How to use Quicken to Determine Saving Amt

[TromboneAl]

I haven't found a clean way of using Quicken to figure out how much I saved last year.

All I need to do is figure out the net amount that was transferred to my investments accounts from my bank accounts. Or I could look at the change in value of the investment accounts, and subtract the dividends, interest, and cap gains.

No easy way to do either of those that I've found.

What do you do?

 

[LOL!]

I use MSMoney. I run a report called Income & Expenses. We've paid all expenses out of our checking account, so I only have to flag that account.

So I see how much expenses were. I know our income and taxes paid by looking at our W2s. I know our taxes by looking at my 1040 (property taxes on Schedule A are part of the MSMoney expenses report, but income_taxes, FICA, Medicare are not). So ...

W2_income - Taxes - Expenses = Amount_saved.

 

[AltaRed]

Al, the way I do it is to generate a Cash Flow report or an Income/Expense report. If you have given the original entries a descriptive description, these should be easy to spot.

One thing Quicken does do well is to record changes between Accounts.

 

[saluki9]

In quicken I just run an income/expense report and set it to exclude my investment accounts and mortgage accounts.

That way it will show me my income, and will show my expenses not including transfers to my investment accounts which I want. The excess amount show in the report is my savings.

 

[TromboneAl]

Yes, those work pretty well, thanks.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

When I feel the urge to use quicken, I drink a beer instead.

I've found that this method usually inspires me to use quicken even less, and to drink another beer.

I'd like to determine if the process proceeds arithmetically or geometrically, but I seem to lose track after awhile.

 

[REWahoo]

I'd like to determine if the process proceeds arithmetically or geometrically...

Neither. It proceeds alcoholically.

 

[cute fuzzy bunny]

Which is probably what led me to say "arithmetically" instead of "linearly".