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.
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.
Balanced Investors
This setup fits an investor who is comfortable with moderate‑to‑high volatility and is focused on long‑term growth rather than near‑term income. A time horizon of at least 10 years, and ideally longer, would suit the all‑equity tilt and periodic drawdowns that come with it. This type of person is usually willing to ride out declines of 20–30% without abandoning the plan, trusts in global capitalism over decades, and values diversification across countries, sectors, and company sizes. They may be in an accumulation phase, regularly adding savings, and they typically appreciate low costs and systematic, rules‑based funds rather than frequent trading or stock‑picking.
This portfolio is almost entirely in stocks, split between a broad US core, global ex‑US, and several factor‑tilted funds that lean toward smaller companies and value characteristics. For a “balanced” risk label, it’s actually quite growth‑oriented because there’s basically no bond sleeve to dampen volatility. Understanding this is important so expectations match reality: when markets drop, this setup will usually fall more than a typical stock‑bond mix. If a smoother ride is important, adding a dedicated stabilizer bucket such as high‑quality defensive assets could help. If the focus is on long‑term growth and the ride is acceptable, staying disciplined and minimizing unnecessary trading becomes the key behavior to focus on.
Historically, this mix has delivered a strong compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.62%, meaning a $10,000 starting value would have grown as if it earned 13.62% every year on average. The worst peak‑to‑trough drop, or max drawdown, of about ‑24% is meaningful but much milder than deep bear markets, which shows a solid risk‑return balance so far. Only 17 days made up 90% of total gains, highlighting how a small number of big up days drive long‑term results. Because timing those days is nearly impossible, staying invested and avoiding panic selling during downturns is crucial to capture the growth this style of portfolio can offer over many years.
The Monte Carlo analysis, which runs 1,000 randomized “what‑if” scenarios based on historical patterns, shows a wide range of possible futures. In this test, 994 out of 1,000 simulations ended with gains, and the average simulated annual return was 14.88%, which is very strong. The 5th percentile outcome of about 81.8% means that in 1 out of 20 scenarios, the portfolio roughly breaks even or modestly gains over the full period, while the median scenario grows almost fivefold. These simulations are helpful for setting expectations, but they rely on the past being somewhat similar to the future, which is never guaranteed, so they should be a guide, not a promise.
Almost 99% of this portfolio is in stocks, with just a token 1% in cash and nothing meaningfully in other asset classes. Compared with a classic balanced benchmark, which often holds a sizable bond allocation, this is much closer to an aggressive equity portfolio in behavior. Stocks historically offer higher returns over long periods but come with larger and more frequent drawdowns. For someone wanting more balance, adding a non‑stock component—such as high‑quality fixed income or other diversifying assets—could reduce volatility and make it easier to stay the course. If the intention is to maximize long‑term equity growth, the key is being mentally prepared for deeper short‑term swings in value.
Sector exposure is broad and nicely aligned with major benchmarks: technology, financials, and industrials lead, with meaningful slices in consumer, healthcare, basic materials, energy, and smaller weights in utilities and real estate. This spread across 11 sectors is a strong indicator of healthy diversification, helping reduce the damage if any one area faces a downturn. A tilt toward economically sensitive areas can boost returns during expansions but may hit harder in recessions or rate shock environments. If volatility ever feels too high, dialing back exposure to the most cyclical corners via more neutral or defensive holdings could help. As it stands, the sector mix looks well‑balanced and consistent with globally diversified equity standards.
Geographically, about two‑thirds of assets sit in North America, with the rest spread across developed Europe, Japan, developed Asia, emerging Asia, and smaller exposures to Africa, Australasia, and Latin America. This is actually very close to many global equity benchmarks that naturally lean heavily toward the US because of its market size. That alignment is a positive, as it keeps the portfolio anchored to global market weights while still including a broad international opportunity set. If there’s a desire to further reduce reliance on the US market, modestly raising international exposure could help smooth outcomes if US stocks underperform. Otherwise, this geographic split already offers solid global diversification for long‑term equity growth.
The market‑cap mix is nicely spread: roughly 30% mega, 25% large, 24% mid, 15% small, and 5% micro‑cap. That’s more diversified across company sizes than a plain large‑cap index, which is a strength. Historically, smaller and value‑oriented companies have sometimes delivered higher long‑term returns, but with bumpier performance and longer dry spells. This portfolio clearly leans into that small and mid‑cap space, adding both opportunity and volatility. If shorter‑term stability matters, nudging weight toward larger, more established companies can calm the ride. If the goal is maximum long‑term equity upside and the owner can ignore noise, keeping this broad size spread and rebalancing occasionally to target weights can be a sensible discipline.
The overall dividend yield is about 1.68%, with higher yields from international and emerging value funds and lower yields from US growth and momentum exposure. Yield is the annual cash payout as a percentage of portfolio value, and here it’s a nice but modest contributor to total return. This setup is better suited to growth than to high income, which fits with the strong historical performance profile. For someone in an accumulation phase, reinvesting these dividends automatically can quietly accelerate compounding over time. If income needs ever rise, increasing exposure to more dividend‑focused or income‑oriented holdings could lift the cash flow, but that may slightly reduce pure growth potential and tilt the risk profile toward more mature companies.
The weighted total expense ratio (TER) of about 0.15% is impressively low for a portfolio that uses several specialized factor ETFs. TER is the annual fee taken by the funds as a percentage of assets, and keeping this number small is one of the simplest ways to improve long‑term outcomes. Compared with many actively managed strategies, this cost level is very competitive and strongly supports compounding. There’s a small cost premium for the factor‑tilted Avantis and momentum funds, but they still sit in a reasonable range given their strategy. Periodically checking for cheaper vehicles with similar exposures can help keep costs in check, but overall the fee structure here is already a clear strength.
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.
On a risk‑return chart known as the Efficient Frontier, this portfolio would likely sit toward the higher‑return, higher‑risk area because it is nearly all equities with factor tilts. Efficient Frontier basically asks: “Given these ingredients, what mix gives the best return for each level of risk?” Optimization here would mean only changing the percentages between the existing funds, not adding new ones. Slightly increasing lower‑volatility core holdings and trimming more volatile factor slices could shift it closer to the “efficient” curve for a balanced profile. It’s also worth remembering that efficiency is only about risk versus return; it doesn’t automatically reflect other goals like simplicity, behavior comfort, or preferences around income and values.
Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.
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.