Roast mode 🔥

Clean energy side quests bolted onto an inefficient mostly sensible US stock core

Report created on Apr 5, 2026

Risk profile

  • Secure
    Speculative

The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.

Diversification profile

  • Focused
    Diversified

The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.

Positions

This thing looks like a perfectly reasonable US core portfolio that went on a field trip to a climate tech conference and bought every brochure. Nearly half the money sits in a boring-but-solid equal weight S&P 500 fund, which is fine. Then you’ve stapled on a sampler platter of small-cap value, mid-cap quality, sectors, and several very spicy “future of energy and infrastructure” ETFs. It’s like you started with a Toyota Corolla and then glued a hydrogen rocket and a solar farm to the roof. Takeaway: decide what’s supposed to be core, what’s supposed to be a bet, and size the bets so they don’t try to become the core.

Growth Info

Historically, the portfolio has grown $1,000 into $1,249 with an 11.61% CAGR. CAGR is just your average yearly speed over a bumpy road trip. Not bad, but the US market and global market both pulled ahead, delivering 13.26% and 14.32% respectively. So you took more “interesting” tilts and still ended up behind the boring benchmarks. Max drawdown of -19.33% also managed to be slightly worse than the US and comfortably worse than global. Translation: you paid with extra drama and still got a smaller trophy. Past data is yesterday’s weather, but it does hint that your “clever” tilts haven’t earned their keep so far.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation — basically a thousand random weather forecasts for your money — paints a pretty middle-of-the-road picture. Median outcome turns $1,000 into about $2,842 over 15 years, with an overall expected return of 8.23% a year. Reasonable, but not “genius investor” territory. The range is wide: roughly $1,022 to $7,901 in the 5–95% band. Translation: you might feel clever, or you might just beat cash by a nose. Simulations use past volatility and returns, so they’re educated guesses, not prophecies. But they do say this: your current setup is more “could be fine” than “clearly optimized.”

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class breakdown: 100% stocks, 0% everything else. For a “balanced” risk label and a 4/7 score, this is basically an equity-only roller coaster pretending to be a sensible family ride. No bonds, no cash, no diversifiers — just vibes and volatility. If markets go up, you’ll ride the wave; if they tank, you’re going down with the ship, no life raft attached. That can be totally fine for a long horizon and strong stomach, but it’s worth acknowledging: this is not what most people mean by “balanced.” It’s more like “balanced between vanilla and chaos — but still all in equities.”

Sectors Info

  • Industrials
    22%
  • Financials
    14%
  • Technology
    14%
  • Health Care
    13%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    8%
  • Energy
    7%
  • Utilities
    7%
  • Basic Materials
    6%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Real Estate
    3%
  • Telecommunications
    3%

Sector mix screams “I like real-world stuff and also some hype.” Industrials at 22% and a chunky 7% in utilities plus 7% in energy says you’re very into pipes, grids, and things that either dig stuff up or bolt it to the ground. Tech and health care are respectable at 14% and 13%, so you’re not ignoring modernity, just tilting toward hard-hat sectors. The roast: this is a bit like cosplaying as a national infrastructure plan. Takeaway: big industrial and utility tilts can help when “old economy” shines, but they’ll drag if the market rotates hard back into pure growth and shiny software narratives.

Regions Info

  • North America
    85%
  • Europe Developed
    6%
  • Asia Developed
    4%
  • Japan
    2%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geography-wise, this is “America or bust” with 85% in North America. The rest of the world is basically a participation trophy: low single digits in Europe, Japan, and emerging markets ex-China. It’s like inviting the entire planet to a party and then locking 85% of the snacks in the US room. The small EM ex-China and international value slivers are a nice nod to diversification, but at these sizes, they’re seasoning, not substance. Takeaway: if the US keeps dominating, this works; if leadership shifts abroad, you’ve effectively bet that the world’s other markets remain background characters.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mid-cap
    40%
  • Large-cap
    26%
  • Mega-cap
    14%
  • Small-cap
    13%
  • Micro-cap
    6%

Your market cap mix is unusually mid-cap heavy: about 40% mid, with only 26% large and 14% mega. Then you add 13% small and even 6% micro. This is the “I don’t just buy the household names; I want their weird cousins” approach. Mid and small caps can outperform over time, but they also wobble more, especially in rough markets or when credit gets tight. The equal weight S&P and small-cap value ETF are doing most of this skew. Takeaway: you’ve chosen a bumpier ride than a typical cap-weighted index, so don’t act surprised when the portfolio mood swings harder than the headlines.

True holdings Info

  • Bloom Energy Corp
    1.18%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Global X Hydrogen ETF
    • iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF
  • Exxon Mobil Corp
    0.72%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® MSCI Energy Index ETF
  • Doosan Fuel Cell Co Ltd
    0.72%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Global X Hydrogen ETF
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    0.70%
    Part of fund(s):
    • First Trust NASDAQ® Clean Edge® Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund
    • Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF
  • Plug Power Inc
    0.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Global X Hydrogen ETF
  • Berkshire Hathaway Inc
    0.66%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund
    • Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF
  • Eli Lilly and Company
    0.64%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® MSCI Health Care Index ETF
  • Eaton Corporation PLC
    0.64%
    Part of fund(s):
    • First Trust NASDAQ® Clean Edge® Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund
    • iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF
  • Apple Inc
    0.51%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF
  • Johnson & Johnson
    0.50%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® MSCI Health Care Index ETF
  • Top 10 total 6.94%

Look-through holdings are the “what’s really inside” scan, and yours says: you’re more concentrated than you think, but not in the usual suspects. The top overlaps are things like Bloom Energy, Plug Power, and Doosan Fuel Cell — the speculative junk drawer of the energy transition theme. Even NVIDIA, Apple, and Berkshire show up, but in tiny doses. Because only top 10 ETF holdings are captured, overlap is actually undercounted, so the true hydrogen-and-energy concentration is likely spicier. Takeaway: you’re not just “investing in themes,” you’re doubling up on the same volatile names from multiple angles without fully seeing how much they dominate the thrill factor.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Very high
Data availability: 7%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
No data
Data availability: 0%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 5%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 94%

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 profile: enormous tilts to value and quality, both at 85%. Factor exposure is like checking the ingredients list instead of trusting the front label, and yours says: “cheap and sturdy.” That’s actually one of the more respectable combinations — like buying used cars but only after a mechanic inspects them. Yield and low volatility are basically market-like, so you’re not chasing dividends or fake calm. The roast: for such a themey, hydrogen-flavored portfolio, the factor profile is surprisingly grown-up. It might even be accidental competence. Takeaway: in bad markets, quality value usually holds up better than speculative growth — which may partly offset your more explosive side bets.

Risk contribution Info

  • Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight ETF
    Weight: 45.47%
    41.4%
  • Global X Hydrogen ETF
    Weight: 5.68%
    10.5%
  • SPDR® S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF
    Weight: 5.59%
    7.0%
  • iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF
    Weight: 5.61%
    6.3%
  • First Trust NASDAQ® Clean Edge® Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund
    Weight: 5.54%
    6.1%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 71.4%

Risk contribution reveals who’s actually shaking the portfolio, not who looks big on the statement. Your equal weight S&P fund is 45% of assets and 41% of risk — fair enough, the main character acting like the main character. But then the 5.7% slice in Global X Hydrogen is doing 10.5% of the total risk, with a risk/weight of 1.85. That’s a chihuahua barking like a Rottweiler. Top three holdings drive almost 59% of total risk, meaning a few positions dominate the emotional roller coaster. Takeaway: if you ever want a smoother ride, that hydrogen chunk is the first lever to pull, not the last.

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 risk vs. return story is where the real roast lives. Your current Sharpe ratio is 0.56 — that’s return per unit of risk, like how much joy you get per panic attack. The optimal mix of the exact same holdings hits a Sharpe of 1.46 with almost the same risk but much higher expected return. You’re a full 10.74 percentage points below the efficient frontier, which is basically the line of “not wasting risk.” Translation: you picked the wobbly, underpowered version of a car that could go faster and smoother using the same parts. The ingredients are fine; the recipe is what’s inefficient.

Dividends Info

  • Dimensional International Value ETF 2.70%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Energy Index ETF 2.40%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Health Care Index ETF 1.40%
  • First Trust NASDAQ® Clean Edge® Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund 0.90%
  • Global X Hydrogen ETF 3.30%
  • iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF 1.00%
  • iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF 1.70%
  • KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF 3.00%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight ETF 1.60%
  • SPDR® S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF 2.00%
  • Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund 1.60%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF 0.70%
  • Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF 0.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.62%

Total yield of 1.62% is firmly in the “meh” zone. You’re not a yield junkie chasing fat payouts, but you’re also not exactly living off this income. Some pieces throw off okay dividends — energy, value, and EM bits — while others are almost purely for growth (or vibes, in hydrogen’s case). This is basically a total-return portfolio with a light cash snack on the side. The roast: you’re taking real equity risk for a yield that wouldn’t pay for a decent streaming bundle. Takeaway: if income is ever a serious goal, this setup will need a very different mix, not just a bigger balance.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Dimensional International Value ETF 0.27%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Energy Index ETF 0.08%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Health Care Index ETF 0.08%
  • First Trust NASDAQ® Clean Edge® Smart Grid Infrastructure Index Fund 0.57%
  • Global X Hydrogen ETF 0.50%
  • iShares Energy Storage & Materials ETF 0.47%
  • iShares U.S. Infrastructure ETF 0.30%
  • KraneShares MSCI Emerging Markets ex China Index ETF 0.24%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Equal Weight ETF 0.20%
  • SPDR® S&P 600 Small Cap Value ETF 0.15%
  • Financial Select Sector SPDR® Fund 0.09%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Top 50 ETF 0.20%
  • Invesco S&P MidCap Quality ETF 0.25%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.24%

Total TER around 0.24% is actually pretty solid — you mostly avoided getting fleeced. Core pieces are cheap, with several funds under 0.10–0.20%. Then the themed ETFs stroll in at 0.47–0.57%, like fancy cocktails on an otherwise sensible bar tab. They’re not criminally expensive, but you are paying extra for buzzwords and narrower focus. The upside: you didn’t accidentally build a 0.8% circus. The downside: those high-fee theme funds haven’t exactly crushed performance so far. Takeaway: keep the cheap, broad stuff as the backbone; make every expensive, niche ETF justify its existence with either clear purpose or a smaller slice.

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