This portfolio has only about 11 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.
Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

Half growth rocket half parked car and somehow still pretending to be a coherent strategy

Report created on Apr 3, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio looks like it was built by two people who never met: one adrenaline junkie and one safety officer. Nearly 37% sits in a broad US index, which is sane. Then another 27% is parked in a money market fund, which is basically saying, “I want growth, but also… not really.” On top of that, there’s a handful of spicy single names like NVIDIA, AMD, Affirm, and a tiny micro-cap side quest in Bridger. The result is a weird barbell: high-octane stocks strapped onto a big pile of cash-ish and a plain index. The takeaway: it’s growth-tilted in theory, but oddly hesitant in execution.

Growth Info

In under a year, this thing turned $1,000 into about $1,303, beating both the US and global markets by ~7 percentage points of annualized return. CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is ~38%, which looks heroic, but with only 11 months of data, that’s more “lucky streak at the casino” than “reliable long-term speed.” Max drawdown of -11.8% versus around -9% for the benchmarks shows you paid for that outperformance with extra gut-churn. And with just 5 days generating 90% of the returns, performance is basically held together by a few very good days. Past data here is yesterday’s weather — interesting, not prophetic.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation tries to guess the next 15 years using this short history, which is like predicting your entire life from how last summer went. Median outcome: $1,000 grows to about $2,524, with most simulations landing between ~$1,699 and $3,537. Annualized, that’s around 6.95%, but remember, it’s based on less than a year of data. Monte Carlo is basically running thousands of “what if” market dice rolls using the portfolio’s recent behavior as a template, which is extremely fragile when that “behavior” is 11 months of mostly good times. Treat these numbers as vibes, not a forecast.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    73%
  • No data
    27%

On paper, 73% is in stocks and 27% is “no data,” which includes that big money market chunk and anything else we can’t classify cleanly. Instructions say not to guess what’s in “no data,” so we won’t, but the visible part already screams equity-focused with a big liquidity or limbo bucket. For a “growth” investor, having that much sitting in the unknown bucket (including a money market fund) is like training for a marathon but walking half the race. General takeaway: decide if this is truly a growth portfolio or a part-time growth experiment with a large comfort blanket.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    30%
  • Financials
    10%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Health Care
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Telecommunications
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Energy
    2%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector-wise, technology is clearly running the show at 30%. Then you’ve got a scattered supporting cast across financials, industrials, healthcare, telecoms, and others, but tech is the main character. Between the direct bets on NVIDIA and AMD plus the index exposure, this borders on tech-stan behavior. Comparing to a broad global index, this tilt is definitely heavier on the shiny, innovation story names. That’s fun when markets love them and brutal when sentiment flips. Sector tilts like this basically mean: “I’m okay with my portfolio mood swings being dictated by whatever tech narrative is trending.” Just know you’re choosing drama over stability.

Regions Info

  • North America
    67%
  • Europe Developed
    3%
  • Japan
    1%
  • Asia Developed
    1%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%

Geographically, this is “America first, everyone else if there’s room.” About 67% is in North America, with tiny sprinkles across Europe Developed, Japan, and other Asia. This is a classic home bias: investing heavily where one lives, because it feels familiar, not because it’s diversified. The rest of the world is basically a footnote. That’s fine if the US continues to dominate, not so great if leadership shifts somewhere else. Global diversification is basically saying, “I don’t know who’ll win, so I’ll own a bit of everyone.” Here, the message is more, “I’m betting hard that the US keeps being the main character indefinitely.”

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    37%
  • Large-cap
    20%
  • Mid-cap
    10%
  • Micro-cap
    4%
  • Small-cap
    1%

The market cap mix is mostly grown-ups: 37% mega-cap, 20% large-cap, 10% mid-cap. Then out of nowhere, a little chaos: 4% micro-cap and 1% small-cap. So 90%+ is in big, liquid, widely followed names — sensible, boring-ish — and then someone snuck in a couple of lottery tickets. That micro-cap slice is tiny in weight but can behave like a drama magnet on bad days. This structure says: “I want stability from giants but also can’t resist a tiny shot at hero status.” Overall workable, but the micro-cap piece is the kid blasting heavy metal at the back of the bus.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    11.68%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Direct holding 8.77%
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    6.45%
  • Bridger Aerospace Group Holdings, Inc. Common Stock
    3.72%
  • Affirm Holdings Inc
    3.42%
  • Apple Inc
    2.64%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.98%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.38%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.23%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.98%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 34.50%

The look-through shows NVIDIA basically has squatters’ rights on this portfolio at ~11.7% total exposure, between the direct holding and the ETFs. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and Broadcom are hitching a ride through your index funds, giving you a stealth mega-cap tech cluster even beyond the flashy names on the list. Overlap is probably worse than reported since we only see ETF top-10 holdings, so hidden concentration is a feature, not a bug. Translation: this isn’t as diversified as it looks on a statement. It’s more like buying three “different” burgers that all use the same sauce — different packaging, same flavor risk.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Low
Data availability: 25%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 73%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 22%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
High
Data availability: 22%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 86%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 71%

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, the biggest tell is a very low tilt to Size — meaning you’re heavily skewed away from smaller companies and into larger ones. Factor exposure is like the ingredient list explaining what flavors drive your returns. Here, you’re basically drinking a “big-company smoothie.” That can mean more stability than a small-cap circus, but also less exposure to some of the historical small-cap growth premium. Quality screens high, which is actually a respectable accident: you’re leaning into stronger, more profitable names rather than junk. In practice, this factor profile says: “I want the big, well-behaved kids, not the scrappy troublemakers.” Not the worst bias to have.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 36.96%
    34.6%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    Weight: 8.77%
    22.2%
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    Weight: 6.45%
    17.3%
  • Affirm Holdings Inc
    Weight: 3.42%
    8.1%
  • Bridger Aerospace Group Holdings, Inc. Common Stock
    Weight: 3.72%
    6.2%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 88.4%

Risk contribution is where the real drama shows. NVIDIA is only 8.8% of the portfolio by weight but contributes a ridiculous 22.2% of total risk. AMD is 6.5% weight and 17.3% risk. Toss in the S&P 500 ETF and your top three positions are doing 74% of the risk lifting. Risk contribution is basically asking, “Who’s actually shaking the portfolio?” and the answer is: your chip darlings plus the index. That’s not diversification, that’s a trio headlining the volatility tour. Trimming or rebalancing these overactive risk hogs can reduce the chance that one bad earnings print wrecks your month.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    High correlation

You’ve got a nice redundant combo in Vanguard S&P 500 and Vanguard Total World Stock, which move “almost identically.” Asset correlation is a fancy way of saying, “Do these things freak out at the same time?” Here, the answer is yes. Holding both of these is a bit like buying two tickets to the same movie — slightly different seats, identical plot. Correlation isn’t evil; you expect stocks to move together. But if the goal was diversification, this particular pairing doesn’t really deliver it. It’s closer to double-down than spread-out, even if it looks diverse on a holdings list.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

The risk vs. return chart is basically screaming, “You’re leaving money on the table with these weights.” The current portfolio Sharpe ratio is 1.43, while the optimal mix (using only your existing holdings) hits 2.21. The Sharpe ratio is like a “bang for your buck” score: return per unit of risk. You’re also sitting 14.3 percentage points below the efficient frontier at your current risk level, which is a polite mathematical way of saying, “Same ingredients, worse recipe.” With smarter weighting, you could get a lot more return for only a little more risk — or similar return with less drama — without adding anything new.

Dividends Info

  • 2023 EFT Series Trust - Brandes U S Value ETF 1.20%
  • Fidelity Hereford Street Trust - Fidelity Money Market Fund 3.50%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
  • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 1.80%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 3.00%
  • SPDR® S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.30%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.65%

Total yield is around 1.65%, which is firmly in the “this is not an income machine” zone. Most of the yield is coming from the money market fund and the more boring broad ETFs. Your growthy single names aren’t here to send checks; they’re here to swing at capital gains. Dividends can be nice for stability — like getting a small paycheck while you wait — but this setup is clearly prioritizing price movement over passive cash flow. If the goal is income, this isn’t it. If the goal is growth, at least the low yield matches the story, even if the big cash chunk muddies it.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • 2023 EFT Series Trust - Brandes U S Value ETF 0.60%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • SPDR® S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.35%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%

Costs are probably the most grown-up part of this whole thing. A portfolio-wide TER of 0.04% is impressively low — like you accidentally did something very right. Yes, there’s one actively flavored ETF at 0.60% and a 0.35% sector fund, but the heavy lifting is done by dirt-cheap Vanguard products, which keeps the overall fee drag tiny. Paying less in fees is like having fewer leaks in your boat — more of the return actually stays with you. So, while the structure is a bit chaotic, at least you’re not overpaying for the privilege of being slightly confused.

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

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

AVDV vs VOO DRAM vs VOO SPMO vs VT SPMO vs VXUS

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