# Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix

> 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.

Data as of Nov 9, 2026. Rebuilt every trading night.

## Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix

Data as of Nov 9, 2026. Rebuilt every trading night.

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.

Allocation and Risk · Lesson 7 of 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

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 −48.50% , Jan 16, 2020 to Mar 18, 2020 . Strategic 60: −22.31% , 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.

### The question

A model portfolio or an allocation fund says it is built with care. How do I tell whether that care added anything?

### The idea

- 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 ).

- 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.

- Use the same dates, and more than one window.

- Put risk beside return ( lesson 1 ).

- Count the fee gap ( lesson 6 ).

- The question is not "did it make money?" It is "did it beat what a simple mix would have done?"

### Worked example

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.

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.)

The benchmark's returns before Oct 2026 are hypothetical: today's rule applied to past prices.

| Window | MDIV | Strategic 60 | Result |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1 year | $11,115 | $10,733 | MDIV $382 ahead |
| 3 years | $13,876 | $15,291 | MDIV $1,415 behind |
| 5 years | $13,446 | $13,326 | MDIV $120 ahead |
| 10 years | $16,487 | $21,772 | MDIV $5,285 behind |

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 .

Over ten years MDIV earned less and swung more, with a worst fall more than twice as deep.

### The common mistake

"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.

A second mistake: a benchmark with a different stock share. Against all stocks, any 60/40 mix looks weak; against cash, brilliant.

### Check your understanding

Pick an answer to see why. Two of three right passes the lesson.

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.

### Takeaways

- Judge any portfolio against a simple mix with the same stock share, never against "the market".

- Read every window to one end date, with the worst fall beside it.

- Count the fee gap in dollars; it sits inside every return you compare.

### Do it on ETFIQ

Set your own portfolio beside its benchmark Your fund

### Where to next

---

Source: ETFIQ, independent ETF data. Recomputed nightly from public filings and prices.
Cite: ETFIQ, Benchmarking a portfolio against a simple mix, data as of Nov 9, 2026. https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/
Licence: https://etfiq.com/license/ Data ETFIQ computes is free to use with attribution: ETFIQ (etfiq.com). Issuer data stays under its owner's terms.
HTML: https://etfiq.com/academy/allocation-and-risk/benchmarking-a-portfolio/