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’s comfortable with meaningful market swings in pursuit of long‑term growth, and who doesn’t need to tap the money for several years, ideally a decade or more. They accept that a drop of 30% or more can happen and focus on staying invested rather than reacting emotionally. Typical goals might include retirement savings, long‑range wealth building, or funding major future plans rather than near‑term spending. Risk tolerance is moderate‑to‑high: not thrill‑seeking, but okay with volatility as long as the strategy is simple, globally diversified, and low‑cost, with minimal need for ongoing maintenance or active decisions.
This portfolio is made up of two broad stock index ETFs, with roughly two‑thirds in international stocks and one‑third in the US, plus a small cash slice. Everything is essentially in equities, so the structure is simple and easy to understand. Compared with many “balanced” benchmarks that might hold 40–60% in bonds, this setup leans clearly toward growth and market risk. That equity tilt can be powerful for long‑term wealth building, but it also means bigger swings in account value. Keeping a dedicated cash buffer outside the portfolio for emergencies can help make these ups and downs easier to live with over time.
Historically, this mix has delivered a strong compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of about 12.9%. CAGR is just the “average yearly speed” of growth over many years, smoothing out bumps. The tradeoff is clear in the max drawdown of roughly –34%, meaning the portfolio once fell that much from a peak during a rough patch. A balanced benchmark with more bonds would usually drop less in crises but also grow slower. This pattern fits a growth‑oriented, globally diversified stock allocation. It’s important to remember that past returns, especially strong ones, can’t be counted on to repeat in the same way.
The Monte Carlo analysis, which runs 1,000 “what if” simulations using historical patterns and randomness, shows a wide range of possible futures. The median outcome (50th percentile) grows an initial amount to around 480%, while the pessimistic 5th percentile ends slightly below break‑even at around 94%. Almost all simulations are positive, and the average simulated annual return is about 14.7%. This highlights both the upside potential and the uncertainty. Monte Carlo is helpful, but it’s still based on the past and assumptions; real markets can behave differently. Using these ranges as rough guideposts rather than promises keeps expectations realistic.
Across asset classes, the allocation is almost entirely stocks at around 98%, with only a small cash slice. That’s why the portfolio’s risk score sits in the middle‑upper range of the scale despite being called “balanced.” Many reference portfolios labeled balanced hold a meaningful position in bonds or other stabilizing assets. This stock‑heavy stance is great for someone who values growth and can tolerate short‑term pain, but it’s not ideal for anyone needing steady income or low volatility. If lower swings are important, shifting a percentage into defensive assets could bring the experience closer to traditional balanced‑portfolio behavior.
The sector mix is broad and impressively close to global market weights, with notable exposure to technology, financials, industrials, consumer areas, and healthcare, plus smaller allocations everywhere else. This alignment with global benchmarks is a real strength, because it avoids big bets on any one theme or story. Tech and financials can be more volatile, especially when interest rates move or economic growth slows, but they’re also major engines of long‑term profits. Because the underlying funds track broad indexes, the sector exposures will naturally adjust over time as the market itself evolves, reducing the need for tinkering.
Geographically, the split is nicely balanced across North America, Europe, Japan, developed Asia, and emerging regions, with the US around 40% overall. That’s actually more globally diversified than many US‑based investors, who often hold far more in domestic stocks. This alignment with global market capitalization is a big positive, spreading economic and political risk across many countries. The tradeoff is that some non‑US regions have trailed the US in recent years, which can make the portfolio look “behind” in the short term. Sticking with this broad global mix is usually rewarded when leadership rotates between regions over longer periods.
By market capitalization, there is a strong tilt toward mega and large companies, with meaningful exposure down the size spectrum into mid, small, and even micro caps. This is what you’d expect from total‑market style index funds and it lines up well with major benchmarks. Bigger companies tend to be more stable and easier to trade, while smaller ones can be more volatile but may offer higher growth potential. This layered size exposure helps smooth out risk: large caps provide ballast, while smaller names add some extra kick. Keeping this broad size mix avoids needing to guess which bucket will win next.
The combined dividend yield of about 2.3% is a nice bonus on top of potential price growth, with the international fund providing the higher yield. Dividends are cash payments from companies’ profits, and they can be useful for either reinvestment or spending. For a growth‑minded investor, automatically reinvesting these payouts helps harness compounding: more shares lead to more future dividends. For someone closer to needing income, this yield won’t fully replace a paycheck, but it can meaningfully supplement withdrawals. It’s worth remembering that dividend levels can change with economic conditions, interest rates, and corporate policies, so they’re never guaranteed.
The total expense ratio (TER) around 0.04% is outstandingly low. TER is the annual fee paid inside the fund, like a tiny membership cost taken from assets each year. Keeping this cost near rock‑bottom is a huge advantage, because even small fee differences compound massively over decades. This cost level compares very favorably with both active funds and many other index products. The structure is already about as efficient as it gets on the cost front, which supports better long‑term performance. With fees this low, the main drivers of outcomes become asset allocation, discipline, and time in the market, not frictions.
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 classic Efficient Frontier view—which looks for the best risk‑return mix from existing holdings—this portfolio sits as a growth‑heavy but sensible point. The Efficient Frontier is like a curve showing the highest expected return available for each level of volatility, assuming only the current building blocks are used. Because both holdings are stock funds, there’s limited room to reduce risk without sacrificing expected return, unless a third, more defensive asset type is introduced. Within the two‑fund setup, adjusting the split slightly could nudge the balance between risk and return, but the current mix is already quite coherent.
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.