Quicken Community is moving to Single Sign On! Starting 1/22/21, you'll sign in to the community with your Quicken ID. For more information: http://bit.ly/CommunitySSO

A Quicken Bug in investment reporting after a stock split

Specific example:
A multi-asset undergoes a stock split:
Before the stock split – 75 shares of a multi-asset (allocation is 27% large cap, 72% small cap, 1% International).
“Portfolio Value Report” with the “Don’t subtotal” option shows correct share number etc.
The “Asset class subtotal” option also shows correct share and Balance allocations.
Stock splits 4:1 Action = StkSplit
After the split, the “Portfolio Value Report” “Don’t subtotal” option still shows the correct updated share number (300) etc.
However, the “Asset class subtotal” option shows an incorrect share total and allocation. The total = 177.2 and is allocated as 12.33% 87.66% and 0.02% respectively., The product of Shares x Price is not equal to the Balance, but the Balance is correct and is allocated correctly.

Comments

  • Jim_Harman
    Jim_Harman SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    Interesting.

    Please compare your Portfolio Value report subtotaled by asset class to the Asset Allocation report. Do you see the same issue in both reports?
    QWin Premier subscription
  • marshc01
    marshc01 Member ✭✭
    Same problem - in fact that report led me to post my "bug" report as the simplest way I could illustrate the issue (narrowed down to one asset in one account and what is shown the day before and after the stock split.) I see no self-evident explanation for the false allocations - they seem arbitrary.
  • q_lurker
    q_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    What is the security?  When was the split?
  • marshc01
    marshc01 Member ✭✭
    Thanks for the feedback. Not to evade the question, but this is a genuine bug that is independent of such parameters. Here’s the proof:
    Create a dummy account with $1000 cash balance (or any other).
    Purchase a dummy asset of 100 shares at $10 as of 3/30/2021 (or any date)
    Edit the asset details – multi-asset, (eg 50% Large Cap, 40% Small Cap, 10% International, or any other allocations)
    Split the asset 4:1 (or any other) as of 3/31/2021 (or other date). Use a share value after split of $2.5 (or don’t enter a value)
    The Investment Portfolio Value report for 3/30/2021 will show the correct share number with the “Don’t subtotal” option and a correct allocation with the “Asset allocation” option.
    The Investment Portfolio Value report for 3/31/2021 will show the correct share number (400 in my example) with the “Don’t subtotal” option but an incorrect total and allocation with the “Asset allocation” option. In my example: 100 Large Cap, 64 Small Cap, 4 International. Total – 168 but should be 400. Percentage allocation is also wrong. All else is correct.
  • q_lurker
    q_lurker SuperUser ✭✭✭✭✭
    My test - 
    • Split Fund security created with asset allocation of 10, 20, 30, and 40% to first four asset classes
    • Bought 100 shares at $10/share = $1000 total
    • StkSplit through Enter Transactions button at 4 new for 1 old; new price = 2.5 (no change in total value intended)
    Before and after pics side by side

    What I see wrong are the 'share' quantities associated with each asset class.  I agree that all data is proper if not subtotaled by asset class.  Other than this one presentation of 'shares', I am not seeing related errors.  How those numbers are actually calculated is truly baffling.  For my case, they should be 40, 80, 120, and 160 totaling 400.  

    I have always considered that pseudo-share presentation really strange and difficult to understand.  IMO, the report should show the real number of shares and a separate presentation (column) for the allocation percentage.  But that would mean a separate column for the Asset Allocation subtotal that would not apply for the other subtotal options.  

    Thanks for your post.  I am sure it can get added to the list of bugs.  But don't hold your breath on a fix simply because there appear to be no consequences (except confusion).

This discussion has been closed.