compare to portfolio error report

leonard kearney

i link to Schwab, and had Raytheon (RTN) stock in portfolio. Stock merged and changed name to Raytheon technologies (RTX). Quicken looks correct, Schwab looks correct - but portfolio compare (after onestep download) keeps reporting that schwab has shares of RTN that are not reported in quicken. dont know if Schwab issue or quicken issue. How do i research this?


Len

Tom Young

I assume you're talking about a placeholder here.

What you do is determine your correct position in the stock(s) - presumably Schwab has that right - and see if your position in the stock(s) agrees to Schwab.  If the two agree you ignore and do not accept that placeholder.

I find that I'm frequently receiving placeholder suggestions when I download from Schwab and I've never found my Quicken records to be incorrect.

leonard kearney

Both Schwab and Quicken look correct on the Holdings page. The system does suggest a place holder, which i do ignore. But the error shows up every time i download from Schwab. Not a problem, just an irritant. Thanks for responding.

Boatnmaniac

@leonard kearney - When you say the system suggests a placeholder, do you mean that the system is making an actual suggestion to create a placeholder once OSU is completed or do you mean there is a placeholder already created and listed below the account register?

If the placeholder is already listed below the account register, have you tried to delete it?  Assuming your holdings in Quicken match what is shown in your online account at Schwab, once the placeholder is deleted the problem should not show up, again.

leonard kearney

the system is making a suggestion to create the placeholder. There is not a placeholder in the account.

all this started when the stock did a name change and a merger (see image)

Are you suggesting i create the placeholder then delete it? I'll try that.

Tom Young

Why are the number of shares different between the two entries?   I guess you received 37 shares of RTX (plus some fractional shares that were sold via a CIL transaction) but the name change happened at the same time and on the same day, so I don't understand why the "name change" entry shows 31 shares. 

This merger occurred back in April so have you be seeing this placeholder suggestion all this time?

How many shares of RTX do you really own?

Boatnmaniac

The name change was the result of the merger.  It was not that there was a name change first which was then followed by a merger.  So, there should be no "Name Change" transaction.

The "Merger" transaction would be appropriate but I like how Fidelity downloaded the transactions in my account:  A "Sold" transaction for all shares of RTN plus a "Bought" transaction for an equal number of shares of RTX...simple and clean.

I agree with @Tom Young -- the 31 shares "Name Change" transaction is suspect. 

What I would do is to go back to either the paper statement for that time period or to my online account transaction history for that period and make note of the actual transactions that Schwab did regarding this merger and name change.  Pay close attention to the number of shares in each transaction and the transaction price of each.  Then compare that to what is entered into the account in Quicken.  Let us know what you find out.

Boatnmaniac

leonard kearney said:

the system is making a suggestion to create the placeholder. There is not a placeholder in the account.

all this started when the stock did a name change and a merger (see image)

Are you suggesting i create the placeholder then delete it? I'll try that.

Specific to your question:  Sorry but, no, I am not suggesting that you create a Placeholder and then delete it.  Based upon the additional information you provided, the shares count discrepancy would still exist so after deleting the Placeholder you would still continue to get suggestions to create a new Placeholder.

What I was thinking (incorrectly, it appears) was that your shares in Quicken are correct but that at one time Quicken might have created a Placeholder that for some reason is no longer valid.  In this type of situation, it would be appropriate to delete the Placeholder and since there would be no shares discrepancy then Quicken would not suggest or create a new Placeholder.

Sherlock

I suspect the issue may be that the CUSIP provided by Schwab for Raytheon technologies (RTX) security was matched to the Raytheon (RTN) security in Quicken.  This should be apparent when performing the comparison as, in addition to indicating that RTN shares are missing in Quicken,  the comparison should should also show that the RTX shares in Quicken are missing at Schwab.  To resolve the issue, I suggest unchecking Matched with online security on the Edit Security Details window of the mismatched securities.  The next time Quicken compares holdings, Quicken will prompt to reestablish the binding.

q_lurker

I agree with the CUSIP comment and suggested path.  

FWIW:  My Quicken transactions were
One Remove Shares of Raytheon 
Two Add Shares of Raytheon Technologies (for the two lots I held at the time).
I believe I got those through a standard Corporate Acquisition entry with a 2.3348 share ratio.  
About 11 days later I recorded a Sale of the fractional shares for the 'cash-in-lieu' received.

While one might accomplish this with a split and a name change (and resetting the online matching), the big picture was more complex:
https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7875091/my-approach-to-utx-otis-carr-rtn-rtx/p1?new=1