Comparisons

BullBenchmark vs Portfolio Performance: paid web app or free desktop app

Portfolio Performance is the most serious free competitor a paid tracker can have. It is open source, it runs on your own machine, and it keeps your data in a file you own. Unlike most of the category, it computes a time-weighted return and an internal rate of return rather than a percentage next to your total value.

We are the paid alternative, so read this page with that in mind. The short version is that if you enjoy configuring tools, Portfolio Performance may be the better answer for you, and it costs nothing. If you want the comparison without the setup work, that is what we are for.

What each one is

Portfolio Performance is a desktop application you install on Windows, macOS or Linux. Your portfolio lives in a file on your own disk. You import transactions from CSV files and from broker documents, or type them in.

The program calculates performance, including a time-weighted return and an internal rate of return, and can compare your results with indices and with individual securities. It is developed in the open, it has an active community, and it has been improving for years.

BullBenchmark is a website. You upload the export from your broker, and the dashboard shows your time-weighted return next to the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq 100, with your own deposits replayed into the index, in the currency you pick. It costs €5.99 a month or €59.99 a year, with a 14-day trial that takes no card.

Where Portfolio Performance is the better choice

There are four cases where we would not argue.

It is free. The whole program is free, with no limited tier and no upsell. If your budget for portfolio software is zero, this is the best zero-cost option in the category.

Your data never leaves your machine. There is no upload, no account and no company between you and your numbers. We never ask for broker credentials and take privacy seriously, but a local file is a stronger guarantee than any privacy policy, ours included. If that matters to you, it weighs in favour of the desktop program.

It goes deeper than we do. Custom classifications, taxonomies, your own reporting periods, your own benchmarks, valuation details and historical price sources are all available. If you want to model something unusual, it can probably be modelled.

Our product answers a small number of questions well. Portfolio Performance answers many more questions, if you are willing to configure them.

It cannot be taken away. Open source means the project outlives any company's business decisions, including ours. For a record you intend to keep for thirty years, that is a form of insurance.

Where a hosted tracker earns its money

The counterweight is friction rather than features. Friction decides whether a tracking habit survives a busy year.

Setup. A desktop program starts empty and has to be told about your situation, with accounts, deposits, importers, price sources and classifications. That first evening is where many people stop. With us the first upload is the setup, and the dashboard exists four minutes later.

Maintenance. A local file needs backups, syncing between laptop and desktop, updates, and the occasional import that needs adjusting when a broker changes its format. None of that is hard, but all of it is your work. A hosted tracker moves that work to the vendor, which is most of what a subscription buys.

Access. Your portfolio lives on one machine. A desktop program is not built for checking your numbers from a phone on a train, and a website is.

The default view. Portfolio Performance can show you the comparison with an index, and you have to build that view yourself. We show it on the first screen, because the product is that comparison. Defaults decide what people look at, which is a practical argument rather than a technical one.

Broker formats. Both tools read files. Ours maps an unfamiliar column layout once and remembers it, and we maintain the mapping rather than you.

The thing they have in common

Both tools take the same position on the two questions this category usually gets wrong. That is worth saying, because most of the market does not.

First, a portfolio's return should be measured with the timing of deposits removed, so that it can be compared fairly with an index. Second, a benchmark comparison should use the total-return version of the index, with dividends reinvested, because your own portfolio keeps its dividends.

A tool that shows a simple percentage next to a price chart measures a different thing, and the difference flatters you. Why this matters is explained in what it costs to never benchmark your portfolio, and the two return figures in time-weighted vs money-weighted return.

Five questions to ask either of us

Instead of a feature table that goes out of date, here is the same short test we publish on our other comparison pages. Put it to any tracker.

Does it show a time-weighted return, and does it say so? If the only number is a percentage next to your total value, you are looking at something that mixes deposits with performance.
When it compares you with an index, does it replay your cash flows, or does it draw the index's own chart next to yours? Ask for the number after a large deposit and see whether the comparison moves.
Is the benchmark the total-return version of the index, with dividends reinvested?
Is everything converted to one base currency at historical rates, including the benchmark?
Does the calculation include closed positions, fees and withheld tax, or only what you still hold today?

Portfolio Performance can be configured to answer yes to all five. We answer yes to all five without the configuration. That is the trade.

What we are deliberately not claiming

We do not list Portfolio Performance's supported brokers, import formats or current feature set, because an open-source project changes weekly and we would be describing a version that no longer exists.

Everything said above is general and, as far as we know, correct at the time of writing in August 2026. If a detail matters to your decision, check it in the project's own documentation rather than on a competitor's page.

Our own side is easy to state. BullBenchmark costs €5.99 a month or €59.99 a year, with a 14-day trial that takes no card. The import is a CSV or XLSX file with a column mapper, we never ask for a broker login, and there is a one-click export of everything we hold about you if you decide to leave.

Who should pick which

Pick Portfolio Performance if you want to pay nothing, if you want your data to stay on your own disk, if you enjoy configuring a tool until it fits, or if your requirements are unusual enough that only a configurable program will do.

Pick BullBenchmark if you want the benchmark without the setup evening, if your money sits at several brokers and in several currencies, if you want to look at it from any device, or if you have tried the desktop route before and stopped maintaining the file.

What happened the last time you installed a portfolio program? If you stopped maintaining it after a month, the subscription buys you the maintenance rather than features. The live demo shows what the dashboard looks like, and how to track multiple brokers in one dashboard covers the case where the maintenance grows fastest.

BullBenchmark reads the transaction export from your broker and shows your return next to the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq 100, fed with the same deposits on the same dates, in your own currency. The first two weeks are free and no card is needed.