Pure Benchmarks · Comparison

Portfolio Apps That Compare You to Real Investors

Plenty of portfolio tools use the phrase peer comparison, and most of them mean something else by it. When you follow the feature through to what is actually on the other side of the comparison, it is usually an index, an ETF or a model allocation. That is a benchmark, not a peer. A genuine peer comparison puts your outcome next to other real people who faced the same market over the same days, and only a few products do it. This page checks six tools commonly named in this category, marks which ones really rank you against investors, and is explicit about who those investors are and what is being measured.

Benchmark and peer are not synonyms

A benchmark is a product: an index, a fund, a model allocation. It is a fixed yardstick and it is useful. A peer is a person holding a real portfolio, making real decisions, paying real costs, and occasionally selling at the wrong moment. Comparing yourself to a benchmark tells you whether you beat a yardstick. Comparing yourself to peers tells you whether your result was ordinary or unusual for someone in your situation. Both are worth knowing, and only one of them is widely available.

Where the peer group comes from decides what the ranking means

There are three ways to build one. A self-published set, where users choose to make a portfolio visible, skews toward accounts people are proud of. A self-registered set, where anyone who signs up is scored, is far larger but blends every strategy and risk level together. A verified connected set, drawn from linked accounts, is the hardest to assemble and the only one that reflects how people actually invested rather than how they present. Each produces a different number, and none of them is wrong as long as you know which one you are reading.

Risk matching is what makes a ranking mean anything

Two investors can hold identical balances and share nothing else. One holds ninety percent fixed income, the other is fully in equities with leverage. Rank them against each other in a rising market and the second one looks brilliant, in a falling one reckless, and in both cases the ranking has measured allocation rather than judgment. Pure Benchmarks sorts every connected portfolio into one of nine standardized risk categories and ranks inside the category, so the comparison holds risk roughly constant and lets the decisions show.

Ranking a portfolio and ranking a stock picker are different measurements

Some tools score you on hit rate: what share of your buys went up. That is a real and interesting measurement, and it is not the same as portfolio return. You can be right more often than you are wrong and still trail, if the positions you were wrong about were larger or held longer. Check which one a tool reports before reading anything into your position on its leaderboard.

What two of these tools reveal by not qualifying

PortfoliosLab and Portfellow are both frequently named when people ask for portfolio apps that compare you to other investors, and neither describes any peer ranking on its own pages. They are good tools, doing benchmarking against indices and strategies. Their presence in this category is a naming problem rather than a product one, and it is worth knowing before you sign up expecting something that is not there.

How this comparison works

Which of these actually ranks you against other real investors, and which ones only compare you to an index while using the word peer?

The test is whether the thing on the other side of the comparison is a person or a product. Several tools marketed around peer comparison benchmark against an index, an ETF or a model allocation, which is a benchmark rather than a peer.
Where a tool does rank you against people, the next question is who those people are: a verified set of connected accounts, or a self-selected group who chose to publish.
The third question is what gets ranked. A hit rate on individual stock picks and a whole-portfolio return answer different questions, and one does not substitute for the other.
Capabilities were read from each vendor's own published pages and documentation on the date shown.
Pure Benchmarks is our own product, and the four things it does not do are listed in the same table as the eight it does.
Two tools are included specifically because they are often named in this category and turn out not to rank you against other investors at all; showing that is more useful than leaving them out.

The comparison

Capabilities verified against each vendor's published pages on September 17, 2026.

Capability	Pure Benchmarks	TipRanks Smart Portfolio	Kubera	Snowball Analytics	PortfoliosLab	Portfellow
Ranks vs investors	Yes	Yes	Partly	Partly	No	No
Risk-matched	Yes	No	No	No	No	No
Verified peers	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	No
Whole portfolio	Yes	Partly	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Decision scoring	Yes	Partly	No	No	No	No
Links brokerage	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes
Index benchmark	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Free real output	Yes	Partly	No	Partly	Partly	Partly
Manual entry	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Non-market assets	No	No	Yes	Partly	Partly	Yes
Price	Free account	Free tier, paid plans above it	$250 per year, or $2,500 for Black	Free plan, paid tiers above it	Free tier, paid Plus, Pro and Max plans	Free to start, paid plans above it

✓ yes · ~ partly · ✗ no

What each capability means

Ranks your portfolio against other real investors rather than against an index alone

This is the whole question. Most tools described as peer comparison turn out to compare you against a model allocation or a fund, which is a benchmark, not a peer.

The comparison group is matched on portfolio risk

Ranking a conservative retiree against a leveraged growth portfolio measures risk appetite, not skill. Without a risk match the ranking mostly tells you what you already knew about your own allocation.

Peer data comes from verified linked accounts rather than self-reported entries

A peer set built from portfolios people chose to publish is a survivorship-biased sample. Nobody publishes the account they are embarrassed by.

Compares the whole portfolio outcome, not individual stock picks

A hit rate on individual trades and a portfolio return are different measurements. You can pick winners often and still trail, if the losers were larger.

Scores each change you made against the portfolio you gave up

Ranking tells you where you finished. Decision scoring tells you which of your own moves put you there.

Connects to a real brokerage account instead of requiring manual entry

A manually entered portfolio drifts out of date the moment you trade, and a comparison run on stale holdings is a comparison of something you no longer own.

Also benchmarks against a market index

Peer comparison is the second baseline, not a replacement for the first. You want both.

Free tier produces the comparison on your real portfolio

Several tools here gate either the peer feature or the holdings capacity behind a paid plan.

Can run on a manually entered portfolio with no account connected

Some people will not link a brokerage, and some accounts cannot be linked. A tool that requires a connection simply cannot serve them, whatever else it does well.

Includes real estate, private holdings and self-custody crypto in the comparison

If a large share of your wealth sits outside a brokerage, a securities-only comparison ranks the visible half of your position.

Every tool in detail

Pure Benchmarks

Ranks whole-portfolio outcomes against verified connected portfolios sorted into nine standardized risk categories.

Best for: Investors who want to know how they did against comparable people, not against a self-selected leaderboard.

Pricing: The ranking and the decision report run on a free account with a linked portfolio.

Strengths

Peer set is built from verified connected accounts rather than portfolios people opted to publish
Every portfolio is recategorized daily from actual end-of-day holdings, so the cohort tracks your allocation as it drifts
Scores each portfolio change against the portfolio you would still hold if you had left it alone
Read-only by design and unable to move money in any linked account

Limitations

Requires a read-only brokerage connection, so there is no way to run it on a manually typed portfolio
Does not track real estate, private holdings or self-custody crypto wallets
An unusual allocation sits in a thinner cohort, which makes its ranking less informative
No stock-picking hit rate, no research ratings and no community leaderboard

TipRanks Smart Portfolio

A genuine investor leaderboard, scored on stock-picking hit rate across a large self-registered user base.

Best for: Active stock pickers who want to know how their trade selection compares to other retail investors.

Pricing: Smart Portfolio has a free tier; the research subscription is sold separately in paid tiers.

Strengths

Measures and ranks the performance of roughly 140,000 individual investors, one of the largest retail peer sets anywhere
Lets you benchmark against average TipRanks portfolios, the best performing TipRanks portfolios, or the S&P 500
Treats each buy or sell as a recommendation and reports a success rate, which is closer to decision-level feedback than most tools get

Limitations

The cohort is everyone who signed up, not investors matched to your risk level, so the ranking blends very different strategies
Scores you as a stock picker via hit rate rather than measuring whole-portfolio outcome
Peer data is drawn from self-registered users rather than a verified cross-custodial set

Kubera

Peer benchmarks drawn from real customers, grouped by net worth rather than by risk.

Best for: People with wealth spread across brokerages, property and private holdings who want a like-for-like wealth comparison.

Pricing: Kubera Essentials is listed at $250 per year and Black at $2,500 per year, after a 14-day trial. No permanent free tier.

Strengths

Club benchmarks compare allocations and performance against aggregated data from Kubera customers with similar net worths
Covers real estate, private equity and crypto alongside listed securities
Peer data comes from actual connected customer accounts

Limitations

The cohort is matched on net worth rather than on portfolio risk, so allocation differences are not controlled for
Comparison is at the allocation and performance level, with no scoring of individual decisions
No permanent free tier

Snowball Analytics

Browsable public portfolios rather than a ranking, with a real free tier.

Best for: Dividend investors who want to see how other people have actually built an income portfolio.

Pricing: A permanent free plan covers one portfolio and ten holdings with limited index benchmarking.

Strengths

Public portfolios of other investors can be browsed on every tier, including the free one
Strong dividend tracking, income projections and filters
A permanent free plan rather than a countdown

Limitations

Browsing published portfolios is not the same as being ranked against a cohort
Published portfolios are self-selected, which biases the sample toward accounts people are happy to show
Benchmarking against anything beyond index funds requires the higher tiers

PortfoliosLab

Strong free analysis and backtesting, compared against indices and model portfolios rather than against people.

Best for: Investors who want risk metrics, drawdowns and backtests without paying for them.

Pricing: Free access is capped at 1 watchlist, 100 symbols, 15 holdings per portfolio, 10 calculations per month and 5 years of history.

Strengths

Backtesting, drawdown and risk analysis across stocks, ETFs, funds, crypto and model portfolios
Free tier limits are published plainly rather than hidden behind a trial
Good correlation and screening tools for portfolio construction

Limitations

Compares against indices and model portfolios, not against other investors, despite often being listed in this category
Portfolios are built manually rather than synced from a brokerage
The free tier caps holdings and monthly calculations, which most real portfolios will exceed

Portfellow

Broad multi-asset tracking with broker sync, benchmarked against indices rather than other users.

Best for: Investors who want one synced tracker across stocks, property, cash and crypto.

Pricing: The site offers a free starting tier; plan prices are published on its pricing page rather than on the feature page.

Strengths

Connects to banks and brokers, including Interactive Brokers and a wide list of other institutions
Covers bonds, single stocks, index funds, real estate, cash and crypto in one view
Calculates true returns including dividends, fees and currency effects

Limitations

No peer ranking or percentile against other users is described on its own feature pages, despite the tool being named in this category
Benchmarking is against market indices and strategies rather than against people
Plan pricing is not stated on the feature page

Your current platform won't show you how your portfolio ranks against real investors in the same risk category. Create your secure Pure Benchmarks account and see exactly where you stand.

See Your Free Benchmark Report

Frequently asked questions

Which portfolio apps actually compare you to other real investors?

Of the six checked here, three do something real. TipRanks Smart Portfolio ranks roughly 140,000 individual investors on stock-picking performance. Kubera compares allocations and performance against aggregated data from customers with similar net worths. Pure Benchmarks, our own product, ranks whole-portfolio outcomes against verified connected portfolios in the same risk category. Snowball Analytics lets you browse published portfolios, which is visibility rather than ranking.

Is peer comparison better than benchmarking against an index?

Neither replaces the other. An index tells you whether you beat the market. A peer comparison tells you whether people in a comparable position did better with the same market, which is the question an index cannot answer because an index does not pay fees, hold cash, or sell during a drawdown.

Why does the risk category matter in a peer comparison?

Without it the ranking measures your allocation rather than your decisions. A conservative portfolio will rank badly against aggressive ones in a bull market and well in a crash, regardless of how well it was managed. Matching the cohort on portfolio risk first is what makes the remaining difference attributable to decisions.

Do these apps use real portfolio data or self-reported numbers?

It varies, and it matters. Kubera and Pure Benchmarks build peer data from connected accounts. TipRanks scores self-registered users. Snowball Analytics shows portfolios users chose to publish, which is a self-selected sample. PortfoliosLab is built on manually entered portfolios and does not rank against users at all.

Is there a free way to see how my portfolio compares to other investors?

Pure Benchmarks produces the full ranking on a free account with a linked portfolio. TipRanks and Snowball Analytics both have free tiers with limits. Kubera has no permanent free tier, only a 14-day trial.

How were these apps compared?

Each capability was read from the vendor’s own published pages and documentation on the date shown on the page. Where a tool is widely described as offering peer comparison but does not document one, that is marked in the table rather than assumed. Pure Benchmarks is our own product and its four limitations are listed alongside everything else.

Keep exploring

See how portfolios at a specific firm rank against real investors everywhere else:

New here? Read the portfolio benchmarking FAQ or the Pure Benchmarks blog.

This page is an information baseline for comparison only. It is not investment advice and not a recommendation to buy, sell, replace, or transfer any specific asset, account, or firm. Past performance does not guarantee future results. All figures shown are illustrative.