This portfolio has only about 2 months of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

Diversified multi asset Canadian portfolio with balanced core and equity satellites but very short track record

Report created on May 10, 2026

Risk profile Info

3/7
Cautious
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is built around one large balanced ETF at just over half the weight, with three smaller equity-focused ETFs sitting around it. That structure gives a multi-asset core plus extra equity and dividend exposure on the side. Because these are all broad allocation or index-style ETFs, the portfolio effectively holds hundreds of underlying stocks and bonds through only four positions. This kind of “fund-of-funds” setup can simplify monitoring and rebalancing. A key point, though, is that all analysis is based on only about two months of history. Over such a short period, it’s hard to say whether the current behaviour reflects a lasting pattern or just a brief market phase.

Growth Info

Over the limited period from mid-March to early May, $1,000 grew to about $1,069, implying a very high annualized CAGR of 57.53%. CAGR, or Compound Annual Growth Rate, is like checking your average speed over a trip, but here the “trip” is only two months, so the implied yearly speed is exaggerated. The portfolio’s max drawdown, the worst peak-to-trough drop, was a shallow -2.1% and recovered quickly. Compared with US and global equity benchmarks, the portfolio lagged meaningfully, but those benchmarks are also measured over the same very short window. With so little history, none of these figures should be read as a stable long-term pattern.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses the short recent history to simulate many possible 15‑year paths for a $1,000 investment. Monte Carlo is basically a “what if” engine: it takes the observed ups and downs, shuffles and recombines them thousands of times, and shows a range of potential outcomes. Here, the median result lands around $2,703, with a wide range between weaker and stronger scenarios. The average annualized return across simulations is 7.31%. Because the input data covers only about two months, these projections are less reliable than usual. They’re more like rough sketches than detailed blueprints and shouldn’t be treated as predictions of what will actually happen.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    30%
  • US Equity
    28%
  • Bonds
    24%
  • No data
    17%

By asset class, the portfolio is split mainly between stocks and bonds, with some positions currently tagged as “No data.” Around 30% is classified as stocks and 28% specifically as US equity, while bonds make up about 24%. The “No data” slice, at 17%, simply reflects missing classification, not an unknown exposure type, so it’s best not to guess what it is. The visible mix suggests a genuine multi-asset structure rather than being all in one asset class. Mixing equities and bonds typically aims to smooth returns over time, but again, the portfolio’s actual risk–return profile may look different once there is more than two months of market history.

Sectors Info

  • Financials
    18%
  • Technology
    14%
  • Energy
    9%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Basic Materials
    7%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    6%
  • Telecommunications
    5%
  • Health Care
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, the portfolio is spread across many areas of the economy, with financials at 18% and technology at 14%, followed by energy and industrials at 9% each. Smaller allocations to materials, consumer areas, telecoms, health care, utilities, and real estate round out the picture. This broad spread looks reasonably aligned with diversified equity benchmarks, which is a positive sign for sector diversification. Sector exposure matters because different economic environments favour different areas at different times. For example, tech-heavy mixes can swing more when interest rates move. Here, no single sector dominates, so the portfolio isn’t making an outsized bet on one specific slice of the market based on the current look‑through data.

Regions Info

  • North America
    65%
  • Europe Developed
    7%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Asia Emerging
    3%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, about 65% of exposure sits in North America, with smaller allocations to developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, emerging Asia, Australasia, and Africa/Middle East. This creates a clear home-region tilt toward North America, which is common when using Canadian- and US-focused building blocks. At the same time, having measurable slices across multiple other regions adds a global flavour and supports the high diversification score. Geographic spread can help when different economies are out of sync, but it also means currency movements can affect returns when converted back to dollars. With such a short observation period, there hasn’t been much time to see how these regional weights behave through different global market conditions.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    27%
  • Large-cap
    18%
  • Mid-cap
    12%
  • Small-cap
    3%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

By market capitalization, the portfolio leans toward larger companies: about 27% in mega-caps and 18% in large-caps, with smaller portions in mid-, small-, and micro-caps. Market cap just refers to how big a company is on the stock market, and larger firms often have more stable earnings and liquidity than tiny ones. This profile is typical of broad index-based strategies that weight holdings by company size. A modest but real allocation to mid and smaller companies adds some diversification and growth potential, though it can also bring extra volatility. Because only two months of returns are available, it’s too early to see how the size mix actually affects the portfolio’s ups and downs across a full market cycle.

True holdings Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    21.88%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard All-Equity ETF Portfolio
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
    • Vanguard US Total Market
  • Vanguard Canadian Aggregate Bond
    12.22%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
  • Avantis CIBC U.S. All-Cap Equity ETF
    7.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Avantis CIBC All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF
  • Avantis CIBC Canadian Equity ETF
    5.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Avantis CIBC All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF
  • Vanguard Global ex-U.S. Aggregate Bond Index ETF (CAD-hedged) (VBG.NE)
    4.25%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
  • Vanguard U.S. Aggregate Bond Index ETF
    4.11%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
  • Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets Index Fund ETF Shares
    3.69%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard All-Equity ETF Portfolio
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
    • Vanguard FTSE Emerging Markets All Cap Index ETF
  • Avantis CIBC International Equity ETF
    3.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Avantis CIBC All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF
  • Royal Bank of Canada
    1.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard All-Equity ETF Portfolio
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
    • Vanguard FTSE Canada All Cap
    • iShares S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index ETF
  • Toronto Dominion Bank
    1.33%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard All-Equity ETF Portfolio
    • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
    • Vanguard FTSE Canada All Cap
    • iShares S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index ETF
  • Top 10 total 64.77%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Looking through the ETFs to their top holdings, a few underlying positions stand out. A broad US total market fund accounts for about 21.9% of the portfolio, and a Canadian aggregate bond fund adds around 12.2%. There are also notable weights in Avantis CIBC US and Canadian equity ETFs, plus global bonds and emerging markets. Canadian bank stocks like Royal Bank of Canada and TD show up via multiple ETFs, creating some overlap. Overlap means the same company may be owned indirectly through different funds, concentrating exposure more than the surface-level ETF list suggests. Since only top‑10 ETF holdings are included, this overlap is likely understated and doesn’t capture the full long tail of positions.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
    Weight: 52.53%
    50.8%
  • Vanguard All-Equity ETF Portfolio
    Weight: 18.34%
    25.1%
  • Avantis CIBC All-Equity Asset Allocation ETF
    Weight: 17.38%
    20.2%
  • iShares S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index ETF
    Weight: 11.75%
    3.9%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall volatility, not just how big its weight is. Here, the balanced Vanguard ETF is about 52.5% of the portfolio and contributes roughly 50.8% of the risk, almost a one‑for‑one relationship. The two all‑equity allocation ETFs together make up about 35.7% of the weight but account for roughly 45.3% of risk, so they punch somewhat above their size. The high‑dividend Canadian ETF, at 11.8% weight, only adds 3.9% of risk, meaning it’s relatively calm compared with the others. The top three holdings contribute over 96% of total risk, showing that, in practice, portfolio behaviour is dominated by these allocation ETFs.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard All-Equity ETF Portfolio
    Vanguard Balanced Portfolio
    High correlation

Correlation measures how closely assets move together, on a scale from -1 (opposite) to +1 (in lockstep). In this portfolio, the balanced Vanguard ETF and the Vanguard all‑equity ETF have moved almost identically over the short sample window. When key holdings are highly correlated, the diversification benefit between them is limited during market swings, even if their labels look different. That’s not necessarily a flaw; it simply means that changing the mix between those two ETFs may adjust risk only slightly in the short run. With only about two months of data, though, these correlation estimates are fragile. Correlations can shift a lot over time, especially across different market environments.

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 efficient frontier chart compares this portfolio’s current mix with alternative combinations of the same four holdings. The Sharpe ratio, which is return per unit of risk after adjusting for a risk‑free rate, is 3.68 for the current setup, while the optimal mix on the frontier shows a higher Sharpe of 4.6 with lower volatility. The minimum-variance mix has the lowest risk and still a strong Sharpe. Being about 5.6 percentage points below the frontier at the current risk level suggests that a different weighting of the same ETFs could have delivered better risk‑adjusted returns over this short backtest. Because the history is so limited, this should be viewed as an illustration of potential trade‑offs, not a firm guide.

Dividends Info

  • iShares S&P/TSX Composite High Dividend Index ETF 0.40%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 0.05%

On the income side, the dedicated high‑dividend ETF currently shows a modest 0.40% yield, and the total portfolio yield is about 0.05% over the brief period observed. Dividend yield measures cash payouts relative to price, but readings over a couple of months can be misleading because dividends are lumpy and often paid quarterly. In a multi‑asset mix like this, total return (price changes plus reinvested income) usually matters more than the yield alone, especially in such a short window. Over longer periods, dividends can provide a steadier component of return and sometimes help cushion volatility, but there simply hasn’t been enough time in this dataset to see that pattern develop meaningfully.

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