cost still wrong in portfolio report
I see that user Garth has reported this problem more than once but I also see the discussion closed.
In Moneydance 2017.6 (1656) when run on OS 10.13.3 the cost entry in the portfolio report is still wrong. The cost entry is the current/latest value and not the cost basis for the date in the portfolio report. I am attaching two files. One is the cost report which shows the cost basis for every date that a buy/sell occurs. Two is the portfolio report for September 2017. Note that the cost basis is current value and not the correct value for September. The example is for Vanguard Dividend Growth. Please let me know if/when this report will be corrected. Thanks
- portfolio.pdf 53.8 KB
- cost.pdf 34.6 KB
Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.
Keyboard shortcuts
Generic
| ? | Show this help |
|---|---|
| ESC | Blurs the current field |
Comment Form
| r | Focus the comment reply box |
|---|---|
| ^ + ↩ | Submit the comment |
You can use Command ⌘ instead of Control ^ on Mac
1 Posted by hal on 05 Feb, 2018 05:04 AM
Using 2017.6 (1656)
I wish to add my voice to that of jbreiland and previously Garth - the portfolio report needs improvement.
Changing the report date to a past date changes the quantity held and price correctly, but as Garth and jbreiland point out, the Cost Basis column remains unchanged. After checking, I see that the Cost Basis column is based on an accurate cost basis for the (remaining) parcels currently held "today", but not for the selected report past date. Further, at present, the Gains column is simply the (Qty held on report date * price on report date)-(Cost Basis). Since the Cost Basis is incorrect except for "today", then the Gains column is of no value for any past date, and then how can the four % return columns be trusted?
I then tried to find out if the % Return columns reflected income earned by the asset, as well as capital gains/losses. I deleted the last income event from the asset I was using as a test example, and the four % Return columns remained unchanged. Therefore I conclude that the % Return columns are not of any value, now for two reasons.
To be of more value, the Portfolio report needs to have an accurate Cost Basis column for the selected report date, and the % Return columns need to take into account both capital gains/losses (realised and unrealised) and income (pre-tax) earned from holding the asset.
In time, it would help if it were made clear in the User Guide on what basis the Gains column and the four % Return columns were calculated. At present, for such an important report, the two short sentences describing the portfolio report do not do it justice.
Icing on the cake would be a portfolio period report that accepted a start date and end date, and provided the various $ columns and a single % Return column (expressed as annual return %) for the selected period, even if the period were less than a year.
System closed this discussion on 07 May, 2018 05:10 AM.