“Designing Balance”: Rebuilding a Global Investment Portfolio Through Systems Thinking

—

in , ,
HORIZONTAL CINEMATIC IMAGE A minimalist, architectural-inspired abstract composition representing balance, systems thinking, and long-term structure. The scene features smooth, matte geometric forms — circular platforms and spherical elements — arranged in a calm, symmetrical yet asymmetrically weighted configuration. The forms appear deliberately placed, suggesting equilibrium through intentional imbalance rather than perfect mirroring. Materials are neutral and refined: soft stone, plaster, or concrete-like surfaces with subtle texture. The color palette is restrained and timeless, consisting of warm off-whites, muted greys, pale sand, and soft beige tones. Lighting is natural and diffused, entering from one side like morning light through an architectural space. Shadows are soft and elongated, adding depth without drama. The atmosphere is quiet, contemplative, and precise. The background is minimal and uncluttered, with generous negative space to reinforce clarity, restraint, and patience. There are no people, no text, no charts, no screens, and no overt financial or technological symbols. The overall aesthetic is cinematic yet understated — calm, balanced, and intentional — evoking architectural design, system composition, and ethical structure rather than speed, noise, or optimization. Shot as if photographed with a high-end cinematic lens, shallow-to-moderate depth of field, sharp focus on the primary forms, soft falloff in the distance. The image should feel editorial, modern, and quietly confident. Optional Negative Prompt (If Supported) Avoid: busy patterns glossy or reflective materials neon or saturated colors futuristic UI elements text, typography, numbers, charts, graphs people or human silhouettes overt AI or technology motifs

How I rebuilt a global investment portfolio using AI, design logic and ethical structure.

This project reflects how AI functions best in the emerging era — not as an autonomous decision-maker, but as a cognitive partner guided by human values, context, and restraint.

In May 2025, I approached investing as an act of design — rebuilding my portfolio as a living system of balance, sustainability, and resilience. The process blended analysis, iteration, and intuition, transforming numbers into a long-term composition of trust and purpose.

As a graphic designer, I’ve always believed that good design tells a story — one of structure, rhythm, and intent. Investing, I realized, could follow the same logic. Through systems thinking — the practice of seeing the whole rather than the parts — I began to treat my portfolio as a narrative of interconnection: assets as characters, sectors as settings, and the market itself as the evolving plot.

For years, my investments were simple: I held Microsoft (MSFT) and Disney (DIS), both since 2019. By 2022, I realized I wanted something more intentional — a portfolio that could evolve like a well-designed framework. It wasn’t just about profit or performance. It was about structure, values, and rhythm — the same principles that guide good storytelling and good design.

The Challenge

Before 2025, my investments were functional but fragmented — a series of disconnected chapters rather than a coherent story. Each stock had its own merit, but there was no throughline, no narrative of balance or intention holding them together.

My earliest core holdings (2022) included fractional to full shares of:

  • Alaska Airlines (ALK)
  • Apple (AAPL)
  • Costco (COST)
  • Johnson & Johnson (JNJ)
  • Mastercard (MA)
  • Proctor & Gamble (PG)
  • Visa (V)

Between 2022 and 2024, I gradually expanded to include stocks such as:

  • AbbVie (ABBV)
  • Alphabet (GOOGL)
  • General Electric (GE)
  • IBM (IBM)
  • McDonald’s (MCD)
  • Pepsi (PEP)
  • Portland General Electric (POR)

Individually, these holdings were strong — but collectively, they lacked rhythm. My portfolio leaned too heavily on U.S. growth and offered little connection between regions, sectors, or long-term themes. It was a collection of scenes without an arc.

The challenge became clear: how to redesign this story into a system that could sustain itself, reinvest automatically, and reflect the values I care about — ethical stewardship, global perspective, and long-term balance.

I began to see investing not as a pursuit of gains but as the act of designing continuity — creating a structure resilient enough to weather volatility yet flexible enough to grow. A portfolio not just managed, but composed.

The Process

I approached the rebuild as both an analytical and creative exercise — part research project, part design experiment. Each decision became a study in rhythm: balancing growth and defense, domestic and international exposure, income and innovation.

As a graphic designer, I thought of it like composition — arranging elements for clarity and contrast. Every asset had to earn its place. The portfolio needed harmony, not noise; motion, not volatility.

I began by studying how global markets interacted, focusing on three design principles: stability, sustainability, and reach. My goal was to build a system that could thrive across economic climates — one capable of growing through reinvested dividends rather than speculation.

Gradually, I transitioned from individual U.S. companies toward exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that offered broader exposure and dependable income. These became the framework — the grid system of my financial design.

  • Bonds and income ETFs such as SCHZ and BNDW established structural balance and monthly cash flow — the base layer.
  • Sustainable sectors like CGW (Global Water) and GII (Infrastructure) reinforced the ethical and physical backbone — assets tied to the world’s real needs.
  • Global growth ETFs like SCHF, SCHY, and IXJ introduced international reach, ensuring the design extended beyond domestic borders.

The more I refined, the more the portfolio began to feel like a living composition — a system of interconnected parts rather than isolated trades.

ChatGPT as Part of the Process

ChatGPT became part of the design process itself — not as a calculator or authority, but as a collaborative critique partner within a human-led decision system.

Rather than asking for instructions, I treated it like a design critique partner: testing assumptions, stress-testing balance, and challenging my own logic. Together, we explored patterns — how one sector’s movement echoed through another, how bond yields responded to rate cuts, how global infrastructure might mirror shifting economies.

It wasn’t automation; it was conversation — dialogue where human judgment set the constraints and AI tested the structure.

I brought data, headlines, and intuition — sometimes screenshots of MarketWatch articles or day-to-day portfolio charts — and ChatGPT responded with analysis, projections, and counterpoints. We built a rhythm of iteration: I refined, it rebalanced; I adjusted priorities, it mirrored the structure back with logic and data.

At times, I even staged “what-if” scenarios — what would happen if the 2008 crisis repeated? How resilient was my portfolio to global shocks? What if rate cuts came faster than expected? These hypotheticals weren’t just financial exercises; they were storyboards of resilience — the same way a designer storyboards failure points to ensure the structure holds.

Through that dialogue, AI became a kind of creative sparring partner — helping me translate abstract market patterns into tangible design language: balance, rhythm, composition, contrast.

Pushbacks against
ChatGPT’s Reasonings

“AI can calculate, but it cannot care“

Not every exchange led to agreement — and that’s what made the process real.

Like any good design critique, collaboration with ChatGPT thrived on tension: logic meeting intuition, data meeting lived experience.

During one June conversation, after a particularly red day in the market, ChatGPT suggested reallocating my shares of Portland General Electric (POR) elsewhere. I pushed back. As a Portland, Oregon resident, I understood that POR wasn’t flashy — but it was the company that literally kept the lights on in my state. It represented stability, identity, and a kind of grounded realism in a digital world. I refused to move it.

That moment crystallized something essential: AI can calculate and optimize, but it cannot care — nor can it understand the emotional, geographic, or ethical architecture behind a decision.

Another debate unfolded in early July when ChatGPT suggested expanding my position in Costco (COST) beyond fractional shares. It made sense mathematically — but at nearly $900 per share at the time, I knew that wasn’t a wise or necessary move. I reminded it that design is also about restraint — knowing when enough is enough, even when expansion appears mathematically sound. Costco stayed fractional, intentionally.

Those pushbacks mattered. They became proof that the portfolio was human at its core — built not from blind optimization, but from dialogue, boundaries, and choice. Even ChatGPT adapted, pivoting toward my reasoning. Together, we learned that a portfolio can be logical and personal — an algorithmic framework rooted in human ethics and locality.

Molding the Final Portfolio

In another case, in early July, I engaged in dialogue with ChatGPT about my skepticism toward adding SCHE (Emerging Markets ETF) — weighing whether the potential rewards justified the risk. The fund included exposure to countries such as Taiwan, Mexico, India, Thailand, Brazil, and a limited portion of China, which raised questions about stability and diversification. Our discussion ranged from examining the economic fundamentals of each country to debating whether adding a single share — or more — would strengthen the portfolio’s balance without allowing it to dominate the broader structure. Despite my initial hesitation, we concluded that opening a position was worth the small, calculated risk.

Most of our exchanges revolved around daily portfolio performance — evaluating progress, assessing balance, and deciding whether subtle refinements were necessary.

Over time, the dialogue molded into a system: I refined, the AI rebalanced; I adjusted priorities, it mirrored the structure back with logic and data. That iterative rhythm shaped a portfolio that was not only optimized, but cohesive in design intent.

By late summer 2025, the new portfolio resembled a living ecosystem rather than a list of holdings — structured, intentional, and quietly self-adjusting through reinvested dividends and compounding returns.

The Outcome

By late summer 2025, the design had taken full shape: a 25-holding global portfolio built on rhythm, resilience, and reach.

It no longer felt like a spreadsheet. It felt like architecture — layered, balanced, and quietly self-sustaining. Every holding had purpose, every yield a rhythm. It was no longer a loose collection of investments, but a system — one designed to sustain itself through reinvested dividends, diversified exposure, and patient growth.

Each layer served a role within the composition:

  • Foundation: SCHZ and BNDW provide global bond stability and monthly income — the portfolio’s grounding structure.
  • Global Reach: SCHF, SCHY, SCHE, IXJ, FNDC, and SCHA extend equity exposure beyond the U.S., balancing large, mid, and small caps across both developed and emerging markets.
  • Sustainability & Infrastructure: CGW (Global Water), GII (Infrastructure), and PICK (Global Metals & Mining) anchor the ethical and material backbone — the tangible systems that sustain modern economies.
  • Property & Real Assets: SCHH (U.S. REITs) and VNQI (International REITs) add diversification through real estate exposure, connecting the portfolio to physical space and global growth.
  • Defensive Resilience: XLU (Utilities) and Portland General Electric (POR) reinforce long-term reliability and community-rooted value — investments that remain steady through cycles.
  • Core U.S. Stocks: Enduring positions in Microsoft (MSFT), Disney (DIS), Visa (V), Mastercard (MA), Costco (COST), Apple (AAPL), Johnson & Johnson (JNJ), Procter & Gamble (PG), AbbVie (ABBV), and Portland General Electric (POR) form the portfolio’s legacy framework — brands built on innovation, trust, and continuity.

Projected 12-month income rose from approximately $85 to more than $144, with all distributions automatically reinvested to reinforce compounding rather than consumption. The result is a portfolio that compounds quietly — a balance between expansion and stability, form and function.

It is minimalist in structure, global in reach, and confident in its restraint. A system that breathes — patient, evolving, and built to endure.

Reflection

What began as a financial experiment evolved into something far more personal — a study in patience, structure, and creative balance. Each decision became an act of design, guided by rhythm and restraint. I learned that managing capital is not unlike designing for people: both require empathy, clarity, and an understanding that stability is something you build — not something you find.

Working with ChatGPT turned this process into an ongoing dialogue about systems and intention — illustrating how AI functions best in the emerging era: not as an autonomous decision-maker, but as a cognitive partner guided by human values and judgment. The portfolio became a mirror for my creative habits — the way I iterate, refine, and seek harmony between form and function.

Every dividend, every adjustment, every small gain echoed a simple truth: balance is a design, not an accident.

By the end of 2025, I no longer saw my investments as numbers on a screen but as a living framework — quietly growing, self-correcting, and aligned with values I care about: sustainability, resilience, and purpose.

Transferable AI Skills Demonstrated

  • Human-in-the-loop AI collaboration
  • Scenario modeling and stress testing
  • Ethical constraint setting
  • Iterative system refinement
  • Judgment-based decision-making