Diagnose

Diagnose — Portfolio overlap & concentration risk

A user with three index funds asks whether they’re diversified. Adrima maps hidden overlap before making a single recommendation.

Why this matters

Overlap is invisible until you map it.

Owning three funds with different names doesn't create diversification if they hold the same stocks. Adrima maps weighted exposure and surfaces concentration before making any recommendation.

You

Can you diagnose my portfolio for hidden risks? I hold VTI, QQQ, and ARKK — three funds, so I assumed I was diversified. I'm 34 with an 8-year horizon.

Adrima

Before I map your exposure, I need to understand your risk profile — not just your time horizon:

If this portfolio dropped 30%, would that force you to change your plans?
Do you have 6+ months of expenses in cash or short-term bonds?
What's your income stability — salaried, variable, or self-employed?

You

A 30% drop would stress me but I wouldn't sell. I have 9 months cash runway. I'm salaried, stable job.

Adrima

You are not diversified. QQQ overlaps VTI by ~74% on a weighted basis. TSLA, NVDA, and MSFT appear across all three funds — you hold ~44% in technology sector risk. Three funds, one bet.

You

What's the biggest structural gap I should fix?

Adrima

Three adjustments, priority order:

Reduce QQQ. It adds concentrated tech risk without anything VTI doesn't already cover.
Add international developed exposure. VTI is US-only — zero allocation to Europe/Japan is a structural gap.
Size ARKK intentionally. Cap below 5% as a satellite or exit. At current sizing it distorts your risk profile.

Output 1 of 3

Investor profile

Built before any recommendation. Adrima maps age, income stability, risk capacity, drawdown behaviour, and key constraints before analyzing a single holding.

Output 2 of 3

Holdings overlap analysis

Three funds, one bet. The overlap table shows which names appear across all three positions and at what weighted concentration — invisible until mapped.

Top name overlap · VTI · QQQ · ARKKHigh concentration

Holding	Appears in	Weighted overlap
MSFT	VTI, QQQ, ARKK	82%
NVDA	VTI, QQQ, ARKK	74%
AAPL	VTI, QQQ	71%
TSLA	QQQ, ARKK	58%
AMZN	VTI, QQQ	54%

Output 3 of 3

Structured recommendations

Every item has an action, a precise reason, and a priority order. No generic rules — each recommendation ties directly back to your profile and the overlap analysis.

Action items · Diagnosis example

↓

Reduce QQQ (from ~22% → below 8%)

Duplicates VTI tech exposure; concentrates ~44% in one sector with no diversification benefit.

Add international developed exposure (target 15–20%)

VTI is US-only. VXUS or VEA reduces US cycle correlation without significantly increasing volatility.

Size ARKK intentionally — cap at 3–5% or exit

5-year beta ~1.8, drawdowns >75% peak-to-trough. At current sizing it distorts your risk profile.

Review fee drag across positions

ARKK (0.75%) is 25× VTI (0.03%). On $100k over 10 years: ~$8,000 in unnecessary cost.

Why this matters

The right allocation depends on the binding constraint.

The binding constraint here wasn't the balance gap — it was sequence-of-returns risk. Adrima surfaces the constraint before prescribing the allocation.

You

I need to optimize my path to retirement. I'm 51, $480k in a 60/40 portfolio, targeting retirement at 62. What's the most efficient strategy from here?

Adrima

Optimizing your path starts with the target, not the portfolio. What monthly income do you need in retirement, in today's dollars? And is the $480k your total investable assets?

You

I want $5,500/month. The $480k is all of it — no pension. I contribute $1,800/month.

Adrima

At $66k/year, you need ~$1.65M at retirement (4% rule). At your contribution rate and 7% nominal return, trajectory = ~$1.52M. Gap: ~$130k. Addressable.

More pressing: at 51, 60/40 is too aggressive. A severe equity drawdown in years 9–10 would impair your withdrawal capacity — that's sequence-of-returns risk.

You

Should I change my allocation now?

Adrima

Glide toward lower equity in phases:

Now–55: Hold 60/40. Focus on closing the $130k gap.
55–59: Step to 50/50. Reduce sector concentration in the equity sleeve.
59–62: Move to 40/60. Build 2–3 years of withdrawals in short-duration bonds — your sequence buffer.

Output analysis

Allocation comparison — current vs. target

Current 60/40 at age 51 vs. target 40/60 at 59 — built phase by phase around sequence-of-returns risk, not a generic age-based rule.

Current · Age 51

US equities54%

Intl equities6%

Bonds (intermediate)32%

Short-term / cash8%

Equity / bond60 / 40

Seq. risk bufferNone

Target · Age 59 (pre-retirement)

US equities38%

Intl equities12%

Bonds (intermediate)30%

Short-term / cash20%

Equity / bond40 / 60

Seq. risk buffer~2.5 yrs withdrawals

Why this matters

The right choice depends on constraints, not the funds.

Adrima applies a constraint-first framework to every comparison — active vs. passive, factor tilts, bond duration, Roth vs. traditional. The answer is never the same for everyone.

You

Can you compare VTI + VXUS versus just holding VT? I want a globally diversified core — $80k, 15-year horizon. Which one actually fits better?

Adrima

It does — but not for the reason most expect. Long-run return difference is negligible. What matters is fit with your constraints:

Do you have a view on US vs. international weighting?
Taxable account, 401k, or IRA?
Regular contributions or lump-sum set-and-hold?

You

Taxable. I'll add monthly. Prefer a slight US tilt — maybe 65/35 rather than VT's ~60/40.

Adrima

That preference is the deciding factor. VT locks you at ~60/40 market-cap weight — you can't adjust without changing funds. VTI + VXUS at 70/30 gives you your target 65/35.

Monthly contributions also work better with two funds: direct new money to whichever sleeve has drifted. For a taxable account with regular contributions and a defined tilt, VTI + VXUS fits better.

Output analysis

Comparison across 6 dimensions

Every dimension evaluated against your constraints — US/international control, rebalancing strategy, tax-loss harvesting optionality. The conclusion follows from the analysis.

Dimension	VTI + VXUS	VT	Adrima's read
US/intl weight control	Full control	~60/40, fixed	VTI+VXUS wins for your 65/35 preference
Expense ratio (blended)	~0.05%	0.07%	Negligible at $80k
Rebalance via contributions	Yes — direct to lagging sleeve	Not possible	VTI+VXUS wins for monthly strategy
Tax-loss harvesting (taxable)	Possible independently	Single fund — no split	VTI+VXUS has optionality advantage
Simplicity	2 funds, minor overhead	1 fund, zero overhead	VT wins if you want to consolidate
Fit for your constraints	High	Medium	Recommendation: VTI + VXUS (70/30)

Why this matters

A single stock is never evaluated in isolation.

The question is always what a position does to your overall exposure and risk budget — not whether the company is worth owning in isolation. Same lens applies to any ETF or sector bet.

You

Before I pull the trigger, I want to understand the full impact. I have a $120k portfolio — VTI, VXUS, and BND. Considering putting 8% into TSLA. What does that actually do to my risk profile?

Adrima

Flag first: you already have indirect TSLA exposure through VTI — roughly 1.5–2% on a weighted basis. Adding 8% directly brings your total effective TSLA exposure to ~9.8%.

At the portfolio level:

Beta rises from ~0.85 to ~0.97 — near 1:1 with market moves.
Consumer discretionary exposure: 11% → 18% — above the 15% cap most professionals use.
Worst-case TSLA impact on portfolio: −1.3% → −5.9% (based on 73% historical drawdown).

You

Is there a better size if I still want some TSLA?

Adrima

Yes. A 3–4% direct position brings total effective TSLA to ~5% — within satellite sizing guidelines. At 5% direct (~7% total), it's intentional rather than reckless — but set a review trigger so it doesn't drift higher.

Output analysis

Risk metrics — TSLA at different sizes

Three scenarios side by side: no direct TSLA, +8% (your original plan), +3% (suggested). Portfolio-level impact mapped — not the stock in isolation.

Portfolio impact · before / afterConcentration flag at 8%

Metric	No TSLA direct	+8% TSLA	+3% TSLA (suggested)
Effective TSLA exposure	~1.8%	~9.8%	~4.8%
Portfolio beta vs. S&P 500	0.85	0.97	0.89
Consumer discretionary	11%	18% ⚠	14%
Worst-case TSLA portfolio hit	−1.3%	−5.9%	−2.8%
Single-stock cap guideline	N/A	Exceeds 5% limit	Within limit