This portfolio loves broad index funds but insists on driving them with the parking brake half on
Report created on Aug 17, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 47.66% -
FZ FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
FZROX - US31635T7081 25.19% -
VT Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 12.43% -
FZ FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
FZILX - US31635T6091 7.40% -
SC Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
SCHG - US8085243009 4.77% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 2.55%
This portfolio is basically two giant “own-everything” engines (US total market plus international total market), then someone panic-added smaller funds around the edges like garnish. Nearly 85% of the risk is coming from just three positions, so the rest is mostly decorative noise pretending to be sophistication. It’s like ordering the sampler platter, then eating only the two big dishes every time. The structure screams “I want simple, low-cost indexing,” but the layering of overlapping funds muddies what should be a very clean story. The end result is broad, yes, but also kind of redundant and less intentional than it looks on paper.
Growth
Historically, this thing did fine… until you compare it to anything with a gym membership. A 12.03% CAGR turning $1,000 into $2,481 is nothing to be ashamed of, but the US market alone stomped it with 15.08% over the same period. You basically paid with performance for being more global and more mellow. The max drawdown at -34.10% was almost identical to the benchmarks, so the pain was the same, just with less long-term payoff. Past performance is like old Instagram photos: interesting, not predictive, and occasionally a bit embarrassing next to the overachieving friends.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation basically says, “Yeah, this portfolio will probably grow, but don’t get cocky.” Monte Carlo just runs thousands of random what-if paths to see how things might play out; here the median outcome is $2,727 from $1,000 over 15 years, with a decent 72.9% chance of ending positive. The range from $965 to $7,302 shows just how wide the universe of “could happen” really is. Simulations are like weather forecasts two weeks out: useful for packing a jacket, terrible for planning a wedding down to the minute.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset-class “diversification” here is basically: stocks, stocks, and more stocks. A clean 100% equity allocation is bold, but calling this “broadly diversified” is like calling a menu diversified because you offer burgers in three sizes. There’s no ballast, no shock absorbers, just pure growth exposure. That explains the sharp drawdowns and the reliance on markets continuing to play nice over long stretches. For a so-called growth setup, the story is internally consistent: everything is riding on the equity train, for better or worse, with no plan B visible in the structure itself.
Sectors
- Technology 29%
- Financials 17%
- Industrials 13%
- Health Care 8%
- Telecommunications 6%
- Consumer Discretionary 6%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Basic Materials 5%
- Energy 4%
- Consumer Discretionary 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this is a tech-flavored everything-burger. Technology at 29% is the main character, with financials and industrials as the supporting cast. The spread roughly mimics broad indexes, but there’s still a clear dependence on the global “chips and clicks” economy doing well. When nearly a third of sector exposure leans on one theme, downturns in that theme hit the whole portfolio’s mood. It isn’t a meme-stock-level bet, but it definitely lives in a world where semiconductors and big platforms have to keep printing profits for the total package not to feel wobbly.
Regions
- North America 49%
- Europe Developed 19%
- Asia Developed 10%
- Japan 9%
- Asia Emerging 7%
- Australasia 2%
- Africa/Middle East 2%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, this is one of the least “home-country-obsessed” US portfolios out there: about 49% North America and 51% everywhere else. That’s almost suspiciously reasonable. Still, this means performance depends heavily on markets that have been chronic underperformers versus the US for a long time. So you got the moral high ground of being globally diversified and, in return, slightly worse returns than just hugging the US market. It’s like insisting on eating healthy at a barbecue: absolutely defensible, but you’re not getting the tastiest plate compared to everyone else piling on brisket.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 44%
- Large-cap 31%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 4%
- Micro-cap 1%
Market-cap exposure is dominated by the mega and large caps: 44% mega, 31% large. Mid-caps get a decent 17%, while small and micro caps are basically an afterthought. So the portfolio is hitchhiking on the biggest, most popular names, with only a token nod toward the scrappier companies. That works fine when giants lead the charge, but it also means the portfolio’s behavior is very index-like and heavily tied to how global titans move. There’s no real tilt toward obscure or high-risk minnows here; it’s big-business capitalism all the way down with minimal spice.
True holdings
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 2.01%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 1.30%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc. 1.15%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
SS Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 1.08%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 1.03%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 0.82%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AS ASML Holding N.V. 0.80%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 0.64%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 0.55%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 0.48%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 9.86%
Look-through holdings show a quiet obsession with semiconductors and US mega-cap tech. Top exposures feature Taiwan Semi, NVIDIA, Apple, Samsung, SK Hynix, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, ASML, and Broadcom. That’s basically a who’s who of “if this breaks, global markets cry.” These names are getting hit from multiple angles via different broad funds, meaning there’s more hidden concentration than the fund list suggests. And remember, this is only from ETF top-10s with just 14.3% coverage, so the real overlap could be spicier. It’s diversification theatre starring the same recurring cast.
Factors
Factor-wise, this portfolio is almost suspiciously normal. Value, size, momentum, quality, and yield all hover around neutral, meaning it behaves a lot like the broad market without strong tilts. The only mild personality trait is a higher low-volatility exposure at 64%. Low-vol just means it favors slightly steadier names over rollercoasters, like picking the sedan over the sports car. So while the allocation looks bold at 100% stocks, the factor mix is relatively chill. It doesn’t scream clever design, more accidental balance: no big bets, no dramatic style bias, just quietly average ingredients.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 47.66% 46.3% -
FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND
Weight: 25.19% 26.4% -
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 12.43% 13.0% -
FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
Weight: 7.40% 6.8% -
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Weight: 4.77% 5.5% - Top 5 risk contribution 97.9%
Risk contribution is where the “I own six funds” illusion collapses. The top three holdings alone throw off 85.62% of total risk, almost exactly matching their weight. That means each big position is doing exactly what you’d expect: if one sneezes, the whole portfolio catches a cold. The Schwab US Large-Cap Growth ETF, despite only 4.77% weight, punches above its size with 5.54% of risk — a small but spicy add-on. Overall, there’s no hidden monster here, just a straightforward story: the giant core funds dominate everything, with the rest barely nudging the risk dial.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationVanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF SharesFIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND
-
High correlationFIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUNDSchwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETFVanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
The correlation picture is basically saying, “You bought twins and dressed them in different logos.” The Fidelity and Vanguard international funds move almost identically, and the US total market funds are the same song, different record label. Add Schwab’s growth ETF, which moves closely with the US total market, and it’s clear these are overlapping slices of the same pie. High correlation isn’t evil, it just means when one drops, the others usually join the party. The portfolio gets psychological comfort from multiple tickers, but mathematically, a lot of this is copy-paste exposure.
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 basically leaving free money on the floor. With a Sharpe ratio of 0.49 and sitting 2.48 percentage points below the efficient frontier at its risk level, it’s like running a race with untied shoes. The efficient frontier is just the best possible trade-off between risk and return using the same ingredients; here, a different mix of these exact holdings could get either more return or less risk. The optimal and minimum-variance portfolios both offer better Sharpe ratios, so the current setup is mathematically… suboptimal at best, lazy at worst.
Dividends
- FIDELITY ZERO INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND 2.30%
- FIDELITY ZERO TOTAL MARKET INDEX FUND 0.90%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.00%
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.00%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.50%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.81%
A total yield of 1.81% is solidly “please don’t call this an income portfolio.” There’s a small nod to dividends via the Schwab dividend ETF and the international funds with ~2.3–2.5% yields, but the overall result is growth-first, income-second. The presence of a dividend ETF at just 2.55% weight is more symbolic than transformational — like sprinkling parsley and calling it a salad. This portfolio clearly relies on capital gains, not cash payouts, to do the heavy lifting. Nothing wrong with that, just don’t pretend the yield is doing more work than it is.
Ongoing product costs
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
- 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) 0.03%
Costs are almost annoyingly good. A total TER of 0.03% is basically couch-cushion money in fee terms. The individual ETFs are all in the rock-bottom range, and the Fidelity ZERO funds literally have a 0% fee. This is one of the rare cases where the roast has to admit: you did not get ripped off by expenses. It’s like accidentally booking business class at economy prices. The irony is that, with fees this low, the only real drag isn’t what you’re paying managers — it’s how you’ve arranged the otherwise excellent building blocks.
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