Global growth portfolio with strong US tilt and quality bias but higher tech and Korea concentrations
Report created on Aug 22, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
VE Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
VEA - US9219438580 35.00% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 30.00% -
FL Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
FLKR - US35473P7107 15.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 15.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 5.00%
This portfolio is a five‑ETF, all‑equity mix with a clear core‑satellite structure. Around two‑thirds sits in broad US and developed‑market index funds, forming a diversified core. The remaining third is split across a South Korea fund, a NASDAQ 100 growth sleeve, and a US dividend ETF as smaller satellites. This blend combines wide global coverage with a few targeted tilts, rather than a long list of niche holdings. Structurally, that keeps the portfolio simple to understand and track while still adding some distinct flavor in terms of country focus, growth exposure, and dividend orientation. The balanced risk score and high diversification rating line up well with what you’d expect from a concentrated list of broad, low‑cost equity ETFs.
Growth
Historically, $1,000 grew to about $2,367 over the period, giving a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.91%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths out all the bumps in between. This return very closely matched the US market and clearly beat the global market benchmark. The trade‑off was a max drawdown of roughly -29%, deeper than the US market’s decline. That drawdown took around nine months to bottom and over a year to recover, which is typical for an all‑equity mix. Just 27 days made up 90% of total returns, highlighting how a small number of strong days can drive long‑term performance.
Projection
The forward projection uses Monte Carlo simulation, which basically re‑runs thousands of “what if” scenarios based on historical returns and volatility. It doesn’t try to predict specific events; it samples patterns from the past to create a range of plausible futures. Here, the median outcome shows $1,000 growing to about $2,842 over 15 years, with a wide range from roughly $980 to $7,782 at the extremes. The average annualized return across all simulations is 8.2%, and about three‑quarters of simulations end positive. These numbers are useful for understanding uncertainty, but they’re still just models: they can’t account for totally new environments or structural market changes.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio is in stocks, so there’s no built‑in ballast from bonds or cash. An all‑equity allocation naturally means larger swings in value, both up and down, compared with a mix that includes more defensive asset classes. Relative to broad “balanced” benchmarks that typically blend stocks and bonds, this portfolio is more growth‑oriented. The flip side is that, over long horizons, equities have historically offered higher potential returns than fixed income, albeit with deeper and more frequent drawdowns. The current structure keeps things straightforward: there’s no complexity from alternative assets, derivatives, or leverage, which makes it easier to grasp where risk and return are coming from.
Sectors
- Technology 36%
- Financials 14%
- Industrials 12%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Health Care 8%
- Telecommunications 7%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is clearly tilted toward technology at 36%, noticeably higher than many broad global benchmarks. Financials, industrials, and health care together form a solid secondary layer, while areas like consumer staples, energy, utilities, and real estate are relatively modest. A tech‑heavy profile often benefits disproportionately during periods of innovation, growth optimism, or falling interest rates, but can be more sensitive when rates rise or when markets rotate toward more defensive or value‑oriented areas. On the positive side, the portfolio still holds all major sectors, so it’s not narrowly concentrated in a single theme, even if tech and related industries are the dominant driver of sector‑level risk and returns.
Regions
- North America 54%
- Asia Developed 20%
- Europe Developed 17%
- Japan 7%
- Australasia 2%
Geographically, the portfolio is anchored in North America at 54%, but that’s meaningfully lower than a pure US‑only approach. There’s substantial developed‑Asia exposure, especially through South Korea, plus developed Europe and a smaller slice of Japan and Australasia. Compared with a typical global market‑cap index, this mix puts extra weight on Korea and slightly reduces the US share. That offers a different economic and currency blend than just holding a US index. Country‑level cycles, policy shifts, and currency moves can all influence returns, so this regional spread helps avoid having everything tied to one single economy while still leaning strongly toward developed markets rather than emerging ones more broadly.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 49%
- Large-cap 33%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 2%
Market‑cap exposure is heavily skewed to the largest companies: about 49% in mega‑caps and 33% in large‑caps. Mid‑caps and small‑caps together make up less than a fifth of the portfolio. This is similar to many mainstream index funds, where giant companies dominate simply because they’re worth more in the market. Bigger firms often have more stable earnings, diversified businesses, and easier access to financing, which can translate into somewhat smoother returns than very small, speculative names. At the same time, this structure means less exposure to the potential higher‑growth, higher‑volatility behavior that smaller companies sometimes provide, keeping the portfolio closer to a “big company” global equity profile.
True holdings
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 5.41%
Part of fund(s):- Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
- Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
-
SS Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 4.07%
Part of fund(s):- Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
- Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 3.54%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc. 3.17%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.29%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.22%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AS ASML Holding N.V. 0.82%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 25.30%
The look‑through data, based on ETF top‑10 holdings, shows meaningful exposure to a handful of large tech and semiconductor names. SK Hynix, Samsung Electronics, NVIDIA, Apple, and Microsoft alone make up a noticeable chunk of the covered slice. Several companies appear via multiple ETFs, for instance large US tech names showing up in both S&P 500 and NASDAQ 100 exposures. Overlap like this can quietly increase concentration: even if each fund looks diversified on its own, the combined portfolio can lean heavily on a small set of global champions. It’s worth noting that actual overlap is likely higher than reported because only top‑10 ETF positions are included in this look‑through.
Factors
Factor exposure is fairly balanced overall, with one clear highlight: a tilt toward quality at 65%. Factor exposure is like checking which “traits” your holdings share, such as cheapness, trend strength, or balance‑sheet strength. A quality tilt usually means more profitable, stable businesses with stronger cash flows and lower debt, which historically have held up better in tougher markets. Other factors, including value, size, momentum, and yield, sit in neutral territory, so they behave broadly like the overall market rather than displaying strong tilts. Low volatility comes in slightly below neutral, suggesting the portfolio doesn’t especially favor the least volatile stocks and may move more in line with broader equity market swings.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 35.00% 31.3% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 30.00% 26.6% -
Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
Weight: 15.00% 21.9% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 15.00% 17.4% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 5.00% 2.9%
Risk contribution looks at how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ from simple weight. Here, the three biggest positions account for nearly 80% of total risk. The South Korea ETF is particularly notable: at 15% weight it contributes over 21% of risk, meaning each dollar there adds more variability than the core funds. The NASDAQ 100 slice also contributes more risk than its weight suggests, which aligns with its growth and tech tilt. In contrast, the US dividend ETF adds less risk than its size would imply. This pattern shows how a smaller number of more volatile or concentrated positions can dominate the overall risk picture.
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 analysis compares your current mix to the best risk‑return trade‑offs possible using the same ETFs with different weights. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.74, which is below both the optimal portfolio (1.03) and the minimum‑variance mix (0.95). Sharpe ratio is a way of measuring return per unit of risk, after accounting for the risk‑free rate. Being 1.35 percentage points below the frontier at the same risk level means that, historically, a different combination of these five funds could have delivered similar returns with less volatility, or higher returns at similar volatility, without adding any new holdings.
Dividends
- Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF 2.50%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.00%
- Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 2.50%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.76%
The overall dividend yield is about 1.76%, combining a higher‑yielding dividend ETF and South Korea exposure with lower‑yield components like the NASDAQ 100. Dividend yield is the annual cash payout as a percentage of price, and it can provide a modest ongoing income stream on top of price gains. Compared with classic income‑focused portfolios, this yield is moderate because of the strong tilt toward growth and mega‑cap tech stocks, which typically reinvest more earnings rather than paying them out. Over time, reinvested dividends can still make a meaningful contribution to total return, even when the starting yield looks relatively modest.
Ongoing product costs
- Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF 0.09%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.07%
Costs are a clear strength here. The total expense ratio (TER) across the portfolio averages about 0.07%, which is very low by any standard. TER is the annual fee charged by a fund, and even small differences add up when compounded over many years. The largest positions sit in some of the cheapest funds, while the more specialized ETF still carries a reasonable fee. This alignment with low‑cost index investing best practices supports better long‑term outcomes because more of the portfolio’s gross return is kept rather than paid out in fees. It’s a solid structural advantage that quietly works in the background every single year.
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