Almost diversified but still basically betting on big US stocks with a tech flavored energy drink
Report created on Apr 7, 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
-
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 33.34% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 33.33% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 33.33%
Composition-wise this is the IKEA starter pack of equity portfolios: three giant ETFs split into perfect thirds and called a day. It’s clean, it’s simple, and it screams “I spent 30 minutes on Boglehead forums once.” The twist is that one of those pieces is the NASDAQ 100, which quietly hijacks the vibe from “balanced” to “growth-tilted roller coaster.” Equal weights sound fair, but they’re not necessarily smart; you’re giving the same influence to a concentrated tech-heavy index as to a broad US and broad international fund. The takeaway: elegant simplicity, but with a not-so-subtle growth sugar rush underneath the minimalist surface.
Growth
Historically, the portfolio pulled a very solid 12.85% CAGR, turning $1,000 into $1,933. Nice. But the US market benchmark still beat it with 13.77%, so you basically added complexity just to underperform “buy the whole US.” Against the global market you look smarter, outperforming by 0.98%. Max drawdown at -28.94% was slightly uglier than both benchmarks and took 14 months to crawl back, so when it hurts, it really leans in. And 90% of returns showed up in just 21 days, confirming the usual: timing the market here would’ve been a clown show; staying put actually worked.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection is the financial version of running 1,000 alternate universes. Median outcome is $2,798 after 15 years from $1,000 — decent, though noticeably tamer than the backward-looking 12–13% glory days. The range from “meh” ($1,818) to “nice flex” ($4,113) is wide, and the tails are even weirder: anything from basically flat ($996) to “I swear I’m a genius” ($7,861). This is the reminder that past returns are yesterday’s weather: useful, not prophetic. The ~8.17% simulated annual return is more grounded, meaning expectations should land closer to “solid long-term grind” than “rockets forever.”
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset classes: there aren’t any. It’s stocks, 100%, like someone saw the “balanced” label and said, “Cool story, ignore.” No bonds, no cash buffer, no anything-that-doesn’t-swing-like-a-stock. For a risk score of 4/7 this is… ambitious. In real life that means when markets drop, the whole thing drops; there’s no polite asset sitting in the corner cushioning the blow. It’s fine for long time horizons and strong stomachs, but let’s not pretend this is some sedate, middle-of-the-road mix. This is an equity portfolio wearing a “balanced investor” name tag it found on the floor.
Sectors
- Technology 33%
- Financials 12%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 7%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, tech is clearly the favorite child at 33%. It’s not “all-in tech bro,” but it’s definitely “tech is my personality.” Financials, consumer, telecom, and industrials show up enough to make it look like you tried to be well-rounded, but the NASDAQ chunk keeps tilting the whole thing toward growth, future-y stories, and higher volatility. Low allocations to utilities and real estate mean very little defensive ballast when people suddenly remember that interest rates and recessions exist. The takeaway: it’s diversified on paper, but the mood music is still “please let the innovation trade keep working.”
Regions
- North America 69%
- Europe Developed 13%
- Japan 5%
- Asia Developed 5%
- Asia Emerging 5%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, this is unapologetically US-centric: 69% in North America and the rest scattered around the planet so you can say “international exposure” without laughing. Europe, Japan, and other regions are basically supporting characters in the movie of US large caps. It’s not outrageous, since the US is a huge chunk of global markets anyway, but let’s call this what it is: home bias with a world-tour side quest. If the US keeps dominating, you look brilliant. If other regions finally have their decade, you’re more “I heard about that from my modest 31% abroad allocation.”
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 48%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 2%
Market cap tilt: 48% mega-cap, 34% large-cap, and the rest is basically pocket change in mid and small caps. So you’re mainly backing the biggest, most established names — the corporate equivalent of buying only stadium-filling bands and ignoring the scrappy indie openers. That keeps things more stable than a pure small-cap gamble, but it also leans heavily on companies that already won. The tiny slice in small caps (2%) is more symbolic than impactful. This structure fits a “don’t blow up my life, but I like growth” mindset, with the caveat that the giants you own can still fall hard.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.34%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.74%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.52%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.67%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.19%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.94%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.86%
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
-
WM Walmart Inc. Common Stock 1.14%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Top 10 total 27.15%
The look-through is like opening the hood and finding the usual mega-cap celebrity lineup: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice, because why not), Meta, Tesla, Broadcom, Walmart. No single stock looks totally insane in size, but remember these show up via multiple ETFs, especially the NASDAQ and S&P 500. So you basically own two different wrappers around the same tech-heavy US mega-cap core, and then toss in international for respectability. Overlap is almost certainly bigger than reported because we only see ETF top 10s. Net result: this is a “global” portfolio that secretly worships the Magnificent Whatever-Number-We’re-On-Now.
Factors
Factor exposure — the “hidden ingredients” — is almost boringly balanced. Value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all sit in that neutral 40–60% band. Translation: you didn’t accidentally build some weird meme-chasing, junk-quality, ultra-volatile monster. Instead, you recreated something that behaves very close to the broad market, with a slight lean into large, higher-quality names via the big US and NASDAQ funds. There’s nothing screaming “genius insight” here, but also nothing screaming “what were you thinking.” Someone either aimed for simple market exposure or stumbled into a surprisingly reasonable blend.
Risk contribution
-
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 33.34% 41.4% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 33.33% 31.5% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 33.33% 27.1%
Risk contribution is where the NASDAQ 100 quietly takes charge. At 33.34% weight but 41.38% of total risk, it’s clearly the drama queen of the trio. The S&P 500 chips in slightly less risk than its weight, and international is the calmest of the three, pulling only 27.10% of total risk for a third of the allocation. So the no-dividends, growth-heavy tech beast is driving most of the mood swings, even though it’s only a third of the portfolio. If the goal is to dial down whiplash, trimming the NASDAQ slice would be the obvious “stop feeding the volatility hog” move.
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 portfolio is sitting right on or very near the efficient frontier, which is awkward because it means you didn’t mess this up. With a Sharpe ratio of 0.56 versus 0.80 for the optimal mix of the same funds, there is a better bang-for-buck combo available, but your current setup is still considered efficient for its risk level. In plain English: you’re not wasting risk; you’re just not squeezing every drop of juice. With only these three holdings, there’s not a magical fourth asset waiting to fix everything — just smarter reweighting if you want to optimize further.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.90%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.53%
Dividend yield at 1.53% is… fine, if the plan is growth over income. The NASDAQ 100 dragging in a 0.50% yield basically says, “Reinvest everything, we’re busy chasing the future.” The international fund does the heavy lifting at 2.90%, while the S&P sits in between like a normal person. This isn’t a portfolio for someone trying to live off distributions; it’s more “let the earnings compound and I’ll see you in a couple decades.” If there’s any overreliance here, it’s on capital gains doing the job, not checks in the mail.
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) 0.08%
Costs are honestly suspiciously low at a total TER of 0.08%. That’s “did you bribe Vanguard?” cheap. The NASDAQ fund is the “expensive” one at 0.15%, which is still nothing compared with the clown show of 1%+ fee products out there. You’re basically paying economy prices while still getting a front-row view of global equity markets. There’s not a lot to roast here except that you used your frugality to assemble three plain vanilla indexes instead of funding something more creative. But, functionally, less money leaking to fees is one of the few guaranteed wins in investing.
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