Why FERT is used some times instead of KMAT

[Former Member]

Hi

I have seen many threads regarding KMAT and FERT, but I have not got a very clear answer.

My question is;

I have seen on many occasions that FERT is used as a configurable material instead of using the standard KMAT material type. Can somebody please tell me why this type of a scenario might arise?

Thanks & Regards

Adithya

[Former Member]

As Ritesh mentioned, it's usually just a business preference to use KMAT vs configurable FERTs.

However, keep in mind that by default KMAT's do not have accounting views for their material master records.  Therefore, one may come across issues elsewhere if an accounting view for some reason is needed for the material.  An example I've come across is KMAT's in conjunction with material ledger use.  Without a material master accounting view the material cannot be valuated in the material ledger tables so errors can arise when posting goods receipts.  Luckily SAP allows the opening of accounting views to be available if need be, but it's something to keep in mind nonetheless.

[Ritz]

Adithya Shekhar,

There can be many different reason for not using KMAT and using FERT as an KMAT. I have seen may clients who prefer to use what SAP suggest as an standard business process. There are some who want a all together new material type.

So the very simple explanation of not using KMAT but FERT with configurable settings is client dont want to mainatin 2 material type for a same product. If some of my products are configurable and some are not then instead of using KMAT & FERT both , i just will use FERT.

Hope it may satisfy you at some level.

Thanks

Ritesh