We use Weighted Cost in Fred Office Plus because it is useful for valuing existing inventory when new stock is received at a different cost.

However, Weighted Cost creates a significant problem in Invoice Pricing Review.

The Markup shown in Invoice Pricing Review is calculated using the site's configured Item Cost method. Therefore, when Weighted Cost is enabled, the displayed markup is based on the blended historical cost rather than the NIS/current cost of the stock on the invoice being reviewed.

This makes the pricing review misleading when supplier costs change.

For example, if an item's NIS increases materially but there is older lower-cost stock on hand, the weighted cost may only increase slightly. Invoice Pricing Review therefore shows a healthier markup than will actually apply when the new stock becomes the replacement cost. The user then has to manually calculate the markup against the new NIS, defeating much of the purpose of Invoice Pricing Review.

Ideally Fred Office Plus should separate inventory valuation from replacement-cost pricing.

I would suggest either:
1. Add a setting to Invoice Pricing Review allowing the markup basis to be selected independently — e.g. Current Invoice NIS / Last Cost / Weighted Item Cost; or preferably
2. Display both Markup on Weighted Cost and Markup on Current Invoice NIS side-by-side.
This would allow pharmacies to retain Weighted Cost for inventory valuation while still making retail pricing decisions using the current replacement cost.

At present the only workaround is to change the entire site's Item Cost method back to Last Cost, which means giving up the benefits of weighted costing simply to make Invoice Pricing Review useful.

Separating these two cost concepts would significantly improve pricing decisions, particularly during periods of frequent supplier price changes.