Highly concentrated mega cap US tech and telecom growth portfolio with strong historical returns
Report created on Apr 16, 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
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL - US02079K3059 36.77% -
AM Amazon.com Inc
AMZN - US0231351067 24.28% -
NV NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 21.44% -
AV Broadcom Inc
AVGO - US11135F1012 8.08% -
PL Palantir Technologies Inc.
PLTR - US69608A1088 3.09% -
AS Ast Spacemobile Inc
ASTS - US00217D1000 2.63% -
RK Rocket Lab USA Inc.
RKLB - US7731211089 2.12% -
MU Micron Technology Inc
MU - US5951121038 1.59%
This portfolio is a pure stock collection of eight individual US companies, with no funds or bonds. Three names dominate: Alphabet, Amazon, and NVIDIA together make up over 80% of the total value, while the remaining five positions are comparatively small satellites. Having everything in individual stocks means every company-specific headline directly hits overall results, unlike a broad ETF that blends many names. Such a concentrated, single-asset-class setup can deliver big upside when the chosen companies do well, but it also magnifies mistakes or bad luck. Anyone running a structure like this is effectively “betting” on a tight set of ideas rather than owning a broad slice of the market.
Growth
Historically, performance has been exceptional: $1,000 grew to about $6,237, far outpacing both the US and global markets. The portfolio’s compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 40.8% versus roughly 14% for the US and 11.8% globally shows very strong stock picking in a favorable period for these names. The trade-off was pain along the way: a max drawdown of about -49% is roughly double the market’s worst fall. That means seeing the portfolio almost halved before recovering. Remember, past performance just shows how this mix behaved in one environment; it doesn’t guarantee similar wins or the same resilience next time.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation takes the historical ups and downs of this portfolio and replays them in thousands of random sequences to map a range of possible 15-year outcomes. It shows a median result of about $2,630 from $1,000, with a wide band from roughly $955 to nearly $7,885. This method is like shuffling and re-dealing the past each time, so it captures volatility and big swings, but it still relies on history repeating in some form. The key takeaway: outcomes are skewed — there is meaningful upside, but also a real chance of ending roughly flat in real terms after many years.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All capital is in stocks, with 0% in bonds, cash-like instruments, or alternatives. That makes the portfolio very growth-focused and highly sensitive to equity market cycles. In calmer markets, a 100% stock allocation can compound strongly, but during deep downturns there’s no built-in stabilizer to cushion falls or provide dry powder. Broad benchmarks often hold at least some defensive assets, especially for investors nearing major goals. A pure-stock structure like this better fits situations where someone can tolerate large temporary losses and has no need to tap the money in the near or medium term, because swings can be sharp and sudden.
Sectors
- Technology 37%
- Telecommunications 37%
- Consumer Discretionary 24%
- Industrials 2%
Sector-wise, exposure is heavily stacked in technology and telecommunications, jointly about three-quarters of the portfolio, with most of the rest in consumer discretionary and a tiny slice in industrials. That’s a big tilt away from the sector mix of broad market indices, which spread more across areas like health care, financials, and staples. Tech and telecom can soar when innovation and growth stories are in favor, but they are also sensitive to interest rates, regulation, and sentiment toward “high growth” names. This concentration means portfolio fortunes will track the health of a fairly narrow set of sectors rather than the broader economy.
Regions
- North America 100%
Geographically, everything is based in North America, specifically the US. That’s very different from global benchmarks, which usually spread significant weight across Europe and Asia as well. A US-only focus has worked brilliantly over the past decade, especially for large technology and internet companies, but it does tie outcomes tightly to one economy, one political system, and one currency. If US markets underperform other regions for a while, or the dollar shifts meaningfully, a geographically concentrated portfolio will feel it more. Geographic diversification doesn’t eliminate risk, but it can reduce the impact of country-specific shocks or policy changes.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 95%
- Large-cap 5%
Nearly all holdings are mega-cap companies, with a small slice in large caps and effectively no exposure to mid or small caps. Mega-caps tend to be more established, widely followed, and often more profitable, which can support quality and resilience compared to tiny, speculative companies. However, relying almost entirely on the largest firms can miss some of the growth potential that historically appeared in smaller businesses. In terms of behavior, this skew means the portfolio may move somewhat like a turbo-charged version of a large-cap growth index, rather than capturing the different cycles smaller companies sometimes experience.
Factors
Factor exposures are estimated using statistical models based on historical data and measure systematic (market-relative) tilts, not absolute portfolio characteristics. Results may vary depending on the analysis period, data availability, and currency of the underlying assets.
Factor exposure here shows very strong style tilts. Value is very low, meaning a deliberate lean away from cheaper, more “bargain-priced” names and toward higher-priced growth stories. Size exposure is also very low, reflecting the dominance of very large companies over smaller stocks. On the positive side, momentum and quality are both high, suggesting the portfolio holds companies that have recently been strong performers and generally show solid fundamentals. This blend tends to shine when growth and trending markets persist, but it can be vulnerable when leadership rotates toward undervalued or smaller names, or when high-momentum stocks suddenly correct.
Risk contribution
-
Alphabet Inc Class A
Weight: 36.77% 29.8% -
NVIDIA Corporation
Weight: 21.44% 29.4% -
Amazon.com Inc
Weight: 24.28% 21.9% -
Broadcom Inc
Weight: 8.08% 7.6% -
Palantir Technologies Inc.
Weight: 3.09% 3.8% - Top 5 risk contribution 92.5%
Risk contribution shows how much each stock drives the overall portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ from its percentage weight. Here, NVIDIA stands out: it’s about 21% of the portfolio but contributes roughly 29% of total risk, reflecting its higher volatility. Alphabet and Amazon also each contribute around a fifth to a third of risk, so the top three names together explain over 80% of the portfolio’s variability. That means day-to-day and year-to-year performance is largely a three-stock story. Adjusting position sizes can shift this balance, bringing risk contributions closer to intended conviction levels without changing the stock list.
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.
The risk–return chart shows the current mix sits below the efficient frontier, meaning for the same level of volatility a different weighting of these same eight stocks could have delivered a better risk-adjusted outcome historically. The Sharpe ratio, which compares excess return to volatility, is 1.08 now versus 1.46 for the optimal mix. That doesn’t mean the portfolio is bad — the absolute returns were very strong — but it suggests the combination of weights wasn’t using the holdings as efficiently as possible. In theory, rebalancing toward the frontier could improve the balance between potential upside and the bumps along the way.
Dividends
- Broadcom Inc 0.60%
- Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
- Micron Technology Inc 0.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.12%
Dividend income is minimal, with an overall yield around 0.12%. A few holdings pay small dividends, but they barely move the needle on total returns. This is typical for growth-focused portfolios, where companies prefer to reinvest profits into expansion rather than returning cash to shareholders. For investors seeking regular income, such a low yield means they would mostly rely on selling shares to fund withdrawals. For long-term growth-focused savers who don’t need cash flow today, a low-yield profile is not inherently a problem; it just clarifies that the main engine of return is price appreciation, not income.
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