You have used java.math.BigDecimal.BigDecimal(double val) constructor.
From JavaDoc:
java.math.BigDecimal.BigDecimal(double val)
Translates a double into a BigDecimal which is the exact decimal representation of the double's binary floating-point value. The scale of the returned BigDecimal is the smallest value such that (10scale × val) is an integer.
Notes:
1. The results of this constructor can be somewhat unpredictable. One might assume that writing new BigDecimal(0.1) in Java creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1 (an unscaled value of 1, with a scale of 1), but it is actually equal to 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625. This is because 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as a double (or, for that matter, as a binary fraction of any finite length). Thus, the value that is being passed in to the constructor is not exactly equal to 0.1, appearances notwithstanding.
2. The String constructor, on the other hand, is perfectly predictable: writing new BigDecimal("0.1") creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1, as one would expect. Therefore, it is generally recommended that the String constructor be used in preference to this one.
3. When a double must be used as a source for a BigDecimal, note that this constructor provides an exact conversion; it does not give the same result as converting the double to a String using the Double.toString(double) method and then using the BigDecimal(String) constructor. To get that result, use the static valueOf(double) method.
Here First point suggests that :
The results of this constructor can be somewhat unpredictable. One might assume that writing new BigDecimal(0.1) in Java creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1 (an unscaled value of 1, with a scale of 1), but it is actually equal to 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625. This is because 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as a double (or, for that matter, as a binary fraction of any finite length). Thus, the value that is being passed in to the constructor is not exactly equal to 0.1, appearances notwithstanding.
Second point suggests to use the constructor with string argument for exact value.
This is the reason for difference of value.
Answer from Raj on Stack OverflowVideos
Everyone says that BigDecimal should be used when dealing with money but it’s much slower and takes more memory than double. I would think this would be especially important in high frequency low-latency applications like trading. Do people actually use BigDecimal in such systems or do they use doubles with some kind of workaround to handle the precision issue?
Edit: I do have experience working on trading and risk systems and I see doubles used much more often than BigDecimal so I was curious to see if this is more common in actual practice. Most of the systems I worked on only need precision to the penny so I wonder if that’s the reason?
Also, BigDecimal is a pain to use and code written with it look much uglier than plain doubles.
You have used java.math.BigDecimal.BigDecimal(double val) constructor.
From JavaDoc:
java.math.BigDecimal.BigDecimal(double val)
Translates a double into a BigDecimal which is the exact decimal representation of the double's binary floating-point value. The scale of the returned BigDecimal is the smallest value such that (10scale × val) is an integer.
Notes:
1. The results of this constructor can be somewhat unpredictable. One might assume that writing new BigDecimal(0.1) in Java creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1 (an unscaled value of 1, with a scale of 1), but it is actually equal to 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625. This is because 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as a double (or, for that matter, as a binary fraction of any finite length). Thus, the value that is being passed in to the constructor is not exactly equal to 0.1, appearances notwithstanding.
2. The String constructor, on the other hand, is perfectly predictable: writing new BigDecimal("0.1") creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1, as one would expect. Therefore, it is generally recommended that the String constructor be used in preference to this one.
3. When a double must be used as a source for a BigDecimal, note that this constructor provides an exact conversion; it does not give the same result as converting the double to a String using the Double.toString(double) method and then using the BigDecimal(String) constructor. To get that result, use the static valueOf(double) method.
Here First point suggests that :
The results of this constructor can be somewhat unpredictable. One might assume that writing new BigDecimal(0.1) in Java creates a BigDecimal which is exactly equal to 0.1 (an unscaled value of 1, with a scale of 1), but it is actually equal to 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625. This is because 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as a double (or, for that matter, as a binary fraction of any finite length). Thus, the value that is being passed in to the constructor is not exactly equal to 0.1, appearances notwithstanding.
Second point suggests to use the constructor with string argument for exact value.
This is the reason for difference of value.
You are trying to use a literal number that cannot fit in a double which has a maximum of 15 decimals precision - probably why you want to use BigDecimal in the first place. So your number is converted to the most acurate representation in a double before initialising BigDecimal. Then the BigDecimal contructor compounds the error by messing up the already messed up double.
You will have to represent numbers as Strings to get that precision.
double x = 2300000870000000000067.7797d;
System.out.println("double:"+x);
BigDecimal balance = new BigDecimal(2300000870000000000067.7797);
System.out.println("balance:"+balance);
BigDecimal stringbased = new BigDecimal("2300000870000000000067.7797");
System.out.println("stringbased:"+stringbased);
Prints
double:2.30000087E21
balance:2300000869999999975424
stringbased:2300000870000000000067.7797
Those are two separate questions: "What should I use for BigDecimal?" and "What do I do in general?"
For BigDecimal: this is a bit tricky, because they don't do the same thing. BigDecimal.valueOf(double) will use the canonical String representation of the double value passed in to instantiate the BigDecimal object. In other words: The value of the BigDecimal object will be what you see when you do System.out.println(d).
If you use new BigDecimal(d) however, then the BigDecimal will try to represent the double value as accurately as possible. This will usually result in a lot more digits being stored than you want. Strictly speaking, it's more correct than valueOf(), but it's a lot less intuitive.
There's a nice explanation of this in the JavaDoc:
The results of this constructor can be somewhat unpredictable. One might assume that writing
new BigDecimal(0.1)in Java creates aBigDecimalwhich is exactly equal to 0.1 (an unscaled value of 1, with a scale of 1), but it is actually equal to 0.1000000000000000055511151231257827021181583404541015625. This is because 0.1 cannot be represented exactly as adouble(or, for that matter, as a binary fraction of any finite length). Thus, the value that is being passed in to the constructor is not exactly equal to 0.1, appearances notwithstanding.
In general, if the result is the same (i.e. not in the case of BigDecimal, but in most other cases), then valueOf() should be preferred: it can do caching of common values (as seen on Integer.valueOf()) and it can even change the caching behaviour without the caller having to be changed. new will always instantiate a new value, even if not necessary (best example: new Boolean(true) vs. Boolean.valueOf(true)).
If you are using your BigDecimal objects to store currency values, then I strongly recommend that you do NOT involve any double values anywhere in their calculations.
As stated in another answer, there are known accuracy issues with double values and these will come back to haunt you big time.
Once you get past that, the answer to your question is simple. Always use the constructor method with the String value as the argument to the constructor, as there is no valueOf method for String.
If you want proof, try the following:
BigDecimal bd1 = new BigDecimal(0.01);
BigDecimal bd2 = new BigDecimal("0.01");
System.out.println("bd1 = " + bd1);
System.out.println("bd2 = " + bd2);
You'll get the following output:
bd1 = 0.01000000000000000020816681711721685132943093776702880859375
bd2 = 0.01
See also this related question