A tech loving US obsessed portfolio that swears it is diversified but the chart says otherwise
Report created on Jul 25, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VT Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 70.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 20.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 10.00%
This portfolio is basically three ETFs in a trench coat pretending to be complex. Seventy percent is the total US market, twenty percent is a tech-heavy growth rocket, and ten percent is a token “hey look I know other countries exist” allocation. For something labeled “balanced,” it is hilariously unbalanced across the only thing that really matters here: equity risk, and almost entirely US equity at that. The structure screams “I like US stocks and then I doubled down on the same theme for fun.” It is simple and low-maintenance, sure, but it is also one big macro bet dressed up as diversification.
Growth
The historical performance looks great on paper: turning $1,000 into $2,243 with a 15.08% CAGR is the kind of number that makes people think they are financial geniuses. CAGR is basically your average speed over the full trip, potholes included. The problem: the US market did slightly better with less pain in the worst drawdown. You took a -27.45% punch to the face and still underperformed the straight-up US benchmark. Beating the global market isn’t shocking when you heavily overweight the US during a US-led run. Past returns here mainly prove you picked the winning horse in a specific race, not that the portfolio is inherently special.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projections politely remind that markets do not care how nice your backtest looked. Monte Carlo just runs thousands of “what if” futures by shaking returns around randomly based on history. The median outcome, $2,716 after 15 years, is fine but not life-changing, and the 5–95% range from $1,000 to $7,815 basically says “anything from treading water to feeling very clever is on the table.” An 8.18% average simulated return is far less exciting than the recent 15% ride. This is yesterday’s weather being used to guess next month’s climate, so the numbers are helpful vibes, not a guarantee.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is a one-word answer: stocks. All of it. One hundred percent. This isn’t a portfolio; it is an opinion about equities pretending to be a strategy. When everything is in the same asset class, you are signing up for full participation in market mood swings with no internal shock absorbers. Different asset classes—like mixing spicy, sweet, and bland foods—help smooth the overall flavor. Here, it is just hot sauce. Fun when risk is paying you, brutal when it is not. Balanced risk classification or not, structurally this is an all-in equity roller coaster.
Sectors
- Technology 39%
- Financials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Telecommunications 9%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, the portfolio has a pretty loud tech crush at 39%, with consumer discretionary and communication-esque exposure layered on top via the NASDAQ tilt. Calling this “moderately diversified” by sectors is generous; it is more like a tech-centric growth portfolio with some supporting actors. This kind of tilt works beautifully when innovation and hype are being rewarded and feels absolutely awful when sentiment flips or regulators wake up grumpy. The rest of the sectors are sprinkled in just enough to be mentioned, not enough to really counterbalance anything. Sector diversification on paper does not change that one theme clearly drives the show.
Regions
- North America 90%
- Europe Developed 4%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Japan 2%
- Asia Emerging 1%
Geographically, the portfolio might as well have “USA or bust” printed on the cover. With 90% in North America and a tiny 10% tossed at the rest of the world, this is global diversification in the same way a layover counts as “travel.” The tiny allocations to Europe, Japan, and emerging markets are rounding errors more than genuine exposure. This setup works great when the US is the star of the global economy and markets reward that dominance. It looks a lot less clever if leadership shifts elsewhere. Geographic diversification is supposed to give multiple engines; here you’ve basically got one jet and some decorative propellers.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 43%
- Large-cap 31%
- Mid-cap 18%
- Small-cap 5%
- Micro-cap 2%
Market cap exposure is heavily skewed to mega and large caps: 74% of this portfolio is living in corporate skyscrapers, with small and micro caps stuffed down into the basement at 7%. That is fine if the goal is to hug benchmarks and ride the giants, but let’s not pretend this is exploring the full market. This is the S&P 500 plus its larger friends with a polite nod toward smaller companies. When big caps lead, you look perfectly aligned; when smaller companies have their moment, this portfolio is sitting on the sidelines watching, already committed to the big-brand franchise.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 6.03%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc. 5.63%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.61%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.07%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.66%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 2.22%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.19%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.80%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.75%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.72%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 30.71%
The look-through holdings reveal the real story: this portfolio is secretly a concentrated bet on a handful of mega-cap darlings. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla—the usual suspects—soak up a huge slice of effective exposure once you account for overlap between the total market and NASDAQ 100 ETFs. You did not buy them directly, but you bought them repeatedly through different wrappers. Overlap is probably even worse than shown since only top-10 ETF holdings are captured. This is less “broad market exposure” and more “the Magnificent Seven plus a very large supporting cast no one ever talks about.”
Factors
Factor-wise, this portfolio is aggressively… average. Every major factor—value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility—sits right around neutral. Factor exposure is basically the ingredient list that explains why a portfolio behaves the way it does, and here it reads like the default setting. No value tilt, no quality emphasis, no yield focus, no clever low-vol cushion. That is not automatically bad; it just means all the drama comes from plain old market direction, sector tilts, and geography, not any intentional factor flavor. If there was a grand design, it is hiding behind “own the market and hope capitalism keeps working.”
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 70.00% 67.9% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 20.00% 24.4% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 10.00% 7.7%
Risk contribution exposes who is actually driving the roller coaster. The total US market ETF, at 70% weight and about 68% of risk, is the main character, as expected. The NASDAQ 100, though only 20% by weight, kicks in over 24% of the risk, clearly punching above its size. That risk/weight ratio of 1.22 says it brings extra drama for every percent you allocate to it. The international slice is just along for the ride at under 8% of risk. So despite the three-fund lineup, it is really a two-engine system: broad US plus high-octane growth, with a tiny, polite global sidecar.
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 is annoyingly competent. The current mix sits right on or very near the curve, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.66 versus 0.84 for the optimal setup using the same ingredients. That means the recipe is mostly fine; the seasoning could just be tweaked. The max Sharpe version squeezes a bit more return for slightly higher risk, and the minimum variance option trims risk with still decent return. Efficient frontier is just the menu of best tradeoffs available from what you already own, and this portfolio has somehow stumbled into a pretty respectable spot on that menu.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.60%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.13%
Dividend yield at 1.13% is basically “coffee money” level. Most of the return story here is growth, not steady income. With a big NASDAQ slice and heavy mega-cap tech exposure, that is exactly what you would expect: companies that would rather reinvest than mail out fat checks. Dividends are not doing any heavy lifting in this setup; they are more of a side effect. Anyone expecting this portfolio to throw off serious cash flow is essentially staring at a cactus and hoping it turns into an apple tree. The engine here is capital appreciation, for better and for worse.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%
Costs are where this portfolio actually behaves like it knows what it is doing. A total TER of 0.06% is impressively low—basically paying couch-cushion money for full-market exposure plus a growth tilt. You accidentally or intentionally dodged the common trap of shiny but expensive funds that quietly eat returns. The funny part is that despite the rock-bottom fees, the structure still manages to be kind of redundant, with overlapping exposure to the same mega-caps. So yes, the duplication is cheap, but it is still duplication. At least if you are going to over-own Apple and NVIDIA, you are doing it on a budget.
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