This portfolio has only about 1.1 years of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

Strongly tech tilted US heavy growth portfolio with high recent returns and concentrated risk

Report created on May 4, 2026

Risk profile Info

6/7
Aggressive
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is fully invested in stocks, mixing broad low-cost index funds with a cluster of individual growth names. Around half sits in diversified US index funds, while the rest tilts into technology-focused funds and single stocks, including several semiconductor and AI-related companies. This creates a “core and satellite” structure: a diversified core plus targeted higher-risk positions around it. That structure matters because the core can anchor overall behavior, while satellites can meaningfully amplify both gains and losses. Here, the satellites are large enough and focused enough that they materially shape how the portfolio moves day to day, making it more aggressive than a plain index-only blend despite the sizable index allocations.

Growth Info

Over the roughly 1.1-year period available, $1,000 growing to about $1,968 is exceptionally strong. The implied Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 87.68% far exceeds both the US and global market benchmarks, which were in the high‑20% range. At the same time, the portfolio’s maximum drawdown of about -14% was only modestly deeper than the benchmarks’ roughly -12%. This combination of high return with only slightly higher drawdown is unusual and heavily influenced by a powerful tech/AI upswing. With such a short history and a tech-tilted mix, it’s risky to treat this as a stable long-term pattern rather than a favorable snapshot of a hot period.

Projection Info

The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which basically “re-rolls the dice” on historical returns 1,000 times to see a wide range of possible future outcomes. For a $1,000 starting point over 15 years, the median path ends near $2,899, with most simulated outcomes between roughly $1,863 and $4,280. The extreme 5–95% range is very wide, running from nearly flat to more than eight times the starting amount, which shows how uncertain long-run equity results can be. Because these simulations lean heavily on just over a year of unusually strong returns, they are especially fragile here, and shouldn’t be read as a forecast or promise of anything.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

All of the portfolio is in equities, with no explicit exposure to bonds, cash-like instruments, or alternative assets. Asset classes are broad buckets like stocks, bonds, and real estate, and mixing them typically smooths the ride because they often react differently to economic shifts. A 100% stock allocation usually means more sensitivity to market swings and economic news, both on the upside and downside. Historically, stocks have offered higher return potential than bonds but with larger and more frequent drawdowns. With such a short track record plus this all-equity structure, the observed strong recent performance sits on top of a risk profile that can be quite bumpy in tougher market periods.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    42%
  • Telecommunications
    17%
  • Financials
    8%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Industrials
    6%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Energy
    2%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector-wise, the portfolio is clearly dominated by technology and related areas, which together make up about 42% of the exposure, well above broad-market norms. Other sectors like telecommunications, financials, health care, and industrials appear, but at much smaller weights, and defensive areas such as utilities and consumer staples are only minor slices. Sector allocation matters because different parts of the economy respond differently to rates, inflation, and growth trends. Heavy tech exposure often means more sensitivity to innovation cycles and interest-rate expectations. This tilt has helped during the recent tech-led surge captured in the short history, but it also means performance can swing more sharply if conditions turn against high-growth, rate-sensitive businesses.

Regions Info

  • North America
    87%
  • Europe Developed
    8%
  • Japan
    2%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%
  • Asia Developed
    1%

Geographically, about 87% of the portfolio is tied to North America, with only modest exposure to Europe, Japan, and other regions. Compared with global equity benchmarks, which spread more evenly across many countries, this is a strong home-country tilt. Geography is important because different markets reflect different currencies, regulations, and economic drivers. A heavy focus on one region concentrates outcomes around that region’s economic health and policy decisions. The strong recent returns seen here have coincided with a particularly good stretch for US large-cap growth and tech. Over longer horizons, regional leadership tends to rotate, so this kind of concentration can feel very different if the US or its tech-heavy segment cools relative to the rest of the world.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    56%
  • Large-cap
    28%
  • Mid-cap
    13%
  • Small-cap
    2%

By market capitalization, the portfolio leans heavily toward mega-cap and large-cap companies, together around 84%, with smaller positions in mid- and small-caps. Market cap just measures company size by stock market value, and size affects behavior: big companies often move more with broad indexes, while smaller ones can be more volatile and idiosyncratic. Here, tiny small-cap exposure means less influence from those more volatile names, while mega-caps—especially in tech—likely drive a large share of daily moves. This size mix aligns fairly closely with common broad-market indexes, which are also dominated by the largest companies, but the specific set of individual holdings still makes the portfolio more concentrated in certain growth themes than a pure index.

True holdings Info

  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    7.87%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 7.61%
  • Amazon.com Inc
    4.35%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 4.02%
  • Micron Technology Inc
    4.24%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.05%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 3.49%
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    3.75%
  • Nebius Group N.V.
    3.25%
  • Intuitive Surgical Inc
    1.85%
  • CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock
    1.74%
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.72%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 1.37%
  • Apple Inc
    0.46%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
  • Top 10 total 33.28%

Looking through the funds into underlying holdings, several names repeat across direct stock positions and the index/ETF layers. Alphabet, Amazon, NVIDIA, and Microsoft all appear both directly and via funds, pushing their total exposures above the direct weights alone. Overlap matters because it creates hidden concentration: owning the same company in multiple wrappers doesn’t diversify that company’s specific risks. Coverage here is only about a third of the portfolio, and ETF data reflects only top-10 holdings, so overlap is likely understated. Even with that limitation, the stacked positions in a small group of large tech and AI-related firms suggest that a handful of companies have an outsized influence on how the overall portfolio behaves.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Low
Data availability: 38%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 38%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 38%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 31%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 85%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Low
Data availability: 36%

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 a very strong tilt toward quality and a very low tilt toward size. Factors are like investing “ingredients” such as value, momentum, or quality that research links to long-term return patterns. A very high quality score suggests emphasis on companies with strong profitability, balance sheets, or earnings stability, which can sometimes cushion drawdowns relative to lower-quality peers. The very low size score indicates a bias toward larger companies rather than smaller ones, reinforcing the market-cap observations. There’s also a high momentum tilt, meaning the holdings have recently been strong performers. In fast-rising markets like the one captured in this short sample, momentum and quality can work together to amplify gains, but momentum can also magnify reversals when trends break.

Risk contribution Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 25.68%
    17.9%
  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund
    Weight: 19.32%
    13.7%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio
    Weight: 8.04%
    12.2%
  • Micron Technology Inc
    Weight: 4.24%
    8.6%
  • Nebius Group N.V.
    Weight: 3.25%
    8.1%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 60.5%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ a lot from simple weights. Here, the top three positions by weight account for about 44% of total portfolio risk, even though they make up a bit more than half the portfolio. More striking are some smaller positions: Nebius and Micron each contribute roughly twice or more their share of risk relative to their weights, and the semiconductor fund also punches above its size. That pattern reflects concentrated exposure to volatile growth names. In practice, this means that a few tech and AI-linked holdings—not just the big index funds—strongly shape the portfolio’s volatility profile, especially during sharp sector moves.

Redundant positions Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Fidelity Total Market Index Fund
    High correlation
  • FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
    FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS
    High correlation

The correlation data shows that several of the core funds move very closely together: the US total market, S&P 500, and NASDAQ 100 exposures are all highly aligned, and the two international funds behave similarly to each other. Correlation measures how often assets move in the same direction at the same time; high correlation reduces the diversification benefit you’d expect from owning multiple positions. In this case, even though there are multiple funds, many are essentially tied to the same underlying drivers, especially US large-cap growth and tech. That helps explain why the portfolio has tracked the tech-led surge so tightly in the short history and suggests that in a downturn, these positions might also drop in tandem rather than offset one another.

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, with a Sharpe ratio around 2.19 versus about 3.37 for the optimal mix using the same holdings. The Sharpe ratio is a simple way to compare risk-adjusted returns by looking at how much extra return you get per unit of volatility after subtracting a risk-free rate. Being below the frontier means that, based on this limited historical window, a different weighting of the same funds and stocks could have delivered higher returns for the same risk, or similar returns with less risk. Given the short, tech-boosted data period, this gap might reflect temporary patterns, so it shouldn’t be treated as a stable, long-run inefficiency.

Dividends Info

  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 11.20%
  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund 1.00%
  • FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 3.00%
  • FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 2.50%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
  • Microsoft Corporation 0.90%
  • Micron Technology Inc 0.10%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.68%

The portfolio’s total dividend yield sits around 1.68%, which is modest and consistent with a growth-oriented, tech-heavy mix. Several holdings, especially in semiconductors and high-growth technology, either pay low dividends or focus more on reinvesting earnings, while a few international and broader index funds provide higher yields in the 2–3% range. Dividends are the cash payouts from companies and can play an important role in total return over decades, particularly in steadier, income-focused portfolios. Here, the low overall yield underlines that most of the recent strong performance has come from price gains rather than income. In weaker markets, that means there’s less built-in cash flow to offset periods when prices move sideways or down.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 0.62%
  • Fidelity Total Market Index Fund 0.02%
  • FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 0.04%
  • FIDELITY TOTAL INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND INSTITUTIONAL PREMIUM CLASS 0.06%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.07%

The average ongoing cost, or Total Expense Ratio (TER), for this portfolio is about 0.07%, which is impressively low. TER is the annual fee charged by funds as a percentage of assets, and small differences compound over time—much like interest, but in reverse. The bulk of the allocation is in ultra-low-cost index funds at 0.02–0.06%, with only the semiconductor fund and NASDAQ ETF charging meaningfully more, still well within typical active or thematic ranges. With fees at this level, costs are not a major drag on performance and leave more of any future returns—whatever they may be—to stay in the portfolio. That’s a solid structural strength, especially over long horizons.

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