Improve transaction download matching?
I've been encountering a difficulty lately which has gotten more pronounced now that I've gone to MD+, due to the difference in the way the Payee and Memo fields come from the institutions (no fault of IK). But it didn't arise there; it's just that transaction matching has gotten more difficult.
The original problem came up when I started making monthly contributions to political candidates, typically in a consistent amount, so that I often had multiple transactions with similar payees and the same dollar amount, which caused some to be incorrectly merged and therefore missed. Turning off auto-matching allowed me to download the one account, manually match, and then put it back on for the other accounts. A bit inconvenient, but workable.
However, with MD+, the Payee is often an exact match, and only the Memo field can distinguish the two, and the current matching doesn't seem to work very well on these transactions. So I'm compelled to turn off matching altogether, which means a lot more transactions to be done manually.
One thing that would help is if we could set the auto-match parameter separately for each account. Thus the one credit card that I generally use for these expenses could be non-matching, while all the rest could continue in auto-match, which otherwise works well.
Possible in a soon update? Thanks.
-- David
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 dtd on 30 Oct, 2022 12:09 AM
just a user - I do feel your pain. I have one account that has dog care within it (Rover.com) and the values are usually the same (consistent). With MD+ (yes, this is a chase credit card), matches are all over the place, i.e. the fitid is assigned to transactions even a month off. I lowered the match parameter to be a lot tighter (14 days versus more), but still - as you point out, transaction matching just isn't as good as with OFX.
So, I agree your request is extremely reasonable, and I +1 it.
As to "possible in a soon update"? I'd hope so, but don't hold your breath. There are so many items in MD+ that need improvement that I doubt this one will rise to the top, but you can always cross your fingers.
2 Posted by david.d on 30 Oct, 2022 02:18 AM
Agreed. Hoping that the more granular approach to controls might be easy to implement, but having run a software change management department in an earlier life, I make no assumptions about the process or priorities.
From: dtd <[email blocked]>
Reply-To: <[email blocked]>
3 Posted by jgreenb2 on 01 Dec, 2022 11:21 PM
Also a +1 from me, although I have never found transaction matching accurate enough to use the auto setting. But it was still fairly easy to approve matches manually and the suggested merges were often correct. With MD+ and Plaid, merge suggestions are sometimes laughably bad. Not sure where the fault lies but things are pretty rough right now.
4 Posted by david.d on 02 Dec, 2022 12:22 AM
I think part of the problem may be temporary. I’ve noticed that the Description fields provided by MD+ are often different from those downloaded via OFX, the latter often duplicating the memo field. So it may be a matter of letting a couple of months go by, so that the fields can match up more cleanly.
From: jgreenb2 <[email blocked]>
Reply-To: <[email blocked]>
5 Posted by dtd on 02 Dec, 2022 01:55 AM
I think you are correct for non-matching transactions, it will just take time, but will improve.
The thing I think will remain is accounts that have multiple identical transactions over a fairly short period of time like rover.com dog care for me. But of course even OFX downloads had that issue (meaning of course MD has no idea how to match such) - and Quicken had the problem as well for the years I used it.
6 Posted by david.d on 02 Dec, 2022 04:24 PM
Perhaps there’s a way to flag an already-merged transaction, removing it from the list of potential matches.
From: dtd <[email blocked]>
Reply-To: <[email blocked]>
System closed this discussion on 03 Mar, 2023 04:30 PM.