Calm looking index portfolio quietly smuggling in a Bitcoin side quest and extra tech on the sly
Report created on May 1, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
VT Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 33.33% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 33.33% -
AV Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
AVUV - US0250728773 16.67% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 10.00% -
FB Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust
FBTC - US3159481098 6.67%
Structurally this portfolio looks sensible at first glance: two big broad-market index funds doing most of the lifting, one small-cap value spice jar, a NASDAQ dollop, and then… 7% Bitcoin for dramatic effect. It’s like a basic, sensible sandwich with a ghost pepper tucked in the middle. The broad US and international funds already provide huge diversification, so the add-ons mostly just shove the risk dial, not the diversification dial. Composition-wise this is basically “three layers of stock market” plus one crypto wildcard, which means the label says “balanced” but the ingredients read much closer to “equity party with a bouncer that called in sick.”
Growth
Historically, this thing has been riding the same roller coaster as the US and global markets, just in the next cart over. CAGR around 20.4% versus roughly 20.4–20.7% for the benchmarks is basically statistical shrug territory — all that clever seasoning produced almost zero extra juice. Max drawdown of about -18% also mirrors the benchmarks, so the crypto and factor tweaks didn’t spare any pain on the way down either. And 90% of returns showing up in just 14 days is a reminder that timing this lineup would be like trying to catch lightning with a thimble. Past data is useful, but it’s still yesterday’s weather, not tomorrow’s forecast.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “Yeah, this could work… or not.” Simulations spit out a median $2,827 from $1,000 over 15 years, but the range runs from “barely above cash” to “nice victory lap.” Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of rolling the dice thousands of times using past-like volatility and returns, then plotting the mess. It doesn’t predict the future; it just shows how ugly or pretty things might get if history rhymes. The 74.7% chance of ending positive looks fine, but that 5th-percentile outcome near $926 is the reminder that all this stock-and-crypto bravado still fully respects gravity.
Asset classes
- Stocks 93%
- Crypto 7%
Asset class mix: 93% stocks, 7% crypto, 0% chill. For a “balanced” label, this is basically a pure growth engine with a speculative sidecar. No bonds, no cash cushion, no real ballast — just “hope the markets cooperate” backed by one of the most volatile assets humans have invented. Stocks doing almost everything means the ride will closely track risk-on moods, while Bitcoin volunteers as the drama generator. Having one high-octane asset next to a giant stock allocation doesn’t create some magical new category; it just sharpens the existing roller coaster. The asset class design here is “risk on, then slightly more risk on,” with nothing invited to calm the room when volatility shows up.
Sectors
- Technology 22%
- Financials 16%
- Industrials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Health Care 7%
- Telecommunications 7%
- Crypto 7%
- Energy 6%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector spread actually looks pretty grown-up on paper: tech in front at 22%, then financials, industrials, consumer discretionary, and the rest reasonably represented. The irony is that behind those tidy percentages sits a very tech-centric growth engine, especially once you account for the NASDAQ 100 exposure and the mega-cap darlings hiding inside the broad funds. The crypto slice gets its own line as 7%, but functionally it’s “high-volatility other,” not a real sector. So while the sector chart pretends this is a nicely balanced economy-in-a-box, the true character is “heavy on innovation and cyclicals, light on the boring stabilizers,” with tech and growth quietly steering the emotional tone.
Regions
- North America 62%
- Europe Developed 13%
- Japan 5%
- Asia Developed 5%
- Asia Emerging 5%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, this is mostly “US plus cameos.” Roughly 62% in North America with smaller slices spread across Europe, Japan, and the rest of the world gives it a superficially global vibe, but the reality is still very US-centered. It’s the classic pattern: broad international fund for respectability, then a US-heavy tilt doing the real work. That’s not automatically bad, just very predictable. The small allocations to emerging and other regions are more like background extras than actual cast members. Overall, the portfolio behaves like it believes the world is mostly one big domestic market with some supporting characters scattered across other time zones.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 34%
- Large-cap 24%
- Mid-cap 13%
- Small-cap 12%
- Micro-cap 8%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Market cap mix looks almost deliberately textbook: 34% mega-cap, 24% large, then a tapered line through mid, small, and micro. On paper, that screams “I read the diversification pamphlet,” but the story beneath is different. Mega-caps, especially the usual tech suspects, still have the narrative power — when they sneeze, the portfolio catches something. The dedicated small-cap value slice and the micro-cap exposure add spice, but they’re not big enough to fully tilt behavior away from mega-led moods. The result is a portfolio that pretends to love the full size spectrum while emotionally still very attached to the biggest, loudest names and the index-heavy parts of town.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 3.06%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc 2.67%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.01%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.56%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.25%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 1.15%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.13%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.04%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.02%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
TS Tesla Inc 0.89%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 15.77%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Look-through holdings tell the usual modern story: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, TSMC, Broadcom, Meta, Tesla — the entire “magnificent whatever-number-we’re-on-now” ensemble is here, spread across multiple funds. This overlap means the portfolio is quietly more concentrated than it looks. Owning an index, plus another index, plus a NASDAQ slice is like buying three different burgers that all use the same patty. Top-holding overlap is probably undercounted because only ETF top-10s are visible, so the real duplication is almost certainly higher. The headline diversification hides a very familiar underlying cast doing most of the heavy lifting and drama creation.
Factors
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 is aggressively… normal. Everything is sitting near neutral — value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility all basically shrug-level. Factor exposure is like the ingredient label on the cereal box: it explains how the thing behaves beneath the branding. Here, the ingredients say, “You bought the default setting.” Even with the small-cap value and NASDAQ toppings, the net effect is mostly market-like, not some clever, intentional tilt. There’s no bold bet on cheapness, quality, stability, or trend-following; the portfolio just soaks up whatever the market serves. Accidentally sensible, maybe, but also a bit directionless in terms of intentional factor design.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 33.33% 31.4% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 33.33% 26.8% -
Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Weight: 16.67% 18.4% -
Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust
Weight: 6.67% 12.3% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 10.00% 11.1%
Risk contribution exposes the quiet troublemakers. The two vanilla-looking Vanguard funds plus the small-cap value ETF drive most of the risk, which is expected. But Bitcoin at 6.67% weight throwing off 12.25% of total risk is the loud guest at a dinner party. Risk contribution is basically asking, “Who’s actually shaking this thing around?” and the answer is: core equity plus that crypto sideshow, with NASDAQ adding an extra wobble. When a small slice carries nearly double its weight in risk, it’s not diversification — it’s pure volatility donation. The top three holdings driving over 76% of total risk shows where the real emotional swings will come from.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationInvesco NASDAQ 100 ETFVanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
The correlation note here is almost comical in its obviousness: NASDAQ 100 and the total US market ETF move almost identically. That means those two aren’t really independent actors; they’re cousins showing up to the same family reunion wearing different jackets. Correlation is just a mathy way of saying, “These things tend to go up and down together.” So the NASDAQ slice doesn’t introduce much new direction; it just doubles down on the same tech-heavy US growth theme already baked into the total market fund. When things break, both of these will likely break at the same time — just with slightly different emotional intensity.
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.
On the risk/return chart, this portfolio sits annoyingly below its own efficient frontier by about 1.1 percentage points of return at the same risk level. The efficient frontier is the curve of “best possible trade-offs” using only the existing holdings in different weights. Being below that line means the portfolio is basically working harder than it needs to for the return it’s getting — like jogging with a weighted vest for no training benefit. Sharpe ratio of 1.03 versus 1.28 for the optimal setup suggests the ingredients are fine, but the recipe is lazy. Same kitchen, same groceries, just not arranged in a particularly efficient way.
Dividends
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.57%
With a total yield around 1.57%, this portfolio is clearly not here for the income. Dividends are more like background noise than a design feature, despite the slightly higher yield from the international slice. Yield this low means most of the “reward” is expected to come from price moves, not cash payouts — classic growth-ish behavior. That’s fine if the goal is capital appreciation, but anyone hoping this quietly functions like an income machine is going to be underwhelmed. The small-cap value ETF tries to nudge yield up a bit, but between NASDAQ and crypto, the overall vibe is “we’ll pay you later, maybe, if the market feels generous.”
Ongoing product costs
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
- Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust 0.25%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.10%
Costs are, frankly, suspiciously reasonable: total TER around 0.10%. That’s “I actually opened the factsheet” territory. The cheap Vanguard cores do the heavy lifting, and even the spicy bits are only mildly overpriced by modern ETF standards. TER — total expense ratio — is basically the annual membership fee for owning these funds, and here it’s closer to warehouse-club pricing than luxury boutique. There isn’t much to roast on costs except that the portfolio wastes its low-fee advantage by not sitting on the efficient frontier. You’ve nailed the “don’t overpay the middlemen” part while still leaving some risk/return efficiency casually on the table.
What next?
Ready to invest in this portfolio?
Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.
Create your own report?
Join our community!
Compare your holdings
How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?
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