Non-pharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) including resource allocation, risk communication, social distancing and travel restriction, are mainstream actions to control the spreading of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) worldwide. Different countries implemented their own combinations of NPIs to prevent local epidemics and healthcare system overloaded. Portfolios, as temporal sets of NPIs have various systemic impacts on preventing cases in populations. Here, we developed a probabilistic modeling framework to evaluate the effectiveness of NPI portfolios at the macroscale. We employed a deconvolution method to back-calculate incidence of infections and estimate the effective reproduction number by using the package EpiEstim. We then evaluated the effectiveness of NPIs using ratios of the reproduction numbers and considered them individually and as a portfolio systemically. Based on estimates from Japan, we estimated time delays of symptomatic-to-confirmation and infection-to-confirmation as 7.4 and 11.4 days, respectively. These were used to correct surveillance data of other countries. Considering 50 countries, risk communication and returning to normal life were the most and least effective yielding the aggregated effectiveness of 0.11 and - 0.05 that correspond to a 22.4% and 12.2% reduction and increase in case growth. The latter is quantified by the change in reproduction number before and after intervention implementation. Countries with the optimal NPI portfolio are along an empirical Pareto frontier where mean and variance of effectiveness are maximized and minimized independently of incidence levels. Results indicate that implemented interventions, regardless of NPI portfolios, had distinct incidence reductions and a clear timing effect on infection dynamics measured by sequences of reproduction numbers. Overall, the successful suppression of the epidemic cannot work without the non-linear effect of NPI portfolios whose effectiveness optimality may relate to country-specific socio-environmental factors.