Sfera PRO+ event handling in nexo PRO+ · direct read-only SQL · file and report export |
| Payroll | Separate product — Gratyfikant GT / nexo / nexo PRO |
| Vendor reporting | Built-in reports and analyses in each program, plus Raportowanie PRO+ in nexo PRO+ for substantially extended custom reports |
| Typical user | Micro business through to roughly EUR 1–20M turnover · very heavy use by accounting offices (biura rachunkowe) |
| Official | insert.com.pl · Subiekt nexo · Rewizor nexo |
What the InsERT line is
InsERT does not publish one program that runs a business. It publishes several, each scoped to one job, each licensed separately, each able to work with the others.
Subiekt is the trade program: sales documents, warehouses and stock movements, orders, price lists, customer records, and since the KSeF obligations arrived both the issuing and the collection of structured invoices. Rewizor is the accounting program — the chart of accounts (plan kont), the journals, the VAT records, JPK_V7, the statutory financial statements. Rachmistrz covers the simplified revenue and expense ledger (księga przychodów i rozchodów). Gratyfikant runs payroll and HR records. Gestor is the CRM. Biuro nexo is the console an accounting office uses to administer hundreds of client entities at once.
This is a deliberate design, and for the Polish market it is the right one. A ten-person distributor needs Subiekt and nothing else, because an external accounting office keeps its books. A manufacturer with an in-house accountant needs Subiekt and Rewizor. An accounting office needs Rewizor, Rachmistrz and Gratyfikant at scale and no Subiekt at all. One bundle would make every buyer pay for a product they will never open.
The family exists in two generations. InsERT GT is the earlier one, and it is mature in the way that only software with a very long field history gets to be — the edge cases have been met, the partner network knows it thoroughly, and a great many Polish companies have run it without incident for fifteen years. InsERT nexo is the current generation: a rebuilt application, a different data structure, and the tiers where extension work lives — nexo PRO adds the Sfera programming interface, and nexo PRO+ adds document handling, data visibility rules, extended custom reporting and event-driven Sfera above it. InsERT sells and maintains both generations, and publishes a migration path from GT to nexo rather than a deadline. That is unusually considerate treatment of an installed base.
The InsERT product family
Most buyers pick programs one at a time, as the business needs them. It is worth understanding what each choice determines about where the numbers end up.
| Program | What it holds | Database | Data access consequence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Subiekt (GT · nexo · nexo PRO) | Sales and purchase documents to line level, stock and warehouse movements, orders, price lists, customer and product records, cash and bank | Microsoft SQL Server, one database per entity (podmiot) | The richest source in the family. Direct read-only SQL gives margin at document-line level, by product, customer and warehouse |
| Rewizor (GT · nexo · nexo PRO) | Chart of accounts, journals, VAT records, JPK_V7, settlements, statutory financial statements | Microsoft SQL Server — the same entity database as Subiekt where they are configured together, otherwise its own | The authoritative figure. Read the ledger for the reported number, and read Subiekt for what is behind it |
| Rachmistrz (GT · nexo · nexo PRO) | Simplified revenue and expense ledger, flat-rate tax records, VAT records | Microsoft SQL Server, one database per entity | Same route as Rewizor. Fewer structures, so the management chart of accounts carries more of the work |
| Gratyfikant (GT · nexo · nexo PRO) | Employee records, contracts, absence, payroll runs, ZUS and PIT filings | Microsoft SQL Server; pushes accounting images of payroll documents to Rewizor's posting module | Where headcount, staff cost by person and cost per hour actually live — usually the missing input in a profitability model |
| Gestor (GT · nexo · nexo PRO) | Customers, activities, opportunities, correspondence, quotations | Microsoft SQL Server, shared with the trade entity database | Links commercial effort to invoiced revenue, which is the harder half of any cost-to-serve question |
| Biuro nexo | No transactions of its own — administers many client entity databases, batch operations, backups | Manages many Microsoft SQL Server databases | Where an accounting office holds several hundred clients. One connection point, many entity databases behind it |
| Navireo ERP | InsERT's separate ERP for larger companies, sold outside the GT and nexo lines | Microsoft SQL Server | Treated as its own system in a governed layer, not as a Subiekt variant |
Two structural facts sit behind that table and both matter more than the feature lists. First, the database is Microsoft SQL Server throughout, on both generations — the best possible answer for a reporting layer, because it is mature, well documented and readable incrementally on a read-only login without touching the application. Second, the unit is the entity (podmiot), not the group. A Subiekt licence covers one entity, so a business running three companies runs three databases with three charts of accounts and no shared view.
Who the InsERT line fits
Trading and distribution businesses. Subiekt was built for this and it shows: multi-warehouse stock, purchase and sales documents, order handling, price lists per customer group. A thirty-person wholesaler running Subiekt nexo with an external accounting office is a sound arrangement, and there is nothing here to fix.
Retail with over-the-counter sale. Subiekt Sprint 2 gives a fast till interface against Subiekt’s stock, with the POS touch module and fiscal device support behind it. Small chains that outgrew a standalone till land here and stay.
Manufacturers and services firms keeping their own books. Subiekt plus Rewizor plus Gratyfikant, in-house, usually with one accountant and one office manager who between them know where everything is. This is where the reconciliation question in the next section arrives first, because both halves of it are visible to the same person.
Accounting offices (biura rachunkowe). Rewizor, Rachmistrz and Gratyfikant under Biuro nexo, at a scale of hundreds of client entities. InsERT’s licensing is built around this — office licences are priced by entity count — and the offices are the most concentrated part of the user base. Increasingly they are also the ones asking whether they can offer clients reporting on books they already keep well.
Groups that grew sideways. A Polish trading company, a second entity opened for a new brand, a small subsidiary abroad on something else. Each decision was correct on the day it was made, and each entity has its own database. What nobody owns is the view across them, and this is the context in which the InsERT line most often reaches us.
What Subiekt and Rewizor hold — and why it is good material
Before the reporting question, be clear about the asset.
Subiekt holds every commercial document at line level, with the product, quantity, price, discount, warehouse, customer and date. That is the raw material of profitability analysis — margin by product, by customer, by channel — and most Subiekt users never see it in that shape, because Subiekt’s own reports answer trade questions rather than management ones.
Rewizor holds the authoritative version of the same period, in a chart of accounts that Polish practice already tends to structure well. The plan kont convention gives the ledger real analytical depth: account numbers carry variable-length analytical segments, and the team-5 accounts are designed to carry cost by cost centre (centrum kosztów, in practice MPK). Where those have been used consistently, much of what a management view needs is already encoded in the account number. Where they have not, the accounts are still a foundation worth building on, and the chart of accounts is a design problem rather than a list .
Both are kept honest by obligation. JPK_V7 has to reconcile, KSeF has to match, the trial balance (zestawienie obrotów i sald) has to balance. Statutory discipline produces clean data as a by-product, and an InsERT database maintained by a competent accountant is complete, internally consistent and stable across years. Compared with the spreadsheet bookkeeping and half-configured cloud tools we more often meet, this is a good starting point — and the quality of a reporting layer is bounded by the quality of what feeds it.
What sits outside the InsERT line’s scope
The join between the programs. Subiekt records what was sold. Rewizor records what was booked. Posting schemes (schematy dekretacji) turn a trade document into a journal entry, and where the programs share one entity database that link is tight. But a document exists in Subiekt before it is posted, some entries never originate in Subiekt at all, and in the common Polish arrangement the ledger sits at an external accounting office on a separate database entirely. A difference between the two is therefore normal rather than an error — and working out which of the ordinary reasons explains this month’s is manual work every time. InsERT gives you both numbers accurately. It does not undertake to explain the gap, and no function-split family could.
The view across entities. One database per entity means a group of four companies is four databases with four charts of accounts. There is no shared structure and no consolidation inside InsERT, so intercompany matching and currency translation happen outside it.
The view across systems. InsERT has no opinion about whether revenue in your online shop matches revenue in Rewizor, or whether headcount in Gratyfikant matches the org chart operations maintains. This is worth saying plainly: no ERP does this. Not the InsERT line, not Business Central, not SAP. Cross-system truth is a layer above every transaction system, which is the point we make at more length here . Nor is it a dashboard problem — a chart drawn on two numbers that do not agree simply draws the disagreement larger.
None of this is a reason to change system. It is a reason to add a layer.
How we elevate it
Getting the data out is the routine part. There are four routes and we have used all of them: direct read-only SQL against the entity database, our default, which works identically on GT and nexo because both sit on Microsoft SQL Server; Sfera, the vendor’s own programming interface, COM and OLE Automation on GT and the SDK-documented module in nexo PRO; scheduled report and file export where a hosting arrangement rules out a direct login; and Biuro nexo as the single entry point where an accounting office holds many client databases. Read-only throughout. Nothing is written back, and users notice no difference in how the programs perform.
What happens next is the InsERT-specific work.
Reconciling the trade line to the ledger
This is the first thing we build for an InsERT client and the one that changes the most. We take Subiekt’s sales, purchases and stock movements for the period and Rewizor’s postings for the same period, and we reconcile them line by line, every day, automatically. What comes out is not a single number but a categorised list: documents issued in Subiekt and not yet posted; entries booked directly in Rewizor with no trade document behind them; timing differences at the period boundary; corrections and credit notes; genuine mismatches. The reported figure is Rewizor’s, always. The explanation of how it was reached is Subiekt’s. Once that runs daily, month-end stops being an argument about which system is right and becomes a short review of a short list. Where the ledger sits at an external accounting office, it also makes that relationship easier, because it turns “your numbers look wrong” into a specific, dated, itemised question.
The dimensions InsERT already gives you, put to work
Polish practice encodes a great deal in structures that are already there: the analytical segments of the plan kont, the team-5 cost accounts against cost centre (MPK), and the categories and attributes (kategorie, cechy) that Subiekt carries on documents, products and customers. We audit how consistently each has been used across history, show you where coverage is thin, agree the rules for filling them going forward, and encode those rules as validation so the discipline holds at the point of entry rather than at year end. Then we map the statutory chart of accounts to a second, management structure alongside it — revenue by what you actually sell, cost by what you actually control, margin where you actually decide. Mapped once, versioned, owned by a named person, reviewed at each close. The statutory chart keeps doing its statutory job untouched.
One view across every InsERT program, every entity and everything else
Subiekt, Rewizor, Gratyfikant and Gestor stop being four answers and become four inputs to one model — sales at line level, the ledger, staff cost by person, commercial activity, joined on a common structure. Each company becomes another entity in that model, whatever it runs, so a group with two on nexo, one still on GT and a subsidiary abroad on something else gets one group view in any currency, with drill-down from a consolidated total back to the Subiekt document behind it. Your online shop, your payment provider and your spreadsheets join on the same terms. This is routine rather than aspirational: we work with 70+ companies across 11 countries, on 12+ different ERP and accounting systems. See Group Reporting & Consolidation , and one CEE group running eight entities across six countries on six different ERPs .
On the governed layer, the rest is the platform doing its standing job: daily reconciliation against the ledger so the close confirms rather than rebuilds, a semantic model that Power BI and AI can both query reliably , and your business context accumulating so answers get sharper the longer it runs.
What becomes answerable
The clearest way to describe the difference is to list what an InsERT client can ask.
- Where exactly do Subiekt and Rewizor differ this month, and which of those differences is real?
- Which customers are actually profitable after delivery, discount and service cost — not just gross margin on the invoice?
- What is group profit across all our entities, when each one has its own plan kont?
- Why did cost move this month, ranked by the lines that moved most, against budget ?
- What does a person-hour actually cost us, using Gratyfikant’s numbers rather than an estimate?
- How much cash is tied up in stock that has not moved in six months, and what is the cash flow consequence?
Every one is answered from data InsERT already holds. The information was there. What was missing was the structure to ask.
What it takes, and what does not change
Connection in days. First reports in the first week. For a single-entity InsERT client, the connection is a read-only login and the first governed reports follow inside a week. A full build — management chart of accounts, dimension repair, consolidation across several entities, the reporting suite — runs in phases over the following months. The distinction matters, and we would rather be precise about it than promise a finished model in a fortnight.
What we need from you: an NDA, read-only credentials to the entity database or databases, and a conversation about what the numbers should mean. Where the ledger sits at an accounting office, a short conversation with them as well — we are asking for read access and nothing else.
What does not change: InsERT stays your system of record. Your accountant keeps working the way they work. No migration, no data cleanse project, no retraining, nothing written back.
Read-only access throughout. Your data stays in an EU-hosted Azure environment, aligned with ISO 27001 and GDPR, governed by you.
In practice
InsERT appears in Polish client estates on its own and alongside other systems, and the pattern that brings it to us is consistent: the trade side and the ledger side each work correctly, and nobody owns the join. The closest published engagement in shape is the multi-country group under Group Reporting & Consolidation — eight entities on six systems, one daily group view, none of them changed.
When the InsERT line is eventually replaced
Many InsERT clients change something at some point — GT to nexo, nexo to Navireo, or out of the family altogether to Comarch ERP XL or Business Central — usually because they outgrew the scope rather than because anything went wrong.
Because the governed layer sits above the source systems, only the connection changes. The data model , the reports, the dashboards and the consolidation logic stay as they are. Clients who built the layer first find the change measurably easier, because they can prove the new system’s numbers against the old from day one — and they keep their reporting history through it rather than starting again.
This is not a theoretical claim. When JING Tea replaced its operational stack, the reporting layer carried through the change unaltered — the systems underneath moved, the numbers and the reports did not.
The InsERT line in the Polish market context
InsERT is one of several capable systems serving Polish businesses. Each gets its own article in the series .
| System | Vendor | Market | How it compares |
|---|---|---|---|
| Comarch ERP Optima / XL | Comarch | PL | Optima is the closest direct comparison to nexo; XL reaches considerably further up-market |
| enova365 | Soneta | PL | Mid-market, strongly extensible, one application rather than a split family |
| Symfonia | Symfonia | PL | Long-established Polish accounting and ERP line, similar buyer to Rewizor |
| Business Central | Microsoft | Global | Cloud ERP — where Polish mid-market groups standardise once they outgrow local software |
| POHODA | STORMWARE | CZ / SK | The nearest Czech and Slovak equivalent, and a single application rather than a family |
From a data-layer perspective the choice matters less than it appears. Each becomes an entity in the same governed model, which means the system decision can be made on operational fit rather than on reporting fear. The full matrix is on the series hub .
Frequently asked questions
Do we need to replace Subiekt or Rewizor to get proper management reporting? No, and we would usually advise against it. Keep them for what they do well — statutory correctness, VAT, KSeF, clean transaction capture — and build the reporting layer above them. Replacing a working system to solve a reporting problem is an expensive way to solve the wrong problem, and whether you need a new system at all is worth answering deliberately .
Is Onetribe a replacement for InsERT? No. Subiekt and Rewizor remain your systems of record and your team keeps using them exactly as they do now. We read from them, never write to them. If you change system later, the reporting layer stays.
Our Subiekt and Rewizor numbers do not agree. Can you fix that? We can make the difference visible, dated and explained every day, which is what most people mean when they ask. We cannot make it disappear, and you should be sceptical of anyone who says they can — the two programs record different things at different moments, so some difference is normal rather than an error. What we build is a daily line-by-line comparison that sorts the gap into categories: not yet posted, posted without a trade document, timing at the period boundary, corrections, genuine mismatch. The first run is longer than people expect and the third is usually short. The ledger stays the authoritative figure throughout.
Is InsERT an ERP or accounting software? Neither label fits the family cleanly. A single program is not an ERP — Subiekt is a trade system, Rewizor is an accounting system. Combined, Subiekt, Rewizor, Gratyfikant and Gestor cover ERP scope for a small business, and InsERT positions nexo PRO+ and Navireo as ERP explicitly. What the family does not carry is the manufacturing and project depth of a system priced three tiers higher, and it is not sold as though it does.
What database do Subiekt and Rewizor use? Microsoft SQL Server, on both the GT and the nexo generations. nexo supports SQL Server 2016 to 2025 and GT supports 2014 to 2025; a free SQL Server 2019 Express Edition ships with the software, and InsERT recommends moving to full SQL Server above roughly ten concurrent users or a 10 GB database. Data is held one database per accounting entity (podmiot).
Can InsERT consolidate several companies? No — it holds one entity per database, which is the correct design for its core user. Consolidation is a layer above InsERT, and multi-entity groups are the most common reason InsERT users come to us. Two companies both running Subiekt and Rewizor are still two separate sets of books.
Can Subiekt and Rewizor connect to Power BI, and is there an API? Yes to both. The API is Sfera — COM and OLE Automation on GT, drivable from VBScript, VBA, Delphi or Excel, and a module of nexo PRO with an SDK documenting the database structure and object model, with event handling added in nexo PRO+. Sfera is built for adding functionality to the programs rather than for bulk extraction, so for reporting the practical route is a read-only extract into a governed model, with BI reporting on the model rather than on the InsERT tables directly. Pointing Power BI straight at the database works once and gets harder to maintain from there — the tables are transactional by design and the structures differ between GT and nexo. Reading this way does not slow the programs down: we read incrementally on a read-only login.
Is InsERT’s own reporting enough? For a single entity, run by someone who knows the program well, the built-in reports do real work and are worth using — and Raportowanie PRO+ extends custom reporting substantially. Where reporting inside the family runs out is at the joins: across the programs, across entities, and across everything you run that is not InsERT. If Subiekt is your only system and one company is your whole business, start with what you have. On AI: InsERT publishes no assistant and no MCP endpoint for the family — Sfera is an automation surface from the COM era, not an AI one. An assistant connection is built against the SQL data or, better, the governed model above it, where the Subiekt-to-Rewizor join it would otherwise trip over is already resolved — why AI fails on raw ERP data .
Official InsERT resources
- InsERT S.A. — company site
- Subiekt nexo — product overview
- Rewizor nexo — product overview
- Subiekt GT — product overview
- Subiekt nexo — system requirements and SQL Server versions
- Subiekt GT Sfera — technical notes on COM and OLE Automation
- Sfera PRO+ — the nexo PRO+ programming module
- InsERT nexo PRO+ — module overview
- KSeF in InsERT programs
Onetribe is not an InsERT partner or reseller. We build the governed data layer above your ERP, whichever ERP that is.
Next steps
- Every source system we connect — the series hub, with the full matrix
- How we consolidate any combination of systems — group reporting
- Why your ERP doesn’t govern your data — the cross-system layer, in detail
- How we govern the numbers day to day — definitions, controls, ownership
- Discuss your InsERT estate — free assessment