Why does the Asset Allocation report double-count -cash'?
NebularNovice
Quicken Windows Subscription Member ✭✭✭
The Asset Allocation report shows "-Cash-' twice with the same amount in the Cash category, once at the top of the group and once at the bottom. Not surprisingly the total investments amount shown at the bottom of the report is too high by exactly that amount.
I say it is too high compared to total investments in the Portfolio Value report. Strangely the total shown beside the graph at the top of the report matches the total in the Portfolio Value report, but if you actually add the 7 numbers for the classifications shown beside the graph, they do not equal the amount at the bottom of the column.
Any ideas why that happens? It has been that way for quite a while.
I am using QfW R23.4 on Windows 8.1.
I say it is too high compared to total investments in the Portfolio Value report. Strangely the total shown beside the graph at the top of the report matches the total in the Portfolio Value report, but if you actually add the 7 numbers for the classifications shown beside the graph, they do not equal the amount at the bottom of the column.
Any ideas why that happens? It has been that way for quite a while.
I am using QfW R23.4 on Windows 8.1.
Tagged:
0
Answers
-
That is certainly odd, and I think a new problem.
Another strange thing is that the subtotal at the bottom of the Cash section of the report (correctly) only includes one of the Cash line items but it is off by a few cents. The overall total of the report is the sum of all the line items so it includes the Cash twice.
I see this problem in my working data file even after doing a Validate and Repair but not in smaller test files.
QWin Premier subscription0 -
Thanks for the reply. How should the problem be reported?
I had also noted the difference in cents. I tentatively assumed it was due to precision problems. Back in the old days, inadequate precision of variables in some computations and not others led to this kind of difference. In any case, that difference is fairly small compared to other discrepancies.0 -
I investigated further, adjusting the end date of the report to find a date where the -Cash- line item started showing up twice.
Turns out it was 8/27/19, when I made several investment transactions. Narrowing it down further by account led me to suspect a cash transfer from an IRA to a Roth account. I deleted this transaction, made sure both sides were gone, then re-entered the transaction and like magic the report now has only one -Cash- line item and everything adds up correctly. Well almost correctly. The total of the 3 cash line items is 13 cents different from the "Total Cash" number. Go figure.
Hopefully you will find something similar. Back up your data file before you start messing with historical transactions.QWin Premier subscription1 -
Thanks for the followup, UKR.
Interesting that your problem started recently. I knew I had observed the problem for quite a while, so I wasn't surprised when I discovered the duplicate -Cash- line first appeared 1/3/2011 in the Asset Allocation Report. It does not appear on 1/2. However the -Cash- amount which is shown in the Report is way off from the Cash amount shown in the Portfolio View for either of those dates. Since I can't even reconcile the much smaller difference I have today, I don't think I'll tackle reconciling a difference which is about 10 times larger and 8+ years older.
The only transactions on 1/3 do not look too suspect: ordinary dividend and related sweep, stock split and name change to that company in a Vanguard account, then some transactions which occur regularly in one of my TIAA-CREF accounts. The amounts involved are quite small, though that may not matter.
Also at that time, both Vanguard and TIAA-CREF were not feeding clean data to Quicken. I wouldn't know where to start to try to clean up those transactions -- if they are even the cause.
BTW, I forgot to mention that I have done the File Validate and Repair. No problems found. The data file itself is huge (170 MB), but I can't figure out how to cut it down without losing access to some of the data.0 -
Sorry, my previous message actually responded to Jim_Harman. :blush:0
This discussion has been closed.