Growth tilted stock portfolio with strong US focus and meaningful exposure to large technology companies
Report created on May 6, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VU Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
VUG - US9229087369 75.00% -
VT Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
VTV - US9229087443 15.00% -
EW iShares MSCI Australia ETF
EWA - US4642861037 10.00%
This portfolio is very straightforward: three equity ETFs and nothing else, with 100% in stocks. The core is a large growth index ETF at 75%, complemented by a 15% value index ETF and a 10% allocation to Australian equities. This gives a clear tilt toward growth companies, moderated slightly by the smaller value sleeve and a modest international position. A concentrated structure like this is easy to follow and understand, which helps when tracking performance and behavior over time. The flip side is that, with only three holdings, most outcomes are driven by just a few underlying markets and styles, so the portfolio’s fate is closely tied to how those specific chunks of the equity universe perform.
Growth
Over the period from 2016 to 2026, $1,000 grew to about $4,508, implying a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.34%. CAGR is like your long‑term average speed on a road trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. This return beat both the US market (about 15.14% per year) and the global market (about 12.52% per year), which is a strong showing. The max drawdown was roughly -33%, similar to the benchmarks, showing that the downside in big shocks was in line with broader markets. Only 35 days made up 90% of returns, highlighting how a relatively small number of strong days had a big impact on the final outcome.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses the portfolio’s past behavior to simulate many possible future paths. Think of it as running 1,000 “what if” scenarios, each jittered by random ups and downs consistent with historical volatility. After 15 years, the median outcome grows $1,000 to about $2,668, with a wide but understandable range from roughly $963 (p5) to $7,984 (p95). The average simulated annual return is 8.19%, and about 72% of simulations end positive. These numbers show how results can vary a lot even with the same strategy. As always, this is a statistical picture based on history, not a guarantee of any specific future outcome.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All assets here are equities, with 0% in bonds, cash, or alternatives. That creates a very “all‑in stocks” profile: high growth potential but also high sensitivity to equity market swings. Asset classes are broad buckets like stocks, bonds, and real estate; mixing them can smooth overall ups and downs because they often respond differently to economic news. Compared to many diversified multi‑asset mixes, this portfolio sits at the higher‑risk, higher‑return end simply because there is no built‑in cushion from bonds or cash. The benefit is full participation in equity rallies, while the trade‑off is feeling the full force of stock downturns without another asset class to offset the impact.
Sectors
- Technology 41%
- Telecommunications 13%
- Financials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Health Care 7%
- Industrials 6%
- Basic Materials 3%
- Consumer Staples 3%
- Energy 2%
- Real Estate 2%
- Utilities 1%
Sector-wise, the portfolio is clearly dominated by technology at 41%, with telecommunications and financials each in the low‑teens, and the rest spread more thinly across consumer, health care, industrials, and smaller slices. This is more tech‑heavy than many broad global benchmarks, which typically have a lower tech weight. Sector allocation matters because different areas of the economy respond differently to interest rates, regulation, and growth trends. Tech‑heavy portfolios often do very well when innovation and growth are rewarded, but can be more volatile when interest rates rise or when markets rotate toward more defensive, cash‑generating areas. The remaining sectors still provide some balance, but tech trends will be a key driver.
Regions
- North America 90%
- Australasia 10%
Geographically, about 90% of the portfolio is in North America and 10% in Australasia, with a specific tilt to Australia through the dedicated ETF. This is more US‑centric than many global indices, where the US usually sits closer to 60% of total market value. Geographic exposure matters because economic cycles, currencies, and policy decisions differ by region. A strong US focus has historically been beneficial in the last decade, as US equities outperformed many other markets. However, it also means portfolio outcomes are closely tied to the US economy and dollar. The 10% Australasia slice adds some diversification but is relatively small compared with the overall North American dominance.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 60%
- Large-cap 27%
- Mid-cap 12%
By market capitalization, 60% of the portfolio is in mega‑caps, 27% in large‑caps, and 12% in mid‑caps. Market cap is simply the total value of a company’s shares, and it often correlates with stability and maturity. A mega‑cap tilt means the portfolio leans heavily into very large, established businesses that dominate major indices. This typically results in behavior that’s more aligned with headline stock benchmarks and can be less volatile than a portfolio packed with smaller companies. The mid‑cap exposure adds a bit of extra growth potential and idiosyncratic behavior, but overall, the structure is firmly anchored in the biggest names, which helps explain the relatively benchmark‑like risk profile seen in the historical drawdown.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 9.98%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc 9.24%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 6.82%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 4.16%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.44%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.30%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 3.29%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 3.11%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.60%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
-
LL Eli Lilly and Company 1.94%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
- Top 10 total 47.88%
Looking through the ETFs, there is notable concentration in a handful of mega‑cap growth names. NVIDIA, Apple, and Microsoft alone make up more than 26% of the look‑through exposure covered, with Alphabet, Amazon, Broadcom, Meta, Tesla, and Eli Lilly also sizable. These companies appear through multiple funds, creating “hidden” overlap even though there are only three ETFs at the surface level. This overlap is important because it means portfolio performance is especially sensitive to this small group of large, growth‑oriented firms. Since only the top‑10 ETF holdings are used, actual overlap may be somewhat higher, but even this partial view already shows that a few giants have an outsized influence on the overall behavior.
Factors
Factor exposure is mostly close to neutral, with a mild tilt away from value and size. Factors are like underlying “personality traits” of stocks that research links to long‑term returns: value, size, momentum, quality, low volatility, and yield. Here, value at 38% and size at 40% both sit in the “low” range, suggesting a preference for growthier, larger companies rather than cheaper or smaller ones. Momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility cluster around neutral, implying no strong lean toward recent winners, very stable companies, or high dividends. Overall, the main takeaway is a gentle growth and large‑cap bias rather than an aggressive bet on any single factor pattern.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 75.00% 80.3% -
Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 15.00% 10.6% -
iShares MSCI Australia ETF
Weight: 10.00% 9.2%
Risk contribution shows how much each ETF drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs. The growth ETF, at 75% weight, contributes about 80% of the total risk, slightly more than its share by weight. The value ETF, at 15% weight, contributes around 11% of risk, and the Australia ETF, at 10%, contributes roughly 9%. This indicates that risk is reasonably aligned with position size, with no small holding unexpectedly dominating volatility. Still, because the growth ETF is so large, its behavior effectively sets the tone for the whole portfolio. This is typical for concentrated structures: one primary holding often acts as the main “engine” of both returns and risk.
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 efficient frontier chart, the current mix sits on or very close to the frontier, meaning that for its level of risk, the expected return is already efficient using the current set of holdings. The Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above the risk‑free rate, is 0.65 for the current portfolio versus 0.83 for the maximum‑Sharpe mix and 0.73 for the minimum-variance mix. This indicates there are theoretical weightings of the same three ETFs that could improve risk‑adjusted returns slightly, but the existing allocation is already in a solid zone. In practice, that suggests the chosen weights strike a broadly effective balance between risk and reward.
Dividends
- iShares MSCI Australia ETF 2.90%
- Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares 1.90%
- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.40%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.88%
The overall dividend yield is about 0.88%, which is modest compared with many income‑focused strategies. Dividend yield is the cash paid out by holdings each year as a percentage of their price. Here, the low yield reflects the dominance of growth‑oriented US equities, where many companies retain earnings to reinvest rather than distribute them. The Australia ETF and the value ETF contribute higher yields (around 2.90% and 1.90%, respectively), offering some income stream, but they are smaller slices of the total. In this structure, dividends are an extra component of total return rather than the main driver, with capital growth playing the leading role.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares MSCI Australia ETF 0.50%
- Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
- Vanguard Growth Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.09%
Total portfolio costs, measured by the weighted average Total Expense Ratio (TER), sit around 0.09%, which is impressively low. TER is the annual fee charged by funds to cover their operating costs, quietly subtracted from returns each year. Low costs are important because they compound over time: even small fee differences can add up significantly across decades. The two large Vanguard ETFs at 0.04% keep the overall cost base down, while the Australia ETF is more expensive at 0.50% but represents only 10% of the portfolio. Overall, this fee structure aligns well with best practices for long‑term investing, leaving more of the portfolio’s gross return in place.
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