Roast mode 🔥

A clingy yield chaser hiding in boring utilities and REITs while pretending to be diversified

Report created on Dec 16, 2025

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

1/5
Single-Focused
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This “balanced” setup looks more like a dividend cosplay portfolio than anything truly diversified. You’ve basically lined up a bunch of yieldy stocks, a few REITs, slapped on three dividend ETFs and one token bond fund, then called it a day. Position sizes are almost copy‑pasted around 4–6%, which feels neat but not exactly thoughtful. Versus a classic balanced benchmark (say 60/40), this is closer to 95/5 with a real estate and utilities obsession. It behaves way more like an equity income fund than a balanced portfolio. Tighten the stock list, define a real stock/bond mix, and decide whether this is an income engine or a growth portfolio, not both vaguely.

Growth Info

CAGR of 13.77% is strong on paper. CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is just “average speed of growth” over time, like your trip average on a wild road journey. But that -32% max drawdown says when the market gets ugly, this thing bleeds like a classic stock-heavy portfolio, not a balanced one. A hypothetical $100k growing at 13.77% for 10 years lands near $360k, but that nice chart ignores your stress during those -30% holes. Also, markets recently have been unusually generous to dividend and quality names. Past data is yesterday’s weather: helpful, but not Google Maps for the future. Build expectations assuming slower growth and similarly nasty drawdowns.

Projection Info

Monte Carlo simulation is basically a financial slot machine that spins thousands of “possible futures” using random returns based on past patterns. Your numbers look flashy: median outcome +363%, top chunk over +600%, and even the pessimistic 5th percentile only around -9%. That’s… optimistic bordering on delusional if taken literally. Simulations are hostage to their inputs: if you feed them a strong historic return series, they spit out heroic futures. Real life comes with regime changes, inflation shocks, wars, and policy shifts the model doesn’t “imagine.” Use these outputs as rough vibes, not promises, and maybe mentally haircut those return expectations by a few percentage points while assuming drawdowns stay just as brutal.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    95%
  • Bonds
    6%

“Balanced” with 95% stock and 6% bonds is like calling a burger “balanced” because you added lettuce. This is an equity portfolio with a decorative bond ribbon. In a real crash, that tiny bond stake won’t meaningfully cushion anything; it’s more emotional support than risk management. A truly balanced mix uses bonds to blunt hits and smooth the ride, not sit in the corner at 6% wondering why it’s invited. Decide whether the goal is income with real downside control or just higher yield with full equity risk. If it’s genuinely about balance, the bond slice needs more than token status, and maybe a bit more variety beyond one active fund.

Sectors Info

  • Real Estate
    23%
  • Utilities
    17%
  • Financials
    12%
  • Basic Materials
    11%
  • Consumer Staples
    11%
  • Energy
    8%
  • Technology
    7%
  • Health Care
    3%
  • Industrials
    2%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    1%
  • Telecommunications
    1%

Sector tilt screams: “Real estate, utilities, and energy are my emotional support animals.” Real estate at 23% plus utilities at 17% and energy exposure through several names makes this heavily tied to interest rates and economic cycles. When rates spike, REITs sulk. When regulators and politicians get weird, utilities and pipelines feel it hard. Versus a broad index, tech is underweight, cyclicals are almost missing, and the portfolio acts like a slow, income-heavy, rate-sensitive dinosaur. If that’s intentional, fine, but don’t confuse that with broad sector balance. Dial back the REIT and utility crowding and bring in more growth and economically sensitive names if long-term total return actually matters.

Regions Info

  • North America
    100%

North America at 100% is basically saying, “The rest of the planet is optional.” That’s home bias turned up to max. Sure, the U.S. and Canada are deep, liquid markets, but there’s zero exposure to Europe, Japan, or emerging markets, meaning you’re fully hitched to North American politics, currencies, and economic cycles. When the U.S. sneezes, this portfolio catches pneumonia. Many global benchmarks give 40%+ to non‑US stocks for a reason: different countries screw up at different times. Adding a straightforward global or ex‑US fund would lower political and currency concentration in one shot. Right now, it’s America-or-bust, and that’s more patriotic than prudent.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    70%
  • Mega-cap
    11%
  • Mid-cap
    9%
  • Small-cap
    3%
  • Micro-cap
    3%

Market cap mix is actually one of the least chaotic parts: 70% big, 11% mega, 9% mid, tiny sprinkles of small and micro. This is a large-cap-dominant, relatively grown‑up portfolio that occasionally slums it with small caps via the Russell 2000 ETF. The problem is not the size mix; it’s that the small and micro exposure is too minor to matter and too noisy to be meaningful strategy. It’s like adding hot sauce by waving the bottle over your food. Either commit to a real small-cap sleeve with intention, or stop pretending that 3% micro and 3% small are doing anything significant for diversification or return.

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.

Risk vs return here is… not optimized, let’s say. You’ve built an equity-heavy, rate-sensitive, yield-tilted machine, then labeled it “balanced” and called it a day. Efficient Frontier is the idea of getting the best return for a given level of risk, like packing a suitcase so you carry the most usable stuff for the same weight. This setup likely sits below that frontier: taking solid equity drawdowns while giving up some growth by overweighting slow, defensive, high-dividend sectors. If you truly want balance, increase genuine diversifiers (bonds, global exposure) or, if you want return, free up some of the sleepy yield plays for more growth engines. Pick a lane and tune it properly.

Dividends Info

  • American Tower Corp 3.70%
  • Ares Capital Corporation 7.10%
  • Atmos Energy Corporation 2.10%
  • Bank of Montreal 3.50%
  • PIMCO Active Bond Exchange-Traded Fund 5.10%
  • Cisco Systems Inc 2.10%
  • Clearway Energy Inc Class C 5.40%
  • Dominion Energy Inc 3.30%
  • Digital Realty Trust Inc 2.40%
  • Enterprise Products Partners LP 6.70%
  • Franco-Nevada Corporation 0.50%
  • Gaming & Leisure Properties 5.30%
  • iShares Core High Dividend ETF 3.10%
  • Kimberly-Clark Corporation 3.70%
  • Newmont Goldcorp Corp 0.80%
  • Realty Income Corporation 5.50%
  • PepsiCo Inc 2.80%
  • Prologis Inc 3.10%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.80%
  • Vanguard Russell 2000 Index Fund ETF Shares 1.20%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 3.51%

This thing is a yield junkie. A 3.51% total yield is decent, and some names are paying 5–7% like they’re trying to apologize in advance. But chasing yield can be like dating for money: sometimes you end up with drama you didn’t budget for. High payouts often mean slower growth, higher leverage, or businesses with limited reinvestment opportunities. Also, dividends aren’t magic—they’re just your own capital handed back in a tax-inefficient way in many cases. Income-focus is fine, but it’s overdone here. Shift the focus from “how big is the yield” to “is the underlying business growing, resilient, and able to sustain payouts without contortions.”

Ongoing product costs Info

  • PIMCO Active Bond Exchange-Traded Fund 0.58%
  • iShares Core High Dividend ETF 0.08%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Vanguard Russell 2000 Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio accidentally looks like it knows what it’s doing. TER of 0.04% overall is impressively low, clearly helped by cheap ETFs like Schwab and Vanguard. The PIMCO ETF at 0.58% is the only drama queen here, charging active-management money in a tiny, almost ceremonial bond slice. Low fees mean more of the return lands in your pocket, which is good because the sector and geographic bets are already doing enough heavy lifting on the risk side. You could either justify that pricey bond fund by making bonds a real part of the plan, or swap to cheaper options so the “balance” isn’t both tiny and expensive.

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

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