Roast mode 🔥

Dividend hoarder portfolio that wants low volatility but secretly chases big tech and growth

Report created on May 6, 2026

Risk profile Info

3/7
Cautious
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio looks like it was built by someone fighting a custody battle between “dividends” and “growth” and just gave both 20% each. Two big Schwab funds sit on top like co‑CEOs, then a small army of dividend-growth, dividend-equity, and utilities funds clutters the middle. It’s diversified in that “lots of tickers, same idea” way: yield, big caps, and more yield. The structure screams income-flavored comfort, yet the growth sleeve quietly drags the risk higher than the cautious label suggests. In short, it’s a mashup of three strategies—growth, dividend growth, and defensive tilt—jammed into one container and told to get along.

Growth Info

Over this short window, the portfolio pulled a 21.12% CAGR, which sounds heroic until you notice the US and global markets both did better. CAGR is basically your “average speed” per year; you’re driving fast, just not in the fast lane. The max drawdown of -13.5% is gentler than the benchmarks, so you traded some upside for a slightly smoother ride. That’s reasonable, but there’s nothing magical here: you lagged the market while still being fully in stocks. Past data is yesterday’s weather — helpful for vibes, not a forecast — but so far you’re paying in performance for comfort.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection runs 1,000 alternate-universe futures and asks, “How ugly or pretty could this get?” Median outcome of $2,790 from $1,000 in 15 years with an 8.14% annualized return is decent, but not fairy tale material. The “possible” range of $943 to $8,173 shows how chaotic reality can be: anything from basically flat to “did I just win a small lottery?” Even with a 73% chance of ending positive, this is nowhere near guaranteed comfort. It’s a reminder that a defensive‑ish equity portfolio is still taking real hits in bad rolls of the dice.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class breakdown is aggressively simple: 100% stocks, zero bonds, zero anything else. For a “cautious” profile labeled 3/7 on risk, this is like calling a roller coaster “moderate intensity” because it doesn’t go upside down. All the risk management is being done with factor tilts and sector choices, not actual asset-class diversification. That works only as long as equity markets collectively cooperate. When everything equity-related gets punched at once, there’s no shock absorber here—just a slightly thicker pillow. It’s an all‑equity portfolio dressed up in sensible clothing, but still an all‑equity ride.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    18%
  • Financials
    14%
  • Utilities
    14%
  • Health Care
    11%
  • Consumer Staples
    10%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    8%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Energy
    7%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector-wise, this portfolio is trying very hard to be “stable adult equities”: tech is only 18%, utilities a chunky 14%, financials another 14%, with health care, consumer staples, and industrials making up most of the rest. No single sector is totally absurd, but the overall vibe is “defensive dividend aristocrat cosplay” layered on top of index‑style tech exposure. It’s not a narrow sector bet, but it definitely leans toward boring-pay-you-back businesses plus a growth sleeve. The catch: when markets really tank, all sectors take a beating; utilities and staples may fall less, but they’re not magical crash insurance.

Regions Info

  • North America
    77%
  • Europe Developed
    15%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%
  • Asia Developed
    2%
  • Australasia
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

Geographically, it’s a classic American homebody: 77% North America and a sprinkling of everywhere else to look worldly. Europe, Japan, and other regions get just enough to appear on the chart but not enough to really matter. It’s “global” in the same way going to an international food court still means you mostly eat burgers. This home bias is common, but it does mean the portfolio is heavily linked to one economic and policy regime. If the local giant stumbles or underperforms for a cycle, the satellite international dividend funds won’t be big enough to move the needle much.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    43%
  • Mega-cap
    32%
  • Mid-cap
    21%
  • Small-cap
    3%

Market cap exposure is almost a textbook big-company crush: 32% mega-cap, 43% large-cap, just a little mid-cap, and almost no small-cap at 3%. So this portfolio is basically saying, “I only trust the kids who already made varsity.” That lines up with the low-volatility and dividend-growth obsession, but it also means less exposure to the scrappy, high-upside side of the market. When the giants lead, this feels great. When leadership rotates to smaller names, the portfolio just watches from the sidelines, clutching its blue chips and wondering why the benchmarks ran ahead.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Apple Inc
    2.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.77%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.42%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.26%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Nextera Energy Inc
    1.26%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® MSCI Utilities Index ETF
  • UnitedHealth Group Incorporated
    1.23%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
  • Texas Instruments Incorporated
    1.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • The Coca-Cola Company
    1.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF
    • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
  • Top 10 total 15.35%

The look‑through holdings reveal the punchline: you keep pretending this is a dividend and stability portfolio, but the top exposures are still NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, Alphabet, and Amazon. The usual tech royalty is hiding inside multiple funds like they own the place—because they basically do. That 2–2.5% in each of NVIDIA and Apple is only from top‑10 slices; the real overlap is almost certainly higher. So under the polite dividend wrapper, this is still a concentrated bet on the same mega‑cap growth names driving everything else. It’s diversification theater, not true independence.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
High
Data availability: 90%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 80%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 70%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
Data availability: 100%

Factor exposures are estimated using statistical models based on historical data and measure systematic (market-relative) tilts, not absolute portfolio characteristics. Results may vary depending on the analysis period, data availability, and currency of the underlying assets.

Factor exposure is where the personality really shows. High value, high yield, and high low‑volatility say “I want boring, steady, and underpriced.” Low size says “please no tiny drama stocks.” Meanwhile momentum and quality are just sitting around neutral, like the portfolio couldn’t decide whether to lean into recent winners or durable business strength. Factor exposure is basically the ingredient label: this one mixes safety and income themes while still letting mega‑cap growth crash the party. In rough markets, the low-vol and yield tilt may help a bit, but you’re not insulated from big tech mood swings—just slightly padded.

Risk contribution Info

  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    Weight: 20.00%
    26.4%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    Weight: 20.00%
    18.8%
  • Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    10.8%
  • Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.7%
  • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.6%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 75.3%

Risk contribution blows up the myth that every 10% weight is equal. The Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF is 20% of the portfolio but 26.4% of total risk — serious overachiever energy. The dividend ETF at the same weight contributes less to risk, while the Putnam value fund, at 10%, punches slightly above its weight. In plain English, the growth sleeve is driving more of the portfolio’s emotional roller coaster than the weights suggest. Risk contribution is the “who’s actually causing the drama” metric, and here the growth fund is clearly the loudest guest at the party.

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 politely informs you this portfolio is leaving performance on the table. At a Sharpe ratio of 1.35, you’re a solid distance below what’s achievable (1.76) using only the existing holdings in smarter proportions. In simple terms, for the same level of risk, the current mix is underachieving; the curve says you could have higher expected return or lower risk without adding a single new fund. Being 1.88 percentage points below the frontier is not a rounding error — it’s the difference between “tight ship” and “good enough, I guess.” This is optimization laziness, not structural limitation.

Dividends Info

  • Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF 1.90%
  • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF 2.00%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Utilities Index ETF 2.50%
  • iShares International Dividend Growth ETF 2.40%
  • Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF 1.00%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.30%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
  • Schwab International Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 2.06%

Yield sits at 2.06%, which is mildly above market-ish, but nowhere near “income machine” territory. You’ve layered on multiple dividend and dividend-growth funds plus a utilities ETF to assemble a yield bump that’s… fine. Dividends are just one way companies return cash; focusing too much on them can be like judging restaurants only by portion size, not taste. The portfolio seems desperate to be seen as “income-conscious,” but structurally it behaves far more like a total-return, mega-cap equity mix with a dividend fetish than a true income-focused setup. The branding is louder than the actual cash flow.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Capital Group Dividend Growers ETF 0.47%
  • iShares Core Dividend Growth ETF 0.08%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Utilities Index ETF 0.08%
  • iShares International Dividend Growth ETF 0.15%
  • Putnam Focused Large Cap Value ETF 0.56%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
  • Schwab International Dividend Equity ETF 0.14%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.17%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio almost ruins the roast. A 0.17% overall TER is impressively low given you’re holding a couple of active-ish funds charging north of 0.5%. The cheap Schwab and iShares ETFs are doing the heavy lifting, while Putnam and Capital Group quietly skim more. Still, for an eight-fund lineup that pretends to be diversified, you’re not bleeding much in fees. Think of it as flying economy with one overpriced snack added—annoying, but not trip‑ruining. Fees are under control; the real inefficiencies are in structure, overlap, and factor mix, not cost drag.

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