Balanced US focused portfolio with strong large cap tilt and historically strong risk adjusted performance
Report created on May 24, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
FX Fidelity 500 Index Fund
FXAIX - US3159117502 50.00% -
RW WASHINGTON MUTUAL INVESTORS FUND R-6
RWMGX - US9393308179 17.00% -
FX FIDELITY U.S. BOND INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
FXNAX - US3161463563 12.00% -
JL JPMORGAN LARGE CAP GROWTH FUND CLASS R6
JLGMX - US48121L8413 11.00% -
PI PIMCO INCOME FUND INSTITUTIONAL
PIMIX - US72201F4900 10.00%
This portfolio is dominated by US large‑cap stock funds with a meaningful but smaller bond sleeve. Roughly half sits in a broad S&P 500 index fund, backed by two active large‑cap equity funds and two bond funds. This structure creates a core‑satellite shape: one big, low‑cost index core surrounded by active managers trying to add value or income. Understanding this layout matters because it shows what really drives results: mostly stock markets, especially big US companies, with bonds smoothing the ride. The mix lines up well with a “balanced” label: most of the growth engine is in equities, while the bond slice acts more as a stabilizer than a main return driver.
Growth
From 2016 to mid‑2026, a hypothetical $1,000 grew to about $4,487, which is a 16.28% compound annual growth rate (CAGR). CAGR is like average speed on a road trip, smoothing out all the bumps along the way. Over the same period, the US market grew at 15.38% annually and the global market at 12.66%, so this portfolio outpaced both. The maximum drawdown, or worst peak‑to‑trough drop, was about ‑29.7% during early 2020, slightly milder than the benchmarks’ ~‑33%. That combination of better returns with somewhat smaller drawdowns suggests historically strong risk‑adjusted performance, though it’s important to remember that past results don’t guarantee similar future outcomes.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses many randomized paths based on historical patterns to estimate a range of future outcomes. Think of it as running the next 15 years 1,000 different ways, then seeing what tends to happen. In these simulations, $1,000 most often ends around $2,542, with a broad “likely” band from about $1,821 to $3,655 and a wider “possible” band from roughly $1,058 to $6,022. The average simulated annual return is 7.15%, with about three‑quarters of scenarios ending positive. These ranges highlight both potential growth and uncertainty: results could be higher or lower than history suggests, especially if future markets behave differently from the past.
Asset classes
- Stocks 78%
- Bonds 22%
Asset‑class‑wise, the portfolio holds about 78% in stocks and 22% in bonds. That puts it firmly on the growth‑oriented side of a classic balanced spectrum, where a 60/40 stock‑bond split is often used as a reference. The higher equity share means returns are more tied to stock market moves, while bonds provide some ballast but not full downside protection. This mix can lead to stronger long‑term growth if stocks do well, with bonds helping during equity sell‑offs. The structure aligns with a “balanced but equity‑leaning” profile, where volatility is clearly present but moderated compared to an all‑stock approach.
Sectors
- Technology 25%
- Financials 12%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Health Care 8%
- Industrials 7%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Real Estate 7%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is broadly spread, with technology the largest slice at 25%, followed by financials, telecommunications, health care, industrials, and consumer areas, plus smaller allocations to real estate, energy, utilities, and materials. This looks reasonably close to a diversified large‑cap stock mix, without an extreme bet on a single industry. A technology tilt can boost returns in periods when innovation‑driven companies lead, but it can also mean sharper swings when interest rates rise or growth expectations cool. Overall, the sector spread is well‑balanced and aligns closely with broad equity benchmarks, which is generally helpful for avoiding overreliance on any one theme.
Regions
- North America 84%
- No data 12%
- Europe Developed 3%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, about 84% of the equity exposure is in North America, with a small slice in developed Europe and some holdings classified as “no data.” This reflects a clear home bias toward the US, which has been a strong performer over the last decade. Compared with a global market index, which typically has a much larger non‑US share, this portfolio is more concentrated in a single region and currency. That concentration can be beneficial when US markets lead, as they have for much of the backtested period, but it also ties outcomes closely to the health of one economy and policy environment rather than a fully global spread.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 34%
- Large-cap 28%
- Mid-cap 13%
- Small-cap 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
By market cap, the portfolio leans heavily into mega‑ and large‑cap companies, which together make up over 60% of exposure, with modest mid‑cap and minimal small‑cap participation. Large firms tend to be more established, widely followed, and often less volatile than smaller ones, so this tilt can reduce some of the sharp ups and downs associated with smaller stocks. However, it also means less exposure to the parts of the market where very high growth sometimes appears. This large‑cap focus lines up with the fund choices—broad US indices and large‑cap active funds—and helps explain why the portfolio’s behavior tracks big US stock benchmarks closely.
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 exposures look generally market‑like: value, momentum, quality, and low volatility all sit in a neutral range, meaning no strong tilt toward or away from these characteristics. Yield shows a mild tilt away from high‑dividend stocks, and size tilts away from smaller companies, consistent with the large‑cap focus. Factors are like the underlying “traits” of stocks—such as being cheap, fast‑rising, stable, or dividend‑heavy—that research links to long‑term returns. A broadly neutral factor profile suggests the portfolio behaves similarly to the wider market rather than pursuing specialty factor strategies. That can make performance easier to compare to standard benchmarks, with fewer surprises driven by niche tilts.
Risk contribution
-
Fidelity 500 Index Fund
Weight: 50.00% 63.1% -
WASHINGTON MUTUAL INVESTORS FUND R-6
Weight: 17.00% 18.9% -
JPMORGAN LARGE CAP GROWTH FUND CLASS R6
Weight: 11.00% 16.4% -
PIMCO INCOME FUND INSTITUTIONAL
Weight: 10.00% 1.3% -
FIDELITY U.S. BOND INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
Weight: 12.00% 0.2%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to overall volatility, which can differ a lot from simple weights. Here, the S&P 500 index fund is 50% of the portfolio but contributes about 63% of total risk. The two active US equity funds, together 28% of the weight, bring total risk influence for the top three funds to over 98%. In contrast, the two bond funds make up 22% of the weight but only around 1.5% of risk. This tells us the portfolio’s ups and downs are overwhelmingly driven by the three equity funds, especially the index core, while bonds mainly act as a stabilizer with relatively little influence on overall swings.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationWASHINGTON MUTUAL INVESTORS FUND R-6Fidelity 500 Index Fund
Correlation measures how similarly investments move—1.0 means they move almost perfectly together. The S&P 500 index fund and the Washington Mutual Investors Fund are flagged as almost perfectly correlated. That makes sense, since both target large US companies and will react similarly to broad market news. Highly correlated holdings can still diversify company‑specific risk, but they add less protection in market‑wide sell‑offs because they tend to fall at the same time. In this portfolio, the main diversification benefit is coming from holding bonds alongside stocks, rather than from big differences between the equity funds, which mostly ride the same market waves.
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‑return chart compares the current mix with an efficient frontier built only from these existing funds. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.73, which measures return per unit of risk above a 4% risk‑free rate. The maximum‑Sharpe combination of the same holdings scores 1.15, while the minimum‑risk mix has a Sharpe of 0.71. The current point sits about 3.97 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, meaning a different weighting of these same funds could, in theory, deliver higher expected return for similar volatility. Even so, the present allocation already offers a decent trade‑off; the chart just shows there is some room for efficiency gains on paper.
Dividends
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.00%
- FIDELITY U.S. BOND INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 3.40%
- JPMORGAN LARGE CAP GROWTH FUND CLASS R6 10.50%
- PIMCO INCOME FUND INSTITUTIONAL 5.90%
- WASHINGTON MUTUAL INVESTORS FUND R-6 4.30%
- Weighted yield (per year) 3.38%
The portfolio’s total yield is about 3.38%, combining stock dividends and bond interest. Individual funds vary widely—one growth‑oriented equity fund shows a very high headline yield, while the core index fund is closer to 1%, and the bond funds sit in the mid single digits. Yield is the cash income paid out, usually as distributions, and can be an important part of total return over time. For a stock‑heavy mix, a yield in this range is fairly robust, especially with bond funds contributing meaningful income. It’s worth remembering that higher yields sometimes reflect specific strategies or past distributions and may not be stable year to year.
Ongoing product costs
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
- FIDELITY U.S. BOND INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 0.02%
- JPMORGAN LARGE CAP GROWTH FUND CLASS R6 0.44%
- PIMCO INCOME FUND INSTITUTIONAL 0.54%
- WASHINGTON MUTUAL INVESTORS FUND R-6 0.26%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.16%
Average ongoing costs, measured by total expense ratio (TER), are low at about 0.16% per year. The index funds are extremely cheap at 0.02%, while the active funds run higher, especially the income and growth funds around 0.5%. Blended together, the heavy use of low‑cost index exposure pulls overall costs down, even with active components included. Costs matter because they come off returns every single year; lower fees leave more of any market gains in the portfolio. Here, the cost structure is impressively low and compares favorably to many mixed active‑passive portfolios, providing a solid foundation for long‑term compounding.
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.
Instrument logos provided by Elbstream.
Help us improve Insightfolio
Your feedback makes a difference! Share your thoughts in our quick survey. Take the survey