[HN Gopher] One Number I Trust: Plain-Text Accounting for a Mult...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       One Number I Trust: Plain-Text Accounting for a Multi-Currency
       Household
        
       Author : ayi
       Score  : 116 points
       Date   : 2026-01-02 10:25 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (lalitm.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (lalitm.com)
        
       | nubg wrote:
       | Can somebody explain to me the advantage of double-entry
       | bookkeeping? Is it basically just a "checksum" so it's easier to
       | notice when something is off?
        
         | Etheryte wrote:
         | Yes, it makes it both really simple to spot mistakes and also
         | allows you to easily audit the whole thing after the fact. In
         | corporate contexts it's a straightforward way to make sure your
         | bookies are also honest, just have an external firm look
         | through the whole thing every now and then.
        
         | phil-martin wrote:
         | I must have read half a dozen intro-to-accounting books, and it
         | never ever clicked for me. I understood the concepts, the
         | benefits, but it just felt 'wrong'.
         | 
         | It wasn't wrong of course, there is so much history, ingenuity
         | and the invention of double entry accounting, but I just
         | couldn't get my brain to understand it.
         | 
         | The way the concepts settled in my head was: double entry
         | accounting is just an excellent way of modelling a graph with
         | nodes and edges. Accounts are nodes, transfers are edges. Every
         | edge has a source and a destination.
         | 
         | For a paper ledger, each column is graph node, and each row is
         | a graph edge.
         | 
         | That was enough for me to be able to learn the rest of the
         | things I needed for interacting with the accounting world.
         | 
         | But I also realised that that description really only helps a
         | very small part of the population. :D It makes things so much
         | worse for most people.
         | 
         | "Hey could you help me understanding this accounting thing?"
         | 
         | "Sure, but first thing is, let's learn graph theory! You know
         | who Dijkstra right?"
         | 
         | Whole buckets of nope.
         | 
         | But thats a digression from your actual question - whats the
         | point?
         | 
         | It presents a rigid set of rules of recording transfers,
         | everything has to have a from account and to account (i.e. a
         | graph edge), every row must add up to zero.
         | 
         | Because of that, it makes it easy to spot any mistakes in data
         | entry. If any of your rows dont add up to zero - then you've
         | made a mistake.
        
         | RedNifre wrote:
         | Here is my explanation for "software people who understand
         | databases". The structure of the explanation will be as
         | follows:                 1. Explain how you would do simple
         | accounting with a database       2. Point out which indices
         | you'd create for performance       3. Show how the "double
         | entry" part of double entry accounting is about the indices
         | 
         | 1. The way you'd do accounting in a database is with two
         | tables: One table for accounts (e.g. your checking account, or
         | the supermarket account, which you don't own) and another table
         | for transactions. The transactions move an amount of money from
         | one account to another, e.g. from your checking account to the
         | supermarket account. Or if you use it for budgeting, you might
         | split your checking account into a groceries account, a rent
         | account etc. (think "categories").
         | 
         | 2. For performance, you would create indices based on the
         | accounts in the transaction table, so you could easily check
         | what's going on e.g. in your groceries account or how much you
         | spent at the supermarket.
         | 
         | 3. Double entry accounting was formalized in the 15th century,
         | way before computers became a thing, but bound paper books were
         | already somewhat affordable. The way you'd do accounting is
         | like this: During the business day, you would write down your
         | transactions as they happen, into a scrapbook, similar to the
         | transactions table mentioned above. At the end of the day,
         | you'd do the "double entry" part, which means you take your
         | "index" books where each book is about one account and you
         | transcribe each transaction from your scrap book into the two
         | books of the two accounts that are mentioned in the
         | transaction, e.g. if you spent $10 from your groceries account
         | into the supermarket account, you'd double enter that
         | transaction both into your "groceries" book and into your
         | "supermarket" book. Then, when you want to check on how much
         | you spent at the supermarket in a particular month, you could
         | easily look it up in the supermarket book (this would be very
         | tedious when using the scrap book). These account centered
         | books are like the indices in the database mentioned above.
         | 
         | So the double entry part is about clever index building for
         | making it easier and faster to understand what's going on in
         | your accounting system.
        
           | thehours wrote:
           | How are investments modeled in this system? e.g I buy $100 of
           | an index fund which can fluctuate in value.
        
             | phil-martin wrote:
             | Accounts (in the accounting sense) are unitless, and refer
             | to whatever meaning we ascribe to them, so we can transfer
             | value from $ to shares, or USD to GBP or whatever.
             | 
             | Lalit describes this I think really well in his article
             | 
             | https://lalitm.com/post/one-number-i-
             | trust/#chapter-4-invest...
        
             | rmunn wrote:
             | Not an accountant, so if I get it wrong someone please
             | correct me. But index fund shares are an asset: something
             | you own. So is your car, your house (if you own it), and
             | your computer. When you buy an asset, you paid a certain
             | price for it. When you sell it, you pay a different price.
             | Until you sell it, though, you don't actually have the
             | money, so it hardly matters what its value is _until you
             | sell it_. If you buy $100 of an index fund and a year later
             | it has grown by 10%, you don 't actually _have_ $110 yet
             | until you sell it. So you just track that you have a
             | certain number of shares of the fund. Let 's say each share
             | sells for exactly $20 when you bought them, so you have
             | exactly 5 shares. Later the share price is $22, but you
             | don't have $110 yet, you still have exactly 5 shares. When
             | you sell them, _then_ you 'll have $110.
             | 
             | So you record two entries:
             | 
             | January 1st, 2025:                 -$100 checking account
             | +5 shares VFINX at $20 ea
             | 
             | January 1st, 2026:                 -5 shares VFINX at $22
             | ea       +$110 checking account
             | 
             | At this point you have "realized" ("made real") $10 of
             | profit from this asset. You bought it for $100 and sold it
             | for $110, so the IRS wants you to pay taxes on the $10
             | profit you made. (This is capital gains tax). Until you
             | sold them, some people would consider you to have $10
             | profit in "unrealized capital gains", but you _did not
             | actually have that profit until you sold the shares_. This
             | is important to remember, because if you start counting on
             | that $10 profit but then the share price drops because the
             | economy took a hit, suddenly you don 't have $110 worth of
             | shares, you have $90 worth of shares, and you'll make a
             | loss if you sell them now. (This is one of the reasons why
             | only the economically illiterate would propose a tax on
             | "unrealized capital gains": that means taxing people for
             | income they have _not actually received_ , but merely
             | _could theoretically_ receive. Which is both immoral and
             | stupid.)
             | 
             | Hope this explanation helps a little. And as I said, if I
             | got something wrong, please correct me and explain how I
             | was wrong; I'm not an accountant. I understand the basic
             | principles, but it's entirely possible I was off on some
             | detail or other.
        
               | rmunn wrote:
               | I feel I should also mention one more thing. The fact
               | that you don't have the money _until you sell the shares_
               | is also why  "net worth" can be a highly misleading
               | concept. (All numbers in the following example are
               | fictional and made up on the spot, BTW). Billionaire Gill
               | Bates, whose net worth is reported to be $20 billion,
               | does not actually _have_ 20 billion dollars. He has $5
               | million (million, not billion) of actual dollars in his
               | bank account(s), but the rest of his net worth is in
               | assets: he owns 200 million shares of MegaSoft Corp,
               | whose share price is currently $100 per share. If
               | MegaSoft Corp 's shares suddenly drop in value (say,
               | because a hacker group announces that MegaSoft's Doors 12
               | OS is full of, well, backdoors and suddenly nobody wants
               | to buy it anymore) and now their shares are selling for
               | $90, then Gill Bates's net worth will become 18 billion
               | dollars instead of 20 billion. Did he "lose" 2 billion
               | dollars in one day? _NO_. He never had those dollars. The
               | "net worth" calculation is just the _theoretical_ amount
               | of money he could make if he sold all his shares.
               | 
               | And in fact, he could never actually make that amount of
               | money by selling all his shares, because if he did put
               | 200 million MegaSoft shares on the market, he'd never be
               | able to find buyers for all of them at the current share
               | price, and he'd be forced to drop his asking price by
               | quite a bit before he managed to sell all 200 million
               | shares. Not to mention the fact that if he tried to sell
               | his entire holdings of MegaSoft Corp, many people would
               | wonder what he knows about MegaSoft's long-term
               | prospects, and would be afraid to buy those shares,
               | driving the share price down even further. Gill Bates
               | would be lucky to make $5 billion, let alone his
               | theoretical net worth of $20 billion, if he were to
               | suddenly sell all his shares. (If he sold them in a
               | trickle over the course of ten years, he might well make
               | the full $20 billion in the end, but not if he dumped
               | them all on the market at once).
               | 
               | This is why (well, it's just one of the many reasons why)
               | net worth is misleading. It's a theoretical number, but
               | the actual amount of wealth someone has in practice
               | entirely depends on market conditions at the moment they
               | need the money, as well as how urgently they need it. (If
               | the market is low right now, can they afford to wait six
               | months for it to recover? Or do they need the money
               | tomorrow and have to sell at a lower-than-ideal price?)
        
               | snowwrestler wrote:
               | Net worth is the denominator for things that people
               | actually want to, which typically don't require
               | converting it all to cash at once. For example, pulling
               | 4% of your net worth per year is one way to fund a
               | retirement. So you won't know if you're ready to retire
               | unless you're tracking net worth.
               | 
               | For very rich people like Gill Bates, net worth is going
               | to be the denominator for massive loans, tax strategies,
               | and corporate maneuvering. Again, none of that will
               | require converting the entire net worth to cash all at
               | once. That doesn't mean it's not real.
               | 
               | Finance is a complex subject, sure, and it gets more
               | complex the bigger the numbers. That doesn't mean it's
               | misleading.
        
               | WorldMaker wrote:
               | A fancy term of art for all this is "cost-basis
               | accounting". Your (double entry) account tracks only the
               | cost basis (how much you have spent and when you spent it
               | for what commodity) not the current price. Current price
               | fluctuates with the market and you can track the price as
               | well to build an unrealized gain/loss statement. This
               | sort of statement is not an account, it's a report on an
               | account. (And yeah, "unrealized" means what it says that
               | it isn't real money in your accounts, just money you
               | potentially could make if you sold/converted/traded what
               | was in your accounts.)
        
               | BoiledCabbage wrote:
               | > (This is one of the reasons why only the economically
               | illiterate would propose a tax on "unrealized capital
               | gains": that means taxing people for income they have not
               | actually received, but merely could theoretically
               | receive. Which is both immoral and stupid.)
               | 
               | But your statement misses the important point of
               | situations where people use the unrealized gains as
               | collateral for a loan which they then use (for example to
               | live off of). This in fact effectively "realizing" them
               | without paying appropriate taxes on them. As long as
               | gains are purely theoretical and not used for any
               | transactions they should remain untaxed. As soon as they
               | become "active" by being sold, or for example in
               | unlocking additional assets by being collateral for a
               | loan, they should be taxed.
               | 
               | Same concept as a retirement account. You can sell within
               | a retirement account and rightfully don't have to pay
               | taxes because you don't really have "access" to the cash.
               | It's still "locked" within the account. Only when you
               | withdraw to have access to it and make it active/real do
               | you pay taxes. But if you take out a large loan
               | leveraging that retirement account as collateral (or
               | against an unrealized gain) you are not making it active
               | and correctly should pay taxes.
        
         | rmunn wrote:
         | It's not really a checksum. It can sometimes function as one
         | (everything should sum to zero, if it doesn't then you have a
         | math error), but since _most_ records you make will just have
         | two entries (spent $25 on groceries, remove $25 from checking
         | account) the everything-sums-to-zero feature isn 't going to
         | catch math mistakes most of the time, because there is no math
         | to be done on most entries. Rather, the fact that everything
         | sums to zero helps you track things later on.
         | 
         | To explain that, I'll rephrase, in my own words, the restaurant
         | example from the article, because that was a good example of
         | the concept. Let's say you went to a restaurant with two
         | friends and decided to split the $90 bill three ways, but your
         | friends didn't have $30 in cash on them at the time. You put
         | the whole $90 on your credit card, and your friends paid you
         | back $30 each the next week: one on Monday, and one on
         | Wednesday.
         | 
         | In single-entry accounting you might have written the following
         | transactions:                 Thursday Jan 1st: $90 restaurant
         | (credit card)       Monday Jan 5th: $30 repaid from Alice
         | (cash)        Wednesday Jan 7th: $30 repaid from Bob (cash)
         | 
         | Thing is, there's nothing to link those transactions together.
         | If you look at these entries three years later, you'll probably
         | be left scratching your head as to why Alice paid you back $30:
         | there's no $30 transaction, so the $90 restaurant transaction
         | won't jump out at you as the reason why Alice paid you back.
         | 
         | But with double-entry bookkeeping, you'd write that as follows:
         | 
         | Thursday Jan 1st:                 -$90 restaurant (credit card)
         | +$30 my share of the restaurant bill (expenses)       +$30
         | Alice's share of the restaurant bill (money owed to me)
         | +$30 Bob's share of the restaurant bill (money owed to me)
         | 
         | Monday Jan 5th:                 -$30 Alice's share of the
         | restaurant bill (money owed to me)       +$30 cash received
         | (cash)
         | 
         | Wednesday Jan 7th:                 -$30 Bob's share of the
         | restaurant bill (money owed to me)       +$30 cash received
         | (cash)
         | 
         | It's not always obvious when you're new to double-entry
         | accounting which entries should be positive or negative, but if
         | you remember the "must add to zero" rule you'll be more likely
         | to get it right. Money flowing _into_ an account is positive,
         | money flowing _out_ of an account is negative. For credit
         | cards, the money flows  "out of" your credit card and into the
         | restaurant's ownership, so the sign should be negative. When
         | you pay the credit card bill later, the sign will be positive
         | on the credit card account (and negative on your checking
         | account, thus again adding to zero) because money is flowing
         | _out_ of your checking account and _into_ your credit card
         | account.
         | 
         | Now, look at that double-entry accounting. When you look at the
         | Wednesday Jan 5th entry, and you see that Alice paid you back
         | $30, you'll start searching for a $30 transaction earlier, and
         | you'll pretty quickly find the January 1st and figure out that
         | she owed you $30 because you had paid her share of the
         | restaurant bill on the 1st. And even if the amounts don't line
         | up (let's say she paid you $20 on Jan 5th and $10 on Jan 12th),
         | there's still a "money Alice owes me" category which has a +$30
         | entry on the 1st, then -$20 on the 5th and -$10 on the 12th,
         | all of which makes it pretty easy to figure out what Alice is
         | paying you back for.
         | 
         | So by recording each entry in at least two places (it's not
         | always exactly two places, e.g. the January 1st expense is
         | recorded in four places total), you get more linkage between
         | the items and it becomes a lot easier to see _why_ the money
         | was going out or coming in.
        
         | iljya wrote:
         | Double-entry accounting models the source and destination of
         | funds. If you keep all of your money in one bank account and
         | neither owe anyone or have anyone that owes you, then double-
         | entry accounting is not necessary because you can record just
         | the one side of every transaction - your bank account is the
         | other side.
         | 
         | However, if you have more than one account or debts, or
         | budgets, then it becomes useful to track both sides of a
         | transaction. If you track both sides of a transaction then you
         | can easily answer questions like: 1. how much money do I have
         | in my investment account? 2. how much debt do I have? 3. how
         | much did I spend on recreational social activities?
         | 
         | You can track debts and investments separately, but then you
         | are still making two entries just in two places.
         | 
         | I think many people have few enough debts and investment
         | account that they track these separately, and the third
         | question, budgeting, can be simplified if each vendor is only
         | ever considered for a single budget, for example, all your
         | flights are part of your vacation budget, and you don't care to
         | break out a flight to a career related conference.
        
       | huhkerrf wrote:
       | I get that people on here don't like subscriptions, and I
       | understand why, but I've been using You Need a Budget for well
       | over a decade, and it is probably the last subscription I'd ever
       | give up.
       | 
       | The automatic import of expenses is so valuable for my family and
       | keeping track of how much we've spent and how much we have left
       | for the month.
       | 
       | We used the fixed-cost version for years beyond when it was
       | officially supported, and it didn't have the automated import,
       | and I don't think I could ever go back to a system that didn't.
       | There were always a few days a month, at least, when I wasn't
       | exactly sure where we were in our expenses.
        
         | dugite-code wrote:
         | For a FOSS alternative: Actual budget isn't dissimilar from
         | what YNAB was years ago when it was an on device budgeting
         | software
        
           | loloquwowndueo wrote:
           | +1, I bought YNAB back when you could - old Windows version
           | that I would run under WINE. I used that until 2025 when I
           | migrated to self-hosted Actual Budget (I run it on fly.io).
           | It does everything I need.
        
         | skwee357 wrote:
         | I dont mind paying for a personal finance tool, but I feel like
         | most of them are made for an average consumer who spends in one
         | currency and needs budgeting. I operate in at least 3
         | currencies, don't care about budgeting, and need support for
         | tracking stocks and automatic currency conversions.
         | 
         | The only tools that were able to provide that were GnuCash and
         | PTAs like beancount.
         | 
         | My point is, there is a big segment of people who are not
         | served by existing personal finance tools simply because they
         | operate in more than 1 currency, or have a slightly more
         | complicated setup than envelope budgeting.
        
           | huhkerrf wrote:
           | I regularly pay with 3 currencies, and YNAB isn't great for
           | that, but it ends up working out because 95% of my spend is
           | in just one.
           | 
           | But, you're right, I have no need for tracking stocks, as I
           | only check in once a year or so, and I can't imagine YNAB
           | would manage that well.
        
           | netsharc wrote:
           | Are the currency conversions automatic, do they fetch the
           | rate of whatever service you're using? E.g. converting USD to
           | EUR on Wise on 28 Dec 2025 surely gets you a different amount
           | compared to doing it on Revolut, or paying EUR with your card
           | (which is USD-denominated), and on Jan 2 2026 the rates are
           | also different..
           | 
           | I was travelling in the Nordics (they had 4 currencies back
           | then, and they still do!) and wanted to have some precision
           | what cash I exchanged with what rate...
        
           | jjav wrote:
           | I also use GnuCash for a moderately complex set of accounts
           | with many income sources in multiple currencies. Works pretty
           | awesome.
        
         | ajdude wrote:
         | I used YNAB since back when they used to just sell the software
         | and maintained a subscription for a little while. I will say
         | that their approach to budgeting has changed the entire way of
         | how I look at money, and even though I have switched to GNU
         | Cash, I have essentially replicated the envelope method there
         | (it requires four entries per transaction instead of the
         | standard two).
         | 
         | For anyone who wants to use this envelope method without paying
         | for YNAB, I recommend checking out Buckets, which is another
         | software that works similarly.
        
           | ixwt wrote:
           | I've been using YNAB 4 (aka YNAB Classic on Android) for some
           | time. I got a new phone, and the phone app finally won't run
           | on the new phone. YNAB 4 is also quite buggy on my Arch based
           | setup (someone maintains a package on AUR using Wine). So I
           | think it's finally time to move on, which I think I'm doing
           | this year.
           | 
           | My only issue with Buckets is that the YNAB importer doesn't
           | take into account that YNAB will take your overspending and
           | take it from your next month's income. I have some bad habits
           | that means I was really using YNAB as more of a financial
           | tracker than an actually budget system. That's my own fault
           | though. The envelope in question comes out to $-10k... That's
           | all my own fault though. It just means I have to massage it
           | into Bucket's system, or start a new budget.
        
             | huhkerrf wrote:
             | I assume Buckets does that because YNAB no longer allows
             | you to take from next month.
        
           | spiffytech wrote:
           | I switched from YNAB to Actual Budget. It's FOSS, and has
           | nifty power user features like a DSL for distributing monthly
           | funds and cleaning up extra at the end of the month.
        
         | x187463 wrote:
         | I'm a huge fan of YNAB. It's a morning routine to log in
         | (really, the tab is always up) and reconcile accounts. The
         | zero-based budgeting method, while not requiring YNAB, is
         | beautifully represented in the software. I'm sure I could use
         | some free software to accomplish the basic tasks but having an
         | associated app my spouse can review for quick decision making
         | is very valuable.
         | 
         | It's made budgeting a tool to accomplish savings, wealth
         | growth, and expense smoothing rather than simply a survival
         | strategy. When you have to deliberately shift funds out of one
         | category to cover another, you really consider the relative
         | priorities.
        
           | huhkerrf wrote:
           | Another unexpected side effect is that it made me "excited"
           | to spend money when I had saved up for it. Before it would be
           | a back and forth, "should I buy this? I've wanted it, but I
           | could use the money for something else..."
           | 
           | With YNAB, it's been "hell yeah, I saved up for this and now
           | I get to buy it."
        
       | phil-martin wrote:
       | I really enjoyed reading this, and it is inspirational as it is
       | something I have wanted to do for a long time. And as a software
       | developer, it really appeals to me.
       | 
       | How do you think it compares time-wise to using existing
       | accounting software? Was the time investment worth it to get the
       | control and visibility you now have?
        
         | lalitmaganti wrote:
         | > How do you think it compares time-wise to using existing
         | accounting software?
         | 
         | Author here. I tried various consumer budgeting apps before I
         | ended up building my own (and then going to Beancount). The
         | main problem with _every_ one of the apps I tried is that they
         | don 't handle investments well. 99% of my money is invested and
         | having net worth figures which are wildly wrong because the app
         | is only tracking bank accounts really annoyed me. That was the
         | reason I built my own thing in the first place.
         | 
         | > Was the time investment worth it to get the control and
         | visibility you now have?
         | 
         | Absolutely yes. I think it helps me really understand where my
         | money is going, how I can make it work harder etc. Even though
         | the RE part of FIRE doesn't appeal to me, the FI part does and
         | knowing where I stand at all times has been very motivating.
        
           | phil-martin wrote:
           | Thank you for taking the time to reply - thank you!
           | 
           | I have question on a more personal front - please feel no
           | obligation to reply.
           | 
           | What impact has having such clear visibility into your
           | accounts had on your relationship with your wife? It feels
           | like it would be a great catalyst for communication, trust
           | and building things if shared finances was a key part of the
           | relationship.
           | 
           | I think this part was the most inspirational - it takes a lot
           | of courage to be that open about finances, even with
           | partners, perhaps especially with partners.
        
             | lalitmaganti wrote:
             | Happy to answer :)
             | 
             | > What impact has having such clear visibility into your
             | accounts had on your relationship with your wife?
             | 
             | That's a great question. Thankfully when it comes to
             | finances we are very aligned in our habits and goals. So we
             | find it very natural to be open because we know that we're
             | both going to be aligned.
             | 
             | Where we differ heavily though is how much we are willing
             | to really getting onto the nitty gritty details. She really
             | likes knowing how our money works but she also has no
             | interest in spending so much time and effort on it.
             | 
             | But that works great because I _love_ this stuff. So every
             | month or so we have a  "finances session" where I sit down
             | with her, take her through the books and make sure we're
             | both happy with everything.
             | 
             | Obviously this very much depends on the couple whether this
             | works but it has for us so far!
        
               | phil-martin wrote:
               | I love that, thank you for sharing.
               | 
               | Would you consider a follow up blog post about how you
               | structure and approach your monthly finance sessions? I
               | understand that it would be well outside of your topics
               | of software engineering, performance and open-source, but
               | I find that the human component of our industry is often
               | missing. An insight into how someone has successfully
               | navigated that would be a wonderful read.
        
               | lalitmaganti wrote:
               | Given the comments on this post and the other Beancount
               | one in the frontpage, I definitely think there's enough I
               | want to say for at least one if not two followups. Stay
               | tuned!
        
           | jjav wrote:
           | > The main problem with every one of the apps I tried is that
           | they don't handle investments well.
           | 
           | Could you expand what were you looking for with respect to
           | investments that was lacking?
           | 
           | I use GnuCash for many investment accounts (in multiple
           | currencies) and haven't run into any limitation, it can show
           | me the true net worth graph.
        
             | lalitmaganti wrote:
             | I'm talking about apps similar to Mint and YNAB.
             | Specifically I used to use an app called Yolt (which was
             | shut down) and then was on an app called Emma for a bit.
             | 
             | I'm sure GnuCash would also work just fine but ultimately
             | it's also a full double entry system. I never tried it
             | because I came across ledger/hledger/beancount first and,
             | being command line tools, they appealed more to my
             | sensibilities.
        
       | Etheryte wrote:
       | This is neat, but I'm not really convinced this level of
       | granularity makes sense for personal finances? Or at least it
       | does not for me personally. I find that simply entering all my
       | accounts into one big excel once a month more than suffices to
       | keep track of everything. Maybe I make a typo here and there but
       | it doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things cuz I'm
       | gonna type a new number next month anyway.
        
         | phil-martin wrote:
         | I guess it depends on the complexity of ones personal finances?
         | The author had multiple currencies, investments, and who knows
         | what else.
         | 
         | I ran a small business for a while, and I would draw a parallel
         | to that. Once a family's finances hits the complexities of a
         | small business, multiple assets, loans, cars, long term
         | savings, investments, I'd say the granularity is worth it. I
         | would certainly like to try it out.
        
           | Etheryte wrote:
           | I tick all the boxes you listed after having worked in a
           | handful of different countries, but personally I don't really
           | see the value add. My bank shows an overview in my main
           | currency of choice and so do brokerage accounts. Perhaps to
           | turn the question around, what value do you get out of it for
           | personal finances? I wouldn't really compare to a business
           | too closely since understanding all of your input costs down
           | to a fine level is much more important there, at least in my
           | opinion. The price of flour doesn't matter too much to the
           | cent when you buy a bag every now and then, but it matters a
           | lot when you're buying in tons.
        
       | pimlottc wrote:
       | I like having an archive of PDF statements but the downside is
       | that it's usually a tedious manual process to download them.
       | There's so many to track - bank accounts, credit cards,
       | investments, utilities, doctor bills... Every website is
       | different, and they are rarely batch-downloadable. So I tend to
       | be a few months behind at any given moment until I get around to
       | it.
       | 
       | Anyone found a better way to keep on top of downloading
       | statements?
        
       | Macha wrote:
       | > The key insight is that bank statement PDFs are almost always
       | columnar. Of course, this relies on the PDF having a proper text
       | layer; if your bank sends you scanned images, you're out of luck
       | (though I've yet to encounter one that does). When you convert
       | them to text while preserving the layout, you get something that
       | looks like this:
       | 
       | So I decided to try this out with my bank who's export options
       | are (one of the mentioned slightly silly multi-line format) XLSX
       | or PDF only, and it appears they've done some "encryption"
       | (really a simple substitution cipher and an embedded font with
       | the characters jumbled up so it renders correctly) to the PDF to
       | prevent this. All the marketing text and headers are in the
       | pdftotext output fine but the actual data is all accented and
       | non-printable characters (also if you copy/paste out).
       | 
       | The substitution cipher does seem stable across a few statements,
       | but still seems like less work to work off the XLSX
        
         | lalitmaganti wrote:
         | Interesting! You might want to try Tabula in that case.
         | 
         | For that type of "obfuscated" PDFs I've come across, it does
         | well, it's just a lot slower to run than pdf2text.
        
           | Macha wrote:
           | It appears Tabula also gets the substituted content instead.
           | 
           | What I'm seeing is that for example, POS is substituted to &
           | !e on every line in every file, etc. I can see by comparing
           | to the rendered PDF for other common text (like my name, the
           | local supermarket, etc) that those all seem to be 1:1
           | substitutions too.
        
         | netsharc wrote:
         | I remember seeing an online shop that did the whole font
         | substitution to prevent web-scraping of their prices.. I think
         | they even changed the substitution between elements so one
         | couldn't just do a single pass replacement and get the original
         | data back..
         | 
         | I guess nowadays it's very cheap to run a headless browser,
         | screenshot the output, and run it through OCR.. hah, to prevent
         | that they'd have to design their webpage as 1 full screen
         | Captcha..
        
         | inetknght wrote:
         | That's a ridiculously dumb idea on the bank's part.
         | 
         | Print the PDF to an image. Then use OCR. Then import the output
         | from that instead.
        
           | Macha wrote:
           | > That's a ridiculously dumb idea on the bank's part.
           | 
           | Yes. The local banks here are pretty reliable for jumping on
           | every dumb idea that anyone anywhere claims improves
           | security.
        
         | abdullahkhalids wrote:
         | My bank outputs different data in the description field for CSV
         | and PDF. The PDF statement descriptions are longer and contain
         | more information.
        
       | symbogra wrote:
       | I used to do this during my first real job and was tracking every
       | sandwich I bought, then one of the senior engineers told me to
       | stop wasting time with it and make more money, and then I was
       | enlightened.
        
         | alexnewman wrote:
         | Agreed this style of making money may have made sense when the
         | world was more Sane but there's no way to penny pinch yourself
         | into a house in 2026
        
           | michaelrpeskin wrote:
           | 25 years ago when my wife and I were poor grad students we
           | had to do this. I tracked everything religiously and she cut
           | coupons for the grocery store. We were generally positive
           | about $100/month at best. Tracking it allowed us to not go
           | negative.
           | 
           | As soon as we got real jobs with a real income, we didn't
           | waste time with that. Our philosophy now is to just make sure
           | that we spend well under our means and not track. We don't
           | penny-pinch, but we still keep some of the grad school "do I
           | really need this?" mentality.
           | 
           | Our normal spending is somewhere under 1/2 of our take-home
           | (including mortgage), so we just don't worry about it and
           | keep saving. It helps that we don't have fancy tastes. It's a
           | nice stress free way of saving and we don't have to get
           | neurotic about tracking every penny either.
        
             | ghaff wrote:
             | It probably worth at some level not totally losing track of
             | various subscriptions or routine daily purchases. Won't buy
             | you a house but can be a few thousand a year.
        
               | michaelrpeskin wrote:
               | One of the things that the tracking taught me was to be
               | allergic to subscriptions. I only have a few where
               | significantly more convenient because I know I'll use it.
               | Outside of our phones (and the kids don't get phones), we
               | have one music service for the family, I'll allow two
               | video streaming services and if the kids want to add one,
               | they have to pick one to cancel, and I have a coffee
               | subscription because the owner lives down the street from
               | me and it's fresher than I'd get in the grocery store.
               | 
               | It's a good point about the routine daily purchases, I
               | never thought of that. But I live semi-rural so I'm not
               | out every day wandering around the city and picking up a
               | snack or anything like that. I imagine that could add up.
        
               | ghaff wrote:
               | That's about where I am along with a couple bundles plus
               | a few computer related subscripts like Backblaze, VPN,
               | and Adobe related.
               | 
               | To the other point, a lot of people have a more or less
               | daily Starbucks or other breakfast related habit.
        
         | tonyedgecombe wrote:
         | Not that a sandwich will make much difference but you have to
         | remember that employers like their staff to be indebted, it
         | makes them compliant.
        
           | tossandthrow wrote:
           | It is not really binary.
           | 
           | I hate budgeting and still save around half my salary.
           | 
           | Though I do realize that this is a different game for some
           | people, where some need it more than others.
        
         | miroljub wrote:
         | Here's another enlightenment for you:
         | 
         | Tracking expenses doesn't take more than 5-10 minutes per day,
         | if you do it daily. With the correct workflow, it shouldn't
         | take more than 30 minutes per month. There are even apps that
         | would do that for you without any effort, though not so
         | perfectly as fine tuned apps.
         | 
         | And now, the enlightenment part: how is expense tracking
         | preventing you from making more money than visiting hecker
         | news, reddit, social media, listening to the radio, watching
         | TV, reading the news, or a million other things? Do you really
         | spend all your waking hours earning more money so tracking
         | expenses for a few minutes would make you make less?
        
           | ajb wrote:
           | This begs the question though, of why individuals still need
           | to do this like a 17th century clerk, when it costs their
           | counterparties fractions of a man-second. Imagine if their
           | was a law which said, every business that takes a credit card
           | has to supply the consumer with the data in standard,
           | machine-processable format (ie not pdf) via their credit
           | account (IE, not making obtaining their email address a
           | condition).
        
         | BeetleB wrote:
         | And then you get married and have kids and wonder why you have
         | trouble paying the bills despite having a household income in
         | the top 5%.
         | 
         | Then you discover that you really do need to know how much you
         | are spending on sandwiches.
         | 
         | I went through this a bunch of times. Always hoping for an
         | obvious smoking gun expense I could just cut. It always was
         | many little things adding up.
        
       | mfro wrote:
       | I have looked at beancount and a few other double entry systems
       | several times over the years. None of the applications I've found
       | except for Microsoft My Money (Sunset Deluxe) has felt intuitive
       | and not wasted my time. One of my accounts can't be imported via
       | csv but other than that it is painless. I recommend it to people
       | who just want a quick, free program for simple reporting.
        
       | whattheheckheck wrote:
       | https://simplifi.quicken.com/
       | 
       | This was the cheapest and easiest way to account for stuff for me
        
       | tantalor wrote:
       | You don't need accounting or double-entry bookkeeping to compute
       | net worth.
       | 
       | Net worth is easy: assets - liabilities
       | 
       | You get the figures from your financial institutions and counting
       | up your cash on hand.
       | 
       | The purpose of double-entry bookkeeping is to track the flow of
       | money and to make sure nothing was missed.
       | 
       | But for net worth, you only need the end result, which you don't
       | need any computation for.
       | 
       | The only thing that this solves is tracking money in flight,
       | because during a transfer it disappears from your view of the
       | accounts. There are simpler solutions to this problem than
       | tracking absolutely everything.
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | You don't even need to be _precise_ for net worth, whereas
         | double-entry accounting needs to be.
         | 
         | For personal finance the problem is almost always very obvious
         | ($3,000 on candles) and all the spreadsheets and budgets won't
         | change that.
        
           | InitialLastName wrote:
           | I find there area few things the budgets and spreadsheets
           | help with from a personal finance perspective:
           | 
           | - Values vs reality: A $3000 candle budget is fine, but if
           | you're spending $10/work-day on candles it might be easier to
           | see when that accumulates and you can compare it against your
           | longer-term aspirational goals. This is especially true for
           | less tangible expenses like subscriptions where it can be
           | difficult to see "I'm spending $3000/year on candles I never
           | burn" from ground level.
           | 
           | - Planning and decision-making: It's easier to make good life
           | decisions (e.g. "should I take $job" or "can I buy $house")
           | if you have an accurate accounting of your life expenses.
        
             | mpyne wrote:
             | Yeah, before we picked up YNAB more than a decade ago we
             | never had issues with $3k of candles disappearing in the
             | budget, but we still struggled to save money.
             | 
             | When we started using YNAB and entering our spending into
             | it, it was like a hockey-stick diagram on our household net
             | worth.
             | 
             | And this isn't even double-entry accounting (which I've
             | adopted for my own personal spending). One thing I'll say
             | is that the way we use YNAB seems different from most other
             | people: we hand-enter every transaction, we don't import it
             | afterwards from the bank. Then we reconcile what we thought
             | we spent vs. what the bank says we spent.
             | 
             | In this way we have to be a bit more intentional about what
             | we're spending money on since there's not some kind of big
             | monthly exercise to make the numbers line up and then a
             | "we'll try to be better next month". Instead it's more like
             | an envelope system where we are tracking budget categories
             | as the month goes by.
        
               | vladvasiliu wrote:
               | I used to use YNAB and I think this was its whole point:
               | you allocate money in different envelopes (budgets) and
               | as the month goes by, you enter your transactions and see
               | how your envelopes deplete.
               | 
               | I didn't actually do this that much, I was much more
               | interested in where my money was going over longer
               | periods (say a year). It was nice enough, but I dropped
               | it a few years ago when they had big price increase and
               | became more expensive than it was worth to me.
        
           | SkyPuncher wrote:
           | My wife and I have moved all of our personal, individual
           | spending to a dedicated card each. Sure, some stuff still
           | makes it into other cards, but the simplicity makes budgeting
           | so much easier. Even if we only accurate capture 90% of our
           | spending, we close enough to targets that it doesn't matter.
           | 
           | My general rule is a simple system that works well enough is
           | better than a complex, but precise system.
           | 
           | We build our budget with this slop in mind, so anything left
           | over is bonus.
        
       | thomascountz wrote:
       | As being discussed in another thread about plain-text
       | accounting[1], what I've found most difficult about these tools
       | is the learning curve between "Assets = Liabilities + Equity" and
       | the realities of modeling a household economy.
       | 
       | I appreciate the level of detail in this post. I think there's
       | often confusion that plaintext == easy/simple. The real takeaway
       | is: "if you're going to go through all of the trouble of managing
       | your economy, you may as well make sure you control your data and
       | own your system."
       | 
       | [1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46463644
        
       | spiffytech wrote:
       | I used Ledger for a while, then some other tools. Now I'm on
       | Actual Budget, a nice FOSS envelope budget app that can import
       | transactions from my bank.
       | 
       | I find value in tracking everything, tracking it by hand, and
       | tracking it with precision (our household budget has 68
       | categories).
       | 
       | When I've tried easing up in the past (e.g., with Mint's
       | lightweight approach) I was left with a budgetary black box where
       | I felt like I never had enough information to make big purchasing
       | decisions. I knew what I had in the bank account, but I didn't
       | know if it was earmarked for anything, or whether the next
       | surprise expense was going to wreck my plans. I felt afraid and
       | paralyzed.
       | 
       | Earning more didn't make the problem go away. Like the financial
       | equivalent of Parkinson's Law, more income just meant more
       | spending. I couldn't out-earn unrestrained consumption. I had to
       | monitor & manage it.
       | 
       | For peace of mind, I found YNAB's philosophy helpful: one-off
       | expenses often repeat predictably on a long-enough time horizon,
       | and can be amortized accordingly. If I itemize all predictable
       | expenses and save a little each month, I know _everything_ is
       | taken care of, and what I really have left over. I never get
       | blindsided because several big expenses hit at once.
       | 
       | I know not everyone has these problems. But I like to talk about
       | my experiences because people don't all need the same things from
       | their finances. It's okay and normal to want control and
       | visibility. Budget apps exist because people find them useful,
       | not because the whole userbase has failed to reach enlightenment
       | and transcend budgeting.
        
       | callumprentice wrote:
       | I agree with an earlier post that asserted "net worth = assets -
       | liabilities" but I'd like to do better at understanding what that
       | really means.
       | 
       | Some are easy like the size of your bank balance. Others are much
       | harder.
       | 
       | For example, one asset we have is our home and there are many
       | websites out there that tell you how much it's worth but they
       | each vary an awful lot and change dramatically - so much so
       | sometimes that any savings you've made in the same period are
       | eclipsed.
       | 
       | Similarly, the 401k I've been building up for years seems like a
       | decent amount but trying to calculate what it's worth after taxes
       | and therefore how much you'll have to spend each month seems
       | unknowable.
       | 
       | I think the same is true of investment accounts. If we seeded one
       | with $500 and it's now worth $250, it's easy to think your net
       | worth has risen by $250 but it really hasn't when taxes, fees and
       | who knows what else is taken into account.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-01-02 23:01 UTC)