{"url":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/","section":"academy","title":"Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix | ETFIQ","description":"Over the 10 years to Oct 30, 2026, MDIV, at 60.4% stocks, grew $10,000 to $16,487, against $21,772 for ETFIQ's hypothetical Strategic 60 benchmark.","as_of":"Nov 9, 2026","structured_data":[{"@type":"LearningResource","@id":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/#lesson","name":"Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix","description":"Over the 10 years to Oct 30, 2026, MDIV, at 60.4% stocks, grew $10,000 to $16,487, against $21,772 for ETFIQ's hypothetical Strategic 60 benchmark.","url":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/","learningResourceType":"Lesson","teaches":"Judging a portfolio against the simple mix with the same stock share: same dates, several windows, risk and fees","educationalLevel":"Intermediate","timeRequired":"PT7M","inLanguage":"en","isAccessibleForFree":true,"isPartOf":{"@type":"Course","@id":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/#course","name":"Allocation and Risk","url":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/"},"position":7,"dateModified":"2026-11-09","author":{"@type":"Organization","name":"ETFIQ Research","url":"https://etfiq.com"},"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"ETFIQ Research","url":"https://etfiq.com"}},{"@type":"FAQPage","@id":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/#check","mainEntity":[{"@type":"Question","name":"A model holds 78% stocks, looked through. Which ETFIQ benchmark should it be judged against?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Strategic 80. 78% sits in the over 70% to 85% band, whose benchmark is Strategic 80."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"A portfolio beat its benchmark over 1 and 5 years and trailed over 3 and 10. What is the fair summary?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"State each window: the result depends on the dates. Each window is a fact about its own dates; report them all."}},{"@type":"Question","name":"Over ten years, a portfolio returned 1 point a year less than its benchmark, with higher volatility and a deeper worst fall. What is the fair reading?","acceptedAnswer":{"@type":"Answer","text":"Less return and more risk than the simple mix. It lost on both sides of the trade-off."}}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"ETFIQ","item":"https://etfiq.com/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Academy","item":"https://etfiq.com/academy/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Allocation and Risk","item":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"Benchmarking a portfolio against a sim","item":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/"}]},{"@type":"WebPage","name":"Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix","description":"Over the 10 years to Oct 30, 2026, MDIV, at 60.4% stocks, grew $10,000 to $16,487, against $21,772 for ETFIQ's hypothetical Strategic 60 benchmark.","url":"https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/","dateModified":"2026-11-09","isPartOf":{"@type":"WebSite","name":"ETFIQ","url":"https://etfiq.com"},"speakable":{"@type":"SpeakableSpecification","cssSelector":[".lede"]},"publisher":{"@id":"https://etfiq.com/#org"}}],"characters":6091,"truncated":false,"content":"ETFIQ / Academy / Allocation and Risk / Benchmarking a portfolio against a sim \n \n Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix\n Data as of Nov 9, 2026. Rebuilt every trading night.\n Over the 10 years to Oct 30, 2026 , MDIV, at 60.4% stocks, grew $10,000 to $16,487 , against $21,772 for ETFIQ's hypothetical Strategic 60 benchmark.\n Allocation and Risk \u00b7 Lesson 7 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 \n Tap a window. See what $10,000 grew to in MDIV and in its matching benchmark, Strategic 60. 1 year 3 years 5 years 10 years Amount (hypothetical) $10,000 Years 10 MDIV yearly rate 5.13% Strategic 60 yearly rate 8.09% $10,000 after 10 years: MDIV $16,492, Strategic 60 $21,770. Hypothetical amount; benchmark returns are ETFIQ rule results on past prices. Windows end Oct 30, 2026. Step 1: match. By its holdings filed for Jun 30, 2026 , MDIV held 60.4% in stocks, looked through. That is the Moderate band (over 50% to 70%), so its benchmark is ETFIQ Strategic 60 : 60% VT, a world stock fund, and 40% US bonds (BND and AGG). Step 2: every window, same end date. Growth of $10,000, each window ending Oct 30, 2026 : Step 3: risk, same ten years. Volatility: MDIV 15.03% , Strategic 60 10.04% Worst fall: MDIV \u221248.50% , Jan 16, 2020 to Mar 18, 2020 . Strategic 60: \u221222.31% , Nov 8, 2021 to Oct 14, 2022 . Step 4: the fee gap. MDIV charges 0.71% a year. The benchmark's funds charge 0.05% , weighted. On $10,000: $71 against about $5 . Both returns already have these fees taken out, so the fee gap is one cause of the 2.96 points, not a cost on top. \n The question\n A model portfolio or an allocation fund says it is built with care. How do I tell whether that care added anything?\n The idea\n Set it beside the simplest portfolio with the same share in stocks : a plain mix of low-cost index funds. That is what ETFIQ's benchmarks are ( Beginner lesson 3 ).\n Four steps: Match the stock share. Find the portfolio's band ( lesson 3 ) and its benchmark: Strategic 20, 40, 60, 80 or 95, named for its percent in stocks.\n Use the same dates, and more than one window.\n Put risk beside return ( lesson 1 ).\n Count the fee gap ( lesson 6 ).\n \n The question is not \"did it make money?\" It is \"did it beat what a simple mix would have done?\" \n Worked example\n The 4 steps beside the drawing at the top work this through on ETFIQ data. Point at a step to light the part of the drawing it describes.\n MDIV, First Trust's Multi-Asset Diversified Income fund, tracks an index that spreads money across several kinds of income-paying assets. (An example, not a pick.)\n The benchmark's returns before Oct 2026 are hypothetical: today's rule applied to past prices.\n Window MDIV Strategic 60 Result \n 1 year $11,115 $10,733 MDIV $382 ahead \n 3 years $13,876 $15,291 MDIV $1,415 behind \n 5 years $13,446 $13,326 MDIV $120 ahead \n 10 years $16,487 $21,772 MDIV $5,285 behind \n Seeing only the last year, you'd call MDIV the winner. As a yearly rate over ten years, MDIV returned 5.13% against 8.09% : 2.96 points a year behind .\n Over ten years MDIV earned less and swung more, with a worst fall more than twice as deep.\n The common mistake\n \"It beat the market last year, so it's good.\" Two errors. \"The market\" is the wrong yardstick for a mix with 40% in other things, and one year is one window. MDIV led its benchmark in the latest year and led in the latest five, and trailed by $5,285 over ten.\n A second mistake: a benchmark with a different stock share. Against all stocks, any 60/40 mix looks weak; against cash, brilliant.\n Check your understanding\n Pick an answer to see why. Two of three right passes the lesson.\n 1. A model holds 78% stocks, looked through. Which ETFIQ benchmark should it be judged against? A Strategic 60 B Global Stocks, 100% C Strategic 80 D The S&P 500 Answer: C. Strategic 80. 78% sits in the over 70% to 85% band, whose benchmark is Strategic 80. Not D: the S&P 500 is all stocks, a different risk. 2. A portfolio beat its benchmark over 1 and 5 years and trailed over 3 and 10. What is the fair summary? A It is better, since it won two of four B State each window: the result depends on the dates C It is worse, since it lost the longest D The data must be wrong Answer: B. State each window: the result depends on the dates. Each window is a fact about its own dates; report them all. Not A: counting wins ignores how big each gap was. 3. Over ten years, a portfolio returned 1 point a year less than its benchmark, with higher volatility and a deeper worst fall. What is the fair reading? A More return per unit of risk B The same result C It cannot be judged without one more year D Less return and more risk than the simple mix Answer: D. Less return and more risk than the simple mix. It lost on both sides of the trade-off. Not A: more risk paid off only if return rose too. \n Takeaways\n Judge any portfolio against a simple mix with the same stock share, never against \"the market\". \n Read every window to one end date, with the worst fall beside it. \n Count the fee gap in dollars; it sits inside every return you compare. \n Do it on ETFIQ\n Set your own portfolio beside its benchmark Your fund \n Where to next\n Previous lesson: Fees, fully costed: expense ratio vs total cost Allocation and Risk: all lessons The explainer behind this lesson ETFIQ Academy How ETFIQ computes these numbers \n Cite this page. ETFIQ, Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix, data as of Nov 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/ Free to use with attribution for data ETFIQ computes; issuer data stays under its owner's terms. The underlying files are at Open data .\n Other forms Plain ETFIQ, Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix, data as of Nov 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/ APA ETFIQ. (Nov 9, 2026). Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix. Retrieved from https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/ Markdown [Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix (ETFIQ, Nov 9, 2026)](https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/)","source":"ETFIQ, independent ETF data. Recomputed nightly from public filings and prices.","publisher":{"@id":"https://etfiq.com/#org","name":"ETFIQ","url":"https://etfiq.com"},"license":"https://etfiq.com/license/","license_text":"Data ETFIQ computes is free to use with attribution: ETFIQ (etfiq.com). Issuer data stays under its owner's terms.","citation":"ETFIQ, Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix, data as of Nov 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/"}