This portfolio has only about 6 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.

An aggressive low cost equity heavy portfolio with strong US tilt and moderate diversification benefits

Report created on Mar 17, 2026

Risk profile Info

6/7
Aggressive
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

The structure is strongly equity focused, with most money in broad US index funds plus a tech‑tilted growth ETF, some real estate, a dividend ETF, and a small money market slice. This mix gives wide exposure to the stock market but with a lot of internal overlap, since several holdings track very similar baskets. Overlap means the actual number of distinct underlying businesses is lower than it appears. Keeping multiple very similar core funds is fine if it’s intentional, but simplifying can make monitoring easier. Tightening the lineup to one main “total market” core, one growth tilt, and one diversifier can keep the overall profile while making the structure cleaner.

Growth Info

The reported historical results show an extremely high compound annual growth rate and a very small maximum drawdown. CAGR, or Compound Annual Growth Rate, is like the average speed of a car over a long trip, smoothing out bumps. These numbers look unrealistically strong for an aggressive stock portfolio and likely reflect a short time window or data quirks rather than a full market cycle. Past performance is always backward looking and not a promise of future outcomes, especially when based on limited history. It helps to also look at how similar index‑heavy portfolios behaved in tougher markets and ask whether the current risk level still feels acceptable during deep downturns.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo analysis shows extremely high projected returns across 1,000 simulations, with eye‑popping end values and no negative scenarios. Monte Carlo simulation uses many random “what if” paths based on historical patterns to estimate a range of possible futures, a bit like running thousands of alternate weather forecasts. When every trial looks fantastic, it usually means the input returns or timeframe are unreasonably optimistic. Simulations are just mathematical toys; they cannot foresee regime changes, crashes, or slow decades. It’s more useful to think in terms of realistic long‑term equity assumptions and ask whether savings rate, time horizon, and withdrawal needs all line up with an aggressive path that can still include painful multi‑year setbacks.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    89%
  • Real Estate
    6%

Asset allocation is overwhelmingly in stocks, with a modest slice in listed real estate and minimal true cash. That high equity share matches an aggressive risk profile and targets long‑term growth, but it also means big swings during bear markets are entirely possible. Real estate adds a different income and inflation‑sensitive stream, though it often still moves somewhat with stocks. Having very little in defensive assets leaves limited cushioning if equity markets drop sharply. Someone comfortable with that trade‑off can stay fully invested, but those who might need short‑term liquidity or who know they panic‑sell in downturns might benefit from carving out a clearer safety bucket in lower‑volatility assets.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    30%
  • Financials
    11%
  • Telecommunications
    9%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Industrials
    8%
  • Real Estate
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    4%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%

Sector exposure is led by technology, followed by healthy slices of financials, communication services, healthcare, industrials, and real estate, with smaller weights across energy, materials, utilities, and consumer‑oriented areas. This sector mix resembles common broad market benchmarks but with an extra growth tilt via the NASDAQ‑style allocation. That tech and growth leaning has helped in recent years, yet it can bite during rising rate environments or when sentiment shifts away from high‑growth names. The spread across 11 meaningful sectors is a positive sign of diversification. Periodically checking whether any single sector has grown into an outsized share can help keep risk in line, especially after strong multi‑year rallies in one theme.

Regions Info

  • North America
    87%
  • Europe Developed
    4%
  • Japan
    1%
  • Asia Developed
    1%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%

Geographically, the portfolio is heavily concentrated in North America, with only a small slice in developed Europe and minimal exposure to other regions. This home‑bias is very common for US‑based investors and has been rewarding in the last decade as US markets outperformed many peers. However, it also ties results closely to the fate of one economic region and one currency. Global markets can go through long leadership cycles, so non‑US exposure can act as a diversification tool over decades. If a more global risk spread is desired, gradually increasing international weight and ensuring it includes both developed and emerging countries can broaden the opportunity set without changing the overall growth orientation.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    38%
  • Large-cap
    33%
  • Mid-cap
    19%
  • Small-cap
    4%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

By market cap, the portfolio leans heavily into mega and large companies, with some mid‑cap and only a thin slice of small and micro caps. Large businesses tend to be more stable, well‑researched, and closely tracked by indexes, which often means lower individual company risk but also more sensitivity to broad market moves. Smaller companies can add diversification and sometimes higher growth potential, though they tend to be more volatile and cyclical. This tilt toward bigger names is fully in line with standard index construction and is not a concern on its own. Anyone wanting extra diversification could gently boost exposure to smaller companies while staying mindful of the bumpier ride they can bring.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.06%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Apple Inc
    2.81%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • NVIDIA CORP
    2.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
    • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
  • APPLE INC
    2.19%
    Part of fund(s):
    • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
    • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.14%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • MICROSOFT CORP
    1.95%
    Part of fund(s):
    • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
    • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Snowflake Inc.
    1.38%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Direct holding 1.35%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • AMAZON.COM INC
    1.23%
    Part of fund(s):
    • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
    • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
  • Top 10 total 20.06%

Looking through the ETFs, a big chunk of risk and return is driven by a handful of mega‑cap growth names like Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, plus Snowflake as a small direct position. That concentration is normal for market‑cap weighted funds, but it means the portfolio’s fortunes are strongly tied to how large growth companies perform. Overlap analysis here is based only on top‑10 holdings, so true overlap is likely higher than shown. Understanding that the same companies appear in several funds helps explain why things may move in sync. If that dominance feels too strong, shifting a bit toward broader or more balanced styles can dial down reliance on just a few giants.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 17%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very high
Data availability: 36%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very low
Data availability: 1%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Very high
Data availability: 5%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 57%

Factor exposure shows strong tilts to yield, size, and momentum, with moderate low‑volatility influence and modest readings for value and quality. Factor investing means leaning into characteristics like value, momentum, or yield that research has linked to long‑term returns, like choosing specific ingredients in a recipe. A strong momentum tilt can shine when markets trend but may struggle in sharp reversals. Yield tilt reflects the presence of dividend and real estate holdings, supporting income but sometimes emphasizing more mature companies. Size exposure here likely reflects broad coverage of smaller firms in the total market funds. Since factor signal coverage is incomplete, the picture is approximate; still, being aware that momentum and yield are key drivers helps set expectations about behavior in different market phases.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 34.21%
    31.1%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 28.34%
    26.6%
  • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
    Weight: 8.68%
    18.1%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Weight: 10.85%
    11.2%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    Weight: 5.23%
    10.7%
  • Top 5 risk contribution %

Risk contribution data shows that the three largest index holdings drive over three‑quarters of total portfolio risk, even though their combined weight is lower than that. Risk contribution measures how much each holding adds to overall ups and downs, which can differ a lot from its percentage weight. Some smaller positions, like the international and dividend slices, contribute more risk than their size suggests, indicating they’re spicier ingredients in the mix. That’s not automatically bad, but it’s useful to know where shocks will come from. Adjusting position sizes, or consolidating overlapping funds, can help align how much risk each sleeve is adding with how important it’s meant to be in the overall plan.

Redundant positions Info

  • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
    Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    Snowflake Inc.
    Fidelity® Government Money Market Fund
    Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
    Vanguard Real Estate Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Most holdings are highly correlated with each other, meaning they tend to move in the same direction at the same time. Correlation is basically how similarly two investments behave; if they both rise and fall together, diversification benefits are limited. Here, the set of broad US and growth‑tilted funds behave much like one blended equity holding, even if the labels differ. That’s why downturns are likely to hit everything simultaneously, except maybe the small cash‑like piece. To improve diversification, it can help to include assets or strategies that historically move differently from US stocks, though even then, correlations often spike in crises. Understanding this prevents surprise when “many” funds all drop together.

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.

Efficient Frontier analysis suggests there’s room to rearrange these same holdings for a better risk‑return tradeoff. The Efficient Frontier is a curve showing the best possible balance between risk and return for a given set of assets, assuming only their historical behavior. Here, a more “efficient” mix could deliver higher expected returns at the same risk level, or similar returns with less volatility. Crucially, efficiency is about the ratio of return to risk, not necessarily about maximum diversification or simplicity. Because many holdings are highly correlated, trimming overlapping pieces and fine‑tuning weights may move the portfolio closer to the frontier. Still, all such optimizations rely on past data, which may not hold in future markets.

Dividends Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
  • FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND 2.60%
  • FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND 1.00%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
  • Fidelity® Government Money Market Fund 1.80%
  • Vanguard Real Estate Index Fund ETF Shares 3.70%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.45%

The blended yield around the mid‑1% range comes from a mix of broad index funds, a higher‑yield dividend ETF, real estate, and the money market fund. Dividend yield is the cash income an investment pays out yearly as a percentage of price, similar to rent on a property. This level of income is consistent with a growth‑oriented equity portfolio rather than an income‑focused one. The presence of a dedicated dividend ETF and REIT exposure is a plus for investors who like some baseline cash flow. If reliable income is a future priority, gradually increasing the share of income‑producing assets over time can help, while still balancing the need for growth to keep up with inflation.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Vanguard Real Estate Index Fund ETF Shares 0.12%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%

The overall cost level is impressively low, with a total expense ratio around 0.04% thanks to index vehicles and no‑fee funds. Expense ratios are like a small yearly membership fee charged as a percentage of assets; every bit you save on costs stays invested and compounds over time. This cost profile is better than what many investors pay and supports stronger long‑term outcomes, especially over multi‑decade horizons. Sticking to low‑fee core holdings is a real strength here and very much in line with best practices. When adding or changing positions in the future, checking that new options maintain this low‑cost standard can preserve the current advantage and prevent silent performance drag.

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