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 stock‑market swings and prioritizes long‑term growth over short‑term stability. A typical profile might be someone with at least a 10‑ to 20‑year horizon who doesn’t need to draw heavily on the portfolio in the near future. They’re okay seeing occasional drops of 30% or more, as long as the long‑run odds favor strong compounding. Simplicity and low maintenance matter more than fine‑tuning or market timing. Risk tolerance is moderate‑to‑high: not an adrenaline‑seeking trader, but someone who accepts that staying fully invested in global equities is the price paid for inflation‑beating growth.
The structure here is about as clean as it gets: two broad stock index ETFs, roughly 70% domestic and 30% international. Everything is in equities, so there’s no built‑in cushion from bonds or cash, but diversification comes from owning thousands of companies worldwide. This kind of “total market plus total international” mix is a textbook core setup that’s easy to understand and maintain. The main implication is that portfolio risk will track global stock markets fairly closely. For someone comfortable with stock-like ups and downs in exchange for long‑term growth, this streamlined construction is very well aligned with common best practices.
Historically, $1,000 grew to about $3,192 over the last decade, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 12.34%. CAGR is like your average speed on a long road trip, smoothing out the bumps. You lagged the U.S. market a bit (14.02% CAGR) but beat the global market (11.46%), which fits a 70/30 U.S./international mix. The max drawdown, about -35%, is hefty but very similar to broad equity benchmarks, showing risk is in line with stocks generally. Past returns can’t predict the future, but this history says the portfolio has delivered solid growth with standard equity-level volatility, not unusually risky or unusually safe.
All assets here are stocks, so there’s zero allocation to bonds, cash, or alternatives. Asset classes are the broad buckets—like stocks for growth and bonds for stability—that shape your overall risk/return experience. A 100% equity stance maximizes long‑term growth potential but also maximizes exposure to market swings, since there’s no fixed‑income ballast when stocks fall. This lines up with a growth‑oriented mindset and a reasonably high, though not extreme, risk tolerance. For truly balanced investors, mixing in some bonds is common; for those with long horizons and strong stomachs, an all‑stock allocation like this can still be very sensible.
The sector mix is tilted toward technology at 27%, with healthy slices in financials, industrials, consumer discretionary, and health care. This pattern is very close to global equity benchmarks today and signals broad economic diversification. Tech’s leadership means you may see sharper ups and downs when interest rates move or when growth stocks fall out of favor, but you’re not making an extra-themes bet—just owning the market’s current shape. The smaller weights in utilities, energy, and real estate help avoid heavy exposure to slower‑growth, more regulated areas. Overall, the sector composition matches benchmark data, which is a strong indicator of diversification.
Geographically, about 72% sits in North America with the rest spread across Europe, Japan, developed Asia, emerging Asia, and smaller allocations to other regions. That’s a mild home‑country tilt but still clearly global. Relative to a pure world market, North America is a bit overweight, which has helped in the last decade but also concentrates some risk in one economic region and one currency. The good news is that meaningful exposure to Europe, Japan, and emerging markets brings different growth drivers and policy environments into the mix. This allocation is well-balanced and aligns closely with global standards while still keeping a U.S. anchor.
Market‑cap exposure leans heavily to mega‑ and large‑cap companies (about 73%), with the rest in mid, small, and micro‑caps. Market capitalization is simply company size by stock value; bigger firms tend to be more stable and more closely followed, while smaller ones can be more volatile but sometimes faster growing. This size spread broadly matches cap‑weighted indexes, meaning there’s no deliberate small‑cap or mid‑cap tilt. The implication is that your risk profile will be dominated by the behavior of the biggest companies, but you still participate in the potential upside of smaller firms without making them a defining driver of volatility.
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings, the largest underlying positions are familiar mega‑cap names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and Meta. None are held directly; they appear only via the index funds, so their weights are naturally capped by the indexes. There is some concentration in a small group of big growth companies, but that’s simply how today’s global market is structured. Because only ETF top‑10 lists are shown, true overlap is actually spread across thousands of smaller names too. The takeaway: you’re getting market‑driven concentration, not extra single‑stock bets layered on top.
Factor exposure is mostly neutral, with slight tilts away from value, size, momentum, and quality. Factors are like the underlying “personality traits” of stocks—such as cheap vs. expensive (value), big vs. small (size), or steady vs. jumpy (low volatility). Here, low scores in value and size suggest a gentle lean toward larger, more growth‑oriented names, which aligns with today’s cap‑weighted markets. Yield and low volatility are roughly neutral, so you’re not overemphasizing dividends or defensive characteristics. Overall, the portfolio looks well‑balanced across factors, behaving much like a broad market portfolio without strong style bets.
Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to total portfolio ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. Your U.S. total market ETF is 70% of assets but contributes about 73% of risk, while the international ETF is 30% of assets and about 27% of risk. That’s very close to proportional, so there’s no single position quietly dominating volatility beyond its size. This is a positive sign: risk is shared between the two funds roughly in line with your allocations. If you ever wanted to dial risk down or up, adjusting the U.S./international split would predictably change overall volatility.
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 risk–return chart, your current mix has an expected return of 13.05% with volatility of 17.36%, giving a Sharpe ratio of 0.64. The Sharpe ratio compares return to risk—higher is generally better for risk taken. The optimal portfolio using the same building blocks has a Sharpe of 0.74, meaning a slightly different weighting of these two ETFs could, in theory, deliver better risk‑adjusted results. Because the current point sits below the efficient frontier, there’s room for improvement just by rebalancing between the existing funds, not by adding new ones. Still, you’re reasonably close, so the current allocation is already quite efficient in practice.
The blended dividend yield is around 1.74%, with domestic stocks yielding about 1.2% and international stocks closer to 3%. Dividends are cash payments from companies and form part of total return alongside price gains. This yield level is consistent with a growth‑focused equity mix that doesn’t chase high income. For investors in the accumulation phase, reinvesting these dividends can quietly boost long‑term compounding. For income‑seekers, this yield alone might be modest, but it’s also relatively tax‑efficient compared to higher‑yield, lower‑growth strategies. Overall, dividends are a steady but secondary contributor here, not the main reason to hold this portfolio.
Costs are impressively low, with a total expense ratio (TER) of about 0.04%. TER is the annual fee charged by the fund, taken directly out of returns, similar to a tiny toll on your investment highway. Over decades, keeping fees this low can make a surprisingly large difference because money saved in costs keeps compounding for you instead of for the fund provider. This fee level is well below the average for many mutual funds and even many ETFs. The costs are impressively low, supporting better long-term performance and aligning strongly with evidence‑based best practices.
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.
Instrument logos provided by Elbstream.
Your feedback makes a difference! Share your thoughts in our quick survey. Take the survey