Concentrated tech and finance mashup pretending to be a calm balanced portfolio
Report created on Jun 13, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 35.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 30.00% -
AV Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
AVUV - US0250728773 20.00% -
XL Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund
XLF - US81369Y6059 15.00%
This “balanced” portfolio is 100% stocks with a big bet on one index, one foreign blanket, one factor tilt, and one sector. That’s not balanced; that’s four levers duct-taped together. The structure screams “I like equity risk but want it to look grown-up on paper.” With 35% in a NASDAQ 100 tracker and another 15% in a financials sector slice, the whole thing is basically a high-octane equity barbell dressed up as “moderately diversified.” It’s coherent enough not to be chaos, but the risk score of 4/7 is doing some heavy marketing work compared to what’s actually under the hood.
Growth
One or more local-currency benchmark funds are unavailable for this report.
Performance-wise, this thing has been riding the bull pretty hard: $1,000 turning into $2,370, with a 16.52% CAGR versus 13.66% for the global market. So yes, it beat the benchmark, but it didn’t do it gently. A -26.69% max drawdown with more than a year to hit bottom and over a year to claw back is not what most people picture when they hear “balanced.” CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is like your average trip speed; drawdown is how far your stomach drops on the steepest hill. This portfolio clearly enjoys the rollercoaster more than its label suggests.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “You might be fine… or not.” Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of running a thousand alternate timelines to see where a $1,000 stake might land. Median outcome at $2,843 after 15 years and an 8.17% average annual return looks decent, but the range from about $1,028 to $7,677 is wide enough to drive a truck through. Past returns feed these simulations, so if the last few years were unusually kind to tech-heavy, risk-on portfolios, the crystal ball is a bit optimistic. Yesterday’s weather, not a prophecy.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset classes? There’s exactly one: stocks, 100%. That’s like calling a diet “balanced” because you eat cake in many shapes. No bonds, no cash buffer, no diversifiers — just pure equity exposure masquerading as a “balanced investor” setup. The label and the contents don’t match. When markets go up, this works great. When they go down, there is nowhere in this portfolio that isn’t wearing the same “I’m a stock” t-shirt. Asset class diversification exists so not everything panics at once; this portfolio opted out of that memo entirely.
Sectors
- Technology 28%
- Financials 27%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Telecommunications 7%
- Energy 5%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Health Care 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector breakdown: tech at 28% and financials at 27% means over half the equity risk is just two corners of the market. That’s less “broad market” and more “I really like screens and spreadsheets.” The dedicated financials slice stacks on top of whatever is already inside the other funds, so the tilt is intentional or accidentally very committed. When those sectors shine, it looks smart; when they both get punched together, it looks like a theme portfolio that lost its warning label. This isn’t sector diversification, it’s a duet with a faint backing choir.
Regions
- North America 71%
- Europe Developed 11%
- Asia Developed 5%
- Japan 5%
- Asia Emerging 4%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geography-wise, this is “US first, world as a side quest.” About 71% in North America, with the rest sprinkled lightly across Europe, Japan, and bits of Asia and emerging markets. The international fund pulls its weight, but the combined NASDAQ plus financials chunk yanks everything back toward home. This is classic home bias wrapped in a slightly more global-looking shell. It’s better than pure domestic, sure, but calling this “global” would be generous. If the US has a rough decade, the portfolio’s escape routes are more like side doors than exits.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 38%
- Large-cap 28%
- Mid-cap 12%
- Small-cap 11%
- Micro-cap 10%
Market cap exposure is surprisingly spicy: 38% mega-cap plus 28% large-cap sounds standard, but then it drops into 12% mid, 11% small, and a chunky 10% micro. That micro-cap slice is where things get weird — smaller companies tend to move like they’ve had too much caffeine. The NASDAQ 100 drives the mega-cap glam, while the small-cap value ETF drags the portfolio into the scrappier end of town. It’s a barbell between giants and ankle-biters, with not much in between to smooth the ride when the small stuff throws a tantrum.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 2.93%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 2.47%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.81%
Part of fund(s):- Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 1.73%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.68%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
JP JPMorgan Chase & Co 1.67%
Part of fund(s):- Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.52%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 1.24%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.23%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 1.15%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 17.44%
Look-through holdings show the usual suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, plus TSMC and some big financials like JPMorgan and Berkshire. These names pop up through multiple ETFs, so the true exposure is higher than the neat percentages suggest, especially since only top-10 positions are counted. This means the portfolio quietly doubles down on a handful of megacap darlings while pretending to be diversified through funds. When a few tech titans and big banks decide to have a bad quarter, they’ll drag the entire show, not just a small slice.
Factors
Factor-wise, this thing is aggressively… average. Everything — value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility — hovers around “neutral,” i.e., market-like. That’s almost impressive given there’s a dedicated small-cap value ETF and a NASDAQ growth monster in the same mix. Factor exposure is like the ingredient label explaining what really drives returns; here, the label basically reads “shrug.” The one real insult is wasted opportunity: you’ve taken strong-tilt ingredients and blended them into a smoothie that behaves like a generic market clone, just with more sector and cap quirks.
Risk contribution
-
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 35.00% 39.7% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 30.00% 24.5% -
Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Weight: 20.00% 22.6% -
Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund
Weight: 15.00% 13.3%
Risk contribution exposes who’s really running the show. The NASDAQ 100 chunk is 35% of the weight but 39.65% of the risk, and the small-cap value fund is 20% weight but 22.57% of the risk. Together with the international fund, the top three holdings drive 86.73% of all portfolio volatility. The financials slice, despite being concentrated, is actually the calmest of the four in risk terms. Risk contribution is that rude friend who tells you which positions are actually shaking the portfolio, and here it’s clear: the “core” funds are throwing most of the punches.
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 efficient frontier, this portfolio weirdly redeems itself. With a Sharpe ratio of 0.75 versus a max of 0.95 and a min-variance of 0.81, it sits right on or near the curve. Translation: for this particular cast of funds, the mix isn’t stupid — it’s just inherently punchy. The efficient frontier is the “best you can do” line for return per unit of risk using the current ingredients. The fact that this portfolio is basically on it means the inefficiency isn’t in the maths; it’s in the decision to only play in a very racy sandbox.
Dividends
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.60%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
- Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund 1.50%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.50%
The portfolio’s total yield limps in at 1.50%, which is cute but not exactly income-generating. The international fund does the heavy lifting at 2.70%, while the NASDAQ 100 cheerfully hands out a whopping 0.40%. This is a capital-growth-first setup that pretends dividends are an optional side salad. If someone were expecting “balanced” to mean “I can live off the cash flow,” this payout would be a rude wake-up call. Dividends here are basically a participation trophy, not a core part of what this portfolio is built to do.
Ongoing product costs
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund 0.09%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.13%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio doesn’t trip over itself. A total TER of 0.13% is respectably low — almost suspiciously sensible compared to everything else going on. You’ve got one slightly pricier active-ish small-cap value fund at 0.25%, but it’s balanced by dirt-cheap broad ETFs. Fees are under control, which at least means the portfolio isn’t lighting money on fire while it leans into concentrated equity risk. If only the same restraint shown on fees had been applied to the “balanced” label and sector bets.
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