nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Accounts Balances Report Error

Snowman

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6031128/uploads/editor/nj/fopq2rx6todg.jpg

I am trying to run an account balances report using the custom dates from 12/31/2014 to 12/31/2018. The set interval is year. As you can see Quicken insists on putting a column at the beginning that is not the FROM date set in the custom dialog box. It starts at 12/30/2014.

This is Quicken Premier 2019 R18.15 using Windows 10 Pro 64bit. The graph report is correct because it uses the 12/31/2014 date.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

Snowman

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6031128/uploads/editor/wc/7mqwrrxcsnfi.jpg

This error is the same as the Account Balances report error. It ignores the FROM custom date of 12/31/2013 and adds the column 12/30/2013 which is should not. The graph representation is correct because the first column it shows is 12/31/2013.

NotACPA

To get the 12/31 balance, it needs to start with 12/30. SO, start your report selection with 1/1.

This has existed FOR YEARS, and isn't anything new.

Snowman

NotACPA said:

To get the 12/31 balance, it needs to start with 12/30. SO, start your report selection with 1/1.
This has existed FOR YEARS, and isn't anything new.

So your answer is that for a "Bug" not to be a bug it just has to be in existence for how many years?!?! If you had bothered to really read the post you would have noticed that I say the graph of the same report started on the correct date 12/31/2013 which is inconsistent with the report portion.

This report, as well as the Net Worth report have the same error. Does a bank statement for a period say 1/1/2019 to 1/31/2019 start with a balance from 12/31/2018? NO IT DOES NOT. It starts with the balance at the beginning of 1/1/2019, NOT 12/31/2018. If I do as you suggest the graph will then be wrong because 12/31/2013 will not longer be on the graph, it will start with 12/31/2014.

This is an example of the inconsistently in this Quicken report (net worth report is another) that needs to be addressed. I guess according to your reasoning the ALT-TAB bug is not longer a but because it has also existed FOR YEARS...

Jim_Harman

Quicken records closing prices for all your securities. When a report needs the opening balance for a particular date so that it can include that day in its analysis, it uses the closing balance from the previous day.

Snowman

Jim_Harman said:

Quicken records closing prices for all your securities. When a report needs the opening balance for a particular date so that it can include that day in its analysis, it uses the closing balance from the previous day.

So Quicken should use the balance but is SHOULDN'T put the useless column in the report. The inconsistency between the graph and the report remain. When the custom dates are selected Quicken should know where to get the opening balances it needs, the fact remains the custom dates selected were from 12/31/xxxx NOT 12/30/xxxx

When I do a budget report from say 1/1/2019 to 1/31/2019 the first column in the report is 1/1/2019, NOT 12/31/2018.

mshiggins

From C. D. Bales:

" ... for a "Bug" not to be a bug it just has to be in existence for how many years?"

It's not a bug just because you think it is, or because you prefer a different treatment: it's only a bug if it is not what the software developer intended. You have not provided a shred of evidence to suggest that Quicken is not working as intended, while the available evidence strongly suggests that what you see is what you are intended to see.

Quicken has worked as you see it since at least Q2002 (and I suspect even earlier, but don't have any earlier version to test with). (And, while it is immaterial to your claim; the Q2002 Account Balances graph also began with the first period selected in the date range).

In addition to the Net Worth and Account Balances reports, the Banking Transaction report also displays a balance on the date before the earliest date in the report date range - which allows the report's ending balance computation to make sense. Also true since Q2002.

And as for your rhetorical question: "Does a bank statement for a period say 1/1/2019 to 1/31/2019 start with a balance from 12/31/2018?"

Yes, it most certainly does.

The starting balance for a bank statement dated 1/1/2019 to 1/31//2019, is the balance in the account as of 12/31/2018.

From my 1/1/2019 to 1/31/2019 BofA bank statement:

"Beginning balance on January 1, 2019 $n,nnn"

That January 1 beginning balance is the balance as of the end of the day of December 31, 2018 (and is the ending balance in my BofA December 31, 2018 statement).

That January 1 balance is NOT the balance for the month of January 2019 (which would be the balance as of the end of the day on January 31), nor is it the balance on January 1, 2019 (which would be the balance at the end of the day of January 1).

All the transactions in the Jan 2019 bank statement are algebraically added to that December 31, 2018 balance, to arrive at the January 31, 2019 balance ... making that December 31 balance critical.

Snowman

To mshiggens, CD Bales, NOTACPA, et al. You have totally missed the point. In your headlong rush to "prove" me wrong you failed to see the point of my original post. The point of the post was that the dates selected were FROM12/31/xxxx PERIOD. The fact that this "bug" has existed since the beginning of Quicken is irrelevant.

What is relevant (and if you look again at the original post) was there was an inconsistency between the graph and the numerical representation of the report. The GRAPH shows the correct data from 12/31/xxxx NOT 12/30/xxxx. The numerical data includes the totally unnecessary column 12/30/xxxx AND the correct column 12/31/xxxx. The 12/30/xxxx column is the error and needs to be fixed.

You make the claim that the beginning balance of say 1/1/xxxx is the ending balance of 12/31/xxxx and that is correct but AGAIN the reports custom date box shows in both reports the BEGINNING date is 12/31/xxxx. That is the date and BEGINNING balance that is germain to the report.

I talked with my banker on Friday and asked what date the beginning balance for my statement (from the first of every month the the last day of every month) was from. He said it is the BEGINNING balance on the first of every month NOT the ending balance of the previous month.

All of this aside THE issue is the unnecessary column of data that is printed in the numerical report that properly DOES NOT EXIST in the graphical report. That is the bug and that is what needs to be fixed.

And as for my rhetorical question: "Does a bank statement for a period say 1/1/2019 to 1/31/2019 start with a balance from 12/31/2018?" the answer is NO. It starts with the BEGINNING balance on 1/1/2019. That they are the same is irrelevant because if the ENDING balance of 12/31/2018 was shown on the statement then the statement would be from 12/31/2018 to 1/31/2019. I have years of statements (from before Quicken existed) from multiple banks that say otherwise.

Jim_Harman

@Snowman,

Do any of your statements have a different starting balance than the ending balance of the previous statement? I doubt it.

To eliminate the 12/30 column on the Net Worth report, you can set the date range from 1/1 to 12/31 (like your statements). Quicken's reports will use the closing prices from 12/31 as the 1/1 opening balances to compute gain and loss.

Snowman

While that suggestion gets rid of the useless column in the numerical representation, the graphical representation now totally ignores the whole first year of data. For example if the custom date is set to 1/1/2015 to 12/31/2018 in the graphical representation you should have bar graphs for 2015 to 2018 EXCEPT when you hover over the top of the bar it says it is for 2015 (12/31/2015) to be exact and completely ignores 12/31/2014.

The issue is consistency between the graphical representation and the numerical representations of the same report, there is none.

Image: https://us.v-cdn.net/6031128/uploads/editor/xk/klkj9i32rg2c.jpg

Jim_Harman

Why should the bar graph include 2014 data if you have set the date range to start on 1/1/2015?

As shown when you hover over the chart, the bars show the value on the ending date in each period.

I agree the first column seems extraneous for a Net Worth report, since it should be a snapshot of the values on the selected dates. Perhaps it would be clearer if they left that column out, or if the first report column heading was "Opening balance"

Snowman

Finally, somebody sees the issue.

The purpose of the report is to provide a net worth data point for 12/31/2014, 12/31/2015, 12/31/2016, 12/31/2017 and 12/31/2018. When the beginning date is set to 12/31/2014 an erroneous column for 12/30/2014 shows up. You suggested the "solution" using a starting date of 1/1/2015. Helpful but not a solution.

A net worth report is a "snapshot" of a financial position on a given date so that is what Quicken should provide for 12/31/2014, 12/31/2015, 12/31/2016, 12/31/2017 and 12/31/2018 but fails to do so.

The starting date should be the starting date, the ending date the ending date. Quicken should just "know" were to find the beginning balance there is no need to display it.

As you pointed out it is extraneous and unwanted information to include the first column and there is no need to include an Opening Balance column because would also be extraneous information.

mshiggins

From C. D. Bales:

"You have totally missed the point."

I missed nothing.

The point is that until you can prove that what you see in Quicken is not what Quicken intends you to see, you have not found a bug. Intended behavior is not a bug. Behavior you dislike is not "improper" just because you don't like it.

Also, when you can figure out how to get a "beginning balance for a period that is not the ending balance of the previous period, please post how it's done (if you work with only the data for January, there is no way you can compute a correct beginning balance for January). The "beginning balance on the first of every month" is the ending balance of the previous month - that's the nature of account balances.

Further, your comment about the budget report not showing any values prior to the starting report date is totally immaterial to this issue.

A budget report is an income/expense type report; the Account Balances and Net Worth reports are asset/liability account balance type reports.

The balance of an account in month two (and all subsequent months) is directly affected by what happened in that account in month one (try deleting a transaction from month one and see what happens to the balances in month two and later). On the other hand, the income and expenses in month two are not affected at all by the income and expense activity in month one (you can delete all the transactions for month one, and the income and expenses for month two will not change).

[The Quicken Business version's Balance Sheet (another asset/liability account balance type report) works just like the Account Balances and Net Worth reports.]

If you're expecting Quicken to "fix" what you think is a bug, I think you'll be waiting a very long time. And while I wouldn't expect Quicken to change the Account Balance/Net Worth/Balance Sheet behavior at all, I suspect you'll have a better chance, if you propose it as an Idea here.

[You're the only person I recall ever having a problem with the way these reports are presented. And after having plenty of opportunity, I don't see where you have identified any harm being done.]

Snowman

CD Bales: You say you did not miss the point and then spend a whole post MISSING the point... AGAIN. Jim Harman "gets" it so I am NOT the only one.

The POINT was that Quicken inserted a superfluous column in the report that contradicted the graphical representation on the same report thereby giving conflicting data.

While an ending balance and a beginning balance are numerically equal THEY ARE NOT the same thing. That is why they have two different names. An ENDING balance for this instance is 12/30/2014 which occurs at 11:59:59pm (or 23:59:59) on that date. When it becomes 12/31/2014 at 12:00:00am (or 00:00:00) it becomes a BEGINNING balance.

This is further confirmed by setting the custom DATE dialog box's FROM date as 12/31/2014 NOT 12/30/2014 as shown on the report. That is a bug... PERIOD.

It is not a matter of what I like or dislike IT IS a matter of what is correct NO matter what the "intent" was. I have over 45 years of experience dealing with the production and review of financial reports, audits, annual reports AND NONE OF THEM have created a report with a ridiculous column like was on this report. Just because Quicken for Business (which is an offshoot of Quicken and a poor example) does it the same way as Quicken is not a surprise but is still does not make it right.

"[You're the only person I recall ever having a problem with the way these reports are presented. And after having plenty of opportunity, I don't see where you have identified any harm being done.]"

I may be the only person that sees this, that and the fact that I first ran into this report only recently again does not make it right. I would think even long time users find and learn new stuff about Quicken all of the time. Having "opportunity" again has nothing to do with this.

Quicken may very well not do anything about it, they have hundreds of other fish to fry, that does not make it right either.

Jim_Harman

@Snowman,
With your experience in accounting, surely you are aware of the practice with a printing calculator of hitting the "=" key to show that the starting total is zero before entering a series of numbers to add up. Likewise with a gas pump, the display shows zeros before you start pumping, so that you know it has been reset and you are only paying for the gas you pumped. You don't "need" this extra information, but it is useful nonetheless.

These reports work in a similar way. They compute and display an opening balance based on the transactions up to the starting date you specify, then for each period they add up all the transactions (including changes in unrealized gains) to arrive at the closing balance for the period. You can see this in action if you click on a number in the Net Worth report to see the underlying detail.

The first column in the report is very useful if you are trying to track down discrepancies between your statements and Quicken's numbers.

You are free to ignore it if you don't find it useful.

Snowman

"From C. D. Bales:

"You have totally missed the point."

I missed nothing."

You then spent the entirety of you post MISSING THE POINT AGAIN! Not ONCE in your entire post do you mention the pertinent issue which is the extra column with the heading of 12/30/2014.

Jim Harman gets it. The POINT was that the report contains a superfluous column with data for 12/30/2014 which should NOT have been there. Look again at the custom date dialog box. On it next to From (or Beginning) is 12/31/2014 NOT 12/30/2014.

"Also, when you can figure out how to get a "beginning balance for a period that is not the ending balance of the previous period, please post how it's done"

I guess you do not know the difference between an Ending balance and a Beginning balance because while they are numerically equal they are NOT the same thing otherwise they would be called the same thing.

The BEGINNING balance for this report is obtained at 12:00:00am on 12/31/2014. It is equal to the ENDING balance which was at 11:59:59pm on 12/30/2014. The column on the report dated 12/30/2014 SHOULD NOT BE THERE. That is the difference between a Beginning and Ending balance.

The graphical representation and the numerical representation on these reports is in conflict with each other. "Intent" has NOTHING to do with it nor does if I like it or don't like it.

I have spent over 47 years dealing with the creation and production of audit and financial statements of all kinds, for businesses, non-profits, personally and for my own businesses. I have NEVER seen a report like this before.

You attempt to justify your position by saying that Quicken for Business does it the same way. I would expect it to since Quicken for Business is based on Quicken. That does not make it right either.

Snowman

"@Snowman,
With your experience in accounting, surely you are aware of the practice with a printing calculator of hitting the "=" key to show that the starting total is zero before entering a series of numbers to add up. Likewise with a gas pump, the display shows zeros before you start pumping, so that you know it has been reset and you are only paying for the gas you pumped. You don't "need" this extra information, but it is useful nonetheless.

These reports work in a similar way. They compute and display an opening balance based on the transactions up to the starting date you specify, then for each period they add up all the transactions (including changes in unrealized gains) to arrive at the closing balance for the period. You can see this in action if you click on a number in the Net Worth report to see the underlying detail.

The first column in the report is very useful if you are trying to track down discrepancies between your statements and Quicken's numbers.

You are free to ignore it if you don't find it useful. "

Not ALL of these reports display opening balances. I selected 12/31/2014 THAT is the date the starting balance should be NOT the ending balance from the previous day. The "extra" information is not useful it is superfluous.

Furthermore, if I set the custom dates as From 3/20/2019 To 3/20/2019 and set the interval to "NONE" by your reckoning there should be a column for 3/19/2019 because it is "very useful" BUT it is not there.

That is where it begins for fall apart. No consistency which makes it very hard to believe any report that Quicken puts out.