Diversified target date core with strong growth tilt and efficient low cost building blocks

Report created on Apr 4, 2026

Risk profile

  • Secure
    Speculative

The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.

Diversification profile

  • Focused
    Diversified

The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.

Positions

The stand‑out feature here is the big core in a single fund: the Vanguard Target Retirement 2050 fund at over three‑quarters of the portfolio. Around another sixth sits in a broad US index fund, with the rest spread across a growth ETF, an international fund, a sector fund, and a few tiny satellite positions. This structure basically layers a simple all‑in‑one solution with some extra growth tilts on top. That’s relevant because most of your outcomes will be driven by that main target‑date fund, not the smaller holdings. A general takeaway: once a core fund dominates like this, changes to the satellites tweak behavior rather than completely reshaping risk and return.

Growth Info

Over the last decade, $1,000 grew to about $3,635 with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.82%. CAGR is the “average yearly speed” of growth over the full period. Compared with the US market, the portfolio slightly lagged by 0.32% a year but beat the global market by just over 2% a year, which is a solid outcome. The max drawdown of about –32% during early 2020 was slightly milder than both benchmarks, showing decent downside resilience. Still, that drop was sharp and fast, underlining that this is very much an equity‑heavy, growth‑oriented mix. As always, these numbers are backward‑looking; future returns and drawdowns can differ a lot from this history.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses past return and volatility patterns to simulate 1,000 different 15‑year paths for a $1,000 starting investment. Think of it as rolling the dice on markets many times to see a range of plausible futures rather than one forecast. The median outcome lands around $2,726, with a “middle” range from about $1,796 to $3,986 and a wide possible band up to roughly $7,229. The average simulated annual return of 7.83% is noticeably lower than the historical 13.82% CAGR, which is a healthy, conservative assumption. The key limitation: this method leans heavily on historical patterns, and real‑world markets can deliver very different shocks and trends.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    92%
  • Bonds
    8%

Asset‑class‑wise, you’re about 92% in stocks and 8% in bonds. That’s aggressive for a “balanced” risk score, but it fits the long horizon implied by a 2050 target date. Stocks drive growth but also bring large swings; bonds act as a stabilizer, like a shock absorber in a car. Compared with many blended benchmarks, this is clearly tilted toward growth and away from short‑term stability. The positive here is alignment with long‑term wealth building, especially for someone far from needing withdrawals. The trade‑off is that big drawdowns are part of the deal, so emotional and financial tolerance for large temporary losses becomes crucial.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    28%
  • Financials
    16%
  • Industrials
    11%
  • Health Care
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    9%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector exposure is nicely spread, with technology leading at 28% and financials, industrials, and health care all meaningfully represented. Consumer, telecom, energy, materials, utilities, and real estate round out the mix. This sector profile roughly resembles broad equity benchmarks, which is encouraging — it suggests no extreme bet on a single theme. The slight tech and growth flavour, supported by QQQ and a semiconductor fund, can boost returns in innovation‑friendly periods but may bite during rate hikes or sentiment swings against growth. The key insight: the core allocation is well‑balanced and aligns closely with global standards, while the smaller growth satellites add a bit of extra volatility and upside potential.

Regions Info

  • North America
    68%
  • Europe Developed
    13%
  • Japan
    5%
  • Asia Emerging
    5%
  • Asia Developed
    5%
  • Australasia
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, about 68% sits in North America, with Europe developed at 13%, Japan and other Asia regions at 15% combined, and small allocations to Australasia, Latin America, and Africa/Middle East. This is broadly similar to many global equity indices where the US dominates, so it doesn’t look like an extreme home‑country bet. That said, outcomes will still be heavily influenced by the US economy, dollar, and policy decisions. The positive alignment with global weights is a strong indicator of diversification across major markets. The trade‑off is that if US stocks underperform other regions for an extended spell, overall results may feel sluggish despite decent diversification outside North America.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    41%
  • Large-cap
    28%
  • Mid-cap
    16%
  • Small-cap
    4%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

By market cap, roughly 41% is in mega‑caps, 28% in large‑caps, and 16% in mid‑caps, with smaller slices in small and micro‑caps. That’s a classic “core index” tilt: heavily anchored in big, established companies while keeping some exposure to the smaller, more volatile names that can drive higher long‑term returns. The emphasis on mega and large‑caps generally reduces company‑specific blow‑up risk and provides better liquidity. At the same time, the modest mid/small exposure keeps some growth optionality. Overall, this is a steady, benchmark‑like capitalization profile, which is beneficial for diversification and keeps the portfolio’s behavior relatively predictable in broad market moves.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    0.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
    Direct holding 0.10%
  • Apple Inc
    0.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Microsoft Corporation
    0.17%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Amazon.com Inc
    0.14%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Tesla Inc
    0.12%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Walmart Inc. Common Stock
    0.11%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    0.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.09%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
  • Top 10 total 1.53%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look‑through snapshot flags that some mega names repeat across your funds, with NVIDIA the clearest example: it appears both as a direct stock and inside multiple ETFs, totaling about 0.36%. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, Alphabet, Meta, and Broadcom also show up via ETFs. Because only ETF top‑10 holdings are captured, this overlap is probably understated. Hidden overlap matters because it can quietly crank up exposure to a handful of big companies even when position sizes look modest. Here, the concentration isn’t extreme, but it’s a reminder that buying more themed or growth funds will likely increase weight in the same small group of large US tech‑related stocks.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
Data availability: 100%

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.

Factor exposure is largely neutral across value, size, momentum, and quality, so the portfolio behaves a lot like the broad market on those dimensions. The standout is the higher exposure to the low volatility factor at 67%. Factors are like underlying “traits” — low volatility means a tendency toward stocks that historically move a bit less than the market. This tilt likely comes from the diversified core and bond sleeve inside the target‑date fund. In practice, this can soften drawdowns somewhat in turbulent periods while still participating in most of the upside. Yield is mildly low, which fits a growth‑oriented stance that prioritizes reinvested earnings and capital appreciation over high cash payouts.

Risk contribution Info

  • VANGUARD TARGET RETIREMENT 2050 FUND INVESTOR SHARES
    Weight: 76.31%
    73.5%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 16.40%
    17.8%
  • Invesco QQQ Trust
    Weight: 3.01%
    3.7%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 2.51%
    2.4%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio
    Weight: 0.78%
    1.4%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 98.8%

Risk contribution highlights how much each holding drives overall ups and downs, which can differ from simple weight. The Vanguard 2050 fund is about 76% of the portfolio and contributes roughly 73% of total risk — almost a one‑for‑one match. The Fidelity 500 fund, at 16%, contributes nearly 18% of risk, slightly more than its weight, while the small semiconductor fund punches above its size with 0.78% weight but 1.36% of risk. The top three holdings together drive about 95% of total risk, which is expected given their size. If someone wanted to change risk meaningfully, adjustments to that big core allocation would matter far more than tinkering with the tiny satellite positions.

Redundant positions Info

  • ProShares UltraPro QQQ
    Invesco QQQ Trust
    High correlation

Correlation measures how often assets move in the same direction at the same time. When correlation is high, diversification benefits are limited because everything tends to rise and fall together. Here, the only flagged near‑perfect pair is Invesco QQQ and ProShares UltraPro QQQ, which both track the same underlying tech‑heavy index, with the leveraged version magnifying moves. That means adding both doesn’t really add variety; it just adds more of the same factor profile and potentially more short‑term swings. More broadly, in equity‑heavy portfolios like this, correlations across holdings tend to spike during big market stress events, so drawdowns can still be deep even with many line items.

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 risk–return chart, the current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.59, while the optimal mix of the same holdings reaches 1.32 and even the minimum‑variance mix sits at 0.76. The Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk, so higher is better. Being 3.57 percentage points below the efficient frontier means that, for the same risk level, a different weighting of these exact funds could have delivered higher historical returns or similar returns with lower volatility. That doesn’t mean the existing mix is “bad,” especially given the simplicity of a dominant target‑date fund. It just shows there’s theoretical room to fine‑tune weights if one wanted to squeeze more efficiency from the current ingredients.

Dividends Info

  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 7.10%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.20%
  • Invesco QQQ Trust 0.50%
  • ProShares UltraPro QQQ 0.70%
  • VANGUARD TARGET RETIREMENT 2050 FUND INVESTOR SHARES 2.10%
  • Vanguard Health Care Index Fund ETF Shares 1.70%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 3.00%
  • Utilities Select Sector SPDR® Fund 2.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.96%

The overall dividend yield sits around 1.96%, which is modest and consistent with a growth‑leaning, equity‑heavy approach. Dividend yield is the annual cash payout as a percentage of the current value — helpful for income needs but only one piece of total return. Most of the long‑run gains here are likely to come from price appreciation rather than income, especially with holdings like QQQ and growth sectors. For long‑horizon investors who reinvest dividends, a lower yield but stronger growth can be perfectly sensible. The key thing is to recognize that this setup favors compounding through rising share prices and reinvested distributions rather than generating large ongoing cash flows.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 0.62%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
  • ProShares UltraPro QQQ 0.88%
  • VANGUARD TARGET RETIREMENT 2050 FUND INVESTOR SHARES 0.08%
  • Vanguard Health Care Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Utilities Select Sector SPDR® Fund 0.09%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.08%

The total expense ratio (TER) across holdings is about 0.08%, which is impressively low. TER is the annual fee charged by funds as a percentage of assets, quietly deducted in the background. Your biggest holdings are in low‑cost index and target‑date funds, and even the specialized ETFs are reasonably priced, with only the tiny positions carrying higher fees. Keeping costs this lean is a real strength: every dollar not spent on fees is a dollar that can keep compounding for you over decades. This cost structure aligns very well with best practices in long‑term investing and provides a solid foundation for competitive net returns.

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