Simon See my response below. The Category is Inflow: To be Budgeted but your record the transaction as an outflow. Hope this helps!

Michele I like this!  I started doing this at the end of the month last month.  I think I'll just do it on a monthly basis, but the extra little bump towards paying off the next thing is nice feeling.  Not a huge amount, but every little bit helps.

TheTabby 

You're right about it not being much. But I figured out that I'm very subtly reducing my categories by about $40/month on a consistent basis, so maybe an estimated $500/year is slipping away to various savings categories. Part of my brain is absolutely convinced that a certain monthly amount is the lowest I can possibly go, say $50 on pocket money for the month, but then by doing this I am slyly and stealthily removing another few dollars from that lowest amount as well. It's just a way I found to gamify myself and my budget.

whatsup It's completely unnecessary and in fact extraneous in YNAB. Which category do you take the money from in order to save it on a transaction by transaction basis? Which category do you add it to on a transaction by transaction basis? After all, there is no generic savings category (or at least there shouldn't be).

Moving money between categories is a budget function, not a transaction function. The money hasn't left your budget.

nolesrule why I agree with to to a certain extend, I'm all about choices. And if users want another avenue to save some money I don't necessarily see a huge issue with it. I think it's a lot of work for probably little gain, but if it helps users, that should be encouraged whether we see benefit or not. 

But again I doubt ynab is likely to implement such a feature worthwhile or not. 

Anyway thats my 2c worth

whatsup My point is you aren't actually saving anything by automatically transferring money from a checking account to a savings account. You're just changing the location of the money.

If you want more money in your savings account, just put more money in your savings account. Lots of ways to do that without creating a ton of extraneous less-than-a-dollar transactions.

nolesrule arh I see. I agree. I was thinking more along the lines of moving money automatically to a savings category. 

whatsup Well, you could do that with each transaction I guess. But then what category are you decreasing and what category are you increasing with these micro-transactions? In that case, just budget less in your spending categories and more in your savings categories.

But you should be budgeting based on what you expect to spend in your spending categories. If you have extra, sweep it at the end of the month. If you want to spend less, budget less and then follow the budget.

nolesrule  I agree you could do it with each transaction it would be a royal PITA. Which ultimately will the solution for anyone who wants to use a round up feature.  I still think its a good *passive way of saving up some extra money that may have been spent or overlooked.

*Not sure if I can really call it passive given all the steps one would need to go through to accomplish it. But I guess it is passive compared to "actively" budgeting it which may be overlooked. 

Slugger Think of all the time, effort and transaction reviewing you would save if instead of:

1) Budget money to Keep the change category

2)Import transactions from accounts that result in an effective zero-sum category change to move money from Keep the change category to emergency fund category (which by the way screws up your Income & Expenses report for those categories... take a look if you don't believe me)

3) Approve transactions

You did this:

1) Budget money to Emergency Fund instead of to Keep the Change category (notice there's no mention of even transfering any money between accounts... it's just not necessary)

People tend to not realize the impact of doing zero-sum category transfers on their spending reports. Weird things happen with reports that are not intended when using transactions to move money between categories.

nolesrule That's why I started with, "I know I could very easily just save the money, but I like seeing it come out little by little."

For one, it isn't the same as a zero-sum category change - it is moving between accounts. Even though YNAB doesn't particularly like a separate savings account, I have one.

Budgeting, and even more particularly SAVING, is as much emotional as it is logical. I respect that balance, and it's why I have been as successful as I have. I have my own demons to wrestle with in regards to money, as do most of us. Much of my savings is bargaining with myself, and so I set myself up to win. Over the years, I have slowly retrained myself to the point where I don't need as many support structures in place. I've also refined and matured my support structures. That doesn't mean that I need to get rid of the ones that make me smile. Smiling is a very important part of budgeting and saving.

Also, I like answering the OP. Saying, "the question you asked is not worth asking" isn't helpful. I offered a solution. I also admitted that just dumping the $25 that I budget every month into my savings transfer would be much more logical and straightforward, but again I nod to smiling. Smiling matters. Keep the Change makes me smile. Therefore, the payoff is a net gain. If it isn't for you, no worries! You do you!

Slugger The moving between accounts part that doesn't actually make a difference. I would suggest that the necessary retraining is the following:

1) check your category balance before deciding to make a purchase

2) If you still decide to make the purchase, then look at the account that you will be making the purchase from to make sure that it has enough money in it

3) make the purchase

The entire purpose of YNAB is to be the crutch to help with the demons. Adding extra layers obfuscates YNAB's usefulness. Stop relying on the growth of specific account balances as a sign of success.

I've been giving this advice for nearly 4 years, and everyone who has had the lightbulb moment realized it was unnecessary extra transactions and turned it off. Rather than fight it, go all-in with YNAB. Budget the money to savings up front and move on. You may even find yourself accomplishing your goals faster that way instead of relying on nickel and diming the growth of your emergency fund.

nolesrule Your points 1, 2, and 3 have nothing to do with a Keep the Change system. The OP asked how to make it work; I answered.

You might even find yourself recognizing that other people are making things work.

Slugger Great, you gave a method for making it work. By budgeting money to an extra category where that category's sole purpose is to ultimately have the money moved to another already-existing category via micro-transactions. Rather than just put that money in the second category to begin with. Got it. Your method is genius and in no way redundant.

"Keep the Change" and similar programs, just like "Budgeting by Account" are deprecated  budgeting methods when you are using YNAB.  Sometimes "you're doing it wrong" is the right answer.

nolesrule said:
Your method is genius and in no way redundant.

Dude, back off. Suggesting alternative perspectives is one thing, resorting to sarcastic insults when someone doesn't agree with you is another.

None of these savings strategies are *WRONG*. Different things work better for different people. There is no universal "right answer".

It is about measuring your priorities, which are both logic and emotion. And if you are using YNAB, you have the tools to put together an actionable plan based on your priorities. Blindly moving money into a savings account doesn't set a priority for that money. Willfully taking action to give a purpose to that money is setting the priority.

Don't be passive. Be active! The more active you are, the more you gain control over your money instead of your money controlling you.

When the computer program moves the money, it makes it easier to just say the computer program over-reached and you can just take the money back. If you make the decision to budget the money to a category, then you decided it was important enough to do that. So if you want to take the money out, then you have to have a legit reason to change your plan.

Sorry you dislike the tough love, but I learned it from arguably the greatest poster and helper in YNAB forum history... too bad he doesn't hang around here anymore.

Resistant Punch Roller Thanks. You tried. Some people just can't get it. I appreciate the backup.

nolesrule The application of the YNAB Forum's "Tough Love" policy that you mentioned isn't consistent though:

Any "Keep the Change" thread like this one gets the whole "Bring the Rain" response, as highlighted by the discussion above in this thread.

Yet, a YNAB credit card user who pays their credit card down to zero daily (the "Keep the Change" process that actually burns cash on a daily basis via the one or more Checking to Credit Card transfer transactions) garners no such outrage from YNAB Forum Elders whatsoever. Why are users like this spared the Tough Love?

elsewhere Not sure which forums you've been visiting, but people recommend against paying the card more than once per month all the time, from the same, "Why on earth would you waste your time doing that" stance that they (we) recommend shutting off round-up apps. 

WordTenor And at least paying your credit card after every purchase has an actual purpose - the credit card agreement says the bill has to be paid at some point in time and is generally harmonious with the YNAB methodology. Whereas the idea that moving $0.93 from Account A to Account B adds unnecessary layers to the YNAB idea that the category defines the purpose rather than the location.

And furthermore it makes even less sense to Budget for the Keep the Change transfers, and then categorize the inflow and outflow to move them from a Keep the Change category to a savings category. If you're going to save the money, just save it in the intended category.
 

Maybe if you were using it to decrement from the same spending category as the purchase, I could see a tiny bit of value as a way to limit spending in small increments... but of course even that wouldn't work if you end up overspending the category anyway.

I didn't realize there was some taboo against paying your CC more often than is required.  I usually do it weekly because I like keeping the utilization number nice and low.  Also it guarantees that even if I forget one week, I still didn't miss the due date, which would happen if I forgot one month.  call me paranoid, but I REALLY hate paying fees and interest because of my own foolishness.

TheTabby it's not that it's taboo, it's just that it is not the most efficient thing to do. If you are worried about forgetting to make a payment, you can generally set up auto-pay for either the minimum due, statement balance, or account balance (in the US at least since I don't know where you are). Back in the olden days of the late '90s early '00s you did have to be a bit more active. The only time in my life I've been late paying a credit card was the time when I received the bill, immediately wrote the check (no online payment available at the time), put it in the envelope, stamped the envelope, stuck it in my purse, and then forgot about it. Luckily the payment arrived after the due date but within the 5-day grace period so no interest charges.

And utilization percentage only matters on the day that they report to the credit bureaus and generally if you pay your balance in full a day or so before the due date, it works out.

TheTabby Right, what jenmas said. It's not wrong; it's just not very efficient. If you have a paid-in-full card in YNAB, you can afford to pay it to zero at any time. So that means that once a month, you can go in, schedule the payment, and ensure it comes out before the due date, saving you time and avoiding any interest and fees. I do this each month when my statement closes on the 12th. The money stays in checking until the following month on the 9th, when the whole statement balance is pulled from checking at once. This keeps the money earning money for me as long as possible, but also ensures I never pay interest. And if you are going to have your credit report pulled, you can pay it completely to zero a few days before the report is pulled, which solves the utilization problem. 

TheTabby The only purpose for keeping the utilization rate low on credit cards (besides, I guess peace of mind, which I use autopayment for), is for credit reporting and credit scores. However, only the statement closing balance gets reported to the credit bureaus, so when a credit report is pulled, utilization is based on the last reported statement balance, not on any intermediate balance.

elsewhere I'm not WordTenor but I don't see the equivalence. As for your the feature, I think they made it too simple. The "correct" suggested payment amount will be different for different people.

1) For those carrying an interest-incurring balance it would be for the full payment category amount.

2) For a PIF user it should be the lesser of the statement balance or the full payment category amount (the latter for when the category gets out of sync, it'll be another tell).

But of course that would require more input from the user to determine the correct payment amount.

In QuickBooks, the credit card reconciliation process triggers setting up the next payment and provides the correct payment amount based on the statement card balance. It's up to the user to manually change it. This is one of those places where statement reconciliation has a useful side effect and could be used to determine the optimum payment, rather than the willy nilly "reconcile frequently and the dates don't matter" current policy.

elsewhere - also a minor note. In WordTenor 's example, it says the statement closes on the 12th which is different than the due date of the payment. The due date may very well be the 9th of the following month. And if one is attempting to game their credit score in terms of utilization rates, a modicum of efficiency will have to be sacrificed.

elsewhere 

simple. My bank doesn't allow an automatic payment of the full statement balance, because it doesn't benefit them to make it easy for me not to pay interest. So I have to schedule it every month. I could do that on any date before the next due date, but I choose to do it on the statement close date because that's when I get the number in my email as a trigger. 

But also I'm not interested in discussing credit cards with you. You went months on the other board complaining every Friday morning like clockwork about how YNAB handles cards and having others explain to you that you were wrong about how YNAB handles cards in conjunction with a redraw account. Since you've never actually understood it and are pretty impervious to other people telling you how it works, I have long since lost interest in entertaining your hypotheticals. 

Step One this thread is three years old.

Vibrant So? I found this three-year old topic as a new user looking to resolve the same issue and contributed a solution. Instead of trolling, why don't you simply understand that this information won't become less useful over time unless YNAB completely change the functionality of their software.

Step One when you tag a user in your reply and don’t add “I know this thread is old but just in case someone else Googles it” it seems like to don’t know the thread is three years old and people are likely to inform you. 

Most of us suggest the one step solution to this problem. 

1. Call your bank, turn off the service, and budget your money yourself. 

WordTenor Okay, so what about the people that don't want to do that? There's a solution in the software. Why not tell people how to actually do it instead of ignoring the question and fobbing them off to their bank?

Step One They can continue doing the very cumbersome and redundant process and accept that it is cumbersome and redundant and that it will be pointed out to them that it is cumbersome and redundant until one day they realize it is cumbersome and redundant and stop doing it. 

But not your process. Your process will wreak havoc on the budget. They need to follow one of the other processes explained in this thread. 

Roundup programs are great when you don’t have YNAB. Trying to keep them and use YNAB is asking for a headache. But you don’t have to listen to the advice if you like headaches. 

WordTenor It's literally the process to do exactly what Simon asked for, but sure, it will "wreak havoc on the budget". 🤨

Step One You have an outflow from TBB. Good luck with that. 

You bumped a three year old thread to give incorrect advice and now you want to argue, out of embarrassment, I assume. I’m going to bed. 

WordTenor I posted the answer to an unanswered question and you've got upset, presumably because you've made 2k+ posts on this forum and still missed the simple solution. Not my fault that you miss things.