Find by amount not working

jhg

In Find and Replace I set up the following:

Amount - Greater than - 5000.00
AND Amount - Less than - 15000.00
Show matches within splits: checked

After clicking FIND the list of displayed transactions omits MANY transactions with amounts in the given range. What am I mising?

Quicken Jasmine

Hello @jhg,

Thanks for reaching out!

That does sound frustrating, and I’d like to help get to the bottom of it. A few quick questions to help clarify:

• Are the missing transactions you're expecting to see part of split transactions, or are they single-line transactions?
• If you uncheck "Show matches within splits," do any of those missing transactions appear?
• Which account types are involved (e.g., checking, credit card, investment)?
• And just to confirm—are the amounts you're filtering for total transaction amounts, or could they be amounts within individual split lines?

Sometimes the results can behave differently depending on whether the match is within a split or the main transaction line, so your answers will help us understand if this is a filter issue or possibly a bug.

Looking forward to hearing back!

Quicken Jasmine

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7961760/find-by-amount-not-working

Just checking in!

jhg

The transactions that are missing are not splits, and it makes no difference if "Show matches within splits" is checked or unchecked.

There's other disturbing behavior in Find/Replace. I set up an amount range to do some testing. I then closed the Find/Replace window and later reopened it; it came up with the originally entered criteria, but when I changed one of the amounts it changed the Field Name from Amount to Payee… now I'm watching Quicken generate a complete list of all transactions in the database, with no way to stop it. There needs to be a "Cancel" button on the search facility for times when people enter (or the program creates) incorrect criteria that select too many rows.

I'll post more details after QUicken finishes doing a brain dump

jhg

Here's one example

Transaction register

The transaction is in a credit card account, and is not a split

Search results

The transaction is missing, but the results include other transactions from the same credit card account.

This is a general issue, searching by amount range just does not work.

CaliQkn

@jhg is it possible that the transaction is from a closed or hidden account? Is the box in the bottom left of the search window checked?

UKR

Find by Amount performs specific to the sign (+ or -) of the query's amount.
The Find query you specified is supposed to find only positive amounts (deposits) in the 1500 … 1600 range.
It will not find debits, i.e., negative amounts, e.g., the -1560 purchase transaction you're missing.

However, the query results will also show transaction totals smaller than +1500 when a transaction has 1 or more Splits and one of the split items falls within the specified range.
These transactions are shown regardless of the setting of "Show matches within splits".
In my test 128 transactions were found, many with a total amount less than 1500. Unchecking "Show matches within splits" did not reduce the number of transactions shown. It remained at 128.
I would concur that this is a bug and needs to be sent up to the programmers for review.

CaliQkn

@UKR you hit the nail on the head. The 1560.00 is a negative number, but the search result the OP showed is all positive numbers. Both numbers in the top and bottom range need to be put in as negative to include the number that is missing.

jhg

Interesting. I expected that since Quicken tries to hide DEBIT vs CREDIT it would understand that I'm interested in the absolute value of a transaction.

Maybe that needs to be added as an option

UKR

BTW, there's already an Idea post on the books about terminating Find/Replace processing.

Please Provide Method of Aborting Find and Replace — Quicken

Please review this Idea, add your vote to the vote count and feel free to add additional comments. More votes are needed if you want the programmers to take action.

Quicken Jasmine

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20487457#Comment_20487457

Thanks for sharing this active idea!

Quicken Jasmine

Hello All,

To help us investigate this issue more thoroughly, we’d like to gather some additional information from those who haven’t already shared it:

1. Exact Steps to Replicate

Please provide the exact steps you're taking in Find and Replace when the issue occurs. For example:

• What search criteria are you entering?
• What settings are enabled or disabled (e.g., “Show matches within splits”)?
• What specific result are you expecting that isn’t appearing?

2. Log Files

If you haven’t already, please share your log files so we can check for background errors or conflicts:

• Open Quicken
• Go to Help > Contact Support > Log Files
• Look for and attach:
  • QW.log (Quicken internal logs)
  • OFXLog.txt (if relevant to your accounts)

These can help us identify any silent issues behind the scenes.

3. Troubleshooting Steps Taken

Let us know what you’ve already tried. For example:

• Have you tested in different accounts (checking, credit, etc.)?
• Have you toggled split settings or tried reversing the amount sign?
• Have you run File > Validate and Repair on your file?
• Does this happen in a new/test file?

Please let me know once you have done so!

jhg

I'm not sure any more needs to be done here.

The problem is that Find/Replace depends on the sign of the amount (debit vs credit) when the intuitive assumption is that it is searching for the absolute value of a transaction. If I want to find transactions between two values I don't care if the numbers are positive or negative, only the absolute value.

I can see cases where the sign might be of interest, so there need to be two options:

• Amount
• Absolute value of amount

In my instance, to find the transaction I was looking for, the criteria should have been ((Amount ⇐ -5000) AND (Amount >= -15000))

There's no bug, just a non-intuitive assumption by the code.

Quicken Jasmine

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20487634#Comment_20487634

Understood, thanks for providing more information. Please don't hesitate to reach out with any further questions or concerns!