Roast mode 🔥

A growth obsessed stock rocket pretending to be a balanced and diversified adult portfolio

Report created on Mar 16, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This thing calls itself “balanced” while being 100% stocks and 80%+ glued to US large‑cap growth. That’s not balanced; that’s just S&P 500 with extra tech sprinkles. The core is one giant S&P 500 position, then you stacked NASDAQ 100 and a large‑cap growth ETF right on top, like putting three nearly identical burgers in one meal and calling it a tasting menu. The developed markets fund is your lone nod to diversification, plus a random pharma theme and a small dividend tilt. Clean it up: decide what’s core, ditch redundant satellites, and only keep add‑ons that genuinely change risk or behavior, not just duplicate the same names.

Growth Info

Historically, this has been riding the bull with style: a ~13.8% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) and a max drawdown around –25%. CAGR is basically your “average speed” over a chaotic road trip, smoothing the potholes. That return is strong versus a plain-vanilla global mix, mostly because you bet hard on US large caps and tech. The flip side: the drop wasn’t mild, and you’ve needed the guts to sit through 25% hits. Also, 23 days driving 90% of returns means a handful of big up days bailed you out — miss those, and the story looks much less heroic.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo results are screaming “high upside, don’t forget downside.” A Monte Carlo simulation is basically a thousand alternate timelines: random market paths based on historical behavior. Median outcome around 456% growth looks dreamy, with a mean annualized ~14.5% — but that’s just math on old patterns. The 5th percentile at about 70% means in a really bad path, you could actually end up with less than you started after the horizon used. Past data is like yesterday’s weather: useful, not psychic. If this level of volatility and the fat tail of ugly scenarios would wreck your plans, consider mixing in more defensive assets instead of just hoping your timeline is one of the lucky ones.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. That “Profile_Balanced” label is doing some Olympic-level lying. A truly balanced setup usually mixes stocks with bonds, maybe some cash or other stabilizers. You’ve gone full equity gladiator arena: great for long horizons and strong stomachs, terrible if withdrawals or big life events show up in a bad year. When stocks tank, there’s nowhere to hide here. If the goal is actual balance, introduce some assets that behave differently in crashes. If the goal is “all gas, no brakes,” just admit it and stop pretending this is a chill, middle-of-the-road mix.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    29%
  • Health Care
    18%
  • Financials
    11%
  • Telecommunications
    10%
  • Industrials
    8%
  • Consumer Staples
    6%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    4%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector exposure screams “Tech and healthcare or bust.” Tech at 29% plus communications (10%) — which includes a lot of quasi-tech like Meta and Alphabet — means roughly 40%+ in digital darlings. Then 18% healthcare with a 10% pharma theme ETF on top? That’s a lot of lab coats and patents. Financials, industrials, and defensives are basically there to make the pie chart look less embarrassing. This is all fine while innovation stories and growth narratives rule the market, but sector crashes do happen. A more even spread would reduce the “please don’t die, tech and pharma” dependence. At least decide whether you want sector tilts on purpose, not just by accident.

Regions Info

  • North America
    86%
  • Europe Developed
    8%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Asia Developed
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%

Geographically, this is “America First, the rest of the world maybe.” About 86% in North America, with Europe and Japan thrown in like garnish: 8% and 3%. Emerging markets? Essentially zero, which is bold if you believe the US will dominate forever, and risky if the rest of the world ever decides to catch up. US-heavy has been a winning bias for years, but that’s looking backward. If leadership rotates — think other regions having their own “US in the 2010s” moment — this setup barely participates. Bumping up non‑US exposure and not ignoring emerging economies would make returns less dependent on one country getting everything right.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    42%
  • Large-cap
    35%
  • Mid-cap
    16%
  • Micro-cap
    3%
  • Small-cap
    2%

Market cap exposure is a full-on mega/big-cap party: 42% mega, 35% big, only tiny scraps in small (2%) and micro (3%). Basically, you bought the headliners and skipped the rest of the festival. That’s great for stability relative to small caps, but it sacrifices diversification and the long-run small-cap growth premium that sometimes shows up over decades. Also, mega-caps can become crowded trades: everyone owns them, everyone panics at once. Adding a deliberate slice of smaller companies — via broad funds, not random stock picking — would smooth out that concentration and give you exposure to different economic drivers than just global giants.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corp
    4.22%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • Apple Inc
    3.43%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • Microsoft Corp
    3.29%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.03%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.89%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Apple Inc
    1.60%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.49%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • Alphabet Inc
    1.40%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.27%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc
    1.20%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
  • Top 10 total 21.81%

Looking through the top ETF holdings, this portfolio is basically a fan club for the Magnificent Seven. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Broadcom — the usual tech royalty — quietly dominate the show. Factor-wise, that means huge growth and momentum exposure baked into everything, even the “dividend” bit to some extent. And that 41% coverage stat is almost certainly understating overlap because we’re only seeing top‑10 ETF holdings; the rest of the iceberg is hidden. This setup works brilliantly when mega‑cap tech wins, but it’s like building your diet around dessert: fun until the sugar crash. Dialing back repeated exposures to the same handful of giants would make the whole thing less fragile.

Risk contribution Info

  • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 50.00%
    51.2%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Weight: 15.00%
    19.4%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 15.00%
    12.7%
  • Invesco Dynamic Pharmaceuticals ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    6.7%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    6.5%
  • Top 5 risk contribution %

Risk contribution reveals who’s actually shaking the portfolio, not just who’s sitting in it. Your S&P 500 fund is 50% of the weight and 51% of the risk — fair enough, it’s the main driver. But the NASDAQ 100 at 15% contributing 19% of risk and the large-cap growth ETF at 5% contributing 6.5% show how your growth tilts punch above their weight. Top three positions driving 83% of total risk is wild: a few funds are basically steering the entire ship. Trimming or consolidating overlapping high‑risk positions and replacing them with genuinely different exposures would keep surprises a bit more manageable.

Redundant positions Info

  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    High correlation

Correlation here is high enough that when one big growth fund sneezes, the others need a ventilator. Correlation just means how often things move together; your NASDAQ 100 and large-cap growth ETF are strongly linked, so owning both doesn’t really spread risk — it just repeats it. Toss in the S&P 500, which is increasingly top-heavy in the same mega‑caps, and your “diversification” in US equities is mostly an illusion. In a real growth bear market, all of these will likely drop in sync. Swapping some of those copy‑paste holdings for stuff that zig when tech zags would give the portfolio actual shock absorbers.

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.

From a risk–return efficiency angle, this portfolio is like lifting heavy with terrible form: strong, but you’re begging for a pulled muscle. The Efficient Frontier is just a fancy way of saying “best return for each level of risk.” Here, you’ve stacked overlapping growth-heavy funds that don’t really buy more return per unit of risk — they just pile on the same risk. That’s why the optimization note is yelling about removing highly correlated assets. Streamline the US growth exposure, add something that actually behaves differently (bonds, real estate, more value, more defensive stuff), and you’d likely land closer to that theoretical efficient line instead of hovering below it out of stubbornness.

Dividends Info

  • Invesco Dynamic Pharmaceuticals ETF 1.00%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
  • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund 1.10%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 3.10%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.38%

The yield at about 1.38% is trying, but no one’s retiring on that income alone. You’ve got one respectable payer in the Schwab dividend ETF and a decent boost from developed markets, but everything else is growth-focused and stingy. That’s fine if the goal is total return and reinvestment, not mailbox money. Just don’t kid yourself: this is a capital growth engine, not an income machine. If steady cash flow ever matters, a bigger allocation to higher-yield, more stable payers or income-oriented assets would be needed. For now, think of the dividends as pocket change, not the rent check.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Invesco Dynamic Pharmaceuticals ETF 0.57%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
  • Schwab S&P 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.10%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio is suspiciously competent. A total expense ratio around 0.10% is impressively low — you must have clicked the right tickers instead of the flashy, overpriced ones. The only real fee offender is the pharma ETF at 0.57%, which is pricey for something that just narrows you into one complicated sector. Fees are like slow leaks in a tire: tiny yearly, brutal over decades. Keeping costs low is one of the few things investors can actually control, so that part is nailed. Now bring the same discipline to your concentration and factor bets instead of just winging it.

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