Quicken Community is moving to Single Sign On! Starting 1/22/21, you'll sign in to the community with your Quicken ID. For more information: http://bit.ly/CommunitySSO

Will merging security "XYZ (401k)" with security "XYZ" cause any problems?

jrm
jrm Member ✭✭
edited June 2018 in Investing (Windows)
Quicken 2015 R12 for Windows.

I've been a Quicken user forever. It's been awhile since I've created a 401k account, so I don't recall what Quicken version I was using when the accounts were set-up. 

I have some securities with descriptions ending in (401k), which I am sure were created from within a 401k account, when updating that holding. In some cases, I already held the same security in a non-401k account (both in real world and within Quicken.) One example is

Vanguard Windsor II Admiral (401k) (no symbol)
Vanguard Windsor II Admiral VWNAX

I also have some securities which only have been held in 401k account, some of these security descriptions include the symbol, such as other Vanguard funds. Others, such as tiaa-cref, do not contain a symbol.

I am running into a situation today, where I have just rebalanced a Vanguard account to which I am adding a new fund, and went to add in from the buy screen. I went through the motions, and it didn't add it. Turns out, that years ago, it was a security in an old (real world and Quicken) 401k account. It wasn't hidden, just had Vanguard misspelled. ;) which is why I didn't see it in my list.

Long and short of it...
1. Why did, or still does, Quicken at (401K) to the end of a security name that is created within the 401k account type?
2. Is there a downside of potential problem in editing the security and removing the (401k) portion of the security name, in this case it already has the symbol, but where it doesn't adding the symbol in? It does happen that this new fund purchase is within an IRA but I'd prefer the security name to be clean. It appears that one security symbol may only be added to the security list once, regardless of the security name associated with it. (If the symbol is listed, I can't have Security 401k and Security.
3,. In cases where the security is listed twice, once with a symbol (used in non-401k accounts) and once without a symbol (and with the 401k descriptor) will I cause a problem merging those securities?

Thanks for all the help!
Janet

ps. Non really related, but how do I include an image inline with my posts?

Comments

  • q_lurker
    q_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2018
    1. Why did, or still does, Quicken at (401K) to the end of a security name that is created within the 401k account type?
    To my knowledge, Quicken never did force that implementation, that is add the (401k) suffix.  I ran a 401k in Quicken actively in the early 90s starting with DOS versions and did not face that circumstance.  I do not know of any later versions that forced that designation.  

    Now what does apply is that not all MF holdings are what they appear to be.  That is, sometimes a 401k administrator would put forth that you were buying into, say, the Fidelity Magellan fund but in reality and legally you were buying units of the administrator's Fidelity Magellan holding.  The prices might be similar, but not the same.  Thus, in your example, the 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral) 401k' security might not be a 1:1 match with the retail 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral)'.  That would be one reason you have a ticker on one and not the other.  I think the way to check that would be to compare specific prices on any particular day.  If the prices are the same on each applicable date, the securities are likely to be one and the same.  But if the prices differ at all, then they are two different securities and should be treated as such.  In those latter cases, I would think it to be a mistake to change the security name on the actual transactions.

    There are also cases where users chose to add the suffix or make similar name changes in order to simplify in their mind reporting from various accounts.  While there are limited cases where this might be desirable, I would deem most such cases misuse and a misunderstanding on the part of the user.  In those cases, it would seem to me to be reasonable to change the names on the applicable transactions.  

    My general rule would be that the same security should have the same name throughout your Quicken file.  That seems to be the direction you are going.  To the extent you do prove to yourself that the two really are one, go ahead with your plan (after making sure you have a good backup!).  
    2. Is there a downside of potential problem in editing the security and removing the (401k) portion of the security name, in this case it already has the symbol, but where it doesn't adding the symbol in? 
    If you have a security -- Vanguard Windsor (401k) -- with the suffix with or without a ticker symbol and you do not have a barebones version of that same security -- Vanguard Windsor -- then there is no downside to editing the security name to remove the suffix.  

    If a security does not have a ticker, you can add a ticker to that security.  This is where things can get tricky.  While Quicken will not let you create a new security that has the ticker of an existing Quicken security, Quicken will let you change a ticker to be a duplicate of another security.  If you have IBM Corp with ticker IBM, you cannot create IBM Corp-2 with ticker IBM.  But you can create IBM Corp-2 with no ticker, then edit IBM Corp-2 to have the IBM ticker.  That addresses the latter part or your #2 and you should be aware of that subtlety.  Two securities can have the same ticker, but Quicken seems to discourage it.  
    3,. In cases where the security is listed twice, once with a symbol (used in non-401k accounts) and once without a symbol (and with the 401k descriptor) will I cause a problem merging those securities?  
    If you are sure they are really the same thing, I cannot think of a problem with merging those securities (making all transactions reference the same single security).  I will add that if you are more concerned going forward as opposed to changing the past, you should be able to enter a Corporate Acquisition transaction whereby (for example) Vanguard Windsor acquires Vanguard Windsor-401k at a 1:1 share ratio.  Quicken will then remove shares of the 401k version and add shares of the basic version in the applicable accounts.  (again, backup first!)  That approach, though simpler to execute, might have impacts on how Quicken shows you performance data. 
    how do I include an image inline with my posts?
    Save the image as a jpeg (jpg) file.  The Windows snipping tool is effective for partial screen captures.  Then click the small camera icon (not the video icon) at the bottom of your message compose screen.  You can then browse to and select the file you saved. 
  • jrm
    jrm Member ✭✭
    edited May 2017
    q.lurker said:

    1. Why did, or still does, Quicken at (401K) to the end of a security name that is created within the 401k account type?
    To my knowledge, Quicken never did force that implementation, that is add the (401k) suffix.  I ran a 401k in Quicken actively in the early 90s starting with DOS versions and did not face that circumstance.  I do not know of any later versions that forced that designation.  

    Now what does apply is that not all MF holdings are what they appear to be.  That is, sometimes a 401k administrator would put forth that you were buying into, say, the Fidelity Magellan fund but in reality and legally you were buying units of the administrator's Fidelity Magellan holding.  The prices might be similar, but not the same.  Thus, in your example, the 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral) 401k' security might not be a 1:1 match with the retail 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral)'.  That would be one reason you have a ticker on one and not the other.  I think the way to check that would be to compare specific prices on any particular day.  If the prices are the same on each applicable date, the securities are likely to be one and the same.  But if the prices differ at all, then they are two different securities and should be treated as such.  In those latter cases, I would think it to be a mistake to change the security name on the actual transactions.

    There are also cases where users chose to add the suffix or make similar name changes in order to simplify in their mind reporting from various accounts.  While there are limited cases where this might be desirable, I would deem most such cases misuse and a misunderstanding on the part of the user.  In those cases, it would seem to me to be reasonable to change the names on the applicable transactions.  

    My general rule would be that the same security should have the same name throughout your Quicken file.  That seems to be the direction you are going.  To the extent you do prove to yourself that the two really are one, go ahead with your plan (after making sure you have a good backup!).  
    2. Is there a downside of potential problem in editing the security and removing the (401k) portion of the security name, in this case it already has the symbol, but where it doesn't adding the symbol in? 
    If you have a security -- Vanguard Windsor (401k) -- with the suffix with or without a ticker symbol and you do not have a barebones version of that same security -- Vanguard Windsor -- then there is no downside to editing the security name to remove the suffix.  

    If a security does not have a ticker, you can add a ticker to that security.  This is where things can get tricky.  While Quicken will not let you create a new security that has the ticker of an existing Quicken security, Quicken will let you change a ticker to be a duplicate of another security.  If you have IBM Corp with ticker IBM, you cannot create IBM Corp-2 with ticker IBM.  But you can create IBM Corp-2 with no ticker, then edit IBM Corp-2 to have the IBM ticker.  That addresses the latter part or your #2 and you should be aware of that subtlety.  Two securities can have the same ticker, but Quicken seems to discourage it.  
    3,. In cases where the security is listed twice, once with a symbol (used in non-401k accounts) and once without a symbol (and with the 401k descriptor) will I cause a problem merging those securities?  
    If you are sure they are really the same thing, I cannot think of a problem with merging those securities (making all transactions reference the same single security).  I will add that if you are more concerned going forward as opposed to changing the past, you should be able to enter a Corporate Acquisition transaction whereby (for example) Vanguard Windsor acquires Vanguard Windsor-401k at a 1:1 share ratio.  Quicken will then remove shares of the 401k version and add shares of the basic version in the applicable accounts.  (again, backup first!)  That approach, though simpler to execute, might have impacts on how Quicken shows you performance data. 
    how do I include an image inline with my posts?
    Save the image as a jpeg (jpg) file.  The Windows snipping tool is effective for partial screen captures.  Then click the small camera icon (not the video icon) at the bottom of your message compose screen.  You can then browse to and select the file you saved. q.lurker, thanks for the detailed responses.

    It has never been my intent to the same security in Quicken with different names, as I feel it just causes more confusion. I would much prefer to know that Vanguard Windsor II is Vanguard Windsor II regardless of which physical account holds it. I'm pretty sure I didn't knowingly set up my securities that way. I have three Quicken accounts which has this occurring, two of which are quite old -- early to mid 1990s, and the other within the last 5 years.

    It never occurred to me that "public" MF shares purchased under a 401k/403b might not be the "real" shares and that they might be the shares of the administrator's holding. That presents an interesting dynamic. I will see if I am able to discern that from the hard copy, as well as using the method you suggested with share price.

    One of these Quicken accounts is an 401k that has been rolled over into an IRA, so the Quicken account in fact no longer has any securities, it just has the historic data. And, it is this account, which in particular has the security that I wish to work with currently. I guess another option, along with those you presented, would be to remove the symbols from these securities, since I don't need the pricing updates, and then created a new security with appropriate symbol and no 401k designator for going forward.

    The 2nd 401k, also from the early 90s, was tiaa-cref so it was proprietary funds w/o any ticker symbols, but in fact, I believe that when the 401k designator showed up was at a time, in one of the more recent versions, that I split out my tiaa-cref contracts into multiple Quicken accounts because of the manner in which the statements were then reflecting the data.

    Here's a view of some of the affected securities, you'll notice that I have dual lines, and in fact, here I notice that some have the same symbols in both. Seeing this particular grouping made me remember adding the security on my own, to the security list (the non 401k choice) and thenfor whatever reason when I was adding securities in via the update 401k, maybe, that it wouldn't take the ones I used. Or, something of the ilk. Too long ago to remember for sure. But, in these cases, the security with the 401k has data attached to it, those without the 401k do not. (In other words, the report on the security is empty. Presumably, I could delete the securities with no data contained in the detail report. And, then, I could turn around and rename the 401k version that does have the detail.)

    image


    Am I correct that the corporate acquisition is a bit similar to the mutual fund conversion in that you will see one remove transaction but an individual add transaction for each original buy (or add) transaction that had occurred?

    I have a few things to look into now, and determine what I think the actual holdings reflected, then I can make the determination if I can accurately have the MF symbol associated with the holding. And, based on those processes, then determine about removing the 401k designator. Because, yes it will be much cleaner, and make me happier with my data, in addition to letting me more forward with my immediate need.

    Quicken backups are my friend, that's for sure.

    Janet

    ps thanks for the note about the image. I snipped it, just didn't realized I needed to save an attach, as opposed to copy/paste.
  • Unknown
    Unknown Member
    edited May 2017
    q.lurker said:

    1. Why did, or still does, Quicken at (401K) to the end of a security name that is created within the 401k account type?
    To my knowledge, Quicken never did force that implementation, that is add the (401k) suffix.  I ran a 401k in Quicken actively in the early 90s starting with DOS versions and did not face that circumstance.  I do not know of any later versions that forced that designation.  

    Now what does apply is that not all MF holdings are what they appear to be.  That is, sometimes a 401k administrator would put forth that you were buying into, say, the Fidelity Magellan fund but in reality and legally you were buying units of the administrator's Fidelity Magellan holding.  The prices might be similar, but not the same.  Thus, in your example, the 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral) 401k' security might not be a 1:1 match with the retail 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral)'.  That would be one reason you have a ticker on one and not the other.  I think the way to check that would be to compare specific prices on any particular day.  If the prices are the same on each applicable date, the securities are likely to be one and the same.  But if the prices differ at all, then they are two different securities and should be treated as such.  In those latter cases, I would think it to be a mistake to change the security name on the actual transactions.

    There are also cases where users chose to add the suffix or make similar name changes in order to simplify in their mind reporting from various accounts.  While there are limited cases where this might be desirable, I would deem most such cases misuse and a misunderstanding on the part of the user.  In those cases, it would seem to me to be reasonable to change the names on the applicable transactions.  

    My general rule would be that the same security should have the same name throughout your Quicken file.  That seems to be the direction you are going.  To the extent you do prove to yourself that the two really are one, go ahead with your plan (after making sure you have a good backup!).  
    2. Is there a downside of potential problem in editing the security and removing the (401k) portion of the security name, in this case it already has the symbol, but where it doesn't adding the symbol in? 
    If you have a security -- Vanguard Windsor (401k) -- with the suffix with or without a ticker symbol and you do not have a barebones version of that same security -- Vanguard Windsor -- then there is no downside to editing the security name to remove the suffix.  

    If a security does not have a ticker, you can add a ticker to that security.  This is where things can get tricky.  While Quicken will not let you create a new security that has the ticker of an existing Quicken security, Quicken will let you change a ticker to be a duplicate of another security.  If you have IBM Corp with ticker IBM, you cannot create IBM Corp-2 with ticker IBM.  But you can create IBM Corp-2 with no ticker, then edit IBM Corp-2 to have the IBM ticker.  That addresses the latter part or your #2 and you should be aware of that subtlety.  Two securities can have the same ticker, but Quicken seems to discourage it.  
    3,. In cases where the security is listed twice, once with a symbol (used in non-401k accounts) and once without a symbol (and with the 401k descriptor) will I cause a problem merging those securities?  
    If you are sure they are really the same thing, I cannot think of a problem with merging those securities (making all transactions reference the same single security).  I will add that if you are more concerned going forward as opposed to changing the past, you should be able to enter a Corporate Acquisition transaction whereby (for example) Vanguard Windsor acquires Vanguard Windsor-401k at a 1:1 share ratio.  Quicken will then remove shares of the 401k version and add shares of the basic version in the applicable accounts.  (again, backup first!)  That approach, though simpler to execute, might have impacts on how Quicken shows you performance data. 
    how do I include an image inline with my posts?
    Save the image as a jpeg (jpg) file.  The Windows snipping tool is effective for partial screen captures.  Then click the small camera icon (not the video icon) at the bottom of your message compose screen.  You can then browse to and select the file you saved. I think you hit the nail on the head when you stated that the inactive fund with the 401K designation you should just delete the fund stock symbol.

    Seems to me to be the easiest solution.  
  • q_lurker
    q_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited May 2017
    q.lurker said:

    1. Why did, or still does, Quicken at (401K) to the end of a security name that is created within the 401k account type?
    To my knowledge, Quicken never did force that implementation, that is add the (401k) suffix.  I ran a 401k in Quicken actively in the early 90s starting with DOS versions and did not face that circumstance.  I do not know of any later versions that forced that designation.  

    Now what does apply is that not all MF holdings are what they appear to be.  That is, sometimes a 401k administrator would put forth that you were buying into, say, the Fidelity Magellan fund but in reality and legally you were buying units of the administrator's Fidelity Magellan holding.  The prices might be similar, but not the same.  Thus, in your example, the 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral) 401k' security might not be a 1:1 match with the retail 'Vanguard Windsor II (Admiral)'.  That would be one reason you have a ticker on one and not the other.  I think the way to check that would be to compare specific prices on any particular day.  If the prices are the same on each applicable date, the securities are likely to be one and the same.  But if the prices differ at all, then they are two different securities and should be treated as such.  In those latter cases, I would think it to be a mistake to change the security name on the actual transactions.

    There are also cases where users chose to add the suffix or make similar name changes in order to simplify in their mind reporting from various accounts.  While there are limited cases where this might be desirable, I would deem most such cases misuse and a misunderstanding on the part of the user.  In those cases, it would seem to me to be reasonable to change the names on the applicable transactions.  

    My general rule would be that the same security should have the same name throughout your Quicken file.  That seems to be the direction you are going.  To the extent you do prove to yourself that the two really are one, go ahead with your plan (after making sure you have a good backup!).  
    2. Is there a downside of potential problem in editing the security and removing the (401k) portion of the security name, in this case it already has the symbol, but where it doesn't adding the symbol in? 
    If you have a security -- Vanguard Windsor (401k) -- with the suffix with or without a ticker symbol and you do not have a barebones version of that same security -- Vanguard Windsor -- then there is no downside to editing the security name to remove the suffix.  

    If a security does not have a ticker, you can add a ticker to that security.  This is where things can get tricky.  While Quicken will not let you create a new security that has the ticker of an existing Quicken security, Quicken will let you change a ticker to be a duplicate of another security.  If you have IBM Corp with ticker IBM, you cannot create IBM Corp-2 with ticker IBM.  But you can create IBM Corp-2 with no ticker, then edit IBM Corp-2 to have the IBM ticker.  That addresses the latter part or your #2 and you should be aware of that subtlety.  Two securities can have the same ticker, but Quicken seems to discourage it.  
    3,. In cases where the security is listed twice, once with a symbol (used in non-401k accounts) and once without a symbol (and with the 401k descriptor) will I cause a problem merging those securities?  
    If you are sure they are really the same thing, I cannot think of a problem with merging those securities (making all transactions reference the same single security).  I will add that if you are more concerned going forward as opposed to changing the past, you should be able to enter a Corporate Acquisition transaction whereby (for example) Vanguard Windsor acquires Vanguard Windsor-401k at a 1:1 share ratio.  Quicken will then remove shares of the 401k version and add shares of the basic version in the applicable accounts.  (again, backup first!)  That approach, though simpler to execute, might have impacts on how Quicken shows you performance data. 
    how do I include an image inline with my posts?
    Save the image as a jpeg (jpg) file.  The Windows snipping tool is effective for partial screen captures.  Then click the small camera icon (not the video icon) at the bottom of your message compose screen.  You can then browse to and select the file you saved. Where you have two securities sharing the same ticker, you'll find the prices are the same throughout since price-storage is mostly (ticker) based.  For those, you can edit away the 401k versions if you care to.  

    The Mutual Fund conversion and Corporate Acquisition are suppose to accomplish the same thing (single Remove, Multiple Adds) and the MF conversion is suppose to be easier.  But current programming seems to have a bug in the MF conversion routine where (as best I recall) the cost basis gets mangled.  
    I guess another option, along with those you presented, would be to remove the symbols from these securities ...
    Yes, that is a viable option.  
    Presumably, I could delete the securities with no data ... 
    That too is a viable approach.  
This discussion has been closed.