From spreadsheet to portfolio intelligence: tools for DIY index investors

From spreadsheet to portfolio intelligence: tools for DIY index investors

Using a broad set of low-cost index funds has become the norm for many investors. These investors rebalance when things drift away from their targets, harvest tax losses, and let compound growth do the heavy lifting. Research backs it. But here's the thing people don't talk about: while the philosophy is easy, actually running it across multiple brokers, accounts, and goals can be a pain.

This guide is for you if you're juggling investments at Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, and maybe Robinhood. If you're tracking retirement, college savings, and a taxable brokerage all at once. If a spreadsheet used to work fine but is starting to feel like a second job (or a nagging job you ignore). And if you want to stay in control of your money while actually seeing your real allocation—not just one account at a time.

We'll walk through what a passive index investor actually needs, compare your options (broker tools, spreadsheets, robo-advisors, and portfolio intelligence apps), and help you figure out what actually fits your life. Along the way, we'll explain some concepts that get thrown around a lot but don't always land clearly.

Let's start with a real problem you're trying to solve.

‍

The evolving world of multi-account portfolio management for DIY Investors

Here's an example of what may happen if you rely only on your broker's dashboard: you see investments in Vanguard and Fidelity, and you have a target-date fund from your old employer's 401(k). You’re aiming for a 80% stock, 20% bond portfolio across each of your portfolios. You figure you should keep the same target asset allocation across all accounts. The Vanguard app tells you you're 80% stocks and 20% bonds. The Fidelity app says 75% stocks, 25% bonds. So you're... confused. Which one is right? Are you really 78% stocks? What about that 401(k)? And if you're trying to do strategic asset allocation—the idea that your overall stock/bond mix is a main driver of your investment risk and return—you need to see all your money in one view.

The academic research on asset allocation is pretty clear: the mix of stocks and bonds you choose tends to matter more than which specific stocks or bonds you pick. Volatility across portfolios is driven primarily by allocation decisions, not security selection. So if you're splitting across three brokers without a way to monitor your accounts in one place, you could be flying blind on an important factor.¹

That's the first reason folks move beyond broker dashboards.

The second reason is tax efficiency. If you have municipal bonds in a taxable account and high-dividend funds in a tax-advantaged account, you could be leaving money on the table. The right asset location strategy—putting tax-inefficient assets in tax-advantaged accounts—can improve your after-tax returns meaningfully over decades.² But that optimization only makes sense if you can see all your holdings at once and think about them as one portfolio, not separate accounts across brokerages. Do you consolidate to one broker then? How do you move your employer’s account? You may not want to move everything to your employment brokerage - what if you change jobs? Isn’t your spouse’s 401k at a different broker?

The third reason is monitoring and rebalancing. Research shows that periodic rebalancing helps investors maintain their target risk profile, especially across volatile periods, and can modestly improve risk-adjusted returns in many cases by automatically "selling high" and "buying low".³ But again, if your portfolio is scattered, this can get messy fast.

Add goal-based tracking on top of it (retirement vs. college vs. a house down payment), and you're possibly looking at a spreadsheet nightmare and a lot of manual work. How do you make sure your spreadsheet is working right? Did you capture every nuance?

To help with this, you have four basic tools to choose from. Let's walk through each one.

‍

¹ Brinson, G. P., Hood, L. R., & Beebower, G. L. (1986). Determinants of portfolio performance. Financial Analysts Journal, 42(4), 39-44.

² Sialm, C. (2009). Asset location for retirement savers. Journal of Finance, 65(3), 959-992.

³ Arnott, R. D., & Lovell, R. D. (1989). Rebalancing: Why, when, where, and how. Journal of Investing, 1(2), 35-40the averageand Every.

‍

Option 1: Broker-Native Tools

Here's an example of what may happen if you rely only on your broker's dashboard: you see investments in Vanguard and Fidelity, and you have a target-date fund from your old employer's 401(k). You’re aiming for a 80% stock, 20% bond portfolio across each of your portfolios. You figure you should keep the same target asset allocation across all accounts. The Vanguard app tells you you're 80% stocks and 20% bonds. The Fidelity app says 75% stocks, 25% bonds. So you're... confused. Which one is right? Are you really 78% stocks? What about that 401(k)? And if you're trying to do strategic asset allocation—the idea that your overall stock/bond mix is a main driver of your investment risk and return—you need to see all your money in one view.

The academic research on asset allocation is pretty clear: the mix of stocks and bonds you choose tends to matter more than which specific stocks or bonds you pick. Volatility across portfolios is driven primarily by allocation decisions, not security selection. So if you're splitting across three brokers with no unified view, you could be flying blind on an important factor.

That's the first reason folks move beyond broker dashboards.

The second reason is tax efficiency. If you have municipal bonds in a taxable account and high-dividend funds in a tax-advantaged account, you could be leaving money on the table. The right asset location strategy—putting tax-inefficient assets in tax-advantaged accounts—can improve your after-tax returns meaningfully over decades. But that optimization only makes sense if you can see all your holdings at once and think about them as one portfolio, not separate accounts across brokerages. Do you consolidate to one broker then? How do you move your employer’s account? You may not want to move everything to your employment brokerage - what if you change jobs? Isn’t your spouse’s 401k at a different broker?

The third reason is monitoring and rebalancing. Research shows that periodic rebalancing helps investors maintain their target risk profile, especially across volatile periods, and can modestly improve risk-adjusted returns in many cases by automatically "selling high" and "buying low." But again, if your portfolio is scattered, this can get messy fast.

Add goal-based tracking on top of it (retirement vs. college vs. a house down payment), and you're possibly looking at a spreadsheet nightmare and a lot of manual work. How do you make sure your spreadsheet is working right? Did you capture every nuance?

To help with this, you have four basic tools to choose from. Let's walk through each one.

‍

Single-Broker Views (Vanguard, Fidelity per-account, Schwab per-account, etc.)

Every major broker provides a dashboard to view your accounts. These are genuinely useful for what they do: clean views of positions, cost basis, realized gains, and simple allocation charts per institution. Your broker knows your exact positions, cost basis, realized gains, and unrealized gains. That's their core data, and they display it cleanly: a pie chart of your asset allocation per account, performance since purchase, and often some basic rebalancing alerts. If you're using Fidelity, for example, you can see a detailed breakdown of holdings and sort by sector or position size.

If you like nice visuals and want to track how a single account is performing, this is genuinely useful.

The catch is obvious: they only show your money at that broker. If you're juggling Vanguard, Fidelity, and Schwab, you need three logins to see the whole picture. These single-broker views only show you their own accounts. You can't view your Vanguard and Fidelity holdings on the same dashboard. That's a feature, actually—they want you to consolidate with them. But you may not want to. You might like Vanguard's fund lineup, Fidelity's trading experience, and Schwab's customer service. So you're stuck.

According to Morningstar Voice of the Investor (2024), the average American's assets are split across employer retirement (38%), bank accounts (23%), brokerage/investment (14%), Traditional IRA (10%), Roth IRA (7%), crypto (4%), and education savings (3%). The average investor has ~5 different types of accounts (employer, bank, brokerage, IRA variants, etc.), suggesting institutional fragmentation is normal. With the rise of FinTech tools and a more mobile workforce, Enrich predicts the number of accounts per person will grow, not consolidate. As a result, getting a consolidated view across brokerage firms is increasingly important to investors managing their own portfolios.

Even if you use (or consolidate to) just one broker, broker tools may not handle complex multi-asset portfolios well. If you own VTI, VXUS, and VTIAX, you have overlap. The broker could treat each as a separate line. If you're trying to figure out if your US/international allocation is 70/30 like you want, you have to do math. If you're trying to decompose a target-date fund or an ESG index fund into its component factors (size, value, geography), good luck.

And—most importantly—broker tools don't generally let you tie holdings to goals. You have an IRA, a 401 (k), a Roth IRA, and a taxable account, all aimed at your retirement. Your IRA is not the only goal aimed at "retirement." And if you have investments in your taxable account where you’re saving for a down payment, how can you split them off to be targeted towards that goal? Single broker-views don’t allow for this.

Broker-hosted aggregation tools (Fidelity full view, Schwab account aggregation, Vanguard outside investments)

Over the last few years, major brokers have added account aggregation features. The idea is smart: you can link your external accounts (at other brokers) from within the broker's platform, and see everything in one dashboard without moving money.

Fidelity Full View is the most mature. You log into Fidelity, set up Full View (powered by eMoney, a tool for financial planners, behind the scenes), and enter your login credentials for other institutions—Vanguard, Schwab, Robinhood, 11,000+ financial institutions. Each day, Full View scans those sites and pulls data into Fidelity. You get a consolidated view of all your holdings in one place, with automatic daily updates for linked accounts.

Schwab Account Aggregation works similarly: you link external accounts from within your Schwab dashboard, and they are then fed into your overall portfolio view.

Vanguard's "Outside Investments" feature lets you manually add external accounts (you type in ticker symbols and share counts) so they're included in Vanguard's portfolio analysis, though updates are manual, not automatic.​

Many other brokerages and robo-advisors have followed suit. This is a real step forward. You get a unified view. And it's free.

Where broker aggregators actually work well

If you're primarily with one broker (say, 80% of your money is at Fidelity) and you have a small account or two elsewhere, aggregators are a solid option. You check at that one broker, see everything, and you're done. The aggregation saves you from having to log in to three platforms.

Fidelity's aggregator also feeds into its portfolio analysis tool (called "Guided Portfolio Summary" or "GPS"), which can show you asset allocation across your connected accounts, not just Fidelity accounts. That's genuinely useful if you want to see whether you're actually at your target 70/30 stock/bond split across all brokers.

The limitations of aggregators

Here's what could break down:

• Connection reliability and coverage gaps: Not all financial institutions allow account aggregation. Some link seamlessly; others require "web access" logins (less secure, because the aggregator logs in as you rather than using a special read-only API). Smaller institutions, credit unions, and newer platforms (such as Coinbase and Fundrise) often don't yet offer aggregation support. If you have accounts at less common brokers, the aggregator might not connect.
• No unified asset allocation analysis across all accounts: Fidelity's Full View does a good job, but even there, you're limited. The aggregation pulls holdings, but if you're trying to see your true across-all-brokers allocation—mapping specific holdings to asset classes and goals—the analysis tools in a broker platform are broker-centric. They can show you asset allocation across your Fidelity + linked accounts, but only if those linked holdings are categorized correctly. If Fidelity doesn't recognize a security or fund from another broker, it might categorize it as "Unknown," and your allocation data becomes unreliable.
• Limited customization: Broker tools are built for the median investor. You generally can't easily define custom asset classes, map holdings to specific goals, or create your own allocation rules. If you have a unique strategy or a mix of factor tilts, you're limited.
• Manual updates for manual adds: You can also manually add accounts to these aggregators (just type in balances), but if you do, you have to update them manually when positions change. You can add holdings manually in Fidelity's Full View, but it's clunky, and new holdings must be entered one at a time.
• Security and privacy trade-offs: Account aggregators store your usernames and passwords and log in to other institutions on your behalf. This is secure (they use encryption and trusted channels), but it's not zero-risk. You're trusting the broker (and the underlying aggregation service) to protect your credentials. It's one more place your login info lives. Also, some financial institutions disable two-factor authentication when an approved aggregator logs in (because they trust the aggregator), which can feel like a security step backward.​

Additionally, these tools are free and don’t drive revenue for brokers; they encourage greater engagement with brokers. Sometimes brokers use this information to inform their wealth management teams who to call to offer financial planning services.

When broker aggregators make sense

• You have most of your money at one primary broker and one or two small accounts elsewhere.
• You just want to see total balances, net worth, and a big-picture allocation view.
• You trust the broker and are comfortable with their aggregation approach.
• You don't have complex goals, custom asset classes, or tax-focused needs.

When they don't

• You have accounts at multiple brokers you want to keep equal-weight (splitting between Vanguard and Fidelity, for example, for diversification).
• You want precise asset allocation tracking with custom rules and goal-based mapping.
• You have accounts at institutions that don't support aggregation.
• You want tax-aware rebalancing suggestions and TLH identification built in.
• You prefer not to share login credentials with additional services.

Broker aggregators are a nice middle ground between "single broker + spreadsheet" and "independent portfolio intelligence app." They give you visibility without moving money, and they're free. The problem is they might not be deep enough for investors who want to actually use that visibility to make smarter decisions about allocation, taxes, and rebalancing. They're more "reporting" than "intelligence.”

This is why many serious DIY investors use broker aggregators alongside a spreadsheet or independent app: the aggregator gives them a quick net-worth check, but for real portfolio analysis and decision-making, they go elsewhere.

‍

Option 2: Spreadsheets and custom scripts

When you decide to manage your investments yourself, the immediate response for most is to build a spreadsheet. This is the DIY investor's best friend. A well-built spreadsheet or Google Sheet can do almost anything. You can define your own asset classes, map holdings exactly where you want them, build custom rebalancing logic, and see your real allocation across every account in one view.

The Bogleheads forum has entire threads dedicated to spreadsheet tricks (link). Rob Berger, a DIY investor influencer, provides a free spreadsheet (link). Folks build Google Sheets with integrations to their bank accounts or manually update them daily. Some go harder and write Python scripts to pull data from APIs. If you like tinkering and have time, this is freedom.

Spreadsheets are freeing because they don't judge. It does what you tell it. You're in complete control. You decide what "US equity" means. Maybe it's just VTI. Maybe it's VTI plus a small-cap value tilt. Maybe it's a specific weighting of individual stocks and funds. Your rules, your way.

However, getting spreadsheets to work can be a time sink and often times anxiety inducing. Every time you open a new account, buy a new holding, or move money, you have to update the sheet. Additionally, the market isn’t static. The median stock fund has an annual turnover of 65%, with the average investor experiencing 51% turnover across their stock fund holdings. Index funds operate at a fraction of that level.4 While index funds have remarkably low turnover, ranging from 4% to 19% depending on the fund type (e.g., small cap requires more frequent rebalancing), it is still another data point to track your exposure and fund overlaps (when two funds are invested in similar factors or dimensions, leading to unexpected concentration)5. If your automated import breaks—and it could—you're back to manual entry. Formulas from advanced rebalancing techniques break quietly. You might not notice for weeks that one cell isn't syncing, and suddenly your "true" allocation is wrong. If you're tracking multiple family members' portfolios or managing your parents' money alongside your own, the maintenance burden gets real. And you’re always left wondering, “Did I capture everything?”

If you're just starting out and want to learn by doing, or if you have a truly simple portfolio and you genuinely enjoy tinkering, spreadsheets are great. They're free, they're flexible, and they force you to understand your own holdings. However, as your life gets more complicated, so does the number of accounts and goals you take on, and as a result, your spreadsheet gets more complicated as well. If Excel formulas feel like home, this might be the path for you. If you have time for upkeep, this is solid.

If complexity is growing or you're tired of maintenance, that's a signal to look at the next option.

‍

⁴ Reid, B., & Millar, K. (2004). Mutual Funds and Portfolio Turnover. Investment Company Institute Research Commentary.

⁵ Personal Fund. (2022). Mutual Fund and ETF Turnover Ratio Research.​

‍

Option 3: Robo-Advisors

Robo-advisors have evolved a lot. Traditional robo-advisors like Betterment, Wealthfront, and Schwab Intelligent Portfolios handle the entire workflow: you tell them your risk tolerance, they build a diversified portfolio, automatically rebalance it, and monitor for tax-loss harvesting opportunities. You don't have to think about asset allocation or individual trades. Behavioral finance research is pretty clear that individual investors tend to trade too much and hurt their returns by reacting emotionally to market swings, so handing the wheel to a rules-based system can blunt some of that damage.⁶

You answer a questionnaire, the algorithm maps you to a portfolio (usually a mix of ETFs from a set of prebuilt model portfolios), and the system takes over ongoing rebalancing and basic tax-loss harvesting with wash-sale avoidance in taxable accounts. In exchange, you pay an advisory fee—typically around 0.25% to 0.50% per year on the assets you transfer into the robo-advisor.⁷ For many people, the trade is: pay a small percentage of assets and never touch the trading screen again.

For a pure index investor, that fee can be hard to justify over long horizons. Passive funds themselves require monitoring but not a ton of trading, and robo fees are not buying you time with a dedicated human planner; you’re paying for automation and guardrails around an already simple strategy. Additionally, the robo-advisor doesn’t manage multi-account portfolios - it can’t handle your 401k, or coordinate tax-optimizing asset location strategies across accounts. If you want a set-it-and-forget-it approach to each of your accounts, you will give up some control. If the robo builds you a portfolio with 11 holdings and you disagree with their international tilt or factor choices, you can’t easily swap pieces out without breaking their system. You’re accepting their definition of “diversified.”

As the category has grown, newer robo approaches have branched in a few directions. Some target higher-net-worth users with allocations into alternatives (private real estate, private credit, structured products), which can add complexity and risk that a passive index investor or one with already concentrated investments (RSUs, entrepreneurs, etc) may not want or need. Another branch focuses on “alpha-enhanced passive” using direct indexing: instead of ETFs, they hold many individual stocks that track an index, so they can harvest losses more granularly and let you personalize exposure (exclude certain sectors, manage single-stock risk, apply ESG screens). Another branch focuses on “alpha-enhanced passive” using direct indexing: instead of ETFs, they hold many individual stocks that track an index, so they can harvest losses more granularly and let you personalize exposure (exclude certain sectors, manage single-stock risk, apply ESG screens). Most recently, a set of AI-native platforms—like Autonomous and Origin’s AI advisor—are pushing toward full “financial brain” territory: you connect your accounts, and you can ask questions like “should I max my 401(k) or pay down my mortgage?” or “how does this job offer affect my taxes and retirement?” and get scenario analysis in real time.

That all sounds powerful, but there’s a real trust issue for many investors. Some don’t like having to move their money to the robo’s custodian and then let that platform execute trades automatically. If you already have a mix of IRAs and taxable accounts at multiple brokers, re-centralizing everything into one robo can feel like a massive lift. And how will you move your employer’s 401(k) to the roboadvisor? And as one Enrich client put it in a conversation: “I’m already hesitant about all these roboadvisors automatically moving money around and executing trades. I’ve seen how fickle all these fintech systems are, so I would rather there just be an advice layer on top of existing accounts.” That’s a very common sentiment among experienced DIY investors who are thinking of switching away from robo-advisors.

‍

⁶ Odean, T. (1999). Do investors trade too much? American Economic Review, 89(5), 1279-1298.

⁷ Morningstar (2025). Are Robo-Advisors Still Worth It? Morningstar Personal Finance.

⁸ Testimonials are from an Enrich client who participated in a interview. No compensation was paid to this user for their testimony. The firm is not aware of any material conflicts of interest related to this statement, robo-advisors.

When robo-advisors make sense:

• You don’t want to manage the day-to-day mechanics of investing. If the idea of picking funds, setting an allocation, and remembering to rebalance stresses you out, automation is a real benefit, even at 0.25%–0.50% per year.
• Your accounts are relatively simple. One or two IRAs and a taxable account are easy to transfer onto a single platform and let the robo run.​
• You’re at an earlier stage. For portfolios in the low five figures, the absolute dollar fee is modest, and the discipline benefit can outweigh the cost.
• You’re okay with their level of personalization. You want a well-diversified, low-cost portfolio and don’t have strong opinions about exact tilts or custom rules.

When robo-advisors make less sense:

• You already have a multi-broker setup. If you’ve got 401(k)s anchored at employers, IRAs at one firm, taxable at another, and maybe some legacy accounts, consolidating everything into one robo may not be worth the hassle or tax friction.
• You’re seeking tax optimization through asset location, taking advantage of the tax protections of various accounts.
• You care about maintaining full control over your accounts and trades. If the idea of an algorithm moving money around without you pressing the button makes you uneasy, you’re not going to sleep well, even if the math is sound.
• You want deeper customization than a model portfolio. If you care about which specific funds implement your strategy, want to manage factor tilts or concentrated positions, or want goal-by-goal asset allocation, most traditional robo-advisors will feel constraining.
• You’re fee-sensitive and already committed to a low-cost index approach. At larger asset levels (say $500k+), even a 0.25% fee is a non-trivial dollar amount every year, layered on top of fund expense ratios, for work that a good portfolio-intelligence tool plus your own discipline can often cover.

‍

Option 4: Independent portfolio tools

Portfolios Intelligence Apps are designed to sit on top of your existing accounts, pulling in data from multiple brokers to give you one unified, analysis-first view. Unlike broker aggregators or robo-advisors, you don’t need to move your money around. You keep your accounts at Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, wherever. The app connects to those accounts, pulls in your holdings, and analyzes them.

Within this category, there are sub-slices:

• Net worth and allocation tracker: primarily shows you your total net worth and a high-level allocation across accounts. These tools are useful for big-picture views, but their lack of granularity and understanding of your investment strategy can make it difficult to assess tax-optimization strategies or whether your portfolio is on track to achieve your financial goals. Sometimes, these are free and used to upsell you to paid financial advising services.
• Retirement planning platforms: focus on modeling income, withdrawal strategies, and success probabilities. Great if retirement planning is the goal, less useful if you're focused on current portfolio management or other financial goals.
• Portfolio intelligence tools: these tools go deep on holdings, decomposition, allocation accuracy, and the mechanics of getting to your target—rebalancing, tax-loss harvesting, asset location—while leaving trading decisions in your hands.

Each solves different problems. If you want to know "will I be OK in retirement?", use a retirement planning platform. If you want to understand your net worth across many public and private investments, use a net worth tracker. If you want to manage your portfolio across accounts with precision and stay in control, you're looking at a portfolio-intelligence app, like Enrich.

‍

‍

No matter which portfolio intelligence app (or if you decide to use them all), you get a unified view across all your brokers without moving a dollar. These apps are designed to help you generate insights in your portfolio that would be difficult to obtain with any of the other options. And you stay in control. You keep your accounts. You make the trades. The app is a decision-support tool, not a managed account.

Since these tools are aggregating data from multiple brokers, security and privacy matter. Check whether they're using established aggregators (Plaid is pretty standard), whether they're auditing their security (SOC 2 Type I is a good sign), and whether they're a registered investment advisor (meaning they're subject to fiduciary duty).

Also, don't let nice charts make you think the tool is doing more than it is. A good portfolio intelligence app gives you information and recommendations. It's not making trades. You are. That's the point.

‍

A deeper look: what portfolio intelligence actually means

If you're considering the portfolio-intelligence route, it's worth understanding what "intelligence" actually covers. Here's what the good ones do:.

‍

‍

⁹ Martellini, L., Milhau, V., & Tarelli, A. (2017). Applying Goal-Based Investing to the Retirement Issue. EDHEC-Risk Institute.

¹⁰ Brinson, G. P., Hood, L. R., & Beebower, G. L. (1986). "Determinants of portfolio performance." Financial Analysts Journal, 42(4), 39-44. Seminal study showing that asset allocation explains over 91% of return variation for balanced funds. Extended by Vanguard research confirming approximately 90% of long-term return variation attributable to strategic asset allocation.

‍

How Enrich works (and where it fits)

Enrich is an independent portfolio intelligence app. If you're trying to figure out whether this type of tool makes sense for you, here's what it does:

‍

‍

¹¹ Martellini, L., Milhau, V., & Tarelli, A. (2017). Applying Goal-Based Investing to the Retirement Issue. EDHEC-Risk Institute.

¹² Returns shown are historical and are presented on an annualized basis for the time period indicated.​ Risk is shown as portfolio standard deviation, a statistical measure of how much returns have varied over time.​ Benchmarks are unmanaged reference portfolios and are shown for illustrative comparison only; you cannot invest directly in an index.​ The chart does not represent personalized investment advice or a recommendation to buy or sell any security or strategy.​ Past performance is not a guarantee, or reliable indicator, of future results; future returns and risk may differ materially from those shown.

¹³ Morningstar (2025). Are Robo-Advisors Still Worth It? Morningstar Personal Finance.

¹⁴ Cerulli Associates. “More Than 72% of Financial Advisors Are Compensated by Fee-Based Models.” Cerulli press release, 17 March 2025.

When to move beyond a spreadsheet

If you're happy with your spreadsheet, there's no urgent reason to change. But here are signs it might be time:

‍

‍

None of these are a "you must move" scenario. But they're all signs that a portfolio intelligence app might deliver real value.

‍

¹⁵ Daryanani, G. (2008). “Opportunistic Rebalancing: A New Paradigm for Wealth Managers.” Journal of Financial Planning, January 2008. Financial Planning Association.

How to Transition Safely

If you're thinking about adding a portfolio intelligence app (or moving to one), here's how to do it without blowing up your system:

‍

‍

The goal is to build confidence before you fully trust a new tool. Don't jump all-in on day one. To learn more about transitioning, read our comprehensive Migrating to Enrich Guide.

‍

The Bottom Line

You've got four paths forward:

• Broker tools are free, simple, and work if your life is simple. The name of the game is to consolidate your assets with a single broker or find a broker that can aggregate your accounts from other brokers.
• Spreadsheets are flexible, empowering, and free—if you have time for them. They're still the backbone of many sophisticated DIY investors' workflows.
• Robo-advisors solve the "I want this to be automatic" problem, but you may lose direct control of your portfolio.
• Portfolio intelligence apps sit in the middle: they give you a unified view, decision support, and tax insights, without taking over or charging you a percentage of assets.

If you're a passive, low-cost index-fund-style investor with accounts at multiple brokers, growing complexity, or a real interest in tax efficiency, a portfolio intelligence approach is worth a look. You stay in control. You keep your accounts where you like them. You get better information. And you pay a small flat fee instead of a percentage that scales with your wealth.

If you want to see what that looks like for your own accounts, Enrich lets you connect your brokers and explore for free on iOS. You can build your goals, see your actual allocation across accounts, and explore rebalancing scenarios. No trades happen without your approval. No commitment. Just a clearer picture of your portfolio.

Start a free trial and see if portfolio intelligence fits how you want to invest.

‍