Highly concentrated growth focused stock portfolio with extreme swings and strong recent outperformance
Report created on Mar 28, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
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.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
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.
Positions
-
AM Amazon.com Inc
AMZN - US0231351067 36.80% -
PL Palantir Technologies Inc.
PLTR - US69608A1088 28.07% -
GO Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL - US02079K3059 24.20% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 8.03% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 2.90%
The portfolio is extremely concentrated: three individual growth stocks make up almost 90% of the value, with the remaining slice in two broad-market ETFs. Everything is in stocks, with no bonds or cash buffer. This is like running a race car with no brakes: amazing speed potential but little protection if the road gets rough. Such focus can deliver huge gains when the chosen names do well, but losses can be equally dramatic if sentiment or fundamentals turn. The big takeaway is that this structure suits someone who is deliberately embracing concentration risk, not someone looking for smoother or more predictable portfolio behavior.
Growth
Historically, the portfolio turned $1,000 into about $5,820 over roughly five and a half years, far ahead of both the US and global markets. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of about 38% massively beat the US market’s roughly 14% and global market’s roughly 12%. However, the max drawdown of about -61% shows huge downside swings versus about -25% for the benchmarks. Only 24 days created 90% of returns, meaning a handful of big up days drove most of the outcome. This combination shows powerful upside but “rollercoaster” risk that many investors find emotionally and financially hard to stick with.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset‑class exposure is 100% in equities, with no bonds, cash, or alternatives. Equities are typically the main long‑term growth engine, but they also drive most of the volatility and drawdowns. A more diversified asset‑class mix usually balances growth assets with stabilizers that tend to fall less, or even rise, when stocks are under stress. Here, every dollar is exposed to equity market swings, which is why both historical returns and drawdowns are so extreme. This setup is aligned with a very long‑term, high‑risk style, but it does leave little flexibility if liquidity needs or risk tolerance change suddenly.
Sectors
- Consumer Discretionary 38%
- Technology 31%
- Telecommunications 25%
- Financials 2%
- Industrials 1%
- Health Care 1%
- Consumer Staples 1%
Sector exposure is heavily tilted toward consumer‑facing and tech‑adjacent businesses, with consumer discretionary and technology dominating, plus a large slice classified as telecommunications. Traditional defensive areas like health care, consumer staples, and utilities are barely present. Portfolios that lean into growth and tech sectors can surge when innovation and risk appetite are rewarded, but they often get hit hard when interest rates rise or when markets rotate into more value‑oriented areas. The flip side is very little ballast from steadier sectors that sometimes cushion downturns. This is a classic “growth engine” sector mix rather than a balanced, all‑weather allocation.
Regions
- North America 97%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, exposure is overwhelmingly in North America, at about 97%, with only a tiny allocation to developed Europe and effectively nothing elsewhere. This is actually not far from many US‑centric portfolios, since US markets dominate global market cap, and the US has been a strong performer in recent years. Being aligned with that has been beneficial. Still, heavy home‑region focus means outcomes are tightly linked to one economy, one currency, and one regulatory regime. Broadening geographic exposure can sometimes smooth the ride, as different regions lead at different times and react differently to global shocks, politics, and policy changes.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 94%
- Large-cap 4%
- Mid-cap 2%
Market‑cap exposure is almost entirely in mega‑caps, with a small amount in large‑ and mid‑caps. Mega‑caps are the giants of the market: highly followed, relatively liquid, and often more resilient than smaller companies in crises. This can actually help somewhat with stability compared to a portfolio full of tiny speculative names, even if the sector and stock‑level concentration remain extreme. The cost is that there is very little exposure to smaller companies, which historically can offer higher growth but also higher volatility. Here, most of the risk comes from concentrated bets in a few very large names rather than from investing in smaller, riskier firms.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 0.59%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 0.53%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 0.40%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 0.21%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 0.20%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 0.19%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 0.15%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 91.87%
Looking through the ETFs, the portfolio’s real story is still the three core stocks. Amazon, Palantir, and Alphabet together dominate exposure, with tiny added slices of other mega-cap names like Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft via the index funds. There is some overlap, especially Amazon and Alphabet appearing both directly and inside the ETFs, which slightly increases hidden concentration in those names. Because ETF data is based only on each fund’s top 10 holdings, total overlap is likely a bit higher than reported. The key point: even with the index funds, the portfolio behaves much more like a basket of a few tech-adjacent leaders than a broad global mix.
Factors
Factor exposure shows mild tilts away from value, yield, size, and low volatility, with momentum and quality closer to neutral. Factors are like the “personality traits” of investments: value, size, momentum, quality, low volatility, and yield. This portfolio clearly tilts toward growth over value, and toward higher‑volatility, lower‑dividend names rather than slow‑and‑steady income payers. A low size score reflects the dominance of mega‑caps rather than smaller firms. These tilts line up with the strong historic performance in a growth‑friendly environment, but they can bite when markets favor cheaper, higher‑yielding, or lower‑volatility stocks instead of fast‑growing names.
Risk contribution
-
Palantir Technologies Inc.
Weight: 28.07% 50.0% -
Amazon.com Inc
Weight: 36.80% 30.8% -
Alphabet Inc Class A
Weight: 24.20% 15.3% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 8.03% 3.0% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 2.90% 0.8%
Risk contribution reveals how much each holding drives overall volatility. Palantir, at about 28% of the weight, contributes roughly half the portfolio’s total risk, a risk/weight ratio of 1.78. That means its ups and downs dominate the experience. Amazon and Alphabet, although larger in weight, contribute relatively less risk per dollar than Palantir but still make up nearly all of what’s left. The two ETFs together contribute only a small slice of total risk despite over 10% of the weight. When a single name drives this much volatility, small position‑size changes or partial diversification can drastically alter how wild the ride feels.
Risk vs. return
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, the portfolio sits below the efficient frontier by about 8 percentage points at its current risk level. The efficient frontier represents the best possible trade‑offs between risk and return using just the existing holdings but in different weightings. A Sharpe ratio of 0.93 is solid, yet the optimal mix reaches about 1.2, meaning more return per unit of risk is theoretically achievable without adding new assets. The minimum‑variance mix shows how much risk could drop if the focus shifted toward stability. This suggests that reweighting current holdings could meaningfully improve the balance between growth potential and volatility.
Dividends
- Alphabet Inc Class A 0.30%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.90%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 3.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.23%
The overall dividend yield is very low, around 0.23%, driven by a focus on growth stocks that reinvest earnings instead of paying them out. Only the ETFs and Alphabet contribute any meaningful yield, and even there it’s modest. Dividends can provide a smoother, more predictable component of total return and may help during flat or choppy markets. In this case, the strategy clearly prioritizes capital appreciation over cash income. That can work well for long‑term compounding if growth continues, but it is not suited to someone who relies on the portfolio for regular spending needs or prefers more visible cash flow.
Ongoing product costs
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
Costs are impressively low on the ETF portion, with expense ratios of 0.03% and 0.05%. Since individual stocks have no ongoing fund fees, the overall explicit cost drag on the portfolio is minimal. Low costs are a quiet but powerful ally, especially over decades, because every dollar not spent on fees stays invested and compounding. In this case, the main “cost” isn’t fees, it’s the potential volatility and concentration risk. From a fee perspective, this setup is very efficient and firmly aligned with long‑term best practices about minimizing ongoing expenses to support better net performance.
What next?
Ready to invest in this portfolio?
Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.
Create your own report?
Join our community!
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.
Help us improve Insightfolio
Your feedback makes a difference! Share your thoughts in our quick survey. Take the survey