This portfolio has only about 2 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.
Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine

Equity portfolio mixing dividend bias quality gaps and a few highly volatile single stock positions

Report created on Aug 28, 2026

Risk profile Info

3/7
Cautious
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately 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 portfolio is fully invested in equities, with the bulk in diversified ETFs and a small slice in individual stocks. Around two‑thirds of the weight sits in broad US ETFs spanning dividend payers, large‑cap growth, small‑cap value, and mid‑cap value. Another chunk adds developed and emerging international equity exposure, while about 6% is in a handful of concentrated biotech and private space names. Structurally, this creates a core‑and‑satellite setup: diversified funds at the core with a few high‑risk satellites. That mix can give both broad market participation and idiosyncratic company‑specific swings. Because there are no bonds or cash, day‑to‑day ups and downs will track the equity markets fairly closely, even if the style mix is distinct.

Growth Info

Over roughly two months, $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $1,095, a strong short‑term gain versus both US and global benchmarks. The reported compound annual growth rate (CAGR) above 50% simply reflects annualizing a brief good spell, not a realistic long‑run expectation. CAGR is like average speed on a tiny stretch of road; with only a short distance, any bump distorts the number. The portfolio’s maximum drawdown of about ‑1.8% was shallower than the benchmarks’ roughly ‑3.5%, but again over a very limited window. With so little history, it is too early to infer that this pattern of outperformance and lower drawdowns represents a persistent trait.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses the short return history to simulate thousands of possible 15‑year paths for a $1,000 investment. Monte Carlo simply means “what if” scenarios: it shuffles and re‑uses historical return patterns to see a range of future outcomes. Here, the median ending value around $2,700 and an average simulated return near 8% per year look broadly equity‑like. The wide spread from about $900 to nearly $8,000 between pessimistic and optimistic cases underlines how uncertain long horizons can be. Because the inputs come from only two months of data, the simulation is far less dependable than one built on a full market cycle, so these numbers are best read as rough illustrations, not precise forecasts.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

By design, this is a 100% stock portfolio, with no bonds, cash, or alternatives in the mix. Asset classes are the big buckets—like stocks, bonds, and real estate—that tend to behave differently in various economic conditions. Having everything in a single asset class concentrates exposure to equity market cycles: when stocks rise broadly, the whole portfolio benefits; when they fall, there’s little natural cushion from more defensive assets. Compared with multi‑asset benchmarks that include bonds, this portfolio should show higher volatility and a stronger link to global growth and corporate earnings. The upside is clear participation in equity risk premia; the trade‑off is greater sensitivity to market downturns.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    19%
  • Health Care
    17%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Consumer Staples
    9%
  • Energy
    9%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    6%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector exposure is fairly spread out, with notable weights in technology, health care, and financials, followed by industrials, consumer staples and discretionary, energy, and telecoms. Smaller slices in materials, utilities, and real estate round out the picture. Sectors represent different parts of the economy, and their cycles can diverge: for instance, defensives like staples and health care often behave differently from cyclicals like industrials and consumer discretionary. This allocation looks reasonably balanced and broadly in line with many diversified equity benchmarks, which is a strong indicator of sector diversification. It means no single economic theme, like purely tech or purely energy, fully dominates the portfolio’s behavior at the sector level.

Regions Info

  • North America
    74%
  • Europe Developed
    11%
  • Asia Developed
    5%
  • Asia Emerging
    4%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geographically, about three‑quarters of the portfolio is in North America, with the rest spread across developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, and a modest allocation to emerging regions and smaller areas like Latin America and Africa/Middle East. Geography matters because local economies, currencies, and policy cycles can diverge. Relative to a typical global equity index, this mix tilts more heavily toward North America while still including a meaningful international slice. That brings some diversification beyond the US, but portfolio returns will still be driven mainly by North American markets and the US dollar. The international stakes add exposure to different growth drivers and political environments without overwhelming the overall regional tilt.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    36%
  • Mid-cap
    23%
  • Mega-cap
    23%
  • Small-cap
    11%
  • Micro-cap
    5%

The market‑cap breakdown shows a healthy spread: meaningful stakes in mega‑ and large‑cap companies, backed by notable mid‑cap and smaller company exposure. Market capitalization is simply a company’s size on the stock market, and different size groups often behave differently. Larger firms typically move more with broad indices and can be somewhat more stable, while small and micro‑caps can be more volatile but offer more company‑specific upside and downside. Here, the mix leans toward bigger stocks but still reserves over 15% for small and micro‑caps. That blend supports diversification across business maturity levels and can make the portfolio more responsive to shifts in sentiment toward smaller companies.

True holdings Info

  • Wave Life Sciences Ltd
    1.92%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.90%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • ProQR Therapeutics BV
    1.72%
  • Apple Inc.
    1.72%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Abbott Laboratories
    1.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • Merck & Company Inc
    1.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • Amgen Inc
    1.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • The Coca-Cola Company
    1.44%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    1.39%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab Emerging Markets Equity ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Top 10 total 16.33%

Looking through ETF top‑10 holdings, coverage is limited—about a third of the portfolio—so hidden overlaps beyond the largest positions are likely. Within the available data, certain big names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, and major health‑care and consumer brands appear once through ETFs, but no single company dominates the entire portfolio by total weight. The largest direct positions are in small biotech names such as Wave Life Sciences and ProQR Therapeutics, each under 2% of the overall portfolio. Overlap analysis matters because the same stock held via multiple funds can quietly increase concentration. Here, visible overlap is moderate, but because only top‑10 ETF holdings are captured, true duplication may be understated.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
High
Data availability: 75%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 19%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very low
Data availability: 5%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 95%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
Data availability: 98%

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 shows strong tilts toward value, momentum, yield, and low volatility, with a notably very low score on quality. Factors are like underlying “personality traits” of stocks—such as being cheap, fast‑rising, stable, or profitable—that research ties to long‑run patterns. High value and yield scores suggest a bias toward cheaper, income‑generating names, while strong momentum and low volatility indicate stocks that have recently done well and been relatively stable. The very low quality exposure implies less emphasis on traditional strength markers like stable earnings, strong balance sheets, or high profitability. In certain environments, portfolios with lower quality can be more sensitive when economic or credit conditions suddenly worsen.

Risk contribution Info

  • Silence Therapeutics plc
    Weight: 1.00%
    27.3%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    Weight: 18.64%
    21.0%
  • Schwab International Equity ETF
    Weight: 16.88%
    15.0%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    Weight: 33.63%
    13.9%
  • Schwab Emerging Markets Equity ETF
    Weight: 8.30%
    8.7%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 85.9%

Risk contribution data show a striking pattern: Silence Therapeutics, just 1% of the weight, accounts for about 27% of total portfolio risk. Risk contribution measures how much each position drives overall ups and downs; a tiny but very volatile holding can dominate, like a single loud instrument in an orchestra. In contrast, the largest ETF, at over 33% weight, adds under 14% of the risk, reflecting its diversification. The top three holdings by weight contribute about 63% of portfolio risk, which is broadly reasonable for a concentrated core. The key insight is that a small cluster of volatile single stocks, especially Silence Therapeutics, materially shapes the portfolio’s total volatility.

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

The efficient frontier analysis shows the current portfolio sitting below the curve of best possible risk/return combinations using the same holdings. The current Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above cash, is about 4.0, while the optimal mix of these assets reaches a Sharpe above 6.5 at similar volatility. That gap suggests the recent performance pattern of these holdings could support a better risk/return trade‑off if the weights were different. Importantly, this is all based on just two months of data, so it may simply be capturing short‑term noise. Still, it indicates that, historically, the same ingredients might have been combined more efficiently during this brief period.

Dividends Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.20%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.00%
  • Schwab Emerging Markets Equity ETF 2.60%
  • Schwab International Equity ETF 3.00%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 1.80%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 2.06%

The portfolio’s overall dividend yield sits at about 2.1%, thanks mainly to the dedicated US and international dividend‑oriented ETFs and the emerging markets fund, all yielding near or above 3%. Yield is the cash income paid out relative to the investment size, and it can meaningfully contribute to total return, especially when reinvested. The growth‑focused large‑cap ETF offers a much lower yield, which is common for growth strategies that often retain earnings. Taken together, this creates a moderate income profile: not a high‑yield approach, but clearly above what a pure growth equity portfolio might deliver. Over time, stable dividends can help smooth total returns, though payouts are never guaranteed.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Schwab Emerging Markets Equity ETF 0.11%
  • Schwab International Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.08%

Total ongoing fund costs, measured by the Total Expense Ratio (TER), are low at around 0.08%. TER is the annual fee charged by ETFs to cover management and operating expenses, quietly deducted from returns. Here, all the core funds use low‑cost index or systematic strategies, with individual TERs mostly in the 0.04%–0.11% range and only the small‑cap value ETF slightly higher at 0.25%. This cost profile is impressively low and aligns well with cost‑efficient investing best practices. Lower fees leave more of any gross return in the investor’s pocket, and over long periods even small percentage differences can compound into substantial dollar amounts.

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?

AVUV vs SPMO SCHD vs SGOV AVUV vs XMMO AVUV vs VTV

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