Broad based equity portfolio with strong US tilt and balanced income growth profile
Report created on Apr 2, 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.
What type of investor this portfolio is suitable for
Balanced Investors
An investor well matched to this kind of portfolio is comfortable with stock market swings and can tolerate sizable short-term drops in pursuit of higher long-term growth. Goals might include building wealth for retirement, funding major future expenses, or growing capital over decades rather than years. They likely prioritize simplicity, transparency, and low costs over constant trading or trying to beat the market with complex strategies. A moderate-to-high risk tolerance is needed, along with the emotional discipline to stay invested through bear markets, understanding that volatility is a feature of an all-equity approach, not a bug.
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 70.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 20.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 10.00%
The portfolio is made up of three low-cost equity ETFs: a broad US index, a broad international index, and a US dividend-focused fund. The US index is the clear core at 70%, with 20% in international stocks and 10% in dividend payers. This structure is simple, transparent, and easy to manage, with everything in publicly traded funds. Having a single dominant core holding keeps behavior close to a mainstream stock market, while the satellite pieces add diversification and a bit more income. For many investors, this kind of “core plus satellites” setup offers a solid foundation that is straightforward to maintain over long timeframes.
Growth
From 2016 to early 2026, $1,000 grew to about $3,325, which is a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.81%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths out ups and downs to show typical yearly progress. Over the same period, the US market did slightly better at 13.78%, while the global market did less at 11.35%. So performance sat between US-only and global benchmarks, which fits the blend of US and international. The max drawdown of about -34% was very similar to both benchmarks, meaning the ride down in bad markets has been typical for an all‑equity mix.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses historical volatility and returns to randomly simulate many future paths for a $1,000 investment over 15 years. Think of it as running 1,000 alternate histories and seeing the range of possible outcomes. The median result around $2,754 implies an annualized return of about 8.2%, but outcomes vary widely: roughly $949 to $7,901 in the central 90% range. About three-quarters of simulations end positive. These numbers are helpful for planning, but they rely on past behavior continuing. Markets rarely repeat perfectly, so it’s best to treat these as broad scenarios, not promises.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio is in stocks, with no bonds, cash, or alternatives. Equities historically provide higher long-term growth but also sharper swings, since there’s nothing here designed to cushion big market drops. Compared with a classic “balanced” portfolio that might hold 40% bonds, this is more growth-tilted and will likely feel more volatile during downturns. For someone with a long horizon who can ride out deep but temporary declines, a 100% stock allocation can be reasonable. For shorter timeframes or lower risk tolerance, adding some stabilizing assets is often how people smooth the ride.
Sectors
- Technology 28%
- Financials 14%
- Health Care 10%
- Industrials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Telecommunications 9%
- Consumer Staples 7%
- Energy 5%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector exposure is led by technology at 28%, followed by financials, health care, industrials, and consumer areas, with the remaining sectors in smaller slices. This looks broadly in line with major global indices, which are also tech-heavy, especially in the US. A sizable tech and communication allocation can help when innovation and growth stocks are in favor but tends to increase sensitivity to interest rate changes and market sentiment around earnings. The good news is that other sectors like financials and health care provide some balance, so the portfolio isn’t overly reliant on just one part of the economy.
Regions
- North America 81%
- Europe Developed 8%
- Japan 3%
- Asia Developed 3%
- Asia Emerging 3%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
Geographically, about 81% is in North America, with the rest spread across Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, emerging Asia, and smaller allocations to Australasia and Africa/Middle East. This is more US-tilted than a truly global market portfolio, where the US is closer to 60%. That tilt has been rewarded over the past decade as US stocks outperformed much of the world. The tradeoff is higher dependence on one economy, one policy environment, and one currency. A stronger global mix can sometimes reduce risk if other regions perform differently from the US at various points in the cycle.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 42%
- Large-cap 38%
- Mid-cap 18%
- Small-cap 2%
Market-cap exposure skews heavily to the largest companies: 42% in mega-caps and 38% in large-caps, with relatively modest mid-cap and very little small-cap exposure. This is typical for index-based portfolios, since indices weight companies by size. Large firms often have more stable earnings, better access to capital, and broader diversification of their own business lines, which can moderate company-specific risk. On the flip side, smaller companies sometimes drive higher long-term returns but with bumpier performance. Here, most of the behavior will be driven by giant global franchises rather than more volatile smaller names.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.12%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.65%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.47%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.43%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.16%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.80%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.72%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.68%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.34%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.10%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 25.47%
Looking through the ETFs, the biggest underlying positions are mega-cap US names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and Meta. Several of these appear in more than one fund, which creates hidden concentration: multiple ETFs are effectively making similar bets. Because only ETF top-10 holdings are used here, true overlap is probably higher than shown. This kind of “index overlap” is normal in broad funds, but it does mean that headline diversification across three ETFs is a bit less diversified at the company level than it first appears, especially around large US technology and communication names.
Factors
Factor exposure across value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility is broadly neutral, hovering around market-like levels. Factors are like investing “ingredients” that explain why some groups of stocks outperform or behave differently over time. A neutral profile means there are no strong tilts toward, say, cheap stocks, high-dividend names, or low volatility defensives. This is exactly what you’d expect from broad index funds and a mainstream dividend ETF. The upside is that performance is less dependent on any single style bet working; the tradeoff is less potential outperformance from factor timing, for better or worse.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 70.00% 73.2% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 20.00% 18.0% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 10.00% 8.8%
Risk contribution shows how much each ETF adds to overall ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. Here, the US index at 70% weight contributes about 73% of total risk, so its impact is roughly proportional. The international fund and dividend ETF contribute slightly less risk than their weights, suggesting they modestly diversify or damp volatility. This is a healthy pattern: the core drives most behavior, while satellites don’t introduce outsized instability. If someone ever wanted to dial risk up or down, adjusting the US core weight would be the primary lever, given its dominant risk role.
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 current mix sits on or very close to the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier is the curve showing the best expected return for each risk level using only these three ETFs in different weights. The current Sharpe ratio (a measure of risk-adjusted return) is 0.55, while the optimal mix reaches 0.76 with a slightly higher return and similar risk. Since you’re already near the frontier, the allocation is broadly efficient. Any potential improvement from reweighting would likely be incremental rather than transformative, which is a strong sign the core structure is well-tuned.
Dividends
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 3.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.78%
The blended dividend yield is about 1.78%, driven up by the 3.40% yield on the dividend ETF and the 3.00% from international stocks, while the US broad index yields around 1.20%. Dividends are cash payments from companies and can be a meaningful part of long-term returns, especially when reinvested. Here, the yield is modest but respectable for a growth-oriented equity mix. It won’t by itself fund heavy income needs, but it does provide a small, steady cash component that can help offset volatility over time. The income tilt is present but not dominant, which keeps growth potential intact.
Ongoing product costs
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%
Total ongoing fund costs, measured by TER (Total Expense Ratio), are extremely low at about 0.04%. TER is the annual fee charged by the ETFs as a percentage of assets. Paying 0.03–0.06% is about as cheap as it gets in public markets and is a major strength of this setup. Lower costs mean more of the portfolio’s returns stay in your pocket each year, and this difference compounds significantly over decades. From a cost perspective, this portfolio is already doing what many investors strive for: using broad, ultra-low-fee index funds as the core 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!
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