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.
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.
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.
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.
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.