+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 10 of 10

FV Function Problem

  1. #1
    Andy Wiggins
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    This file might be a help:
    http://www.bygsoftware.com/examples/...Calculator.zip

    ... except that it arrives at a figure of $34,432. This file also shows the
    loan replayment schedule.

    It's in the "Accountants" section on page:
    http://www.bygsoftware.com/examples/examples.htm
    This workbook includes two worksheets that can help you calculate the likely
    repayments you will have to make on mortgages and personal loans (including
    HP and conditional sale agreements).


    --
    Andy Wiggins FCCA
    www.BygSoftware.com
    Excel, Access and VBA Consultancy
    -

    "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on

    a
    > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I

    do a
    > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by

    using
    > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > formula with an amortization application?
    >
    > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    > Terry




  2. #2
    N Harkawat
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    The reason you are getting different results is becase when you use CUMIPMT
    excel is assuming that you are paying down your debt every month for 48
    months and hence each successive months interest cost keeps coming down and
    thus total interest paid is only 1257.
    However when using FV the principal gets simply compunded ( no paying down
    of loan) and is therefore higher than above



    "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on
    > a
    > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I
    > do a
    > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by
    > using
    > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > formula with an amortization application?
    >
    > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    > Terry




  3. #3
    TerryG
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    That's what I suspected, but wasn't sure. Thanks very much for your reply!!

    Terry


    "N Harkawat" wrote:

    > The reason you are getting different results is becase when you use CUMIPMT
    > excel is assuming that you are paying down your debt every month for 48
    > months and hence each successive months interest cost keeps coming down and
    > thus total interest paid is only 1257.
    > However when using FV the principal gets simply compunded ( no paying down
    > of loan) and is therefore higher than above
    >
    >
    >
    > "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on
    > > a
    > > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I
    > > do a
    > > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by
    > > using
    > > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > > formula with an amortization application?
    > >
    > > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    > >
    > > Thanks!!
    > >
    > > Terry

    >
    >
    >


  4. #4
    Andy Wiggins
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    This file might be a help:
    http://www.bygsoftware.com/examples/...Calculator.zip

    ... except that it arrives at a figure of $34,432. This file also shows the
    loan replayment schedule.

    It's in the "Accountants" section on page:
    http://www.bygsoftware.com/examples/examples.htm
    This workbook includes two worksheets that can help you calculate the likely
    repayments you will have to make on mortgages and personal loans (including
    HP and conditional sale agreements).


    --
    Andy Wiggins FCCA
    www.BygSoftware.com
    Excel, Access and VBA Consultancy
    -

    "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on

    a
    > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I

    do a
    > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by

    using
    > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > formula with an amortization application?
    >
    > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    > Terry




  5. #5
    N Harkawat
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    The reason you are getting different results is becase when you use CUMIPMT
    excel is assuming that you are paying down your debt every month for 48
    months and hence each successive months interest cost keeps coming down and
    thus total interest paid is only 1257.
    However when using FV the principal gets simply compunded ( no paying down
    of loan) and is therefore higher than above



    "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on
    > a
    > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I
    > do a
    > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by
    > using
    > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > formula with an amortization application?
    >
    > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    > Terry




  6. #6
    TerryG
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    That's what I suspected, but wasn't sure. Thanks very much for your reply!!

    Terry


    "N Harkawat" wrote:

    > The reason you are getting different results is becase when you use CUMIPMT
    > excel is assuming that you are paying down your debt every month for 48
    > months and hence each successive months interest cost keeps coming down and
    > thus total interest paid is only 1257.
    > However when using FV the principal gets simply compunded ( no paying down
    > of loan) and is therefore higher than above
    >
    >
    >
    > "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on
    > > a
    > > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I
    > > do a
    > > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by
    > > using
    > > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > > formula with an amortization application?
    > >
    > > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    > >
    > > Thanks!!
    > >
    > > Terry

    >
    >
    >


  7. #7
    TerryG
    Guest

    FV Function Problem

    I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on a
    loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I do a
    FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by using
    $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    formula with an amortization application?

    BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.

    Thanks!!

    Terry

  8. #8
    Andy Wiggins
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    This file might be a help:
    http://www.bygsoftware.com/examples/...Calculator.zip

    ... except that it arrives at a figure of $34,432. This file also shows the
    loan replayment schedule.

    It's in the "Accountants" section on page:
    http://www.bygsoftware.com/examples/examples.htm
    This workbook includes two worksheets that can help you calculate the likely
    repayments you will have to make on mortgages and personal loans (including
    HP and conditional sale agreements).


    --
    Andy Wiggins FCCA
    www.BygSoftware.com
    Excel, Access and VBA Consultancy
    -

    "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on

    a
    > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I

    do a
    > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by

    using
    > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > formula with an amortization application?
    >
    > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    > Terry




  9. #9
    N Harkawat
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    The reason you are getting different results is becase when you use CUMIPMT
    excel is assuming that you are paying down your debt every month for 48
    months and hence each successive months interest cost keeps coming down and
    thus total interest paid is only 1257.
    However when using FV the principal gets simply compunded ( no paying down
    of loan) and is therefore higher than above



    "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on
    > a
    > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I
    > do a
    > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by
    > using
    > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > formula with an amortization application?
    >
    > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    >
    > Thanks!!
    >
    > Terry




  10. #10
    TerryG
    Guest

    Re: FV Function Problem

    That's what I suspected, but wasn't sure. Thanks very much for your reply!!

    Terry


    "N Harkawat" wrote:

    > The reason you are getting different results is becase when you use CUMIPMT
    > excel is assuming that you are paying down your debt every month for 48
    > months and hence each successive months interest cost keeps coming down and
    > thus total interest paid is only 1257.
    > However when using FV the principal gets simply compunded ( no paying down
    > of loan) and is therefore higher than above
    >
    >
    >
    > "TerryG" <TerryG@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
    > news:C2ED4658-BA2E-4D83-863C-43D2652D093F@microsoft.com...
    > > I'm doing an auto loan amortization and getting conflicting results with
    > > similar Excel functions. I'm looking at a GM loan of 1.9% for 4 years on
    > > a
    > > loan of $32,000, and trying to obtain the total cost of loan, P+I. If I
    > > do a
    > > FV(0.019/12,48,,32000,0) I get $34,524. However, if I use several online
    > > auto loan calculators I get $33,257. I can obtain the latter result by
    > > using
    > > $32,000 + CUMIPMT(0.019/12,48,32000,1,48,0). But shouldn't the FV
    > > calculation agree, or am I incorrect in trying to use a compound interest
    > > formula with an amortization application?
    > >
    > > BTW, CUMIPMT requires the Analysis Toopak Addin.
    > >
    > > Thanks!!
    > >
    > > Terry

    >
    >
    >


+ Reply to Thread

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0 RC 1