This portfolio is almost entirely in growth-focused assets, with 96% in stocks and 4% in crypto. Within equities, it blends broad global market funds, explicit factor ETFs, a dividend tilt, and some thematic exposure to semiconductors. The largest single position is a U.S. small-cap value ETF at 16%, followed by a diversified all-equity ETF and a U.S. large-cap growth ETF at 15% each. This mix creates a core‑and‑satellite feel: broad “core” holdings surrounded by more specialized tilts. Structurally, it’s clearly equity-led rather than balanced between stocks and bonds. That makes it more sensitive to stock market cycles, but also gives it more direct participation in equity growth and earnings trends over time.
Over the period shown, a hypothetical $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $1,732, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 23.61%. CAGR is like the average yearly “speed” of growth over the full journey, smoothing out bumps along the way. This has been slightly ahead of both the U.S. and global market benchmarks, which delivered around 21–22% annually over the same window. The portfolio’s maximum drawdown, at about -19%, was very similar to the U.S. market’s pullback. That means the extra return came without a noticeably deeper worst decline, though this is a short, very strong market phase and may not reflect more typical environments.
The Monte Carlo projection uses historical returns and volatility to simulate many possible 15‑year paths for $1,000, giving a range of outcomes instead of a single forecast. Here, the median outcome lands near $2,794, with most simulations falling between roughly $1,800 and $4,200, and a wider possible band stretching from about $1,000 to almost $7,800. This spread illustrates uncertainty: the same portfolio can lead to very different results depending on future markets. The overall average simulated annual return is about 8.11%, with a 73.7% chance of ending above the initial $1,000. As always, this relies on past patterns and cannot guarantee anything about what actually happens next.
From an asset class view, this is a high-equity portfolio: 96% stocks and 4% crypto, with no bonds or cash-like assets in the mix. Equities are typically the main growth engine in long-term portfolios, but they also drive most of the ups and downs. Crypto adds an extra return driver that has historically been very volatile and loosely tied to stock fundamentals. Relative to more traditional multi‑asset blends, this structure leans firmly into growth assets and away from explicit stabilizers like bonds. That can be effective when growth assets are rewarded, but drawdowns may also be sharper because there is less of a cushion from defensive asset classes when markets fall together.
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector-wise, technology stands out at 28%, amplified by the dedicated semiconductor ETF. Financials, industrials, and consumer discretionary each contribute meaningful slices, while health care, energy, consumer staples, and telecom provide additional variety. Smaller allocations to materials, utilities, and real estate round out the picture, and the 4% crypto slice sits outside traditional sectors. Compared with a broad global equity benchmark, this tilt toward tech—especially semiconductors—can boost returns when innovation and chip demand are strong, but it also tends to increase sensitivity to interest rates, cycles in electronics demand, and regulatory shifts. The presence of dividend and value funds helps add balance to this growth-heavy tilt.
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, about 69% of the portfolio sits in North America, with most of the rest spread across developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, and smaller emerging regions. This creates a clear, but not extreme, U.S. and North American tilt compared with global market indexes, where the U.S. is big but not quite this dominant. The remainder gives some exposure to non‑U.S. currencies, policies, and business cycles, especially via dedicated international quality, value, and emerging markets funds. This structure has historically benefited from U.S. market strength, while still tapping into growth and value opportunities abroad, but it also means results remain strongly tied to North American economic and policy conditions.
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
The market cap breakdown is quite spread out: roughly 56% in mega- and large‑cap names, 19% mid‑cap, and a notable 21% in small and micro‑caps. That’s more exposure to the smaller side of the market than a traditional global index, which tends to be dominated by mega‑caps. Larger companies often bring more stability and liquidity, while smaller ones can be more volatile but sometimes offer higher growth potential or stronger value characteristics. This mix means portfolio behavior is influenced both by big global leaders and by more niche or domestically focused companies, adding another layer of diversification beyond geography and sector, but also slightly raising sensitivity to risk in smaller companies.
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through ETF top holdings, the most visible concentrations are in a handful of tech and semiconductor giants: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, AMD, Micron, TSMC, Amazon, and Alphabet all appear across multiple funds. Combined, these names make up a noticeable slice of the portfolio, even before considering any overlap outside the top‑10 lists. There is also a 4% exposure to bitcoin through a trust product. Because only ETF top‑10 holdings are captured, actual overlap is likely higher than shown. This means that while the portfolio holds many funds, some individual companies and the bitcoin position still drive a meaningful share of its overall behavior.
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.
On factor exposure, value stands out with a “High” score of 62%, driven by explicit value and dividend strategies and the U.S. small‑cap value fund. Factor exposure is essentially how much the portfolio leans into certain characteristics that academic research links to long‑term returns. A value tilt often does better when cheaper, out‑of‑favor companies recover relative to more expensive growth names, but it can lag during strong growth or momentum-driven markets. The other factors—size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility—are all near neutral, meaning they behave roughly like the broad market on those dimensions. Overall, the portfolio expresses a clear value bias on top of an otherwise balanced factor profile.
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its simple weight. Here, the semiconductor ETF is only 10% of the portfolio but contributes about 20% of total risk, more than twice its size. That reflects the high volatility and strong price swings in that theme. The large-cap growth and small-cap value funds both contribute risk roughly in line with their weights, while the all-equity and equal-weight S&P funds actually contribute proportionally less risk. With the top three holdings accounting for just over half of overall risk, the portfolio has some concentration in how risk is generated, particularly through the semiconductor sleeve.
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 optimization chart compares the current mix with an “efficient frontier,” which shows the best achievable return for each risk level using these same holdings in different weights. The current portfolio sits below this frontier at its risk level and has a Sharpe ratio of 1.13, while the optimal combination reaches 1.59 with slightly higher return and slightly lower risk. The minimum variance version shows considerably lower risk but also lower expected return, yet still a higher Sharpe than the current mix. This suggests that, purely from a math standpoint, reweighting the existing funds could improve the trade‑off between volatility and expected return without changing what’s held.
The overall dividend yield for the portfolio is about 1.43%, coming from a mix of higher‑yielding factor and dividend funds and lower‑yielding growth and tech exposures. Dividend yield is the annual cash payment from holdings as a percentage of their price, and it can contribute a meaningful share of total return over long periods. Here, a dedicated U.S. dividend ETF and the value strategies help lift yield, while growth‑ and tech‑heavy funds sit toward the lower end, some with well under 1% yields. This puts the portfolio’s income level roughly in line with or slightly below many broad equity benchmarks, emphasizing growth and factor tilts over pure income generation.
The portfolio’s total expense ratio (TER) averages around 0.21%, which is quite low for an actively tilted, multi‑ETF equity mix. TER is the annual cost charged by funds, expressed as a percentage of invested assets, and it comes out of returns automatically, like a small yearly haircut. Individual fund costs range from just 0.04% for the large‑cap growth ETF up to 0.35% for the semiconductor ETF, with the factor and emerging markets funds sitting in the middle. Overall, these costs are impressively contained for a portfolio combining global exposure, factor strategies, and a crypto trust, which supports better long‑term compounding compared with similar but more expensive approaches.
Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.
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.
Your feedback makes a difference! Share your thoughts in our quick survey. Take the survey