Globally diversified stock portfolio with heavy United States tilt and modest single stock risk pockets
Report created on Mar 28, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.
What type of investor this portfolio is suitable for
Balanced Investors
This setup lines up well with an investor who has a long time horizon, can tolerate meaningful ups and downs, and wants straightforward global stock exposure. Goals might include long‑term wealth building, retirement saving, or growing capital for major future needs rather than near‑term spending. Emotional tolerance for 20–30% drawdowns is important, because there’s no built‑in shock absorber from bonds or alternatives. At the same time, this person likely values simplicity, broad diversification through low‑cost index funds, and a small sleeve for higher‑risk growth ideas. Patience, consistency, and a focus on decades instead of months are key traits for this profile.
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 61.18% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 30.09% -
AM Amazon.com Inc
AMZN - US0231351067 4.15% -
HO Robinhood Markets Inc
HOOD - US7707001027 3.25% -
BE Bloom Energy Corp
BE - US0937121079 1.27% -
VM Vanguard Federal Money Market Fund Investor Shares
VMFXX - US9229063006 0.06%
The portfolio is almost entirely built from two broad stock ETFs, with a big tilt to a domestic large‑cap index and a smaller but still meaningful slice in international stocks. On top of that, there are three individual growth names plus a tiny cash‑like money market fund. Structurally this is mostly a simple, buy‑and‑hold equity portfolio with a small “satellite” sleeve in single stocks. That design keeps the core diversified and rules‑based, while allowing some extra upside (and risk) from concentrated positions. A general takeaway: this kind of “core plus satellite” approach can work well if the satellite allocations stay small enough that they don’t dominate overall risk.
Growth
Over the last few years, a $1,000 starting amount grew to about $1,529, implying a 9.57% compound annual growth rate (CAGR). CAGR is like calculating your average speed on a road trip: it smooths out bumps along the way. The portfolio basically matched the US market (slight 0.10% lag) and clearly beat the global market by 1.73% a year, which is a strong relative result. The trade‑off is notable drawdowns: the worst peak‑to‑trough fall was about -27.3%, roughly in line with major equity sell‑offs. That level of volatility is typical for an all‑stock mix, so it fits a balanced‑but‑growth‑oriented profile.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Every investable dollar here sits in stocks, with essentially no allocation to bonds, real estate funds, or other diversifiers. That makes the portfolio straightforward and growth‑focused but also fully exposed to equity market ups and downs. A more “balanced” mix in textbook terms often includes some fixed income to cushion drawdowns and smooth the ride, especially during recessions or market panics. Staying 100% in stocks can make sense for long horizons and strong risk tolerance, but it does require emotional discipline when markets fall. One general takeaway: if big swings in account value would cause stress or panic selling, adding a modest defensive slice can help.
Sectors
- Technology 25%
- Financials 17%
- Consumer Discretionary 13%
- Industrials 11%
- Health Care 8%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Energy 4%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector exposure looks broadly diversified, with notable allocations across technology, financials, consumer areas, industrials, health care, and smaller slices in more defensive groups like utilities and staples. The sector mix is fairly close to major global benchmarks, which is a good sign that the underlying ETFs are doing their job. A roughly quarter‑sized tech allocation is typical for modern equity markets but does mean sensitivity to interest rates and innovation cycles. Cyclical sectors can boost returns in economic expansions but usually fall harder in recessions. Overall, the sector spread is well‑balanced and aligns closely with global standards, helping avoid over‑reliance on any single part of the economy.
Regions
- North America 72%
- Europe Developed 11%
- Japan 5%
- Asia Developed 4%
- Asia Emerging 4%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, the portfolio is heavily tilted toward North America at about 72%, with the rest spread across developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, and small slices of emerging markets. That’s more home‑biased than a pure global market weight, where US/North America typically sits closer to 60%. This has been beneficial in recent years because US equities have outperformed many other regions. The flip side is that long‑term returns become more tied to one economy, currency, and policy regime. The positive news: there is still decent global diversification in place. The main question is whether this level of home tilt fits the desired comfort with foreign exposure.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 46%
- Large-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 2%
The market cap breakdown leans strongly toward mega‑ and large‑cap companies, with only a small allocation to mid‑caps and a sliver in small‑caps. Large, established firms often bring more stability, stronger balance sheets, and better liquidity than smaller peers, which can reduce extreme volatility. On the other hand, small‑caps sometimes deliver higher long‑term growth but with bigger drawdowns and wider performance swings. The current mix is very similar to broad global benchmarks, which generally skew to the biggest companies. That alignment is beneficial because it keeps idiosyncratic small‑company risk modest while still giving some exposure to the “up‑and‑coming” segment of the market.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.48%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.06%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.03%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.88%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.57%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.51%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.47%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
- Top 10 total 28.80%
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings, the biggest underlying exposures cluster in mega‑cap US technology and growth names like Amazon, NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta. Amazon shows explicit overlap, with a direct single‑stock position plus exposure via the ETFs, pushing its combined weight above 6%. This kind of hidden concentration matters because a single company can influence returns more than headline ETF weights suggest. The coverage only includes ETF top‑10 positions, so true overlap is likely higher in practice. The useful takeaway: when adding individual stocks that are already large index components, it’s worth checking if your conviction justifies the extra concentration in those specific businesses.
Factors
Factor exposure across value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility sits near neutral, meaning it behaves a lot like the broad market rather than making strong bets on any specific style. Factors are basically traits that help explain why some groups of stocks move differently from others, like preferring cheaper companies (value) or steadier ones (low volatility). A neutral profile suggests returns will mostly be driven by overall market direction and asset allocation choices, not style timing. That’s actually a strength for many long‑term investors: it avoids the risk of being heavily out of favor if one factor suffers a bad multi‑year stretch.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 61.18% 58.1% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 30.09% 24.2% -
Robinhood Markets Inc
Weight: 3.25% 8.4% -
Amazon.com Inc
Weight: 4.15% 6.3% -
Bloom Energy Corp
Weight: 1.27% 3.1% - Top 5 risk contribution 100.0%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to the overall ups and downs, which can be quite different from its simple weight. The main domestic ETF carries most of the risk, but in line with its size. The interesting part is the small stock positions: Robinhood and Bloom Energy together are about 4.5% of the portfolio yet contribute over 11% of the total risk, showing how volatile they are. Amazon also contributes more risk than its weight. This doesn’t mean they’re “bad,” just that they play an outsized role in turbulence. A useful check is whether that level of concentrated risk in a few names truly matches your conviction and comfort.
Risk vs. return
This chart shows the Efficient Frontier, calculated using your current assets with different allocation combinations. It highlights the best balance between risk and return based on historical data. "Efficient" portfolios maximize returns for a given risk or minimize risk for a given return. Portfolios below the curve are less efficient. This is informational and not a recommendation to buy or sell any assets.
Click on the colored dots to explore allocations.
On the risk‑return chart, the current mix sits noticeably below the efficient frontier, meaning it isn’t using its volatility as effectively as possible given the existing holdings. The Sharpe ratio of 0.54 is much lower than the max‑Sharpe and minimum‑variance portfolios, which both achieve better risk‑adjusted returns at dramatically lower risk levels using the same building blocks. The efficient frontier is simply the best trade‑off line you can get by reweighting current holdings. Being 7+ percentage points below it signals room to tweak position sizes—especially the risk‑heavy single stocks—so that either risk falls for similar expected return, or return improves for similar risk.
Dividends
- Vanguard Federal Money Market Fund Investor Shares 4.00%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.90%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 3.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.46%
The overall yield sits around 1.46%, coming from a mix of modest dividends in the domestic ETF, a higher yield from international stocks, and a small contribution from the money market fund. That’s on the lower side for an income‑focused investor but typical for a growth‑oriented, large‑cap equity allocation. Dividends matter because they provide a steady cash component that can be reinvested or used for spending, especially in flat markets where price gains are limited. Here, the total yield is more of a side benefit than a central feature. The main engine of return is expected capital appreciation rather than ongoing income.
Ongoing product costs
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.03%
Costs are impressively low, with total expense ratios hovering around 0.03–0.05% for the core ETFs. That’s far below many active funds and even below a lot of other index products. Over decades, small fee differences compound significantly, so keeping expenses tight is one of the most reliable ways to improve net returns without taking extra risk. This allocation is well‑aligned with best practices on cost control, and that’s a real strength. With such low ongoing fees, the main drivers of performance become market behavior and allocation choices, not drag from fund expenses. In terms of cost efficiency, you’re very much on the right track.
What next?
Ready to invest in this portfolio?
Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.
Create your own report?
Join our community!
The information provided on this platform is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as financial or investment advice. Insightfolio does not provide investment advice, personalized recommendations, or guidance regarding the purchase, holding, or sale of financial assets. The tools and content are intended for educational purposes only and are not tailored to individual circumstances, financial needs, or objectives.
Insightfolio assumes no liability for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the information presented. Users are solely responsible for verifying the information and making independent decisions based on their own research and careful consideration. Use of the platform should not replace consultation with qualified financial professionals.
Investments involve risks. Users should be aware that the value of investments may fluctuate and that past performance is not an indicator of future results. Investment decisions should be based on personal financial goals, risk tolerance, and independent evaluation of relevant information.
Insightfolio does not endorse or guarantee the suitability of any particular financial product, security, or strategy. Any projections, forecasts, or hypothetical scenarios presented on the platform are for illustrative purposes only and are not guarantees of future outcomes.
By accessing the services, information, or content offered by Insightfolio, users acknowledge and agree to these terms of the disclaimer. If you do not agree to these terms, please do not use our platform.
Instrument logos provided by Elbstream.
Help us improve Insightfolio
Your feedback makes a difference! Share your thoughts in our quick survey. Take the survey