Interesting argument. We usually associate progress with more abstraction, yet this shows how simpler interfaces can reduce long-term complexity.
Have you noticed performance or data consistency benefits compared to API-based integrations?
Spot on, Vishwajeet. The abstraction of third-party APIs often just hides a massive amount of brittle technical debt.
To answer your questions—yes, we see massive benefits on both fronts:
Performance (0ms Latency): With API integrations, you are constantly battling pagination, rate limits, and network round-trips just to render a chart. Because we parse the CSV entirely in the browser and store the normalized data locally (via IndexedDB), querying and filtering 10,000 trades takes exactly 0ms. The UI is instantly responsive because the database is effectively the client's RAM.
Data Consistency (Immutable Ledgers): This is the biggest hidden cost of APIs. Broker APIs frequently drop historical data (e.g., only syncing the last 90 days) or silently change their enum values, which corrupts historical portfolio performance.
A CSV is an immutable ledger. Once the user downloads it, it becomes the canonical truth. If a broker changes their export schema tomorrow, our LLM ingestion engine just adapts on the fly to parse the new format—but the user's historical database is completely insulated and never breaks.
We explicitly traded "automatic background sync" for "0ms latency and indestructible history." For long-term wealth tracking, we believe it's the right trade-off.
Contribute meaningful comments to climb the leaderboard and earn badges!