Educational investment analysis Not investment advice · Not a fiduciary

Alpha Test Only
ETF EXPLORATION, WITH THE MATH IN VIEW

Analyses the mix.
Generates
ranked
alternatives.

Set hypothetical inputs and compare your starting ETF mix with searched alternatives. Growth, risk, costs, and assumptions stay visible; required stability failures leave results exploratory and unranked.

Built on published research. Historical checks and conditional simulations make assumptions visible. Eligible disclosed holdings help screen overlapping alternatives; the analysis does not remove selection bias.

Educational analytics. Rigorous mathematics.
No investment advice. No fiduciary relationship.

GETTING STARTED

Simple steps to start an analysis

You choose the inputs. Steady Otter runs the analysis.

  1. List the ETFs you’re interested in

    Enter ticker symbols separated by commas. This is the pool of ETFs the analysis will explore.

    ETF entry field with the example tickers VTI, VXUS, BND and GLDM, separated by commas.

    Then let Steady Otter do the work.

    Search alternative mixes and compare growth, downside, costs, and assumptions.

    Historical results and modeled outcomes, clearly separated.

    Start analysis

  2. Add a hypothetical starting mix Optional

    Enter each holding’s percentage as your starting mix, or use an equal-weight seed instead.

    Seed benchmark entry with example weights of VTI 20%, VXUS 10%, BND 50% and GLDM 20%, totaling 100%. The equal-weight option is off.
THE FEATURE TO START WITH

Two portfolios.
One clear comparison.

A bigger return number tells only part of the story.

Put your seed mix beside an alternative from the same run. Read aligned rows for growth, drawdown, volatility, holdings, and funded projections. Compare the same periods and cost assumptions.

See the compare screen
Portfolio comparisonIllustrative screen
Comparison screen aligning the seed baseline and an alternative, with funded projection values above their AI summaries.

Rank is a model result. It is not a recommendation.

YOU SET THE QUESTION

Different budgets.
Different levels of exploration.

Keep the money in the example separate from the work done by the computer.

HYPOTHETICAL FUNDING

Change the scenario

Explore starting amounts, monthly contributions, and a modeled taxable or IRA setting. Use invented numbers—your actual finances are not needed.

ALGORITHM BUDGET

Change the search depth

Quick, Balanced, Thorough, and Max budgets control how much search and simulation work is requested.

COMPUTE EFFORT

Change the resources

A separate effort setting controls the compute resources used for that work. More resources do not guarantee a better result.

BUILT ON PUBLISHED RESEARCH

Research-backed, rigorous methods.

Compare growth, downside, costs, and search stability. Historical checks and conditional simulations show evidence and limits; they do not establish future performance.

When enough history is available, we reserve later data for testing and freeze rankings before that test. Reports show assumptions, missing evidence, and model limits.

A loose stack of methodology references by Hansen, White, Politis and Romano, Cawley and Talbot, and Bailey and coauthors. Explore our methods
CURIOUS ABOUT THE NUMBERS?

The math is understandable.

Compounding, drawdown, and simulations—explained with examples at a 10th-grade math level.

Make sense of the math