Another Advanced Portfoio update

[Chris Good]

Hi Mike,

Ah! Thanks for identifying where the difference in the 'Money In' came from.
I can't believe I didn't figure that out because the value was split between
my wife and I.
The other reason I didn't figure it out was that I was adding up the cost of
the stock purchases whereas I think, from what you say (simplified), the
report adds up the credits from asset accounts.

The residual values are usually small (unless a share unit is very
expensive) and I'm not very worried about it, as long as I know how it is
calculated.

That being said, I agree with you that money coming from a dividend is not
really money in, so credits from the residual account shouldn't be counted
in Money In.

I think your first suggestion could work, although it would be difficult to
prove if the report is correct.
Your 2nd suggestion could be problematic owing to share price variations. At
which point of time would you determine the price of 1 share?

I  have a suggestion that will work for me. Other people may like to weigh
in if they disagree...

My DRP Residual accounts are of type Asset, not Bank. How about you don't
include in Money In, credit transfers from Asset type accounts, only Bank
type accounts.
You don't earn any interest on DRP Residuals, so to me, it makes sense that
they are not Bank type accounts.

BTW, You have fixed the doubled income problem I previously had - wonderful!

Regards, Chris Good

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Alexander [mailto:mta at umich.edu]
> Sent: Monday, 17 February 2014 12:35 PM
> To: Chris Good; gnucash-user at gnucash.org
> Subject: RE: Another Advanced Portfoio update
> 
> --On February 16, 2014 7:47:41 PM +1100 Chris Good
> <chris.good at ozemail.com.au> wrote:
> 
> > New report is much better! Everything is perfect except for Money In.
> > For a stock I have which just has 2 transactions (initial purchase +
> > DRP with an increase in Residual), I can see Money In is correct being
> > just the cost of the initial stock purchase.
> > But for another stock which has 3 DRPs, 2 increasing residual and 1
> > decreasing residual, the Money In is close to what I expect (Ie the
> > cost of the initial shares + the cost of the DRP share allocation, but
> > it is a few dollars out, and I cannot figure out a combination of
> > values to explain it.
> >
> > If you still have the TEST database I sent you, with the transactions
> > for BOQ, could you please run your new report on it and check out
> > Money In?
> 
> I still have that test file and use it regularly to test my changes.
> 
> I assume that you see money in that is 2.53 too high in the report on that
> account.  This is because the transaction on 9 Dec 2012 transfers
> 4.52 to the DRP Residual asset account and the transaction on 26 May
> 2013 transfers 2.53 back to round up the purchase to an even number of
> shares.  The report considers each transaction separately and makes no
> connection between these two.  Hence the 2.53 looks like money in.  If
this is
> not what you're seeing then most of what I saw below is irrelevant.
> 
> Contrast this with another investment I had once upon a time where
> dividends were also reinvested.  I could also add cash to the reinvestment
> account which would be added to the next dividend to purchase more
> shares.  At first glance this looks much like your account, but the money
I
> added didn't come from a previous dividend and should be considered
> money in.
> 
> I can think of two ways to distinguish these cases, neither of which I
like all
> that much.  I could assume that money transfered to an asset account as
part
> of a reinvestment transaction (one that has both income and shares
> purchase) is being transfered to a DRP holding account.  As long as the
net
> transfer to the account is positive, I could assume that there is no money
in
> to the stock account as a result of these transactions.
> 
> The other possibility is to ignore any money transfered into an
reinvestment
> transaction so long as it was less than the cost of one share.  If this
money
> came from something other than a previous dividend, then this would be the
> wrong thing to do.
> 
> I like the first of these better and I'll think about implementing some
like this
> unless someone has a better idea.
> 
>                  Mike
> 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6091 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.gnucash.org/pipermail/gnucash-user/attachments/20140217/a6217493/attachment.p7s>