Matching downloaded transactions in MD 2010

Noname's Avatar


10 Dec, 2009 02:35 PM

When MD 2010 thinks a downloaded transaction is a match it doesn't give me a way to override. I tried each of the selections it offered and none of them let me include the new downloaded transaction as a new transaction (it finds the earlier dated transaction and doesn't even show the new transaction date). This, of course, throws my balances off tremendously and now my accounts are out of balance as they are missing transactions.


Showing page 8 out of 10. View the first page

  1. 211 Posted by okichatan on 20 Feb, 2010 07:50 AM

    okichatan's Avatar

    I've been using build 741 and the merge/download seems much better (than 735). Thanks for the improvements!

  2. 212 Posted by mnc on 21 Feb, 2010 02:49 AM

    mnc's Avatar

    Agreed, build 741 is a major improvement. I have started using MD seriously now, and if it makes it through the next couple of days, my license will be purchased!

    One thing -- didn't there used to be a function that marked downloaded transactions as "conditionally cleared"? Right now, all downloaded transactions are marked as uncleared even after I accept them.

    Did I just miss something in how this works? I suspect I did. :-)

    Thanks for all your efforts and thanks for the help!


  3. 213 Posted by -Kevin N. on 21 Feb, 2010 03:25 AM

    -Kevin N.'s Avatar

    Hi Marcbot,

    One thing -- didn't there used to be a function that marked downloaded transactions as "conditionally cleared"?

    I created a Trac ticket 2446 a while back for this. Vote it up, the more the better.

    -Kevin N.

  4. 214 Posted by mnc on 21 Feb, 2010 03:35 AM

    mnc's Avatar

    Thanks @kmnugent. I just added my vote. :-)


  5. 215 Posted by Angie Rauscher on 21 Feb, 2010 11:03 PM

    Angie Rauscher's Avatar

    FYI for everyone watching here- We have released an "Almost Final Draft" of the Moneydance 2010 help documentation, which is located here.

    The transaction matching portion of the documentation is STILL IN PROGRESS, due to the continuing alterations to that piece of the software.

    Angie Rauscher
    Moneydance Support

  6. 216 Posted by Neal Plotkin on 24 Feb, 2010 01:37 PM

    Neal Plotkin's Avatar

    I still can't get downloaded transactions to match categories. I'm using build 741, and I have Automatically Merge Downloaded Transactions checked in Preferences-Network. All downloaded transactions enter as ATM Withdrawal (the default), and there's no way to undefault the account.

    Is there anything else I'm supposed to do?

  7. 217 Posted by Gray Maddry on 26 Feb, 2010 01:46 AM

    Gray Maddry's Avatar

    Using 743 in WINXP. Matching works when there is an existing transaction, but I still have to click merge and then accept which is a pain when importing a qif form a credit card company which makes me download all transaction from the last closing date. That means if I keep the card up to date several times a month I i import the same transaction several times so the extra click counts.. For an unmatched transaction I still have to accept before I can modify the category. I can see any change from the previous build.

  8. 218 Posted by -Kevin N. on 26 Feb, 2010 04:30 AM

    -Kevin N.'s Avatar

    Hi Gray,

    but I still have to click merge and then accept...

    Ctrl + Enter 'Accepts' the highlighted txn.

    I still have to accept before I can modify the category.

    Hitting 'Enter' allows editing of highlighted txns at any point.
    HTH -Kevin N.

  9. 219 Posted by Randy on 26 Feb, 2010 12:25 PM

    Randy's Avatar

    Gray you can also select a group of transactions by doing ctrl (cmd on mac) click or shift - click (after you select the first one normally), then the button changes to "Accept All", which will accept the selected transactions all at once.

  10. 220 Posted by Gray Maddry on 26 Feb, 2010 02:06 PM

    Gray Maddry's Avatar

    For me pressing enter accepts the transaction.

    -----Original Message-----
    From: kmnugent
    [mailto:[email blocked]]
    Sent: Thursday, February 25, 2010 11:31 PM
    To: [email blocked]
    Subject: Re: Matching downloaded transactions in MD 2010 [Problems]

  11. 221 Posted by alfacanguro on 27 Feb, 2010 10:27 PM

    alfacanguro's Avatar

    I've been testing build 735, and have been experiencing matching problems. How do I get build 741? I would like to test this version before I decide whether to purchase Moneydance.

  12. 222 Posted by eddieb on 27 Feb, 2010 10:30 PM

    eddieb's Avatar

    The latest preview/beta release is always here:

    It's up to Build 743 now.

  13. 223 Posted by alfacanguro on 28 Feb, 2010 02:09 AM

    alfacanguro's Avatar

    Thanks Eddie. I just completed install of the udpate.

  14. 224 Posted by Noname on 21 Apr, 2010 02:46 AM

    Noname's Avatar

    I had a reminder auto-commit 5 days before the actual transaction occurred. When the transaction was finally imported from my bank, MD (build 748) matched it to a similar (but incorrect) transaction. Scrolling through the options that MD offered for matching it never offered the correct match of the reminder. So I went into the register to find the reminder transaction that was in there for 5 days and now it was gone. Therefore, there was no hope of finding and matching to that original transaction. I know that I didn't delete that transaction so I'm assuming that MD overwrote it. (I do have "automatically merge downloaded transactions" selected.) My main concern is not that MD didn't match correctly but that it overwrote the auto-committed reminder and so it was never offered as a match possibility. There was no way for me to "undo" that initial step as it seemed to happen when it came into the register. Even if I selected the "original" description from the bank I still had lost the auto-committed reminder. If I didn't have the "automatically merge" option checked would that have forestalled this problem?

    When I was working in build 746 I had performed the same kind of process (auto-commit reminder/import actual transaction/MD correctly matched and merged the 2 transactions) without any problem.

    Any insights are welcome. Thanks.

  15. 225 Posted by Noname on 21 Apr, 2010 03:06 AM

    Noname's Avatar

    When reviewing the options MD is offering for matching I'm finding it difficult to distinguish which option MD is actually suggesting. Occasionally, when I'm looking at the transaction in the register during the confirmation process (transaction still has blue dot) the transaction is shown as I want to accept it. I hit "accept" and then it is changed to a totally different description. When I look at the list at the bottom of the screen of MD suggestions for the transaction they are all in gray scale with the "original" in white. It is very hard to understand which transaction MD is suggesting to use. I had been (incorrectly) assuming that the way the transaction was displayed in the register was the choice that MD had made and I just needed to accept it. When I manually select one of the options in the list it turns blue in color. I think it would be really helpful to have a bold color (the blue would be fine) to highlight the match MD is suggesting to clarify what is being accepted into the register.

    I'm working on Mac OS X 10.5.8, Java 1.6 MD build 748.

  16. 226 Posted by avp2 on 21 Apr, 2010 06:15 PM

    avp2's Avatar

    It took me a while to figure out which lower (matching) window item was the one being suggested (and the meaning of the "merge", etc. labels) too. Seems like the topmost item in the list should be MD's pick at any time.

    I think it would also be very helpful if transaction categories would show (in their transaction field) from the most nested child, or right to left, instead of from the overall parent. I have two to three levels in many of my categories and have to select a transaction category to see whether it is what I want probably 80% of the time. Whereas, I hardly have any nested categories with the same most-nested child name.

  17. 227 Posted by Randy on 21 Apr, 2010 06:27 PM

    Randy's Avatar

    avp2, there is an option to show the most nested category. If you look in File -> Preferences -> the general tab, there is an option labeled "show full account paths". If that is unchecked, it just shows the most nested one. You have to restart the program after making your selection for the change to take.

  18. 228 Posted by avp2 on 21 Apr, 2010 07:00 PM

    avp2's Avatar


    I believe I have seen it, but had not tried it. I will.

  19. 229 Posted by jwc on 30 Apr, 2010 03:06 AM

    jwc's Avatar

    I finally bit the bullet and upgraded from 2008 because of the iPhone app.

    This thing is broken. It works far, far worse than the 2008 model. It takes me up to twice as long to do the same thing.

    a) I can't modify transactions before I accept them. In the old model, where there was an editable preview of what the final transaction would look like once accepted, I could manually remove all the bank garbage from the memo field before I hit "accept." Now I have to accept, search out the transaction, and delete the memo each time. The searching part alone can take twice as long as the simple select, delete, click "accept" workflow from before. This goes for anything else I need to modify, too--dates or check numbers or what have you.

    b) The matching is worse. I know they keep saying that it's the same algorithm or whatever, but I had a transaction that was only 7 days earlier, that had a matching amount and check number, and the algorithm didn't find it. I feel almost certain that 2008 would have made that simple match. Instead I have to delete the downloaded transaction altogether.

    c) The matching interface is still really confusing. I have a lot of similar transactions--my wife eats at Chipotle almost every day, for one thing--and it's very very hard to tell which transaction MD thinks it's matching.

    d) Having all these unconfirmed transactions affecting the balance on my account just makes no darn sense to me. Basically, until I confirm them, I have tons of double-charges everywhere! This means that unless I disable auto-downloading, I have to do a bunch of work every day in MoneyDance before I can see an accurate account balance. I cannot reliably open MoneyDance, check an account balance, and close it. If open MoneyDance and I see a blue dot next to the account, it's a signal that the account balance is probably wrong.

    Please, please think on that: there is now a "feature" that almost guarantees my account balances are incorrect. MD is now reliably unreliable.

    I don't think that the current approach can't work, I actually like some things about it. I think it could be made to work, but as currently implemented it makes my bookeeping much harder than 2008 did.

  20. 230 Posted by okichatan on 30 Apr, 2010 09:28 AM

    okichatan's Avatar

    Re: "a) I can't modify transactions before I accept them."

    Before accepting it, I can double click the transaction entry above the "matching window", edit it, hit enter to accept, THEN accept it.
    Note however I am using the BETA version.

  21. 231 Posted by jwc on 30 Apr, 2010 03:40 PM

    jwc's Avatar

    okichan, thanks for your comment, but that doesn't address the problem. Perhaps I didn't make it clear.

    2008 offered you a preview of the final, merged transaction that you could edit before you accepted it. That way you could control exactly what you'd get from hitting "accept." What you are referring to is editing the original register transaction, prior to merge, which still leaves MD in control of what the result of the merge looks like.

    To illustrate: whenever the memo field is empty in the original, MoneyDance will merge the original and the downloaded transactions by filling the empty field with whatever data is in the downloaded transaction. Personally I can't stand this, because that data is usually indecipherable garbage, plus if I really need to see it I can just use option-mouse-over to get a quick look.

    In MD 2010, I have to first click accept, and then hunt down the original transaction to modify it and delete the gibberish. Not only does this require searching, it requires mentally shifting gears between being in merge mode and register mode. That mental shift alone is jarring and slows workflow. And to do several of these in a row is quite laborious.

    In MD 2008, which had the editable preview, I could click on its memo field and erase the gibberish, and then I could click accept, and move to the next transaction, without ever leaving merge mode. Because the editable preview was always in the same place, i.e. the top of the downloaded transactions area, it was easy to do many of these in a row, very very quickly. There was no mental shifting gears, and more importantly no searching.

    That may be an uncommon case for other people, but how about this: a check I'd written was cashed earlier than I expected, on 4/28. I'd already entered the check in my register with the expected date, 5/3. So there was a downloaded transaction that had a date of 4/28, and it was correctly matching itself to the transaction dated 5/3. But while the transaction was correctly matched, clicking "accept" left me with a transaction wrongly dated 5/3, which I had to leave merge mode to hunt down and correct. In 2008, I could simply have edited the date in the editable preview, clicked accept, and continued to the next downloaded transaction.

    If you never worked with 2008, this all may be very hard to visualize. The net effect is that without leaving the merging process, you could make the final result look exactly how you wanted it to. Right now MD decides on its own how the final result will look, and the only recourse for the user is to hunt down the transaction post-merge and make corrections then.

  22. 232 Posted by Gray Maddry on 01 May, 2010 02:13 AM

    Gray Maddry's Avatar

    I agree with jwc and hope Sean and team get it fixed soon as he said they would.

  23. 233 Posted by LarryCL on 10 May, 2010 11:18 PM

    LarryCL's Avatar

    Yet again, Moneydance has astounded me by suggesting a really stupid match for a downloaded transaction.

    I am running Moneydance 2010 r748.
    Last week, I entered a check I wrote for $100 (check #1234 for sake of example) into my register after I wrote it. I also visited an ATM and withdrew $100. I didn't put this transaction into my register.

    Today I downloaded transactions from my bank. Check #1234 had not cleared yet, so it was not in the list of downloaded transactions. The ATM withdrawal, of course, had cleared and was in the list.

    Even though they were on different days, had different descriptions, and the downloaded transaction DID NOT HAVE A CHECK NUMBER, Moneydance tried to match the ATM transaction to the check I had entered into the register.

    As people have been saying for what seems like forever, when Moneydance makes an error like this it is far too easy to miss and to just hit accept, which would match the transactions erroneously.

    I realize we have been talking about this for months, and in fairness the latest builds are much better than they were in the past, but false matches like this happen far too often, especially when the transactions are for common amounts (e.g, $50, $60, $100).

    Could someone from Moneydance please chime in as to if there are more planned improvements to the matching algorithm? And I really hope I don't have to open and/or vote on yet another trac ticket. I've been doing that for the past 6 months.

  24. 234 Posted by patrick on 13 May, 2010 04:58 PM

    patrick's Avatar

    I have been having almost no trouble matching or categorizing downloaded transactions until today when MD (748) absolutely refused to match a downloaded transaction with its counterpart despite all info being the same (date, amount, payee, etc.) It kept wanting me to categorize rather than merge, but to add insult to injury when I agreed to categorize nothing happened. If I deleted the downloaded transaction it just downloaded again the next time. Finally, all I could do is to enter all the categories in the downloaded transaction manually and then delete the transaction it should have merged with. MD is so close to being an outstanding application, but it is spoiled by silly stuff like this (and like the way it makes one update security prices which some of us have asked to be changed for months).

  25. 235 Posted by -Kevin N. on 13 May, 2010 05:16 PM

    -Kevin N.'s Avatar

    Hi patrick,
    I too have very little trouble matching downloaded txns. The one or two odd balls like the one you mention DO happen but not often enough for me to be too concearned.
    They happened in MS Money too, so I don't really think it's a totally MD specific matter.
    I'm curious, what is the issue with the way MD updates stock prices?
    -Kevin N.

  26. 236 Posted by patrick on 13 May, 2010 05:36 PM

    patrick's Avatar

    See comment #10 in the discussion at:
    It's not a problem with the way MD itself updates prices when it is opened, it is a major problem with the workflow that the user has to go through to enter prices of bonds (and some stocks) which cannot be updated automatically.

  27. 237 Posted by Ben Spencer on 13 May, 2010 05:55 PM

    Ben Spencer's Avatar


    With regard to the transaction not being offered as a MERGE. Is is possible that the transaction already in your register had been marked as cleared (with a green check)? Cleared transactions are excluded from the list of those that can be merged with.


  28. 238 Posted by patrick on 13 May, 2010 06:04 PM

    patrick's Avatar

    Hi Ben:
    No, it had no checkmark at all in the C column.

  29. 239 Posted by Ben Spencer on 13 May, 2010 06:41 PM

    Ben Spencer's Avatar

    If the problem comes up again would you please take some screenshots and attach them to a new discussion so I can diagnose it further.


  30. 240 Posted by Gray Maddry on 17 May, 2010 02:35 AM

    Gray Maddry's Avatar

    Using 749 after loading a qif from a credit card I had to go and delete all the "merged" transactions since they didn't merge. MD also tried to merge two transaction that were a month apart in time. One more month like this and I am going back to 2008 and will start looking for a MD replacement. THIS IS TRULY RIDICULOUS. (shouting intended).
    I and many others have been complaining about this for months. I can't believe anyone tested this it is so bad.

Comments are currently closed for this discussion. You can start a new one.

Keyboard shortcuts


? 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