High growth portfolio with strong tech tilt and concentrated exposure to metals and miners

Report created on Apr 7, 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

The portfolio is almost entirely in equities, with 94% in stock-based ETFs and 6% in gold. Within that equity slice, there’s a heavy focus on growth and momentum themes, plus a big tilt toward technology and semiconductor companies, and a meaningful chunk in gold and silver miners. This means the portfolio is built to chase capital growth rather than steady income or capital preservation. That’s great for someone who can handle ups and downs, but it does mean bigger swings in value. A useful takeaway is that this structure fits a long-term, return-focused mindset more than a short-term, stability-focused one.

Growth Info

From mid-2018 to early 2026, $1,000 grew to about $4,231, which is very strong. The portfolio’s CAGR, or Compound Annual Growth Rate, was 21.28% per year, far ahead of both the US market and the global market. CAGR is like average speed on a long road trip — it smooths out the bumps. Max drawdown, the worst peak-to-trough fall, was about -34%, similar to the benchmarks, showing that extra return came without dramatically worse crashes. The catch is those strong gains were concentrated in around 34 trading days, which means missing a handful of big up days could have hurt results a lot.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses historical data and random simulations to estimate how $1,000 might grow over 15 years. Think of it as running the market thousands of different ways based on past volatility and returns. The median outcome lands around $2,586, with a wide “likely” range from roughly $1,777 to $3,974, and more extreme outcomes stretching lower and much higher. The average simulated annual return is 7.68%, with around a 72% chance of ending positive. That’s solid, but importantly, these are not promises. They’re rough weather forecasts built from past conditions, and actual future markets can behave very differently.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    94%
  • Other
    6%

Asset-class-wise, this is a very equity-heavy setup: 94% stocks and 6% in gold. That leans firmly into growth rather than defense. Equities are historically the main driver of long-term wealth, but they also bring the largest drawdowns in tough markets. The modest gold allocation can act as a partial diversifier or crisis hedge, but at 6%, it won’t fully offset big stock market declines. Relative to a more balanced multi-asset mix, this is closer to a high-equity “growth” profile. The key implication is that the portfolio is designed for long horizons and tolerance for volatility, not for someone relying on steady short-term withdrawals.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    44%
  • Basic Materials
    17%
  • Financials
    10%
  • Industrials
    6%
  • Telecommunications
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    4%
  • Health Care
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Consumer Staples
    1%
  • Energy
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector exposure is dominated by technology at 44%, with basic materials at 17%, and everything else spread thinly. That’s a much bigger tech tilt than broad market benchmarks and a much higher share in materials via gold and silver miners. Tech-led portfolios often benefit in environments with innovation, digital demand, and low or stable rates, but they can be hit hard when interest rates rise or when sentiment turns against growth names. Materials, especially miners, tend to be tied to commodity cycles and can be very volatile. The upside is strong growth potential; the tradeoff is more pronounced booms and busts than a broadly sector-balanced portfolio.

Regions Info

  • North America
    71%
  • Europe Developed
    11%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Latin America
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, about 71% of exposure sits in North America, with the rest spread across developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, and small slices of emerging markets and other regions. This is more US/North America-focused than truly global-market weights, which naturally boosts exposure to US tech and semiconductor leaders. That’s worked very well in recent years but also ties performance closely to one economic region and one currency. If US growth or valuations cool while other regions shine, this portfolio may not fully capture those opportunities. The benefit is familiarity and strong historic performance; the cost is less geographic diversification than a global market-weighted approach.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    47%
  • Large-cap
    29%
  • Mid-cap
    12%
  • Small-cap
    4%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Market cap exposure is skewed toward the largest companies: around 47% mega-cap and 29% large-cap, with relatively modest mid- and small-cap exposure. This is typical for growth and tech-heavy portfolios, where the dominant players are massive firms. Large companies tend to be more stable, better capitalized, and widely followed, which can reduce certain risks but also means less pure “small-cap” upside. The relatively low small- and micro-cap slice suggests fewer returns will come from early-stage or niche companies. Broadly, this tilt supports liquidity and stability of holdings, while limiting the classic small-cap risk/return profile. It’s a growth play mostly via big established names.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    9.16%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Apple Inc
    5.44%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Microsoft Corporation
    3.82%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Broadcom Inc
    3.03%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
    1.74%
    Part of fund(s):
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Newmont Goldcorp Corp
    1.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF
    • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.41%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Agnico Eagle Mines Limited
    1.27%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF
    • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.13%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
  • Top 10 total 30.13%

Looking through the ETFs, there’s notable concentration in a handful of mega-cap names. NVIDIA alone adds up to about 9% of total exposure, with Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, and TSMC also prominent. These show up repeatedly across the growth, tech, and semiconductor funds, creating “hidden overlap,” where different ETFs hold the same underlying stocks. That can quietly raise dependence on a small group of companies, even though the fund list looks diversified. It’s not inherently bad — these have been strong performers — but it does mean portfolio results are especially tied to the fortunes of a few large tech-related names.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Low
Data availability: 80%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 94%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 80%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 80%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
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 is fairly balanced overall, with size, momentum, quality, and low volatility all near neutral, meaning roughly market-like behavior on those fronts. The two notable tilts are low value and low yield — the portfolio leans away from cheaper, higher-dividend stocks and toward growthier, less income-focused names. Factors are like underlying “traits” that explain returns; here, the traits skew toward growth and reinvestment rather than bargains and cash payouts. In practice, that often does well in periods when growth is rewarded and interest rates are favorable but can lag when markets rotate into value, dividend, or more defensive styles.

Risk contribution Info

  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    Weight: 30.00%
    30.4%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    Weight: 15.00%
    21.7%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 15.00%
    17.2%
  • Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF
    Weight: 20.00%
    14.9%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF
    Weight: 7.00%
    7.9%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 91.9%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. The semiconductor ETF is only 15% of the portfolio but contributes about 22% of risk, with a risk/weight ratio of 1.44 — meaning it’s much more volatile than average. The two US growth/tech funds together, plus semis, drive roughly 69% of total risk. That concentration is fine if high-growth tech and chips are exactly where risk is intended, but it’s worth being aware that swings in these areas will dominate the experience far more than the gold-related or international momentum pieces.

Redundant positions Info

  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF
    Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Correlation measures how often assets move together. The two US growth/tech funds — the Schwab large-cap growth ETF and the Vanguard tech ETF — move almost identically. Highly correlated assets limit diversification because when one drops, the other tends to drop too. Here, even though there are multiple funds, those two effectively behave like a single large tech-growth position split across two wrappers. This doesn’t make them “bad,” but it means the mental picture of diversification should treat them as one big risk grouping rather than two separate, offsetting pieces of the puzzle.

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 risk–return chart shows the portfolio sitting below the efficient frontier by about 5.6 percentage points at its current risk level. The efficient frontier represents the best possible return for each risk level using just these existing holdings but in different weights. Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above the risk-free rate, is 0.83 now versus 1.33 for the optimal mix and 1.18 for the minimum-variance mix. That suggests there’s room to improve risk-adjusted returns simply by reweighting the current ETFs, without adding anything new, if the goal is to make the same holdings work more efficiently together.

Dividends Info

  • Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF 3.70%
  • iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF 0.80%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.40%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF 1.70%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.30%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.10%

The portfolio’s total dividend yield is about 1.10%, which is quite low compared with income-focused strategies and even many broad market funds. Most of the yield comes from the international momentum ETF and the metals miners; the core US growth and tech funds pay very little. Dividends are just one part of total return, but for investors seeking regular cash flow, this setup won’t generate much. Instead, it’s geared toward price appreciation — you’d typically be relying on selling shares when needed rather than living off dividend income alone, especially in retirement or for near-term spending.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • SPDR Gold Mini Shares 0.10%
  • Invesco S&P International Developed Momentum ETF 0.25%
  • iShares MSCI Global Gold Miners ETF 0.39%
  • Schwab U.S. Large-Cap Growth ETF 0.04%
  • iShares MSCI Global Silver and Metals Miners ETF 0.39%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.19%

Costs are a real strength here. The weighted TER, or Total Expense Ratio, is about 0.19%, which is impressively low for a portfolio with thematic and sector ETFs like semiconductors and precious metals miners. TER is the annual fee charged by funds, and small differences compound over time. Being in this range keeps more of the return in your pocket, especially over long horizons. This aligns well with best practices: using mostly low-cost vehicles and keeping average expenses below many actively managed alternatives. From a cost perspective, the structure is doing exactly what it should to support long-run performance.

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