comparison
GoldFynch vs WalkingPDF
GoldFynch is a review platform: you upload a case, it processes it, and you read documents in a browser at a low monthly price. WalkingPDF is not a review platform and does not host a case. It checks one thing - whether a production set is internally consistent - and issues a certificate. If you need somewhere to read documents, that is GoldFynch's job. If you need to know whether the set you are about to serve is clean, that is ours.
What each one is for
- GoldFynch: process, host and review a case in a browser; per-GB pricing; a workspace you log into.
- WalkingPDF: a single read-only check of a production set, with a verdict, four artifacts and a download window measured in hours.
- GoldFynch holds your documents for as long as the case runs. We delete them on a two-hour schedule.
- Neither replaces the other: one is where the review happens, the other is the gate before the set is served.
The trade-off, stated plainly
A hosted platform is the right place to run a review, and its per-GB model makes sense for months of work. It is a poor fit for a single question asked once, because the answer arrives after an upload, a processing run and a workspace to navigate. A check that costs $49 and returns a certificate is the cheaper way to answer that one question - and the certificate is the part a platform does not issue.
When to use both
Run the check on the set before it goes out, then load the set into the platform you review in. The audit does not need to see the review, and the review does not need to re-run the QC.
Frequently asked questions
Do you host documents?
Only for the length of the audit. Files are deleted automatically after the retention window, and you can delete them sooner.
Can WalkingPDF review documents for privilege?
No. It checks internal consistency; it does not read for privilege, relevance or responsiveness.