Solid funds clumsy mix this portfolio is a diversified underachiever wearing dividend cosplay
Report created on Aug 2, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 60.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 20.00% -
VT Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 20.00%
Structurally this thing is three funds in a trench coat pretending to be something complex. Sixty percent goes to international stocks, then you bolt on “all US stocks” at 20% and a US dividend tilt for the other 20%. Translation: two broad market nets plus one extra filter for companies that hand out cash. It’s not nonsense, but it’s not exactly elegant either. The overlap between the total US fund and the dividend fund means a chunk of the US allocation just shouts “dividends” louder instead of adding new ideas. For a “balanced” label, it’s basically 100% equities with slightly fancier branding.
Growth
The track record is the classic “look good until you compare it” story. Turning $1,000 into $2,903 with an 11.29% CAGR sounds nice… right up until the plain vanilla US market does 15.08% over the same period and laps it. Even the global market, not exactly a hype machine, beats it with 12.53%. The max drawdown of -34.32% is basically the same punch in the face as the benchmarks, just with less payoff afterward. So the portfolio takes almost benchmark-level pain while delivering second-tier growth. Past performance isn’t destiny, but history here screams “you could have done less and gotten more.”
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection is the financial equivalent of “manage your expectations.” Simulations take the past volatility and returns, shake them in a statistical blender, and spit out thousands of possible futures. Median outcome: $1,000 grows to about $2,853 in 15 years — fine, not thrilling. The “likely” zone runs from roughly doubling money to a bit over quadrupling it, which is a wide “maybe it’s good maybe it’s meh” range. There’s also a non-trivial chance you basically spin your wheels and end around breakeven in real terms after inflation. As always, this is weather-forecast-level useful: good for vibe-checking risk, terrible for promises.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is simple: 100% stocks, 0% everything else. For a portfolio labeled “balanced,” this is more like an all-equity enthusiast wearing a sensible name tag. No bonds, no cash sleeve, no alternatives — just pure participation in market mood swings. That means every correction, crash, and panic shows up in full color on the statement. There’s nothing wrong with going all-in on equities as a concept; just don’t pretend it’s structurally balanced. When the only asset class on the menu is stock, your risk dial is basically stuck far higher than that 4/7 label suggests.
Sectors
- Technology 23%
- Financials 18%
- Industrials 13%
- Health Care 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Consumer Staples 8%
- Energy 6%
- Telecommunications 5%
- Basic Materials 5%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this is a fairly index-like salad, but with a noticeable comfort in boring grown-up industries. Tech at 23% is substantial but not “tech junkie,” while financials at 18% and industrials at 13% give it more “middle management” flavor than “Silicon Valley rocketship.” Energy, materials, and telecom are all meaningfully present, so nothing is completely ghosted. The downside: this setup happily absorbs broad market shocks without leaning hard into any particular growth engine. You’re basically signed up to own the world’s economic average — slightly older, slightly more income-leaning — instead of actually picking a distinct lane on innovation, defensiveness, or cyclicality.
Regions
- North America 45%
- Europe Developed 21%
- Asia Developed 11%
- Japan 9%
- Asia Emerging 7%
- Australasia 2%
- Africa/Middle East 2%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, this thing is more worldly than most home-biased portfolios, but it leans so hard into “international” it almost forgets it’s based in the US. About 45% in North America and a chunky 55% scattered across Europe, Japan, and the rest of the globe gives it a definite “abroad first” flavor. That sounds sophisticated, but remember: a lot of that international slice has spent a decade underperforming the US. So you’ve managed to overweight the exact regions that have been dragging global returns. It’s respectably diversified on a map, but in performance terms it’s like betting more heavily on the bench than the star player.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 37%
- Mega-cap 36%
- Mid-cap 19%
- Small-cap 4%
- Micro-cap 1%
The market-cap breakdown is a love letter to big companies. Mega-caps and large caps together eat up 73% of the portfolio, with mid-caps making up most of the rest. Small and micro caps exist, technically, at 5% combined — more like garnish than strategy. This tilt is very “index comfort zone”: stable-ish giants, fewer scrappy underdogs. That usually means smoother behavior than a small-cap circus but also less exposure to the part of the market that sometimes drives higher long-term growth. You’ve basically chosen the corporate equivalent of blue chips and middle managers while letting the ambitious interns mostly sit out.
True holdings
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 2.53%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
SS Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 1.36%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 1.30%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 1.26%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc. 1.17%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AS ASML Holding N.V. 1.01%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AB Abbott Laboratories 0.91%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
MR Merck & Company Inc 0.88%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
UN UnitedHealth Group Incorporated 0.86%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
AM Amgen Inc 0.86%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
- Top 10 total 12.14%
The look-through just confirms the obvious: your supposed diversification is secretly a bet on a handful of global heavyweights. Top underlying positions are the usual suspects — big chipmakers, megacap tech names, and a who’s who of healthcare — showing up via multiple funds. Apple, NVIDIA, TSMC, Samsung, ASML… they’re all in there courtesy of broad funds that love the same winners. And remember, this is only using ETF top-10 data, so real overlap is almost certainly higher. On paper, it’s three ETFs; under the hood, it’s a crowded VIP lounge of the same mega-firms quietly driving a lot of your fate.
Factors
Factor-wise, this portfolio is wearing a “steady adult” costume. High yield, high value, and high low-volatility tilt say, “Please pay me dividends and don’t throw me around too much.” Factor exposure is just the fancy term for which hidden traits the portfolio leans into — like checking whether your playlist is secretly 80% sad songs. Here, the portfolio clearly favors cheaper, income-paying, supposedly calmer stocks. That usually means you give up some sizzle when markets are euphoric in exchange for fewer full-blown meltdowns. Of course, “low volatility” does not mean “no volatility”; it just means slightly less chaos when the market decides to throw furniture.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 60.00% 61.1% -
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 20.00% 21.1% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 20.00% 17.9%
Risk contribution lays out who’s actually driving the drama, and it’s very on-brand: the 60% international fund contributes 61% of risk, basically punching exactly at its weight. The total US fund at 20% weight and 21% risk contribution is similarly in line. The dividend ETF is the quiet kid: 20% of weight but less than 18% of risk, thanks to its more defensive, income-tilted holdings. So despite owning three funds, there’s no subtle risk wizardry happening. One giant international allocation and one big US sleeve are steering the ship; the dividend fund is basically the slightly calmer passenger not making much difference when waves hit.
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 efficient frontier chart, this portfolio is literally leaving performance on the table. The efficient frontier is just the nerdy curve showing the best return you could have had for each risk level using the same building blocks. You’re 1.42 percentage points below that frontier at your current risk — taking 16.32% volatility and getting a Sharpe ratio of 0.49, while the max-Sharpe version hits 0.79. Even the low-risk option has a better Sharpe at similar returns. Translation: with the exact same three funds, just in smarter proportions, you could get more return for equal risk or similar return for less drama. Inefficiency dressed as simplicity.
Dividends
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.10%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.60%
- Weighted yield (per year) 2.40%
The total yield at 2.4% screams “income-aware but not actually an income machine.” The dedicated dividend ETF is doing the heavy lifting at 3.1%, while the broad US and international funds sit closer to market-level payouts. So the portfolio kind of half-commits to a dividend story: enough yield to feel responsible, not enough to be interesting. Dividends can help smooth the ride a bit, but they’re not magic — prices still move, and yield doesn’t protect against bad stock selection or weak regions. Here, the dividend tilt mostly adds flavor rather than fundamentally changing the risk or return profile in a heroic way.
Ongoing product costs
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- 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) 0.05%
Costs are the one part of this portfolio that’s almost too sensible to roast. A total TER of 0.05% is basically couch-cushion money in ETF land. You’re getting global exposure, dividend tilts, and total-market coverage for less than many people pay in checking account nonsense fees. It’s so cheap it actually makes the performance underachievement slightly more painful — you did the hard part (keeping costs low) and then muddied it with a clunky structure and suboptimal weights. Still, credit where it’s due: at least you’re not paying champagne prices for tap water. This is tap water priced like… slightly cheaper tap water.
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