This portfolio has only about 1.9 years 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.
Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

A tech fueled balanced portfolio that keeps saying it is diversified while double dipping everywhere

Report created on Dec 17, 2025

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This thing calls itself “balanced” but it’s basically an index salad with extra tech dressing and a side of Bitcoin. You’ve got S&P 500, Total World, Total International, plus separate mid and small caps — congratulations, you bought the same companies three times in slightly different packaging. That 24% S&P 500 stacked on top of 18.6% Total World is a masterclass in overlap, not genius diversification. In plain terms, you’re paying for multiple tickets to the same movie. A cleaner setup would trim the duplicate broad-market funds and keep one main equity core, then build around it with only truly distinct satellites.

Growth Info

Historically, this portfolio has been spoiled by the market gods: ~20% CAGR with only a -16.5% max drawdown is absurdly kind. CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is just the “average speed” your money grew at per year. Toss in the fact that 90% of returns came from 15 days, and you’re basically living off market lightning strikes. Compared with a boring 60/40 that might chug along at 7–9%, this looks like cheat codes. But past data is yesterday’s weather: helpful, not psychic. Use this track record as a confidence check, not a reason to assume “20% forever.” Expect more volatility and lower long-run growth than this backtest suggests.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation showered you with confetti: median outcome +1,648%, even the 5th percentile at +323%, and 999/1000 runs positive. Monte Carlo just means “we ran a bunch of random future paths using past volatility and returns,” like simulating 1,000 alternate financial universes. The problem: if you feed the machine heroic historical returns, it spits out heroic futures. Garbage in, fantasy out. A 25% annualized return in simulations is pure dreamland for a balanced-ish portfolio. Treat these numbers as an upper-bound fairy tale and stress-test with more modest returns and nastier drawdowns before assuming you’ve discovered a low-risk money printer.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    77%
  • Bonds
    17%
  • Other
    5%
  • Cash
    1%

Asset mix: ~77% stocks, 17% bonds, 5% “other” (gold and Bitcoin), 1% cash. For something stamped “Balanced” with a risk score 4/7, this is more “aggro-lite” than middle-of-the-road. You’re basically growth-first, with bonds around mainly to make the volatility chart feel less embarrassing. The 5% in “other” is a weird split: some sensible gold and then crypto chaos packed together like they’re cousins. If the goal is truly balanced behavior, dial in what role each bucket plays: stocks = growth, bonds = stability, other = hedge or wild card. Then adjust stock/bond/other weights to match real sleep-at-night levels instead of label marketing.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    33%
  • Financials
    10%
  • Industrials
    7%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Health Care
    5%
  • Telecommunications
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Energy
    2%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector breakdown screams tech addiction: 33% technology, then a distant second in financials (10%), with the rest scattered in single digits. On top of that, you’ve got a pure tech ETF, a semiconductor ETF, and a 5% Apple single-stock shrine. For a “highly diversified” portfolio, this is like saying, “I eat a varied diet” and then revealing it’s 33% pizza, 10% fries, and a token salad leaf. The risk is clear: if tech stumbles or valuations reset, your whole portfolio catches the flu. You don’t need to nuke tech, but shifting toward less sector overlap would make returns less hostage to one industry’s mood swings.

Regions Info

  • North America
    60%
  • Europe Developed
    7%
  • Asia Emerging
    3%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

Geography-wise, it’s “USA or bust” with 60% in North America and pretty skinny allocations elsewhere: Europe 7%, Japan 3%, developed Asia 3%, emerging Asia 3%. For a setup that owns Total World and Total International, this still manages to feel like you stapled on global exposure as a formality. The home bias is normal for a US-based investor, but calling this strongly global is generous. The risk: if US large caps underperform a decade (it happens), your portfolio is basically chained to them. A more intentional approach would size US vs. rest-of-world based on actual conviction and risk tolerance, not accidental overlap from three broad equity funds.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    34%
  • Large-cap
    22%
  • Mid-cap
    16%
  • Small-cap
    4%
  • No data
    1%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

Market cap spread: 34% mega, 22% big, 16% mid, 4% small, and crumbs elsewhere. So yes, you technically own “the whole market,” but the bouncers are clearly favoring the megacaps. That S&P 500 + Total World + separate mid and small-cap ETFs create a weird illusion of diversification while still heavily leaning on the giants. When nearly everything in your portfolio is a different door into the same megacap party, you’re not getting as much diversification as the fund count suggests. A cleaner structure with one or two broad funds purposefully weighted for mid/small exposure would be less messy and easier to actually manage.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard Intermediate-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Your correlation picture is basically: “Different tickers, same vibes.” The bond funds are highly correlated with each other, mid and small caps move together, and S&P 500 plus Total World are near clones. Correlation just means “do these things go up and down together?” High correlation kills true diversification — you’re rearranging furniture on the same boat. In a crash, most of this equity chunk dives together; you just get to watch it happen through multiple app icons. Consolidating redundant funds and focusing on truly different risk drivers (like distinct bonds, defensive assets, or less-US-heavy equity) would make downturns less of a synchronized swan dive.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

Risk-return efficiency here is “good raw ingredients cooked in a slightly chaotic way.” The historical return is wild for the level of drawdown, but that’s heavily helped by a tech-fueled bull run and low-rate backdrop that might not repeat. Efficient Frontier just means the best mix of return for a given level of risk — not magic free lunch, just smarter trade-offs. Right now, you’re taking on concentrated sector and regional risk while pretending broad diversification solves everything. Cleaning up overlapping equity chunks, deciding a real stock/bond target, and clarifying what role gold and Bitcoin play could land you closer to a truly efficient, grown-up allocation instead of this almost-there mashup.

Dividends Info

  • Apple Inc 0.40%
  • Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund ETF Shares 3.80%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.30%
  • SPDR Portfolio High Yield Bond 7.40%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares 1.30%
  • Vanguard Intermediate-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund ETF Shares 4.60%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.40%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares 1.50%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 1.70%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.88%

Total yield around 1.9% is fine for a growth-tilted mix, but nobody’s retiring on this cash flow unless they’re living extremely small. You’ve got some real income from bonds (3.8–4.6%) and that SPDR high-yield bond blasting 7.4% like it’s still 2006. Meanwhile, the equity side is cute but not exactly an income machine — tech and semis are there for growth, not regular paychecks. Dividends are just one way to get paid; total return (growth + income) is what matters. Still, if future spending is a goal, gradually shifting a slice toward more predictable, sustainable income streams would avoid needing to sell into every nasty dip.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • SPDR® Gold Shares 0.40%
  • iShares Bitcoin Trust 0.12%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • SPDR Portfolio High Yield Bond 0.05%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Vanguard Intermediate-Term Corporate Bond Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total World Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.07%

Costs are where this portfolio quietly flexes: total TER around 0.07% is “I actually read the fee column” territory. You somehow assembled a pretty complicated Franken-portfolio while still paying thrift-store prices. Even the more expensive bits — gold at 0.40% and semis at 0.35% — aren’t outrageous for niche exposure. The irony is you’re paying almost nothing to hold multiple overlapping funds that don’t add much. Low cost is great, but low cost clutter is still clutter. Streamlining to fewer, broader holdings would keep expenses tiny and make it much easier to see what the portfolio is *actually* doing when markets go nuts.

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

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

AVDV vs VOO DRAM vs VGT DRAM vs SMH DRAM vs VOO

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