Growth focused US equity portfolio with strong tech tilt and efficient risk adjusted performance
Report created on May 9, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 60.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 40.00%
This portfolio is extremely simple: two US equity ETFs, with 60% in a broad S&P 500 fund and 40% in a Nasdaq 100 fund. That means everything is in large US companies, with a clear tilt toward growth and technology from the Nasdaq sleeve. A concentrated two‑fund setup is easy to understand and monitor, but naturally limits diversification compared with mixes that spread across more regions or asset types. The structure funnels most outcomes through how large US growth companies behave. This simplicity can make the portfolio’s drivers very transparent: when big US stocks and tech do well, the portfolio is likely to do well; when they struggle, there are few other offsets.
Growth
Over the period from late 2020 to May 2026, $1,000 grew to about $2,370, giving a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.82%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths out bumps to show long‑run pace. This beat both the US market (15.77%) and global market (13.65%). The flip side is a max drawdown of -28.52%, meaning at one point the portfolio was almost 29% below its peak. That’s a bit deeper than the US benchmark’s worst drop. Just 27 days made up 90% of returns, showing that missing a few strong days could have changed the story a lot.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses thousands of simulated paths, based on historical risk and return, to estimate a range of possible 15‑year outcomes. It’s like running the same movie with slightly different weather each time to see how it might end. The median outcome shows $1,000 growing to about $2,739, or 7.87% annualized across simulations, with a wide possible range from roughly $1,012 to $7,497. Around 73% of simulations end with a positive return. These numbers are not forecasts or guarantees; they simply show what could happen if the future rhymes with the past in terms of volatility and average returns.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio is in stocks, with 0% in bonds, cash equivalents, or alternative assets. That creates a pure equity profile: higher potential long‑term growth, but also more pronounced ups and downs. Compared with a more mixed asset allocation that includes bonds or cash, this setup leans firmly into market risk. This aligns with the “Growth Investors” risk classification and a 5/7 risk score, which reflects a willingness to accept volatility for higher return potential. The trade‑off is that during broad equity downturns, there’s little built‑in cushioning from more defensive asset classes to soften the impact.
Sectors
- Technology 42%
- Telecommunications 12%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Financials 7%
- Health Care 7%
- Industrials 6%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is dominated by technology at 42%, with telecommunications at 12% and consumer discretionary at 11%. The remaining sectors — financials, health care, industrials, consumer staples, energy, utilities, materials, and real estate — are present but smaller. Relative to a broad global benchmark, this is a clear tech and growth tilt. That kind of mix tends to benefit when innovation‑driven companies and digital platforms lead markets, but it can be more sensitive when interest rates rise or when investors rotate toward more cyclical or defensive areas. The spread across other sectors still provides some cushioning, though tech clearly sets the tone.
Regions
- North America 99%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, the portfolio is almost entirely US‑based, with 99% in North America and about 1% in developed Europe. That means results are heavily tied to the US economy, US corporate earnings, and the US dollar. This is more concentrated than a typical global equity benchmark, where non‑US markets make up a large share of total value. The strong historic performance of the US over the last decade has made such tilts look attractive, but it also means less exposure to different economic cycles, policy regimes, and currencies. The low diversification score (2/5) mainly reflects this geographic narrowness.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 49%
- Large-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 15%
Market cap exposure is tilted strongly toward the largest companies: 49% in mega‑caps, 35% in large‑caps, and 15% in mid‑caps. There’s effectively no small‑cap exposure. Mega‑caps are the household names that dominate indices and often have more stable business models and financing access, which can dampen some company‑specific risk. However, heavy reliance on a handful of huge firms can create concentration in the biggest index constituents. With less exposure to smaller companies, the portfolio participates less in potential small‑cap rallies, but also avoids the typically higher volatility and business risk that smaller firms often carry.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.84%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 6.87%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 5.06%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 4.21%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.35%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.97%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.88%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.57%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.46%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.37%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Top 10 total 39.57%
Looking through to the ETFs’ top holdings, a small group of companies accounts for a meaningful slice of the portfolio: NVIDIA (7.84%), Apple (6.87%), Microsoft (5.06%), Amazon (4.21%), both Alphabet share classes (over 6% combined), Broadcom, Meta, Tesla, and Micron. Many of these appear in both ETFs, so overlap creates “hidden” concentration even though there are only two funds. The coverage here is only the top 10 ETF holdings, so total overlap is likely higher. This shows that despite owning hundreds of underlying stocks, portfolio behavior is heavily influenced by the performance of a dozen giant growth and tech names.
Factors
Factor exposure is fairly balanced overall, with most factors in the neutral band. Factor investing looks at traits like value, size, or momentum that research links to returns — like different “flavors” of risk. Value and size both show mildly low exposure (39%), meaning a slight tilt away from cheaper, smaller stocks and toward larger, more growth‑oriented names. Momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility sit near neutral, implying a market‑like profile on those dimensions. The key takeaway is a mild bias toward big, growthy companies without extreme tilts in other factors, so performance may track broad markets but with extra sensitivity to large growth cycles.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 60.00% 53.0% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 40.00% 47.0%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. Here, the S&P 500 ETF is 60% of the portfolio but contributes about 53% of risk, while the Nasdaq 100 ETF is 40% of the weight yet nearly 47% of the risk. Because the Nasdaq fund is more volatile, each dollar there “works harder” in terms of risk, as shown by its higher risk/weight ratio (1.17 vs 0.88). This means that even though the Nasdaq slice is smaller, it punches close to its weight in driving overall volatility and return swings.
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 suggests this portfolio is already on or very close to the optimal risk/return mix for its two holdings. The Sharpe ratio — a measure of return per unit of risk, using a 4% risk‑free rate — is 0.72 for the current allocation, while the maximum achievable Sharpe with these two funds is 0.92 at slightly lower risk and return. Since the optimal and minimum‑variance portfolios coincide here, the frontier is relatively flat around that point. The key insight is that, given these specific ETFs, the existing weights are broadly efficient, even if small tweaks could mathematically improve risk‑adjusted returns.
Dividends
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.82%
The portfolio’s overall dividend yield is modest at 0.82%, blending the S&P 500 ETF’s 1.10% yield with the Nasdaq 100 ETF’s 0.40%. Dividend yield represents cash income as a percentage of the investment each year, before price changes. This level is typical for a growth‑oriented US equity mix, where many companies reinvest profits rather than pay them out. As a result, most of the portfolio’s return historically has come from price appreciation rather than income. For investors tracking total return, that’s neither good nor bad on its own — it simply reflects a tilt toward companies prioritizing expansion over steady cash payouts.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.08%
Total ongoing fund costs, measured by the Total Expense Ratio (TER), sit around 0.08% per year — 0.03% for the S&P 500 ETF and 0.15% for the Nasdaq 100 ETF. TER is like a small annual service fee taken directly from fund assets. These levels are impressively low compared with many actively managed funds and are consistent with low‑cost index investing. Over long periods, small fee differences can compound into meaningful amounts, so having costs this low supports better net returns. In this portfolio, fees are not a major drag; most performance will be driven by market behavior rather than expenses.
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