Two fund US growth rocket with all the engines strapped to the same side
Report created on Apr 26, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 64.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
SCHG - US8085243009 36.00%
This “portfolio” is really just two flavors of the same ice cream: broad US large caps plus extra US large-cap growth on top. It looks diversified at first glance, but the diversification score of 2/5 is being generous. There’s no real balance across assets, no ballast, just one big bet dressed in two tickers. Structurally, it’s like owning a sedan and an SUV from the same brand and calling it a garage of variety. The upside is simplicity; the downside is that when this slice of the market sneezes, every part of this portfolio catches the same cold.
Growth
Historically this thing absolutely ripped: $1,000 grew to $4,502 with a 16.3% CAGR, beating both the US and global markets. That’s road-trip-bragging-rights territory. But the -33% max drawdown reminds you it’s still a roller coaster, not a savings account. And 90% of the returns came from just 37 days, which means missing a tiny handful of good days would have turned flex-worthy performance into something much more average. Past data is like yesterday’s weather — helpful, but it doesn’t promise the next decade will treat this growth tilt as kindly.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection is the statistical way of saying, “We rolled the dice 1,000 times and here’s the range of chaos.” Median outcome of $2,858 after 15 years sounds decent, but the spread from about $966 to $7,713 shows how wide the future can swing. A 74.5% chance of ending positive is good, but not “sleep-like-a-baby” safe. The average simulated return around 8.2% is noticeably tamer than the backward-looking 16.3%, a quiet reminder that markets don’t care how good the backstory looks on a chart.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset-class “diversification” here is simply: stocks, and only stocks, all of the time, at 100%. There’s zero attempt at mixing in anything that behaves differently — no stabilizers, no defensive assets, just full-speed equity exposure. That can feel smart in bull markets and painfully exposed when things unravel. Think of it as building a house out of only glass: looks great in the sunshine, not so fun in a hailstorm. This setup maximizes participation in equity upside but also signs up the whole portfolio to ride every equity downturn from the front row.
Sectors
- Technology 38%
- Telecommunications 13%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Financials 10%
- Health Care 9%
- Industrials 8%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector-wise, the portfolio is basically worshipping the growthy end of the modern economy. Technology at 38% plus telecom at 13% and a chunky consumer discretionary tilt means the portfolio is heavily wired into innovation, spending, and screens. The more boring, stodgy corners barely show up. That’s great when the world is happily clicking, scrolling, and buying; less great when the market decides it cares about cash flows, regulation, or cyclicality again. The portfolio isn’t just tilted toward growth sectors — it’s practically living there and paying premium rent.
Regions
- North America 100%
Geographically, this is pure “America or nothing.” North America at 100% means the rest of the world might as well not exist. No exposure to other major economies, no currency diversification, no hedge if the US has a rough patch relative to global markets. It worked out in the backtest, where US stocks outpaced global ones, but that’s backward-looking luck, not a permanent law of finance. This isn’t a world portfolio; it’s a US fan club that forgot there are entire markets beyond the S&P’s jurisdiction.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 52%
- Large-cap 31%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 1%
Market cap exposure is as mainstream as it gets: 52% mega-cap, 31% large-cap, 16% mid-cap, and a lonely 1% in small caps. Translation: the giants run the show, the mids are there for supporting roles, and small caps barely get a speaking line. That’s fine for stability within equities, but it means the portfolio is chained to the fate of the mega-companies dominating headlines and indexes. If the very biggest names hit a rough patch collectively, there’s almost no offset from smaller, more idiosyncratic parts of the market.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 9.21%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 7.82%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 5.90%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 4.48%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.66%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.36%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.93%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.78%
Part of fund(s):- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.49%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.00%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 43.61%
The look-through holdings scream “Magnificent Overlap.” NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Meta, Tesla — basically the usual suspects — together eat a huge chunk of total exposure. Since both ETFs love the same mega-cap growth darlings, the portfolio is double-dipping into the same names. Overlap is underreported because we only see ETF top 10s, so the real concentration is likely worse. This isn’t two independent engines; it’s one engine fed by two fuel lines, all going into the same handful of superstar stocks.
Factors
Factor-wise, this is almost suspiciously middle-of-the-road. Value, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all sit in the “neutral” band, which is code for “basically market-like.” Size exposure is mildly low, which fits the mega/large-cap dominance, but there are no bold factor bets here. Factor exposure is like the ingredient label explaining why a portfolio behaves the way it does; in this case, it reads like plain vanilla with extra big-company flavor. For such a concentrated, growthy-feeling mix, the factor profile is oddly tame and unintentionally balanced.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 64.00% 60.0% -
Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
Weight: 36.00% 40.0%
Risk contribution reveals who’s actually shaking the portfolio, not just who’s sitting in it. The S&P 500 ETF is 64% of the weight and adds about 60% of the risk; the growth ETF at 36% weight chips in ~40% of the risk. So the growth sleeve is punching a bit above its weight, but the real point is: 100% of the risk comes from just two funds that are heavily correlated. There’s no secret sleeper position causing chaos — the whole thing is basically one big, unified bet on US large-cap equity mood swings.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationSchwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETFVanguard S&P 500 ETF
The correlation chart may as well say, “Yes, these two are basically the same thing.” When assets move almost identically, they don’t diversify each other; they just echo each other’s bad days. Holding both here is like owning two copies of the same album and expecting your playlist to sound more varied. In a crash centered on US large-cap growth, both ETFs will likely slump together, not offer any real comfort. Correlation is supposed to help you mix ingredients; this combo just doubles down on the same flavor.
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 behaves itself. Its Sharpe ratio of 0.68 isn’t top-dog, but it’s close enough that the optimizer basically shrugs and says, “Yeah, that’ll do.” The maximum Sharpe blend tweaks things to 0.84 with a bit more risk and return, while the minimum variance version stays pretty efficient too. The key point: with just these two funds, the current mix is already near the best possible risk/return line. The roasting isn’t about efficiency; it’s about how narrow and single-theme that “efficient” exposure really is.
Dividends
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.85%
Dividend yield at 0.85% is basically the financial version of background noise. The growth ETF barely pays anything, and even the broad S&P 500 slice doesn’t lift the total much. This portfolio is clearly not here for income — it’s banking on price appreciation doing the heavy lifting. That’s fine if the aim is pure growth, but it does mean that in rough patches there isn’t much in the way of steady cash flow to soften the psychological blow. Dividends aren’t everything, but here they’re almost a rounding error.
Ongoing product costs
- Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.03%
Costs are hilariously low: a total expense ratio around 0.03% is about as close to free as the industry gets. It’s like accidentally walking into first class and no one asking for your ticket. For all the concentration sins and overlap issues, at least you’re not overpaying to commit them. There’s no expensive active manager here pretending to be a genius while hugging the index — just brutally cheap access to the broad US market and its growthiest bits. Fees are not the problem in this story; everything else is.
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!
Compare your holdings
How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?
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