Two index funds one brain cell and somehow still pulling its weight without style
Report created on Apr 28, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
FS Fidelity Total Market Index Fund
FSKAX - US3159116934 60.00% -
FT FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
FTIHX - US31635V6386 40.00%
This portfolio is the IKEA flat-pack of investing: two big vanilla index funds bolted together and called a day. Sixty percent home market total stock, forty percent total foreign, then hands off the wheel. It’s simple to the point of boredom, which is both its strength and its roast material. There’s no nuance, no tactical anything, just a binary choice between “here” and “everywhere else.” The upside is there’s not much to screw up; the downside is there’s also nothing clever going on. Structurally, this is basically “own capitalism, shrug, and go outside,” whether or not that was the plan.
Growth
Historically, this thing has behaved like a competent but slightly lazy student in a smart class. Turning $1,000 into $3,349 with a 13.06% CAGR is nothing to whine about, but the pure US market walked right past it at 15.14%. At the same time, it edged out the global market, so it’s basically the kid who underperforms the curve at home but looks impressive on a world stage. Max drawdown at -34.41% was nearly identical to the benchmarks, proving diversification did not save it from a proper faceplant in 2020. As usual, past data is yesterday’s weather — informative but hardly a prophecy.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation — think “1,000 alternate timelines for your money” — paints a future that’s… fine. Median outcome of $2,757 after 15 years on $1,000 invested is decent but not fireworks territory. The likely range from about $1,856 to $4,158 shows plenty of room for both mild disappointment and pleasant surprise. The fun bit is the “welcome to volatility” range: in nasty scenarios you barely crawl to $1,018, while in lucky universes you push $7,489. Translation: the portfolio is playing a normal stock-market game, not rigged for disaster or glory. Simulations, like horoscopes, are illustrative, not guarantees.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class breakdown: 100% stocks, zero subtlety. For something labeled “Balanced,” this is about as balanced as a one-wheeled bike. You either ride the equity rollercoaster or you don’t ride at all. No bonds, no cash buffer, no diversifiers — just pure ownership of businesses and the mood swings that come with them. That’s great when markets behave, less cute when volatility spikes and there’s nothing defensive in the mix. From an educational standpoint, this is a textbook example that “balanced” in a risk label does not necessarily mean balanced in asset types; here, it’s all-in on growth and drawdowns.
Sectors
- Technology 25%
- Financials 16%
- Industrials 12%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Health Care 9%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Basic Materials 5%
- Energy 4%
- Utilities 3%
- Real Estate 3%
Sector-wise, the portfolio is basically a mirror of modern capitalism: tech, finance, industrials, and consumer names steering the ship. Twenty-five percent in technology screams “we believe in software and vibes,” while 16% in financials makes it very dependent on interest-rate whiplash. Industrials and consumer discretionary round out the cyclical flavor, with defensive areas like staples, utilities, and real estate left in the support role instead of center stage. This isn’t a bizarre tilt so much as a default one — you get the index’s personality, not your own. When the economic engine revs, it participates; when it stalls, this lineup doesn’t exactly float above the mess.
Regions
- North America 63%
- Europe Developed 15%
- Japan 6%
- Asia Developed 6%
- Asia Emerging 5%
- Australasia 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, this portfolio is “US first, rest-of-world also invited.” About 63% in North America and 37% scattered across Europe, Japan, developed Asia, and emerging regions is actually surprisingly reasonable for a US-centric setup. It avoids the classic “America or bust” disaster, but let’s not pretend it’s some precision-engineered global design — it’s just following market-cap gravity. The non-US slice is a mixed bag of developed and developing markets, so there’s some genuine diversification, but nothing surgical. When the US sneezes, this portfolio still catches a cold; it just has a few foreign tissues lying around to help.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 44%
- Large-cap 31%
- Mid-cap 18%
- Small-cap 5%
- Micro-cap 1%
The market cap spread is straight-down-the-middle index behavior: 44% mega-cap, 31% large-cap, then a taper off into mid, small, and a token 1% micro-cap. Translation: the portfolio is mostly run by corporate giants with a sprinkling of mid-sized strivers and a tiny dusting of chaos gremlins. There’s no heroic small-cap tilt, no deliberate bet on underdogs, just whatever the global market naturally serves up. The result is solid stability from the mega-caps with enough smaller names to add some zip — but not enough to give the returns a radically different personality from a plain total-market fund.
Factors
Factor-wise, this portfolio is almost aggressively average, which is unintentionally impressive. Value, size, momentum, and quality all humming around neutral screams “I did not pick sides; I just bought the market.” The only real tilt is higher low volatility, meaning it quietly leans a bit toward steadier names instead of drama queens. Yield is on the low side, so it’s not exactly a cash-flow machine — more of a capital-growth type that tosses you some occasional pocket change. Overall, the factor profile is accidentally sensible: no wild bets, no glaring contradictions, just a balanced ingredient list sprinkled with a mild safety bias.
Risk contribution
-
Fidelity Total Market Index Fund
Weight: 60.00% 64.5% -
FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
Weight: 40.00% 35.5%
Risk contribution is where the illusion of choice fully dissolves. The 60% US fund contributes about 64.5% of portfolio risk, slightly over-punching its weight, while the 40% international fund chips in 35.5%. In other words, the US side is doing most of the emotional damage on bad days and most of the heavy lifting on good ones. There’s no hidden ticking time bomb here — just the straightforward reality that the bigger position drives the bus. It’s a decent example of how risk and weight usually track each other in a simple portfolio, right up until correlations or volatility spike and rewrite the script.
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, this portfolio actually behaves like it read a textbook. Its Sharpe ratio of 0.57 lags both the optimal mix and even the minimum-variance portfolio, but the whole structure still sits right on or near the efficient frontier. Quick decode: Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk, like pay per unit of emotional turbulence. Being on the frontier means you’re not wasting risk with this particular set of building blocks — you’re already using them about as sanely as possible. So the roast here is simple: it’s boringly efficient, not thrillingly brilliant, but at least it’s not leaving easy points on the table.
Dividends
- Fidelity Total Market Index Fund 1.00%
- FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 2.60%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.64%
Dividends here are a polite side dish, not the main course. A blended yield around 1.64% puts this portfolio firmly in the “growth first, income if it happens” category. The US fund barely scrapes 1%, while the international sleeve does more of the yield lifting but still isn’t exactly raining cash. Anyone expecting this to behave like an income machine would be disappointed; this is more like reinvest-and-wait territory. The upside is it avoids the classic trap of chasing high yield at the expense of quality. The downside is that, in terms of cash flow, this thing whispers instead of sings.
Ongoing product costs
- Fidelity Total Market Index Fund 0.02%
- FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 0.06%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%
Costs are where this portfolio accidentally flexes. A total expense ratio of 0.04% is so low it’s almost rude to complain. You’re basically paying couch-cushion money for full global equity exposure. That’s “you clicked the right funds by luck or design” territory. Of course, low cost doesn’t magically fix everything else, but it does mean the portfolio isn’t bleeding from hidden fee paper cuts every year. Think of it as flying economy with a cheap ticket but somehow still getting a decent seat — unglamorous, efficient, and entirely functional, if not particularly exciting to brag about.
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