Inventory Aging Report Shows Different Age Between Single and All Locations

Q: When I run the Inventory Aging Report for a single location, the age of the same inventory is more recent than if I run it for all locations.  How could that happen?

A: When you run an Inventory Aging Report for "All" locations, we use the "last receive date" (i.e., the date received from the PO or IM modules) for aging purposes.  When you use single location, we use either "last receive date" or "last transfer receiving date."  In this case, you probably have some recent transfers to this location, which causes the system to consider that as the age date and distort the aging calculation.

Why do we use two different standards between single and multiple locations?  This is because in a single location scenario, it is quite possible that there are no receiving transactions for that location.  Therefore, to limit aging calculation to receiving transactions only may cause a problem for a single location aging calculation. On the other hand, if we calculate aging for all locations, it would be reasonable to expect that the receiving takes place for at least one of the locations. Using that receiving transactions for aging would be accurate.

So when you run an Aging Report for a single location and multiple locations, the aging value may not match.  The bottom line is that it is not possible for us to give you accurate aging information for a single location if there are transfer transactions.  The aging report for all locations will always show the true aging information for your organization regardless of whether you use transfer transactions or not.

Please also refer to the following similar knowledge base article on this issue:

http://support.elliott.com/knowledgebase/articles/606960-inventory-aging-report-by-location-sequence-produc



Feedback and Knowledge Base