Highly concentrated semiconductor themed portfolio with strong historic gains and capacity for large performance swings
Report created on Apr 19, 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
-
SM VanEck Semiconductor ETF
SMH - US92189F6768 86.13% -
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc
BRK-B - US0846707026 13.87%
This portfolio is extremely focused, with roughly 86% in a single semiconductor ETF and about 14% in one individual company. That means just two positions fully explain how the portfolio behaves. A concentrated setup like this is very different from a broad market mix that holds hundreds of names across industries. Concentration matters because a handful of holdings will drive almost all the ups and downs, for better or worse. Here, the ETF already bundles many chip stocks, while Berkshire adds a diversified conglomerate layer. The structure creates a clear “core plus satellite” feel, but with the core itself tied to a single industry rather than the overall market.
Growth
Historically, performance has been exceptional. A hypothetical $1,000 invested in 2016 grew to about $16,232, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 32.3%. CAGR is like average speed over a road trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. This far exceeds both the US market (14.68%) and global market (12.11%) over the same period. The flip side is a max drawdown of about -43%, meaning the portfolio once fell that much from peak to trough before recovering. That’s a much deeper drop than broad markets. The fact that 90% of returns came from just 53 days underlines how timing and big moves have heavily shaped the outcome.
Projection
The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which basically runs thousands of “what if” paths by remixing past return patterns. It doesn’t predict a single future; it shows a range of plausible outcomes if markets behaved in statistically similar ways. Here, the median path turns $1,000 into about $2,790 over 15 years, with a wide possible range from roughly $1,003 to $7,677. That spread shows the uncertainty that comes with an aggressive, concentrated portfolio. Monte Carlo results rely on historical behavior and can’t capture future structural changes in markets or industries, so they’re best seen as a rough map of risk and variability, not a promise.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio sits in stocks, with no bonds or cash-like assets in the mix. Stocks tend to offer higher long-term return potential but also higher volatility, meaning bigger and more frequent price swings. A 100% equity allocation removes the stabilizing effect that bonds or cash can sometimes provide during market shocks. Compared to broad benchmarks that include a mix of assets or even defensive sectors, this portfolio leans fully into growth and risk. That all‑stock stance is consistent with the “Aggressive” risk label and helps explain why both historic gains and drawdowns have been more extreme than the overall market.
Sectors
- Technology 86%
- Financials 14%
Sector-wise, the portfolio is dominated by a single area: roughly 86% in technology via semiconductors, and about 14% in financials via Berkshire. Many broad equity benchmarks spread across several major sectors, so this is a sharp tilt. Concentrating in one industry can amplify the impact of sector-specific cycles, such as demand booms or slumps, regulatory changes, or shifts in interest rates. For example, tech-heavy lineups often react strongly to changes in growth expectations and financing conditions. The financials slice behaves differently, partly tied to economic activity and capital markets, which adds a small balancing effect but doesn’t offset the clear technology focus.
Regions
- North America 84%
- Asia Developed 11%
- Europe Developed 5%
Geographically, the portfolio leans heavily toward North America at about 84%, with the rest split between developed Asia and developed Europe. That’s a US‑centric profile, although semiconductors are inherently global through their supply chains and customers. Many global benchmarks also have a large US weight, but they usually give more space to other regions. Geographic concentration means that macroeconomic trends, policies, and currency moves in North America will have an outsized impact on performance. The slices in Asia and Europe, largely through chip manufacturers and equipment firms, do provide some international exposure, though they’re still tied to the same industry ecosystem.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 51%
- Large-cap 40%
- Mid-cap 8%
By market capitalization, the portfolio is dominated by mega‑cap and large‑cap companies, with only a small mid‑cap slice. Mega‑caps are the very largest firms by market value; they tend to be more established, with deep liquidity and broad analyst coverage. Large‑caps are just below that tier. This structure closely resembles many major equity indices, which also skew toward the biggest companies. It means most of the portfolio’s risk and return is tied to the fortunes of large, globally important businesses rather than smaller, more idiosyncratic names. That can reduce single-company blow‑up risk, even though industry and stock‑market risk remain high.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 16.21%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
-
TS Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 9.24%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 7.28%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
IN Intel Corporation 4.89%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 4.65%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 4.15%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
LR Lam Research Corp 4.08%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
KL KLA Corporation 4.05%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AS ASML Holding NV ADR 3.87%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Top 10 total 72.29%
Looking through the ETF into its top holdings, several semiconductor giants emerge as key drivers: NVIDIA, TSMC, Broadcom, Intel, AMD, Micron, Lam Research, KLA, and ASML together make up a large share. Berkshire appears only in the direct holding, not inside the ETF, so there’s no overlap there. However, within semiconductors, the same big names appear repeatedly via the ETF, creating concentration in those companies even though they’re held indirectly. Because only the ETF’s top ten are captured, actual overlap may be somewhat higher. This kind of “hidden” concentration means those few chip leaders can strongly influence portfolio performance across multiple layers.
Factors
On investment factors, this portfolio shows very low exposure to low volatility, with low scores in value and yield as well. Factor exposure describes how much a portfolio leans toward characteristics like cheapness (value), stability (low volatility), or income (yield) that research links to returns. A very low low‑volatility score suggests holdings have historically been more swingy than the market. Low value and yield scores indicate a tilt away from cheaper, higher‑dividend stocks toward growth‑oriented names where more of the payoff comes from price changes. In strong uptrends, that growth tilt can be powerful, but it often comes with sharper pullbacks when sentiment turns.
Risk contribution
-
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
Weight: 86.13% 95.0% -
Berkshire Hathaway Inc
Weight: 13.87% 5.0%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. Here, the semiconductor ETF is 86% of the portfolio but contributes about 95% of total risk. Berkshire, at nearly 14% weight, contributes only about 5% of the risk. This means the ETF almost completely dominates the portfolio’s behavior; Berkshire plays a relatively small stabilizing role despite its size. When one holding’s risk share is much higher than its weight, overall outcomes become tightly tied to that position’s fortunes. The “top 3 holdings” stat restating 100% risk in two names underscores this concentration.
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 vs. return chart shows this portfolio sitting on or very close to the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier represents the best possible trade‑offs between risk (volatility) and expected return using only the current holdings in different weightings. The Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above a risk‑free rate, is about 0.94 for the current mix and 1.05 for the mathematically optimal version. Since the current and optimal portfolios share the same risk and return points here, the allocation is already highly efficient for its chosen risk level. In other words, given these two holdings, the structure uses them in a risk‑return‑aware way.
Dividends
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.17%
Dividend yield is very low, with the overall portfolio yielding around 0.17% and the semiconductor ETF at about 0.2%. Yield is the cash income paid out each year as a percentage of the investment’s price. Many broad equity portfolios offer higher yields, often from more mature, slower‑growth businesses. Here, most of the historic and expected return has come from price movement rather than cash payouts. That’s common for growth‑oriented, tech‑heavy mixes, where companies often reinvest profits instead of distributing them. For someone tracking total return, low yield isn’t inherently negative, but it does mean income plays a minimal role in this portfolio’s profile.
Ongoing product costs
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.30%
Costs look moderate to low for an active, thematic tilt. The main ETF charges about 0.35% per year in total expense ratio (TER), and the blended portfolio TER is roughly 0.30%. TER is like a built‑in service fee that comes out before returns reach you. Over long periods, lower costs leave more of the growth in your pocket, especially when compounded. Compared with many specialized or thematic funds, a 0.35% TER is quite competitive. This cost structure means the portfolio isn’t giving up much performance to fees, which is a strong foundation given its reliance on capital appreciation rather than high dividends.
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