— For the multi-unit operator
What's the difference between Void Hunter and Leak Detector
You have two products that both look at voids. Which one do I need?
Different windows on the same operation. Both are free to try; you probably want both, but most operators start with one based on what export they can get out of their POS today.
Void Hunter operates on aggregated employee-performance data — the row-per-employee-per-period export. The columns are Location, Employee, Net Sales, Void Amount. Toast calls this "Employee Performance Report"; Square calls it "Team Sales Report"; Clover has "Employee Reports." This export is small (one row per employee per period) and downloadable in 30 seconds from any POS that supports it.
What Void Hunter tells you: per-store void rates ranked against each store's own peer median, top names by void $, the annualized excess-vs-peer-band recovery surface. It's the 30-second canary check — "is anyone obviously above the band?"
Leak Detector operates on ticket-level data — one row per ticket — with columns for tender, void status, comp $, discount $, optional timestamps. Toast calls this "Sales Detail"; Square has the full Transaction History export; Clover has Reports → Transactions. This export is bigger and more granular.
What Leak Detector tells you: six separate signals from the same data — void-after-payment (the cash skim), cash-only voiders, comp abuse, promo stacking, discount-after-close, and day-of-week patterns. Each name gets a composite risk score 0-100, and the same name showing up on three or four signals at once is your strongest theft signal.
How to pick: if all you have is the summary export, run Void Hunter and you'll catch the gross outliers. If you can get the ticket-level export, run Leak Detector — it'll catch the same names plus surface schemes Void Hunter can't see (because aggregated voids don't show the tender or the timestamp).
The trial at never86.ai/trial supports both with a toggle. Drop your CSV, pick the agent, see the read.