Tech tilted America obsessed pseudo diversified stock pile wearing a very sensible cost mask
Report created on May 22, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 50.00% -
AV Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
AVUV - US0250728773 20.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 20.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 10.00%
This portfolio is four ETFs in a trench coat pretending to be “balanced.” Half is a plain S&P 500 core, then you bolt on a levered-feeling NASDAQ growth tilt, a chunky small-cap value slice, and a token dividend comfort blanket. It looks diversified because the tickers have different vibes, but under the hood it’s basically “US stocks, but louder at the edges.” For a “balanced” label, 100% equities and zero ballast is pretty on-the-nose. Structurally, this is a one-theme portfolio: everything is some flavor of US stock risk, just with different marketing. It’s efficient, yes, but also very single-note in what actually drives outcomes.
Growth
Historically the portfolio has been the overachieving kid in class: $1,000 grew to $2,387, beating both the US market and global market with a 16.9% CAGR. CAGR is just your smoothed average growth rate, like saying “on average I drove 60 mph” even if you sped and braked the whole way. Max drawdown hit about -24%, so when things went south, it sank with the crowd and took over a year to claw back. Outperformance came with normal equity pain, not superhero resilience. Past data is yesterday’s weather though: nice to brag about, useless as a promise.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “This might work out fine… or not, good luck.” Monte Carlo just runs thousands of alternate-history timelines to see where $1,000 could end up. Median outcome of about $2,755 in 15 years sounds respectable, but the range is chaos: roughly $900 on the low end and $8,400 at the high end. That’s the price of being 100% in stocks: massive uncertainty wrapped in a pretty average expected return. The 73.5% chance of a positive outcome is nice, but there’s still a real shot at going nowhere after a decade and a half of drama.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class breakdown is hilariously simple: 100% stocks, nothing else. For something tagged “balanced,” this is more “all-gas-no-brakes.” No bonds, no real diversifiers, nothing that behaves meaningfully differently when stocks have a tantrum. It’s like building a four-course meal out of slightly different kinds of pizza and calling it “varied cuisine.” There’s efficiency here, sure, but balance in name only. When markets are kind, this structure looks smart and focused; when they’re not, everything is on the same sinking ship, just arguing over who has the crispiest crust.
Sectors
- Technology 32%
- Financials 12%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Industrials 8%
- Health Care 8%
- Energy 7%
- Consumer Staples 7%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector-wise, this thing is clearly tech-smitten: about a third in technology, with more growthy exposure hiding in consumer and communication names. Calling this “balanced” while running a 32% tech chunk plus all those mega-cap darlings is generous. It’s basically betting that the modern economy continues to revolve around chips, platforms, and algorithms, with the rest of the sectors there as supporting cast. There’s at least some spread into financials, industrials, health care, and energy, but they’re side characters in a tech-centric show. If tech catches a cold, this portfolio gets the full seasonal flu, not just a sniffle.
Regions
- North America 99%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, this portfolio has one setting: the United States, with a token 1% Europe just to say it checked a box. This is less “global investing” and more “USA or bust.” It completely ignores the fact that a big chunk of the world’s economic growth and stock market value lives outside North America. Yes, many US companies earn revenue globally, but that’s not the same as owning other markets directly. The result is a big geopolitical and currency bet disguised as home comfort: if the US stumbles relative to the rest of the world, this thing has nowhere else to hide.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 34%
- Large-cap 32%
- Mid-cap 14%
- Small-cap 11%
- Micro-cap 9%
The market-cap mix is actually one of the more interesting parts: a heavy lean into mega and large caps, with a surprisingly meaningful 20%+ combined footprint in small and micro caps. So it’s like pairing giant cruise ships with a swarm of dinghies in the same fleet. The mega-caps dominate headlines and day-to-day behavior, but the small-cap value chunk is lurking, ready to add extra volatility and a very different cycle when it wants. It’s not broken, just noisy: the size spread turns normal large-cap risk into something a bit more unpredictable and occasionally swingy.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.72%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.68%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.49%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.04%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.58%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.26%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.15%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.55%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.09%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 0.71%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 27.27%
Look-through holdings scream “hidden overlap.” NVIDIA at 5.7%, Apple at 4.7%, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Tesla, Meta, Berkshire — it’s basically the usual US mega-cap pantheon showing up repeatedly across both the S&P 500 and NASDAQ 100. And that’s just from the top-10 slices we can see, with two-thirds of underlying holdings not even visible here. Overlap being understated is almost funny: the true concentration in a handful of giant names is likely higher. On paper it’s four ETFs; in reality it’s “the same dozen mega-caps plus some side quests in value and dividends.”
Factors
Factor exposure is shockingly normal. Everything hugs “neutral” — value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility all hovering around market-like levels. Factor exposure is basically the ingredient label for what drives returns; this one reads like a store-brand cereal: nothing extreme, nothing spicy. The only mild standout is quality leaning a bit higher, which suggests the large-cap core isn’t full of total junk. For a portfolio that looks loud at first glance (growth, small-cap value, dividends all crammed together), the factor profile says it accidentally averages out to pretty standard market behavior. Chaos in design, normal in outcome.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 50.00% 47.0% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 20.00% 23.2% -
Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Weight: 20.00% 22.8% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 10.00% 7.0%
Risk contribution shows who’s actually shaking the boat. The S&P 500 ETF is half the weight and about half the risk — the boring anchor doing what it should. The NASDAQ 100 and small-cap value positions, though only 20% each, together drive almost half the portfolio’s risk. That’s the spicy duo: they punch above their weight, adding extra swings both up and down. The dividend ETF is a 10% passenger contributing only 7% of total risk, basically the kid in the back seat not causing trouble. Overall, a small number of positions dominate the drama, while the rest just come along for the ride.
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 efficient frontier, this portfolio actually behaves like it knows what it’s doing. The Sharpe ratio of 0.77 is lower than the max-Sharpe setup at 0.93, but the optimizer confirms it’s sitting right on or very near the frontier for its risk level. Efficient frontier is just the nerdy curve showing the best return you can squeeze from these ingredients at each risk point. Translation: given these exact holdings, the mix isn’t wasting much potential. It’s a bit like owning a weird but well-tuned car — you could push it a little harder or softer, but you’re not currently driving it completely wrong.
Dividends
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.30%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.17%
Dividend yield at about 1.17% is… modest. For all the effort of including a dedicated dividend ETF, the overall income level is still barely above the broad-market feel. That Schwab dividend fund is basically there as a psychological comfort animal: it looks “safe” and “income-y,” but the heavy tech and growth exposure elsewhere drags the total yield back down. Income here is a side effect, not a defining trait. Anyone expecting this line-up to spew cash like an old-school high-yield portfolio is going to be disappointed — this is more “growth costume with a small dividend badge.”
Ongoing product costs
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.10%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio plays it almost annoyingly right. A blended TER of 0.10% is dirt cheap — you’re basically paying budget-airline prices while still landing at the same destination as the fancy funds. The S&P 500 and Schwab dividend ETFs are bargain-bin, and even the “expensive” small-cap value at 0.25% isn’t outrageous. There’s very little to roast here: you’re not lighting money on fire via fees. If anything, the frugality just highlights that any underperformance or stress won’t be because of costs; it’ll be entirely due to the asset mix choices.
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