• State Verified Answer
  • Replies 7 replies
  • Answers 1 answer
  • Subscribers 2 subscribers
  • Views 0 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

Inventory valuation reporting — FIFO or average cost?

Anita Sharma

I am preparing our inventory configuration for deployment and require clarification on the cost accounting methodology employed by FieldPulse.

Specifically:

  1. Does the Inventory Reporting module utilize First-In-First-Out (FIFO) or weighted average cost methodology for valuation?
  2. If FIFO is used, how does the system handle part returns that were drawn from different cost layers?
  3. For the Inventory Valuation Report (referenced in documentation as help-036), what is the exact calculation logic applied?

Our finance team requires this information for SOX compliance documentation. I have reviewed the available documentation but did not locate explicit methodology statements.

I am using FieldPulse version 3.3.1-web. Please advise.

  • 0

    Hi Anita, great question and I appreciate the detailed context on your compliance requirements.

    FieldPulse currently uses weighted average cost methodology for inventory valuation, not FIFO. Here is how this works:

    1. When parts are received, the system calculates: (Existing Quantity × Current Average Cost + New Quantity × Purchase Cost) ÷ Total Quantity
    2. This average cost is applied to all subsequent consumption until the next purchase adjusts the calculation
    3. For the Inventory Valuation Report (accessed via Reports → Inventory → Valuation), this calculated average cost is multiplied by current on-hand quantity

    Regarding part returns: when a technician returns a part to inventory, it is revalued at the current average cost at time of return, not its original acquisition cost. This is standard for perpetual average cost systems.

    Currently, FIFO is not available as an alternative methodology. I have logged your request for configurable costing methods with our product team — this is a common request from organizations with specific compliance frameworks.

    Would you like me to provide the exact API field names if your finance team needs to extract this data for external reconciliation?

  • 0

    Can you confirm whether the average cost recalculation happens at the time of receipt or at end-of-day batch? Also need to know if the /inventory/transactions endpoint exposes the unit_cost field as calculated or as-originally-entered.

    Response example would help.

  • 0 in reply to Carlos Vega

    Hi Carlos — recalculation is real-time at receipt, not batched. For the API, unit_cost in transaction responses returns the calculated weighted average applied to that consumption event. The original purchase price is not exposed in the standard transaction endpoint.

    If you need cost layer detail for audit purposes, the /inventory/purchases endpoint retains original costs with timestamps — you would need to correlate these with transaction dates externally.

  • 0

    I would add that from a SOX perspective, you should document the cost flow assumption in your internal controls documentation explicitly, noting that FieldPulse implements perpetual weighted average. This differs from IAS 2's benchmark treatment (FIFO or weighted average are both permitted, but the method must be consistently applied).

    One edge case to consider: negative inventory balances. If your technicians consume parts before the corresponding purchase order is received, most perpetual average systems will use the last known average cost, then recalculate upon receipt. You should verify whether FieldPulse permits negative inventory and how it handles the subsequent "catch-up" calculation. This is a common source of valuation discrepancies during period-end close.

  • 0 in reply to Omar Hassan

    Thank you for that additional detail, Omar — that is accurate. FieldPulse does permit negative inventory by default, and the recalculation behavior you described is exactly how the system operates: last known average is applied to consumption into negative territory, then full recalculation upon next receipt.

    Your compliance documentation should note this behavior if your operation allows unfilled consumption.

  • 0

    Thank you for the clarifications. I have documented the weighted average methodology for our controls.

    One follow-up: Is there any roadmap item for FIFO implementation? Our parent company standardized on FIFO for inventory valuation in 2019, and while we can maintain separate records for compliance, native support would eliminate significant reconciliation overhead.

    Additionally, I request confirmation of whether the cost basis is stored with sufficient precision (i.e., decimal places) to prevent rounding drift in high-volume environments. Our annual transaction volume exceeds 50,000 line items.

  • 0 in reply to Anita Sharma

    Thank you for this detailed inquiry, Anita. I wanted to provide context from the product perspective.

    On FIFO: This is a powerful capability we have heard from many enterprise customers. While I cannot commit to a specific release date, I can confirm that configurable cost accounting methodologies — including FIFO and specific identification — are under active exploration for a future release. We understand the operational impact when parent entities mandate a specific method.

    On precision: FieldPulse stores all cost values to four decimal places (e.g., $12.3456) internally, with display rounding to two decimal places in most interfaces. This should provide sufficient precision for your transaction volume.

    We would welcome the opportunity to discuss your specific requirements in more detail through your Customer Success Manager. This input directly shapes our prioritization.