# Pending transactions sub-total

**URL:** <https://community.emma-app.com/t/pending-transactions-sub-total/1054>\
**Category:** Feedback & Ideas\
**Created:** [September 10, 2019, 7:24pm UTC](https://community.emma-app.com/t/pending-transactions-sub-total/1054 "2019-09-10T19:24:04Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![o99](https://yyz2.discourse-cdn.com/flex030/user_avatar/community.emma-app.com/o99/32/2132_2.png) [@o99](https://community.emma-app.com/u/o99)\
**Post date:** [April 10, 2022, 5:02pm UTC](https://community.emma-app.com/t/pending-transactions-sub-total/1054/5 "2022-04-10T17:02:57Z")

</div>

Reviving this topic as I’m interested in whether it was ever given consideration?

Furthermore, with the [new design](https://community.emma-app.com/t/emma-3-0-designs/5008), my previous suggestion based on the “This Week” card is perhaps no longer relevant. Within the new design I think it would be really useful if there could be better visibility of pending transactions within Analytics.

I believe I’m correct in the following understanding of how Analytics behaves:

- Spending total is the sum of category totals
- Although pending transactions are listed within categories, they do not contribute to category totals. Therefore they are not represented within the spending total.

Because of this, I feel there is a big blind spot when it comes to pending transactions within analytics.

I suggest that either of the following would help:

1. Include pending transactions within category totals
2. Create a separate pending transactions section within analytics so that we can see how much funds we have in a pending state across all accounts.

My preference would be for option 2, but I feel either option would be better than the current behaviour.

---

_[View the full topic](https://community.emma-app.com/t/pending-transactions-sub-total/1054)._