This portfolio has only about 1.4 years of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.

Highly concentrated growth portfolio with strong tech tilt and very elevated individual stock risk

Report created on May 9, 2024

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

2/5
Low Diversity
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

The portfolio is heavily concentrated in a few single stocks, with Apple and AMD alone making up over half of the total weight and Janone adding another sizeable chunk. A small portion is allocated to dividend-focused ETFs and a handful of other individual names, but overall diversification is low, which is consistent with the “Growth Investor” risk classification. When a portfolio leans this hard into just a few positions, day-to-day returns can swing more than a broadly diversified mix. For someone comfortable with bigger ups and downs, this kind of structure can be intentional, but it’s worth being very clear that results will depend heavily on just a couple of companies.

Growth Info

Over the roughly 1.4‑year history, $1,000 grew to about $1,266, a solid gain but still behind both the US and global market benchmarks over the same period. The portfolio’s compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 19.54% trails the US market’s 32.14% and global market’s 26.02%. Max drawdown, the worst peak‑to‑trough drop, hit about -19%, noticeably deeper than the benchmarks’ roughly -10%. With such a short window, these numbers are more like a snapshot than a long-term pattern. The main takeaway: risk has been high, returns decent but not superior, and there’s no evidence yet of persistent outperformance.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    95%
  • No data
    5%

About 95% of the portfolio is in stocks, with a small slice labeled “no data” that we can’t categorize. A near‑all‑equity allocation fits a growth‑oriented mindset and often makes sense for long horizons, but it also means there’s almost no built‑in cushion from bonds or cash‑like assets. When markets drop, a structure like this tends to fall more, and there’s little natural stabilizer. Compared with more balanced mixes that include fixed income, this setup is aggressive. For someone seeking smoother rides or shorter‑term goals, adding defensive assets can reduce the impact of big drawdowns, even if it might trim some upside in roaring bull markets.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    55%
  • Industrials
    12%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Energy
    6%
  • Financials
    3%
  • Health Care
    2%
  • Consumer Staples
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%

Sector-wise, the portfolio is dominated by technology at 55%, with smaller but noticeable stakes in industrials, telecommunications, consumer discretionary, and energy. Compared with broad market benchmarks, this is a very tech-heavy tilt. Tech exposure often boosts growth potential but can be especially sensitive to interest rate changes, regulation, and shifts in market sentiment toward innovation. When tech does well, this kind of tilt can shine; when the sector falls out of favor, performance can lag badly. Having some exposure to more defensive areas like utilities, health care, or consumer staples can sometimes smooth those cycles, but here those sectors are relatively minor players.

Regions Info

  • North America
    90%
  • Asia Emerging
    5%

Geographically, around 90% of exposure is in North America, with a modest slice in emerging Asia. That home‑region focus aligns with many investors’ natural preference and can feel more familiar, which is a psychological advantage. However, global benchmarks typically hold a more balanced mix across multiple regions. Heavy reliance on a single region means local economic conditions, regulations, and currency movements will strongly shape outcomes. If North America continues to lead, that’s great; if another region outperforms, this setup may miss some of that growth. Over time, introducing more geographic diversification can help reduce reliance on any one economy’s fortunes.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    62%
  • Large-cap
    18%
  • Micro-cap
    11%
  • Mid-cap
    4%

By market cap, the portfolio leans heavily into mega‑cap and large‑cap names, with smaller positions in micro‑cap and mid‑cap stocks. Mega‑caps are often more established and can be relatively more stable than tiny companies, but they still carry significant volatility, especially in tech. The 11% micro‑cap slice, including a concentrated Janone position, adds a lot of idiosyncratic risk — company‑specific events can move the price dramatically. This combination gives a core of well‑known giants plus a high‑octane satellite of very small companies. That structure can enhance upside but also amplifies the chance of sharp, stock‑specific drawdowns that aren’t driven by the broader market.

True holdings Info

  • Apple Inc
    32.61%
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    18.91%
  • Janone Inc
    10.59%
  • Amazon.com Inc
    3.30%
  • Nio Inc Class A ADR
    2.86%
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    2.70%
  • Telus Corp
    2.34%
  • Valero Energy Corporation
    2.14%
  • Enbridge Inc
    2.11%
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
    1.99%
  • Top 10 total 79.55%

Looking through the holdings, risk is driven almost entirely by direct single-stock positions rather than overlapping ETF exposures. Apple, AMD, and Janone dominate the risk profile, while the ETFs add diversification but at relatively small weights. Because the ETF analysis only uses top‑10 holdings, some overlap is likely understated, yet the big story here is still the direct bets. Hidden concentration through ETFs isn’t the main issue; the explicit concentration in a few names is. For someone aiming at stock‑picking style upside, that’s deliberate, but it also means portfolio behavior will closely track those specific companies’ fortunes.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 97%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 95%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 79%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
High
Data availability: 85%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 64%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 95%

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-wise, there’s a very low size exposure and high momentum and quality exposure. Factor exposure describes how much the portfolio leans into traits like size, value, or momentum that research suggests drive returns over time. A very low size score means a strong tilt away from smaller companies overall, despite a micro‑cap outlier; most weight sits in larger firms. High momentum suggests many holdings have done well recently, which can help in trending markets but may hurt in sudden reversals. High quality generally means stronger balance sheets or profitability, which can be a positive stabilizer. With only 1.4 years of data, these factor readings are informative but not yet definitive patterns.

Risk contribution Info

  • Janone Inc
    Weight: 10.59%
    53.8%
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    Weight: 18.91%
    24.2%
  • Apple Inc
    Weight: 32.61%
    13.0%
  • Nio Inc Class A ADR
    Weight: 2.86%
    1.9%
  • Amazon.com Inc
    Weight: 3.30%
    1.5%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 94.4%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can be very different from its weight. Here, Janone at about 11% weight drives nearly 54% of total risk — more than five times its share — making it the loudest “instrument” in the portfolio. AMD and Apple together bring the top‑three risk contribution close to 91%, even though other stocks and ETFs are present. This kind of concentration means portfolio volatility is largely a story about just a few names. Adjusting position sizes, especially in the highest risk‑per‑weight holdings, can realign the risk profile without changing the overall strategy too dramatically.

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 portfolio delivering high expected return but with very high volatility and a Sharpe ratio of 1.18. Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk; higher is better. The optimal mix of the existing holdings, without adding anything new, reaches a Sharpe of 2.73 with lower risk and similar expected return, while the minimum‑variance version offers much lower risk with still‑positive returns. The current setup sits well below the efficient frontier, meaning the same holdings could be weighted more effectively. Simply rebalancing toward the optimized mix could meaningfully improve risk‑adjusted outcomes without changing the overall “menu” of assets.

Dividends Info

  • Apple Inc 0.40%
  • Algonquin Power & Utilities Corp 5.30%
  • Enbridge Inc 5.00%
  • Alphabet Inc Class C 0.30%
  • JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF 8.50%
  • Meta Platforms Inc. 0.40%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 2.60%
  • Toronto Dominion Bank 3.30%
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 0.70%
  • Telus Corp 7.10%
  • Valero Energy Corporation 1.80%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.06%

The total portfolio yield is about 1.06%, which is fairly modest despite several high‑yield holdings like JEPI, Telus, and Enbridge. That happens because a large share of the portfolio is in low‑ or no‑dividend growth names, where the focus is more on capital appreciation than cash payouts. Dividend yield is simply the annual cash paid divided by price, and it can provide a useful income stream, especially in retirement or for regular withdrawals. In a growth‑heavy structure like this, dividends are more of a side benefit than the main engine. Any income‑oriented goals would likely require either higher-yield allocations or a larger portfolio balance.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF 0.35%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.02%

On costs, the picture is very strong. The overall TER estimate is around 0.02%, helped by the Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF’s rock‑bottom 0.06% fee and only one moderately priced ETF at 0.35%. Low costs mean more of the portfolio’s return stays in your pocket rather than going to managers year after year. Over long periods, even small fee differences compound significantly, especially in tax‑deferred accounts. This fee profile aligns well with best practices and supports better long‑term performance potential. With costs already impressively low, most of the improvement opportunities lie in diversification and risk balance rather than in squeezing out additional basis points on fees.

What next?

Ready to invest in this portfolio?

Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.

Select broker

Create your own report?

Analyze your portfolio

Join our community!

Join Discord

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