Cash Flow
You can tell the two ways money goes missing apart, and you know which fix each one needs.
Money goes missing from a cash flow plan in exactly **two** ways, and they need opposite fixes. Telling them apart is the most useful thing to know about this module.
That toast is a summary, not one of the four warnings below. There is one for each failure — this one for no rule, a second for no company — and neither carries a count or an amount. The rail is where the detail lives.
A toast repeats whenever the gap itself changes: an edit that widens or narrows it, or switching to another plan. A gap that is holding steady does not re-announce, so a toast appearing again means something moved.
| Warning | What is wrong | Where it is | | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------- | | *N accounts have no cash flow rule, so X is not in this plan* | no schedule | **not in the plan** | | *N sources have no cash flow rule, so X is not in this plan* | no schedule | **not in the plan** | | *N accounts have no company, so X is hidden unless you view Combined Producers* | no company | **in the plan, but not in this view** | | *N sources have no company, so X is hidden unless you view Combined Producers* | no company | **in the plan, but not in this view** |
**No rule means absent. No company means present but invisible.** Conflating them sends you to the wrong module — which is why the warnings are worded so differently.
Every one of the four carries `{{amount}}` alongside the count. That turns them from a nag into a reconciliation tool: **the number in the warning is exactly what the plan is short by.**
So when a plan does not agree with the budget total, you do not have to hunt. Add up the warnings; the difference is accounted for.
The money has no date, so the plan cannot place it. The fix is a rule on the account or the source — in budgeting or in financing, not here.
[Find accounts without a cash flow rule](/kb/article/find-accounts-without-a-cash-flow-rule) and [find sources without a cash flow rule](/kb/article/find-sources-without-a-cash-flow-rule).
The money is in the plan and correctly dated. It just cannot be attributed to a company, so a per-company view has nowhere to put it.
Two valid responses:
- **Assign the company** on the account or source, if it belongs to one. - **Switch to the combined view**, if the split does not matter for what you are reading.
Neither is a workaround; they answer different questions — see [view one company, or all of them](/kb/article/view-one-company-or-all-of-them).
A plan reading a **cost control set** can also report *outdated* rules — a rule pointing at the past with no payment date supplied. That money is neither absent nor hidden; it is placed in a period that has already gone — see [fix an outdated cash flow rule](/kb/article/fix-an-outdated-cash-flow-rule).
On any plan you did not build yourself, read the rail before the grid. A plan can look entirely plausible — a curve, a trough, a recovery — while missing a third of the production's money.
Markdown