Three index funds in a trench coat pretending to be diversification
Report created on Jun 23, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 60.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 25.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 15.00%
This portfolio is basically a three-ETF cosplay of diversification: big slab of S&P 500, smaller slab of “rest of world,” and then a bonus hit of NASDAQ 100 on top like extra hot sauce. It looks tidy, but it’s basically one bet in three wrappers: global stocks with an extra obsession for large US growth. With only three positions, there’s nowhere to hide when that style goes out of fashion. This structure is easy to follow, but simplicity here comes at the cost of nuance. The whole thing behaves like a slightly over-caffeinated US equity fund that occasionally remembers other countries exist.
Growth
Historically, the portfolio has done the classic “US bull market hero” thing: turning $1,000 into $2,258 with a 15.47% CAGR. That’s very solid, but it slightly trailed the broad US market while just about beating the global market. Translation: all this “clever” tilting mostly recreated a plain US index with extra steps. The max drawdown of -26.69% was deep enough to hurt and long enough to be annoying, taking 14 months to crawl back. Past performance is like old vacation photos: nice to look at, but they don’t guarantee the next trip goes as smoothly.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “It’ll probably be fine… but also maybe not.” Monte Carlo just runs thousands of what-if scenarios to see how often this mix wins or loses. The median outcome of $2,671 after 15 years is a polite “don’t expect recent returns to repeat.” The range from about $905 to $7,802 shows the roulette-wheel nature of 100% stocks: anything from disappointment to victory lap is on the menu. Simulations rely on past data, so if markets decide to go off-script, the model will look just as surprised as everyone else.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is easy to summarize: stocks, and then more stocks, backed up by some additional stocks. It’s a 100% equity portfolio wearing a “balanced” label, which is generous at best. No bonds, no cash sleeve, no alternatives — just one asset class doing all the work and all the panicking when volatility spikes. That’s great when markets climb, but there is zero built-in shock absorber. If this is “balanced,” then a roller coaster with one giant loop is “gently undulating transport.” The ride is simple, but nobody should be shocked when it occasionally drops fast.
Sectors
- Technology 35%
- Financials 13%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 7%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this thing is a tech-forward, growth-flavored buffet. Technology at 35% dominates the stage, with everything else sharing the leftovers. Financials, telecom, and consumer discretionary show up just enough to pretend this isn’t a single-theme portfolio. The result is a portfolio that lives and dies by how the high-growth, high-expectation names behave. When that crowd is beloved, returns look brilliant; when sentiment turns, this sector mix can feel like holding a bag of bricks. It’s less “broad economy exposure” and more “if innovation stumbles, everything stumbles together.” Subtle, it is not.
Regions
- North America 77%
- Europe Developed 9%
- Asia Developed 4%
- Japan 4%
- Asia Emerging 3%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, this is basically Team North America with some reluctant guest appearances. With 77% in North America, the rest of the world is treated like a side quest: Europe gets single digits, Asia barely registers, and emerging markets are background extras. The label says “total international,” but the overall mix says “America first, second, and probably third.” This kind of home-region overweight works beautifully when the home team wins, but it also means the portfolio is heavily tied to one economic, regulatory, and political ecosystem. Global diversification is technically present, but spiritually half-hearted.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 47%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 1%
Market-cap breakdown screams “only the cool kids allowed”: 47% mega-cap, 34% large-cap, with mid-caps tossed a small bone and small-caps barely existing at 1%. It’s basically a fan club for the world’s most famous companies. That’s comfortable, but also means the portfolio is heavily linked to whatever narrative is driving the giants — hype, regulation, concentration risk, and all. There’s almost no exposure to smaller, scrappier businesses that sometimes drive future growth or behave differently in rough markets. It’s like building a sports team with only superstars and no bench players: impressive, but fragile when things go weird.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.95%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 5.29%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.79%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.08%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.56%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.40%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.10%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.77%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.62%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.28%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 29.85%
Look-through holdings reveal the punchline: the same megacap names are lurking everywhere. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice, because why not), Broadcom, Tesla, Meta — it’s an all-star overlap festival. The NASDAQ tilt just pours more sauce on the same entrée the S&P 500 already serves. Hidden concentration shows up when one company appears in multiple funds, so the true exposure to these giants is bigger than it looks at first glance. This is marketed as three funds, but functionally it’s one very opinionated bet on the current tech-and-megacap royalty staying on their throne.
Factors
Factor profile is hilariously “accidentally sensible.” Everything sits near neutral: value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all hover around market-like levels. Factor exposure is basically the ingredient list behind performance — and this kitchen is serving “just index, but with extra US.” There’s no deliberate lean into classic tilts like deep value, tiny companies, or ultra-stable names. The portfolio will largely rise and fall with whatever broad equity markets do, especially US large growth. For something that screams tech and megacap in the holdings, the factor stats are surprisingly vanilla. Someone either got lucky or refused to get fancy.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 60.00% 59.5% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 25.00% 21.3% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 15.00% 19.2%
Risk contribution is where the NASDAQ 100 quietly admits it’s the drama queen. At 15% weight, it’s contributing over 19% of total risk, while the 60% S&P 500 sleeve contributes proportionally and the international piece actually under-punches its weight. Risk contribution shows which holdings move the emotional roller coaster, not just who’s largest on paper. Here, one smaller slice is using a megaphone while the rest stay relatively measured. When volatility spikes in that high-growth segment, the whole portfolio feels it. You don’t see the fireworks in the allocation pie chart, but they’re definitely wired in backstage.
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 section grudgingly gives this portfolio a gold star: it’s basically on the curve, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.71 versus 0.92 for the mathematically “best” mix using the same ingredients. The efficient frontier is just the geeky line showing the best return per unit of risk from your existing holdings. Being near it means the weighting choices aren’t wildly inefficient or random. This combo squeezes most of the juice from the three-fund setup, even if the juice is still 100% equity risk. It’s a rare case where the spreadsheet approves, even if the diversification story is thinner than advertised.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.50%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.28%
Dividend yield at 1.28% is basically pocket change: not zero, but not exactly “income strategy” territory. The NASDAQ 100 contribution at 0.40% is especially allergic to paying out, while the international fund does most of the heavy lifting with a 2.50% yield. Dividends here are more of a side effect than a design feature. This portfolio is clearly built for capital growth, not regular cash flow. When markets are kind, the total return can look great, but anyone dreaming of living off these payouts alone would quickly discover it’s more snack money than rent money.
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) 0.05%
Costs are almost suspiciously low, with a total TER of 0.05%. That’s “did I forget a decimal?” cheap. The S&P 500 and international funds are basically charging lunch money, and even the NASDAQ 100 tilt isn’t gouging. Fees aren’t what’s holding this portfolio back; if anything, this is a masterclass in not setting money on fire via expense ratios. It’s like accidentally sitting in business class and discovering you paid the economy fare. The main critique isn’t cost — it’s what those very cheap dollars are actually buying in terms of risk and concentration.
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