Here's an analysis of the Client Portfolio (P:2011703) compared to your Balanced Model, 65/35 (P:2033914), with a proposal report and key talking points for your moderate risk client.

Client Portfolio vs. Balanced Model, 65/35: Key Metrics (as of 2026-04-02)

METRIC	Client Portfolio	Balanced Model, 65/35
Total Return Level	$27,920.81	$30,277.14
Cumulative Total Return (since 2023-04-03)	+42.6%	+40.4%
Standard Deviation (since inception)	0.56%	0.57%
Max Drawdown (since inception)	23.16%	22.82%
Historical Sharpe Ratio (since inception)	0.66	0.60

Proposal Report & Key Talking Points 1. Performance

• Total Return:

The Client Portfolio edged ahead with a cumulative total return of +42.6%, slightly outperforming the Balanced Model, 65/35 at +40.4% over the tracked period.

• Portfolio Value:

While Client delivered a higher percentage gain, the Balanced Model's ending value ($30,277.14) is higher than Client ($27,920.81), likely reflecting differences in initial starting balances or contributions. 2. Risk Metrics

• Volatility (Standard Deviation):

Both portfolios display virtually identical risk, with Client at 0.56% and the Balanced Model at 0.57% daily standard deviation since inception. This fits well for a moderate risk profile.

• Max Drawdown:

Drawdown measures the peak-to-trough loss over the period. Client's drawdown was 23.16% vs. the Balanced Model's 22.82% — both consistent with moderate risk expectations and almost the same. 3. Risk-Adjusted Return

• Sharpe Ratio:

Client Portfolio had a Sharpe Ratio of 0.66, slightly higher than the Balanced Model's 0.60. This means Client delivered marginally better returns per unit of risk taken, highlighting efficiency. Key Recommendations & Discussion Points

• Portfolio Alignment:

Both portfolios are closely aligned in risk and drawdown, suitable for a moderate risk investor.

• Return Advantage:

Client Portfolio has delivered slightly higher returns, both in absolute and risk-adjusted terms, indicating strong management or asset selection within the moderate risk spectrum.

• Potential for Further Optimization:

The Balanced Model provides a slightly higher end value, with nearly identical risk and drawdown, suggesting that a hybrid approach or minor rebalancing could reap additional benefits.

• Consistency & Comfort:

The narrow difference in volatility and drawdown suggests either portfolio would provide a consistent risk experience, which is crucial for moderate investors focused on growth without excessive fluctuations.