First, My Question/Observation makes two assumtions that you may confirm or correct.
Assumptions:
1) TODAY'S BALANCE is the reported "current" balance from my bank including all CLEARED and UNCLEARED transactions.
2) Quicken will not attempt to pair an Upcoming Transaction with an actual bank transaction until it is CLEARED. At the time a bank transaction it is CLEARED it will remove the corresponding UPCOMING TRANSACTION (if there is one) & make an entry in CLEARED transactions.
Question/Observation:
There may be a problem accurately reporting the "Real BALANCE". If the "REAL BALANCE" ONLY takes into account the current balance from the bank and the "UPCOMING TRANSACTIONS". It will be incorrect if the bank balance includes any uncleared transactions that are also contained in the "UPCOMING TRANSACTIONS". There will be a double counting of this single debit item.
My Question is: Is the "REAL BALANCE" smart enough to take into account a transaction that is both a) Uncleared with the bank (but reflected in the bank's current balance), and existing in UPCOMING TRANSACTIONS?
I don't think anyone is "at fault": but I am reasonably certain that pended transactions are not available for download ... and that they should not be available.
Pended transactions are pended for a reason. First of all, they may never clear your account. Second, some pended transactions are not even for the correct amount of the actual transaction.
Downloading pended transactions would require a great deal of extra work. If the transaction actually clears for the amount originally pended, a second download of that transaction would have to occur so the software would know when the transaction actually cleared. If the pended transaction never clears, some sort of transaction would have to download to cause the original pended transaction to be deleted or voided. And if the amount of the pended transaction was different from the amount of its cleared transaction, some method would be needed to handle this: probably a transaction to delete the downloaded pended transaction and another downloaded transaction for the cleared transaction. [And while the pended transaction with the incorrect amount was in your downloaded data ... your "available" balance would still be incorrect.]
In addition to the logic for not downloading pended transactions; I have even stronger reason to believe that pended transactions are not available for download.
I can go to my bank web site and initiate a download from there. No Quicken product (nor any other product) is involved in that download; just my bank and I. I can choose to download a QIF file, or an OFX file, or a QFX file (Quicken desktop OFX file): NONE of those downloads include pended transactions: all those files are intended for software like Quicken and Money. The only way those pended transactions (which I can clearly see on the screen of my financial institution's web site as I initiate the download) can be excluded from those downloads is by my financial institution; I asked for "all" transactions.
I know of no one who has ever reported receiving pended transactions in downloads ... from any financial institution ... to any piece of software.
And I think downloading them would create more problems than it could solve.
My preference is for two balances to be downloaded (and displayed): "cleared balance" and "available balance" (I believe the OFX specs already allow this). And one set of transactions: cleared transactions.
I agree that using pending transactions is problematic & could create more problems.
The problem is real-time vs. next day reporting and Quicken has to decide to do one or the other.
Real Balance INFERS real-time. In fact, Real balance is a direct result (calculation) of the total of ALL those ("problematic") pending transactions and nothing else!
Upcoming transactions are only drawn down on a next day basis.
The nut of the problem is that REAL BALANCE is calculated using both a real-time (bank balance) & next day (upcoming transactions) reporting system & is sometimes inaccurate because of synchronization issues.
* REAL BALANCE may be COMPLETELY a bad idea to implement if it can't be integrated in real-time with the bank's data OR would be redundant if Quicken's approach changed and was calculated on a next day basis**
Real Balance INFERS real-time. In fact, Real balance is a direct result (calculation) of the total of ALL those ("problematic") pending transactions and nothing else!
Upcoming transactions are only drawn down on a next day basis.
The nut of the problem is that REAL BALANCE is calculated using both a real-time (bank balance) & next day (upcoming transactions) reporting system & is sometimes inaccurate because of synchronization issues.
I disagree. In RealBalance; "real" just means what is says, "real". "Real time" is an impossibility; you couldn't click the Refresh button fast enough to get your data in "real time". RealBalance is as current as the last successful "Refresh".
The RealBalance does not include anyfuture Quicken Online Upcoming Transactions: it's the balance supplied by the financial institution + any current (today) or past Quicken Online Upcoming Transactions. Put another way: if there are no Upcoming Transactions dated today or earlier ... the RealBalance is the same as the "current balance".
Upcoming Transactions are "removed" when a downloaded cleared transaction matches them ... when ever that occurs.
[It might be nice if QO could do a better job of matching, but matching is not always as easy as it may seem.]
As long as the financial institutions only provide a current balance that includes pended transactions, there's nothing Quicken can do. If there was a downloaded "cleared balance", Quicken could get the RealBalance closer ... as long as you got all your Upcoming Transactions correct, and as long as those Upcoming Transactions included ALL transactions pending at the financial institution ... including the totally unexpected debit card transaction to have AAA come and give your car a jump start.
If the RealBalance doesn't provide you any useful information, just ignore it. But don't ask it to do the impossible.
I disagree. In RealBalance; "real" just means what is says, "real". "Real time" is an impossibility; you couldn't click the Refresh button fast enough to get your data in "real time". RealBalance is as current as the last successful "Refresh".
The RealBalance does not include any future Quicken Online Upcoming Transactions: it's the balance supplied by the financial institution + any current (today) or past Quicken Online Upcoming Transactions.
I don't think there is anything to disagree about. :)
Perhaps if you take another look at the previous posts, you may see the point about the double counting issue that is occurring with "REAL BALANCE".
If not, let me know and I will post an example of this.
I don't think there is anything to disagree about. :)
You may be right.
Regarding your comment:
"Is the "REAL BALANCE" smart enough to take into account a transaction that is both a) Uncleared with the bank (but reflected in the bank's current balance), and existing in UPCOMING TRANSACTIONS?"
If the balance supplied by the financial institution includes pended transactions, then the answer must be, no.
[Remembering that not all transactions "existing in upcoming transactions" are included in RealBalance; just the ones with dates of today or earlier: QO calls them "Transactions not yet cleared".]
Since Quicken Online has no access to the actual pended transactions, it has no way to know which pended transactions - if any - might be included in the balance supplied by the financial institution, nor which pended transactions - if any - might be represented by "Transactions not yet cleared".
So I think RealBalance isn't a number I'd put much stock in; though I see nothing Intuit can do to make it better as things stand now.
So I think RealBalance isn't a number I'd put much stock in; though I see nothing Intuit can do to make it better as things stand now.
What Intuit should do "might" be the only thing that we have a different take on. I believe that the the problem is serious & significant enough that it requires some kind of remediation.
I was hoping for some kind of comment from the Intuit folks here.........
In my view they really can only do one of three things:
1) Scrap the whole idea of "REALBALANCE"
2) Calculate "REAL BALANCE" only using cleared transactions
3) On the possibility Intuit can read pending transactions from a bank, make Quicken online smart enough to avoid the double counting issue described in previous posts
I imagine 2 would be the most practical & preferable at this point in the software's development. The real time current balance from the bank could still be reported separately as it is now, and the "REALBALANCE" would be much MUCH more accurate .
Problem with "REAL BALANCE" Accuracy? Aug 11, 2009 08:57 pm
This post is about: Quicken Online
There could be an option to click a Pending transaction in your account that is also pending on the bank's account balance that is sent to Quicken Online. Then, QO could reflect your correct balance so you can correctly forcast your amount of money until your next paycheck. Seems pretty easy to me.
Here is what I am finding and what makes QO not work for my daily money management. Forecast is key, but QO does not have the options to accurately forecast, or provide a true REAL BALANCE.
Here is why. QO uses the banks AVAILABLE balance as the account balance, which contains the bank POSTED balance and PENDING transaction balance. Then QO takes your UPCOMING balance and adds that to the BANK balance for a REAL balance. However (in my case), I have duplicate entries in my UPCOMING transactions that are also already included in the banks PENDING transactions. I enter all my transaction via mobile to make sure I do not miss a thing in measure up-to-the-minute cash flow.
If QO would allow you to use the POSTED bank balance along with the UPCOMING QO transactions, then the REAL balance would be highly accurate. It would still be your responsibility to include any PENDING bank transaction that you did not include in the UPCOMING QO tranactions to keep this current.
But if you are entering all your transactions as the happen or as scheduled in your UPCOMING, then you will be fine.
So, in short, my request would be for QO to pull and report only POSTED bank balances. Otherwise, QO is only a reactionary reporting tool and cannot delivery TRUE cashflow forecasting.
No quicken staffer has acknowledged this issue/post and yet it is a MAJOR MAJOR issue...- and don't tell me they don't read this stuff.
I think they may be ignoring it because it is a real blunder to go to the effort to copyright the term "true balance" and present it as a significant feature when the actual implementation of said feature is a huge failure.
And as far as this being a free thing - quicken should not hide behind free as an excuse for poorly implemented software.
I hope they get their act together soon because their chances of being a leader in this area is disappearing fast.
Yes, you're right. The behavior you're describing happens with some financial institutions and not with others.
Can you post back with the names of your financial institutions?
In the meantime, there are a couple of workarounds you've probably already figured out -- you can manually delete the upcoming transaction that you know is already accounted for in the balance your bank sends us. Or, you could wait a day or two for it to officially clear, in which case we'll hopefully match it to your upcoming transaction.
I hope this helps temporarily. It is on our list of things to fix, but I can't promise a date for when it will be changed.
Quicken and MS Money desktop capture only the posted balance. I was thinking that this was the standard.
Logging into Chase and QO kinda defeats the automation QO is offering or any reason to proactively log my transactions. It becomes a reactionary process of weeding our the transactions that are duplicated on a daily basis and makes it a manual process. I can do that in a spreadsheet without QO.
Well, you are right compared to other online services competing for the same space.
Mint.com works off of the POSTED balance with the bank. No questions asked. Oh, and they share reports on your favorite feeds. (Yahoo, MSN, etal).
You are in charge of your pending transactions. If you don't know, then you should not be using your debit card, credit card or checks.
Voice of experience, QO works perfectly. When my balance is in the dangerzone, I get the alerts.
But 90% of the time the duplication between the banks PENDING transactions and my logged UPCOMING transactions trigger NSF alerts and all kinds of red warnings online. After a day or so of actual bank POSTING my account are beautiful.
But for those several days until the bank POSTS the transactions, QO is lost.
So using QO mobile to keep track of ACTUAL TRUE balances or REAL BALANCES does not work. QO works best when you use your debit or credit card, and then wait 2-5 bus days for the transction to post. THEN check your balance. It will be accruate then (if you do not create another transaction in the meantime).
Recently I noticed that my "As of today..." balance is no longer including pending transactions. I've been using the "workaround" you mentioned above (manually deleting any upcoming transaction that shows up in my bank's pending transaction list), which is quite easy to do and very accurate, and is THE reason why I use QO.
I don't know why this was changed, but for me to manually add 10+ transactions everyday to keep my Real Balance accurate is a change for the worse. Big time. Please tell me there is some way for me to revert back to the old way. I love QO, but without accuracy I'll have to find something else that is as accurate as QO used to be. Please help!!!
Forums 
