This portfolio has only about 1 months of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it Roast mode 🔥

Hyperactive tech flavored index soup pretending one lucky month is a personality trait

Report created on May 12, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is basically three sensible index funds with a handful of hyperactive satellites duct-taped on the side. About 70% is boring, broad market exposure, then the remaining slice goes on a field trip to semiconductors, pure tech, South Korea, and a very spicy space and memory theme. It looks like someone started with a simple core and got bored, then started adding “fun” ETFs like toppings on a pizza. The result is a portfolio that can’t quite decide if it’s a calm index hugger or a speculative side quest. Structurally it’s not chaos, but it’s definitely noisier than it needs to be to say “balanced.”

Growth Info

That 375% “CAGR” over one month is the financial equivalent of hitting every green light on a six-block drive and claiming you’re an F1 driver now. With only about a month of history, the chart is mostly random noise plus a lucky streak, not some deep truth about the portfolio’s genius. The max drawdown of just -1.08% is cute, but again, over a few weeks it tells almost nothing about how this will behave in a real crash. Beating both US and global markets by a mile over this micro-window is more of a fun trivia fact than a reliable pattern.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation here is basically trying to predict a 15-year saga from a one-episode pilot. Monte Carlo takes past volatility and returns, shakes them in a blender, and spits out thousands of possible futures. But when the input history is a month-long sugar high, the outputs are more “educated guess” than “forecast.” A median outcome of $2,571 from $1,000 over 15 years and a 72% chance of ending positive sound reasonable, but they’re built on flimsy data. Treat these ranges as rough storyboards: they show that outcomes can vary wildly, not that this particular portfolio is destined for any specific path.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    93%
  • No data
    7%

Asset-class-wise, this thing is basically all-in on stocks, with 93% in equities and a mysterious 7% in the “no data” penalty box. That’s not a balanced multi-asset mix; it’s an equity portfolio with a small dark corner no one has labeled properly. Calling this “Balanced” is generous — there’s no visible ballast from bonds or other stabilizers here, just a whole lot of riding the stock market roller coaster. The lesson: if almost everything is equities, volatility is part of the deal, no matter what the risk score marketing label says. The missing-data slice just adds a little extra “surprise me” on top.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    36%
  • Financials
    11%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    1%

Sector-wise, this portfolio has a clear crush on technology at 36%, then sprinkles the rest across everything else like it’s trying to look respectable. The core index funds already load plenty of tech, then the dedicated tech and semiconductor ETFs come in and stomp on the gas. Other sectors are there mostly to avoid embarrassment, not to drive the show. That kind of tech tilt can feel brilliant when innovation is in fashion and brutal when the market remembers that trees don’t grow to the sky. It’s less “sector diversification” and more “tech with supporting cast.”

Regions Info

  • North America
    67%
  • Asia Developed
    10%
  • Europe Developed
    8%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Asia Emerging
    3%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geographically, it’s very much “America first, others if we must.” About 67% sits in North America, with the rest scattered in small doses across developed and emerging regions, plus a separate bet on South Korea. The international index position tries to look worldly, but the net effect is still a home-biased portfolio with a token global nod. That’s common, but it also means the portfolio’s fate is tightly tied to one region’s fortunes. If the US stumbles while other areas do better, this structure is likely to miss a good chunk of that party — at least based on how equity markets have behaved historically.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    44%
  • Large-cap
    30%
  • Mid-cap
    15%
  • Small-cap
    3%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

On market cap, this is a classic “index at the core, giants on the throne” setup: 44% mega-cap, 30% large-cap, and then a polite 15% mid-cap with crumbs for small and micro. So it looks diversified on paper, but in practice the megacaps are calling most of the shots. That’s what you get when broad index funds rule the portfolio — they’re built around the biggest companies by design. The satellites might smuggle in some smaller names via thematic ETFs, but they’re not big enough to flip the script. This is still very much a “big companies first, everyone else later” structure.

True holdings Info

  • Ast Spacemobile Inc
    3.82%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • Rocket Lab USA Inc.
    3.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • Planet Labs PBC
    2.95%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • EchoStar Corporation
    2.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • Firefly Aerospace Inc. Common Stock
    2.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • 5N Plus Inc.
    2.38%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.33%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® MSCI Information Technology Index ETF
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
  • Filtronic
    2.30%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • SK Hynix Inc
    2.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
    • Roundhill Memory ETF
  • OHB SE
    2.12%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Tema ETF Trust
  • Top 10 total 26.76%

The look-through holdings reveal a secret love affair with space, satellites, and semis. Top exposures include AST SpaceMobile, Rocket Lab, Planet Labs, EchoStar, and other niche names that don’t exactly scream “steady and boring.” NVIDIA and SK Hynix also pop up, showing the chip obsession runs deep. Because the data only covers ETF top 10s, this is just the visible tip of the iceberg, but even that tip is shouting “high-octane themes.” It’s a sneaky combo: on the surface it looks like mild-mannered index funds, under the hood there’s a pocket of small, volatile bets quietly amplifying risk.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Very high
Data availability: 7%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 23%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 7%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
No data
Data availability: 0%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 93%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Low
Data availability: 23%

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-wise, this portfolio is loudly value-tilted (85%) while being very low on size (6%) and high on momentum (75%). Translation: it’s somehow chasing “cheap” stocks and fast-rising names at the same time, mostly in bigger companies. That’s like trying to be a bargain hunter and a trend chaser simultaneously — not impossible, just a bit confused. The very low size exposure means smaller companies barely matter, so most of the factor story plays out in mid-to-large names. With short history, these numbers are more personality sketch than biography, but they do hint that this portfolio won’t behave like a plain vanilla market clone when style winds shift.

Risk contribution Info

  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund
    Weight: 35.00%
    23.9%
  • FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
    Weight: 20.00%
    20.2%
  • Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF
    Weight: 6.30%
    17.0%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 15.00%
    10.0%
  • Roundhill Memory ETF
    Weight: 3.00%
    8.0%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 79.0%

Risk contribution exposes who’s actually shaking the boat, and it’s not who the weights alone suggest. The broad US and international funds together eat a big share of risk, which is expected, but the South Korea ETF is the real drama queen: 6.3% weight but nearly 17% of total risk. Roundhill Memory pulls a similar stunt, tripling its share of risk versus its size. When a few small positions hit 2.5–2.7 times their weight in risk, they’re basically strapping fireworks onto an otherwise sensible framework. That may be intentional spice, or just what happens when niche ETFs sneak into a “balanced” mix.

Redundant positions Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Fidelity Total Market Index Fund
    High correlation

The correlation story is simple: the Total Market Index Fund and the 500 Index Fund move almost identically. That’s like owning two versions of the same burger and congratulating yourself on menu diversity. From a risk perspective, they’re singing the same song, so in big market moves they’ll likely lurch in tandem rather than offset each other. Correlation just measures how often things move together, and here the answer is “a lot.” In a calm month that looks harmless; in a serious downturn it just means the red numbers might show up on two lines instead of one.

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, this portfolio is dramatically underachieving its potential using the very same ingredients. The Sharpe ratio of 9.18 versus an optimal 12.7 (with higher return at a bit more risk) and even 9.55 for the minimum-variance flavor says one thing: these weights are not pulling their weight. Sitting over 50 percentage points below the frontier at this risk level is like running a three-legged race in a field of sprinters. With only a month of data, the exact numbers are shaky, but the message stands: the mix feels more accidental than engineered from a risk/return perspective.

Dividends Info

  • Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF 2.00%
  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund 1.00%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Information Technology Index ETF 0.30%
  • FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 2.50%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.19%

The income side is frankly an afterthought. A total yield around 1.19% means dividends are more of a background hum than a feature. The international and South Korea funds do some lifting, but the tech-heavy pieces and growthy exposures barely chip in, which is exactly what they’re built to do. This is a capital-growth-first setup, not a “pay me while I wait” structure. Nothing wrong with that, just don’t pretend it’s some kind of income machine. And with only a sliver of history, even the yield snapshots are just that — snapshots, not a long, stable payment track record.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Franklin FTSE South Korea ETF 0.09%
  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund 0.02%
  • Fidelity® MSCI Information Technology Index ETF 0.08%
  • FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 0.06%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio accidentally behaves like a grown-up. A total TER around 0.06% is impressively low for something with this many moving parts. The core index funds are dirt cheap, and even the pricier satellite ETFs aren’t outrageous, just mildly indulgent. It’s like building a mostly economy-class portfolio with a couple of slightly fancy seats thrown in. Fees aren’t the villain here; if anything, they’re the quiet hero that stops the whole setup from leaking money before it even hits the market. You actually clicked some of the right things on this front.

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