Future Transactions

So I am testing out YNAB for the first time. I have been using ms money for over 21years now. I found YNAB to be the closest to how I am doing my budget. So far I am liking what I am seeing except for one aspect. Future Transactions...

I do our budget for the next month before that month begins. As soon as I get my last check for the month, I plan the next month. This means that I pay all of my bills at the beginning of the month for the entire month. What I don't like is how YNAB views those bills. They fall into the scheduled transactions as opposed to "this just happened". I could just date those bills for today but according to YNAB's website, they only auto match up to 10 days. Some of my bills are at the end of the month so those probably won't auto match when the bill comes in.

I also don't like how the amount spent is not already removed from the budget line item. The transaction will go "through" in X days but the funds should be viewed as "gone" now.  When I look at the entire budget, I want to see where that category is at "now" as it pertains to that month. I should not have to go into the inspector page to see what it would be after future transactions are reconciled as it pertains to this month. There is a difference between "Scheduled Repeated Transactions" and "Enter Now/Set Future Date". Once I enter the transaction (aka sever it from the Scheduled Transaction), I would like for it to be accounted for in my budget (regardless of whether it is dated for the future of this month). As long as it is for this month and has been entered in the register, count it against that budget category. 

I do my bills via my bank which mails the check. I date my transactions for the dates when the check is slated to be delivered. Those funds should be viewed as spent already.

270replies Oldest first
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Active threads
  • Popular
  • jenmas said:
    And nolesrule might not be a current subscriber, but he has indeed used the software.

     To be fair, this aspect is irrelevant. I started (continued?) this discussion and I _am_ currently using the software. Strawmaning the topic based off of whether nolesrule    is currently using YNAB seems silly.

    Reply Like 4
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 5
      • Reported - view

      RIP_MSMoney Personally I think it should at the very least include all uncleared transactions in the lookback.

      Reply Like 5
      • bevocat
      • Sometimes, It Just Sucks to Be You
      • bevocat
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      nolesrule Well, that just makes too much sense and references metadata that the developers have access to! 😂

      Reply Like 2
  • Blue Filly said: I dont know why but you guys are reminding me flat-earthers and anti-vaccine supporters.
    Blue Filly said:
    I don't understand why you are making this personal

     Blue Filly Seriously, please just stop.. http://bfy.tw/N5bu

    These lines of comments help no one nor deepen the pool of thought.

    Others are also not helping but you seem to keep going to new levels.

    Reply Like 2
  • Just to reiterate, some of us have been asking for this feature for over 3 years. It would be very useful, it's a good idea, and we're not going to stop asking for it.

    I have yet to see a legitimate counter argument for why it can't be done.... not from any users in this thread and not from representatives of YNAB.

    Reply Like 3
  • adriana01 said:
    This is why I find the decision confusing: YNAB recommends entering transactions manually because sometimes we know about transactions the bank doesn't yet have, but YNAB does not allow entering future dated expense transactions that affect the budget because the bank doesn't have them yet but we do.

     DING DING DING.

    This is what drives me crazy about all of this. YNAB already draws a distinction between "working balance" and "cleared balance." Future-dated transactions ought to effect the working balance (without resorting to falsifying the transaction date.) 

    More generally, I roll my eyes whenever YNAB apologists defend these inconvenient software features by arguing that YNAB's  approach is more "accurate" / better matches reality. Pardon me, but this entire budgeting system is based imaginary abstractions -- my money isn't actually sorted into ~30 envelopes. Likewise, my  "Funds for April" and "Funds for May" is just an imaginary distinction I choose to make, not based on any real-world attributes of that money. The whole point of my budget is to help me see my money in ways that don't match reality, but help me make better choices.  Just because cash is still in my accounts doesn't mean I need to see it in my budget. YNAB has separate views for "Accounts" and "Budget" and they have different purposes. 

    Reply Like 11
  • Faness said:
    Even though the transaction is planned, things can still change up to the date the transaction is planned - what if the amount changes?

    IF the amount changes, I'd simply change the plan at that point. Perhaps you've heard of Rule 3?

    Resorting to, "what if such & such happens" as an explanation is ludicris. By that logic, I shouldn't budget at all, because I MIGHT lose my job and would have to conserve finances. All those budget entries would have to CHANGE, so I definitely shouldn't enter them now, right?

    Assuming you see the unreasonableness of that approach, can you see how a future-dated transaction is the identical issue?

    Reply Like 5
    • dakinemaui I see the line you're drawing, but in both cases we still want your budget to reflect today. Taking funds out of the Available column before they've been spent is like hiding money from yourself and we don't want that - we want you to have a full and honest overview of what's currently in your budget. If your priorities change, job loss or otherwise, your budget tells you where you are as of today so you can make decisions going forward.

      Reply Like
      • bevocat
      • Sometimes, It Just Sucks to Be You
      • bevocat
      • 8 mths ago
      • 3
      • Reported - view

      Faness on what planet is an uncleared check money that’s not spent? Sure, I could put a stop payment on it and spend the money on something else, or just spend it and let the check bounce but those are aberrations, not the way to view your account balance in the normal course of business. If you have to undertake such drastic measures, THAT is when you should have to make unusual manipulations to your budget and register, not have it be the default behavior. 

      Reply Like 3
      • adriana01
      • adriana01
      • 8 mths ago
      • 4
      • Reported - view

      bevocat Yes! Post-dated transactions (regardless of whether they are post-dated checks, or bills committed to via a bill pay system) are spending that has happened & has to be accounted for in the budget. Paying my electric bill is normal, whether I send the money the day I get the bill or the last day possible shouldn't make a difference because that money is committed to that purpose. I need to see that in my categories & accounts in order to be able to make decisions if my situation changes. Changing a payment I have already set up is the abberation, not setting up the payment in the first place.

      Reply Like 4
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 8 mths ago
      • 6
      • Reported - view
      Faness said:
      Taking funds out of the Available column before they've been spent is like hiding money from yourself

      You're missing the point -- that money has been spent, it just hasn't left my account yet. I'm not going to change my mind.  I simply want the account balance to reflect reality.

      If this were a paper check, you would suggest that I record when I mail the check, right? I can change my mind just as easily and put a stop order on that check in 2 minutes. Isn't your advice therefore inconsistent?

      Step back a moment, and perhaps you can you see that the very foundation of YNAB is to hide money from yourself. I absolutely hide the Grocery money from myself so I don't accidentally spend it on bling for my pet ferret (or whatever).

      I realize you're trying to explain one of two views. I totally understand that view, and some of the time that makes sense for my needs. However, it doesn't ALWAYS make sense for my needs. We're not asking for an either/or -- merely the choice.

      Reply Like 6
      • bevocat
      • Sometimes, It Just Sucks to Be You
      • bevocat
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui We don't get to have choices, because they're somehow convinced that toggle settings create unmanageable complexity for their support staff.

      So we get a compromise. Which as we all know means everybody gets hosed equally.

      Reply Like 2
  • bret said:
    YNAB's  approach is more "accurate" / better matches reality.

    Clearly, I'm forced to date all of this month's bills with April 1 if I want my categories to provide useful, pro-active spending guidance. So much for "better matching reality".

    Reply Like 5
  • RIP_MSMoney said:
    To me this is a very solvable problem. Keep future inflows in the scheduled transaction but allow outflows to show up.

    Precluding future inflow transactions doesn't actually prevent people from budgeting money they don't already have. Two trivial workarounds are to either leave TBB negative or even enter their paycheck dated early.

    It just makes things difficult for people who want to temporarily add it to understand cash-flow then remove it to restore accurate spending guidance.

    Reply Like 4
  • I can definitely see how this would be desirable to have ynab adjust to budget for scheduled transactions, but I can also see how, especially for newer budgeters who don;t have much buffer if any may want to put scheduled transaction in that they don't currently have the money to cover, but they will (if all goes well) before the transaction date.  This falls into the category of to protect new budgeters we are going to block certain things advanced budgeters who have sufficient buffers may want to do.  IMO ynab should have an advanced mode toggle, to allow such things for those who want them (I'm also thinking of the old ynab4 red arrow which much like this works just fine if you have enough buffer but may cause problems if you have little to no buffer).

    I think your best bet is to just date the transactions for the date you schedule them, as as far as cash flow planning you should checkout some local credit unions, alot of them offer interest checking accounts that pay ok.  Like my credit union pays me 2%APY on the first $25,000 of my checking account balance. To compare the online bank I have my high yield savings account at pays 2.2% APY on that account with no minimums or maximums.  So I just keep everything in my checking account except for funds specifically budgeted towards savings based categories, I actually read one person on here who lumped all there savings categories under one master category grouping, then used the budgeted this month amount for the whole group to decide how much to transfer to savings, and since my checking account is almost as good as my savings account for interest I have chosen to adopt that method to keep things simple rather than having to carefully forecast my cash flows.

    Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Slate Blue Sander I've never seen a high yield checking account that doesn't require transaction-based hoops to jump through.

      Reply Like
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      Slate Blue Sander I agree there are use cases for both impacting and not impacting category/account balances. The mere existence of a future dated transaction in the register vs. in a scheduled area is that user-selectable "toggle" you mentioned.

      Reply Like 2
    • nolesrule I dont know what ones you've seen. My credit union requires only two things, to be signed up for electronic statements (a non-issue for me as I do so anyway on all my accounts) and 12 transactions per month on either your debit card or a credit card issued by the credit union and I think most people make at least 12 card transactions of at least $5 each per month, even in my case where I usually use a PIF CC that pays me 2% cash back, my subscriptions like netflix I just auto bill to my credit union cc, which in addition to meeting the transaction requirements also still earns some rewards, though it isn;t nearly as good as 2% cash back for small monthly subscriptions or small transaction when I buy just a few things at the store or stop off for some (budgeted for) fast food, it's simple to meet that requirement even while still mostly using a seperate rewards cc.

      Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Slate Blue Sander Those are exactly the transaction hoops I'm talking about. I don't have a dozen small transactions I could use for that so putting things on autopay that way would result in a not-insignificant amount of rewards lost. Otherwise, it would require adding an extra mental IF/ELSE statement to pulling a card out of the wallet at the register, and knowing how many transactions have already happened in the particular statement period.

      Reply Like 1
      • adriana01
      • adriana01
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Slate Blue Sander my rewards checking requires that the debit transactions be in person, either PIN or non-pin. And to get maximum rewards they require a certain amount of credit card transactions too. That card is only a 1% cash back so theoretically I should do any spending over that amount on a card with more rewards, but optimizing that is hard work. Even altering my spending habits to get the required # of transactions is hard, since I would prefer to limit my debit card use to avoid getting that card info exposed to fraud.

      Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      adriana01 Yeah, that's the other thing. I only use my debit card at an ATM.

      Reply Like 2
    • adriana01 It's worth sopping around. One of my local credit unions does that too where you can get a slightly higher rate but too many hoops to jump though, 18 card transactions with at least $500 in monthly credit card spending, that is too much to deal with. But 12 transactions of at least $5 each for 2% isn't that hard, and the only type of transaction that is excluded from counting is an ATM withdraw (shame because I totally would withdraw $20 12 times throughout the month and deposit the cash back a day or two later.  I figured out after my monthly subscriptions are autobilled, some as much as $30 for the month, I only need 6 more transactions, I have more than 6 transactions a month of under $20 I can easily use between a fast food purchase at least once a week at between $6-$12 each time, and those times inbetween regular grocery shopping where you just need one or two things to get you by until the next major trip.  So yes there are hoops but if you do a little searching you can probably find something with just a few simple hoops that makes it worth it.

      Reply Like
      • adriana01
      • adriana01
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Slate Blue Sander so far I haven't seen any that have a better return than the one I have, but I do check periodically.

      Reply Like
  • Unpopular opinion here and maybe it's because I'm a noob. 

    I just don't see why this is a feature that needs to be changed. I think the request adds a level of difficulty that wouldn't be ideal for a lot of people. For example, I got my best friend and her boyfriend set up in YNAB. She's very savy but some of the concepts are still proving hard to understand. (Looking at you account balance vs budget category balance). Her boyfriend is even worse. He's not the most technologically savy and we've had to break everything down for him to get it. 

    My thing is this, if you are paying a bill today, meaning you are giving those dollars a very specific job that will for sure happen, why not just record the transaction as happening today? Out of sight, out of mind, done. It's no longer available. It doesn't matter when it comes out of your account, you can't spend that money because technically you've already spent it on something else. 

    The only issue is the extra step of matching that transaction when it actually hits your account. This point I will give you. I haven't experienced it myself but from what others have said YNAB only matches transactions within 10 days.

    Faness I'd be curious to hear the thought process behind not extending this to say 30 days. I think this would solve this issue entirely.

    The issue I find in changing the behavior of future dated transactions in the app is that not everyone views this in the same way so it would add another level of complexity.

    For example, Person A might write a check on the 1st with an effective date of the 20th. You send it out on the 1st because for whatever reason you know it will take some time arrive. Person A has fully funded that category and wants those funds to reflect as gone from their available balance on the 1st.

    Person B does the same thing however Person B has not fully funded that category. Person B knows they have a paycheck coming in on the 15th and they'll add funds to that category at that time. Person B does not want that transaction to affect their available balance until the effective date written on the check. Person B may have other transactions that will come in before the 15th that will use up the current available balance. 

    In this case I think the system works for both situations as intended. Each individual gets to decide when their money is spent. 

    I really don't see the need for an extra step to complicate this. The only thing that I can see as necessary is the ability to ensure the transactions will match.

    Again noob opinion here but this is just how I understand the software and the methodology.

    Reply Like 1
    • Captain Taniele Just another note. I thought about this from the cash envelope perspective. 

      Say I have $200 in my eating out envelope. Say I know for a fact that I'll be going out to dinner with my friends next weekend and I'll spend $100. Using my example above, if I'm Person A, I'd want to take that $100 out of my cash envelope so I don't spend it during the week. I still have that $100 but perhaps I'd put it in another envelope for scheduled spent funds or something.

      If I'm Person B I still plan on spending that $100 but I haven't fully funded my eating out budget so I don't want it to come from the $200 that I have available. I know that I'll receive money next Friday for example and I'll use that to fund the category for the weekend. 

      In either case the system works. Each person gets to decide when a transaction will affect their available balance. I just don't see the need for a feature change in this regard.

      Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Captain Taniele Accurate transaction dates are fundamental to being able to research discrepancies. What if the spending happens multiple times a month for the same amount? What's the differentiation?

      The thing is there's no good reason for it in terms of how it doesn't affect the category, and it should have been considered in the first place. It was a lazy choice when architecting the software. As a developer myself, I am not willing to defend a lazy choice that restricts something arbitrarily that doesn't violate the Business Rules (in this case the 4 Rules of YNAB). As has been mentioned, the workaround to this is category bloat and complicated reporting. Your dining out example would require an extra category, which means your budget will have an extra category, and your reports would have an extra category unless you take the even extra additional steps to do a clean-up later. It's just not a user-friendly experience.

      Furthermore, this isn't about just category management, but it's also about cashflow management in your accounts. If you know the date of the transaction in YNAB, you can look at your transactions and answer the question of whether the transaction is going to put you into overdraft, and when, so you'll know if you need to move money around between accounts. Will it go negative before the next paycheck? And if not, how long after in case for some reason there's a delay in when I get my paycheck. With today's interest rates, there's no reason to keep more money in checking than necessary.

      So this functionality can actually address two different awareness issues.

      Reply Like
  • Captain Taniele said:
    Using my example above, if I'm Person A, I'd want to take that $100 out of my cash envelope so I don't spend it during the week. I still have that $100 but perhaps I'd put it in another envelope for scheduled spent funds or something.

     I think this is covered above, but the way YNAB the program works is that $100 is still in my envelope (category). So when I'm out to eat with my other friends this weekend I forgot that I've already planned for that $100 and maybe spend too much. It's not obvious in the app that is accounted for - I have to remember or look at the inspector. Or the workaround above and as you describe is create another envelope (category).

     

    Captain Taniele said:
    I know that I'll receive money next Friday for example and I'll use that to fund the category for the weekend. 

     YNAB doesn't want you to do this and for good reason. True story ... Last month my employer forgot to give me the small stipend (bonus) I was to receive on 3/15 ... it came in my check at the end of the month instead. If I was counting on that money I was out of luck. 

    Reply Like 3
  • ChicagoFlyer said:
    YNAB doesn't want you to do this and for good reason. True story ... Last month my employer forgot to give me the small stipend (bonus) I was to receive on 3/15 ... it came in my check at the end of the month instead. If I was counting on that money I was out of luck. 

     That's exactly my point though. That's what Faness  was saying about things can come up. In my dining out example, Person B has not spent that money, they have not budgeted that money either. They just know they want to spend that money. In my check writing example the principle still holds.

    Not everyone can have their current categories fully funded at the beginning of the month. That doesn't mean they shouldn't plan for those scheduled expenses. You can't budget money you don't have. If you're living paycheck to paycheck and trying to break that cycle you will have scheduled transactions that you simply do not have the funds to cover at the beginning of the month. 

    It's the same for groceries that you'll need to buy with your second paycheck. The only difference is that you aren't necessarily scheduling your grocery transaction. Scheduling a transaction does don't meant the category is full funded. It does not go against YNAB principles.

     

    ChicagoFlyer said:
    but the way YNAB the program works is that $100 is still in my envelope (category). So when I'm out to eat with my other friends this weekend I forgot that I've already planned for that $100 and maybe spend too much.

     That's what I'm trying to address. The cash example is a way how you would do it in "real life". You don't have to move the money anywhere in the app. The issue for the app is that the scheduled transaction won't post until a future date so it still shows available. My point is why schedule it for a future date if in essence you are saying the money is spent now. Just say it's spent today, the day you write the check. This way it takes it out of your available balance. Then you won't overspend the category because you'll see the money is not available.

    I just think it's not that complicated. The only issue is that the OP wants the transaction to a) be deducted from the balance when the check is written and b) post on the correct date for when the check is processed.

    My fix is:

    a) mark the transaction date as the date the check is written in YNAB

    b) match the transaction as it comes in on the correct date the check is processed.

    It's not even a fix in my book. It's just the normal process of how things work. 

    This is how your bank account works. If you were budgeting on paper you would record the payment on the day you write the check and deduct it from your available balance. It wouldn't matter to you when the check clears your bank.

    I just really can't see the issue beyond that of transactions automatically matching in YNAB.

    Reply Like 1
  • nolesrule said:
    transaction dates are fundamental to being able to research discrepancies.

     Agreed which is why I'm saying you would match the transaction when finally posts on the correct date. 

    If it happens multiple times a month it just that means you are making multiple entries and you are then matching them when they come through.

    You have to approve transactions anyway. I just don't see the issue here.

    nolesrule said:
    As has been mentioned, the workaround to this is category bloat and complicated reporting.

     I definitely was not suggesting adding categories. I don't think that's necessary. If the goal is to adjust the available balance when you write the check the solution is to use today's date as the transaction date until the transaction posts. I don't see a need for a new category.

    I think the point Faness was trying to make is that even though something is scheduled, it doesn't necessarily mean the transaction will be processed.

    For example, say you write that check and you deduct it from your available balance and you move on. Then, your check gets lost in the mail. How do you know the money hasn't been deducted from your account in reality? 

    Or for example say you have a Netflix subscription and you know that money comes out every month. The OP would want that to be deducted from the available balance before nthe transaction happens. But then what if you decide you want to cancel your Netflix subscription this month? If you don't remember to go back and delete that transaction that never actually happened then your account balance is out of wack.

    All this to say I get where YNAB is coming from. Simply scheduling a transaction for a future date is not an absolute. Things change. In this case I think it's the individual's responsibility to track this sort of thing, not YNAB.

    Reply Like 1
    • Captain Taniele I think you phrased these arguments better than I did. ;)

      As for the automatic matching, it's a net for the matching logic. If you enter a transaction for 4/1, we doubt it's the same transaction that imports on 4/25 - that's an unusually long time for a transaction to be pending. However, the transaction can still be Manually matched, it just won't automatically match in case they are separate occurrences. 

      Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      Faness I have two checks I wrote in Q3 2018 that didn't get deposited till March. If the algorithm detects multiple potential matches, then choose the most recent one to auto-match if that's how they want to play it. There's no reason not to look at all uncleared transactions.

      Again, this is just lazy programming using the excuse that it's difficult.

      Reply Like
    • nolesrule Wow! I've never heard of a check being held for that long. 

      Was the check for a specific amount? Since transactions are only matched by date and amount, the date frame was shortened to help prevent matching issues. We didn't want the $5 Starbucks purchase on 4/25, matching to the $5 Walmart purchase on 4/1. There was recently another thread here in the forum where a transaction was matching to the wrong scheduled transaction and caused some confusion, the date range is meant to help limit those occurrences.

      I know you've mentioned having programming experience, but I am not so versed. I'm not sure how difficult this would be to change, but it was put in place for a reason. If automatic matching beyond that span is a pain point I'm more than happy to check on that.

      Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      Faness said

      Wow! I've never heard of a check being held for that long. 

      Was the check for a specific amount?

      Yes. Dues and activity checks for my daughter's girl scout troop. They are flush in terms of funds because they are very successful with cookie sales, so the leaders don't make bank runs much at all. It's extreme, but it it's a real-world example. It's also quite annoying that they wait so long.

      Reply Like 2
  • Captain Taniele said:
    why not just record the transaction as happening today

     Because many people use YNAB to answer questions other than, "Can I afford this purchase without shortchanging myself on anything else". Having transactions dated for when the money leaves my control facilitates better decisions.

    Not to mention dating a transaction today that clears weeks later screws up importing. While not insurmountable, it is more work than is necessary. Call me lazy if you wish -- it's a badge which I'm proud to wear.

    Reply Like 3
  • dakinemaui said:
    Not to mention dating a transaction today that clears weeks later screws up importing. While not insurmountable, it is more work than is necessary. Call me lazy if you wish -- it's a badge which I'm proud to wear.

     I'm in no way calling anyone lazy. I think I've made clear that I do agree a change needs to be made, I just don't agree that it's the change that some people are requesting. 

    IMO if YNAB adjusted the date range for matching transactions then this whole issue is fixed. That's the whole basis I'm trying to get across. That's just based on my opinion and my relatively new understanding of the software.

    Reply Like
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 8 mths ago
      • 6
      • Reported - view

      Captain Taniele 

      Expansion of the matching window doesn't solve the issue of providing information on which to base cash-flow decisions. What is the upcoming demand from my checking account on a day by day basis over the next 4 weeks? When can I move "excess" funds into a different account? Do I need to pull any money back, or will the income that arrives a week earlier be sufficient? That sort of thing. When the money leaves the account is important in some contexts, and fudging the dates to get categories to decrement isn't enough.

      Poor decisions of this sort cost real dollars from lost interest or even overdraft fees. YNAB's recommendation of a single checking account just doesn't make sense at some level of cash holdings (personal call on where that lies).

      All that is necessary for these assessments is a running balance and future-dated transactions that affect account balances. I can understand YNAB not implementing them as part of the "minimum viable product" at launch (their words), but it's been several years at this point.

      Instead, we get Zapier integration (whatever in the heck that is) and I can ask Alexa how much is in my Grocery category (if I had such a device). I would bet a large sum of money that those took WAY more time and effort than something that would be useful to far more users. Many users would also like a running balance to aid reconciliation.

      Reply Like 6
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 3
      • Reported - view

      Exactly. Right now (in YNAB4) I can look at my checking account register and see that it will go negative on April 20th with no new money coming in. I also know that we're receiving 2 paychecks on the 12th and 15th, so I don't need to worry about it and I have 5 days to move some money around if both checks fail to deposit for some unlikely reason. Furthermore, I can see (by temporarily adding in the checks) that those checks would cover us through the May 1 mortgage payment.

      I also can see that quarterly property taxes are due on the 1st of next month, and I usually pay that a few days early. It means that I can schedule the property tax payment anytime after the 15th and not worry about overdrafting.

      But we'll be getting 2 more checks on the 26th and 30th, so maybe I'll schedule the property tax payment for after the 26th. I can then move in all my May expenses into the register and see how far those checks will last and decide how much money I want to move into a savings account. I can then decide after the April 12th/15th checks how much money I want to keep in checking and how much I can move to savings... based on the end of April checks I won't be receiving for another 2 weeks.

      I calculated that due to the rate spread between checking and savings, this method keeps more money in savings on average to the point I could cover the costs of the YNAB subscription... but unfortunately I can't actually do this in YNAB.

      Now, if they introduced cashflow modeling like the module that existed in MS Money (it even had pretty cashflow line graphs), then I wouldn't actually need this feature for cashflow purposes. But I would still need it for category balance reliability. In MS Money the Scheduler wasn't even part of the account register. It was a separate module  cashflow data. I actually spent more time there then in my account register. I'd post a screen shot, but my MS Money data is 5 years out of date, so it wouldn't make any sense.

      Reply Like 3
  • nolesrule said:
    Exactly. Right now (in YNAB4) I can look at my checking account register and see that it will go negative on April 20th with no new money coming in. I also know that we're receiving 2 paychecks on the 12th and 15th, so I don't need to worry about it and I have 5 days to move some money around if both checks fail to deposit for some unlikely reason.

     I can do the same thing in YNAB with the Toolkit extension (without which, YNAB would be terribly hobbled and nearly useless) and running balance activated. A simple glance at my scheduled transactions yields the results you describe.

    I've been in favor of future dated transactions all along -- still am, for the other reasons that have been beaten to death here and pushed aside by YNAB staff -- but this particular problem doesn't exist for me with the all-essential Toolkit.

    Reply Like
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      JoeDid The problem is this assumes that all your recurring transactions occur exactly one time per month. Anything else and the running balance projection using the Scheduler is inaccurate.

      Reply Like 1
      • JoeDid
      • Remember: It is To Laugh
      • Purple_rain
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      nolesrule That's a point I overlooked, probably because, my budget being seriously simple, I don't run into that problem. Carry on.

      Reply Like
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      I have a work around for that too. Anything that recurs twice a month or fortnightly, I make two scheduled transactions for. For the 1st and 15th, I make 2 once a month scheduled transactions. For my fortnightly paycheck, I have two transactions each of which is an every 4 week scheduled transaction.

      Reply Like 2
      • JoeDid
      • Remember: It is To Laugh
      • Purple_rain
      • 8 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      Superbone Not to steal your thunder, but I've done that on the rare (for me) occasions where I needed a twice-a-month transaction. Also for the rare times I wanted to do what-if scenarios.

      Reply Like 1
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      JoeDid I have no thunder to steal. 😄 I'm just stating the facts and I've been using it for a while now and it works great although it is a workaround and it requires more maintenance if you need to change one. Just one of the many workarounds that I need as an advanced user of the software.

      Reply Like 2
  • Faness said:
    The way I was reading things, I thought the point was to replace the Scheduler completely with the future dated transactions. 

     Respectfully, to the best of my knowledge, following the posted arguments, that was never mentioned as the goal. I don't think anyone suggested dumping the Scheduler. Correct me if I'm wrong.

    Reply Like 2
    • JoeDid I don't believe you are. :)

      I was reading Entered Transactions as a replacement for Scheduled Transactions, thus assumed the Scheduler wouldn't be a part of the equation - but I know what happens when people assume, my mistake. After re-reading the arguments, I understand it's not about changing the behavior of Scheduled Transactions but adding a separate option for Entered Transactions.

      Reply Like 2
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 8 mths ago
      • 6
      • Reported - view

      Faness It's not even a separate option. It's just the ability to enter it for a future date and not make it a scheduled transaction. In other words, exactly how YNAB 4 worked.

      Reply Like 6
  • dakinemaui said:

    ynaber2613 I would say "does not" rather than "cannot". While I personally treat Rule 3 as a rule and correct all overspending (even CC overspending), lots of people don't. YNAB could easily be consistent with its choice of which CC to short (e.g., first-come, first serve after cash transactions are covered).
    (Regarding that "after cash transactions are covered" part, I do think that practice is wonderful as it blurs the line between purchase methods in favor of the view that "spending is spending". I just wish it were more obvious when ANY overspending has occurred.)

     Not really hung up on word usage too much but the software as designed/written cannot differentiate  purchase order or purchase account and therefore can assign a cash transaction to one or more credit cards.  In my opinion that makes no sense at all.  I had a situation where all credit cards were paid in full and then made a cash transaction in a category that just happened to have had previous purchases using 2 different credit cards.  There was not enough money in the category to cover the transaction so instead of making the category go red (cash overspending) it made it go orange and assigned the overspending to 2 different credit cards.  Why would YNAB assign cash spending to a credit card if it is paid in full, the credit card cannot possibly be used to cover cash spending in that situation.  I know I could correct the problem by covering the overspend from another category but sometimes I just prefer to allow a category to go red until the end of the month when I true up everything.

    Anyway, since I am a paid in full user I converted all credit card accounts to checking accounts and the problem is solved for me, now "spending is spending". However, I still think the current credit card implementation is wrong in some cases.

    Reply Like 2
  • Faness said:
    Entered Transactions as a replacement for Scheduled Transactions

     I am very confused where you would have ever gotten that. That has never been stated.

    Reply Like
    • RIP_MSMoney The discussion above was for changing the behavior of Scheduled Transactions, specifically noted that they were designed wrong. I connected the dots of replacing them with Entered Transactions instead, which was my mistake.

      Reply Like
  • Superbone said:
    For my fortnightly paycheck, I have two transactions each of which is an every 4 week scheduled transaction.

     Of course, you'll still have 2 months a year where the projected running balance will be inaccurate. 😉

    Reply Like
      • Superbone
      • YNAB convert since 2008
      • Superbone
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      nolesrule Granted it is a workaround and it’s not perfect. Still gets you further into those months than without it.

      Reply Like
  • Faness said:
    Was the check for a specific amount? Since transactions are only matched by date and amount, the date frame was shortened to help prevent matching issues.

     That feels too simplistic of rules for matching. The name of the transaction should be a factor as well as some fuzzy logic for the amount (for instance "transaction downloaded matched date, name, but was 11.54 while register was 11.87. Lets choose that one" )

    Here was an old article for ms money. My point is only two points of comparison seems fairly limited. Matching with more aspects could easly allow a wider net for the comparison date range.

    http://moneymvps.org/faq/article/397.aspx

    Reply Like
    • RIP_MSMoney I believe this was the case because the payee is not constant. If you enter a transaction with Wally World as the payee, but it imports from your bank as Walmart Store #7665, we didn't want that to stop the matching. It's great to have input about how changing this would help!

      I want to thank you again for creating this thread. I know I've asked a number of questions, but seeing different angles of an issue is a great help!

      Reply Like
      • dakinemaui
      • dakinemaui
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      RIP_MSMoney I would never want it fuzzy match differing amounts (even if the payee was the same). Import is supposed to save work, but that is asking for trouble which will be far more onerous to puzzle out than the effort just to manually decide, "yeah, I fat-fingered that amount".

      Reply Like 2
      • RIP_MSMoney
      • FinTech Programmer
      • rip_ms_money
      • 8 mths ago
      • Reported - view

      dakinemaui I would agree. This would be a very last resort. I am not sure how MSMoney really did their matching but I can't deny the fact that they were really good. When buying from amazon, the bill comes to X with an estimate for tax. I have found that the final charge doesn't always match. MSMoney has always been able to resolve that. When it matches it would put an icon to indicate "we matched but the amounts don't match, please review". There are other times where our scheduled transaction would include the costs for transaction fees (like ATM fees). Sometimes my spouse will be able to find a bank that doesn't charge. MSMoney is still able to go "Pretty sure this is the transaction but amounts dont match". I go in and correct the split and then accept. These are edge cases but I find them more helpful than harmful.

      Reply Like
  • nolesrule said:
    Yes. Dues and activity checks for my daughter's girl scout troop.

     Seriously right! Why dont those leaders just cash those darn things... sooo funny. So glad it is not just our troop.. thats awesome..

    Reply Like 1
      • nolesrule
      • YNAB4 Evangelist
      • nolesrule
      • 8 mths ago
      • 2
      • Reported - view

      RIP_MSMoney Mrs. nolesrule is a leader for our other daughter's troop and handles the money. Those checks get deposited the next day.

      Reply Like 2
      • Technicolor Cheetah
      • Not sure when I became a cheetah...but I'll run with it
      • technicolor_cheetah
      • 8 mths ago
      • 1
      • Reported - view

      RIP_MSMoney nolesrule

      It's the PTA for me, Scouts run a distant second. 

      I dropped a check off at school for the PTA in October, it was cashed in March.  So maybe the check I wrote to them last month might be cashed by summer?

      Reply Like 1
Like6 Follow
  • 6 Likes
  • 8 mths agoLast active
  • 270Replies
  • 1971Views
  • 33 Following