Roast mode 🔥

Confused growth chaser mixes shiny themes with sensible cores then forgets to beat the basic index

Report created on Apr 17, 2026

Risk 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.

Positions

This portfolio looks like two different people built it and never spoke to each other. Half of it is boring, textbook stuff: broad US, small-cap growth, and international. The other half is “shiny object syndrome”: AI, rare earth metals, and medical gadgets. It’s a growth portfolio that can’t decide whether it wants stable compounding or a tech-fueled joyride. That split personality means risk is coming from a few flashy themes while the sensible side quietly does most of the heavy lifting. The takeaway: it’s not a disaster, but it’s definitely not a clean, intentional design. More “Pinterest mood board” than engineered portfolio.

Growth Info

You took equity-level pain and then politely declined equity-level gain. A 12% CAGR from 2020-2026 isn’t bad in isolation, but the US market did 14.46% in the same period while dropping less than you. That’s like running the same race, tripping more often, and still finishing behind. The global market even squeaked ahead of you with similar bruises. Max drawdown at -28.4% and a two-year recovery shows you signed up for a proper roller coaster. Past performance isn’t destiny, but here it loudly says: “You paid for growth risk and only got ‘meh’ growth reward.”

Projection Info

Monte Carlo simulation is basically running your portfolio through a thousand alternate universes and seeing how often you don’t cry. Median outcome of $2,759 after 15 years from $1,000 is decent, but not life-changing. There’s a wide spread: maybe barely above $1,000, maybe north of $8,000. That 8.3% average simulated return is lower than the backward-looking ~12% CAGR you saw historically, so the model is basically saying, “Don’t expect the recent party to continue at the same pace.” Past data is yesterday’s weather; these projections are just well-educated guesses, not guarantees.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes: 100% stocks, zero subtlety. This is a pure growth setup with no bonds, no cash buffer, nothing to stop the ride when markets decide to be dramatic. For a “growth” risk tag, that’s consistent, but it also means every tantrum in equity markets hits you straight in the face. No shock absorbers. All gas, no brakes. That’s fine if the time horizon is long and the stomach is strong, but it’s not exactly sophisticated risk management. The big picture: this is a one-asset-class bet pretending diversification within equities solves everything. It doesn’t.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    29%
  • Health Care
    17%
  • Basic Materials
    10%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Financials
    8%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    6%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector-wise, you’re basically saying, “Tech, heal me, and dig rare stuff out of the ground while you’re at it.” Technology at 29% plus those AI and NASDAQ tilts makes you very growth and innovation dependent. Health care at 17% and medical devices add another layer of fancy, high-margin risk. Materials at 10% with rare earths is a geopolitical and commodity drama magnet. There’s a token sprinkle of everything else, but the portfolio’s vibe is clear: if future innovation and industrial shifts stall, this setup sulks hard. It’s not unhinged, just unapologetically tilted toward the exciting stuff.

Regions Info

  • North America
    79%
  • Europe Developed
    6%
  • Asia Emerging
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    4%
  • Australasia
    3%
  • Japan
    2%
  • Latin America
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

Geographically, this is very much “USA first, everyone else can wave from the background.” North America at 79% is basically a polite way of saying the rest of the planet is a side quest. International exposure exists, but it’s almost a garnish rather than a real second pillar. Given how much of the world’s economic growth happens outside the US, this is a pretty loud home bias. It worked recently because US mega-caps have been on a heater, but that’s not a law of nature. The takeaway: you’re globally aware on paper, but practically running an American empire fan club.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    40%
  • Mega-cap
    25%
  • Mid-cap
    22%
  • Small-cap
    10%
  • Micro-cap
    2%

The market cap mix is actually one of the saner parts: 25% mega-cap, 40% large-cap, 22% mid, 10% small, 2% micro. So you’re not doing anything extreme like “all meme micro-caps” or “only trillion-dollar behemoths.” But that small-cap growth ETF definitely adds some extra spice that doesn’t always translate into better returns, especially when small caps underperform for long stretches. Think of this as a mostly grown-up size profile with a bit of “What if we hit it big?” energy creeping in around the edges. Reasonable structure, even if the themey stuff makes it noisier than it needs to be.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.11%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • iShares Future AI & Tech ETF
  • Apple Inc
    2.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.75%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.41%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • iShares Future AI & Tech ETF
  • Abbott Laboratories
    1.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF
  • Intuitive Surgical Inc
    1.25%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.94%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.94%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Top 10 total 15.55%

The look-through holdings basically confirm you worship at the altar of the Usual Tech Gods. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta… all in there, but mostly by accident through multiple ETFs. Real overlap is higher than shown because only top-10 holdings are counted, so what looks like diversification is partly just the same megacaps wearing different ETF costumes. You’re stacking exposure to the same giants via S&P 500, NASDAQ 100, AI, and growth sleeves. Translation: fewer independent bets than the fund list suggests. You’re not as diversified as the ticker salad implies; it’s more like a tech-heavy echo chamber.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 84%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 84%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 84%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
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 exposure is hilariously normal for a portfolio that looks so dramatic at first glance. Value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility — all basically neutral. Factor exposure is the “ingredients label” of what actually drives returns, and yours reads like: “Mostly market, nothing weird added.” That means despite the AI, rare earths, and growth funds, you’ve somehow landed on a very vanilla blend at the aggregate level. It’s either quietly competent or accidentally balanced, but either way it should behave a lot like the broad market in many regimes. Ironically, for something this flashy, the underlying factor profile is boringly sensible.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 21.05%
    18.8%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 13.16%
    16.1%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Weight: 13.16%
    14.9%
  • VanEck Rare Earth/Strategic Metals ETF
    Weight: 7.90%
    12.6%
  • iShares Future AI & Tech ETF
    Weight: 7.89%
    10.9%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 73.3%

Risk contribution shows who’s really shaking the table, and your flashy picks are putting in overtime. Small-cap growth is 13.16% of weight but 16.10% of risk. NASDAQ 100 is similar. The rare earths ETF is the real drama queen: 7.9% weight, 12.61% of risk — that’s way more chaos than its tiny slice suggests. Top three holdings drive about half the portfolio’s risk, so the rest are mostly passengers. This isn’t automatically bad, but it’s sneaky. If those growthy, tech-heavy chunks have a bad year, the “diversification” won’t save you nearly as much as the pie chart might claim.

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.

The efficient frontier chart is where your portfolio gets called out by math. Your Sharpe ratio — return per unit of pain — is 0.52, while an optimal mix of your existing ingredients could hit 0.88 with slightly higher returns and lower risk. That’s the annoying part: you already own the right building blocks, but the weights are kind of drunk. You’re 3.23 percentage points below the frontier at your risk level, which is finance-speak for “You’re leaving free performance on the table.” Reweighting the stuff you already hold could give you a smoother and better ride without adding anything new.

Dividends Info

  • iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF 0.40%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
  • VanEck Rare Earth/Strategic Metals ETF 1.30%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.50%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.40%

Total yield at 1.4% is basically a participation trophy. The Schwab dividend ETF is doing the heavy lifting with 3.4%, while most of the growthy stuff is like, “Dividends? Never heard of her.” This is clearly not a portfolio built for income; it’s built for growth and capital appreciation. Nothing wrong with that, but anyone expecting juicy cash flow from this setup is going to be underwhelmed. The dividend fund does at least add a slightly more mature, cash-generating flavor, but overall this is a “reinvest and wait” structure, not an “I’d like my paycheck from the market now” deal.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares U.S. Medical Devices ETF 0.40%
  • iShares Future AI & Tech ETF 0.47%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • VanEck Rare Earth/Strategic Metals ETF 0.54%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.16%

Costs are actually shockingly reasonable for something with this many niche toys. Total expense ratio at 0.16% is solid. The core funds are cheap; the themey stuff (AI, medical devices, rare earths) quietly hike the average but not to a ridiculous level. You basically managed to buy a bunch of specialized ideas without turning the fee line into a joke. Think of it as: “You picked some expensive desserts, but your main course was from the value menu.” The roast here is mild: you could shave a bit more by ditching high-fee toys, but you’re not torching money on costs.

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

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