This portfolio has only about 0 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 🔥

This portfolio wants to be conservative but keeps sneaking off to the casino with stock funds

Report created on May 6, 2026

Risk profile Info

2/7
Conservative
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

Structurally this thing is a “conservative” portfolio in the same way a sports car with one brake pad is “safe.” Around 26% sits in an S&P 500 ETF, then you copy‑paste the US market with multiple total-market funds, sprinkle in an active growth fund, add a bunch of tiny satellite stocks and niche ETFs, and call it a day. The 14% in Treasuries is the lone adult in the room trying to supervise 86% in equities. With essentially zero history to judge it, this looks more like a collection of things someone liked than a deliberate design, and the overlap screams “accidental complexity” rather than “careful planning.”

Growth Info

With roughly two weeks of history, the “performance” section is basically reading tea leaves in a shot glass. A $1,000 hypothetical became $1,010, which is lunch money, not a track record. The quoted 25.6% CAGR over this micro-period is just math having a laugh; annualizing two weeks is like judging a marathon runner after three steps. It slightly lagged the US market and beat the global market, but over this timescale that’s statistical noise, not a pattern. Past data is always a bit like yesterday’s weather; here, it’s barely yesterday’s hour.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is trying hard to sound serious while standing on a sample size of “basically nothing.” Simulations fire off 1,000 alternate futures and spit out a median of $2,604 from $1,000 over 15 years, with wide ranges on either side. That’s normal: Monte Carlo is basically a financial multiverse generator. But because the starting data window is so tiny, the volatility, return assumptions, and therefore all the pretty numbers are on wobbly legs. The only safe conclusion is that this portfolio behaves like a mostly equity mix with a bond buffer — plenty of upside and plenty of ways to have a bumpy ride.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    86%
  • Bonds
    14%

For something tagged “conservative,” a 86% stock / 14% bond split is pretty punchy. That’s not a mild salsa; that’s ordering “extra hot” and then putting a single ice cube in the bowl. Equities drive long-term growth but also most of the gut‑punch drawdowns, while bonds normally calm things down. Here, bonds are just a side dish, not a genuine counterweight. Over a full market cycle (which this portfolio has absolutely not lived through yet), that means portfolio behavior will lean much closer to stock‑fund roller coaster than a sedate, low‑drama experience. The label says “risk score 2,” but the asset mix clearly didn’t read it.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    24%
  • Financials
    12%
  • Industrials
    11%
  • Health Care
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    6%
  • Energy
    6%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, this portfolio is pretending to be diversified while clearly having favorite children. Tech leads at 24%, and then there’s a dedicated semiconductor fund plus some speculative-ish names, so the true tech/adjacent exposure is likely even higher. Financials, industrials, health care, and telecom all show up in decent amounts, so it’s not a total single‑theme bet, but it definitely has a growth‑and‑chips addiction under the surface. Energy and basic materials are present but more as garnish. The combination of broad funds plus a few narrow sector bullets means the portfolio can quietly double down on trends without needing to say it out loud.

Regions Info

  • North America
    71%
  • Europe Developed
    7%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Asia Developed
    2%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, this portfolio has a massive home bias: 71% in North America, then token allocations scattered over the rest of the planet like guilt money. Europe Developed at 7% and Japan at 3% make a modest effort, but the rest of the world gets table scraps. This is “USA first, everyone else maybe later.” With such a short history, it hasn’t seen a full cycle where US and non‑US leadership flip, but eventually they tend to take turns. Right now, the portfolio behaves mostly like a US equity portfolio with a few international side quests, not a genuinely global approach.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    33%
  • Large-cap
    25%
  • Mid-cap
    15%
  • Small-cap
    8%
  • Micro-cap
    4%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

On market cap, the portfolio starts off respectable and then gets progressively weirder. About a third in mega‑caps and a quarter in large‑caps is standard big‑company core. Then you’ve got 15% mid‑cap, 8% small‑cap, and 4% micro‑cap, helped along by the explicit small‑cap value ETFs and assorted tiny satellite stocks. That trailing 12% in smaller names is the spicy part of the recipe. They can add return and diversification over long stretches but also introduce much noisier behavior. With essentially no time history, there’s no evidence yet of how this tilt behaves in stress — just a clear signal that this portfolio likes mixing blue chips with bar‑fight stocks.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.50%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Apple Inc
    2.16%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.34%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.14%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.01%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.91%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Raytheon Technologies Corp
    0.84%
  • Exxon Mobil Corp
    0.83%
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Top 10 total 13.04%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look‑through holdings reveal the usual suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, Meta — a Greatest Hits of megacap growth hiding in multiple funds. NVIDIA at 2.5% and Apple at 2.16% show that a decent chunk of the portfolio is really a big‑tech bundle, even though nothing is owned directly. Overlap coverage is limited (only about 18% of the portfolio is visible via ETF top 10s), so the concentration might actually be higher. Raytheon and Exxon show up directly, adding their own little single‑stock bets on top. Net effect: the portfolio looks diverse on the surface but quietly revolves around the same handful of giants driving most modern equity indices.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
High
Data availability: 15%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 59%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
No data
Data availability: 0%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
High
Data availability: 3%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 99%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
Data availability: 73%

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-wise, this portfolio is trying to be a sensible adult, at least on paper. A high value tilt (78%) plus high quality (62%) and high low-volatility (67%) is basically the “responsible stocks” combo: cheaper, sturdier, and theoretically a bit calmer. Size at 25% means a mild lean away from small caps overall, even though some specific positions are small or micro; the core wrappers dominate. Factor exposure is like the ingredient list behind the flashy branding, and here it says “boring but solid” rather than “YOLO rocket ship.” With no momentum data and almost no time history, there’s no proof this profile holds up yet — it just looks thoughtfully constructed instead of pure chaos.

Risk contribution Info

  • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 25.80%
    27.6%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares
    Weight: 12.68%
    13.7%
  • VANGUARD PRIMECAP FUND ADMIRAL SHARES
    Weight: 10.08%
    13.2%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 7.05%
    11.5%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 7.66%
    8.2%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 74.0%

Risk contribution is where the illusion of diversification gets punched in the face. The top three positions — S&P 500 ETF, Vanguard Total Stock Market Admiral, and Primecap — are about 48% of the weight but over 54% of total portfolio risk. Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets is only 7% by weight but shoulders a hefty 11.5% of risk, meaning it punches well above its size. This is typical: risk lurks in a few big, broad equity positions, while the tiny satellite holdings mostly add noise, not dominance. In practical terms, day‑to‑day portfolio drama will be driven by these core chunks, no matter how many small curiosities decorate the fringes.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Avantis® International Small Cap Value ETF
    High correlation
  • iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China
    Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares
    FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
    Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Correlation-wise, this portfolio is a masterclass in owning slightly different flavors of the same thing and calling it variety. The S&P 500, total-US-market funds, and Fidelity’s zero-fee clone all move almost identically — the data literally flags them as near twins. International developed funds also hug each other tightly. That means when one of these big chunks zigs, the others mostly zig too; there’s not much zig‑zag cancellation going on. In a broad equity selloff, this setup doesn’t give you clever offsets; it just gives you a synchronized slump with a few Treasuries and tiny oddball holdings trying (and mostly failing) to soften the hit.

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 basically calls this portfolio inefficient with a bullhorn. A Sharpe ratio of 2.08 sounds impressive until the “optimal” portfolio with the same ingredients claims a Sharpe of 34.37 — an absurd number that mostly exposes how useless optimization becomes when fed minimal, suspiciously rosy data. The model says you’re sitting 145 percentage points below the best achievable risk/return mix using only current holdings. Translation: even without adding anything new, just reweighting these same ingredients could theoretically push you much closer to the curve. The current portfolio is comfortably below the frontier, meaning it’s taking more noise than the simulation thinks is necessary for the return it’s chasing.

Dividends Info

  • Avantis® International Small Cap Value ETF 2.80%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
  • BWX Technologies Inc 0.50%
  • Constellation Energy Corp 0.50%
  • CF Industries Holdings Inc 1.60%
  • iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China 2.20%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 10.90%
  • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND 1.00%
  • GE Vernova LLC 0.10%
  • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Occidental Petroleum Corporation 1.70%
  • Raytheon Technologies Corp 1.60%
  • Thermo Fisher Scientific Inc 0.40%
  • Sprott Uranium Miners ETF 2.70%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
  • Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury Index Fund ETF Shares 3.80%
  • Valero Energy Corporation 1.80%
  • VANGUARD PRIMECAP FUND ADMIRAL SHARES 28.00%
  • Vertiv Holdings Co 0.10%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
  • Exxon Mobil Corp 2.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 4.52%

On yield, the headline 4.52% looks pleasantly chunky, but the details are… odd. Most broad funds sit in the 1–3% range, perfectly normal. Then there’s a comically high “28% yield” on the Primecap fund and 10.9% on the semiconductor fund — numbers that scream “data glitch or one‑off distribution,” not a stable income machine. Treating those as normal would be like assuming every year has 13 months because you got a bonus once. The bond ETF pulling 3.8% does the real income heavy lifting. Overall, dividends exist, but this is not some precision income engine — more a typical equity portfolio with a side of coupons, plus some very suspicious datapoints.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Avantis® International Small Cap Value ETF 0.36%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
  • iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China 0.25%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 0.60%
  • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Sprott Uranium Miners ETF 0.75%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Vanguard Intermediate-Term Treasury Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
  • VANGUARD PRIMECAP FUND ADMIRAL SHARES 0.27%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares 0.04%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.10%

Costs are where this portfolio actually behaves like it knows what it’s doing. A total expense ratio around 0.10% is impressively low, helped by cheap core ETFs and even a zero‑fee fund. Then, like a chaotic garnish, you’ve got some boutique stuff: 0.36% and 0.25% on the Avantis funds, 0.60% on the semiconductor active fund, and a spicy 0.75% on the uranium miners ETF. Those are expensive sprinkles on an otherwise frugal sundae. Still, the aggregate fee drag is modest — it’s like flying mostly economy with one or two impulsive upgrades. You’re not lighting money on fire here, even if a couple of line items try to.

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