Luum publishes this comparison. We build one of the products discussed, so read it with that in mind. Facts were last verified on September 10, 2026; the other products change too, so check their sites.
Portfolio trackers in Canada, compared
A comparison of the Canadian portfolio trackers, written by the people who build one of them, and honest about where each of the others is the better answer.
Last updated September 10, 2026 · 7 min read
Written by a competitor. Read it that way.
Luum is one of the products discussed below, and we build it. That is a reason to be sceptical of any roundup, including this one, so this page is organised around a single rule: every other product gets a stated case where it is the better choice than ours. Those cases are the parts worth reading, because they are the parts we have no incentive to write.
There is no ranking, no scores and no "best" verdict here. What each tool is best at depends on what you hold and what you are trying to find out, and a numbered list would imply a comparison that does not exist.
The question that actually decides this
Not "which is best", but which job you need doing. The Canadian tools in this category do four genuinely different things, and most of the frustration people report comes from buying one job and expecting another.
| If the job is… | The answer is usually… |
|---|---|
| See everything I own, including non-investments | An aggregator, Wealthica |
| Calculate and place my rebalancing trades | Passiv |
| Report across many countries and currencies | Sharesight |
| Keep my data on my own machine, for free | Wealthfolio |
| Get adjusted cost base exactly right | AdjustedCostBase.ca |
| Track without connecting anything | Greenline |
| Analyse investment accounts against my targets | Luum, which is what we built it for |
Each row links to a fuller comparison. What follows is the short version of each.
Wealthica: the widest aggregator
Pick it when: you want one screen showing every financial account you have, investments and otherwise, across a very large number of Canadian institutions.
Wealthica's coverage is the broadest in the Canadian market and it is the reason to choose it. If the question keeping you up is "what do I actually have, and where", an aggregator answers it and an investment-analysis tool does not.
Where it is weaker: breadth trades against depth. It is a financial dashboard rather than an investment-analysis product, which is the axis our comparison covers.
Passiv: rebalancing, and actually executing it
Pick it when: you hold a target allocation and want the trades that restore it, calculated and placed.
Passiv is the only tool in this list that will put an order in, and its free tier is genuinely usable. For a Questrade holder in particular the economics are hard to argue with. Nothing in this page is a suggestion that it does that job badly. It is the tool for that job.
Where it is weaker: it is not a measurement or tax-record product, and it is not trying to be. The full comparison, and a wider look at Passiv alternatives.
Sharesight: global coverage and mature reporting
Pick it when: your holdings span several countries and currencies.
Sharesight has been doing dividend and tax reporting for a long time and does it well, across far more exchanges than anything Canada-specific. If your portfolio is international, its coverage is the deciding factor and Canadian rules are not what you most need optimised.
Where it is weaker: it is built for a global user base, so Canadian specifics (pooled cost base across accounts, registered-account context) are not the centre of its design. The full comparison.
Wealthfolio: free, open source, local-first
Pick it when: you do not want your financial data on anyone else's infrastructure.
This is the strongest privacy position available in the category, and no hosted product can match it on that axis. It is also free and open source, which means you can read exactly what it does. If keeping data local is a requirement rather than a preference, the decision is already made.
Where it is weaker: local-first means you run it and you back it up, and there is no automatic sync. The full comparison.
AdjustedCostBase.ca: one job, done thoroughly
Pick it when: cost base is the problem you need solved, especially if the superficial loss rule is in play.
It tracks that rule. Luum does not. If you are realising losses and repurchasing, that difference is decisive and it points away from us. The full comparison.
Greenline: no connections, by design
Pick it when: you want a Canadian tracker and you would rather type your holdings in than connect a brokerage.
Manual entry is a real choice with real advantages: nothing is shared with an aggregator, and nothing breaks when a brokerage changes its login flow. The full comparison.
Luum: investment accounts, against targets you set
Pick it when: you hold investment accounts at more than one institution and want them measured together: combined return, pooled adjusted cost base, allocation and drift against your own targets, with registered and taxable accounts distinguished. Portfolio tracking built for Canadian investors sets out what that involves here specifically: four account types, two currencies and a cost base pooled across institutions.
Where it is weaker, collected in one place so it is not scattered through the page:
- It places no trades. Passiv does.
- It does not apply the superficial loss rule. AdjustedCostBase.ca does.
- It does not aggregate non-investment accounts. Wealthica does.
- It is hosted, not local-first. Wealthfolio is.
- Its market coverage is Canada-first. Sharesight's is broader.
- It is newer than most of the above, with the shorter track record that implies.
A spreadsheet is a legitimate answer
It belongs in this list. It is free, it encodes exactly the rules you chose, and for a handful of holdings in one account it is often the right tool. Where a spreadsheet stops being enough is specific about the four places it goes quietly wrong, and "quietly" is the operative word. The failure mode is a missing row, not an error message.
What we would tell a friend
Work out which of the four jobs you need first. If you need two of them, two tools is a perfectly reasonable answer and cheaper than expecting one product to be all of them. Several of the pairings above are complementary rather than competing.
And if you are choosing between us and something on this list for a job that thing does better, pick that thing.
Common questions
Can I trust a roundup written by one of the products in it?
Not on its verdicts, which is why this page has none. What you can reasonably use it for is the map: the four jobs, which tool does which, and the stated cases where something other than ours is the better answer. Verify anything that matters against the product's own site before deciding.
Why is there no ranking or scoring?
Because the ranking would depend entirely on what you hold and what you want to know, and any single order would be wrong for most readers. It would also be the part of the page most useful to us and least useful to you.
Do I need more than one of these?
Often yes, and that is not a failure of any of them. Measurement and rebalancing are different jobs, as are aggregation and analysis. Two tools that each do one job well beat one tool that half-does both.
This comparison is educational and general in nature. It is not investment, tax, or legal advice. Verify current features and pricing directly with each provider before deciding.