Riding a rocket with no seatbelt and calling it diversified long term investing
Report created on Apr 8, 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
-
FD FedEx Corporation
FDX - US31428X1063 40.00% -
ME Meta Platforms Inc.
META - US30303M1027 21.00% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 15.00% -
MU Micron Technology Inc
MU - US5951121038 12.00% -
NV NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 12.00%
The composition here is basically four high-octane stocks plus one boring grown-up ETF trying to keep them in line. With 40% in FedEx and another 33% split between Meta and NVIDIA, this isn’t a portfolio; it’s a personality test. The S&P 500 slice is clearly the token “I heard diversification is good” allocation. Structurally, this is concentrated stock picking with a side salad of index exposure. That’s fine if the goal is thrills, not sleep. In general, when one position hits 40%, it stops being a holding and becomes a lifestyle choice. Most people would treat that level of concentration as “career risk,” not “fun hobby.”
Growth
Historically, this thing has been an absolute monster: $1,000 turning into $31,274, with a 41.29% CAGR, absolutely torching both US and global markets. That’s meme-stock-level returns backed by real companies. But the -56.94% max drawdown is the hangover from that party — watching more than half your value vanish is not for casual investors. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is like your average speed on a road trip; this portfolio has been doing 120 mph in a 65 zone. Past data is useful, but it’s still yesterday’s weather. The takeaway: amazing historical returns bought with brutal volatility and steel-nerves-level drawdowns.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection is the “what if” simulator: it runs 1,000 parallel universes and checks where your $1,000 ends up in 15 years. Median outcome of $2,768 with an 8.26% average annual return is solid but hilariously modest compared with the 41% historical rocket ride. Range from about $1,061 to $7,859 shows the chaos built into this kind of portfolio. Monte Carlo is helpful, but it’s still using history as a guide, which works about as well as driving using only the rearview mirror. Bottom line: odds of a positive outcome are good, but the spread of possibilities screams “buckle up.”
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset classes: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. This isn’t an allocation; it’s an all-in bet on equity markets never taking a truly extended nap. No bonds, no cash buffer, no diversifiers — just pure exposure to the stock rollercoaster. That matches the “Aggressive” risk label perfectly, to be fair. The risk is that when markets tank, there’s nowhere to hide and nothing in the portfolio that tends to zig when stocks zag. Takeaway: an equity-only setup can work for very long horizons and strong stomachs, but it’s extremely unforgiving if life forces you to sell during a crash.
Sectors
- Industrials 41%
- Technology 29%
- Telecommunications 23%
- Financials 2%
- Consumer Discretionary 2%
- Health Care 1%
- Consumer Staples 1%
- Energy 1%
Sector breakdown: 41% industrials (hello FedEx), 29% tech, 23% “telecom” which in practice is Meta, and then a sprinkling of everything else to look respectable. This is basically a two-and-a-half-sector portfolio. It’s less “broad market exposure” and more “I like delivery trucks and algorithms.” Sector risk here is high: if logistics or mega-tech hits a rough patch, there’s no offset from other parts of the economy. A healthier setup usually avoids letting one industry drag the whole ship. Takeaway: this is a concentrated thematic bet in disguise, not a balanced sector mix.
Regions
- North America 100%
Geography: 100% North America. Apparently the rest of the planet’s stock markets are just optional side quests. No exposure to other major economies means you’re fully tied to the fate of one region’s politics, currency, regulation, and economic cycles. It’s worked out historically because US markets have been on a heater, but that isn’t guaranteed forever. Past outperformance can lull investors into home bias — the “why leave home, Netflix delivers” of investing. Takeaway: relying on a single region is fine if you consciously want that risk, but it’s definitely not global diversification.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 52%
- Large-cap 45%
- Mid-cap 3%
Market cap tilt: 52% mega-cap, 45% large-cap, 3% mid-cap, and absolutely no love for small caps. This is a “big kids table only” portfolio. You’re basically betting that the giants stay giants and the index keeps rewarding the same names. That can work for a while, but it concentrates risk in crowded trades where everyone’s already piled in. It also misses out on the potential growth (and chaos) of smaller companies. Takeaway: this is a size profile that screams “I like winners after they’ve already won,” which can be fine — just don’t pretend it’s broad across the size spectrum.
True holdings
-
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
-
AA Apple Inc 1.00%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 0.74%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 0.52%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 0.46%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 0.39%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 0.37%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 89.94%
Look-through shows the overlap problem hiding under the hood. Meta and NVIDIA appear both directly and through the S&P 500 ETF, quietly ratcheting up exposure. When the index owns what you already own, you’re doubling down without really meaning to. Top holdings like Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Alphabet sneak in via the ETF, so you’ve basically stapled a mini-Magnificent-7 basket onto a few big bets. Overlap is understated since only ETF top 10s are shown, so the hidden concentration is likely worse. Takeaway: this looks less like diversification and more like an echo chamber of the same mega-cap growth names.
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-wise, you’ve got very low size (big-company bias), high momentum, and high quality. Factors are like the flavor profile of your portfolio — the hidden ingredients driving behavior. High momentum means you’re chasing what’s been working lately, while high quality leans toward solid, profitable names. That combo is basically “fast car with good brakes,” which is less reckless than it looks on the surface. Low size just means you’ve ghosted small caps. The issue: relying heavily on momentum means you’re vulnerable when trends flip violently. Takeaway: whether intentional or not, this factor mix is growth-tilted and trend-friendly, not value-hunting or safety-first.
Risk contribution
-
FedEx Corporation
Weight: 40.00% 38.7% -
Meta Platforms Inc.
Weight: 21.00% 21.5% -
NVIDIA Corporation
Weight: 12.00% 16.0% -
Micron Technology Inc
Weight: 12.00% 15.4% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 15.00% 8.4%
Risk contribution exposes who’s actually shaking the portfolio. FedEx at 40% weight contributes 38.69% of the risk — it’s doing exactly what its oversized position suggests. Meta at 21% weight and NVIDIA and Micron at 12% each are punching a bit above their weight, while the S&P 500 ETF is the chill friend contributing far less risk than its share. Top three holdings drive over 76% of total risk, meaning this is basically a three-stock rollercoaster with a quiet index sidekick. Risk contribution is like a spotlight for drama queens; trimming those can reduce shocks without changing the number of holdings.
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 chart, the current portfolio sits 6.95 percentage points below where it could be at the same risk level. Translation: you’re taking 27.11% volatility for a 26.96% return, but a smarter mix of the exact same holdings could get you more bang for that same pain. The Sharpe ratio of 0.85 versus 1.32 for the optimal portfolio is like running a sports car on low-octane fuel — it still moves fast, but not as well as it could. Takeaway: this isn’t underpowered, it’s just inefficient. Reweighting, not new products, could tighten up the risk/return deal.
Dividends
- FedEx Corporation 1.60%
- Meta Platforms Inc. 0.40%
- Micron Technology Inc 0.10%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.92%
Total yield at 0.92% is basically pocket change. This portfolio clearly does not care about income; it’s here for capital gains and vibes. FedEx tries with a 1.6% yield, but the rest are either token payers or non-payers. For someone hunting for steady cash flow, this setup is a mismatch. Dividends can act like a small built-in return booster and a psychological comfort during downturns — here they’re more of an afterthought. Takeaway: this is a growth-first, income-last approach, which is fine if the plan is to hold and not rely on the portfolio to pay bills anytime soon.
Ongoing product costs
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
Costs are the one area where this looks suspiciously competent. The only fund, Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, has a 0.03% TER, which is about as close to free as investing gets without a favor from a rich uncle. The individual stocks don’t carry ongoing fund fees, so ongoing costs are essentially a rounding error. That said, low cost doesn’t rescue bad concentration or high risk — it just means you’re taking those risks cheaply. Takeaway: fee discipline is on point; now the rest of the portfolio could use the same level of adult supervision.
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