Big tech worship with a side of dividends pretending to be diversification
Report created on May 19, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 60.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 20.00% -
AV Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
AVUV - US0250728773 10.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 10.00%
This portfolio is basically a US mega-cap growth shrine with some decorative accessories. Sixty percent in the S&P 500, another 20% in the NASDAQ 100, then 10% in small-cap value and 10% in dividend stocks as a kind of guilt offering to “diversification.” It looks like someone started with a simple broad-market ETF, then panic-added satellites that mostly orbit the same star: big US companies. The structure screams “core and satellite,” but the satellites are mostly just zoomed-in versions of the core. The result is a portfolio that appears balanced on the surface while being heavily dependent on the same narrow set of market drivers under the hood.
Growth
Historically this thing has ridden the tech-led rocket pretty well: $1,000 became $2,342 with a 16.5% CAGR. That’s slightly ahead of the US market and solidly ahead of the global market, so performance-wise it hasn’t embarrassed itself. Max drawdown around -24% shows it still bleeds like an equity portfolio in a bad year, just maybe with nicer branding. And 90% of returns coming from only 28 days is a reminder that this portfolio lives and dies by a handful of manic sessions. Past returns here look good, but they’re basically a love letter to the recent dominance of US large-cap growth.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “Could be great, could be meh, could be awkward.” Simulations show a median outcome of about $2,762 from $1,000 over 15 years, with a pretty wide possible range. Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of running thousands of “what if the market does this?” experiments based on past volatility and returns. It’s like replaying the last decade with the randomness shuffled. The portfolio’s big equity bet means outcomes stretch from “barely grew” to “that worked out nicely.” But as always, yesterday’s data is yesterday’s weather: useful for packing a jacket, not for booking a beach wedding.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class allocation is gloriously simple and dangerously single-minded: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. This isn’t a balanced blend; it’s an all-equity joyride with “Balanced Investors” slapped on the label for decoration. No bonds, no cash cushion, no real diversifiers—just pure equity beta all the way down. That means when markets are kind, growth looks impressive; when they’re not, the drawdowns hit full force. Asset allocation is basically the big lever for controlling the emotional rollercoaster, and this setup is more Six Flags than Sunday stroll. Great if that’s intentional, brutal if someone thought “balanced” meant anything like smoother.
Sectors
- Technology 35%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Financials 11%
- Health Care 8%
- Industrials 8%
- Consumer Staples 7%
- Energy 6%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector mix screams tech obsession in a business-casual outfit. Technology at 35% is the main character, and then you’ve got consumer discretionary and telecom tagging along, all very growth-flavored. Financials, health care, and industrials are there mostly so the sector pie chart doesn’t look embarrassing. This portfolio acts like the parts of the economy that actually make or move physical stuff are background extras. When tech and adjacent growth sectors are in favor, this looks genius; when they’re not, it’s like discovering the “diversified” portfolio is just one big bet on a small cluster of high-powered themes pretending to be the entire market.
Regions
- North America 99%
Geography-wise, this is basically the United States of Portfolio. At 99% North America, the rest of the world may as well not exist. Apparently international markets, currencies, and different economic cycles are just rumors. The diversification score being low is no mystery: there’s zero attempt to tap into global growth drivers beyond “America will handle it.” That has worked for quite a while, but it also means the portfolio is chained to one economy, one political system, and one market style. If US leadership ever pauses for a nap, this setup has nowhere else to hide or participate.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 39%
- Large-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 6%
- Micro-cap 5%
Market cap exposure is mostly big kids’ table: 39% mega-cap and 35% large-cap dominate. Mid-caps get a decent 15%, while small and micro-caps together barely crack double digits. This is basically the S&P 500 and NASDAQ 100 calling the shots, with small-cap value tossed in like a token “I read about factor investing once” gesture. The result is a portfolio that moves like a typical US large-cap index with a faint whiff of smaller, scrappier names. If the giants keep winning, fine. If the leadership baton passes to smaller companies, this positioning is more spectator than participant.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 6.58%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 5.30%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.93%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.45%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.94%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.60%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.77%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.30%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 0.85%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 31.15%
The look-through holdings are a who’s who of US mega-cap royalty: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, Broadcom, Berkshire. You didn’t build a portfolio; you built a fan club. NVIDIA at 6.6%, Apple at 5.3%, and Microsoft at almost 4%—and that’s only from the top-10s we can see. Because overlap analysis only uses ETF top holdings, real concentration is likely worse than it looks. Owning multiple funds that all pile into the same mega-caps is like ordering three different combo meals that all come with the same fries. Different packaging, same exposure.
Factors
Factor profile is almost unsettlingly normal: everything is neutral-ish—value, size, momentum, quality, yield, low volatility all hover around market-like levels. Factor exposure is basically the ingredient list of hidden portfolio traits, and this one reads like plain vanilla ice cream. Even with a small-cap value slice and a dividend ETF, the big S&P 500 and NASDAQ weights steamroll any strong tilt. So behavior-wise, this won’t be some quirky factor-driven monster; it will mostly act like a standard broad US equity blend with a mild growth lean from all that tech. Accidentally sensible, if a bit boring under the hood.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 60.00% 57.9% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 20.00% 24.3% -
Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Weight: 10.00% 10.9% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 10.00% 6.9%
Risk contribution shows who’s actually shaking the portfolio, and surprise: the S&P 500 slice is doing most of the heavy lifting. At 60% weight and ~58% of risk, it’s basically the portfolio. NASDAQ 100 is only 20% by weight but contributes over 24% of the risk, punching above its size like an over-caffeinated sidekick. Small-cap value is 10% weight and roughly 11% of risk—respectable. The dividend ETF is the quiet kid: 10% weight, only ~7% of risk. With the top three positions driving over 93% of total risk, the rest of the allocation is more garnish than real stabilizer.
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, this portfolio is annoyingly competent. The current allocation sits on or very near the frontier, meaning for this particular set of holdings, the risk–return tradeoff is actually efficient. With a Sharpe ratio of 0.75 versus a possible 0.93 at the optimal point, there’s theoretical room to squeeze more juice—but that would also crank volatility higher. The minimum-variance mix offers less risk with still decent returns. The punchline: even though the building blocks are highly concentrated in US equities, the way they’re combined is mathematically pretty sharp. Concept: strong. Ingredient choice: still heavily one-note.
Dividends
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.30%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.14%
Dividend yield at 1.14% is nothing to brag about, especially with a dedicated dividend ETF in the mix. SCHD drags the average up a bit with its 3.3% yield, but the NASDAQ 100’s 0.4% and S&P 500’s modest 1% keep this from being any kind of income machine. This setup looks like someone wanted growth and then threw in one dividend fund to feel responsible. Cashflow-wise, it’s a light drizzle, not a paycheck. The portfolio still relies overwhelmingly on price returns, not dividends, so the “dividend” angle is more branding than core identity.
Ongoing product costs
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.08%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio quietly nails it. A total TER of 0.08% is impressively low—cheaper than many single-fund solutions. You’ve got the big core ETFs almost paying you to hold them, with only the small-cap value fund charging anything noticeable, and even that is reasonable. Expense ratios are like a slow leak in your returns; here, the leak is more of a drip. For a portfolio that leans so heavily on broad, commoditized exposure, at least it isn’t paying champagne prices for tap water. You clicked the low-cost options and then didn’t mess it up.
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