Sage 200, Access Dimensions and Exchequer: What Changes When Migrating to Xero?

Sage 200, Access Dimensions and Exchequer can all be migrated to Xero, but they should not be treated as interchangeable source systems. The extraction route, accounting structure and controls we need to validate differ between them.

Three source systems, three different migration considerations

These are preferred routes rather than absolute requirements. Where the normal extraction method is unavailable, the source needs to be assessed before an alternative is agreed.

The destination may be Xero, but the source still matters

All three systems can contain nominal transactions, customers, suppliers and tax information, but the way that detail is stored and exposed is different. A migration therefore needs to start with the source system rather than a generic import template.

The practical differences affect extraction, mapping and reconciliation. They can also affect which historical detail is available to reproduce inside Xero.

Sage 200: structure, periods and accounting behaviour

Sage 200 migrations commonly require decisions around accounting periods, nominal codes, departments and cost centres, foreign currency, allocations and connected add-ons. Multi-company Sage 200 environments also need a clear entity sequence and consistent mapping decisions across the group.

The objective is not to reproduce the Sage structure mechanically. Departments and cost centres may need to be redesigned for Xero Tracking, while the Chart of Accounts may be simplified or restructured where the old coding no longer serves the finance team.

Access Dimensions: important detail can sit outside the obvious ledger export

Access Dimensions projects can require additional attention to allocations, SOP-derived sales invoice descriptions, VAT detail, departments and cost centres, and attachments. That means the extraction route can materially affect the usefulness of the history that reaches Xero.

Where AOI is available, it is our preferred route because it can provide the detail needed for a controlled historical migration. If it is not available, we establish what alternative reports or exports can support both migration and reconciliation.

Exchequer: reporting access is part of the migration plan

For Exchequer, Visual Report Writer can provide a practical route to the detailed information needed to reconstruct and reconcile accounting history. Where it is unavailable, the project needs an agreed alternative evidence set.

We also review departments, cost centres, VAT, aged ledgers and any unusual account behaviour before deciding how the information should be represented in Xero.

What changes when the project contains multiple entities?

With a group migration, source-system differences sit alongside another layer of planning: entity order, common Chart of Accounts decisions, tracking conventions, cut-over dates and entity-level reconciliation.

Standardising what should be consistent can make the group easier to operate after migration, but each company still needs its own control evidence. A group programme should not turn reconciliation into one combined check.

What remains consistent across all three?

Whatever the source system, we still need a controlled scope, agreed Xero structure, reliable extraction, transformation rules and reconciliation back to source evidence. The method changes; the accounting controls should not.

Before go-live, the finance team should understand what history is included, what has been restructured, what remains outside Xero and how the final balances have been validated.