This portfolio has only about 3 months of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it Roast mode 🔥

Diversified on paper mostly just owning the same global stocks three slightly different ways

Report created on Jun 3, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

Structurally this thing is the IKEA bookshelf of portfolios: three big generic equity funds stacked on top of each other and called “balanced.” Half is one core equity ETF, another 30% is a global ex-Canada fund, and the final 20% is a small‑cap value sprinkle so it feels “smart.” With only three months of history, any apparent precision is mostly vibes and recent market luck. The whole setup screams “I bought broad stuff and hoped the labels meant diversification.” It’s not awful, but it’s more copy‑paste than crafted: lots of overlap, very little nuance, and absolutely nothing in here that would behave differently when markets actually get interesting.

Growth Info

That 79.6% “CAGR” over three months is comedy material. CAGR is supposed to be a long‑term average growth rate; over a few months it’s just market sugar rush annualized into nonsense. The portfolio did rocket from $1,000 to $1,139, but so did almost everything else wearing an equity label. Both US and global benchmarks slightly outpaced it, which says this very “engineered” mix basically matched an off‑the‑shelf world tracker and still lagged. Max drawdown of only –3.6% sounds heroic, but over this tiny window it just means markets didn’t crash yet. Past data is useful, but three months is more yesterday’s weather than climate.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is pretending to be wise based on three months of market mood swings, which is generous. Monte Carlo is just: “what if we rerun thousands of alternate histories based on recent volatility and returns?” The median ending value of $2,722 after 15 years and a wide $933–$7,644 range basically says: “anything from meh to great is possible, thanks for coming.” With such a short sample, the 8% expected return is more historical guesswork than science. These simulations look clean and precise, but here they’re more like a sketch drawn on a napkin than a blueprint.

Asset classes Info

  • US Equity
    82%
  • Stocks
    19%

“Balanced” here clearly doesn’t mean what normal humans think it means. Asset classes? It’s just equity dressed up in three outfits: 82% labeled US equity and the rest lumped into generic “stocks.” No bonds, no real diversifiers, just one giant equity bet with a risk score of 4/7 pretending to be middle‑of‑the‑road. When everything is basically the same asset class, portfolio behavior in a real downturn is going to rhyme loudly across positions. Over a full cycle, this setup lives and dies with global stocks; the word “balanced” is more marketing costume than accurate description.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    21%
  • Financials
    19%
  • Industrials
    12%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    11%
  • Energy
    8%
  • Basic Materials
    7%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Telecommunications
    6%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector spread looks nice at first glance — tech, financials, industrials, discretionary all getting their turn on stage — but under the hood it’s just a world index cosplay. Tech at 21% and financials at 19% is basically “we own the big generic market, plus a side quest in smaller names.” Nothing here is truly differentiated: no deliberate sector avoidance, no bold tilt, just a softly market‑like blend. That’s fine if the goal is to be average, but let’s not pretend this sector mix is some handcrafted masterpiece. It’s more “whatever the indexes happen to own” than a thought‑through sector view.

Regions Info

  • North America
    67%
  • Europe Developed
    15%
  • Japan
    7%
  • Asia Developed
    4%
  • Asia Emerging
    3%
  • Australasia
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically this portfolio is that friend who swears they’re worldly because they went to New York once. North America at 67% dominates, with Europe and Japan getting the usual supporting roles and the rest of the world thrown in like garnish. For a Canadian client, the “ex‑Canada” piece is almost aggressively global‑but‑not‑here, which is cute, but overall this is just a standard developed‑markets‑heavy world allocation. Emerging regions barely register. It looks diversified on a pie chart, but it’s the same familiar economic blocs everyone else owns, not some radically differentiated global stance.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    35%
  • Large-cap
    24%
  • Mid-cap
    18%
  • Small-cap
    13%
  • Micro-cap
    7%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The market cap mix tries to be spicy: 35% mega‑cap, 24% large, then a smattering down the size spectrum with 13% small and 7% micro. That last bit is where the chaos lives. Small and micro‑caps are like the emotional support gremlins of a portfolio — fun when they’re up, feral when they’re not. Layer that onto a heavy mega‑cap core and you get a barbell that can swing harder than you’d expect from a “balanced” label. With only three months of data, the true behavior of those smaller names in stress is completely untested here.

True holdings Info

  • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market Index ETF
    12.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.87%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Apple Inc
    1.80%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.47%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    0.99%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Royal Bank of Canada
    0.91%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P/TSX Capped Composite
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    0.83%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.81%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.79%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI Index ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.66%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    • Vanguard Large-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    • iShares Core S&P Total U.S. Stock Market ETF
  • Top 10 total 22.86%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look‑through holdings reveal the punchline: the same giant names keep photobombing everything. A US total market ETF sits at 12.7% through the wrappers, and the usual suspects — NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet — are all quietly double‑dipping across funds. Overlap is probably even worse beyond the top‑10 slice we see. So while the portfolio wears three different ETF tickers, a lot of the money is just circling around the same global mega‑cap pond. It’s diversification theater: many logos, broadly the same underlying companies doing the heavy lifting.

Risk contribution Info

  • iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    Weight: 50.00%
    51.1%
  • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    Weight: 30.00%
    31.7%
  • Avantis CIBC Global Small Cap Value ETF
    Weight: 20.00%
    17.3%

Risk contribution is the “who’s actually shaking the ride” metric, and it’s brutally straightforward here: the two big core ETFs own the volatility spotlight. The 50% holding contributes 51% of total risk, the 30% piece adds almost 32%, and the supposedly spicier small‑cap value fund actually under‑punches at 17% risk from 20% weight. So the adventurous‑sounding tilt isn’t even the main troublemaker (yet). This is a classic case where the boring‑looking big funds quietly control the emotional roller coaster, and the satellite allocation mostly gets credit for being edgy without taking center‑stage risk.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard FTSE Global All Cap ex Canada Index ETF
    iShares Core Equity Portfolio
    High correlation

The correlation section basically outs the secret: the main global ex‑Canada ETF and the core equity portfolio move almost identically. Correlation is just how often two things zig and zag together; here it’s “twin siblings” levels, not distant cousins. So while there are three funds on the menu, two of them are ordering the same thing. In a calm market, that just looks tidy. In a downturn, it means multiple positions will likely slide in sync, making those pie‑chart slices feel like an illusion of choice rather than true independent drivers of returns.

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 quietly shames the current mix. The frontier is the curve of best possible return for each risk level using the same ingredients, just different weights. This portfolio sits 4.2 percentage points below that line at its risk level, which is the investing equivalent of running with a weighted backpack for no reason. Sharpe ratio — return per unit of risk — is 3.88 versus 4.35 for the optimal mix, so even just rearranging the existing ETFs could squeeze more out of the same volatility. It’s not disastrous, but it’s far from “as good as these holdings can be.”

What next?

Ready to invest in this portfolio?

Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.

Select broker

Create your own report?

Analyze your portfolio

Join our community!

Join Discord

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