Missing Actuals in Savings Budget Tab

I ran into a real headscratcher as I was missing some values in the Actuals column of the Savings Budget tab. Looking at the hidden columns, the Period Actuals are found, but the formula for column AI Modified Actuals is “manually” entered in each cell rather than populated for the range and stops at row 101. I was able to drag the formula down into lower cells and the Actuals were then pulled over, but it might be a good idea to configure the formula to cover AI7:AI automatically to support users with a larger category list.

Thanks for alerting me to this, @cculber2, and great digging to find the source of the problem.

The sheet used to start with 101 rows. Your large number of categories must have expanded it beyond bottom of the pre-populated formulas. I just published an update that extends the sheet to start with a 200-row capacity.

I try to use ARRAYFORMULA() for helper formulas but there are a few places where that was not possible in this template. (I colored those columns gray so it was clear where updates would be needed with added rows.)

How are you finding the template generally?
Keep the feedback coming!

You’re welcome, and thanks, @randy! I’ve preemptively extended the other gray columns so I don’t get caught off guard later.

In general I’m enjoying the new template, especially since it’s much more responsive than the Envelope or Foundation templates. Granted, I brought in 9 years of Mint.com transactions, so there’s a lot to process.

I like how it marries some of the best points of the Envelope and Foundation templates such as savings rollovers and the combined budget and category tab. Being able to update savings or budget amounts en-masse is also a Godsend.I’m also a huge fan of Transfers being included on the Savings Budget tab. Reconciling Amazon purchases with the newly revived CSV importer will get easier now!

The prototype is pretty fantastic as is, so I can’t wait to see what it will bring to the table once it hits release status.

Great feedback, @cculber2. It sounds like you’ve dug pretty far into it, so that means a lot. The Tiller add-on envelope budget has been a workhorse but hasn’t been updated meaningfully in a few years. It occurred to me that we could shift a lot of the work done with scripts to in-cell formulas making the whole thing more performant and transparent (with a just a few small compromises on feature scope).

With my personal finances, I’ve tested with ~32k transactions, 20 years of Quicken & iBank. I notice a couple second lag when I shift periods. If you don’t mind me asking, how many transactions do you have? How noticeable is the recalculation? What actions cause it to lag most?

I’m also curious how close the migrator got to matching up your two data sets. The calculations are similar, but have been implemented completely separately… so, honestly, I’m skeptical that they’ll line up exactly dolllar-for-dollar— and I don’t have a real-world dataset to do a meaningful comparison. Did the migration workflow get you close enough?

As for “release status”, I don’t have a ton of new features planned; mostly, I just plan to iron out the kinks (that you and the rest of the community have helped flag) and get it more reliable. I’m all :ear:s if you have suggestions. Generally, I’d like to avoid feature creep that can bog it down and make it harder to understand for new users. (I thought @kevinwholland had an interesting suggestion today… I’m curious if I can make that work readily.)