Concentrated tech powered growth portfolio with strong historical returns and room for smarter risk balance
Report created on May 30, 2024Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
VG Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
VGT - US92204A7028 32.19% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 28.90% -
SM VanEck Semiconductor ETF
SMH - US92189F6768 14.57% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 11.18% -
XA SPDR® S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF
XAR - US78464A6313 8.52% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 4.64%
The structure is very growth-heavy and focused: 100% in stock ETFs with roughly three quarters in broad U.S. indexes and one quarter in aggressive themes. About 61% sits in tech and semiconductors through dedicated funds and tech-heavy index exposure. There’s also a smaller slice in aerospace and defense plus a modest dividend tilt. A setup like this puts nearly all the chips on equity growth, especially in fast-moving areas. That’s powerful when markets rise but can sting in sharp drawdowns. As a general takeaway, anyone running a similar setup usually treats it as a high-conviction satellite or needs to be very comfortable with big swings.
Growth
From late 2020 to now, $1,000 grew to about $2,384, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.33%. CAGR is like an average yearly “speed” of growth over the journey. This clearly beat both the U.S. market (about 13.11%) and global market (about 11.17%), which is a strong result. The tradeoff is a max drawdown of -31.78%, meaning at one point the portfolio was down nearly a third from a peak. That’s noticeably deeper than the U.S. market’s drop. Past returns are great confirmation that the growth tilt paid off, but they can’t be assumed to repeat, especially if tech leadership cools.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All assets here are stocks, with 0% in bonds, cash, or alternatives. That’s a pure-equity stance and lines up with an aggressive growth mindset. In calmer periods and bull markets, this can be very rewarding. In recessions or big market shocks, though, there’s nothing in the mix designed to act as a cushion. Compared with more balanced allocations that include bonds or defensive assets, the ride will usually be rougher. As a general guideline, investors who rely on their portfolio for near-term spending usually blend in steadier assets, while those with long horizons can more easily tolerate 100% equity exposure.
Sectors
- Technology 62%
- Industrials 12%
- Telecommunications 5%
- Consumer Discretionary 5%
- Health Care 4%
- Financials 4%
- Consumer Staples 3%
- Energy 2%
- Utilities 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is dominated by technology at about 62%, with smaller allocations across industrials, telecom, consumer areas, health care, financials, and others. This is far more tech-concentrated than broad market indexes, which spreads more evenly across sectors. The upside is strong participation in innovation and growth trends. The downside is sensitivity to interest rates, regulation, or a rotation away from tech leadership. This kind of tilt can experience sharp swings when sentiment shifts against growth stocks. A helpful framing: is such a strong sector bet intentional? If not, broadening into more cyclicals and defensives can smooth the experience.
Regions
- North America 96%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, roughly 96% of exposure is in North America, with only a small slice in developed Asia and Europe. That’s a clear home-country bias but also quite common for U.S.-focused portfolios. When the U.S. leads, this bias works out nicely; when leadership rotates abroad, returns can lag more global mixes. Currency risk is simple here since almost everything is dollar-based, which is convenient for a U.S. investor. A typical global benchmark holds a larger share outside the U.S., so anyone wanting closer alignment with world markets might consider gradually nudging exposure toward more international diversification over time.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 43%
- Large-cap 33%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 6%
- Micro-cap 2%
There’s a strong tilt toward very large companies: around 43% in mega-caps and 33% in large-caps, with the rest spread across mid, small, and micro caps. That means most of the portfolio rides on established giants, especially in tech and growth industries. Large caps often provide more stability and liquidity than tiny names, which is a plus for risk control relative to a small-cap-heavy portfolio. However, it can also mean missing some of the potential “small company” premium. For people wanting a more even size mix, adding dedicated small- or mid-cap exposure is one common way to rebalance this tilt.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 11.68%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 7.84%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 5.41%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.62%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 1.70%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.51%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.46%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.28%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
LR Lam Research Corp 1.22%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Applied Materials Inc 1.21%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 36.94%
Looking through the ETFs, the same big tech and chip names show up repeatedly: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, TSMC and others. NVIDIA alone totals around 11.68% across funds, and Apple nearly 8%. This is classic “hidden concentration”: even without owning single stocks, several ETFs pile into the same giants. Because this is based only on ETF top-10 holdings, the true overlap is probably higher. Hidden concentration matters because a few companies can end up driving most of the outcome. For someone seeking more balance, using funds with different underlying focuses can reduce this kind of clustering.
Factors
Factor exposure shows mild tilts away from value, yield, and low volatility, with neutral exposure to size, momentum, and quality. Factors are like underlying traits (cheap vs expensive, stable vs volatile) that explain why investments behave a certain way. Low scores in value and yield mean the portfolio leans toward pricier, fast-growing companies that pay low dividends, typical for tech-heavy setups. The low-volatility tilt away suggests higher sensitivity to market swings. This combination tends to outperform in growth-led bull markets but can be hit hard when investors rotate toward defensive, income, or bargain-priced stocks.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 32.19% 36.6% -
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
Weight: 14.57% 21.8% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 28.90% 21.6% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 11.18% 11.3% -
SPDR® S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF
Weight: 8.52% 6.6% - Top 5 risk contribution 97.9%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding actually drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. The tech ETF at 32.19% weight contributes about 36.62% of total risk, while the semiconductor ETF at 14.57% weight contributes a hefty 21.81%. Together with the S&P 500 ETF, the top three positions generate around 80% of portfolio risk. This confirms that the true risk engine is concentrated in a handful of tech-related exposures. If a smoother ride is desired, trimming those high risk-contribution pieces or pairing them with less correlated, steadier assets can bring the risk profile closer to expectations.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationInvesco NASDAQ 100 ETFVanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
The correlation between the Nasdaq 100 ETF and the tech ETF is about 0.98, which is almost perfect. Correlation measures how often two investments move together, from -1 (opposite) to 1 (identical). When two holdings behave nearly the same, owning both doesn’t add much diversification; they tend to rise and fall together. Here, the Nasdaq and tech funds effectively amplify the same growth story rather than diversifying it. Investors sometimes keep both for subtle differences in composition, but if reducing overlap is a goal, consolidating similar exposures or adding funds with low correlation can improve diversification without expanding the number of positions.
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 current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.75, which trails both the optimal portfolio at 1.03 and even the minimum-variance mix at 0.83. Sharpe ratio measures return earned per unit of risk, like miles per gallon for a car. Being about 4.96 percentage points below the efficient frontier at the same risk level means that, using only the existing funds, different weights could achieve better risk-adjusted returns without adding new products. In plain terms, this setup takes more risk than it “needs to” for the payoff. Periodic reweighting toward the model’s optimal mix could tighten that gap.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 2.60%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.30%
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
- SPDR® S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.30%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.62%
The total yield across the ETFs is about 0.62%, which is low and confirms a growth-first, income-second approach. Yield is the cash paid out annually as dividends, expressed as a percentage of the investment. The dedicated dividend ETF helps a bit at 2.6%, but its small weight means it doesn’t move the overall yield much. For long-horizon investors focused on compounding, low yield is not a problem as long as growth delivers. For someone relying on their portfolio for regular cash flow, a mix like this would usually need to be paired with higher-yield holdings or a separate income sleeve.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- SPDR® S&P Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.35%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.14%
The overall cost level is impressively low, with a weighted total expense ratio (TER) around 0.14%. TER is the annual fee charged by funds, quietly deducted from returns, so keeping it low is like reducing friction on a moving car. The core broad-market ETFs are extremely cheap, and even the more specialized funds are reasonably priced for their niche exposure. Over decades, this cost discipline meaningfully boosts net performance compared with pricier active products. This is a real strength of the setup: even if nothing else changed, compounding at low cost is a solid structural advantage that supports long-term outcomes.
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