Three fund global equity portfolio with strong US tilt and low cost broad market exposure
Report created on Apr 22, 2026Risk 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
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 60.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 20.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 20.00%
This portfolio is a straightforward three‑ETF mix entirely in stocks. About 60% goes to a broad US large‑cap index, 20% to a concentrated US growth index, and 20% to a broad international stock fund. Structurally, it leans heavily toward US equities while still including a meaningful slice of companies listed outside the US. This kind of “core plus satellite” setup is common: a broad core index with a more focused growth‑tilted sleeve. The simplicity makes it easy to understand what’s driving results. With everything in equities and no bonds or cash, returns and volatility are both tied closely to global stock markets rather than income or capital‑preservation assets.
Growth
From late 2020 to April 2026, a hypothetical $1,000 in this mix grew to $2,117, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.64%. CAGR is like your average speed on a road trip, smoothing out all the ups and downs into one yearly rate. Over this period, the portfolio slightly lagged the US market by 0.44 percentage points a year but beat the global market by 1.51 points. The worst peak‑to‑trough drop was about ‑27%, a meaningful but not extreme decline for an all‑equity mix. Recovery took just over a year, showing resilience but also how drawdowns can require patience.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses 1,000 simulations based on past return and volatility patterns to estimate possible futures. Think of it as running the same 15‑year experiment many times with slightly different “weather” each run. The median outcome turns $1,000 into about $2,767, with a wide range from roughly $1,011 to $7,569 between the 5th and 95th percentiles. That spread illustrates uncertainty: history is a guide, not a promise. An 8.08% average annualized return across simulations suggests equity‑like growth expectations with meaningful risk. Around 75% of simulations end positive, which highlights how time horizon can help, but individual paths can still be bumpy and very different from the median.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio is in stocks, with 0% in bonds, cash, or alternatives. That creates a “pure equity” profile: higher growth potential but also more exposure to market swings. Asset classes behave differently in stress; for example, bonds often move differently from stocks, which can soften downturns. Here, diversification happens within equities across thousands of companies and many countries, not across fundamentally different asset types. This is consistent with the balanced risk label leaning toward growth, but it means short‑term values can fluctuate a lot. Over long periods, such equity‑only mixes have historically rewarded patience, yet they also require comfort with bigger temporary drops.
Sectors
- Technology 34%
- Financials 12%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector‑wise, about a third of the equity exposure sits in technology, with the rest spread across financials, telecoms, consumer areas, industrials, health care, and smaller allocations to other sectors. A tech weight in the mid‑30% range is higher than many broad global benchmarks, reflecting the US and growth tilts. Tech‑heavy portfolios can benefit when innovation and earnings growth lead markets, but they tend to be more sensitive to interest‑rate changes and sentiment around growth companies. The presence of financials, industrials, and defensives like consumer staples and utilities adds some balance, helping avoid being an almost single‑theme portfolio despite the noticeable tech emphasis.
Regions
- North America 81%
- Europe Developed 8%
- Japan 3%
- Asia Developed 3%
- Asia Emerging 3%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, about 81% of the portfolio is in North America, with roughly 19% spread across Europe, Asia, Australasia, Latin America, and Africa/Middle East. A global equity benchmark is usually more diversified outside the US, so this represents a notable US tilt. That tilt has been rewarded in recent years as US stocks outperformed many other markets, but it also means results are closely tied to the US economy, policy, and currency. The international slice still adds exposure to different economic cycles and local themes, which can help if leadership rotates away from the US over a future period, even though the US remains the main driver.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 47%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 1%
The portfolio is dominated by mega‑caps and large‑caps, which together make up over 80% of the exposure, with mid‑caps and small‑caps playing much smaller roles. Large global companies tend to have diversified revenues, stronger balance sheets, and more analyst coverage, which can make their share prices somewhat more stable than very small companies. At the same time, smaller caps have historically been a source of higher volatility and sometimes higher long‑term returns. This mix behaves broadly like mainstream equity benchmarks that are also large‑cap heavy. It means portfolio performance is driven by the biggest global names rather than niche or early‑stage companies.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 6.33%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 5.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.09%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.16%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.52%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.27%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.11%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.08%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.85%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 0.94%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 30.81%
Looking through the ETFs, the top underlying positions show meaningful overlap in a handful of very large companies. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, Meta, Tesla, and Berkshire Hathaway together account for a sizeable slice of the covered portion, with all exposure coming via funds rather than individual stock picks. When the same company appears across multiple ETFs, its true influence on the portfolio can be higher than any single fund weight suggests. This creates a form of “hidden concentration” in mega‑cap growth names, especially in technology and related industries. The overlap could be even larger than reported because only ETF top‑10 holdings are included here.
Factors
Factor exposure across value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility is broadly neutral and close to market‑average levels. Factor investing looks at characteristics like cheapness (value) or recent winners (momentum) that research links to long‑term return patterns. In this case, no factor stands out as a strong tilt toward or away from a specific style. That means the portfolio is behaving much like a broad market index rather than expressing a deliberate bet on, say, high dividend stocks or deep value. This balanced factor profile can make performance easier to interpret because results mainly reflect overall equity markets, not niche style swings.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 60.00% 58.7% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 20.00% 25.2% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 20.00% 16.1%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which isn’t always proportional to weight. Here, the S&P 500 ETF is 60% of the allocation and contributes about 59% of total risk, very much in line with its size. The NASDAQ 100 ETF, at 20% weight, contributes roughly 25% of risk, meaning it punches above its weight due to higher volatility and growth bias. The international ETF, also 20% by weight, adds only about 16% of risk, acting as a mild diversifier. Overall, risk is shared broadly sensibly across the three positions, with no single ETF dominating excessively.
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.
The risk‑return optimization chart shows the current mix sitting on or very near the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier is the curve of best possible returns for each level of risk using just these three holdings in different proportions. With a Sharpe ratio of 0.66, the portfolio’s risk‑adjusted return is decent, though the max‑Sharpe and minimum‑variance combinations score higher at 0.87 and 0.81 respectively. Since those points stay within a similar risk band, the data suggests this allocation is already reasonably efficient. Any further improvement would likely come more from modest reweighting than from major structural flaws in the existing building blocks.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.32%
The overall dividend yield is about 1.32%, with the international ETF offering the highest yield and the NASDAQ 100 ETF the lowest. Dividend yield is the annual cash payout as a percentage of price, similar to a “rental income” rate on your investment. In this portfolio, income plays a secondary role; most of the total return historically has come from price growth rather than dividends. That’s consistent with the heavy exposure to US large‑cap growth companies, which often reinvest profits instead of paying out high dividends. Investors tracking this portfolio would typically think of it as growth‑oriented with a modest income kicker rather than a high‑income strategy.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%
The weighted average ongoing cost (TER) is roughly 0.06%, which is very low by industry standards for equity ETFs. TER is like a small annual service fee charged inside the fund that slightly reduces returns each year. Keeping it low helps more of the portfolio’s gross performance flow through to you over time, and the difference compounds. For example, a 0.5% versus 0.06% annual fee gap may seem tiny year to year but can add up significantly over decades. Here, the cost structure is a clear strength: it aligns well with best practices for low‑cost, index‑based investing and supports long‑term compounding.
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!
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