A tech tilted all stock rocket ship pretending diversification is more than a participation trophy
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.
What type of investor this portfolio is suitable for
Growth Investors
This setup fits someone who’s comfortable watching their net worth swing like a theme park ride and still sleep at night. Long time horizon, high risk tolerance, and a growth‑first mindset are basically assumed. There’s a clear bias toward what’s been winning lately—US, large caps, and tech—so there’s at least a touch of recency bias disguised as confidence. This kind of investor probably prioritizes long‑term wealth building over short‑term comfort and doesn’t need income yet. But they’ll eventually need to shift gears from “max growth” to “don’t blow this up,” especially as real‑life goals like retirement or major expenses get closer to the front of the line.
Positions
-
STATE STREET EQUITY 500 INDEX FUND CLASS K
SSSYX - US85749R1564 66.53% -
State Street Small/Mid Cap Equity Index
SSMKX - US85749T4004 16.47% -
Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
VGT - US92204A7028 6.60% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 5.29% -
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 5.11%
This thing is basically an S&P 500 shrine with accessories. Two thirds in a big 500 index, another chunk in small/mid caps, plus a total US market fund that’s basically a duplicate selfie. Then you sprinkled a tech ETF on top like hot sauce and tossed in a tiny bit of international to look worldly. Compared to a plain vanilla global 60/40, this is a full‑equity, US‑centric growth machine with some redundant pieces. Cleaning this up means cutting overlapping funds that all own the same giants and deciding if you actually want different return drivers or just five ways to buy the same market.
Look-through holdings
-
NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA.US ETFs 1.53% From ETFs: Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares, Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.53% -
Apple Inc
AAPL.US ETFs 1.24% From ETFs: Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares, Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.24% -
Microsoft Corporation
MSFT.US ETFs 0.97% From ETFs: Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares, Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.97% -
Broadcom Inc
AVGO.US ETFs 0.41% From ETFs: Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares, Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.41% -
Amazon.com Inc
AMZN.US ETFs 0.18% From ETFs: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.18% -
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
2330.TW ETFs 0.17% From ETFs: Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.17% -
Micron Technology Inc
MU.US ETFs 0.16% From ETFs: Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.16% -
Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL.US ETFs 0.15% From ETFs: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.15% -
Advanced Micro Devices Inc
AMD.US ETFs 0.13% From ETFs: Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.13% -
Meta Platforms Inc.
META.US ETFs 0.12% From ETFs: Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.12% - Top 10 total 5.03%
Note: Overlap may be understated because only ETF top-10 holdings are used.
The look‑through data barely scratches the surface (only 6.2% of the portfolio properly covered), but we still see the usual tech celebrities: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Broadcom, TSMC, AMD, Meta. In other words, the portfolio is quietly star‑struck. Top‑10 holdings coverage is only 36% of the ETFs, so the true overlap is probably much higher than shown. That means this is likely more concentrated in the mega‑cap tech theme than the numbers admit. For sanity, it’d help to run a full overlap check or at least be honest that this isn’t “five diversified funds” so much as one big US equity bet with a handful of the same heroes repeated.
Growth
Historic performance at ~16.9% CAGR is excellent, which is exactly what you’d expect from a decade where US large‑cap and tech were on steroids. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is just “average yearly speed” over the trip. But you paid for it with a ~35% max drawdown, which is the gut‑punch peak‑to‑bottom fall. That’s stock‑only life. A few big up days (39 days making 90% of returns) did most of the work, meaning missing those would have wrecked results. Treat the past as “nice sample, not guarantee.” A more balanced structure could keep upside potential while slightly softening the next punch to the face.
Projection
Monte Carlo says this rocket has serious fuel but also serious turbulence. Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of saying “we throw the dice 1,000 times using past‑style volatility and see what happens.” In the median scenario, your money multiplies several times; in a bad‑luck 5th percentile, you still end up up ~30%—which screams “all‑equity, high‑octane growth profile.” The catch: these sims assume the future vaguely rhymes with the past and that US equities don’t suddenly forget how to win. Past data is like yesterday’s weather: useful, but it won’t warn you about the freak storm. Gradually adding true diversifiers could keep growth but reduce dependence on a single script.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
- Cash 0%
- Other 0%
- No data 0%
Asset classes: 100% stocks, 0% everything else. That’s not a portfolio; that’s a personality test. No bonds, no cash buffer, no real diversifiers—just pure equity beta. For someone decades from retirement, fine; for anyone closer to needing money, this is an all‑gas‑no‑brakes setup that assumes markets recover before life does something inconvenient like job loss or big expenses. Adding even a modest slice of lower‑volatility stuff (bonds, stable assets, etc.) could turn this from “roller coaster” into “fast train with handrails.” Right now, the risk score of 5/7 feels about right: you signed up for the ride; just don’t act surprised when it drops suddenly.
Sectors
- Technology 35%
- Financials 13%
- Health Care 9%
- Industrials 9%
- Telecommunications 9%
- Consumer Discretionary 9%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Energy 3%
- Real Estate 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Consumer Discretionary 1%
Tech at 35% is a full‑blown tech habit, not a mild preference. Then you’ve got reasonable chunks in financials, healthcare, industrials, and communications, but let’s be clear: if tech sneezes, this portfolio catches pneumonia. This is the standard US index + extra tech problem: you already owned a ton of tech through the S&P 500 and total market, then added a dedicated tech fund for dessert. Sector tilts can be fine, but doubling down on what’s already dominant is how you turn diversification into cosplay. Dialing back the standalone tech fund or offsetting it with something less correlated would create a more balanced sector story without killing growth potential.
Regions
- North America 94%
- Europe Developed 2%
- Asia Emerging 1%
- Asia Developed 1%
- Japan 1%
- Latin America 0%
- Africa/Middle East 0%
- Australasia 0%
- Europe Emerging 0%
Geography breakdown screams “America or nothing.” About 94% North America and a token 5–6% scattered across the rest of the planet. That’s basically home bias with a passport stamp. US dominance has worked brilliantly in recent years, but that’s not a law of nature. Other regions and economies occasionally have their moment, and right now they’re barely allowed in the door. Global diversification is like having more than one income stream—boring until the main one slows down. Upping the true international share and not just pretending with a tiny allocation would reduce the “US exceptionalism or bust” gamble and give the portfolio a better chance if leadership rotates.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 39%
- Large-cap 29%
- Mid-cap 20%
- Small-cap 9%
- Micro-cap 3%
Market cap mix—39% mega, 29% big, 20% mid, 9% small, 3% micro—is actually one of the more balanced parts. The size exposure reading (85%) tells us you lean decently into smaller companies compared with a pure mega‑cap shrine, especially via the small/mid index. That said, with such heavy S&P 500 and total market exposure, the giants still run the show. This is like saying you support small businesses but do most of your spending at Amazon and Walmart. If the goal is truly benefiting from size premia (small caps historically offering higher but bumpier returns), you’d want to intentionally size that tilt and be ready to stomach their extra drama.
Factors
Factor exposure shows which “hidden flavors” drive returns. Here, size, momentum, and low volatility pop up as the big three, though signal coverage is low, so take it as blurry guidance. Size tilt (toward smaller firms) plus momentum (recent winners) is basically “I like fast climbers who are still scrappy.” Low volatility mixed in tries to act like a seatbelt—but with incomplete data, that might be flattering noise. Loading into momentum while not explicitly checking quality is like picking race cars without lifting the hood. If factor tilts are intentional, great—lean into them with eyes open. If accidental, at least decide whether this cocktail really fits how you handle bad markets.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationVanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF SharesSTATE STREET EQUITY 500 INDEX FUND CLASS K
Your funds are basically best friends who all hang out at the same parties. The S&P 500 and total US market fund are highly correlated, meaning they move almost in lockstep. Correlation is just “do things go up and down together?” High correlation with similar holdings means you pay for multiple tickers but get the same drama. In a crash, they’ll all dive together; nothing here is really designed to zig when the others zag. Swapping overlapping US equity clones for genuinely different assets or markets would earn you actual diversification instead of a bunch of different logos doing the same thing.
Risk Contribution
-
STATE STREET EQUITY 500 INDEX FUND CLASS K
Weight: 66.53% 64.2% -
State Street Small/Mid Cap Equity Index
Weight: 16.47% 18.8% -
Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 6.60% 8.0% -
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 5.11% 4.9% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 5.29% 4.1% - Top 3 risk contribution 90.9%
Risk contribution tells you who’s actually shaking the portfolio, not just who’s taking up space. Your big 500 fund is 66.5% of weight and 64% of risk—fair enough, it’s the main character. The small/mid fund is 16.5% weight but almost 19% of risk, and the tech ETF is only 6.6% weight yet adds almost 8% of total risk. Top three holdings driving over 90% of risk means the rest are basically extras in the movie. If that concentration is deliberate, fine. If not, trimming the tech tilt and the redundant US overlap would spread risk more evenly and avoid one theme over‑deciding your future.
Dividends
- STATE STREET EQUITY 500 INDEX FUND CLASS K 1.50%
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.40%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 3.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.24%
A total yield around 1.24% tells you this portfolio does not care about income; it cares about growth. That’s consistent with heavy tech and big US exposure. The international fund has a decent yield (~3.1%), but it’s so small it barely moves the needle. Dividends aren’t everything, but they’re like a slow drip of returns even when markets are moody. Here, the bet is clearly “reinvest, grow, and we’ll figure income out later.” If long‑term compounding is the target, that’s coherent. If steady cash flow is ever going to matter, this setup will need a serious redesign toward higher and more stable yield sources.
Ongoing product costs
- State Street Small/Mid Cap Equity Index 0.04%
- STATE STREET EQUITY 500 INDEX FUND CLASS K 0.02%
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
- 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) 0.03%
Costs are hilariously low. A total expense ratio around 0.03% is basically free in investing terms. That’s “you either did homework or got lucky with the default options” territory. Fees quietly eat returns over decades, so having them this low is one of the few unambiguous wins here. The only mild criticism: if you’re going to hold a bunch of overlapping, highly correlated funds, at least you’re not overpaying for the redundancy. Keeping the low‑cost mindset while simplifying the menu would lock in this advantage and avoid wasting even a cheap fee on clones of the same exposure.
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.
Risk–return efficiency here is good but not great. Efficiency just means “are you getting enough return for the amount of pain you’re taking?” This portfolio screams, “All stocks, all US, extra tech—hope you like volatility.” Given the risk level, the historical return looks strong, but it’s not clear you’re using diversification to its full power. Overlapping US funds and a chunky sector tilt add risk without much newness. A cleaner core (fewer duplicate US funds), more real international, and at least a sliver of lower‑volatility assets could move you closer to the efficient frontier—where each unit of risk actually earns its keep instead of just amplifying the same bet.
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!
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.
