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

Efficient on fees bloated on duplication and hanging out in tech land without a clear plan

Report created on May 6, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio looks like it was built by someone who kept forgetting what they already owned and just added another “total market” fund for safety. You’ve got multiple broad US funds, a dedicated S&P 500 ETF, a Primecap active fund, and then a few satellite funds and single stocks sprinkled on top for decoration. Structurally, it’s 86% equity with a modest Treasury sleeve pretending to be the adult in the room. The big problem: lots of positions but not a lot of actual diversification. Owning three flavors of the same US equity core is like ordering three combo meals at the same fast-food place; you just end up with more fries, not a better diet.

Growth Info

Historically, this thing has done well enough that it can brag at parties, but not enough to be the main character. A $1,000 stake turned into $2,462, which feels great until it sits next to the US market’s $2,662 result. That’s 14.69% CAGR versus 15.88% for the US benchmark — close, but consistently a step behind the pure market. On the plus side, it beat the global market’s 13.28% CAGR, so the home bias didn’t totally backfire. Max drawdown of -30.6% was slightly better than the benchmarks, but not by much. Past data is like yesterday’s weather: informative, but it doesn’t promise tomorrow won’t dump rain on your parade.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “Calm down, this isn’t a lottery ticket.” Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of running thousands of what-if futures: different return paths, volatility, and randomness, then seeing how often things end okay. Median outcome of $2,735 from $1,000 in 15 years is… fine, not heroic. The wide range — from about $1,080 to $6,796 — screams uncertainty more than destiny. A 75.6% chance of ending positive is decent but not bulletproof. The 7.65% annualized return across simulations is a sobering downgrade from recent history, reminding that markets don’t care what the backtest did for you last cycle.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    86%
  • Bonds
    14%

Asset class split: 86% stocks, 14% bonds. For something labeled “Balanced,” that’s more “moderately caffeinated equity” than truly balanced. The Treasuries sleeve looks like it was added just to keep the risk score from embarrassing anyone, not to seriously cushion crashes. Asset classes are the big building blocks — stocks for growth, bonds for stability. Here, the growth block is towering; the stability block is the little Lego stuck to the side. When storms hit, this mix will still sway heavily with equities, with bonds acting more like a slightly padded floor than a proper seatbelt. The label says “balanced,” the contents say “equity with training wheels.”

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    24%
  • Financials
    12%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • 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 definitely has a tech crush, with technology at 24% — the biggest slice. Then come financials, industrials, health care, and a random smattering everywhere else. There’s even a redundant listing of consumer discretionary, which feels metaphorically appropriate: the portfolio can’t quite decide what it wants there. Plus you added a semiconductor sector fund on top, which is basically pouring more hot sauce on the tech taco you were already eating. Sector allocation matters because it decides what kind of economic stories you’re betting on. Here, the story is pretty simple: when growthy, tech-heavy markets are happy, you’re smiling; when they’re not, everything sulks together.

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 is “USA and some optional sightseeing.” North America at 71% dominates the scene, with Europe, Japan, and other regions picking up scraps in the single digits. This isn’t a global portfolio, it’s a US portfolio with a few foreign stamps to look worldly. Geography matters because different economies and currencies dance to different beats; here, everything mostly follows the US DJ. The developed ex-US and emerging allocations exist but are too small to seriously change the narrative. If the US leads, great. If the US stumbles, the “international diversification” is more of a polite side comment than meaningful pushback.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    33%
  • Large-cap
    25%
  • Mid-cap
    16%
  • Small-cap
    8%
  • Micro-cap
    4%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Market-cap mix looks pretty reasonable at first glance: 33% mega-cap, 25% large-cap, then a functional layer of mid, small, and micro caps. On paper, that’s a nice distribution — not just worshipping the giants, but still heavily anchored in the big names that move indexes. The twist is that the small and micro allocations are juiced through value and international tilts, so they’re not just tiny versions of the S&P 500. Market cap matters because big companies behave like cruise ships, while small ones behave like speedboats in a storm. This portfolio has mostly cruise ships with a few lively speedboats dangling off the back, adding spice and extra whiplash.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Apple Inc
    2.30%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.42%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.21%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.07%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.97%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Exxon Mobil Corp
    0.83%
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.75%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    0.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
  • Top 10 total 13.53%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look-through holdings reveal the usual suspects running the show: Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, Meta, Tesla — all comfortably embedded across multiple funds. This is the classic “accidental mega-cap tech concentration” move: you didn’t buy them directly, but they still own the place. Exxon is the only name you bothered to invite individually, even though it’s also in the index anyway. Overlap is understated because only ETF top-10s are counted, so the real duplication is even worse. This is why looking under the hood matters; otherwise you think you own a symphony, when in reality the same few lead singers are just switching costumes between funds.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 86%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 86%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 86%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 86%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
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 profile: aggressively average. Everything is basically neutral — value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all hovering around 50%. Factor exposure is like the ingredient label behind the flashy packaging: it explains what flavors actually drive returns. Here, the label says “pretty much market-like in every direction.” For a portfolio with small-cap value funds and an active Primecap piece, it’s almost impressive how thoroughly the tilts cancel each other out. No strong value bargain-hunting vibe, no hardcore quality bias, no intentional low-vol safety net. It just ends up behaving like a mildly tweaked index, which makes all the complexity and fund count feel a bit over-engineered for the outcome.

Risk contribution Info

  • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 27.80%
    31.7%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares
    Weight: 12.68%
    14.9%
  • VANGUARD PRIMECAP FUND ADMIRAL SHARES
    Weight: 10.08%
    11.9%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
    Weight: 7.78%
    10.9%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 7.66%
    8.9%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 78.4%

Risk contribution makes it clear who’s really driving the rollercoaster. The top three holdings — S&P 500 ETF, total US market Admiral shares, and Primecap — are 50.5% of the weight but 58.5% of the risk. That’s not outrageous, but it tells you the supporting cast is mostly there for flavor while the core US equity block does the heavy lifting. The Avantis US small-cap value ETF punches above its weight with a risk/weight ratio of 1.41, meaning it swings harder than its size suggests. Risk contribution is basically asking, “Who’s shaking the table?” Answer: the US core and the spicy small-cap side dish, not the supposedly diversifying odds and ends.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares
    iShares Core S&P 500 ETF
    FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    High correlation
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

The correlation list reads like a family reunion for indistinguishable index clones. The Fidelity ZERO total market fund, S&P 500 ETF, and both Vanguard total market share classes are all moving almost in lockstep. That’s not diversification, that’s four different wrappers on the same underlying exposure. Same with the pair of developed and total international funds — they’re more siblings than strangers. Correlation just measures how often things move together; in a crash, these highly correlated pieces will likely all go down together, just with different brand names. This kind of overlap makes the portfolio look more complex than it is, while not actually spreading risk as much as the fund count suggests.

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, this portfolio is literally leaving free money on the table. Its Sharpe ratio is 0.63, while the optimal mix of the exact same holdings gets to 1.1 — a massive gap. And the model says it’s sitting 5.45 percentage points below the efficient frontier at its risk level. The efficient frontier is just the best possible tradeoff between risk and return using what’s already here; being below it means the weights are kind of clumsy. The kicker: even the max Sharpe portfolio is way riskier, with 33% volatility and wild 37% expected return, so the current version manages to be both less efficient and still fairly bumpy. Impressive in the wrong way.

Dividends Info

  • Avantis® International Small Cap Value ETF 2.80%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
  • iShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China 2.20%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 10.90%
  • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND 1.00%
  • iShares Core S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Occidental Petroleum Corporation 1.70%
  • 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%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund Admiral Shares 1.00%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
  • Exxon Mobil Corp 2.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 4.51%

The portfolio’s total yield clocks in at 4.51%, which looks suspiciously shiny for a mostly equity index setup. Then you see why: Primecap is listed with a 28% “yield” and the semiconductor fund at 10.9%, which is either a data quirk or the most unhinged income strategy ever invented. Dividends are just cash distributions — nice, but not magical. Chasing them blindly can mean concentrating in weird corners or misreading return of capital, specials, or artifacts. Here, the base of broad market funds has pretty normal yields around 1–3%, so the overall picture is more “healthy drizzle” than “income machine,” no matter what those outlier numbers suggest.

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%
  • 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 the one area where this portfolio behaves like it’s read a finance book. A total TER of 0.10% is impressively low for this many moving parts, helped by ultra-cheap core ETFs and a zero-fee Fidelity fund. The active and smart-beta pieces are moderately priced rather than outrageous, so at least you’re not paying hedge-fund money for mutual-fund reality. Still, paying 0.60% for a sector fund in a portfolio this index-heavy is like putting premium rims on a Toyota: noticeable, not necessary. Overall though, fees are firmly under control — it’s the overlapping structure and half-baked tilts doing the damage, not the price tag.

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