I have a Vanguard IRA account which also contains a brokerage account. They are all part of one IRA. Quicken sees two accounts, the brokerage and the mutual fund. I can see no way to tell Quicken that a transfer from one to the other is not an IRA contribution.
Am i missing something?
I don't really care about this, but I am curious.
Why do you have 2 accounts set-up in Q? Is that some sort of Vanguard requirement?
Quicken brokerage accounts can easily hold BOTH stock and mutual funds. I have 2 such accounts set up ... my "general portfolio" (i.e. taxable account) and my Rollover IRA.
db
Ditto. Some people just seem to HAVE to complicate things, eh?
Thanks. I guess I just didn't think about it when I added the brokerage and told Quicken it was a new account. I think you are saying I could have added it to the existing account.
I'll have to decide if I want to "fix" this or live with it. Vanguard does seperate investment and brokerage - they have different account numbers and show up seperately on the Vanguard web site.
The OP is NOT complicating things; Vanguard has long standing issue with Quicken the way they set up accounts. For example, look at
Thanks Andrew. My subsequent experiments and the link you provided both indicate that you CANNOT combine Vanguard investment and brokerage accounts in a single quicken account. I think it is because they have different account numbers, and quicken associates a single account number with a single online active account.
Have you asked Vanguard if you can hold mutual funds in your brokerage account?
Bullshit. People who use Quicken to interface with financial institutions in that manner are NEVER going to be without problems. Period. Much easier to NOT use the interface. I haven't used Quicken to interface this way since 1994. I download stocket prices, currency values, etc, with no problems.
Some people would complicate the Lord's Prayer, given half a chance. If you want ONE account, simply do updates manually.
Very true. In fact, I think we all need to take your argument to its logical conclusion and say that since computers will always have "problems" we should give up trying to use them at all (never mind that Vanguard seems to stand out on this particular issue from all other FIs) and go back to paper checkbook registers and not to continue to improve the paradigm.
The day I go back to paper chequebook records is the day.....
Just sayin' that one shouldn't expect relatively cheap software to handle all the possible weirdness from financial institutions whom they have no control over.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required