US equity portfolio combining broad market exposure with a momentum tilt and very low costs
Report created on May 14, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
FX Fidelity 500 Index Fund
FXAIX - US3159117502 80.00% -
FM MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
FMTM 20.00%
This portfolio is very simple: two US stock funds, with 80% in a broad US index fund and 20% in a focused US momentum ETF. Almost everything is in equities, and there is effectively no allocation to bonds or cash-like assets. With only two holdings, the structure is easy to understand and monitor. The broad index fund provides a diversified core, while the momentum ETF adds a more active, trend-following component. Because the youngest asset defines the history, there is only about a year of data, so any patterns seen in this mix may not represent how it behaves over longer market cycles.
Growth
Over the roughly 1.1‑year period, a hypothetical $1,000 grew to about $1,371, giving a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 32.18%. CAGR is like your average speed on a road trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. Over this short window, the portfolio outpaced both the US and global market benchmarks, with similar or slightly smaller maximum drawdowns around the mid‑teens. A -12.56% max drawdown shows the portfolio still experiences notable swings. Only 11 days created 90% of returns, which underlines how a few strong days drove most gains. With such limited history, these strong results may simply reflect a favorable market phase.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses the short return history to simulate many possible 15‑year paths, like rolling the dice 1,000 times using the same loaded probabilities. It suggests a median outcome of about $2,725 from $1,000, with a wide range from roughly $976 to $7,765 between the 5th and 95th percentiles. The average annualized return across simulations is 8.08%, and about three‑quarters of scenarios end positive. Because all this is based on just over a year of data, these numbers are more fragile than usual. The model mainly shows that outcomes can vary a lot, rather than offering a reliable forecast.
Asset classes
- Stocks 99%
- Other 1%
Asset‑class exposure is almost entirely in stocks (99%), with only a tiny 1% in “other.” This makes the portfolio strongly growth‑oriented, as returns mainly depend on how equity markets perform over time. Compared with broad multi‑asset benchmarks that mix stocks and bonds, this is much more equity‑heavy. That usually means more upside potential over long horizons but also larger short‑term ups and downs. Over the brief history, volatility and drawdowns have been moderate rather than extreme, helped by the diversified index core. Still, without bonds or cash buffers, any future market downturn could feed through quite directly into the portfolio’s value.
Sectors
- Technology 32%
- Industrials 15%
- Financials 10%
- Telecommunications 9%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Health Care 8%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 5%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 2%
- Consumer Discretionary 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector exposure is spread across many areas, but with a clear tilt: technology is the largest slice at 32%, followed by industrials at 15% and financials at 10%. The rest is shared across telecoms, consumer areas, health care, energy, materials, utilities, and real estate. This pattern broadly resembles major US benchmarks, which also lean toward technology, but the exact weights will differ, especially because of the momentum sleeve. Tech‑heavy portfolios can benefit when growth and innovation themes are in favor but may be more sensitive to interest‑rate changes or shifts in risk appetite. The diversification across several other sectors provides some balance to that dominant tech exposure.
Regions
- North America 100%
Geographically, the portfolio is 100% in North America, effectively entirely US‑focused. That means performance is tightly tied to the US economy, US interest rates, and the US dollar. Compared to global equity benchmarks that include many regions, this is a clear home‑country concentration. Over the last decade, a US tilt has generally been rewarded, and the brief history of this portfolio shows strong returns relative to a global benchmark. However, with only 1.1 years of data, it is hard to judge how this concentration might behave across very different global conditions, such as extended periods when non‑US markets lead.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 37%
- Large-cap 32%
- Mid-cap 27%
- Small-cap 5%
The portfolio spans company sizes, with 37% in mega‑cap, 32% in large‑cap, 27% in mid‑cap, and 5% in small‑cap stocks. This creates a core large‑company base similar to broad US indices, while still keeping meaningful exposure to mid‑caps, which can offer different growth and risk characteristics. Mega‑caps tend to be more stable and heavily researched, whereas mid‑ and small‑caps can move more sharply, both up and down. The momentum ETF may tilt this balance slightly toward more volatile names within those size buckets. Given the short history, it is difficult to say whether the size mix has been a major driver of performance so far.
True holdings
-
TW Twilio Inc 0.85%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
PW Quanta Services Inc 0.76%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
MT MasTec Inc 0.73%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
CI Ciena Corp 0.72%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
FI Comfort Systems USA Inc 0.71%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
ES Element Solutions Inc 0.70%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
VR Vertiv Holdings Co 0.70%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
CO Coherent Inc 0.69%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
CA Caseys General Stores Inc 0.69%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
-
LF Littelfuse Inc 0.68%
Part of fund(s):- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
- Top 10 total 7.23%
Looking through the momentum ETF’s top 10, individual positions like Twilio, Quanta Services, MasTec, and others each account for well under 1% of the whole portfolio. Known holdings from ETF disclosures cover only about 7.2% of the overall portfolio, so most underlying positions are outside the reported top 10 list. That means any overlap identified here understates the true duplication between the ETF and the index fund. Still, the visible holdings are mostly mid‑cap and specialized companies, suggesting that the momentum sleeve adds more focused, higher‑beta names on top of the broad, large‑cap index base, which likely amplifies swings during strong or weak market periods.
Factors
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 strong tilt toward momentum at 75%, while value and size are mildly below neutral at 25% and 30%, and yield is also on the low side at 30%. Factors are like investing “ingredients” that describe why groups of stocks behave in certain ways. A high momentum tilt means the portfolio leans into stocks that have performed well recently, which can help in trending markets but can hurt when trends sharply reverse. Lower value and yield exposure indicate less focus on cheaper, higher‑dividend companies. With only about a year of data, factor estimates may shift meaningfully over time, especially if the momentum ETF changes its holdings.
Risk contribution
-
Fidelity 500 Index Fund
Weight: 80.00% 79.1% -
MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
Weight: 20.00% 21.0%
Risk contribution shows that the 80% index fund provides about 79.05% of the portfolio’s overall volatility, while the 20% momentum ETF contributes around 20.95%. Risk contribution measures how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. Here, risk is fairly proportional to allocation, with the ETF adding only slightly more risk than its size would suggest. That means the broad index core still dominates behavior, while the momentum piece acts as a modest “tilt” rather than a primary risk engine. This balance has worked smoothly in the short sample, though relationships could change in different market stress periods.
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 the current mix is already on or very near the frontier, meaning it offers a strong trade‑off between risk and return given these two holdings. The Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above a risk‑free rate, is 1.44 for the current portfolio, compared with 1.86 for the theoretical optimal and 1.54 for the minimum‑variance combination. Since the portfolio sits close to this curve, reweighting between these same two funds would provide only limited improvement. However, all these numbers are derived from just over a year of data, so they should be viewed as a snapshot, not a stable long‑term pattern.
Dividends
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
- MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF 0.20%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.92%
The overall dividend yield is modest at 0.92%, with the index fund yielding about 1.10% and the momentum ETF around 0.20%. Dividend yield is the cash income from holdings divided by price, and it can meaningfully support returns in more income‑focused portfolios. Here, most of the return potential comes from price movements rather than cash payouts. Over the short history, capital gains have dominated results, which fits with the high momentum tilt and growth‑oriented US exposure. In different market phases, dividends could become a more important stabilizing element, but this portfolio is not strongly geared toward that source of return.
Ongoing product costs
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.02%
Costs are impressively low. The reported total expense ratio (TER) for the portfolio is just 0.02%, driven by the ultra‑cheap index fund. TER is the annual fee charged by funds, and small differences can compound over long periods. Even if the momentum ETF has a higher fee, its 20% weight keeps the blended cost extremely competitive. Low costs help investors keep more of whatever the market delivers, especially over decades. In this case, the fee level is a clear strength: it supports better long‑term outcomes compared with similar portfolios that might charge several times as much, though market returns will always be the main driver.
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