Say you have an Autocat rule that would assign to the “discretionary spend” category any transaction with “7-Eleven” on the description AND a MAX Amount of $20… in this case a transaction from 7-Eleven for $19 will match this criteria since 19 “is smaller” than the max amount of 20.
But this works backwards when the transactions have negative numbers (like CC transactions). In this same example but using negative numbers, logic would dictate to put -20 in the “MIN Amount” column (as opposed to the MAX amount on the previews example). This way a -19 transaction from 7-Eleven would match the criteria since -19 “is bigger” than the Min amount of -20.
But no! Autocat thinks that -20 is in fact larger than -19 where in fact, it is a smaller smaller. In autocat min/max rules logic: 19 is smaller than 20 BUT -19 is also smaller than -20
Can someone please comment on this, its driving me crazy.