(Canadian

Nope. There are not $50k worth of transactions due in the next 6 days. Thanks though. It's a Quicken bug for sure.Alan said:Take a look at the amounts for individual accounts. I tried what I think is the same report you did and found that for most of the individual accounts, the sidebar amounts and the report amounts were equal. They differed in one account where I had manually entered transactions dated a few days beyond the current date, but still in the current month.
In sum, the sidebar amounts were for the current date (July 25) while the report amounts were for the end of the month, July 31. This may explain your discrepancy. If not, a little digging at the individual numbers should explain the difference.
I don't think your problem is a bug. It's a design decision that may or may not have been a good one, The problem with Quicken, in my opinion, is not how it works, but the absence of a thorough reference manual.
I'm with Alan on this. The best way to get to the bottom of this is to examine each balance account by account. You should be able to see which accounts match up and which ones don't. Then you will probably be able to find out why they differ. It will likely be that the two different balances are using different date measurements.Alan said:Take a look at the amounts for individual accounts. I tried what I think is the same report you did and found that for most of the individual accounts, the sidebar amounts and the report amounts were equal. They differed in one account where I had manually entered transactions dated a few days beyond the current date, but still in the current month.
In sum, the sidebar amounts were for the current date (July 25) while the report amounts were for the end of the month, July 31. This may explain your discrepancy. If not, a little digging at the individual numbers should explain the difference.
I don't think your problem is a bug. It's a design decision that may or may not have been a good one, The problem with Quicken, in my opinion, is not how it works, but the absence of a thorough reference manual.
John, the design of the net worth report is to include full months. You could choose to have the report run, for example, from 01/2017 to 12/2017. In that case, the last column would definitely not agree with the sidebar. You just have to understand that the sidebar is today, and the report's last column is the end of whatever month you have selected for the report to end.John Burgess said:I’m with Rich on this one. Even if you can “explain” the discrepancy by saying it’s calculated one one in one place, and another way somewhere else, that’s BS. They should use the same rules everywhere, e.g. use today, or month end, but don’t switch between the two. I should never see two numbers when they should be the same. Why should I have to figure out why there’s a difference?
So if it’s a “design decision” then it’s a design BUG.
OK guys, I made the change and the discrepancy grew by $25,000. New theory please!Alan said:Take a look at the amounts for individual accounts. I tried what I think is the same report you did and found that for most of the individual accounts, the sidebar amounts and the report amounts were equal. They differed in one account where I had manually entered transactions dated a few days beyond the current date, but still in the current month.
In sum, the sidebar amounts were for the current date (July 25) while the report amounts were for the end of the month, July 31. This may explain your discrepancy. If not, a little digging at the individual numbers should explain the difference.
I don't think your problem is a bug. It's a design decision that may or may not have been a good one, The problem with Quicken, in my opinion, is not how it works, but the absence of a thorough reference manual.
Changing to "show projected balances" made my discrepancy larger. You are wrong.John Burgess said:I’m with Rich on this one. Even if you can “explain” the discrepancy by saying it’s calculated one one in one place, and another way somewhere else, that’s BS. They should use the same rules everywhere, e.g. use today, or month end, but don’t switch between the two. I should never see two numbers when they should be the same. Why should I have to figure out why there’s a difference?
So if it’s a “design decision” then it’s a design BUG.
Thanks for the suggestion. The second circled checkbox, "Include accounts... " was not checked. I checked it and no numbers were changed or harmed in the checking of that box.RickO said:For a visual on what @jacobs is saying, see below. Make sure you don't have hidden accounts selected AND make sure you have not customized the account list to exclude any accounts:
it is your job because we need to rule out settings or a misconception that is responsible. Like it or not, the vast majority of situations like this turn out to be an incorrect setting or a user's lack of understanding of why there's a difference.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Projected balance for the sidebar is only going to match if there are pending transactions between now and the end of the month, but none after the end of the month.Alan said:Take a look at the amounts for individual accounts. I tried what I think is the same report you did and found that for most of the individual accounts, the sidebar amounts and the report amounts were equal. They differed in one account where I had manually entered transactions dated a few days beyond the current date, but still in the current month.
In sum, the sidebar amounts were for the current date (July 25) while the report amounts were for the end of the month, July 31. This may explain your discrepancy. If not, a little digging at the individual numbers should explain the difference.
I don't think your problem is a bug. It's a design decision that may or may not have been a good one, The problem with Quicken, in my opinion, is not how it works, but the absence of a thorough reference manual.
I am late to this thread, but I am glad the Q&A eliminated some of the possible reasons.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
John, I don't think the issue here is minor rounding differences. $50,000+ is not a floating point or rounding error. (Maybe for the government, not for us mere mortals!)Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
QM2017 is still a supported product so that bug should get fixed there :-\Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Do not hold your breath. Quicken has not announced any plans to fix this that I know ofRich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Well, it turns out the bug I thought I found in Quicken 2017 was actually user error; I was going to report it, but when I checked my work again, I found I didn't have the account hidden in Quicken 2017 that I do in Quicken 2018. When now I hid the account from reports that I had previously hidden from he left rail, the two net worth numbers match. So my bug isn't a bug; it's operating correctly.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Spammer! Do not contact.Alan said:Take a look at the amounts for individual accounts. I tried what I think is the same report you did and found that for most of the individual accounts, the sidebar amounts and the report amounts were equal. They differed in one account where I had manually entered transactions dated a few days beyond the current date, but still in the current month.
In sum, the sidebar amounts were for the current date (July 25) while the report amounts were for the end of the month, July 31. This may explain your discrepancy. If not, a little digging at the individual numbers should explain the difference.
I don't think your problem is a bug. It's a design decision that may or may not have been a good one, The problem with Quicken, in my opinion, is not how it works, but the absence of a thorough reference manual.
Quicken user since Q1999. Currently using QW2017.
Questions? Check out the Quicken Windows FAQ list
Yes I know where the discrepancy is. It's on my brokerage. It's a bug in quicken that I have reported and others have retired and they show little or no interested in g fixingRich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Are you theorizing taht I have $50k worth of future transactions scheduled for this month? If so, I would not be using Quicken to track my finances; I'd have my own accountant doing it by hand. Anyhow, yes, I've already answered this question, hopefully it's not repeated too many times. ;-PAlan said:Take a look at the amounts for individual accounts. I tried what I think is the same report you did and found that for most of the individual accounts, the sidebar amounts and the report amounts were equal. They differed in one account where I had manually entered transactions dated a few days beyond the current date, but still in the current month.
In sum, the sidebar amounts were for the current date (July 25) while the report amounts were for the end of the month, July 31. This may explain your discrepancy. If not, a little digging at the individual numbers should explain the difference.
I don't think your problem is a bug. It's a design decision that may or may not have been a good one, The problem with Quicken, in my opinion, is not how it works, but the absence of a thorough reference manual.
Rich, I understand that you think you’re affected by a bug in Quicken. Saying there’s a discrepancy in your brokerage account is still pretty broad, and several of us were suggesting how to dig a layer deeper to find the source of the discrepancy, because we don’t have enough information from what you’ve posted here to pinpoint a definitive bug. Please understand I’m not saying there isn’t one, only that I couldn’t replicate it with the info posted here. If you’ve provided Quicken Support more info elsewhere, they can push an issue to the developers to look into.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
lainslie9, not to minimize your problem, but this thread is about Quicken Mac, not Windows. The programs are very different, and the source of problems like this are different between the two platforms.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
lainslie9... you are posting in a Mac thread. You would be better off starting your own new topic since the products are totally separate.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Well, the fact that Quicken, which is supposed to help me track my finances, is reporting two very different numbers for my net worth, $50,000 different in fact, hmm, you think that's not a "definitive bug"?Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Maybe you have a security price or transaction dated in the future? Check the price history.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?
Maybe you have a security price or transaction dated in the future? Check the price history.Rich Cook said:Thanks for all the answers. I have tried all of them so far and there is still a huge discrepancy. The difference lies in my investment account. As @John Burgess said above, regardless of why, why is it my job to hunt through the interface to see how too different definitions of "net worth" can possibly make sense in one piece of personal finance software?