We ran the Stock Status report for the Main warehouse through 5/31/24 on 6/25/24 and the stock value was $3M. However, when I ran the report today through 5/31/24, the stock value is $1.7M.
Just wondering-since we’re running the reports as of 5/31/24? Shouldn’t amount remain the same though? Even if it the report is for the purposes of material quantity, shouldn’t it remain the same because it is being ran as of 5/31/24?
I’ll let @JasonMcD explain:
Stock Status is a list of the current material quantities and extended material costs. It is not for display the transaction value as of that date.
I wanted to know since we’re running the reports as of 5/31/24? Shouldn’t amount remain the same though? Even if it the report is for the purposes of material quantity, shouldn’t it remain the same because it is being ran as of 5/31/24?
If I remember right, could be wrong, but I think the report uses the current costs, so if the part costs have changed, when you re-run it, the quantities may be correct, but the costs are not.
@KPreda is spot on. While the SSR can calculate the quantities in the past, it cannot calculate the costs in the past. A search of this forum (and its previous incarnation - the Vantage Yahoo!Group) will turn up many threads similar to this one. You are not alone in thinking the report should work one way and discovering that what we want is not easily done, at least with the current architecture.
we didn’t do anything (knowingly) that would cause our inventory value to be cut in half and it is no longer close to tying out to the TB.
Can you verify that you ran the report the same way both times.
Many available “options”.
“Include Non-Stock Items” for example, can give you a drastically different value.
I urge you to search the forum to see what others with the same problem have done. Even Epicor states on EpicCare (KB0034343):
The Stock Status Report is not intended to be used as a sub-ledger for the General Ledger.
What they are telling you, (I believe) is that the report does not do what you think it does, nor what it’s description implies. You can’t get there from here. Correct @Mark_Wonsil ?