Hi, dear Anon, principally You seem to follow my own style, besides VTI you choose three technology ETFs. They had and have high potential, expect a lot of volatility but also risk. Possibly You already read my text?: https://seedly.sg/questions/what-is-your-general-investing-philosophy-strategy Standard thinking - i assume - would advise against being invested in such a high share of technology companies, especially as a beginning investor. I would never recommend that allocation to other persons, but to be honest, I for myself choose a similar approach like You. Make extra sure, that You never panic when there is a tech stock or general drop down. Even when Your portfolio should halve stay then with it. Also recognize that You have a lot of overlap with all these ETFs, even VTI has 6 tech companies under it's top 10 holdings: Microsoft Corporation 4.67% Apple Inc. 4.25% Amazon.com, Inc. 3.44% Facebook, Inc. Class A 1.81% Alphabet Inc. Class A 1.45% Alphabet Inc. Class C 1.38% Johnson & Johnson 1.31% Berkshire Hathaway Inc. Class B 1.18% Visa Inc. Class A 1.11% Procter & Gamble Company 0.97% You can calculate Your ETF overlap here: https://www.etfrc.com/funds/overlap.php QQQ & VGT: 48% overlap by weight QQQ & VTI: 34% overlap by weight VGT & VTI: 26% overlap by weight My own thinking is, that technology will always be the driver of progress of societies and economies, thus the high potential. One important point is that the U.S. were always the tech leaders for decades, but can they persist as leader into the future? Surely China will be upcoming, and in the best case scenario there will be a win-win situation by a U.S.-China global codominance. But it could also happen that China soon will be technology leader #1. Then the U.S. tech stocks could drop a lot. As to Your question: the traditional approach was to recommend to retail investors a mixture of stocks and bonds. Bonds for stability, but this stability and performance (5-7% per year in the past) is not valid anymore. My own approach (though I'didnt follow it yet) would be to substitute bonds for gold, as to stability, but there will not be generated income by gold, only costs (for storing safely). Investing icon Burton Malkiel recommends currently to substitute bonds with dividend stocks, or better dividend stock ETFs, which You own already with VTI (1.91% dividend yield per year). Here is an interesting recent podcast where he is interviewed: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/episode-023-dr-burton-malkiel-host-rick-ferri/id1436401528?i=1000482482893 He was the first one to suggest to stay with average returns (passive investing), which his friend Jack Bogle then enacted with index funds. (They had arguments over ETFs, which interestingly were a no-go for Bogle). What I could recommend: I feel You're in need of better diversification. Some alternatives would be to have more global/other diversification with appropriate ETFs for: global allocation (MSCI World, MSCI ACWI, FTSE World) China (here it is very difficult to know which index is the best): ?A50, ?CSI300, ?ex state owned, ?PGJ, or technology ETF CQQQ Biotechnology some European exposure Emerging markets possibly are to risky and not better than western countries + China physical gold could be nice REITs (U.S: VNQ, Europe: IQQP, Singapore S-REIT ETFs, global REIT ETFs). As to Ireland domiciled ETFs: they do better, when the dividend yield is high and the TER fees comparable, there is no good definition for 'high dividend' ETFs, however for VOO or VTI with around 2% dividend yield Ireland-domiciled ones have better overall performance when withholding tax is acknowledged. GOOD LUCK, take care !