How we score
Six criteria, fixed weights
Every product is assessed on the same six criteria with the same weights. Data security carries the most weight because this category asks for access to bank accounts, and a product that is excellent at everything else and careless with access is not a product worth recommending.
The composite is the weighted mean of the six figures. It is computed, not chosen: changing any criterion moves the headline score, and there is no editorial adjustment applied afterwards.
What the scores do not measure
- Whether the product suits you. A high score on a tool built for a balance sheet unlike yours is irrelevant.
- Company longevity. Scores describe the product today.
- Investment outcomes. Nothing here is advice, and a projection is not a promise.
Scale
The scale runs 0 to 100 but is displayed from 50, because nothing assessed here scores below that. Products that would score lower are generally not worth a page. A gap of two or three points is inside the noise of any honest assessment and should not decide a purchase.
Corrections
Competitor details are checked against the vendor’s own pricing and feature pages, and each comparison records when it was last verified. Where that field says a row is unverified, it means exactly that. If you find something wrong, tell us and it gets fixed with the date changed.
Scored assessment
82/100
- Data security 25%
- 8.8
- Asset coverage 20%
- 9.2
- Sync and accuracy 20%
- 7.6
- Planning tools 15%
- 8.4
- Pricing 12%
- 6.5
- Day-to-day use 8%
- 7.9
Read-only bank connections through Plaid; end-to-end encryption on holdings. No write access to any account.
Stocks, ETFs, funds, bonds, crypto, FX, property, precious metals, watches and arbitrary custom assets in one balance sheet.
Institution syncs are reliable; manual assets need periodic revaluation and some pricing feeds lag by a day.
Monte Carlo projections, goal tracking and scenario comparison. Deeper than a tracker, shallower than dedicated planning software.
Usable free tier; the paid tier is mid-market for what it does but not the cheapest way to watch a single portfolio.
Dense by design. Rewards a large portfolio, over-serves a simple one.
The composite is the weighted mean of these six figures, not a separate judgment. Changing a criterion moves the headline score.