This portfolio has only about 1.1 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.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

Growth focused portfolio with heavy technology tilt and meaningful cash buffer over a short data history

Report created on May 20, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

4/5
Broadly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio mixes growth‑oriented stock and fund positions with a sizable cash‑like buffer. Roughly a fifth sits in the Schwab money market fund and another slice in Vanguard’s money market fund, while the rest is spread across active mutual funds and individual stocks, plus a small crypto position. That blend creates two distinct “buckets”: a relatively stable cash component and a more volatile growth component. Structurally, this means overall ups and downs are driven mostly by the equity and crypto side, not the cash. With only about 1.1 years of history, it’s hard to say whether this balance is a long‑term pattern, but right now it looks like a growth engine paired with a noticeable parking zone for liquidity.

Growth Info

Over the 1.1‑year period, $1,000 grew to about $1,316, implying a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 27.48%. CAGR is like the “average speed” of the portfolio over the trip, assuming a smooth path. The portfolio lagged both the US and global market benchmarks by roughly 4 percentage points a year and experienced a deeper maximum drawdown of -17.19% versus around -12%. Max drawdown measures the worst peak‑to‑trough fall, showing how painful a bad stretch can feel. With such a short track record, these results are more like a snapshot than a long‑term verdict, but they do show solid absolute gains with somewhat bumpier downside than broad markets.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses the limited past 1.1 years of returns to simulate many possible 15‑year paths. It’s like running 1,000 alternate histories where returns vary randomly based on recent behavior. The median outcome grows $1,000 to about $2,354, with a wide “likely” range between roughly $1,756 and $3,407, and extreme scenarios stretching from just over $1,000 to about $5,470. The average simulated annual return is 6.68%, modestly above the assumed cash path. Because the input history is so short and includes a strong recent period, these numbers should be seen as rough illustrations, not firm expectations; they mainly show how wide long‑term outcomes can be for a growth‑tilted mix.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    68%
  • No data
    19%
  • Cash
    10%
  • Crypto
    1%
  • Other
    1%

Asset‑class exposure here is dominated by stocks at 68%, with about 10% in cash and a tiny 1% in crypto. Another 19% falls into “No data,” which simply means the system doesn’t have a tagged asset class for those positions; it’s best not to guess what’s in that bucket. A high equity share naturally ties the portfolio more closely to stock market cycles, while the cash slice can help damp volatility and provide liquidity. The small crypto allocation adds a bit of optionality but also idiosyncratic risk. Versus broad market benchmarks that are almost all equity, this mix is slightly more conservative at the total portfolio level because of the material cash component.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    37%
  • Industrials
    11%
  • Cash
    10%
  • Telecommunications
    6%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Financials
    3%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    2%
  • Health Care
    2%
  • Crypto
    1%
  • Consumer Staples
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%
  • Basic Materials
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector exposure is clearly tilted, with about 37% in technology and lower weights spread across industrials, telecom, energy, utilities, financials, consumer areas, health care, real estate, and basic materials. A 10% sector label for cash reflects the money market positions rather than an operating business sector. A tech‑heavy profile often benefits when innovation‑driven companies are in favor but can be more sensitive during periods of rising interest rates or when growth expectations reset. The spread across other sectors shows broader diversification than a single‑theme portfolio, yet the tech overweight remains the main driver of sector risk and potential return. Over just 1.1 years, that tilt hasn’t dramatically outpaced the market, but sector cycles can play out over longer horizons.

Regions Info

  • North America
    65%
  • Cash
    10%
  • Asia Developed
    2%
  • Europe Developed
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, about 65% of exposure is tagged to North America, with small allocations to developed Asia and Europe plus the cash segment. This leans more toward North America than a typical global benchmark, where the region is large but not quite this dominant. Geographic concentration ties results more closely to one economic region’s growth, policy, and currency, which can be helpful when that region leads but leaves less benefit from independent cycles elsewhere. The modest non‑US developed exposure does add some global flavor, but the portfolio effectively behaves more like a North America‑centric strategy than a fully global one. With only a short data window, it’s not yet clear how this tilt behaves across different global market environments.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    27%
  • Large-cap
    22%
  • Small-cap
    10%
  • Mid-cap
    6%
  • Micro-cap
    3%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

By market capitalization, the portfolio tilts toward larger companies, with 27% in mega‑caps and 22% in large‑caps, plus smaller slices in mid, small, and micro‑caps. Market cap is essentially company size by stock market value. Bigger firms often have more established businesses and can be less volatile than tiny names, while small and micro‑caps can swing more sharply but offer higher company‑specific upside. This mix is broadly aligned with many major indices that are naturally dominated by large and mega‑cap stocks, though the explicit inclusion of small and micro positions adds an extra layer of idiosyncratic risk. Given the brief 1.1‑year history, it’s too early to see a clear, persistent size pattern in performance, but structurally it leans big.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 73%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 41%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 49%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 37%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 83%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Low
Data availability: 33%

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 notable very low tilt to Size, meaning the portfolio behaves more like a large‑cap‑oriented basket than a broad mix across company sizes. In factor terms, “Size” refers to the historical tendency of smaller firms to act differently from larger ones. A very low Size score suggests less sensitivity to small‑cap swings and more to how bigger companies fare. Yield and Low Volatility both sit in the “low” range, implying the portfolio doesn’t strongly emphasize high‑dividend or historically steadier stocks. Value, momentum, and quality all look neutral, close to market‑like. With only around 1.1 years of data, these factor readings are early signals rather than stable, long‑term tilts, but they do point to a growth‑leaning, larger‑company style.

Risk contribution Info

  • MicroStrategy Incorporated
    Weight: 6.27%
    17.4%
  • CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock
    Weight: 3.82%
    15.3%
  • T. ROWE PRICE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY FUND INC. T. ROWE PRICE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY FUND INC.
    Weight: 12.01%
    15.1%
  • Oracle Corporation
    Weight: 7.05%
    15.0%
  • Arista Networks
    Weight: 5.26%
    9.6%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 72.4%

Risk contribution highlights how much each holding drives total volatility, which can differ a lot from simple weights. MicroStrategy, at 6.27% of the portfolio, contributes about 17.39% of overall risk, nearly three times its weight. CoreWeave is 3.82% by weight but 15.34% of risk, more than four times its size, and the T. Rowe Price global tech fund combines a 12.01% weight with 15.07% of risk. Together, the top three positions account for 47.80% of portfolio risk. This shows how a few concentrated, more volatile growth‑oriented names and funds dominate the day‑to‑day swings even though the portfolio includes cash and many smaller positions. It’s a classic case where the “loudest instruments” in the orchestra set the overall sound.

Redundant positions Info

  • Vanguard Federal Money Market Fund Investor Shares
    Schwab Value Advantage Money Fund
    High correlation

The correlation data flags one strong relationship: the Schwab Value Advantage Money Fund and the Vanguard Federal Money Market Fund move almost identically. Correlation measures how similarly assets move, from -1 (opposite) to +1 (in lockstep). Highly correlated cash‑like funds won’t add much diversification benefit against each other; instead, they function more as interchangeable liquidity pools. That’s not inherently a problem, since the goal for money market funds is usually stability rather than diversification. It simply means that, when markets move, both these positions should behave very similarly. With limited history, correlation estimates can bounce around, but for short‑term cash vehicles this near‑one relationship is broadly what you would expect.

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 analysis compares this portfolio’s risk‑return mix to what could be achieved by just reweighting the existing holdings. The current portfolio shows a Sharpe ratio of 1.28, with about 28.70% return and 19.32% volatility. The Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk above a risk‑free rate; higher is better. The “optimal” mix of the same holdings reaches a Sharpe of 2.27 at lower volatility, and the minimum‑variance mix achieves even higher risk‑adjusted efficiency at very low risk. Being about 13.67 percentage points below the frontier means, based on this short 1.1‑year sample, the current weights have not maximized risk‑adjusted outcomes. It suggests the same ingredients could be combined differently to smooth the ride, though those conclusions are tentative given the limited data.

Dividends Info

  • FIDELITY TELECOM AND UTILITIES FUND FIDELITY TELECOM AND UTILITIES FUND 9.00%
  • Oracle Corporation 1.10%
  • T. ROWE PRICE QM U.S. SMALL-CAP GROWTH EQUITY FUND T. ROWE PRICE QM U.S. SMALL-CAP GROWTH EQUITY FUND 5.90%
  • Raytheon Technologies Corp 1.60%
  • Schwab Value Advantage Money Fund 3.80%
  • VANGUARD EXPLORER VALUE FUND INVESTOR SHARES 9.40%
  • Vanguard Federal Money Market Fund Investor Shares 3.90%
  • VANGUARD GROWTH AND INCOME FUND INVESTOR SHARES 10.00%
  • Waste Management Inc 1.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 3.11%

The portfolio’s overall dividend yield is about 3.11%, with certain funds showing especially high stated yields, such as the Vanguard growth and income and Explorer value funds, and the Fidelity telecom and utilities fund. Yield here measures how much income you receive annually relative to the investment value. A 3%‑ish portfolio yield can add a steady income component alongside price changes, though distributions from active funds can also reflect capital gains, not just dividends. Money market funds contribute with moderate yields that tend to move with short‑term interest rates. Over just 1.1 years, it’s hard to judge how stable these payout levels will be, but income clearly plays a supporting role next to capital appreciation in this setup.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • FIDELITY TELECOM AND UTILITIES FUND FIDELITY TELECOM AND UTILITIES FUND 0.68%
  • T. ROWE PRICE QM U.S. SMALL-CAP GROWTH EQUITY FUND T. ROWE PRICE QM U.S. SMALL-CAP GROWTH EQUITY FUND 0.80%
  • T. ROWE PRICE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY FUND INC. T. ROWE PRICE GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY FUND INC. 0.93%
  • VANGUARD EXPLORER VALUE FUND INVESTOR SHARES 0.54%
  • VANGUARD GROWTH AND INCOME FUND INVESTOR SHARES 0.39%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.23%

The weighted total expense ratio (TER) of around 0.23% is impressively low for a portfolio using several active mutual funds. TER is the annual fee charged by funds as a percentage of assets, quietly deducted in the background. Lower costs mean less performance “drag” each year, which compounds positively over time. Individual active funds in the mix charge higher fees, up to around 0.93%, but they make up only part of the whole, keeping the blended cost moderate. Compared with many actively managed portfolios, this fee level is a structural strength. Over decades, even a fraction of a percent can add up meaningfully, so having a low baseline cost puts less pressure on returns to overcome 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