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; } } }

How do you sync Quicken with Financial Institution's data

jdparker225

Using Quicken Classic Premier, Version R60.15, Build 27.1.160.15 for Windows

I have an IRA with Merrill Lynch (ML) and the holdings as shown on ML's website do not match the holdings as shown in Quicken. For example:

Quicken shows a mutual fund WFMIX (Wells Fargo Special Mid Cap Value Fund - Class Inst) while the ML website shows ESPNX (Allspring Special Small Cap Value Fund - Class Inst). WFMIX was renamed to Allspring Special Mid Cap Value Fund - Class Inst in July of 2021 but Quicken still has the old name.
Quicken shows a mutual fund JSMGX (Janus Henderson Triton Fund - Class Inst) while the ML website shows JCAPX (Janus Henderson Forty Fund - Class Inst)

In both cases the number of shares match but, of course, the share prices do not.

I downloaded from the ML website the last 270 days of qfx files and there are no references to WFMIX or JSMGX but there are plenty of references to ESPNX and JCAPX. It appears that the transaction references (e.g. adding/subtracting shares, dividends, capital gains) associated with WFMIX and JSMGX were simply assigned to ESPNX and JCAPX respectively.

I strongly suspect that the ML website is correct.

The IRA is a rollover of a 401K that I did in 2021 and I have done one step updates at least weekly since then with no errors reported.

So…

First: How do I fix this?

Second: How come Quicken hasn't noticed the issue and complained or done something about it?

Third: How did this happen?

Thanks

Jim

Find more posts tagged with

Accepted answers

All comments

jr7107

Lots going on here, I will ask a moderator to move this to the Investing section here to get additional opinions https://community.quicken.com/categories/quickencommunity_investing_windows

Will ask some questions and try to move from there:

Is there a point in time when Quicken and ML ever match?
Do you have access to all of the statements either online/PDF from that point?
Did the rollover from 2021 force those into different investments of the new FI?

I will make the assumption that ML is 100% correct.

Fund Renaming - When a security renames you can complete a "Corporate Name Change" transaction on the date that occurs. The investment register will have a note transaction in the account on that date.

Interpreting the WFMIX fund versus the ESPNX fund discrepancy is going to require some additional information. These are two different funds. If ML says you have ESPNX then I will assume that as correct. Possibly double check the security used in Quicken that matched when making purchases. Was there a fund exchange at any point that could have been executed via corporate action? Do the purchased lots in Quicken match the cost basis of the lots in ML?

Same questions for the Janus funds.

I would start the investigation at the rollover from old FI to new FI in the statements, trying to get to question 1 above. Then some additional details should help move this along.

jdparker225

Let me rephrase the first question: What would happen if I right clicked on an incorrect holding, selected "Edit Security", then changed the name and symbol, and pressed OK? Would that fix it for that security? What would happen to all the transactions related to that security, both previous and subsequent? Could I then repeat with other securities until every thing matches?

Thanks

Jim

jr7107

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469392#Comment_20469392

It won't change any of your existing Security transactions. Effectively this is a name and ticker change. As always backup your file before any major operation.

jdparker225

Actually it did change the previous transactions. E.g.: All prior transactions for WFMIX (Wells Fargo Spec Md Cp Val I) are now transactions for ESPNX (Allspring Special Small Cp Val I). Since the transaction in the qfx file (at least the most recent 270 days worth) were for ESPNX (Allspring Special Small Cp Val I), I expect that all subsequent transactions will be for that as well.

So things are looking much better.

Another odd thing: all the security names that were correct were all caps: E.g., "BLACKROCK STRATEGIC INCOME…" The incorrect ones were initial caps.

There is a downside to this. The security edit was applied to all accounts in my data file. That doesn't really affect anything for me because all of those other accounts (well there is only one) are old 401Ks that I no longer have (I still have them in Quicken for their histories) since the employer switched from Empower to Fidelity and there never was any commonality between the holdings under Empower (which had some of those securities) and those under Fidelity. I think this is a pretty serious Quicken error. A security edit should only apply to the account in which the edit was made.

Thanks Jim

jr7107

Nothing about the transaction changed.

It was a Buy, Sell, CG, Income, etc. You changed the ticker on a Security that was in an account. A ticker change on a security that is used in multiple accounts will be affected by that change. That is by design so that Corporate Actions and other such transactions such as simple pricing of the unique ticker can occur.

It's not an error, it is working as designed.

It appears that Quicken now matches ML, and you can check the "Match to Online Security" in the Security details, and further transactions should match appropriately.

jdparker225

I do not agree.

First, I am not sure what you mean by 'you can check the "Match to Online Security" in the Security details'. What I found is that in the edit panel for the security, there is a "Matched with online security" check box and it is checked and was checked prior the changes. The only thing I can think that it means is that the symbol is a valid symbol. E.g., WFMIX is valid symbol but the name is no longer "Wells Fargo Special Mid Cap Value Fund - Class Inst". It is now named "Allspring Special Mid Cap Value Fund - Class Inst". Were you referring to something else?

I was not faced by a corporate action, I was faced with errors in the holdings of one account. My original post mentioned 2, I later found a 3rd. E.g., WFMIX is a valid security and, although I don't have it in my ML IRA, I could validly have it in another account. The fact that I don't have it in any other active account is happy coincidence. Perhaps a button could be added to the update dialog to include an option to apply to all accounts or to apply only to the current account.

I do not know how or when those errors were introduced. The only updates to Quicken's version of the account were done via one step update which were done on at least a weekly basis since the account's creation in 2021. As mentioned in the original post, I have downloaded the qfx files containing all the transactions for that account for the last 270 days and there were no transactions for the 3 securities that were in Quicken but which I do not really have but there were transactions for the 3 securities I do have but were not in Quicken. All of those transactions seem to have been applied to securities that Quicken had even though the qfx file had the symbol and name of the securities I actually held.

So at least one design flaw is that Quicken doesn't verify that the qfx (or one step?) transactions apply to securities in the account in Quicken. I can see that might be complex since those transactions might be adding securities you do not have or getting dividends for stocks recently sold. I haven't taken a deep dive into the qfx files but, if they don't, perhaps they should include a list of all the holdings in the account which Quicken could verify against what Quicken has.

Thanks

Jim

jr7107

If you believe the software to be defective then you have to address with the Quicken support group. The ticker change will apply to that Security through all accounts. I haven't known it to behave any other way.

Once you changed the ticker, and then run an OSU I would have thought Quicken to ask you to "match" to the position in Quicken to the FI. Possibly it didn't and that Quicken and the FI matched the security.

Migrating accounts from FIs takes a minute and eyes on the before and after. I only ever change the FI (delete old login/create new login) on a migrated account, and never actually create a new one in Quicken. That helps reduce workload on moving positions, transfers etc. That is a personal preference.

Uncertain how the errors occurred but if all the balances match in ML or Fidelity today, then they should be easy to reconcile daily/weekly/monthly going forward. The big providers are fairly reliable when providing the data but glitches can occur.

Boatnmaniac

I haven't taken a deep dive into the qfx files but, if they don't, perhaps they should include a list of all the holdings in the account which Quicken could verify against what Quicken has.

In QWin go to the Account Register. Click on the upper right Gear icon and then click on Reconcile Shares. Quicken will then compare the securities holdings you have in your account in Quicken to the securities and number of shares the brokerage last reported to Quicken. If there is any discrepancy Quicken will let you know which securities have the discrepancy and what the shares count discrepancies are.

jdparker225

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469625#Comment_20469625

Let me think about contacting the support group.😕

Quicken did not ask me to 'match' anything. The number of shares of the incorrect security was the same as the number of shares for correct securities in the FI's website. I believe it would have done so if the number of shares did not match, but they did for all 3 securities I changed.

I don't understand your discussion on migrating accounts.

I never noticed the "Reconcile Shares" button that Boatnmaniac pointed out. I may start using it from time to time. 😊

Thanks

Jim

Boatnmaniac

I never noticed the "Reconcile Shares" button that Boatnmaniac pointed out. I may start using it from time to time.

I use it every time I get new transactions downloaded into my investment accounts. For me it's part of the Reconcile to Online Balance process.:

Reconcile Shares
Click on the blue font Online Balance below and on the right of the Account Register. If the dollar amounts shown match, copy it. (If the dollar amounts do not match, they likely will within 3-4 days when all the funds from buying/selling shares have settled.)
Reconcile….when the popup opens, paste the dollar amount copied from #2.

When done all applicable transactions will be marked "R". Works like a charm provided you can be patient with #2 until all the cash from securities trades transactions are fully settled and downloaded from the brokerage (usually 2-3 days after the trade was completed).

jr7107

Account migration is my terminology for transferring an account to a new broker, like a rollover or broker switch.

Back in the day I had an account with "Broker S", and they were purchased by "Broker T". When my account moved to "Broker T", all I did was disable the online settings at the old broker, and set it up for "Broker T" and began the one step updates after verification. This is a personal preference, I have seen others complete "Transfer" transactions to a fresh account.

Sometimes there will be some "housekeeping" transactions downloaded in the first run from the new broker you need to clean up. If dividends went "ex" at the old broker they will show up most likely a bit later as a "transfer in". Some quirks, but overall I find less work with little to no difference.

jdparker225

I know this is off topic but it appears to me that I, if I really wanted to, could fix the problem of the security edits being applied to all accounts:

Save a backup. I already have a backup from just prior to making the edits.
Export the ML IRA account where I want the keep the security changes to a .qfx file.
Restore the backup prior to the security edits.
Delete the ML IRA account (is this necessary?)
Import the ML IRA .qfx file.

Would that work?

Would that sort of technique work for restoring an individual account from a backup? I know it wouldn't be quite the same. Why doesn't Quicken support (directly) restoring an individual account from a backup?

Thanks

Jim

jr7107

I will let another SU comment, I never had need to use this. The transfer appears not to support Investments and they offer QIF as alternative:

https://info.quicken.com/win/how-do-i-export-data-to-a-qxf-file

jdparker225

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469697#Comment_20469697

Meant qif file not qfx.

Thanks

Jim

jdparker225

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469692#Comment_20469692

This was not applicable to this situation. In the rollover, the 401K was cashed out and the money sent to ML who created the IRA. They then used the cash to buy securities. Aside: The 401K that was rolled over was not the old 401K that had one of the securities that I edited (different employer). The rolled over 401K still exists in Quicken with a zero balance but has history I want to keep.

Thanks

Jim

Jim_Harman

Back to your original question, since these are different funds and I don't see any indication online that there was a merger or anything related to these funds, are you sure there was not actually a sale of WFMIX and it was replaced by ESPNX and JSMGX replaced by JCAPX?

I think the best approach would be to look back in your statements to 2021 and see what actually happened, then correct the transactions in Quicken.

jr7107

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469737#Comment_20469737

I would complete all of these transactions in the same Quicken account. In the same account process the "Sell". Reset the online credentials to the new broker. Download or manually key the new ML IRA buy transactions. So yes, it is applicable in my example but also personal preference amongst Quicken users how to handle.

Jim_Harman

Regardless of whether it is one account or two, after everything was sold are you sure the same funds were purchased, or were ESPNX and JCAPX bought in the new brokerage? That would explain what happened.

You would have to review old statements or look online to be sure.

jr7107

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469766#Comment_20469766

I believe the original problem to be resolved.

The discrepancies were reconciled above with the ticker changes after account review. The discussion took a tangent into handling rollovers/broker changes in Q and behavior when changing tickers among accounts.

jdparker225

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469773#Comment_20469773

Agree.

q_lurker

Regarding …

I know this is off topic but it appears to me that I, if I really wanted to, could fix the problem of the security edits being applied to all accounts: …

The proper way to fix the misuse of the security rename step is to undo that step (rename them back to what they were) and then properly account for how the WMFIX holding became ESPNX shares and JSMGX became JCAPX shares.

The conventional wisdom is that moving or copying individual accounts from one file to another is impractical - risky, difficult or impossible to get right, not worth the effort.

jdparker225

Just how do you "properly account for how the WMFIX holding became ESPNX shares and JSMGX became JCAPX shares”?

I have checked all the statements from ML for the rollover IRA and the rollover IRA never had either WMFIX or JSMGX. ESPNX and JCAPX were purchased in June of 2021. Prior to June of 2021, the rollover account had only cash in it. Prior to the security edit, Quicken's transaction history showed those purchases as purchases of WMFIX and JSMGX. The security edits fixed the holdings and the transaction history at least for that account. It potentially corrupted an old account I no longer have but keep in Quicken for its history. I wish that were not the case but, I'd rather have what I have now than what I had before the security edits.

Shame on me, I guess, for not noticing the problem sooner.

Thanks

Jim

Boatnmaniac

By any chance was your current IRA a rollover from a 401(k) plan or some other tax deferred retirement plan, maybe even rolled over from a different investment company to ML?

If so, did that rollover occur at about the time that these odd security transactions started to occur?

q_lurker

That is saying the original (and subsequent) entries in the ML account should have been ESPNX and JCAPX. From there, it still comes down to the brute force method of changing each transaction's security one by one. If you sort the transaction list by security, you can quite readily paste the correct security over the existing security and move to the next transaction. The process goes quicker than you might expect. This leaves the other accounts properly using those other securities untouched.

You asked two other pertinent questions in your opening post.

Second: How come Quicken hasn't noticed the issue and complained or done something about it?
Third: How did this happen?

How this likely happened - Normally when Quicken encounters a new (to your Quicken file) security in a download, it pauses to ask you what to do, giving you the chance to match it to an existing security, or create a new one. If it finds a close match (like the two Jason Henderson funds), it might make that one the 'default' choice. If the user is not sure, confused, or just goes too quickly, downloads of JCAPX transactions become treated in Quicken as JSMGX transactions. Users have reported instances where Quicken has skipped that user-control check though I am not sure those reports have been validated.

Not noticing the issue - Once that match has been made, Quicken operates with the understanding that downloads of JCAPX (Janus Henderson Forty Fund Class I with CUSIP 'abcdefghi') are to be shown in your Quicken file as JSMGX (Janus Henderson Triton Fund Class I with that same CUSIP identifier). That is when the Security detail box for JMSGX about Matched with online security gets checked. And from that point, Quicken has nothing to complain about. Because the CUSIPs match (purportedly with the user's agreement), matches on ticker and name are not necessary. Indeed, matches on names and tickers can be unreliable as different agencies have used different formats over the years.

Hope this helps

jdparker225

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20469926#Comment_20469926

I might restore and try the brute force method. It would be 3.5 years worth of transactions. There ought to be an easier way.

Re how this likely happened: Quicken never paused to ask me what to do. I can only guess at this point but my guess is that the original purchases were mistreated and Quicken got stuck.

Re not noticing the issue: that does not sound like a good way to do the check.

Thanks
Jim

jdparker225

I created a clone of my Quicken data file from a backup prior to the security edits and did the brute force method of fixing the issue. The first transaction edit for each security responded with a complaint about not having lot information. I responded with OK and got the same pop-up again. It took a couple of OKs before it went on. There were no complaints on subsequent transaction edits for the same security. It was a mind-numbingily easy set of edits but there were many of them. It would have been easy to make some kind of stupid error. It would have been much safer if there had been a way to do it with three edits, one for each security,

So now I have 2 data files:

one with the securities changed in all (2) accounts but, presumably, the lot information is intact. Since both accounts were IRAs, I guess I don't care about lot information.
one with the security changes limited to one account but with at least some missing lot information. But I do not really know if the unchanged account is correct or not. It is not an active account and I don't have any statements to look at to see what was really in it.

Plan to do some double booking for awhile to see if there are any negative impacts to one approach or the other.

Thanks

Jim

Jim_Harman

To see the lot information as currently recorded in Quicken, you can go to an Investing > Portfolio view and next to Group by, select Accounts. Click on the little + sign next to the security name to see the lots.

jdparker225

Interesting: The data file corrected with the brute force method is missing a lot for the single placeholder entry for 11/30/2023 for each of the corrected securities.

Looking at the data file corrected via security edit, there were a number of place holder entries for a number of securities in the IRA account. Among all the lots in that account there, were none dated 11/30/2023 that were not placeholder entries. (OK, that's a double negative. In other words all the lots dated 11/30/2023 were placeholder entries.)

It is not unusual for Quicken, when doing one step update for this account, to pop-up a dialog showing discrepancies between the number of shares shown in Quicken and those shown in the financial institution. I always click on details and select to create a placeholder entry.

Anyway, bottom line is, I am missing those placeholder entries for the lots of the securities updated the brute force way but the number of shares for these securities match between the two data files. That can't be a good thing.

Thanks

Jim

q_lurker

Are you seeing the placeholder transactions? If not, Edit / Preferences - Investments. Show hidden transactions. You should be able to edit those placeholders, I suppose. But to really have reliable data, you need to delete them and enter suitably accurate transactions.

But if you have been accepting placeholders for the last 3+ years where you have had 4 mismatched securities, you could have an almost indecipherable mess on your hands. Or you might have a bunch of meaningless placeholders, because now you’ve corrected the security names in the preceding transactions.

jdparker225

I am seeing placeholder transactions. I am studying them and need to do more. There are some interesting/funny things about them. Need some time to take deep dive into them. Will be busy for next couple of days on family matters.

Thanks

Jim