Security Type---
Gary R
Quicken Windows Subscription Member ✭✭✭
How would you classify an ETF? Would you put it under mutual funds or Stocks in the Security Type.
0
Best Answers
-
I always had them as stocks even though they technically are mutual funds. Since I download from my brokers I am pretty sure they automatically were classified this way.
Quicken Windows user since 1993.
5 -
ETFs are more like stocks than mutual funds, since the price varies during each day's trading session. I buy and sell them using limit orders, which you can't do with mutual funds.I created some new Security Types for Bond ETF and Stock ETF. Quicken doesn't care. The advantage to not using the Stock security type is that I can set or download the asset mixtures.
Quicken user since version 2 for DOS, now using QWin Biz & Personal Subscription (US) on Win10 Pro.
2
Answers
-
I always had them as stocks even though they technically are mutual funds. Since I download from my brokers I am pretty sure they automatically were classified this way.
Quicken Windows user since 1993.
5 -
Appreciate your prompt reply. Actually, Quicken treated them under OTHER in the Security window. They were also showing up Other in the Asset allocation report.0
-
ETFs are more like stocks than mutual funds, since the price varies during each day's trading session. I buy and sell them using limit orders, which you can't do with mutual funds.I created some new Security Types for Bond ETF and Stock ETF. Quicken doesn't care. The advantage to not using the Stock security type is that I can set or download the asset mixtures.
Quicken user since version 2 for DOS, now using QWin Biz & Personal Subscription (US) on Win10 Pro.
2 -
OMG
I didn't realize that we can set up out own security types. I just added ETF's and works perfectly. It didn't even change any of the asset mix which is good.
Thank you so much-----0 -
Just wanted to say that you guys are awesome and provide a great resource. You just made my life so much easier with your replies. I can't thank you enough.2
This discussion has been closed.