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; } } }

Smarter Reporting With Tags

belvis

I rely on tags and reports a lot. So I will have multiple tags on lots of transactions. Let's say I have tags called Tag A, Tag B, and so on.

I want to generate a transaction report showing just Tag B and Tag D, ignoring any transaction that does not include at least one of those tags. That works great. But I want to group them independently on the same report. So I set the "Row" to "Tag", but what I get is a group of transactions that have Tag A, Tag B, and Tag C, then below that a group with Tag A, Tag B, and Tag D, then a group with Tag B, Tag E, and Tag F, and so on.

What I want is a group with all the transactions that use Tag B (regardless of what other tags may be used by those transactions) followed by a group with all the transactions that use Tag D (regardless of what other tags may be used by those transactions).

I can get at what I'm after by making two separate reports, one for each tag, but that is less convenient, especially when it's more than 2 tags I'm interested in, because I end up having to jump back and forth between reports rather than staying in one report.

Find more posts tagged with

Reports

Quicken Mac

Reviewed

Status: Reviewed

Comments

bbuckley

Yes I agree! This is very frustrating for reporting. I always put the tags in the order I want them, for example, "Trips:Asheville:John", but when multiple transactions have a different order the report has multiple entries that have to be added together to get the desired results. I just learned that all my painstakingly careful entries get a messed up if I try to Sync to a Mobile/Web file (Which I try once in awhile but it ALWAYS hangs or otherwise messes up my data file).

jacobs

What I want is a group with all the transactions that use Tag B (regardless of what other tags may be used by those transactions) followed by a group with all the transactions that use Tag D (regardless of what other tags may be used by those transactions).

The problem this poses for a report is that any transaction which has Tag B and Tag D would then be listed twice, once in each subtotaled group — meaning the total of the report would not be the total of the transactions, because of that duplication. You might be okay with that for your purposes, but others would not be happy to have a report total which isn't the total of the transactions selected.