This portfolio has only about 1.3 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 Roast mode 🔥

Hyperactive growth chaser with sneaky factor bets hiding under a boring three ETF wrapper

Report created on Jul 7, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio looks simple on the surface and weirdly spicy underneath. On paper it’s mostly two big broad funds with a few “fun” satellites bolted on, but those satellites are doing more steering than hitchhiking. In theory, a core-and-satellite build should add a little flavor; here it’s more like you dumped a bottle of hot sauce into vanilla yogurt. The blend mixes plain total-market exposure with concentrated tilts in small value, momentum, semis, and quality, which is a lot of agendas for one portfolio. With only about 1.3 years of history, it’s hard to say if this Frankenstein mix is genius or just temporarily lucky, so any strong narrative is basically fan fiction.

Growth Info

The recent performance looks ridiculous: $1,000 turning into $1,459 in ~15 months and a 34% CAGR is “tell your friends” territory. It also beat both US and global markets by 7–9 percentage points a year, which screams “benefiting from exactly the right themes at exactly the right time.” But with only 1.3 years of data, this is more one good season than a proven track record. Max drawdown around -14% is normal for a growthy all-stock mix, so the ride hasn’t even been that painful yet. Past data over such a short stretch is basically a highlight reel, not a full documentary, so treating this as typical would be delusional.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is trying to sound scientific, but it’s building castles on 1.3 years of weather. Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of running thousands of “what if” simulations using the recent return and volatility pattern, which here is heavily colored by a tech-and-momentum-friendly window. Median $1,000 → ~$2,666 in 15 years and an 8.1% annualized outcome aren’t crazy, but the possible range ($984–$7,780) basically says “anything from flat to fantastic.” With so little history, these simulations are more like guessing based on a single semester’s grades — directionally useful, but absolutely not a prophecy.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

The asset class breakdown is aggressively uncomplicated: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. That’s not diversification, that’s commitment. It’s basically saying every dollar lives and dies with equity markets, no backup instruments, no shock absorbers, just vibes. For a “growth” label, that’s on-brand, but it also means when stocks sneeze, this portfolio gets pneumonia. Over one hot year and change, that looks like bold genius; over an actual full market cycle, it just guarantees you’ll feel every drawdown in full HD. The absence of other asset classes makes the outcome entirely dependent on one engine never stalling — historically optimistic, to put it politely.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    33%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Industrials
    12%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, this is tech-flavored with extra growth seasoning. Technology at 33% is a clear addiction, but it’s at least cushioned by decent slices of financials, industrials, and other sectors so it’s not a pure one-trick pony. Still, that 5% dedicated semiconductor slice is the portfolio’s little casino corner: tiny by weight, big on drama. Compared to a broad market, the tilt toward higher-volatility, story-driven parts of the market is obvious. With only 1.3 years of history, sector “success” here is mostly just being on the right side of recent fashion, which is exactly the kind of thing that reverses the minute everyone starts to feel comfortable.

Regions Info

  • North America
    76%
  • Europe Developed
    10%
  • Asia Developed
    5%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Asia Emerging
    3%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geographically, this thing mostly believes the world ends at the US border: 76% in North America and tiny crumbs everywhere else. There is some international exposure — which is more than many US portfolios manage — but 10% Europe and low-single digits elsewhere basically says “we know other markets exist, we just don’t trust them with real money.” That home bias happens to have been rewarded in the recent US-led run, so the last 1.3 years make this look smart. Over a full global rotation, though, this kind of lopsided geography can quietly turn into a drag when other regions finally get a turn in the spotlight.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    35%
  • Large-cap
    28%
  • Mid-cap
    19%
  • Small-cap
    11%
  • Micro-cap
    6%

The market-cap mix pretends to be balanced, but it’s clearly leaning toward the big kids’ table: 35% mega-cap and 28% large-cap dominate the show. Mid, small, and even micro caps do have a meaningful presence, so it’s not strictly a mega-cap index clone. Still, the real power sits with huge, already-successful companies, which often means less explosive upside but fewer complete disasters. The small and micro slices add some chaos, but they’re not driving the bus. Given the short 1.3-year window, the current mix may look smoother than it really is; small and micro caps can be quiet for years and then suddenly matter a lot — usually at the worst possible time.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.95%
    Part of fund(s):
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Apple Inc.
    3.05%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.27%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.82%
    Part of fund(s):
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Micron Technology Inc
    1.40%
    Part of fund(s):
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.37%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.99%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 18.57%

The look-through data screams “Mega-Cap Tech Fan Club.” NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, Amazon, Alphabet (both share classes), Meta, TSMC — it’s like someone printed the usual suspects list and used it as a shopping list. These names show up in multiple ETFs, so the real exposure is more concentrated than the fund lineup suggests. And that’s just within the top 10 holdings; 70% of the portfolio is beyond what we can see, so actual overlap is almost certainly higher. With only a short history, it’s easy to mistake this concentration for genius stock-picking via ETFs when it’s mostly riding the same crowded trade from several angles.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 25%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 15%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 5%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 85%

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.

The factor profile is where the portfolio quietly admits what it’s really doing. Very low size exposure means it’s effectively underweight smaller companies; the “small cap value” slice is more token than identity. Then there’s high momentum and very high quality — that combo is basically “chase what’s working, but only if it looks respectable on paper.” Factor exposure is just the hidden recipe: value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low vol are the flavors. Here the mix says trend-following blue-chip darlings, not scrappy underdogs. With just 1.3 years, these factor tilts look brilliant because they lined up with recent winners, but that luck can flip when leadership changes.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 45.00%
    42.5%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 25.00%
    21.8%
  • MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    10.4%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.6%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    9.5%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 93.8%

Risk contribution shows who’s actually shaking the portfolio, and the answers are predictable but still hilarious. The core US fund is 45% of the weight and about 43% of the risk — fair. The international fund is also behaving. Then there’s the 5% semiconductor ETF contributing almost 9.5% of total risk, pulling nearly double its weight in drama. That tiny slice is punching way above its weight class, especially in a portfolio already tilted toward growth and momentum. Risk contribution is basically asking, “Who’s making this portfolio twitch?” and the answer is: the core funds plus one excitable chip bet doing cartwheels in the corner.

Redundant positions Info

  • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
    Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

The correlation snapshot tells a simple story: the total US market fund and the US quality ETF move almost in lockstep. That means the supposedly “distinct” quality sleeve is, in practice, largely echoing what the core US holding is already doing — just with a fancier label and slightly different seasoning. Correlation is just how often two things dance in the same direction; high correlation means when one jumps, the other usually jumps too. With limited data, that link could soften over time, but right now it looks like the portfolio added an extra mirror of the US market rather than a clearly independent driver of returns.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

On the efficient frontier, this portfolio is that student getting a B+ with A+ potential using the exact same books. It sits about 1.8 percentage points below the frontier at its current risk, with a Sharpe ratio of 1.44 against an optimal 2.07 using only existing holdings. The optimal version cranks risk and return to cartoonish levels, but even the minimum-variance mix slightly beats the current Sharpe. The efficient frontier is just the curve of best possible return for each risk level; being below it means the ingredients are fine, but the recipe is sloppy. And with only 1.3 years of data, even these “optimal” points are more guesswork than gospel.

Dividends Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.00%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.50%
  • MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF 0.20%
  • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF 0.30%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.25%

At a 1.25% total yield, this portfolio clearly did not show up for the income buffet. Dividends here are more background noise than a defined feature, which makes sense for a high-growth, momentum-tilted setup. The international slice does most of the yield heavy lifting, while the trendy growth and semiconductor holdings contribute almost nothing. Yield is just the cash drip you get without selling anything, and in this case, that drip is barely a trickle. Over 1.3 years, dividends haven’t been the story at all — this portfolio is unapologetically banking on price movement rather than quiet, compounding cash flows.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.07%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio accidentally nailed it. A total TER around 0.07% is comically low for something with this many factor tilts and thematic flavors. The cheap Vanguard cores drag the average down so hard that even the pricier small value and semiconductor funds barely move the needle. TER (total expense ratio) is just the annual “cover charge” for owning the funds, and here it’s more like a loose coin in the couch. Over time, low fees matter a lot more than a year or two of lucky performance, so this is one of the few parts of the portfolio that doesn’t need a disclaimer or an apology.

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