This portfolio worships US growth stocks then pretends it cares about dividends and diversification
Report created on Jun 4, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
SC Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
SCHG - US8085243009 69.28% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 20.56% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 10.16%
This portfolio is basically one loud bet in a flimsy disguise. Nearly 70% in a single US large‑cap growth ETF runs the show, with a dividend ETF stapled on for respectability and a token international sleeve that barely registers. It’s like building a mansion out of one giant room, adding a small closet labeled “dividends,” and a window labeled “international.” Structurally, this is a core US growth portfolio that couldn’t fully commit to either pure growth or pure income, so it awkwardly does both and neither. The result: simple, powerful, and very one‑dimensional. When US growth sneezes, everything here catches pneumonia.
Growth
Historically, this thing has absolutely ripped: $1,000 turning into $4,836 is not shy money. A 17.14% CAGR beats both the US and global markets by a comfortable margin, and the max drawdown of about -33% was basically in line with everything else during 2020’s panic. So yes, the portfolio has been the overachieving kid in class. But remember, CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is like your average speed on a road trip — it doesn’t tell you when you almost drove off a cliff. Past data is yesterday’s weather: nice to brag about, useless as a guarantee.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection is the cold shower after that performance flex. Monte Carlo just means the computer runs thousands of random “what if” futures based on past volatility, not some casino‑grade prophecy. Here, the median outcome over 15 years turns $1,000 into about $2,734, which is miles below the historical joyride. The possible range from roughly $900 to $7,400 screams “could be amazing, could be meh.” The expected annualized return of 7.83% bluntly says the past decade was unusually kind. This portfolio can win big, but the simulations quietly remind that gravity exists.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is just a polite way of saying “100% stocks and vibes.” There’s no ballast, no shock absorbers — just full‑throttle equity exposure. That’s great when markets trend up; it’s equally great at turning drawdowns into emotional horror shows. Asset classes are like food groups: relying solely on one can work for a while, but you shouldn’t be surprised when you feel every bump. This portfolio is honest about being stock‑only, but that also means its risk dial is permanently stuck higher. No hidden safety nets, no side quests — just pure market rollercoaster.
Sectors
- Technology 38%
- Telecommunications 13%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Health Care 10%
- Financials 9%
- Industrials 7%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector-wise, this is tech‑and‑friends cosplay. With around 38% in technology and double‑digit exposure to telecoms and consumer discretionary, the portfolio is clearly tilted toward growthy, innovation‑heavy businesses rather than boring plodders. Health care, financials, and industrials get some scraps, while defensives like utilities and real estate are barely on the map. That’s great in a world where innovation is rewarded and money stays cheap; less fun when regulation, rates, or sentiment flip. Sector weights here are not neutral — this is a bet on the modern economy’s shiny, fast‑moving corners, with the “slow and steady” sectors mostly benched.
Regions
- North America 90%
- Europe Developed 4%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Japan 2%
- Asia Emerging 2%
Geographically, this thing is wearing an American flag as a cape: about 90% in North America, with the rest scattered in polite rounding errors across Europe and Asia. The “global” exposure is more decorative than functional. It’s like saying you eat “international cuisine” because you added soy sauce to your burger. When the US booms, this home bias pays off handsomely; when it lags, the portfolio has nowhere to hide. The world outside the US is basically treated as an optional side quest rather than part of the main storyline. This is America‑or‑bust investing, plain and simple.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 48%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 2%
Market cap exposure is heavily skewed toward the giants: roughly half in mega‑caps and another third in large‑caps. Mid‑caps get a minor supporting role, and small‑caps are barely a cameo at 2%. This is a portfolio that trusts the corporate mega‑tankers, not the scrappy speedboats. Big companies bring stability and liquidity, but they also mean the portfolio’s fate is tied to a relatively small club of huge firms. Don’t expect much from under‑the‑radar growth stories here — this is a “buy the winners everyone already knows” setup, with very little in the way of true small‑company risk or opportunity.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.77%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 6.85%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.73%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.99%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.39%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.02%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.76%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.69%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.41%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
-
LL Eli Lilly and Company 2.17%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Top 10 total 39.78%
The look‑through holdings scream “Magnificent Seven fan club.” Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Tesla, Meta, Broadcom, and Eli Lilly soak up a big chunk of the visible exposure. And that’s just from top‑10 ETF holdings, so the true overlap is probably even louder than the data shows. This isn’t three ETFs; it’s mostly one story told three times with slightly different accents. When the megacap darlings do well, the portfolio looks brilliant. When they all stumble together, there’s nowhere to rotate because the same names are hiding in multiple wrappers. Hidden concentration is doing heavy lifting here.
Factors
Factor exposure is surprisingly middle‑of‑the‑road for something that looks so growth‑obsessed. Size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility are all hovering around “neutral,” meaning the portfolio behaves a lot like the broad market on those dimensions. The one clear signal is value at 37% — a mild tilt away from cheap stocks, which fits the growth‑heavy story. Factors are basically the secret spices that explain returns; here, the recipe is “market‑like, but skip the bargains.” The upside is a smooth, familiar risk profile; the downside is paying up for popular companies and being very exposed if sentiment toward pricey darlings sours.
Risk contribution
-
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Weight: 69.28% 77.5% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 20.56% 14.7% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 10.16% 7.8%
Risk contribution here is hilariously lopsided. The large‑cap growth ETF weighs 69% but contributes over 77% of the total portfolio risk. That single position is basically the main character; the dividend and international funds are backup dancers politely trying not to get in the way. Risk/weight above 1.0 means it’s punchier than its size, which fits for a growth‑tilted ETF full of volatile stars. The other two positions, with risk/weight under 1.0, are actually toning things down a bit. On paper this is a three‑fund portfolio; in practice, one fund is driving the volatility bus and the others are just along for the ride.
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 efficient frontier, this portfolio actually holds its own: the current mix sits right on or very near the curve, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.71. The “optimal” version using the same ingredients nudges the Sharpe to 0.88 with slightly higher risk and return, while the minimum‑variance mix delivers lower risk and a similar Sharpe to what you’ve already got. The efficient frontier is just the nerdy line showing the best possible trade‑off using these funds. Translation: the holdings are loud and concentrated, but within that choice, the weights aren’t embarrassingly inefficient. This is aggressively simple, but not mathematically silly.
Dividends
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.30%
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.60%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.22%
The total yield of about 1.22% makes this look like a growth portfolio that tried to bolt on “income” for marketing purposes. The dividend ETF pulls its weight with a decent yield north of 3%, but it’s heavily diluted by the low‑yield growth fund that dominates the allocation. Dividends here are more of a side effect than a defining feature. If this were a band, the dividend ETF would be the bass player quietly doing real work while the growth ETF thrashes around on stage screaming “capital gains!” The result is modest income and a very clear bias toward price movement over payouts.
Ongoing product costs
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.05%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio doesn’t trip over itself. A total expense ratio around 0.05% is impressively low — you’re basically paying ETF pocket change. That’s cheaper than many “all‑in‑one” products that do less and charge more. It’s almost suspiciously sensible: three mainstream ETFs, dirt‑cheap fees, no exotic markups. Fees are under control; you likely clicked the plain‑vanilla, big‑brand options that do the job without drama. The irony is that the portfolio’s main flaw — concentration in US growth — isn’t about cost at all. You’re not wasting money on fees; you’re just choosing to live and die by one big bet.
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