Issues with P&L statement with comparative columns

When generating a P&L report in Manager v22.3.55 (Server Edition) with comparative columns for multiple years see screenshot below:

It will in view (see below) conflicting periods (Profit and Loss Statement 2018 - 2021
For the period from 2018-07-10 to 2018-12-31), i.e. the period displayed should be from 2018-07-10 to 2021-12-31 (not 2018).

Screenshot 2022-05-18 at 07.29.58

Also the first column is printed in bold (not displayed here because of confidential data but you can replicate on your own business) while it ideally should be the same as the other columns.

I can replicate this, but I am not certain I would consider this an error; the P&L is still only intending to report on one period which is taken to be the first listed column, which is bolded as a result (this is noted in the guides Create reports | Manager) and the others are only shown for comparison. If the P&L were truly for a period of several years, all years should be consolidated into a single column.

However, there does seem to be an error in the rendering; note how the final column runs off the “page.”

Using error was maybe an overstatement and renamed it to issues. However, the arguments made still stand. Adding comparative columns was a recent and welcome addition. We compare several periods with each other over a total period and as such the total period should be mentioned and not only of the first column. Therefore also bolding the first column does not do justice to that.

Secondly your screenshot runoff is fixed in v22.3.55.

I also use manager to compare multiple periods and also arrange the columns in chronological order left to right.

For my work flow Manager could be improved by either

  1. Have the option to not highlight any column and not show the date range for any column

  2. Have the option to choose which column is highlighted (which is my ideal). Use case: the last full financial year is the reference and sometimes I include the total to date for the current financial year.

However from Mangers perspective it is operating to design. Many users have the reference column as the first with the prior year after it (reverse chronological order).

This is definitely not a bug or error, but by design. Additional columns in reports are clearly labeled on the Edit screen as comparative columns. The report is for the defined period listed in the first defined row on the Edit screen, with comparisons to that period. This behavior is consistent throughout the program and has always been this way since comparative columns were first added years ago.

Yes and like anything else in Manager things can be subject to review.