Two index funds in a trench coat pretending to be a diversified global strategy
Report created on May 28, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 70.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 20.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 10.00%
This “balanced” portfolio is basically one big S&P 500 sandwich with a NASDAQ frosting and a tiny sprinkle of foreign stocks for decoration. Seventy percent S&P 500 plus 20% NASDAQ 100 is like ordering a burger and then adding a side of more burger. The 10% international sleeve is trying its best, but it’s basically a rounding error against the US mega-cap parade. Structurally, it’s simple and clean, but also wildly one-dimensional. The portfolio looks diversified on a fund list, yet under the hood it’s just different flavors of the same growth-heavy US equity story marching to the same drumbeat.
Growth
Historically, this thing absolutely ripped: $1,000 turning into $2,306 with a 16.12% CAGR is “you picked the right decade” territory. You very slightly beat the US market and comfortably beat the global market, but that came with a -26.75% drawdown that took 14 months to crawl back from. That’s not a paper cut; that’s a full-on punch to the face. Also, 90% of returns came from just 27 days, meaning performance depended on a tiny handful of good moments. Past data is helpful, but it’s basically yesterday’s weather — great story, not a guarantee of tomorrow.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection is the buzzkill friend reminding everyone the party doesn’t last forever. Simulations spit out a “most likely” $1,000 → $2,652 in 15 years, with a wide possible range from “barely above water” at $1,023 to “lottery scratcher went well” at $7,440. Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of saying “we shook the historical numbers in a random jar 1,000 times.” The median 7.83% annualized return is way tamer than your recent 16% victory lap. Translation: the past decade’s tech-fueled rocket is not the base case forever, no matter how good it felt.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is simple: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. That’s not a blend, that’s an opinion. For a portfolio wearing a “Balanced Investors” label, this is basically an all-equity growth engine with no brakes installed. When everything is in stocks, you’re riding one asset class through every market mood swing — no bonds, no cash buffer, no real shock absorbers. It’s efficient if the goal is maximum long-term equity exposure, but let’s not pretend this is some smooth, balanced glide path. It’s a pure stock roller coaster with front-row seating.
Sectors
- Technology 38%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Financials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Industrials 8%
- Health Care 7%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this is a tech-centered universe with 38% in technology and a solid chunk more in telecommunication and consumer discretionary — basically “stuff powered by chips and subscriptions.” Energy, utilities, real estate, and basic materials are all tiny side characters in the background. You’ve built a portfolio that lives and dies on growth-y, innovation-heavy sectors, while the boring, defensive parts of the market barely get a cameo. It works great when the world loves tech and growth; it stings when sentiment flips and suddenly everyone wants dull, steady, and cash-heavy instead of shiny and volatile.
Regions
- North America 90%
- Europe Developed 4%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Japan 2%
- Asia Emerging 1%
Geographically, this portfolio screams “America or bust” with 90% in North America and only token positions elsewhere. Europe, Japan, and emerging Asia are basically just background extras waving from the crowd. You’re getting almost the entire story from one economic region and one currency regime, even though a huge chunk of global market value and growth lives elsewhere. It’s a classic US-home-bias setup: looks safe because it’s familiar, but it’s still concentration. When US mega-caps sneeze, this portfolio catches pneumonia, and there’s not much help coming from overseas.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 48%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 1%
Market-cap exposure is pure “big boys only” energy: 48% mega-cap, 34% large-cap, with mid-caps as sidekicks and small-caps barely existing at 1%. This is like investing only in stadium headliners and ignoring every opening act. Mega-caps can be stable-ish, but they’re also the most crowded trades on earth, heavily owned by everyone and their robo-advisor. There’s almost no exposure to the smaller, more idiosyncratic parts of the market that can behave differently. So when the giants move together, the whole portfolio goes with them — there’s not much diversification coming from size differences here.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.24%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 5.98%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.45%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.88%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.28%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.88%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.71%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.52%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 0.99%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 34.84%
The look-through holdings just confirm the joke: you didn’t build a portfolio, you built a tribute band to the Magnificent Seven. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Broadcom, Tesla, Meta, Berkshire — all stuffed in via overlapping ETFs. NVIDIA alone is over 7%, and those big names show up across both S&P and NASDAQ funds, so hidden concentration is very real. Overlap is officially “understated,” which is a polite way of saying the actual top exposures are probably even chunkier. When these names work, you look like a genius. When they miss, everything hurts at the same time.
Factors
The factor profile is hilariously neutral across the board — value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility all hover around “market-like.” This isn’t a clever factor play; it’s basically the default setting of capitalism. Factor exposure is like the ingredient label behind the portfolio, and here it reads “mostly everything in average proportions.” No bold tilt toward cheap stocks, steady dividend payers, or low-volatility plodders, and no over-the-top bet on trends or tiny companies. The behavior is going to echo the broad market: when the market zigs, this portfolio zigs right along with it.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 70.00% 67.4% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 20.00% 24.9% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 10.00% 7.7%
Risk contribution is brutally straightforward: three holdings, 100% of the risk. The S&P 500 ETF does most of the heavy lifting at 67% of risk, roughly in line with its 70% weight. The NASDAQ ETF, though, punches above its weight — 20% of assets but nearly 25% of total risk, thanks to its extra juice in tech and growth. The international fund is a quiet background actor: 10% weight but under 8% of risk. In practice, almost all the mood swings come from the US large-cap complex, especially the NASDAQ slice throwing elbows in the volatility department.
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 basically says, “You accidentally did something smart.” The portfolio sits on or very near the frontier, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.73 versus 0.92 for the optimal mix using the same ingredients. That means the collection of funds is fine; it’s the weighting that’s just slightly suboptimal, not tragically misbuilt. The max Sharpe portfolio delivers similar return with a bit less risk, so the current setup isn’t squeezing every last drop of risk-adjusted juice from its holdings. Still, for a simple three-ETF pile, it’s remarkably efficient — suspiciously so, even.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.05%
The dividend profile is firmly in the “don’t quit your day job” category at a 1.05% yield. The NASDAQ 100 slice barely pays anything, which is what happens when you load up on growth companies that prefer buybacks and reinvestment to handing out cash. The international fund tries to raise the average with a higher yield, but at only 10% weight it can’t move the needle much. This isn’t an income machine; it’s a total-return, price-movement-driven story. Anyone expecting steady checks from this lineup is basically asking a sports car to tow a trailer.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%
Costs are where this portfolio actually behaves like it read a book once. A 0.06% total TER is impressively low — you’re paying bargain-bin fees for front-row seats to the global equity show. The NASDAQ fund is the priciest at 0.15%, but even that is hardly offensive in ETF land. The rest is cheap Vanguard goodness doing what it says on the tin. Fees aren’t what will hurt you here; market swings and concentration will. Still, credit where it’s due: you didn’t light money on fire with expensive wrappers. You saved your risk budget for everything else.
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