Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

Globetrotting ETF collector with a side quest for shiny metals and slightly confused risk taking

Report created on Apr 25, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio looks like someone started with three sensible core funds and then went on an ETF tasting tour. About half the money lives in broad, boring building blocks, while the rest is scattered across tiny satellite bets on single countries, niche themes, and multiple flavors of silver. It’s diversified in the “lots of line items” sense, not necessarily in the “coherent strategy” sense. The result is a portfolio that can’t decide if it wants to be a disciplined core index setup or a hobbyist’s collection of interesting ideas. Structurally it works, but it has the vibe of a fridge filled with leftovers from too many different recipes.

Growth Info

Historically, the portfolio has done pretty well on paper: $1,000 turning into $2,339 with a 13.23% CAGR is nothing to be ashamed of. But the US market quietly walked past with a 15.63% CAGR, leaving this mix lagging by 2.40% a year while taking a very similar gut punch in 2020. That’s the annoying part: nearly the same max drawdown, but less reward. Beating the global market by a hair is nice, but given all the complexity and exotic tilts, this is a lot of moving parts just to roughly match a boring global index.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “This could work out fine… or just meh.” A median outcome of $2,631 after 15 years on $1,000, with a 7.26% simulated annual return, is comfortably ahead of cash but not exactly heroic. Monte Carlo is just fancy dice-rolling based on past behavior, so it’s more weather forecast than prophecy, but the message is clear: plenty of upside, plenty of disappointment potential. A 74.5% chance of a positive result is nice, yet the wide range ($1,114 to $6,242) shows this portfolio is signing up for a decent amount of uncertainty for that level of expected payoff.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    80%
  • Bonds
    18%
  • Other
    2%

On paper, the asset mix screams “balanced,” with 80% in stocks, 18% in short-term Treasuries, and 2% hiding in “other” (aka shiny silver stuff). In practice, it’s more like a growth portfolio wearing a slightly conservative jacket. The bond slice is short-term and fairly tame, acting more like a volatility dampener than a real counterweight. That 2% “other” is basically a mood swing tied to precious metals. So the structure nods toward risk control, but most of the real action is still in equities, with the bond piece quietly sweeping up after the party rather than enforcing any rules.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    20%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Industrials
    11%
  • Basic Materials
    9%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Health Care
    5%
  • Telecommunications
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, this portfolio is trying to look diversified, but the tech and financials addiction is pretty obvious. With technology sitting at 20% and financials at 15%, it’s leaning hard into the parts of the market that throw big parties in bull runs and bad hangovers in crises. Industrials and materials add another chunky dose of economically sensitive exposure, so “defensive” sectors are basically background extras. This isn’t a portfolio that glides through recessions; it rides the economic roller coaster and hopes the safety bar holds. The spread looks textbook on a pie chart, but the risk is clustered in the cyclical, mood-swing parts of the market.

Regions Info

  • North America
    44%
  • Europe Developed
    11%
  • Asia Emerging
    9%
  • Australasia
    6%
  • Latin America
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, this looks “global,” but it still thinks the world orbits North America at 44%. There’s a respectable spread to developed Europe, emerging Asia, Australasia, and random slices of Latin America and Africa, often delivered via those single-country ETFs. It’s like someone tried to correct a US bias by throwing darts at a world map. The result is a portfolio that technically spans the globe but does so in a slightly chaotic way, mixing broad global exposure with oddly specific regional bets that can swing hard without moving the overall needle much in a sensible way.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    26%
  • Mega-cap
    22%
  • Mid-cap
    20%
  • Small-cap
    8%
  • Micro-cap
    3%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The size mix is surprisingly reasonable at first glance: mega and large caps together at 48%, mid-caps at 20%, and a sprinkling of small and micro caps. But the reality is more like a barbell with a wobbly middle. You’ve got big, index-style behemoths on one side and racy growth and niche plays on the other. Mid-caps sit there doing the adult supervision but not really dominating the show. This setup means a lot of the stability story still comes from the giants, while the edgy return drama is outsourced to smaller, more volatile names that can move a lot without always delivering proportionate upside.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • iShares Semiconductor ETF
  • Sprott Physical Silver
    1.50%
  • Apple Inc
    1.13%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.87%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • iShares Semiconductor ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    0.84%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Commonwealth Bank of Australia
    0.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI Australia ETF
  • BHP Group Ltd
    0.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI Australia ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    0.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Nextracker Inc. Class A Common Stock
    0.51%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
  • Top 10 total 9.01%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look-through data reveals a familiar “hidden overlap” problem: big names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and TSMC show up across multiple ETFs, even though none of them are single-stock positions. It’s the classic “I diversified by owning five funds that all secretly love the same ten companies” move. Add in the metals theme via miners and physical silver, and you end up with a portfolio that pretends to be wildly varied while quietly circling the same tech and metals heavyweights. Coverage is only 26.6%, so overlap is probably worse than it looks — this is just the visible tip of the duplication iceberg.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 59%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 81%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 59%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 57%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 99%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%

Factor exposures are estimated using statistical models based on historical data and measure systematic (market-relative) tilts, not absolute portfolio characteristics. Results may vary depending on the analysis period, data availability, and currency of the underlying assets.

Factor-wise, this portfolio is shockingly normal, almost disappointingly so given the eccentric ETF menu. Value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all sit in a “neutral” band, basically mimicking the market’s personality. Factor exposure is like the ingredient label behind the returns, and here it reads “vanilla with a few sprinkles.” For all the single-country bets, thematics, and metals, the hidden drivers are not doing anything particularly spicy. It behaves like a generic broad equity mix with extra complexity layered on top, which is mildly ironic given how many “interesting” funds are in the cart.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 17.00%
    19.2%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 15.00%
    16.0%
  • iShares Semiconductor ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    9.2%
  • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    7.1%
  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    6.8%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 58.4%

Risk contribution exposes who’s actually steering the roller coaster, and it’s not the tiny satellite funds. The S&P 500 ETF and the total international fund together shoulder over 35% of total risk, exactly as expected. But that 5% semiconductor ETF punching out 9.23% of risk is the loud guest at the party, with clean energy and Australia also contributing more drama than their weights suggest. The top three risk contributors making up 44.43% of portfolio risk means a lot of the daily emotional volatility traces back to a small handful of positions while the rest mostly just ride along.

Redundant positions Info

  • Sprott Physical Silver
    iShares Silver Trust
    High correlation
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

The correlation picture calls out a couple of “why did we double up on that?” moments. Holding both Sprott Physical Silver and the iShares Silver Trust is basically owning the same mood swing twice in slightly different packaging. Similarly, pairing mid-cap growth and small-cap growth that move almost in lockstep adds more lines on the statement than true diversification. Correlation just means things move together — and here, some of the “different” holdings are just clones in disguise. When markets get ugly, those twins don’t help each other; they just fall together, making the portfolio look busier without actually spreading risk.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

The efficient frontier chart is where this portfolio gets properly roasted. At its current risk level, it sits a chunky 6.53 percentage points below what could be achieved just by rearranging the same ingredients. The Sharpe ratio of 0.55 versus a max of 1.11 screams “inefficient,” meaning it’s taking more stress for less payoff than necessary. Even the minimum variance setup with a Sharpe of 0.69 looks more rational. In plain English: with the exact same funds, a less chaotic weight mix could either boost returns for the same risk or cut risk for similar returns. This is like driving a Ferrari in first gear.

Dividends Info

  • iShares MSCI Indonesia ETF 4.30%
  • iShares MSCI Ireland ETF 2.80%
  • iShares MSCI Peru ETF 1.40%
  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF 2.90%
  • SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security 0.20%
  • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF 1.30%
  • iShares Cybersecurity and Tech ETF 0.10%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF 1.60%
  • iShares Semiconductor ETF 0.40%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.50%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 1.80%
  • Vanguard Short-Term Treasury Index Fund ETF Shares 3.90%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.70%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 2.10%

The overall yield clocks in at 2.10%, which is the financial equivalent of a polite nod, not a standing ovation. Some of the regional funds and the Treasury ETF bring in decent income, but then you’ve got growthy and thematic funds contributing basically pocket lint in dividends. The result is a portfolio that clearly isn’t built around income, yet pretends to care a little via those higher-yielding bond and international slices. It’s fine, just a bit half-hearted: not low enough to ignore, not high enough to be a real feature. Dividends here are more side effect than core design.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares MSCI Indonesia ETF 0.59%
  • iShares MSCI Ireland ETF 0.50%
  • iShares MSCI Peru ETF 0.59%
  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF 0.50%
  • SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security 0.45%
  • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF 0.41%
  • iShares Cybersecurity and Tech ETF 0.47%
  • iShares Silver Trust 0.50%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF 0.39%
  • iShares Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Short-Term Treasury Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.21%

On fees, this portfolio mostly behaves like it knows what it’s doing. A total TER of 0.21% is pretty reasonable, especially given the circus of single-country and thematic ETFs sprinkled on top. The core Vanguard pieces are dirt cheap and do most of the heavy lifting, while the exotic stuff quietly siphons off higher fees in the background. It’s not daylight robbery, but paying 0.5–0.6% for tiny slices of Indonesia, Peru, and Ireland is definitely “enthusiast” behavior. Overall though, costs are under control — this could have been a far more expensive way to achieve this level of organized chaos.

What next?

Ready to invest in this portfolio?

Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.

Select broker

Create your own report?

Analyze your portfolio

Join our community!

Join Discord

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

AVDV vs VOO DRAM vs VOO SPMO vs VXUS DRAM vs SOXX

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