High dividend tilt with diversified US equity core and moderate growth and small cap value sleeves
Report created on Sep 1, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 50.00% -
GP Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF
GPIQ - US38149W6306 22.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
SCHG - US8085243009 11.00% -
AV Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
AVUV - US0250728773 8.50% -
SC Schwab International Equity ETF
SCHF - US8085248057 8.50%
This portfolio is a concentrated but fairly straightforward all‑equity mix built mostly around one core holding. About half sits in a broad US dividend ETF, with a little over one‑fifth in a Nasdaq‑100 options‑overlay income fund. The rest is split across US large growth, US small‑cap value, and a global ex‑US equity ETF. So the structure leans heavily on US stocks, dividends, and equity income, with some growth and small‑cap exposure layered on. A setup like this can behave differently from a plain total‑market index: income and defensive tilts may smooth the ride somewhat, while the growth and small‑cap sleeves keep some upside sensitivity to stronger markets.
Growth
Over the period shown, $1,000 grew to about $1,816, which translates into a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) near 23.6%. CAGR is like your average speed on a road trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. That result is strong in absolute terms, though it lagged both the US and global equity benchmarks by roughly 2–2.5 percentage points per year. The portfolio’s maximum drawdown, or worst peak‑to‑trough fall, was about -17%, slightly milder than the US market but close to the global market. It took around three months to recover, which is a fairly normal healing time for a moderate correction. As always, this is a short, favorable window, and past returns do not predict future performance.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses the portfolio’s past behavior to simulate many possible futures, a bit like running 1,000 alternate timelines. Each simulation shakes returns and volatility randomly based on history, then shows where a $1,000 investment might end up after 15 years. The median outcome lands around $2,865, with a wide “likely” band from roughly $1,842 to $4,256. There’s also a fairly broad tail: in 5% of cases values dip near where they started, and in another 5% they exceed $7,000. The average simulated annual return is just over 8%, much lower than the recent historical CAGR, underlining that unusually strong short‑term performance should not be assumed to continue.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio is in stocks, with no bonds or alternatives in the mix. That means full exposure to equity market ups and downs, without the natural dampening that bonds or cash‑like assets can provide. From an asset‑class perspective, this is more aggressive than a traditional “balanced” stock‑bond blend, even though the underlying stocks include many mature, dividend‑paying companies. The diversification, therefore, comes from mixing different flavors of equity—dividend, growth, small‑cap value, and non‑US—rather than mixing different asset classes. This structure can work well in long, strong equity cycles, but investors need to remember that in broad equity sell‑offs, an all‑stock allocation typically moves down in tandem with the market.
Sectors
- Technology 27%
- Health Care 14%
- Consumer Staples 12%
- Financials 10%
- Energy 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 9%
- Industrials 8%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Basic Materials 1%
- Utilities 1%
Sector exposure is reasonably spread out, with technology at about 27% and health care, consumer staples, financials, and energy all having meaningful slices. There is no single sector dominating the landscape, and even tech—while the largest—sits at a level often seen in broad US benchmarks. This balance is helpful because sector cycles can be very different: for example, defensive areas like staples and health care often hold up better in recessions, while tech or consumer discretionary can be more sensitive to growth and interest rates. A mix like this means performance is not overly tied to one specific economic story, and it aligns fairly well with what’s usually considered a diversified sector profile.
Regions
- North America 92%
- Europe Developed 5%
- Japan 2%
- Asia Developed 1%
Geographically, the portfolio is heavily tilted toward North America, at about 92%, with modest exposure to developed Europe and a small slice in Japan and other developed Asia. In practice, that means company earnings, currency exposure, and political risk are all largely anchored in one region. This is quite typical for portfolios centered on US‑listed equity funds and has historically benefited from strong US market performance. However, it also means that if US markets lag other regions for a stretch, the portfolio may not fully capture gains elsewhere. Compared with a truly global equity benchmark, this is a clear home‑country tilt that trades some international diversification for deeper exposure to the US market.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 48%
- Mega-cap 22%
- Mid-cap 19%
- Small-cap 6%
- Micro-cap 5%
By market capitalization, there is a solid core in larger companies: around 70% is in mega‑ and large‑caps combined, similar to many broad indices. At the same time, there’s a meaningful allocation to mid‑caps and a smaller but noticeable slice of small and micro‑caps. Larger companies tend to be more stable and widely followed, while mid‑ and smaller‑caps can be more volatile but sometimes offer stronger growth or value opportunities. This blend means the portfolio’s behavior won’t be as “mega‑cap dominated” as some benchmark‑tracking funds, and periods when smaller companies outperform could add extra juice. On the flip side, smaller segments can amplify drawdowns when markets are stressed.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 3.00%
Part of fund(s):- Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
AA Apple Inc. 2.63%
Part of fund(s):- Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
AB Abbott Laboratories 2.45%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
MR Merck & Company Inc 2.40%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
AM Amgen Inc 2.40%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
KO The Coca-Cola Company 2.14%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.01%
Part of fund(s):- Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
HD The Home Depot Inc 1.97%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
VZ Verizon Communications Inc 1.97%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
CV Chevron Corp 1.96%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
- Top 10 total 22.93%
Looking through ETF top‑10 holdings, several well‑known names such as NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Coca‑Cola, and Home Depot appear with combined weights around 2–3% each. These positions are held indirectly through multiple funds, meaning their true influence can be larger than any single ETF’s weight might suggest. Overlap analysis only covers a bit under 40% of portfolio value, so hidden concentration could be slightly higher than it appears. Still, no single underlying company dominates overall exposure, which is positive from a concentration standpoint. The mix of technology, health care, consumer, and telecom names in the look‑through list also echoes the diversified sector profile seen at the portfolio level.
Factors
Factor exposure shows notable tilts. Value sits high at about 68%, meaning the portfolio leans toward stocks trading at cheaper valuations relative to fundamentals, which can behave differently from pure growth styles. Yield is also elevated at 65%, and low volatility is similarly high, both consistent with a focus on dividend‑paying and more stable companies. Momentum is on the lower side, suggesting less emphasis on stocks that have recently been big winners. Size and quality come out around neutral, so they’re broadly market‑like. Together, this mix often leads to a profile that can be somewhat more defensive in down markets, but may lag during sharp, growth‑led rallies when high‑momentum stocks race ahead.
Risk contribution
-
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 50.00% 42.9% -
Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF
Weight: 22.00% 24.5% -
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Weight: 11.00% 13.1% -
Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Weight: 8.50% 11.6% -
Schwab International Equity ETF
Weight: 8.50% 7.9%
Risk contribution, which measures how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, looks fairly concentrated in the largest positions. The main dividend ETF, at 50% weight, contributes about 43% of the overall risk, which is roughly proportional. The Nasdaq income ETF and the US large‑cap growth fund together add almost 38% of the risk on only 33% of the weight, making them slightly higher‑octane components. The small‑cap value ETF is the most “punchy,” with 8.5% weight but nearly 11.6% of the risk, typical for smaller, value‑oriented stocks. Overall, the top three funds drive over 80% of total risk, so portfolio behavior is still dominated by that core trio.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationSchwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETFGoldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF
Correlation describes how closely different holdings move together; a correlation near 1 means they tend to rise and fall in tandem. Here, the Nasdaq income ETF and the US large‑cap growth ETF move almost identically, which isn’t surprising given their shared focus on large US growth names. That close linkage means they add less diversification relative to each other than their separate labels might suggest. During strong tech and growth rallies, this pair may boost performance together, but in tech‑led pullbacks they’re likely to sag at the same time. The other holdings, which tilt more toward dividends, value, and international stocks, help provide some differentiation around that tightly linked growth cluster.
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 risk‑return, or efficient frontier, analysis shows the current mix sitting below the frontier by just over one percentage point of return at its current risk level. The Sharpe ratio—return per unit of risk—of about 1.39 is good, but the model suggests that with different weights across the same funds, it could be higher, around 1.7. The minimum‑variance version slightly lowers risk while keeping expected returns quite close, also with a healthy Sharpe. In plain language, the existing lineup of ETFs is capable of a somewhat more efficient balance between risk and reward, purely through reweighting, though the current setup is already in a generally attractive zone rather than far off the mark.
Dividends
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.20%
- Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF 9.90%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.00%
- Schwab International Equity ETF 3.00%
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
- Weighted yield (per year) 4.08%
The overall dividend yield of roughly 4.1% is meaningfully higher than broad US market averages, largely thanks to the dividend ETF and the high‑payout Nasdaq income strategy. Yield is the portion of return coming in as cash distributions rather than price changes. In this portfolio, dividends and income can play a big role in total return, especially in sideways markets where price appreciation is modest. It’s also worth noting that not all holdings are high yielders; the large‑cap growth sleeve, for example, has a much lower yield, reflecting its focus on companies that reinvest profits. This blend gives a strong income backbone while keeping some growth‑oriented exposure.
Ongoing product costs
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
- Goldman Sachs Nasdaq-100 Core Premium Income ETF 0.29%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Schwab International Equity ETF 0.06%
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.12%
Costs are low overall, with a total expense ratio (TER) around 0.12% per year. TER is the annual fee charged by each fund as a percentage of assets, quietly deducted inside the ETF. Most holdings are in very low‑cost index funds, and even the higher‑fee small‑cap value and Nasdaq income ETFs are modestly priced compared with many active funds. Low ongoing costs matter because they compound over time; every 0.1% not paid in fees stays invested and can grow. In this case, the fee drag is small enough that it supports, rather than hinders, long‑term performance. This is a clear strength of the portfolio’s design.
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!
Compare your holdings
How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?
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