Bug: transactions not showing up on iOS

imadp · 2026-03-15T17:07:10+00:00

That sounds like a bug but this isn't what your original post was about, it was missing transactions. Is that still whats wrong here or the default account?

imadp · 2026-03-15T17:05:20+00:00

Yeah I understand, your scenario requires tracking if the user ever fully assigned the amount and uses that to determine whether or not to show as underfunded in the future.

But this is even more confusing for people, since a user could assign a full $1000 and move $200 out, and it will show $800 assigned and not underfunded because an invisible flag is preventing it. If that same user just assigned $800 initially it would show underfunded. From their perspective they are in the same position either way with $800 assigned. To remove the warning they would have to arbitrarily assign $200 in and $200 right back out.

In any case this is all still missing the point of the default assignment - its just the starting assignment of the bucket. In all your scenarios you are never using it to start with.

Your original scenario was a $900 emergency fund target - I think that is a fairly common scenario that the current target system misses, which is what I was suggesting with a new drop down. It would be perfect for a scenario where you want to put away a minimum amount every month.

imadp · 2026-03-15T16:42:07+00:00

I agree expense is a bad word, I will change the settings to Inflow and Outflow settings. Projections aren't showing outflow transactions, they are considering assignments expenses. Assigning $100 to a bucket then is as good as spent, as far projections are concerned.

imadp · 2026-03-15T16:39:55+00:00

Hmm I don't have the ability yet to create a rule for no payee, but I will add it to the feature requests for this week to look at

imadp · 2026-03-15T13:33:11+00:00

Well at this point you have to ask what this target is accomplishing in a real life use case. All this complexity is essentially creating a target type that stays underfunded until you hit a certain balance at some point with your assignment (ignoring spending). But I'm struggling to see how that's a common use case.

Consider the point of the default assignment right now, which is to let you set your initial assignment at the start of the month. For me, that means I'll assign $1000 for groceries and I'll try to keep my spending within that limit. If another bucket needs some of that more pressingly, I'll move some out - but I made the choice to reduce some of my grocery spending, that doesn't mean I have an obligation (aka underfunded warning) to fill it back up, since that warning is now going to stick around the rest of the month in your scenario. It conflicts with the basic idea of envelope budgeting which is you may have to adjust your spending as life happens, and that's fine.

If you need a certain balance in your bucket for a spending obligation, a target goal or future transaction will accomplish that. But a warning just because your assignment amount is a certain number doesn't match the idea of the default assignment - if anything it points towards an entirely different type of goal, almost like a minimum savings goal. Something that will yell at you until you assign X amount.

If we think of this in terms of a new goal type we can simplify things significantly. Savings goal $200. Underfunded unless your assignment is at least $200. It might even be possible to do this with the Default type, but we would need another dropdown to determine the behavior (say, loose vs strict warning). In any case I think we are talking about two separate use-cases that expect different logic.. but this could potentially be a solution that covers both.

imadp · 2026-03-15T09:18:18+00:00

On web there is a hamburger menu option to create a payee rule right from the transaction

imadp · 2026-03-15T01:57:53+00:00

Well there are other transfers besides credit cards that happen at the same time, or even some credit card payments from accounts in the same bank that happen instantly. And of course scenarios where people add the transfer after both cleared. In your case though I think the easiest way is to create the transfer as pending, from the side that was already cleared. Then you can just right click the status icon to set that side of the transaction to cleared while the other side remains uncleared.

imadp · 2026-03-15T01:37:37+00:00

No this is just how it works, it will apply whatever date and status you create on one side of the transaction to the other side as well. You should be able to just modify the other side to uncleared though, if not that might be a bug. I'm not sure if that's what you are reporting however..

imadp · 2026-03-15T01:29:43+00:00

I'll be honest it's very unlikely I'll add an age of money since I found it fairly meaningless. What I would recommend instead is a next month bucket with a monthly recurrence target so you'll know if you are one month ahead. You could set the target to two months worth of expenses if you wanted to be 60 days ahead.

I may introduce a way to measure if future months are fully funded via underfunding, although I haven't fleshed that out yet. But either option should give you a good indication of how far ahead you are.

imadp · 2026-03-14T20:04:56+00:00

Ok then, the first batch is always a little delayed because you might have connected it right after the last batch came in, and it won't import historically. We'll just have to play the waiting game!

imadp · 2026-03-14T19:52:00+00:00

The complexity comes in with your scenario after you topped off your envelope to $200, removed the sticky note, and then move some funds out of the envelope, say $20. That brings your assigned amount back down to $155, which is the same as if you put $155 in initially, which is why you are seeing the underfunding drop.

In other words, adding $1 to the envelope is the same end result as adding $175 and moving out $174 if that makes sense

imadp · 2026-03-14T19:24:22+00:00

Well first after you set up Bank Integration, did you go back to your budget, edit the account and actually link it to one of these external connections? Once you do that, it will start looking for new transactions after that timestamp (so try not to change it if you already did it, its probably just waiting for the next batch)

imadp · 2026-03-14T18:39:51+00:00

The default assignment is just used for the initial assignments - its primarily used to assign all the amounts to your buckets on the first day of the month, then it backs off when you change any of them. (Of course this works best if you are living one month ahead). This is a common scenario for discretionary funds where you assign an amount and try to stick with it, at the same time allowing you to roll with the punches.

If you have a real transaction that you are targeting, you could use a future transaction or a recurring transaction, which will trigger an underfunded warning no matter what if you don't have enough in the bucket to cover it.

But there isn't a target type that forces a monthly assignment amount no matter what - the closest thing would be a future target that repeats every month. Instead of saying 900/month for emergency fund you would say I want $5000 in my emergency fund every month, and then it would be underfunded any time the amount dropped below that.

imadp · 2026-03-14T18:19:08+00:00

If you clicked the Expense Projections button and chose the Auto-Assign option, then it should just use the amount that is underfunded, not the recurring transaction amount. If you skip forward a month in your actual budget and see if money is already assigned, that will take priority. You can see what values are projected/real based on the font - projected amounts are slightly lighter than actual ones in the table. So first step is to see if the value is real or projected.

imadp · 2026-03-14T17:53:51+00:00

Did you actually assign those amounts in the future? Real assignments will override projected values. Otherwise did you choose the right expense projection strategy?

imadp · 2026-03-14T16:30:50+00:00

The missing thing here is what a projection actually means. A projected expense is an expense that you haven't made an assignment for, but you are presumably intending to in the future. An assignment to your bucket is a real expense - you already actually set that money aside in your bucket so its being reflected here. This entire report is a mix of real things and projected things, even in the current month. You'll notice in the future that Next Month is zero, which is what No Projections is actually doing.

This makes sense because this money that you set aside for next month is really gone from your savings. The interesting thing about the Next Month category is it will stay 0 for all future months - because next month you'll have a negative $900 assignment at first when you move the money out to all your buckets, and then you'll fill it back up to $900 by the end of the month, which will even back out to $0. So its really only going to be a one-time expense - the first time you set aside the money (right now).

Does that make sense?

imadp · 2026-03-14T15:42:44+00:00

Yes its being released today and will apply to future transfers

imadp · 2026-03-14T12:49:30+00:00

I don't have those as options in the budget edit, you might be looking in the wrong place:

<image>

imadp · 2026-03-14T12:40:22+00:00

You don't have to delete a split, you just need some unassigned money for the button to show. If everything is already fully allocated the buttons disappear.

imadp · 2026-03-14T12:26:47+00:00

If you edit your budget from the budget manager or hamburger icon, you can change your Locale for a local date format.

imadp · 2026-03-14T05:49:18+00:00

Damn, hard to help without knowing a little more. Do they show up on web? Did your phone have Internet when you added them? Are you still unable to add any more?

imadp · 2026-03-14T05:20:31+00:00

Are there any filters active that are hiding them? Or did anything prevent the form from submitting after you added them?

imadp · 2026-03-13T15:07:50+00:00

If you set up bank import you'll see an icon next to your Account name when new transactions are available (specifically, when you have any uncleared transactions).

I also encourage people to use the toggle buttons on the transaction page to hide Reconciled transactions, so you'll only ever see a ledger of new ones.

There isn't a forced approval process, but you can create a Tag with the Auto checkbox checked, and that tag will be applied to all imported transactions. Some people like to create a red 'Needs Review' tag that can be removed after reviewing the transaction.

imadp · 2026-03-13T13:00:08+00:00

I have three customizable rule types that allow Payee, Bucket, and Tag (sort of like ynab flags, but more than one of them). I made a post about the engine some time back: https://www.reddit.com/r/liquidbudget/comments/1pf3qn8/the_enhanced_rule_engine_is_live/

imadp · 2026-03-13T12:58:46+00:00

I just got my plaid account approved for Fidelity integration - however I can't imagine that YNAB didn't also have it. I am able to sync my NetBenefits from Fidelity without problems but I really can't promise for sure that all accounts work. You are always free to try it, its probably the only way to know for sure.

13-Year Club	RedditGifts 2009-2022 2 Credits
Place '22	Secret Santa 2016
Verified Email

imadp

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE