Skip to content

Settings and activity

1 result found

  1. 245 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    Hi everyone, thank you for sharing how the current tracking limits impact your reporting and tracking of different aspects of your business and processes. We know this is an important capability.

    We’re exploring how we might tackle the needs in this idea and enhance Tracking Categories for the future.

    While we can't commit to developments at this stage, we want you to know we hear the support and feedback from our community on this.

    We’ll provide another update as the direction for this feature becomes clearer.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Sarah Colegrove commented  · 

    We track 30-40 jobs per year and then use P&L Reports to analyse profitability of each job. Now I've come to the maximum and can't add another category for 2026, nor can I even delete an older category so only the maximum of four remain. My only option now is to start adding all our 2026 jobs under 2025, creating much more work every time I do even weekly reports. It shouldn't be too big an ask to allow more categories or for the archived categories to be dormant and not included in the maximum number. This is critical to our business and I'm sure it would be for many others. Whether this gets actioned or not should not depend on a community vote! Most users would never find this page and even know they could vote. Even when I've asked your Xero Support people specifically about what I can to address this issue nothing was even mentioned about a vote. Measuring the level of interest behind a certain change by this voting system will guarantee a low level of participation and will give a very distorted (under reported) response. An email to all users asking for their feedback would give you a much more accurate response.

    Sarah Colegrove supported this idea  ·