Diversified income tilted portfolio with strong US focus and modest defensive characteristics

Report created on Apr 17, 2026

Risk 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

This portfolio is built mainly from broad stock index ETFs, income-focused equity funds, a sector fund, and a gold ETF. Roughly a third sits in a total US stock fund, with meaningful slices in international stocks, dividends, covered-call income, and energy, plus a notable allocation to gold. That mix blends growth, income, and a bit of defense. For a balanced-risk profile, this structure makes sense: core broad funds are doing the heavy lifting, while the satellite positions (energy, dividends, gold) shape behavior around income and downside resilience. The key takeaway is that it’s already a mostly “one-stop” equity mix, so future tweaks are more about fine-tuning tilts than rebuilding from scratch.

Growth Info

Historically, $1,000 grew to about $2,569 over the period, which is a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.39%. CAGR is like your average speed over a long road trip, smoothing out all the bumps. That’s almost identical to the US market benchmark and comfortably ahead of the global market, so returns have been strong without needing to beat the US outright. Max drawdown — the worst peak‑to‑trough drop — was about -16%, notably shallower than both benchmarks. That means the portfolio captured similar upside with smaller historical drops, which is exactly what many balanced investors want: strong growth with somewhat gentler setbacks.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection runs 1,000 simulated 15‑year paths using patterns from historical returns and volatility to estimate a range of possible futures. Think of it like running the same movie with slightly different weather each time. The median outcome is about $2,627 on $1,000, with a wide but reasonable “likely” band from roughly $1,775 to $4,038. There’s also a meaningful chance of flat or negative outcomes, which is normal for equity-heavy portfolios. Importantly, simulations rely on past data and assumptions, so they’re guides, not promises. The big message: long-term odds look favorable, but you still need to be emotionally ready for a bumpy ride along the way.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    87%
  • Other
    11%
  • Not classified
    2%

Around 87% of the portfolio is in stocks, 11% in “other” (mainly gold), and a small slice not classified. That’s an equity‑heavy mix, which fits a growth‑oriented but not extreme risk profile. Stocks drive long‑term returns but also most of the volatility; gold adds a different type of asset that often behaves differently in crises or inflationary spikes. Compared with a classic 60/40 stock‑bond setup, this is more growth‑tilted and will likely swing more. For someone with a balanced risk label, the main question is whether that higher equity share matches the real-world comfort level with big market swings over multi‑year periods.

Sectors Info

  • Energy
    19%
  • Technology
    17%
  • Financials
    10%
  • Health Care
    9%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    6%
  • Telecommunications
    6%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, the portfolio is notably tilted toward energy at 19%, compared with much lower energy weight in broad market indices. Technology, financials, health care, and industrials are all present in healthy amounts, giving decent balance across the economic cycle. An energy tilt can help when commodity prices and inflation are strong, but it may lag when energy falls out of favor or when markets reward more growth-oriented areas. The benefit is exposure to a sector that often behaves differently from broad equities; the trade-off is extra sector-specific volatility. The key takeaway is that sector risk is meaningfully shaped by that deliberate energy overweight.

Regions Info

  • North America
    75%
  • Europe Developed
    6%
  • Japan
    2%
  • Asia Developed
    2%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, about 75% of exposure is in North America, with modest slices across Europe, Japan, developed Asia, emerging Asia, and smaller regions. That’s more US‑centric than the global stock market, where US exposure is closer to 60%. A home bias is common and has worked well in the last decade, but it also ties results more heavily to one economy, one set of regulators, and mostly one currency. The non‑US allocation still brings diversification, especially if other regions outperform in future cycles. The practical takeaway: this is a US‑anchored portfolio with some global seasoning rather than a truly global balance.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    35%
  • Mega-cap
    27%
  • Mid-cap
    20%
  • No data
    11%
  • Small-cap
    3%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

By market cap, the portfolio leans heavily into mega- and large-cap companies, with 62% there and around 20% in mid‑caps, leaving only small slices in small and micro caps. Large and mega caps tend to be more stable and liquid, often with more diversified businesses, which can reduce the “wild swings” seen in smaller stocks. On the flip side, smaller companies sometimes drive outperformance in certain cycles, so limited exposure may miss some of that potential. For most long‑term investors, this large-cap tilt is very normal and helps keep volatility manageable, especially when combined with an income and low‑volatility tilt elsewhere.

True holdings Info

  • Exxon Mobil Corp
    3.47%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
  • Chevron Corp
    3.06%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Apple Inc
    2.07%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • ConocoPhillips
    1.56%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.53%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.12%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    0.93%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • EOG Resources Inc
    0.82%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
    • JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.82%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 17.62%

Looking through the ETFs, the biggest underlying names are familiar large companies like Exxon Mobil, Chevron, NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, and Amazon. There is some overlap: for example, mega-cap tech stocks show up in multiple broad funds, while oil majors are reinforced by the dedicated energy ETF. Overlap isn’t bad by itself, but it does create hidden concentration in certain giants, especially in energy and big tech. Since only ETF top‑10 holdings are visible, this concentration is likely understated. The main takeaway is that even though you hold several funds, part of the risk is still tied to a relatively small group of large, well-known companies.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 74%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 89%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 74%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 74%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
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 exposure is mostly neutral across value, size, momentum, quality, and yield, meaning the portfolio behaves broadly like the market on those dimensions. The standout is low volatility, which shows a high exposure. Factors are like underlying “personality traits” of investments; a low‑volatility tilt means you lean slightly toward steadier companies whose prices have historically moved less. That often helps during market drawdowns but can lag in sharp, speculative rallies. This low‑vol tilt lines up well with a balanced risk score: it nudges the portfolio toward smoother rides without dramatically changing return expectations, which is generally a positive alignment with risk-conscious goals.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 35.00%
    39.7%
  • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
    Weight: 15.00%
    22.2%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 15.00%
    14.7%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    Weight: 12.00%
    11.5%
  • JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF
    Weight: 12.00%
    7.8%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 95.8%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives overall ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. The total US stock ETF is 35% of the portfolio but contributes about 40% of the risk, so it’s the main risk engine. The energy sector fund is just 15% by weight yet adds over 22% of risk, showing it’s relatively volatile. Together with the international fund, the top three positions generate more than three‑quarters of total risk. Meanwhile, the covered-call income ETF contributes less risk than its weight. The takeaway: if you ever wanted to dial risk up or down, adjusting these largest risk contributors would have the biggest impact.

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, the current portfolio sits below the efficient frontier, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.95 versus 1.37 for the optimal mix. The Sharpe ratio measures how much extra return you’re getting for each unit of risk, similar to miles per gallon. Being 2.77 percentage points below the frontier at the same risk level means that, using only these existing holdings, a different weighting could theoretically deliver higher expected return or similar return with less volatility. The good news is you’re already in a decent zone; the message is that rebalancing among the current ETFs could squeeze more efficiency out of what you already own.

Dividends Info

  • JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF 8.30%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
  • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund 2.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 2.60%

Income-wise, there’s a clear tilt. The total yield around 2.6% is boosted by the JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF at about 8.3% and the Schwab dividend ETF at 3.4%. Covered-call and dividend strategies trade some upside potential for current cash flow, which can be very attractive for investors who like regular distributions or plan partial withdrawals. The core index funds and energy ETF add moderate yields on top. The practical point: a meaningful slice of your return comes as cash rather than just price gains, which can make the emotional ride easier and reduce the need to sell shares when you want spending money.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Gold Trust 0.25%
  • JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF 0.35%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund 0.09%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.11%

Costs are impressively low, with a total expense ratio around 0.11%. TER (Total Expense Ratio) is the annual fee the funds charge, like a small drag on performance each year. The broad Vanguard and Schwab funds are especially cheap, and even the more specialized energy and income funds are reasonably priced. Over long periods, saving a few tenths of a percent each year compounds into a noticeable difference in ending wealth. This cost profile is a real strength: you’re getting diversification, income, and some defensive features without paying a big fee premium, which supports better long-run outcomes compared with higher-cost alternatives.

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