Every investor asks the same question after a year-end statement arrives: was that a good return? The honest answer is that "good" is not a number — it is a relationship between your return, your risk, and the right benchmark. This guide walks Canadian DIY investors through how to set a meaningful reference point and stop falling for the headline traps that distort the picture.
A 10% return sounds excellent until you learn the benchmark gained 22%. A 4% return sounds mediocre until you remember you were 60% in bonds during a volatile year and your benchmark gained 5%. The raw number tells you almost nothing without context.
Three factors define whether a return is truly good:
| Asset class / portfolio type | Historical / target nominal return |
|---|---|
| Canadian equities (S&P/TSX Composite) | ~6–8% per year |
| Bonds | ~3–5% annually |
| Balanced portfolio (60% equities / 40% fixed income) | 5–6% nominal target |
| All-equity portfolio | 7–9% nominal target |
Canadian equities (as measured by the S&P/TSX Composite) have historically returned roughly 6–8% per year in nominal terms over multi-decade periods. Global equities — blending Canada, the U.S., and international markets — have delivered broadly similar long-run results, with the U.S. market outperforming meaningfully over the past 15 years in particular. Bonds have historically contributed 3–5% annually, though the actual figure varies widely with rate cycles.
A simple rule of thumb many Canadian financial planners use: a diversified balanced portfolio (roughly 60% equities, 40% fixed income) targeting 5–6% nominal annually over the long run is reasonable planning territory. An all-equity portfolio might target 7–9% nominal over the very long run, with significantly more short-term volatility.
These are planning assumptions, not guarantees. Sequence of returns, currency effects, and fees all erode outcomes in ways that raw historical averages hide. If you want to model how your current mix might play out, the sequence of returns risk article explains why average returns and actual returns diverge — especially near retirement.
The single most common benchmark mistake Canadian investors make is comparing their diversified portfolio — which may include Canadian equities, bonds, real estate, and international stocks — to the U.S. S&P 500. This is problematic for several reasons:
A Canadian all-equity all-in-one ETF — XEQT, VEQT, or similar — is a far more relevant benchmark for a Canadian all-equity investor than the S&P 500 alone. If you want to understand how these all-in-one funds are built, see XEQT vs VEQT vs VFV.
Before you can compare your return to any benchmark, you need to calculate it correctly. Most brokerage statements show a money-weighted return (MWR), which is influenced by when you added or withdrew funds. If you added a large lump sum right before a downturn, your MWR looks worse than the market — not because your portfolio picked the wrong stocks, but because of timing.
The time-weighted return (TWR) strips out the timing of your cash flows and shows how your portfolio's investment decisions actually performed. It is the standard used by professional fund managers and the one that makes benchmark comparisons fair. WealthWise calculates your Modified-Dietz TWR automatically so you can compare apples to apples. For a deeper explanation of the difference, see the article on time-weighted vs money-weighted returns.
Your benchmark should mirror your asset allocation as closely as possible. Here is a practical framework:
| Portfolio type | Reasonable benchmark |
|---|---|
| 100% Canadian equities | S&P/TSX Composite Total Return |
| All-equity (global) | XEQT or VEQT total return (CAD) |
| Classic 60/40 | 60% global equity index + 40% Canadian bond index |
| Conservative (30/70) | 30% global equity + 70% bond index blend |
| 100% U.S. equities | S&P 500 Total Return (hedged to CAD, or unhedged — match what you hold) |
WealthWise's VS S&P 500 benchmark tool lets you plot your actual TWR against the index over time, so you can see periods of outperformance and underperformance with real data instead of rough estimates.
A portfolio returning 8% gross but carrying 2% in management fees and MER delivers 6% net. Over 20 years, that difference compounds into a staggering gap. Low-cost index ETFs — with MERs often well under 0.25% for all-in-one funds — leave far more return in your pocket. Always evaluate your return net of fees. Do not compare your pre-fee return to a benchmark that assumes no fees.
When assessing whether a robo-advisor or actively managed fund is worth its higher cost, the relevant question is not whether it returned 9% — it is whether it returned enough more than a comparable index to justify the extra fee. Most peer-reviewed evidence suggests this is rarely the case over long periods, though there are specific situations (tax management, drawdown protection) where active management adds value.
A 7% return in a year when inflation runs at 4% delivers only 3% in real purchasing power. Over a long retirement, real return — not nominal return — determines whether your plan succeeds. When evaluating whether your portfolio is "on track," use an inflation-adjusted target. Canadian financial planning typically uses a real return assumption of 3–5% for equities and 0–2% for bonds, depending on the rate environment at the time of planning.
A single calendar year tells you almost nothing meaningful. Markets can swing 20–30% in either direction in a given year for reasons that have nothing to do with your portfolio construction. Good investment decisions regularly underperform in the short run before delivering over the long run — that is partly what generates the equity risk premium in the first place.
Consider evaluating your portfolio over rolling 5-year periods at minimum. If your 5-year annualized TWR is within 1–2% of a comparable benchmark, net of fees, and your risk level was appropriate for your situation, that is a genuinely good result that the vast majority of active investors fail to achieve consistently.
There is no universal answer to "what is a good portfolio return" in Canada or anywhere else. A 6% real return on a conservative balanced portfolio built for a near-retiree is exceptional. A 10% nominal return on a 100% equity portfolio during a year the market gained 18% is underwhelming. The question is always: did you earn a fair return for the risk you took, net of fees, compared to the right benchmark? WealthWise is built to help you answer exactly that question with real data.
There is no single threshold, but a diversified balanced portfolio (60% equities, 40% bonds) targeting 5–6% nominal annually over the long run is a reasonable planning assumption. An all-equity portfolio might aim for 7–9% nominal over the very long run, with higher volatility. What matters most is comparing your return to the right benchmark for your asset mix, net of fees.
Only if you hold 100% U.S. equities denominated in USD. Most Canadian investors hold a mix of Canadian equities, global equities, and bonds — which should be compared to a blended benchmark that reflects that mix. An all-in-one ETF like XEQT or VEQT is often a more relevant reference point for a Canadian all-equity investor.
Time-weighted return (TWR) strips out the impact of when you added or withdrew money, isolating how your portfolio's investment strategy actually performed. Money-weighted return (MWR) reflects the timing of your cash flows, which can make your return look better or worse than the market even if your investments were identical. TWR is the standard for benchmarking against an index.
Fees reduce your net return directly. A portfolio earning 8% gross but paying 2% in management and fund expenses nets only 6%. Compounded over 20+ years, even a 1% fee difference can cost tens of thousands of dollars. Always compare your net-of-fee return to a benchmark that also assumes low or no fees — such as a low-cost index ETF total return.
At minimum, evaluate rolling 5-year annualized returns. A single year is largely noise — markets can swing 20–30% for reasons unrelated to your portfolio quality. Five to ten years of data gives a much clearer picture of whether your strategy is generating a fair risk-adjusted return compared to a relevant benchmark.
Start with WealthWise for free →Educational content. Figures and rules verified against the official sources above; tax amounts change annually.
Wealth