Cost Basis error: Portfolio view does not match Security detail view for one security

1. Running Windows 2017. I've used Quicken for 20 years. Just ran into a new one:

- Bought 175 shs SBUX @ $58.27 plus a $25 commission = cost basis of $10,222.25
- SBUX has increased in price since then, so there's an unrealized gain on the position.
- This is correctly reflected in the portfolio view (see first attached file, tmp-q-portfolio-view).
- However, when I click on the name of the security to see the Security Detail View, the Holdings info in that view is showing an unrealized loss, with an "Avg. Cost Per Share" of $85.101829. Completely screwy and wrong (see second attached file, tmp-q-security-detail-view).

This is the only account in which I hold SBUX. No other SBUX held anywhere.

2. Also, this is the only holding with an issue: the Portfolio View and the Holding detail in the Security Detail View matches for all other holdings.

3. Also, this error is propagated to the cost basis report (Report > Investing > Portfolio Value & Cost Basis)

4. I then deleted the transaction and checked the Security Detail View again (clicked on the name of another position, then switched to Starbucks. This time I found that the Holdings detail showed zero shares as expected, with a cost basis of $4670.57 and a gain of -$4670.57. WTF? (See third attached file, tmp-q-security-detail-view-2)

Any suggestions how to correct this error?

Comments

  • NotACPA
    NotACPA SuperUser, Windows Beta Beta
    Have you EVER sold any shares of SBUX?
    Have you previously bought and then sold SBUX?
    Q user since DOS version 5
    Now running Quicken Windows Subscription,  Home & Business
    Retired "Certified Information Systems Auditor" & Bank Audit VP
  • Jim_Harman
    Jim_Harman SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    Are there any hidden Placeholders for this security? go to Edit > Preferences > Investment Transactions and make sure "Show hidden transactions" is checked.
    QWin Premier subscription
  • Bur Davis
    Bur Davis Member ✭✭
    @NotACPA , yes I previously have bought and sold shares of SBUX. All of those past transactions were properly reconciled: when a position was closed out, SBUX no longer appeared in my portfolio, and cost basis was correctly accounted for.

    @Jim_Harman , I have now checked "Show hidden transactions". There are no hidden Placeholders that I can see. What would I be looking for?

    I have now gone back over all previous SBUX transactions, reconfirmed that all buys and sells match up.

    The only reason I can think that the Security Detail view shows zero shares with a negative cost basis is that some db file is fkd up somewhere.

    I have run Validate and Repair and the issue is still there.

    Is there any way I can directly read the investment db outside of Quicken? Any utility that would let me debug this?
  • NotACPA
    NotACPA SuperUser, Windows Beta Beta
    IF you didn't assign the EXACT same tax lots to those SBUX shares as your broker assigned, then it's almost guaranteed that your cost basis wouldn't agree with them ... and could result in what you're seeing.
    You need to go back to your Year End Brokerage stmt for every year in which you sold SBUX and compare the results.

    And, sorry, but there's no way to read any Q data file outside of Q.
    Q user since DOS version 5
    Now running Quicken Windows Subscription,  Home & Business
    Retired "Certified Information Systems Auditor" & Bank Audit VP
  • q_lurker
    q_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    - However, when I click on the name of the security to see the Security Detail View, the Holdings info in that view is showing an unrealized loss, with an "Avg. Cost Per Share" of $85.101829. Completely screwy and wrong (see second attached file, tmp-q-security-detail-view).

    That difference between the one account (current) and the broader (historical) Security Detail is an indication to me that something is amiss with your historical transactions.  

    I have now gone back over all previous SBUX transactions, reconfirmed that all buys and sells match up.

    It is not sufficient IMO that they "match up", as that could mean a variety of things.

    Having confirmed that there are no placeholders, I would backtrack through time (vary the As of date) with the portfolio views with the "Show Closed Lots" option checked to display.  I would be looking to see if somehow cost basis did not appropriately decrease with each sale and increase with each purchase.  That might lead to deleting and re-entering some sales.  

    I would edit each sale of SBUX to confirm that 'proper' lots are selected.  While 'proper' should imply matching to what your broker used and you reported as cap gains on your tax return, in this context I also mean lots that Quicken recognizes at the time of sale.


  • Bur Davis
    Bur Davis Member ✭✭
    Thanks folks. I figured it out by running Validate again and looking more closely at the output. It signaled an issue with the Date Acquired field on a lot I had transferred from one broker to another back in 2007.

    When I opened that 'Add' transaction, sure enough the Date Acquired field was corrupt. I backtracked to identify the acquisition date for that lot (from the Buy in the previous brokerage account), filled that in, saved, and voilà (of course any date prior to the Add would have done I'm sure).

    So case closed but it leads me to ask: do you ever run into this kind of bit-rot in Quicken data?

    I say 'bit-rot' because I am 100% positive that 2007 Add transaction had accurate data when it was entered (or I would have noticed a problem when I did my 2007 taxes;-).
This discussion has been closed.