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; } } }

Why does my new security not get saved to the security list?

EMcRory

I have several securities, using the same security symbol, for tracking various forms of precious metals. The security symbols used are either ^XAUUSD (for gold), or ^XAGUSD (for silver), and they simply track the security based on the spot price of the metals, like a commodity. Any sort of collector value is not tracked. I have different names for the securities because some are rounds, some are bars, and some special products such as proofs, but I track them based on the price of metal they are made from. I like to know how many of each type I have, just for organizational reasons. Just today, I got a Proof American Eagle 1oz coin and tried to add it to my security list but after adding it, it does not appear in the security list. There is no message of any kind that the security has not been saved. I don't understand why I have added different gold and silver products in the past, without a problem, but now the new security is not being saved to the list. I would love some help to figure out why I cannot seem to add another precious metals security. My current list is below, to show how the list is categorized.

Find more posts tagged with

Investments

Windows

Securities

Accepted answers

Jim_Harman

@EMcRory I just did an experiment adding a security with the same ticker as an existing one and it behaved as you describe:

On the Security List, hit Add Security
Enter the name of the new security (not the ticker symbol)
This says "not found" so I click on enter manually
Enter an existing symbol and hit Next
Specify the Asset Class and hit Done
It appears to have accepted the new security but there is no new security in the Security List. Apparently it sees the existing symbol and does not add the new security because it flags it is as a duplicate. I think this behavior is new, in the past there may have been an error message.

If I do this instead, it accepts the new security and symbol

At step 4, leave the symbol blank
Then at step 6 it adds the new security
Click on the name of the new security to open the Security Detail view and click on Edit Details
Add the existing symbol and click on OK
This brings up a dialog with a Merge Quotes checkbox. Leave this blank and click OK
You should now have the new security with the quotes for the existing ticker.

I already have a security BP for BP Plc in a test file and I was able to add securities Big People and Bob Parsons with the BP symbol using this method. I don't know what side effects this might have, but I think it has worked for others.

@mshiggins are you familiar with this situation?

mshiggins

@Jim_Harman if you are referring to the security failing to be created if the symbol already exists in Quicken, yes. It is a longstanding issue/feature. The behavior is the same in Q2017.

The workaround you describe is the approach I have used in the past if I wanted to add more than one security with the same symbol. It came in handy for tracking the Roth 401(k) shares separately from the traditional 401(k) shares within the single 401(k) account Fidelity uses.

All comments

NotACPA

Have you tired clicking "Show Hidden Securities" at the bottom of that security list?

And/Or, you can simply try adding it again.

EMcRory

Yes, I have clicked the "show hidden securities" checkbox…they are still absent!

EMcRory

I have also tried adding the security using different classes, and this did not work either.

bmciance

When did you add them? Have you tried closing Quicken and restarting? I have seen where I added a security and it didn't show in the list until I did that.

Jim_Harman

Also it looks like your security list is filtered to include only securities that have "silver" in the name.

Click on the X next to silver at the top and I bet your Proof American Eagle will appear.

EMcRory

No, even when I type "Proof" in the in filter box, nothing is listed. If I filter using the carat (^)symbol, which all of the ticker symbols associated with the gold and silver security names have that I'm tracking, there is still no sign of the security names I was attempting to create.

EMcRory

Yes, I have restarted the program as well as the computer itself. I have also deleted some old securities that are no longer in my portfolio, thinking that possibly I had exceeded the number of securities allowed. I currently have 541 securities listed and have no idea what Quicken allows.

EMcRory

My first problem adding a new security began just today.

NotACPA

What about when that box is completely empty?

And why can't you simply add the security again?

EMcRory

Perhaps I'm not understanding the questions, but if the filter box is left "completely empty" then nothing will show up. When I try to add a new security, which I've done numerous times in the past, the new security does not get saved; at least that's been my experience just today. That's the whole reason for asking the question that started this discussion.

EMcRory

…I've done some testing and found that a new security added with any name other than ^XAGUSD or ^XAUUSD, works fine. Perhaps it's indicating that there may be a maximum number of securities that can be added starting with the same symbol? I'm going to call support this week and see if they have an aswer.

Sceptic

@EMcRory I think you may have hit an undocumented limit for commodity type securities. To test this out, uncheck "Download Quotes" for one of the ^XAUUSD securities, and then see if Quicken will allow you to add the new security.

Jim_Harman

@EMcRory I just did an experiment adding a security with the same ticker as an existing one and it behaved as you describe:

On the Security List, hit Add Security
Enter the name of the new security (not the ticker symbol)
This says "not found" so I click on enter manually
Enter an existing symbol and hit Next
Specify the Asset Class and hit Done
It appears to have accepted the new security but there is no new security in the Security List. Apparently it sees the existing symbol and does not add the new security because it flags it is as a duplicate. I think this behavior is new, in the past there may have been an error message.

If I do this instead, it accepts the new security and symbol

At step 4, leave the symbol blank
Then at step 6 it adds the new security
Click on the name of the new security to open the Security Detail view and click on Edit Details
Add the existing symbol and click on OK
This brings up a dialog with a Merge Quotes checkbox. Leave this blank and click OK
You should now have the new security with the quotes for the existing ticker.

@mshiggins are you familiar with this situation?

q_lurker

@Jim_Harman What you just described with your first trial and the workaround is Quicken behavior for as long as I can remember. The workaround is the only way I know to get multiple securities to have the same symbol. I would assume the OP knew and understood that approach.

@Sceptic The OP seems to have more such gold securities than silver so I am doubtful of your guess, but it is worth a shot. It also raises the point that only one such security needs the Download quote checked, since all the securities share the same price-history and security data.

smayer97

Could you have reached the maximum capacity of trackable securities in QWin of 2000?

NotACPA

I don't understand "nothing will show up". With my Security List box completely empty, EVERYTHING is displayed.

q_lurker

@EMcRory What name are you actually trying to use?

As noted, I believe you must be creating these securities with a two step process:

Add security manually with a name and type (Other) but no ticker.
Edit the security to apply the ticker.

So the security should appear in the full security list after step 1. Does it? If not, the issue is something other than the ticker symbol you are using.

Jumping ahead of that answer, Quicken will not create a new security with a name matching an existing security. But its comparison is based on something like the first 15 (maybe more) characters of the name. So if you try a name like ‘Silver Rounds_Generic Eagle’, Quicken would not create it at step 1. The first x characters match an existing security name. Quicken does not indicate it is refusing that name.

Jim_Harman

@EMcRory

Perhaps I'm not understanding the questions, but if the filter box is left "completely empty" then nothing will show up.

What we are saying is to click on the X at the right side of the Search box so that it says "Search" in gray letters and the magnifying glass appears. That takes it out of Search mode and should display all of your securities. If the box looks completely empty because it has Space characters in it, there will still be an X at the right and the list will only show securities with names or Symbols that have that many spaces.

Do you see something different?

Jim_Harman

@q_lurker I think your Step 1 got scrambled somehow. Did you mean to say "Add the security manually with a name but no ticker and a Type of Other?

q_lurker

yes. Edited to correct. Thanks.

Jim_Harman

I don't see any correction yet. Would you like me to do it?

EMcRory

Sorry Jim, I have not had a chance to look into this yet. I just got to work and will be tied up for a bit until I can get back to this issue. I really appreciate your help however! Stand by.

EMcRory

Jim, this work around seems to have worked! What I don't understand is why this problem started now. I've been adding securities using the same ticker symbols for multiple gold and silver products for a while now.

mshiggins

@Jim_Harman if you are referring to the security failing to be created if the symbol already exists in Quicken, yes. It is a longstanding issue/feature. The behavior is the same in Q2017.

EMcRory

It baffles me that Quicken doesn't fix this issue! Thanks again for showing me the workaround by way of putting in the ticker symbol AFTER creating the named security. I'm fairly certain that if I were to call support, the support person would not know how to deal with this issue.

Sceptic

@EMcRory in my opinion, it's not an issue that needs to be fixed. Normally you wouldn't want different securities to use the same fund ID or Ticker. Each security should have a unique fund ID or Ticker. Commodity Fund IDs follow the same rule as stock tickers in Quicken. Each Fund ID can only belong to one security.

What you are doing with creating multiple commodity securities is very unusual. It’s possible to create a security in Quicken without a Fund ID and then add the Fund ID afterward, but this is not a safe or supported workaround. It works only because Quicken does not re‑run its ticker/Fund ID uniqueness checks after the initial creation of the security. As a result, Quicken will allow you to attach a duplicate ticker or commodity ID later — even though it normally prevents this.

The problem is that Quicken’s internal systems still expect each ticker or Fund ID to belong to only one security. When multiple securities share the same ID, several issues can occur over time:

Only one of the securities will reliably receive quote downloads
Price history may merge, overwrite, or corrupt
Holdings and performance reports may show incorrect values
Downloaded transactions may attach to the wrong security
Validate & Repair may begin reporting security‑list errors

These issues may not appear immediately, but they tend to surface later as the file grows.

The safe approach is to use the real ticker or Fund ID for one security — the one you want to receive price downloads — and give any additional related securities a unique custom ticker. If you want those custom securities to follow the same price history, you can use Quicken’s ~~Copy Prices From~~ CSV Price Update feature or manually update prices to mirror the real security’s prices without breaking the internal logic.

This avoids corruption, keeps downloads stable, and preserves accurate reporting.

Edit: Removed reference to obsolete feature (removed with Quicken 2018 - I wasn't aware of this).

Jim_Harman

@Sceptic I am not familiar with the "Copy Prices From" feature. How do you do that?

Sceptic

Sorry, that seems to be a feature no longer available in Quicken. The only current options are CSV file update, or manual entry.

mshiggins

@Sceptic I think you are overstating the risks involved with having more than one security using the same symbol. In some cases, Quicken itself creates multiple securities with the same symbol. For example, an ESPP or Employee Stock Option security will have the same symbol.

Here is a discussion from a few years back discussing some of the pros and cons:

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7886109/tracking-the-same-symbol-in-multiple-quicken-accounts-using-different-unique-security-names

Sceptic

@mshiggins In my opinion, that scenario is a different situation, and perfectly ok to do. In that scenario, the different securities with the same fund ID or ticker are being used in their own separate accounts. In this current discussion, the different securities with the same fund ID or ticker are all in the same account. That is where the issue is. Bottom line - Across accounts, identifiers don’t interact. Inside one account, they comingle and Quicken gets confused.

q_lurker

@Sceptic Many many years ago (think early 90s), Quicken did not object to securities sharing the same ticker. Then they programmed in the current behavior including leaving in the current backdoor workaround (probably inadvertently, IMO). That change irritated a select number of users who had been doing that ticker sharing for a number of plausibly valid reasons (details of which elude me at the moment). While I predicted at the time, Quicken would close that backdoor, apparently the backlash was sufficient that they left it open ever since.

In my opinion, you have overstated the risks of sharing a ticker.

Only one of the securities will reliably receive quote downloads - The quote downloads go into a price history file that is primarily ticker based (exception for non-tickered securities). My understanding is that any lookup of a securities price history does so on the basis of the ticker. I do not see your concern as realistic and I am not aware of any such problem having been reported in this community or its predecessors.
Price history may merge, overwrite, or corrupt - What is to merger, overwrite or corrupt? There is only one set of data for ^XAGUSD (any selected ticker).
Holdings and performance reports may show incorrect values - How? Again, there is only one set of prices involved.
Downloaded transactions may attach to the wrong security - That is the commonly the 'catch' for those wanting shared tickers. The downloaded transactions from a FI are CUSIP based, not ticker based. Supposing a users wanted two securities 'Ford' and 'Ford for College' both with ticker 'F'. Maybe in different accounts, maybe in same account. The FI is going to send transaction data based on CUSIP and that 'Matched with online security' only applies to a single security. All such transactions would either flow to 'Ford' or 'Ford for College'. The FI has no way to distinguish the way the user has chosen.
Validate & Repair may begin reporting security‑list errors - I am not aware of any such issue being reported.

I believe users have been using shared tickers for a very long time even though the technique is definitely discouraged by Quicken. I believe users (including the current @EMcRory) have had minimal troubles in doing so and have found their way around the downloading issues in manners that satisfy their needs. @EMcRory has taken the number of securities sharing one ticker to a new extreme (for me), but I do not believe that number is the source of this question/discussion.

Jim_Harman

Note also that in @EMcRory's case, the securities are not not matched with online securities (in their screenshots all the CUSIP IDs are blank) so I think any concerns about mixups of downloaded transactions are unfounded.

mshiggins

@q_lurker thanks for your expanded explanation regarding risks - or lack there of - associated with having multiple securities sharing the same symbol. Nicely elucidated.

Sceptic

@q_lurker thank you for your detailed and thoughtful reply. I may have overstated the risk yes, for this situation with the commodities. The fund IDs are only being used for valuation purposes. But I think it would be diservice for any user to come acress this thread and think they can use the same Fund ID and Ticker without any risk. In the real world, a Ticker and Cusip are an important and unique fund indentifiers for a security. And for that reason alone Quicken programing and architecture should follow suit.

Quicken moved away from allowing shared Fund IDs/tickers because the underlying architecture has never supported multiple securities under one identifier inside the same account. Shared identifiers were never truly supported — only possible through UI loopholes.

As Quicken added modern systems — EWC+, cloud sync, improved quote downloads, and tighter cost‑basis tracking — shared identifiers began causing corruption. The removal of features like “Copy Prices From” reflects Quicken’s shift toward enforcing unique identifiers to prevent these architectural collisions.

Here are my responses to your responses

“Only one security will receive quote downloads — so no problem.”
The issue isn’t quote downloads. The issue is that Quicken cannot maintain two distinct securities under one identifier inside the same account. Both securities map to the same internal price‑history object and the same security‑ID lookup, which causes collisions regardless of quote‑download behavior.
“Price history can’t merge because there’s only one set of data.”
This actually proves the problem. If two securities share the same ticker/Fund ID, Quicken must use one shared price history. That is exactly why data merges, overwrites, and corrupts.
“Reports can’t be wrong because they use the same prices.”
Report errors come from position and cost‑basis collisions, not price differences. When two securities share an identifier, Quicken cannot keep their transactions, cost basis, or realized gains separate. Reports reflect the merged or mis‑assigned data.
“Downloaded transactions use CUSIP, so only one security gets them.”
Partially true. Yes, only one security matches the CUSIP. But the second security becomes structurally unstable: it cannot maintain independent cost basis, positions, or price history. It becomes vulnerable to mis‑assignment, merging, or corruption. The dismissal ignores the consequences of having a “ghost” security with a duplicate identifier.
“Validate & Repair errors haven’t been reported.”
Absence of user reports is not evidence of architectural safety. Most users don’t run Validate & Repair, don’t understand its logs, and don’t recognize corruption when it occurs. The underlying collision still exists whether or not the log reports it.

Yes, it may seem I am overstating the risks for this commodities valuation, but I think it would have been a disservice for me not to speak up about the risks of anyone using loopholes to creating multiple securities with the same Fund ID or Ticker. Someone may come accross this thread and think it would be ok for a stock security to be set up multiple times with the same fund ID, as in the thread that @mshiggins shared. Again, in that case, what made it ok was because the stock securities with the same fund ID were housed in different accounts. But again, someone might not be aware of that subtle difference.

q_lurker

@mshiggins Appreciate the support. I was apparently drafting my comments simultaneous with yours. I appreciate the link to the 2021 discussion.

@Sceptic And I believe it is likewise a disservice to scare users with unfounded conjecture. I have long taken the approach that a one-to-one relationship between security name and ticker is most appropriate, most beneficial, consistent with real world circumstances, and least likely to cause the user confusion and least likely to lead the user to make errors. Further, I would not expect Quicken's programmers to endorse shared tickers. The user must take responsibility when using the program in unconventional manners.

BUT, and its a big but, I have not seen definitive evidence, that sharing a ticker has caused corruption within the database or internal calculational errors on Quicken's part for performance or holdings.

Now I will add that as I use a couple of AI agents, they make the same sort of claim as you do. (Question was: Is it a fact that within Quicken have two or more securities share the same ticker symbol will corrupt the database or cause calculation problems for performance or holdings?)

But digging a touch deeper, for example, one refers to this post in the community from just this year as a source:

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7972886/both-securities-are-resolving-to-the-same-underlying-entry

But looking at that post, the discussion does not support the AI position, nor was it clearly two securities sharing the same ticker. The post was essentially unresolved when the OP failed to respond. Ergo, I don't trust an AI answer to that type of question at this point. Actually, challenging Copilot on their statements, the AI backed off. I'd hate to see an AI agent use your post as further evidence.

Put a test together demonstrating such calculational errors and I'll reconsider. A test proving (really proving) database corruption is likely beyond reasonable efforts. FWIW: the validation routine does not identify a shared ticker as a problem.

Beyond that, we've ventured too far from @EMcRory 's issue at this stage. Until he has clarified and addressed our questions or resolved his, I'll be quiet.