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; } } }

I would like to understand what a linked checking account does for you that can't be done without it

Chris_QPW

I'm especially interested in hearing what Quicken Mac lacks in its existing brokerage accounts.

From what I have seen the main reason that Quicken Windows got this feature is because its brokerage accounts were first a "list" that changed into a very restrictive brokerage account "register" (To this day the documentation still calls it a list).

Anyone that thinks because they see some kind of checking account features at their broker that this is a reflection of this is fooling themselves. When available (not for retirement accounts for instance) it doesn't matter what is at the financial institution. The truth behind the scenes is that the transactions are all downloaded into the investment account and cash transactions are then pushed/pulled from this virtual checking account.

A side note of asking this question is because I think there are "side effects" of having such a virtual account that haven't been specified in the request for this feature, like having the account appear separately in different parts of Quicken that the Quicken Mac developers might not be aware of and as such when they develop this feature this might not be implemented.

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

markus1957

I would like to understand what a linked checking account does for you that can't be done without it

Be included in Projected Balances aka cash flow. A linked account can be included but an investment account cannot. I tried it for a while to experiment with a brokerage cash management account. Ultimately I went back to mostly using my checking account so I unlinked it.

As for the investment account register structure, based on the behavior I've seen, I'm inclined to think it is now a hybrid of spending account registers and the old investment account register tables. The segmented types of transactions in the manual entry process and the fields available, make it look like there might be an underlying table structure on the investment register side that is almost identical to spending accounts. An elaborate query combines them for display as the register.

I would speculate that the linked account structure is not virtual, but merely hidden, where the linked account process exposes it. I agree it wasn't always this way, but it changed several years ago.

Sceptic

My theory is that all investment accounts on Quicken Windows has the ability to have a linked checking account. It is just made only available for certain account types.

I think Quicken developed the ability to have linked checking accounts for investment accounts, in response to MS Money's Investment account structure. In MS Money, every investment account had separate investment and cash registers. I remember it was cumbersome because you needed to flip back and forth between the two registers. I thought that set up lacked continuity.

I've tried to use investment accounts with linked checking accounts but found their features lacking when it came to online connectability and reconciliation. What I have evolved to, and found what works best for me is to set up "linked" investment and cash accounts as totally separate accounts and link them with "X" transactions. This way I can connect with online services for both sides, and fully reconcile both sides.

In my opinon, there is no value or benefit to having these investment accounts with linked checking accounts. I think users are placing value on them because they think they need them because their brokerage offers investment accounts with cash management services or checking accounts. If you have such an arrangement with your broker, you can always set them up as separate accounts and link them "manually" with "X" transactions. Which again, in my opinion is a better and more complete setup.

Chris_QPW

I base my remarks on "virtual checking account" on the fact that both in the old OFX logs and the Cloud Sync logs for Express Web Connect + there is clearly only one account, the brokerage account. Where the "splitting" happens can be debated, but clearly the download is one stream of data that then gets split based on having the option on in Quicken or not. It doesn't start at the financial institution.

Chris_QPW

My theory is that all investment accounts on Quicken Windows has the ability to have a linked checking account. It is just made only available for certain account types.

I absolutely agree, there is really only a base "investment account type" with small variation on the way it treats that account, and the ability to link a checking account or not is one of them. I was surprised lately that there is an "inherited IRA account type" and it allows for a linked checking account. So, clearly these are just "flag" choices in the software.

EDIT: Another compelling reason I think that they are "virtual" is the fact that when they make changes to the other non-investment accounts they automatically are in all those accounts, but lots of times the "linked checking accounts" get 'left behind' or in other cases they have problems that no other non-investment account has.

Chris_QPW

I will throw this out. One thing that was pointed out lately is that in Quicken Windows you can "Write a check" and flag it to be printed from and investment account, but the "Write check dialog" that actually allows printing will not pick it up. This is clearly just an oversight and even though I have never used it, I'm sure that Quicken Mac has no such limitation.

Sceptic

What is very strange about that is any type of check writing from an inherited IRA is absolutely not allowed. I think that when they created the account type, they enabled that flag in error.

Jon

I can print checks for my Fidelity CMA, which is a brokerage account in Quicken Mac. I haven't tried other types of investment accounts.

Sceptic

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20574833#Comment_20574833

That just irks me. Inherited IRAs are not allowed to have linked checking accounts, therefore, a person is never allowed to write their own QCD check from an Inherited IRA. Then the QCD check must be sent directly from the custodian/trustee to the charity. If the person sends their own QCD check from an IRA account that doesn't allow checkwriting, it will be treated as a IRA distrbution, and a regular charitable cash donation - not a QCD.

That is the issue with allowing checkwriting for investment accounts in Quicken. If the brokerage does NOT allow IRA checkwriting, Quicken cannot “override” that. Most brokerages are not legally allowed to offer checking services to their clients. Currently there are only four brokerages that can legally offer full checking services to their clients. These brokerages have the infastructure in place for proper tax handling when a client writes their own check. The majority of others do not. If a Quicken user writes their own check from an investment account that doesn't allow it, they are essentially writing a bad check.

Chris_QPW

Yeah that was mentioned in the original discussion. But in the scope of Quicken, I don't think Quicken should be the gatekeeper. And the main reason is because I seriously doubt there is anything in the existing protocol that will flag that and I don't think there is any hope that Quicken Inc/Intuit can influence the financial institutions and people controlling the standards to put it in.

But even more to the point you can't write a check on any given account unless the financial institution allows it. The fact that it might cause a tax penality or not is on the user. At least until better handling of QCDs and such in Quicken. And then in that case Quicken should have some way to ask the user what is the intent. In the exact same account two different checks could have two different tax ramifications.

Sceptic

In my opinion Quicken should not have investment accounts with linked checking accounts. And for liability sake, also not allow check writing from any investment accounts.

Jon

I took a look this morning and it appears that QMac would let me print a check from any investment or retirement account that I have, including my old 401K accounts. The only accounts I have that don't show up in the print dialog are cash and credit card accounts.

Since QMac doesn't actually print the entire check - you have to buy printed checks and then QMac fills them out for you - I don't really see a problem with this. Nobody's going try to print a check for an account that they don't already have checks for.

Jim_Harman

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20574843#Comment_20574843

I disagree with not allowing check writing from investment accounts. It may not be a good idea to use an investment account to pay for living expenses directly, but for taxable accounts, a check is just a type of withdrawal. If the brokerage will issue a checkbook, I think there should be a way to record the checks in Quicken. I also thank that any account that supports check writing should also support check printing.

For check writing from IRAs, I think there should be some sort of warning in Quicken that user-written checks from an IRA might not qualify as a QCD, and encouraging users to check with the IRA administrator to see if a user-written check will qualify.

I also think Quicken should implement native support for QCDs. Currently QCDs must move through a taxable account in Quicken for them to be recorded correctly in the Tax reports and Tax Planner. There is a long-standing Idea post requesting this, which has 214 votes and has been in the Planned state for over 3 years.

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/7864626/improve-handling-of-ira-distributions-including-qcds-and-roth-conversions

Regarding linked checking accounts, the only use I have found for one is for managing a Trust. The Trust requires that its net income be distributed to the beneficiary, and the standard accounting practice is to track and report on income and principal separately. In my case, all of the trust's assets are held in one brokerage account which is connected for transaction downloading. It requires some manipulation of the downloaded transactions, but I can use the linked checking account to track the trust's income, expenses, and distributions.

Sceptic

I agree that it is not a problem, because hopefully most people would know that you cannot write or print your own checks from retirement accounts except for very specific exceptions. But, there are always some users that will try to find loopholes to write or print checks from their retirement accounts and not understanding the legal and tax implications.

Sceptic

@Jim_Harman I didn't read the thread you attached completely, but it doesn seem to relate to the issue I am addressing

For legal reasons, most brokerages (all but 4) cannot offer investment accounts with a linked checking account. That means only a client of one of those brokerages can legally write their own QCD or RMD check. By allowing check writing from retirement accounts on Quicken, I think it sends the wrong message to users of Quicken, who don't realize that is available to only a small subset of users, and who also don't understand the legal and tax ramifications of writing a check from a broker that doesn't allow it.

As for investment accounts with linked checking accounts on Quicken, they are simply not needed. They are an artifact from long long ago. They were simply Quicken's attempt to compete with MS Money. You can accomplish the same thing by setting up a separate investment and checking acounts and link them with "X" transactions.

John_in_NC

Chris:

I am not sure what info your OP was intended to glean. But, I will say that I do not find it a drawback to not having linked checking accounts in QMac. I suspect the few people who clamor for this are simply wanting to reproduce what they were familiar with.

I can write (and actually print) checks from investment accounts if needed. I can setup scheduled transactions for cash transactions. I cannot schedule investment transactions, and that gets asked for a lot. About the biggest hassle is that all cash transx must have a "Type" of Payment/Deposit. The columns available are ones from both investment and cash/credit accounts.

I prefer that my Quicken data represents real world accounts, so I am not a fan of "virtual" accounts.

markus1957

Agree that downloads are one stream of data for both spending accounts and investment accounts. The old OFX structure provides the means to accommodate both types of data streams. I think it remains the case that Quicken takes the download stream and plugs it into its own table structure. We might be debating the semantics of "virtual".

Investment account registers for a while now are no longer limited to investment type transactions only. They appear to be organized into a hybrid of both spending account transactions and investment account transactions, each with their own distinct data table structure. In my mind segregating spending type transactions in investment accounts from investment type transactions by using a linked checking account is more cosmetic than virtual.

The reason being is that it might be a more complicated workflow to display spending transactions and investment transactions together in the same register than it is to separate them into separate registers which is more indicative of their natural and historical state.

Sceptic

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20574903#Comment_20574903

The issue isn’t about users committing fraud. The issue is that investment accounts legally cannot issue checks unless the custodian explicitly authorizes checkwriting.
A regular checking account is designed for checkwriting; an investment account isn’t. If Quicken allowed users to print checks on accounts where the custodian doesn’t permit it, the check would be an unauthorized instrument, and that creates regulatory, banking, and contractual liability — even if the user’s intent is honest.

Chris_QPW

To be honest my main goal is the belief that linked checking accounts were created as a workaround for a limitation that Quicken Windows had because of the history of the code and that the Quicken Mac developers are making a big mistake by saying they will implement this in Quicken Mac.

But I'm certainly open to the idea that I'm missing something and that there is a compelling reason why linked checking accounts are needed. So, far I haven't heard of one. For the true edge cases like QCDs I think @Jim_Harman's proposals far better solve those kinds of problems.

Chris_QPW

I would like to state the reason I don't think Quicken shouldn't be the gatekeeper of this is because I'm thinking of the "actual world" instead of the ideal one. I don't think at this point it is practical to believe that the financial institutions will provide the information needed for Quicken to do the right thing automatically. Given that, then Quicken should error on providing the functionality for when it is needed and the user has to be responsible to use those features "wisely".

There are tons of ways to get yourself in trouble in Quicken if you don't know what you are doing. It is in fact one of the reasons I would no longer recommend Quicken Classic to a person that doesn't already know finances very well.

Boatnmaniac

I concur.

Sceptic

I agree. But user responsibility only matters when the underlying action is authorized; checkwriting from an account that legally cannot issue checks isn’t a matter of judgment — it’s a matter of compliance.

The other thing it's not only QCDs, but the same or more serious compliance issues exist for RMD's as well.

If an IRA doesn’t allow checkwriting, any check written from it bypasses the custodian, bypasses 1099‑R reporting, and creates an unreported distribution. That’s why Quicken cannot allow checkwriting unless the custodian explicitly supports it.

Here is the bottom line for me -

Quicken should not allow checkwriting directly from any brokerage account, period. Checkwriting should only be allowed from an associated checking account, if the brokerage legally can offer it. (again only four can do so currently) Again that associated checking account doesn't need to be set up as a linked checking account on Quicken.

Sorry Chris, I am probably "beating a dead horse", but I have said my peace, so I will bow out. Thank you for giving me an opportunity to state my case.

Jim_Harman

@Sceptic could you identify the four brokerages that can have linked checking accounts?

My main experience is with Vanguard, and for years they have offered check writing on taxable brokerage accounts, but not IRAs. The checks are ~~drawn on~~ [clarifying] paid from the Money Market settlement account. They discourage check writing, but you can still set it up if you want.

They manage the check writing behind the scenes via a relationship with a bank. When you write a check, it is processed by the bank and the downloaded transactions come from Vanguard. They are are a Sell of the settlement fund and a Withdraw for the check amount. I never found the linked checking account to be useful, because Quicken would record the transactions as a SoldX, sending the money to the linked account, and a Withdraw from the linked account. As a result, the linked account always ended up with a zero balance.

To make a QCD at Vanguard, you go to their website and submit a QCD request. You identify the amount and the charity and they send you a check made out to the charity. You send the check to the charity along with their contribution form.

Chris_QPW

Here is what CoPilot says on this:

Chris_QPW

I'm going to repost this comment because with these comments that get collapsed it might get missed.

This to me is the "smoking gun" on why in fact linked checking accounts are needed, even in Quicken Mac.

"Checkwriting should only be allowed from an associated checking account" (as stated by @Sceptic )

What does this even mean? (I had to look up the details that follow)

Technically there isn't any such thing as an "associated checking account". By law brokerages can't have checking accounts. (stated by me before researching)

So, how are they giving "check writing"? (the brokerage firm) The basic answer is they aren't.

What they are doing is sweeping the money from/to a bank account. That is account is either a separate bank, or the given financial institution is authorized to act as both an investment firm and a banking firm. But even in the case that they are acting as a banking firm those are "separate sweep accounts".

Given that then what really should be happening is that the financial institution should present these banking accounts to Quicken as a separate account. And in an ideal world that is exactly what would happen.

But again, we aren't living in that world, and what they are actually doing is funneling the transactions through the investment transaction protocol.

I now see that this is one of the reasons Quicken Windows was forced into making linked checking accounts! It wasn't just the limited investment account register.

Sceptic

@Chris_QPW I hate to say this but your list is incorrect. There used to be 5 brokers that offered true checking accounts with their Traditional IRAs:

@Jim_Harman - yes the list includes Vanguard

Fidelity
Charles Schwab
Vanguard (limited)
TD Ameritrade
ETRADE*

I started saying five and listed the five brokerages in my other comments. But started saying four because, Vanguard is limited in what checks are allowed. Then, now, I just learned that TD Ameritrade and ETRADE* have discontinued checkwriting from their Traditional IRAs.

So now there are only three brokerages that allow full checkwriting on their Traditional IRA accounts, and their taxable brokerage accounts -

Fidelity
Charles Schwab
Vanguard (limited)

Chris_QPW

I have no "stake" in the answer, it just what Copilot said. 😂

Sceptic

@Chris_QPW when a brokerage allows checkwriting, they always partner with a banking entity to do so.

Brokerage	IRA Checkwriting Partner	How Checks Are Processed
Fidelity	UMB Bank, N.A.	External bank prints & processes checks; Fidelity handles IRA reporting
Charles Schwab	Schwab Bank (internal)	Schwab Bank processes checks; Schwab Brokerage handles IRA reporting
Vanguard	No external partner	Vanguard redeems VMFXX shares to fund checks

Vanguard offers limited checkwriting because they have no external banking partner.

Yes, brokerages cannot themselves offer checkwriting. They partner with a banking entity to do so. I've also mentioned this in other comments. But for simplicity sake, I just mention the broker only.

Sceptic

https://community.quicken.com/discussion/comment/20574934#Comment_20574934

@Chris_QPW I should have read this comment first. Sorry. It would have saved me from reiterrating what you already said here. This new thread format is a pain sometimes because comments are easily missed because either they are collapsed or not in chronological order.

Sceptic

I've learned that you need to verify what Copilot says sometimes. I sometmes know they are wrong, and question their answer. Their responses sometimes are amusing. Most of the time they give a plausible explanation. But other times, they will acknowledge their mistake.

Chris_QPW

I want to thank everyone that has responded to this thread. You have contributed greatly to my understanding of why this feature was put in.

Whereas I started with the belief that this was just because of the limitations of the Quicken Windows investment register I now see that in fact it that was the case Quicken Inc or Intuit before them could have fixed it long ago.

But like a lot of core problems we see in Quicken the original source is in fact the financial institutions. Linked checking accounts is a kludge in Quicken to work around bad data from the financial institutions, just like many more kludges in Quicken.

What I have been calling a "virtual checking account" is in reality an account that really exists in the real world, but the brokerage firm are hiding.

You have a data flow where the brokerage firms are taking an external checking account's transactions and forcing them through the data feed of the investment account that and then on the other side Quicken is trying to recreate the real account.

In some cases, I rather not really have the "real world representation" and this is one of them. Just as I rather have the MMF sweeps just be the cash balance, in this case I would just rather deal with this the investment account even though it doesn't represent what is really going on in the background.

And I will point out something else. As far as I know there isn't way for the financial institution to actually send data to Quicken through the investment account where Quicken will treat is directly as a check. I believe (but I might be wrong) that one has to manually change the transaction downloaded to become a check transaction. I would expect instead the original downloaded transaction to be more like just a withdraw transaction.

Sceptic

I hope @Chris_QPW won't mind that I add a complete list all the brokerages that offer checkwriting for their Traditional IRAs and taxable investment accounts. These are the accounts that would be a candidate for a linked checking on Quicken. But as Chris' comments above indicate, how well they work or interface with Quicken depends on the brokerages.

I myself will restate that there is no real need for an investment account with a linked checking account on Quicken. Just simply set up a separate investment account and checking account, and then manually link them with "X" transactions. But again, the arrangement only works as well as the online capabilities of the brokerage and the partner banks.

Brokerage	Bank Partner	Type	Notes
Fidelity	UMB Bank, N.A.	External	External bank prints & processes checks; Fidelity handles IRA reporting
Charles Schwab	Schwab Bank	Internal	Schwab Bank processes checks; Schwab Brokerage handles IRA reporting
Vanguard	None	N/A	Vanguard redeems VMFXX shares to fund checks
Wells Fargo Advisors	Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.	Internal	Taxable Accts only - Full cash‑management suite
Merrill Edge	Bank of America	Internal	Taxable Accts only - Linked bank checking
Robinhood	Coastal Community Bank	External	Taxable Accts only - Full checking

I have a Wells Fargo Advisors Trust account with full cash management. I tried setting it up as a linked checking account, but the results were not good. The reconciliation process for the checking account was antiquated. I could not set up online services for the linked checking account. I don't remember them now, but there were other things that made it very cumbersome.

So I decided to separate the linked accounts and set up a separate investment account and checking account. It works great. I can download transactions for both the investment and checking account as separate accounts. For Wells Fargo Advisor accounts with cash management, I would never recommend using a linked checking account on Quicken

John_in_NC

When I opened my taxable investment account with Morgan Stanley, they sent me a book of checks and debit card. They use Morgan Stanley Bank N.A.

Everything draws off the cash balance in the account with a similar representation on their website/Quicken download. Reconciling to the cash balance is no issue.

I am not sure of the point of this thread: does it really have anything to do with Quicken for Mac, or issues with linked cash accounts in Windows?

Chris_QPW

The reason it should concern Quicken Mac users is because the Quicken Mac developers have said they are going to implement the same linked checking account feature in Quicken Mac.

It has bothered me for quite some time since I have been under the impression the only reason it was even being considered in Quicken Mac is because of Quicken Windows users that had converted over to Quicken Mac. They usually complain right after the conversion because their linked checking accounts don't get converted correctly.

I now know that there is a reason for this feature other than limitations in Quicken Windows, but frankly I see it as a hack for bad data. But if Quicken Inc dropped all the hacks they have had to put in over the years most of the downloading of transactions, online bill payments, and such would also be "questionable".

Sceptic

Yes I think so. These things are all related. The bottom line for Mac users is, just because Quicken Windows offers brokerage accounts with linked checking accounts that doesn't make it a good thing. I've outlined some of the issues I have had and how a linked checking account really doesn't add any benefit. Writing your own RMD or QCD check could make a linked checking account be of benefit, only if your brokerage can legally offer checking or checkwriting capabilities from a traditional IRA. I think we had a good discussion thanks to Chris. Not everyone is going to agree on everything. But hopefully some good information has been flushed out so people can decide if an investment accout with a linked checking is a good setup for their needs.

NotACPA

Strawman logic fallacy. If the FI doesn't allow checks to be issued against an investment account … how would a user know what TRABA and account number to use on the MICR line of the checks?

For both my wife and myself, our taxable Fidelity account is our primary checking account … and the account number is the MICR line has both additional numeric characters and a numeric-for-alpha character substitution for the account number.

Even if someone used the TRABA from another account at that FI, the check would bounce as soon as it hit the FI's bank partner. And there's plenty of legal precedent, already, for writing bad checks.

Jim_Harman

One other point on linked checking accounts before we bring this to a close:

Linked accounts are not useful when the brokerage keeps uninvested cash in a money market fund and downloads a Bought transaction for each deposit and a Sold to cover each check, because unless you delete all the Bought and Sold transactions, the account's cash balance and thus the linked account balance always goes to zero.

In that case, however, a linked checking account may be more useful now that Quicken has implemented the option to treat a money market fund as cash. Then the uninvested funds will remain as Cash in Quicken's account and thus appear as the balance in the linked account.

Boatnmaniac

Fidelity has downloaded the Core Position MMF position as Cash into Quicken since at least 2002. When I set up my mother's Trust brokerage account for her in 2013 I did select the option to show that "cash" in a linked checking account so I could easily track the cash balance, deposits into it, transfers out of it and, yes, payments made via both ACH/EFT and checks. And there were no buy/sell MMF transactions involved at all. It worked really well until 2019 when she passed away and I needed to close out the account.

When Fidelity migrated to EWC+ from DC last year it messed up the cash reporting process so Fidelity and Quicken needed to come up with the current process which has now been extended to some other FIs.

So, yes, I agree that the linked checking account has real value in this type of situation. It made my life and use of Quicken easier back then because the transfers between the brokerage account and the linked checking account occurred automatically in the background without me needed to do anything. It would be a real disservice to many Quicken users to remove the linked checking account option for at least taxable brokerage accounts.

But I agree, without the MMF being treated as cash the linked checking account likely has little or no value.

Jim_Harman

I have started experimenting with a Fidelity account which started showing its cash as a position in FDRXX in October of last year. Today I switched it to show that position as cash and the change appears to have gone smoothly, on the surface at least. The Bought and Sold transactions for FDRXX are gone and the ReinvDivs have changed to Divs. If I get brave, I will take a backup and try changing it to a linked checking account.

This is probably a topic for another discussion, but one issue I have noticed is that the FDRXX position is still showing in the Online Center. The Online Center Compare to Portfolio and Reconcile Shares from the account's gear menu say the account and brokerage holdings are in agreement.

Chris_QPW

I remember one post where a person noted the same thing, that the Online center doesn't display the right information, so I imagine a bug report is in order for this. It is most likely just something the developers never thought of.

markus1957

I expect what you see is "as designed" behavior. Holdings data are sent by the FI during each download. So, you are seeing what the FI is reporting to Quicken. Quicken recognizes you have elected to treat it as cash, so it reports that holdings are in agreement.

I learned experimenting with the Vanguard settlement fund that you can hold an actual position in the fund that is separate from the settlement fund holding. So, Quicken can't just ignore the ticker, it would have to discriminate a settlement fund holding from an actual holding which as I recall was not segregated in the holdings data sent during the download.

Then after trades there is often a period where cash is reported until it is incorporated into the settlement fund. I could see where the math while not complicated, could get confusing if Quicken tried to implement it.

In the register, how does cash shown versus cash reported by FI behave with the selection to treat it as cash?

Jim_Harman

In the register, how does cash shown versus cash reported by FI behave with the selection to treat it as cash?

@markus1957 In this Fidelity register, the FDRXX holding is shown as cash and as I said earlier, the Bought and Sold transactions for FDRXX are gone and the FDRXX ReinvDivs have changed to Divs, so all is good in that regard.

markus1957

I was not clear enough with the question. When you click on the amount link next to Cash Balance in the bottom right corner of the register, it compares the Quicken cash balance with the FI reported online cash balance.

I'm curious since Fidelity does not know about your Quicken selection for FDRXX, depending how they report FDRXX (which sounds like they report it as a holding rather than a cash amount), it would show a zero online cash balance reported and Quicken would show the value of FDRXX in cash. Some FIs using settlement funds do not report the cash balance so that might happen too. Normally, the window pop-up would offer to enter a cash balance adjustment transaction if the amounts differed.

Chris_QPW

I'm going to post this here because when you comment too deep the forum tends to hide the comments.

I expect what you see is "as designed" behavior. Holdings data are sent by the FI during each download. So, you are seeing what the FI is reporting to Quicken. Quicken recognizes you have elected to treat it as cash, so it reports that holdings are in agreement.

I want state why I think this is a bug.

The feature "treat this MMF as cash" purposely doesn't track the real world. It is a "data manipulation/transformation"". And that is what the user has asked for.

The reason I believe that the Online Center has a bug is because I believe that Quicken should be consistent in the way it shows the data. For instance, I expect what is shown in the Holdings view to be consistent with what is shown in the Portfolio view.

And I will address one more thing that was mentioned, the summary information that the financial institution sends with the downloaded transactions hasn't changed. It will certainly reflect what the financial institution has, as in the number of shares you have in the MMF if they are using one.

But that is in fact the "job" of the feature, to hide the fact that the financial institution is treating it as a security when the user just wants to treat it as a cash balance.

So, part of that job/feature is to ignore any investment share balance of a MMF that has been marked as "treat as cash". If it wasn't doing that then you would get placeholders for that MMF.

Jim_Harman

I hate nested replies.

The Update Cash balance window lists the cash balance in Quicken and the cash balance downloaded from Fidelity and they are the same.

On the Balances tab in the Online Center it lists the same amount as Cash.

NotACPA

Co-Pilot is, simply, wrong in several aspects.

For each of the "dual-charter" institutions, no single legal entity holds both charters. It's a separately incorporated subsidiary that holds the 2nd charter.

Also, "Wells Fargo Advisors" is the brokerage subsidiary. "Wells Fargo Clearing" is a clearing-house … not a brokerage.