Workflow comparison
FillScope or a spreadsheet: which trading journal should you use?
Use a spreadsheet for maximum flexibility and portability; use FillScope when repeatable IBKR Flex imports and a defined review workflow matter more.
When is a spreadsheet the better choice?
A spreadsheet is a strong choice when the trader wants complete control over formulas, works with a small dataset, needs offline portability, uses several brokers with custom exports, or does not want to provide a Flex token to another application. Its weaknesses are manual import work, formula drift, inconsistent tagging, and harder audit trails.
When is FillScope the better choice?
FillScope fits an Interactive Brokers workflow where repeated Flex imports, stable metric definitions, import-health records, risk coverage, playbook review, psychology notes, and the same dashboard over time are valuable. Its weaknesses are dependence on IBKR report availability, product-defined metrics, server availability, and the need to review credential controls.
What should determine the decision?
Compare data ownership and export, credential policy, broker coverage, import frequency, formula transparency, review habits, privacy requirements, cost, support, and the ability to reproduce a metric from source rows. Do not choose from a performance promise; neither tool creates an edge by itself.
Can both be used together?
Yes. A trader can keep an independent spreadsheet or export as a reconciliation layer while using FillScope for repeatable review. Periodically compare statement totals, row counts, realized P&L, commissions, and date coverage so a dashboard does not become the only copy or the only interpretation of the records.