Growth focused three ETF portfolio with strong value tilt and concentrated risk in a single strategy
Report created on Jun 8, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 33.34% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 33.33% -
NA Tema ETF Trust
NASA 33.33%
The portfolio is split almost evenly across three ETFs, each roughly a third of the total. Structurally, that looks simple and easy to track, but the behaviour depends heavily on what sits inside the Tema ETF Trust, where detailed classifications are partly missing. Equal-weight lineups like this avoid any one holding dominating by size alone, yet risk can still bunch up if one ETF is more volatile. With only about two months of history, any impressions of how this mix behaves over time are very tentative, so it’s better to see this phase as an early snapshot rather than evidence of a stable, long-term pattern.
Growth
One or more local-currency benchmark funds are unavailable for this report.
Over roughly two months, $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $1,309, which implies an extremely high annualized return (CAGR) of 384.53%. CAGR, or Compound Annual Growth Rate, is like the average yearly “speed” of growth over a journey. Over such a short window, though, this number is very noisy and not a realistic guide to long-term expectations. The maximum drawdown — the largest peak‑to‑trough drop — was a modest -4.17%, a bit deeper than the global market’s -2.23%. With only a few weeks of data, both the outperformance and relatively shallow drawdown could simply reflect short-term market swings rather than a durable pattern.
Projection
The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which takes past returns and volatility, then generates many random paths to show a range of possible futures. Here, $1,000 ends at a median of about $2,359 after 15 years, with a wide possible range from roughly $1,013 to $5,513. Monte Carlo is useful for visualizing uncertainty, but it leans heavily on the short two‑month history available. When the starting data is this limited and unusually strong, the simulated outcomes tend to look rosier and more precise than reality, so these numbers are better seen as an illustration of risk and variability, not as a forecast.
Asset classes
- Stocks 67%
- No data 33%
The asset class breakdown shows 67% in stocks and 33% marked as “No data,” where the asset class wasn’t identifiable. That means the visible picture is clearly equity-heavy, but it’s incomplete. Asset class mix matters because stocks, bonds, and cash typically react differently to economic news, helping smooth returns when combined. With a third of the portfolio uncategorized, it’s hard to judge full diversification across asset classes. What can be said is that the identifiable portion is growth‑oriented, and the missing slice simply adds uncertainty around how the portfolio might behave in different market conditions until more granular data becomes available.
Sectors
- Technology 32%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Health Care 4%
- Financials 4%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Industrials 4%
- Energy 1%
- Utilities 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector data shows a clear tilt toward Technology at 32%, with other areas like Telecommunications, Consumer Discretionary, Health Care, Financials, and Consumer Staples each in the low‑ to mid‑single digits. This looks more tech‑heavy than broad global indices, where technology is large but not typically this dominant. Sector concentration matters because different sectors react differently to interest rates, regulation, and economic cycles. Tech‑oriented allocations often deliver strong growth in favorable environments but can be more sensitive to rate hikes or shifts in market sentiment. Over only two months, that tilt has helped performance, but such short‑term results don’t say much about how this concentration might play out over years.
Regions
- North America 66%
Geographically, 66% of the portfolio sits in North America, with the remainder not fully broken out. This aligns directionally with common world indices, where North America is a large share of global market value, though the exact balance is unclear due to missing details. Geographic spread matters because economies, currencies, and policy environments differ; holding companies from multiple regions can soften the impact if one area goes through a rough patch. With partial data, the observable part of the portfolio leans toward a North American growth story. Over a short two‑month span, that may or may not reflect how the mix would behave across a full market cycle.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 34%
- Large-cap 23%
- Mid-cap 9%
The market capitalization breakdown shows meaningful exposure to large, established companies: 34% in mega‑cap and 23% in large‑cap, with a smaller 9% in mid‑cap. Market cap refers to company size on the stock market; bigger firms often have more diversified businesses and somewhat steadier earnings, while smaller ones can be more volatile but sometimes grow faster. This profile looks tilted toward larger firms, which broadly aligns with many mainstream indices that are also dominated by mega‑ and large‑caps. Because only part of the portfolio is classified here, the true exposure may be somewhat broader, but the visible slice suggests a bias toward established names rather than smaller, more speculative stocks.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.48%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.52%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.43%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.87%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
RK Rocket Lab USA Inc. 2.71%
Part of fund(s):- Tema ETF Trust
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.36%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.21%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
PL Planet Labs PBC 2.21%
Part of fund(s):- Tema ETF Trust
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.03%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
FT Filtronic 1.80%
Part of fund(s):- Tema ETF Trust
- Top 10 total 29.63%
Looking through ETF top‑10 holdings, several well‑known large technology and consumer names appear, such as NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, and Alphabet, alongside more specialized companies like Rocket Lab and Planet Labs. The same company showing up in multiple ETFs can quietly increase concentration, even when each ETF has an equal weight in the portfolio. For example, NVIDIA alone represents about 5.48% of total exposure from just the visible top holdings. Because only ETF top‑10 positions are captured, overlap is likely understated. This partial view still signals that a handful of big growth names and a few niche holdings can meaningfully influence overall results despite the seemingly simple three‑ETF structure.
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 exposure shows a very high tilt toward Value (85%) and a very low tilt toward Size (0%), with High Momentum (75%) and High Low Volatility (60%). Factors are like underlying “traits” — such as value or momentum — that help explain why assets move the way they do. A strong value tilt usually points toward companies trading on cheaper metrics versus fundamentals, while a very low size score implies a strong lean toward larger companies over smaller ones. High momentum suggests holdings that have recently performed well, and high low‑volatility exposure points toward relatively steadier price moves. With only two months of data, though, these factor scores are early signals rather than firm, long‑term tilts.
Risk contribution
-
Tema ETF Trust
Weight: 33.33% 74.7% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 33.34% 15.0% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 33.33% 10.3%
Risk contribution shows that the Tema ETF Trust, at 33.33% weight, accounts for about 74.70% of total portfolio risk. Risk contribution measures how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its simple weight. Here, Tema’s risk‑to‑weight ratio of 2.24 means it influences volatility more than twice as much as its share of capital. The two broad ETFs, by contrast, each contribute less risk than their one‑third weights. This pattern indicates that short‑term performance has been driven mostly by whatever sits inside the Tema ETF Trust, even though all three holdings look equally important by size.
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 efficient frontier chart compares the current mix with two theoretical portfolios built from the same three holdings: the optimal (highest Sharpe ratio) and the minimum variance (lowest risk). The Sharpe ratio measures risk‑adjusted return, like “return per unit of volatility.” Even over this tiny sample, the current portfolio sits 16.99 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, meaning a different weighting of these same ETFs would have delivered better risk/return trade‑offs historically. However, since all inputs come from just two months of unusually strong performance, these optimization results are highly fragile and shouldn’t be read as a stable blueprint for the future.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.47%
Dividend yield for the portfolio is modest at about 0.47%, with the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF providing around 1.00% and the NASDAQ 100 ETF around 0.40%. Dividend yield is the cash income paid out each year as a percentage of the current value, separate from price changes. A lower yield is common in growth‑oriented setups, where more of the return is expected from rising share prices rather than regular income. Over a short two‑month period, dividends barely register in total returns and can be lumpy around payment dates, so this snapshot is more about the general income profile than a meaningful slice of recent performance.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%
The portfolio’s total expense ratio (TER) is low at roughly 0.06%, with the S&P 500 ETF at 0.03% and the NASDAQ 100 ETF at 0.15%. TER is the annual fee charged by the funds, taken directly from returns, so lower costs leave more growth in your pocket over time. This level is impressively low and compares favorably with many similar broad‑market ETFs, which is a structural positive that doesn’t depend on market direction. Over decades, even small fee differences can compound significantly. While only two months of return data are available, the cost advantage is already clear and provides a solid foundation for long‑term compounding.
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