Two index funds in a trench coat pretending to be diversified
Report created on Apr 21, 2026Risk 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
-
FX Fidelity 500 Index Fund
FXAIX - US3159117502 80.00% -
QQ Invesco QQQ Trust
QQQ - US46090E1038 20.00%
This portfolio is basically a US megacap fan club: 80% plain-vanilla S&P 500 plus 20% QQQ for extra caffeine. Structurally, it’s a barbell with both ends in the same gym — broad US large caps and then… more US large-cap tech. Calling this “low diversity” is generous; it’s the investing version of eating burgers and then adding a double burger as your side. The whole thing is entirely growth‑equity flavored with zero ballast from anything else. The upside is it’s simple and coherent. The downside is when US growth sneezes, this portfolio catches the full-blown flu with no backup immune system.
Growth
Historically, this thing has absolutely ripped: $1,000 turning into $4,468 is serious “numbers go up” energy. A 16.22% CAGR beats both the US market (14.82%) and global market (12.21%), so the turbo-growth tilt did exactly what it says on the label. Max drawdown at -32.36% was brutal but roughly in line with the benchmarks, which means it falls as hard as the market but flies a bit faster on the way up. Just remember: CAGR is like an average speed on an insane road trip — it hides all the potholes and panic braking along the way.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation basically throws this portfolio into 1,000 alternate futures and checks what happens. Median outcome of $2,764 after 15 years is nice, but the spread from about $983 to $7,286 shows the real punchline: future paths range from “boring cash-like outcome” to “worked out great.” An 8.02% average annual return in the simulations is much tamer than the 16% historical party. That’s the catch — past data is yesterday’s weather, not a prophecy. This portfolio is set up to participate heavily if growth wins again, but it’s also signing up to suffer loudly if it doesn’t.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class breakdown: 100% stocks, 0% everything else. This isn’t an allocation; it’s an equity monologue. There’s no bonds to soften blows, no real assets to hedge inflation, no cash buffer — just pure exposure to market mood swings. Being all‑stock is like driving everywhere at highway speed: efficient when the road is clear, but every pothole and accident becomes your problem. The “growth” risk label of 5/7 is frankly polite; in reality this is aggressively tied to equity cycles. It will look heroic in raging bull markets and uncomfortably naked when volatility spikes.
Sectors
- Technology 37%
- Telecommunications 12%
- Financials 10%
- Health Care 9%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Industrials 8%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 3%
- Consumer Discretionary 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector profile screams “tech and friends.” Technology at 37% plus another 12% in telecom/communication is basically a big bet that anything with chips, code, or attention spans keeps dominating. Other sectors exist here, but mainly as decoration: financials, healthcare, industrials, staples all get a seat at the table but nowhere near the microphone. This kind of tilt works brilliantly when innovation darlings keep winning, and feels brutal when leadership rotates to more boring parts of the market. It’s like building a band around three lead guitarists and a drummer who occasionally gets a mic — impressive until trends change and you suddenly wish you had a bassist.
Regions
- North America 99%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geography: 99% North America, a grudging 1% Europe Developed, and the rest of planet Earth basically doesn’t exist. This portfolio behaves like the world ends at the US border with a brief layover in Europe for politeness. That’s great if US dominance keeps rolling, less great if leadership shifts elsewhere. Global market returns are driven by more than one country, but this setup is clearly “America or bust.” It makes performance super tied to US macro, politics, and regulation — if the US sneezes, there’s no other region here to at least hand over a tissue.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 47%
- Large-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 1%
Market cap breakdown is a love letter to giants: 47% mega-cap, 35% large-cap, 17% mid-cap, and a token 1% in small caps. So despite owning “500” companies plus QQQ, this portfolio is basically a handful of mega-names dragging the whole cart. That’s fine when the titans are marching upward, but it also means the fate of the portfolio is weirdly concentrated in very few firms. It’s like saying you “watch a lot of shows” but actually just rewatching the same three blockbusters on repeat — impressive box office, limited range.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 1.79%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AA Apple Inc 1.45%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 1.14%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 0.98%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 0.74%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
TS Tesla Inc 0.73%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 0.73%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AV Broadcom Inc 0.70%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 0.67%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
WM Walmart Inc. 0.63%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- Top 10 total 9.55%
The look-through list is a who’s who of the usual suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Meta, Tesla, Alphabet, Broadcom, Walmart. They’re popping up via both funds, which means overlap is doing a quiet little concentration trick. And remember, this is only based on ETF top 10s, so the real duplication is likely worse. The portfolio pretends to have two holdings, but in reality it’s one big shrine to the same small set of mega-cap growth names. When those names win, everything here looks genius; when they stumble, there’s nowhere to hide because they’re stacked on top of each other.
Factors
Factor profile is remarkably “market-ish” with a twist. Value, momentum, quality, and low volatility all sit near neutral — no wild flavor there. Where it gets interesting is Size at 39% (mild tilt away from smaller companies) and Yield at 30% (clear tilt away from higher-dividend stocks). Translation: this portfolio likes big, shiny, low-yield growth darlings more than small or income-heavy names. Factor exposures are like the secret ingredients list; here it says “less small, less yield, standard everything else.” That means it will usually enjoy growth-fueled rallies more than stodgy, dividend-led markets and may feel pretty out of sync when boring value or small caps finally have their day.
Risk contribution
-
Fidelity 500 Index Fund
Weight: 80.00% 77.2% -
Invesco QQQ Trust
Weight: 20.00% 22.8%
Risk contribution is refreshingly unsurprising: the S&P 500 fund is 80% of the weight and about 77% of the risk, while QQQ is 20% weight and about 23% of the risk. So QQQ punches a bit above its weight but not dramatically. Still, that 20% slice is the adrenaline shot — it adds a disproportionate chunk of volatility relative to its size. Risk contribution is basically asking, “Who’s shaking the portfolio the most?” In this case, both positions are doing their fair share, but QQQ is the louder troublemaker despite being the smaller sibling. Nothing insane, just concentrated and very binary.
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 actually behaves itself. A Sharpe ratio of 0.68 sits below both the optimal portfolio (0.9) and even the minimum variance option (0.81), but it’s “on or very near” the frontier given its holdings. Translation: for this narrow two-fund world, the mix is reasonably efficient, even if not mathematically perfect. The efficient frontier is the curve of best bang-for-buck risk vs. return; being close to it means the portfolio isn’t wasting risk on sheer stupidity, just on deliberate growth enthusiasm. So structurally it’s not a clown car — it’s a focused, high-octane setup that simply chooses volatility over balance.
Dividends
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.40%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.96%
Dividend yield at 0.96% is pocket lint by design. QQQ’s 0.40% drags the total down from the S&P 500 fund’s 1.10%, so this portfolio clearly didn’t show up for income. That’s not inherently wrong, it’s just a choice: almost all the story here is price appreciation, not cash payouts. Relying on dividends to smooth the ride isn’t happening — this is a growth roller coaster, not a slow dividend train. When markets are kind, reinvested dividends add a quiet boost; when markets are rough, this portfolio offers almost no cash “consolation prize” while you wait for prices to recover.
Ongoing product costs
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%
Costs are comically low: 0.02% for the S&P 500 fund, 0.20% for QQQ, blended to a total TER of 0.06%. That’s basically couch-cushion money for running a portfolio glued to massive, professionally managed indexes. Fees are under control — you clearly clicked the cheap buttons. The irony is that the portfolio pays almost nothing to be as concentrated and growth-heavy as it is; if anything’s going to hurt long-term returns here, it’s definitely not costs. You’ve built a high-octane, US megacap machine at budget pricing, which is both efficient and slightly terrifying given how undiversified the rest of it is.
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