Growth focused equity portfolio with strong technology tilt and historically higher returns with deeper drawdowns
Report created on May 2, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 23.78% -
SO Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
SOXQ - US46138G6153 22.26% -
VF Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor
VFMO - US9219355081 19.53% -
FR Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
FRDM - US02072L6074 18.38% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 16.05%
This portfolio is built entirely from five equity ETFs, with no bonds or cash buffer. Around two thirds of the weight sits in US large‑cap growth and momentum themes, led by a broad Nasdaq 100 fund and a concentrated semiconductor ETF. The rest is split between a US momentum factor ETF, a freedom‑screened emerging markets fund, and a US dividend equity ETF. This creates a clear growth orientation with a modest income layer on top. A structure like this can move faster than a broad market mix, both up and down, because every building block is equity risk. The mix also blends rule‑based factor funds with plain index tracking, which can behave differently across market cycles.
Growth
From mid‑2021 to April 2026, a $1,000 hypothetical investment grew to about $2,214, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 17.73%. CAGR is the “average speed” of growth per year, smoothing out the bumps along the way. Over the same period, the US market returned about 13.00% annually and the global market 10.46%, so this portfolio outpaced both benchmarks. The trade‑off was a deeper maximum drawdown of roughly ‑30%, versus around ‑24% and ‑26% for the benchmarks. That drawdown lasted almost two years from peak to full recovery. Only 21 trading days produced 90% of total gains, showing that missing just a handful of strong days would have changed the picture a lot.
Projection
The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which is like running 1,000 alternate history paths based on how the portfolio behaved in the past. Each path shakes returns and volatility in a different order to see a spread of possible futures. In these simulations, $1,000 over 15 years had a median outcome of about $2,744, with most paths landing between roughly $1,796 and $4,185. The average annual return across all paths was 8.21%, noticeably lower than the recent historical CAGR, which reflects the model baking in the impact of volatility and bad sequences. As always, this is not a forecast; it’s a way of visualizing the range of possible long‑term outcomes, not a promise.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio sits in stocks, with 0% allocated to bonds, cash, or alternative assets. That makes the risk/return profile very tied to equity markets: when stocks do well, there’s no drag from safer assets, but during equity sell‑offs there’s nothing in the mix that historically tends to cushion the fall. Many diversified benchmarks include sizable bond or cash components, especially as risk is dialed down; by comparison, this portfolio is more aggressive. One upside of a single asset class is simplicity: performance is easier to understand because everything is exposed to similar broad drivers like earnings growth, interest rates, and overall risk appetite.
Sectors
- Technology 50%
- Health Care 9%
- Industrials 7%
- Financials 7%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Telecommunications 7%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Utilities 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is heavily tilted toward technology at 50%, with the rest spread across health care, industrials, financials, consumer areas, telecom, energy, materials, utilities, and real estate. A 50% tech weight is much higher than broad global equity benchmarks, where tech is large but not half of the total. This aligns with the inclusion of the Nasdaq 100 and a dedicated semiconductor ETF, which both lean into tech and related industries. Tech‑heavy portfolios often benefit strongly during innovation and growth phases but can swing more sharply when interest rates rise or when investors rotate toward more defensive or value‑oriented sectors. The non‑tech slice still offers some diversification, but tech clearly drives the story here.
Regions
- North America 78%
- Asia Developed 9%
- Latin America 5%
- Asia Emerging 2%
- Europe Emerging 2%
- Europe Developed 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
Geographically, about 78% of the portfolio is in North America, with the rest spread across Asia (developed and emerging), Latin America, Europe (developed and emerging), and a small slice in Africa/Middle East. This US‑heavy profile is common in many equity portfolios, especially those built from US‑listed ETFs, and it aligns reasonably with the US share of global market capitalization, though it still represents a home‑country tilt. Exposure to emerging markets is modest but present, mainly via the freedom‑screened EM ETF, which focuses on specific countries rather than broad coverage. This mix means portfolio outcomes are heavily linked to US economic and policy trends, while still capturing some growth and political risk from other regions.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 42%
- Mega-cap 29%
- Mid-cap 18%
- Small-cap 5%
- Micro-cap 5%
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans strongly toward larger companies: roughly 71% in mega‑ and large‑caps combined, 18% in mid‑caps, and only 10% in small and micro‑caps. Large and mega‑caps tend to be more established businesses with deeper capital markets access and more analyst coverage, which can make their prices somewhat more stable than smaller peers. The smaller‑cap slice adds a bit of extra growth and idiosyncratic risk, as these companies can move more sharply on news. Compared with many broad equity indices, this size breakdown is broadly aligned with typical market weights, so there’s no extreme small‑cap or mega‑cap concentration beyond what the sector and thematic tilts already introduce.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.62%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.36%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor
-
SS Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 1.94%
Part of fund(s):- Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.91%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor
-
TX Texas Instruments Incorporated 1.84%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 1.65%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
TS Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 1.54%
Part of fund(s):- Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
-
MR Marvell Technology Group Ltd 1.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 1.33%
Part of fund(s):- Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 1.33%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Top 10 total 20.96%
Looking through ETF top‑10 holdings, the largest underlying names include NVIDIA, Broadcom, Samsung Electronics, Micron, Texas Instruments, Apple, TSMC, Marvell, SK Hynix, and Microsoft. Many of these appear in multiple ETFs, especially those tied to technology and semiconductors, which creates overlapping exposure. For example, Nvidia’s total look‑through weight of around 4.6% and Broadcom’s 3.4% likely come from more than one fund. Because this analysis only covers ETF top‑10 positions, real overlap is probably somewhat higher. Hidden concentration like this means that a handful of big tech and chip names can influence returns more than the simple five‑ETF lineup might suggest, particularly during sector booms or corrections.
Factors
Factor exposure shows a notable tilt toward momentum at 67%, while value, size, quality, and yield all sit in the neutral band and low volatility is mildly underweighted at 34%. Momentum measures how much the portfolio holds stocks that have been recent winners; research finds these can keep outperforming for stretches, but they also tend to get hit harder when trends reverse suddenly. A low exposure to the low‑volatility factor means the holdings are, on average, a bit more “excitable” than the broad market, which fits with growth, tech, and semiconductor themes. The neutral readings elsewhere suggest the portfolio is not strongly leaning into traditional value, defensive quality, or high‑income characteristics beyond the dedicated dividend ETF.
Risk contribution
-
Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF
Weight: 22.26% 35.8% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 23.78% 23.7% -
Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor
Weight: 19.53% 18.0% -
Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF
Weight: 18.38% 14.6% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 16.05% 7.8%
Risk contribution looks at how much each ETF adds to overall ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. The semiconductor ETF is 22.26% of the portfolio but contributes 35.83% of total risk, giving it a risk‑to‑weight ratio of 1.61. That means it punches well above its size in driving volatility. By contrast, the dividend equity ETF is 16.05% of the weight but only 7.83% of the risk, acting as a stabilizer with a ratio below 1. The top three holdings together contribute about 78% of total risk, even though they’re roughly two thirds of the capital. This highlights that risk is quite concentrated in a small number of growth‑oriented, more volatile ETFs.
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 vs. return chart shows the current portfolio with a Sharpe ratio of 0.69, compared to 0.89 for the optimal portfolio and 0.66 for the minimum‑variance option. The Sharpe ratio measures risk‑adjusted return: how much excess return (over a 4% risk‑free rate) the portfolio earns per unit of volatility. The current mix sits about 1.26 percentage points below the efficient frontier at its risk level, meaning there are combinations of these same five ETFs that would historically have delivered slightly better returns for the same volatility. It’s already reasonably efficient and not far from the frontier, but the optimization math suggests that reweighting among the existing holdings could potentially tighten the tradeoff between risk and reward.
Dividends
- Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF 1.80%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.30%
- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF 0.30%
- Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor 0.70%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.18%
The overall dividend yield is about 1.18%, which is lower than many broad equity income benchmarks but in line with a growth‑oriented profile. The Schwab US Dividend Equity ETF stands out with a yield around 3.3%, acting as the main income engine, while the Nasdaq 100, momentum, semiconductor, and emerging markets funds all have yields below 2%. Dividends matter because they contribute a steady component of total return, especially in sideways markets, and can be reinvested over time. Here, though, capital appreciation has clearly been the main driver historically, and the dividend slice mainly adds a modest income layer and some stability rather than turning the portfolio into an income‑focused strategy.
Ongoing product costs
- Freedom 100 Emerging Markets ETF 0.49%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Invesco PHLX Semiconductor ETF 0.19%
- Vanguard U.S. Momentum Factor 0.13%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.20%
Total ongoing fund costs (TER) come to roughly 0.20% per year, which is impressively low for a portfolio that includes factor strategies, a sector ETF, and a niche emerging markets fund. For context, TER is like a small annual membership fee taken by the funds before returns reach you. The cheapest holding is the US dividend ETF at 0.06%, while the highest is the freedom‑screened emerging markets ETF at 0.49%, reflecting the extra work of its specialized approach. Keeping average costs this low is a meaningful positive: small percentage differences compound over long periods, so an efficient fee structure like this helps more of the portfolio’s gross performance show up in net results.
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