Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

A world tour of ETFs with a side quest in random silver and pricey niche bets

Report created on Apr 25, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio looks like someone started with a sensible index core and then panic-bought every “interesting” ETF they saw. A decent chunk in broad US and international funds sets a rational base, and then it veers off into Indonesia, Peru, cyber, silver, clean energy, semis, and future security like a kid loose in a candy store. It technically hits “balanced” on a risk label, but the mix is more chaotic than that score suggests. The result is a structure that pretends to be simple at the top while hiding a patchwork of tiny themes underneath, each too small to matter alone but noisy enough to complicate the ride.

Growth Info

Historically, this thing has done fine but not exactly brag-worthy. Turning $1,000 into $2,339 with a 13.23% CAGR is solid on paper, until the US market strolls in at 15.63% and quietly shows it up. You basically took more ideas to end up with less money than a plain US index. Max drawdown at -30.29% was slightly gentler than the benchmarks, but not in a way that changes anyone’s life. And needing just 24 big days for 90% of returns screams “don’t try timing this.” Past performance here is decent, but it does not justify the complexity overhead.

Projection Info

Monte Carlo says the future is… meh with mood swings. Simulations take the past volatility and returns, shake them like dice, and spit out many possible 15‑year paths. Median outcome of $2,580 isn’t thrilling compared with the historical 13%+ CAGR; the projected 7.44% annualized is noticeably tamer. The range from about $1,069 to $6,500 is basically the model saying, “could be okay, could be chaos.” And remember, this is all yesterday’s weather used to guess tomorrow’s climate. The portfolio looks like it traded a lot of structural neatness for a return profile that’s surprisingly ordinary.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    80%
  • Bonds
    18%
  • Other
    2%

On the surface, 80% stocks, 18% bonds, 2% “other” screams textbook balanced-ish. In reality, the 18% in short-term Treasuries is doing the emotional labor of calming down a pile of excitable equity toys. Short-term bonds are the boring friend who drives everyone home safely; they won’t win any races, but they keep the overall car from flipping. The 2% in “other” is basically silver cosplaying as a meaningful diversifier. Overall, the asset class split is the least chaotic part of this portfolio — but it also exposes how much of the real drama is crammed inside that 80% equity bucket.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    20%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Industrials
    11%
  • Basic Materials
    9%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Health Care
    5%
  • Telecommunications
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, this portfolio is pretending to be broad but clearly has a tech crush. Technology at 20% plus dedicated semis and cybersecurity ETFs screams “please let innovation bail me out,” even though the headline weights look respectable. Financials and industrials show up enough to make it seem grown-up, while basic materials and utilities quietly carry some ballast. But the dedicated clean energy and silver/miners slices add extra cyclicality and drama on top. Compared with a plain index, this setup nudges the dial toward “exciting for no extra pay,” layering thematic bets on top of what could have been a calmer sector spread.

Regions Info

  • North America
    44%
  • Europe Developed
    11%
  • Asia Emerging
    9%
  • Australasia
    6%
  • Latin America
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, this is “global,” but with a flair for random side trips. North America at 44% is a soft US tilt, then Europe developed and Asia emerging show up in reasonable slices. So far, so sensible. Then you’ve got tiny darts at Indonesia, Peru, Ireland, and Australia via single-country ETFs, turning diversification into a trivia contest. Each of those 5% slots is too small to drive the bus but big enough to introduce unique risk and news-driven headaches. It’s global allocation with a decent backbone, plus a handful of country bets that feel more like collection than conviction.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    26%
  • Mega-cap
    22%
  • Mid-cap
    20%
  • Small-cap
    8%
  • Micro-cap
    3%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The market cap mix is actually one of the more reasonable parts: 22% mega-cap, 26% large, 20% mid, and a modest 8% small with a sprinkle of micro. That’s a broad spectrum without going full “tiny illiquid science project.” The mid- and small-cap growth/value ETFs add some spice, but not enough to completely warp the profile. The issue isn’t the cap breakdown itself — that’s fairly grown-up — it’s that this perfectly workable size mix is being overshadowed by niche themes and country bets. The size structure says “balanced,” while the rest of the portfolio keeps yelling “look at me.”

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • iShares Semiconductor ETF
  • Sprott Physical Silver
    1.50%
  • Apple Inc
    1.13%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.87%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • iShares Semiconductor ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    0.84%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Commonwealth Bank of Australia
    0.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI Australia ETF
  • BHP Group Ltd
    0.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI Australia ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    0.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Nextracker Inc. Class A Common Stock
    0.51%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
  • Top 10 total 9.01%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Look-through holdings show the usual suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Broadcom, TSMC — the standard “index plus tech royalty” cast. Nothing wrong with those names, but they’re quietly stacked through multiple ETFs. That 1.67% NVIDIA and 1.13% Apple exposure is only from top-10 slices; real overlap is higher once you count everything beyond the top holdings. Add in miners and silver plays, and you’ve basically doubled down on a handful of big themes while pretending it’s all separate ideas. Hidden concentration here isn’t catastrophic, but it does mean the portfolio is a lot less original than the ticker salad suggests.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 59%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 81%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 59%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 57%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 99%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
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 almost comically neutral across the board. Value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all sit roughly around 50%, i.e., painfully average. Factor exposure is like the flavor profile of a dish; this one tastes exactly like the market, despite all the fancy ingredients you threw in. For a portfolio stuffed with semis, clean energy, cyber, and random countries, you’d expect some strong tilt somewhere. Instead, everything cancels out into “generic market soup.” The irony is that all the complexity, thematics, and silver drama net out to a factor profile that could’ve been achieved with about three simple funds.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 17.00%
    19.2%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 15.00%
    16.0%
  • iShares Semiconductor ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    9.2%
  • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    7.1%
  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    6.8%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 58.4%

Risk contribution exposes who’s really driving the mood swings. The S&P 500 and Total International together are 32% of weight but 35% of risk, which is fine — they’re the backbone. The clown car arrives with that 5% semiconductor ETF contributing 9.23% of risk, almost double its weight. Clean energy and Australia are also punching above their weight. When a 5% holding is dragging nearly a tenth of overall volatility, it’s less “diversified satellite” and more “tiny drama queen.” The portfolio pretends risk is spread out, but a few lively slices are doing far more wobbling than their size would suggest.

Redundant positions Info

  • Sprott Physical Silver
    iShares Silver Trust
    High correlation
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Correlation-wise, the report politely points out the obvious duplicates. Sprott Physical Silver and iShares Silver Trust move almost identically, so holding both is diversification in the same way owning two umbrellas is “weather hedging.” The small-cap growth and mid-cap growth funds also dance to nearly the same tune. Correlation just means things tend to move together — and here, several positions are basically echo chambers. Instead of building independent shock absorbers, this portfolio repeats itself in shiny wrappers, making drawdowns more synchronized and less forgiving when a theme or style hits a rough patch.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

On the risk–return chart, this portfolio is sitting a solid 6.53 percentage points below the efficient frontier, which is like running slow and still getting winded. The Sharpe ratio of 0.55 against a max of 1.11 using the same ingredients is the insulting part: you already own the pieces for a much better risk-adjusted setup; the weights are just doing interpretive dance instead of working efficiently. The minimum-variance option is ultra-safe but barely earning, while the optimal is fast and furious. This portfolio manages to be neither especially safe nor especially rewarding, just statistically inefficient in the middle.

Dividends Info

  • iShares MSCI Indonesia ETF 4.30%
  • iShares MSCI Ireland ETF 2.80%
  • iShares MSCI Peru ETF 1.40%
  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF 2.90%
  • SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security 0.20%
  • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF 1.30%
  • iShares Cybersecurity and Tech ETF 0.10%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF 1.60%
  • iShares Semiconductor ETF 0.40%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.50%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 1.80%
  • Vanguard Short-Term Treasury Index Fund ETF Shares 3.90%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.70%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 2.10%

At a 2.10% total yield, the income profile is… fine but unremarkable. A few country funds and the short-term Treasuries chip in real cash flow, while the growth and tech-heavy names mostly just wave politely from the sidelines. Dividend yield is the “rent” your holdings pay you while you wait; here, the rent is moderate and inconsistent. You’ve also mixed low-yield future-tech themes with higher-yield boring stuff, which again kind of cancels out. This is not a coherent income strategy; it’s more like whatever yield happened to tag along for the ride with your various ideas.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares MSCI Indonesia ETF 0.59%
  • iShares MSCI Ireland ETF 0.50%
  • iShares MSCI Peru ETF 0.59%
  • iShares MSCI Australia ETF 0.50%
  • SPDR S&P Kensho Future Security 0.45%
  • iShares Global Clean Energy ETF 0.41%
  • iShares Cybersecurity and Tech ETF 0.47%
  • iShares Silver Trust 0.50%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF 0.39%
  • iShares Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Small-Cap Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Short-Term Treasury Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.07%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.21%

Costs are the quietly impressive part: a 0.21% total TER is genuinely low, especially considering how many shiny, niche ETFs are in here. The core Vanguard pieces are ultra-cheap and do most of the heavy lifting, while the iShares satellites siphon off a bit more without becoming outrageous. Still, some of those 0.5%+ country and theme funds are basically luxury toppings on a budget pizza — they don’t move performance much but make the bill more complicated than it needs to be. Fees are under control overall, but the pricier satellites aren’t really earning their drama.

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

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

AVDV vs VOO DRAM vs VOO SPMO vs VXUS DRAM vs SOXX

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