How do you separate your portfolio? Or do you?

[BostonDomainer]

As title states... how do you separate your portfolio. I personally have what i would consider 3 portfolios with each maintained by separate registrars, with different email addresses, and and different park/development status (will explain). The way I separate them is as follows:
1st) Public names... names that I may have on forums, put in signatures, or list for sale etc.
2nd) Names that would fetch x,xxx plus resell. These, I don't put up for sale on forums and I may or may not park for various reasons.
3rd) I have the private collection. These are names that I would be willing to pay end user prices ( or have) to hold or develop) They never hit the public and they're only for sale from direct email interest or if I solicit from end users or companies. The email is either private or it's an email that I never use for personal usage. Within this tier, I am especially careful on how I administer to these names for reasons that would be domain specific.

This 3 tiered little structure works well for me. What do you do? If any...k:

 

[copper]

I just use spreadsheet with following column titles.
Domain name
Buy/Register Date
Registrar
Paid Amt
Category/Industry
Exp. Date
Expected Sale Price
OVT
WordTracker
Parking site
Parking Revenue
Parking keyword

 

[Johnn]

There is no easy way or software but using spreadsheet would be best since you can sort columns anyway you want to.

Name
Registrar
Expiration date
Created date (can get from domaintools and many registrars - helpful if the name is old)
Category 1 - Extension: .com .net, etc...
Category 2 - 2 character, 3 letter, 4 letter, etc..
Category 3 - Business, Finance, Real estate, etc..
Purchase date/price/from
Estimate Selling price
Sold to date/price/name
DNS

 

[BostonDomainer]

Perhaps I should have been more specific. I was more curious on methodology rather then a systematic approach. Yes, Excel delimited column break up etc. is a systematic approach. My question, however, (forgive initial approach) was to engage in the ideological approachability in the reasoning for such approaches (if that makes sense).