Portfolio report
Tech leaning global-ish index soup that thinks it is balanced but clearly loves drama
Report created on Oct 2, 2026The briefing
What stands out
The top three positions drive over 80% of total risk, which means all those extra tickers are mostly set dressing. If the US market and big growth names have a bad year, this “balanced” mix is going to feel every bit of it, regardless of …
Tech exposure near 40% plus a dedicated China tech sleeve makes the portfolio heavily dependent on one broad theme showing up to work. If regulators, politics, or just plain old sentiment turn on that area, the whole thing goes from “modern growth engine” to “why …
The efficient frontier quietly roasting you is the funniest part: using only the current funds, a different mix gets way better risk-adjusted returns. Same ingredients, different recipe — the chart basically says, “Nice effort, but you rearranged the furniture and somehow made the room smaller.”
Highlights from the assessment. Explore the analysis below for context and assumptions.
Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
The starting point
Positions
-
VT Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 43.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 23.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 18.00% -
CQ Invesco China Technology ETF
CQQQ - US46138E8003 8.00% -
VB Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares
VBR - US9229086114 8.00%
Structurally this portfolio is “lazy three-fund” cosplay with extra caffeine shots. Almost 80% is basically two giant US market trackers plus a total international wrapper, then you bolt on a racy China tech slice and a small-cap value side quest. On paper it screams “diversified core,” but the add-ons tilt it away from boring balance and into “I like excitement but won’t admit it” territory. The result is a fairly concentrated bet on growthy, US-heavy tech with a sprinkling of factor and China spice. It’s not chaotic, just conflicted: the core wants to behave like a sensible index portfolio, the satellites are there to make sure volatility never feels too far away.
Growth
Historically this thing did fine but not heroic. Turning $1,000 into $2,141 with a 13.68% CAGR sounds great until the US market strolls past at 15.65% and quietly flexes. Beating the global market by a rounding error is hardly a victory parade for a tech-heavy, China-juiced mix that took bigger risks than a plain US index. The max drawdown of -28.74% also managed to be worse than the US market’s dip while still underperforming it — the annoying combo of “more drama, less payoff.” And it took over two years from peak to fully recover, so the ride was very much “roller coaster with extra waiting in line.” Past data is useful, but it’s still yesterday’s weather report.
Drawdowns
- Worst fall 11/16/2021 – 10/14/2022 -28.7%
- Time from the high to the bottom 332 days
- Time back to the previous high 01/29/2024 472 days
- Today, below the last high -1.9%
- Worst fall, US Market -24.5%
- Worst fall, Global Market -26.4%
Benchmarks over the same dates, for reference only.
Worst falls
- 11/16/2021 – 10/14/2022 Back at the high after 804 days -28.7%
- 02/18/2025 – 04/08/2025 Back at the high after 126 days -19.3%
- 01/27/2026 – 03/30/2026 Back at the high after 77 days -9.5%
- 07/16/2024 – 08/05/2024 Back at the high after 65 days -9.2%
- 02/16/2021 – 03/04/2021 Back at the high after 56 days -6.5%
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “Expect okay, hope for great, prepare for meh.” A Monte Carlo simulation is just a fancy way of running thousands of what-if market scenarios to see where the portfolio typically lands. Median outcome of $2,701 over 15 years on $1,000 is decent, but notice how the “likely range” runs from $1,794 to $4,094 and the “possible range” is basically $1,000 to almost $7,700. Translation: future outcomes are all over the place, and 26% of the time this doesn’t even beat cash by much. The profile fits the portfolio’s personality: not reckless, but absolutely capable of delivering both pleasant surprises and long, annoying stretches of underwhelm.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
On asset classes this portfolio is that person who orders only one thing on the menu and insists it’s “varied enough.” It’s 100% stocks, zero bonds, zero anything else. For something labeled “balanced,” this is equity-max mode with a nice PR spin. Asset-class diversification is the basic “don’t put everything in one basket” idea; here the basket is just different flavors of stocks. That’s fine if the goal is pure growth and stomach-churning drawdowns are acceptable, but let’s not pretend this is structurally mellow. In bad markets, there’s nothing here whose job is to stay boring; everything gets to jump into the volatility pool together.
Sectors
- Technology 38%
- Financials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 7%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Real Estate 2%
- Utilities 2%
Sector-wise, tech clearly runs this show at 38%, with the China tech ETF acting like an extra shot of espresso on top of an already amped NASDAQ tilt. Then there’s a supporting cast of financials, consumer discretionary, and telecom, but they’re backup dancers, not headliners. Being this tech-heavy is like building a band around lead guitar and hoping rhythm, drums, and bass will just sort themselves out. When tech trends up, it looks genius; when it stalls, the whole portfolio suddenly feels very mortal. It’s not absurdly concentrated, but it’s definitely living the “if growthy tech sneezes, everything catches a cold” lifestyle.
Regions
- North America 75%
- Asia Emerging 10%
- Europe Developed 7%
- Asia Developed 3%
- Japan 3%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically this portfolio is very “Stars and Stripes with a side of Great Wall.” About 75% in North America, then a solid chunk of emerging Asia thanks to the China tech slice and the international fund, with Europe and the rest of the world politely filling in the margins. So yes, there is international diversification, but let’s be real: the story is still US-dominated with a specific side bet on Chinese tech volatility. Global diversification is meant to spread political, regulatory, and economic risk; this setup softens that a bit but then re-concentrates risk in one especially unpredictable region. It’s global-ish, but very much US-plus-a-plot-twist.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 41%
- Large-cap 30%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 8%
- Micro-cap 2%
The market-cap profile is pretty standard “index world”: 41% mega-cap, 30% large, and then a taper down to mid, small, and a token 2% micro-cap. The only real personality here comes from that dedicated small-cap value slice, which drags the portfolio slightly away from pure mega-cap worship. Mega-caps still clearly drive the bus though, and those names tend to be the same tech and platform giants that already dominate headlines. This isn’t a problem, just slightly ironic: there’s a whole small-cap value ETF stapled on, yet the portfolio is still structurally ruled by a handful of mega behemoths doing most of the heavy lifting.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.89%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc. 4.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.52%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.39%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.86%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.78%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.57%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.48%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.26%
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 1.02%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 24.21%
The look-through holdings basically confirm what everyone suspected: this is a shrine to the usual suspects. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, Broadcom — they’re all here, and some of them are here multiple times via overlapping ETFs. With only ETF top-10 data, overlap is actually understated, so the true concentration is probably higher than it looks. Look-through analysis is like checking the ingredients label; here it reads “big US tech, more big US tech, and a side of big US tech.” The portfolio pretends to own thousands of stocks, but a small club of mega names quietly dominates the narrative.
Factors
Factor exposure here is almost suspiciously neutral across the board. Value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility — everything hovers near 50%, which is basically “market average, nothing spicy.” Factors are the hidden traits (like “cheap,” “fast-growing,” or “steady”) that explain why portfolios behave the way they do. This one looks like it tried very hard not to have a strong opinion. Given how techy and US-tilted the top names are, the factor profile being this bland is mildly hilarious: the portfolio acts edgy at the surface (China tech! NASDAQ!) but under the hood it’s structurally beige. It’s chaos flavored with index vanilla.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 43.00% 40.3% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 23.00% 27.2% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 18.00% 14.7% -
Invesco China Technology ETF
Weight: 8.00% 10.5% -
Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 8.00% 7.3%
Risk contribution reveals who’s actually shaking the portfolio, and surprise: the top three holdings account for over 82% of total risk. Vanguard Total Stock Market and the NASDAQ ETF in particular are punching above their already hefty weights, and the China tech ETF is a small allocation doing big-volatility cosplay, with risk/weight of 1.31. Risk contribution is like checking who’s really making noise in a group project; the “core” funds are doing most of the screaming. Despite the “balanced investor” label, the risk engine is concentrated in a few growth-heavy positions that turn market swings into noticeably louder portfolio mood swings.
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 leaving performance on the table. The Sharpe ratio — think “return per unit of pain endured” — sits at 0.58, while the best mix of these same holdings hits 0.84 and even the lowest-risk combo scores 0.77. The current setup is 1.66 percentage points below the efficient frontier at its risk level, which is like driving the same car as everyone else but insisting on worse gas mileage. The efficient frontier just shows the best possible trade-offs using your existing ingredients; this portfolio has all the right pieces, just arranged in a slightly inefficient, “could be sharper if someone bothered” way.
Dividends
- Invesco China Technology ETF 2.50%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 1.90%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.40%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.35%
Dividends are clearly not the star of this show. A 1.35% overall yield is what you get when you stack tech-heavy growth with some international and a token value sleeve. The China and international funds try to lift the income number a bit, but NASDAQ’s 0.40% yield drags it right back down. Dividend yield is just the cash you’re paid while you wait; here the message is: “You’re mostly here for price moves, not for checks in the mail.” Nothing wrong with that, but this is not an income engine — more a growth machine that occasionally tosses out pocket change.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco China Technology ETF 0.65%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
- 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) 0.11%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio behaves like a responsible adult. A total TER of 0.11% is impressively low, especially considering you snuck in a 0.65% China tech fund just to see if anyone was paying attention. The Vanguard pieces are doing heroic work here at 0.03–0.07%, dragging the average back down to earth. Expense ratios are just the annual cover charge you pay to be in the market; in this case, the club is cheap. So yes, kudos: mechanically, you’re not lighting money on fire with fees — most of the performance story, good or bad, is on the portfolio’s own decisions, not cost leakage.
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!
Compare your holdings
How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?
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