High growth concentrated semiconductor tilt with strong US focus and aggressive risk profile

Report created on Apr 6, 2026

Risk 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

This portfolio is heavily concentrated in a handful of positions, with a big core in a broad US index ETF and a very large single-stock bet on Micron. Around two-thirds of the money sits in the S&P 500 fund plus Micron, with the rest in a semiconductor ETF, a tech ETF, and a few individual blue chips. That structure drives the “aggressive” label and the low diversification score. A setup like this lives or dies on a few key names and one main industry theme. Anyone running something similar should be very comfortable with big swings in value and with the idea that results will likely be far from “market average.”

Growth Info

Historically, the portfolio’s performance has been spectacular: turning $1,000 into about $17,183 over ten years, far ahead of both US and global markets. The compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 37.35% is more than double the US market’s 15.98%, but it came with a very deep max drawdown of about -41.5%. CAGR is like your average speed over a long road trip, while max drawdown shows the worst peak‑to‑trough drop. This history shows how concentrated, high-growth themes can crush benchmarks in the right decade but feel brutal in bad years. Past data looks amazing here, but it cannot be treated as a template for the next ten years.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses many “what if” paths based on historical volatility and correlations to estimate future ranges. Think of it as re‑playing market history thousands of slightly different ways to see where $1,000 might end up. The median outcome around $2,633 over 15 years translates to about 7.9% per year, with a wide band between roughly $1,006 and $7,459. This shows that even for a portfolio with a stellar past, future results could be much more modest and highly uncertain. The 72.9% chance of a positive outcome is encouraging, but the wide spread is a reminder that aggressive, concentrated portfolios can land in very different places by the end of a long horizon.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Everything here is in stocks, with no bonds or other defensive assets in the mix. That’s a pure growth stance: all the risk and all the return potential come from equity markets. Equity‑only portfolios tend to do very well over long horizons but can suffer deep and prolonged drawdowns, especially during recessions or liquidity shocks. Compared with a typical “balanced” allocation, this setup offers more upside but a much rougher ride. For someone who doesn’t need to tap the money for many years and can emotionally handle seeing big percentage swings, 100% stock exposure can make sense. For anyone with near‑term spending needs, the lack of stabilizing assets would generally be a key concern.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    61%
  • Financials
    11%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Telecommunications
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    4%
  • Health Care
    4%
  • Industrials
    4%
  • Consumer Staples
    2%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%
  • Basic Materials
    1%

Sector-wise, the portfolio is dominated by technology at about 61%, with smaller buckets in financials, energy, and a mix of other areas through the S&P 500 ETF. That tech-heavy stance explains both the huge historical upside and the aggressive risk score. Tech and semiconductors tend to be very sensitive to interest rates, economic cycles, and shifts in innovation sentiment, so their prices can swing much more than steadier “defensive” industries. The smaller exposures to financials and energy offer a little diversification but don’t really offset such a large tech core. In practice, this setup behaves more like a targeted bet on the digital and semiconductor economy than a broad cross‑section of global businesses.

Regions Info

  • North America
    90%
  • Europe Developed
    9%
  • Asia Developed
    1%

Geographically, exposure is overwhelmingly tilted toward North America, at around 90%, with only modest allocations to developed Europe and almost negligible Asia. That’s even more US‑focused than common global benchmarks, which usually give a much larger share to non‑US markets. Being heavily tied to one region and currency has pros and cons: it has been very rewarding over the past decade as US large‑cap growth led the world, but it also means country‑specific policy changes, regulation, or economic shocks can impact almost the entire portfolio at once. A more geographically mixed approach usually smooths out region‑specific risks, but it can also dilute the strong tailwinds that have supported US‑centric portfolios recently.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    69%
  • Large-cap
    20%
  • Mid-cap
    9%
  • Small-cap
    1%

Most of the exposure sits in mega‑cap and large‑cap stocks, with only small slices in mid‑ and small‑caps. Mega‑caps are the giants of the market; they tend to be more established and, in many cases, more resilient during stress than smaller names, though they can still be very volatile in sectors like tech. This tilt means the portfolio’s fate is heavily linked to a relatively small group of the largest, most influential companies, especially in US indices. Limited small‑cap exposure can reduce some idiosyncratic risk but also limits potential diversification benefits and the sometimes higher long‑term return potential that smaller, riskier companies historically have offered in certain periods.

True holdings Info

  • Micron Technology Inc
    23.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    Direct holding 23.21%
  • ASML Holding NV
    7.84%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    7.76%
    Part of fund(s):
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Direct holding 1.99%
  • American Express Company
    5.86%
  • Chevron Corp
    3.66%
  • Apple Inc
    3.66%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    2.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.35%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Top 10 total 59.66%

Looking through the ETFs, there’s meaningful hidden concentration in a few big tech and chip names. Micron alone is over 23% of the portfolio, with a small extra slice via ETFs, while NVIDIA shows up twice and totals almost 8%. Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, Amazon, and Alphabet all appear via the funds, creating a cluster in a similar growth‑tech ecosystem. Overlap means that when a handful of large tech-related names move together, the whole portfolio moves with them. This kind of concentration can be great when that theme is in favor but can drag everything down at once when sentiment turns, even if the number of line items looks diversified at first glance.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
High
Data availability: 100%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Low
Data availability: 100%

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 strong tilts toward momentum and quality, with lower exposure to size and low volatility. Momentum means the portfolio leans into stocks that have done well recently, which often helps in trending bull markets but can hurt sharply when leadership flips. Quality reflects companies with strong balance sheets and profitability, which can provide some resilience even within volatile sectors. Low size exposure indicates a bias toward larger firms, while low low‑volatility exposure means holdings are generally more jumpy than the broad market. Together, this profile points to a high‑octane, trend‑following growth style that tends to shine when markets reward strong recent winners but may see sharper pullbacks during abrupt rotations or risk‑off periods.

Risk contribution Info

  • Micron Technology Inc
    Weight: 23.21%
    39.7%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 43.90%
    27.8%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    Weight: 8.84%
    10.5%
  • ASML Holding NV
    Weight: 7.84%
    8.0%
  • American Express Company
    Weight: 5.86%
    4.9%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 90.9%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding actually drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ a lot from its weight. Micron is the standout: it’s about 23% of the capital but nearly 40% of the total risk, meaning its moves dominate the portfolio’s behavior. The S&P 500 ETF is the largest position by weight yet contributes a smaller share of risk than its size would suggest, acting as a relative stabilizer. The top three holdings together account for over 78% of risk, so this is effectively a concentrated bet with a broad‑market cushion around it. Adjusting position sizes is the main lever for anyone who’d want the portfolio’s risk to be more evenly spread.

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 risk‑return chart, the current portfolio sits below the efficient frontier, meaning it’s not making the best possible use of its own ingredients at this risk level. The Sharpe ratio, a measure of return per unit of volatility, is 1.01, while the optimal mix of the same holdings reaches about 1.42. That gap suggests that simply reweighting the existing positions—without adding anything new—could materially improve risk‑adjusted returns. The minimum‑variance version would cut risk but also lower expected return. The positive takeaway is that the building blocks are strong; better balancing between the concentrated bets and the broad ETF core could bring the portfolio closer to an efficient mix for the chosen risk appetite.

Dividends Info

  • ASML Holding NV 0.80%
  • American Express Company 0.80%
  • Chevron Corp 3.50%
  • Micron Technology Inc 0.10%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.30%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 0.82%

Income is clearly a secondary goal here. The overall dividend yield of about 0.82% is well below what broad equity markets often provide, reflecting a tilt toward growth‑oriented tech and semis. Chevron and the S&P 500 ETF offer the more meaningful yields, while Micron and the tech ETFs contribute very little income. For an investor focused on long‑term capital appreciation, a low yield is not a problem; funds can be reinvested to chase higher growth. But for anyone who expects regular cash flow from their portfolio, this setup wouldn’t naturally generate much in the way of steady dividends and would require selling shares to fund spending needs.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.05%

The cost picture is a real strength. The blended total expense ratio (TER) of about 0.05% is extremely low, thanks to heavy use of very cheap Vanguard index funds and only one moderately priced VanEck ETF. TER is the annual fee charged by funds as a percentage of invested assets, and keeping it low leaves more of the return in your pocket each year. Over long horizons, even small fee differences compound into meaningful dollar amounts. This portfolio is very well aligned with best practices on costs, and that’s an important tailwind for long‑term performance, especially given the already high‑risk, high‑return nature of the underlying holdings.

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