Triple leveraged QQQ cosplay with a token nod to diversification and a huge tech sugar high
Report created on Apr 21, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 43.58% -
QQ Invesco QQQ Trust
QQQ - US46090E1038 43.25% -
TQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ
TQQQ - US74347X8314 13.17%
This isn’t a portfolio so much as a QQQ shrine with an S&P 500 bumper sticker. Two positions (S&P 500 and vanilla QQQ) split the stage almost 50/50, then a 13% side bet in triple‑leveraged QQQ walks in like the drunk cousin at Thanksgiving. Diversification score 2/5 feels generous; this is basically “big US growth stocks or bust.” Structurally, everything depends on one style, one region, and one economic story behaving nicely. If that story keeps working, it’s fireworks. If it doesn’t, there’s no backup band here — just the amps turned to 11 and no fire extinguisher in sight.
Growth
Historically, the numbers are outrageous in the fun way: $1,000 morphs into $8,359, with a 23.76% CAGR that leaves both US and global markets eating dust. Of course, the bill for that joyride is a -55% max drawdown — you didn’t just hit a pothole, you drove off a cliff and climbed back up over almost three years. And needing just 36 days to generate 90% of returns screams “lottery ticket dynamics.” Past data is like yesterday’s weather: it tells you what this setup *can* do, not what it *will* do when the next storm shows up.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation politely taps the brakes on the past decade’s rocket fuel. A median outcome of $2,742 after 15 years basically says, “Yeah, that 23% annual joyride probably doesn’t repeat.” With an average simulated return of 8.17% and a 5–95% range from “barely broke even” to “still pretty wild,” the future looks more like a normal roller coaster than a SpaceX launch. Simulations are glorified what‑if games: they shake the past around to see what might happen. They don’t predict the next crash; they just confirm this portfolio is perfectly capable of both hero stories and horror movies.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” is refreshingly simple: 100% stocks, no brakes, no airbags, no seatbelts. There is zero ballast here — no bonds, no cash, nothing that tends to zig when stocks zag. That’s fine if the only acceptable answer is “more upside, more everything,” but it means when equities decide to throw a tantrum, the entire portfolio sulks in unison. Asset classes are like food groups; this plate is just fried sugar. When the market diet changes or growth falls out of fashion, there’s nothing bland and boring here to stabilize the meal.
Sectors
- Technology 44%
- Telecommunications 14%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Consumer Staples 7%
- Health Care 7%
- Industrials 5%
- Financials 5%
- Energy 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector-wise, this thing is a tech-and-friends fan club. Technology alone at 44%, plus telecom at 14% and a chunky consumer discretionary slice, basically recreates the modern “online economy” trade. Staples, health care, financials, energy, and utilities are all background extras. When tech and growth-y areas are in favor, this looks brilliant. When they aren’t, it looks like someone confused a diversified portfolio with a NASDAQ souvenir shop. Common indexes spread their bets across economic engines; this one pretty much says, “If innovation stumbles, so do we, and loudly.”
Regions
- North America 98%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, this is “USA or nothing” with 98% in North America and a token 1% in developed Europe that barely registers. The rest of the world might as well not exist here. That works great when US mega-growth is dominating headlines, index returns, and investor narratives. It’s less fun if leadership quietly shifts elsewhere or if US valuations finally decide gravity is real. Global diversification is basically owning more than one economic story; this portfolio picked its favorite country and slammed the door, hoping that bet stays fashionable indefinitely.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 46%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 14%
Some holdings may not have full classification data available. Percentages may not add up to 100%.
Market cap exposure is a straight-up love letter to giants: 46% mega-cap, 34% large-cap, 14% mid-cap, and essentially no interest in smaller companies. This is like only betting on household names and pretending smaller businesses don’t matter. The upside: these behemoths can dominate indexes and feel “safer” because everyone knows them. The downside: when the big guys re-rate or stall, the whole structure gets dragged with them. There’s hardly any exposure to the more volatile, quirky small-cap space — but given you already spiked in leverage, maybe that’s the one bit of accidental restraint.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.72%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 6.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 5.00%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 4.04%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.09%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.87%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.80%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.70%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.59%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
WM Walmart Inc. 1.54%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Top 10 total 38.81%
The look-through holdings reveal the not-so-hidden truth: this is a concentrated bet on the Magnificent Everything. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, both Alphabet share classes, Meta, Tesla — the usual suspects collectively own the place. And they show up multiple times courtesy of both QQQ and the S&P 500. That duplication means the apparent three-ETF spread is actually one giant pile of the same mega-cap growth names. Overlap is likely even worse than shown, since we only see top-10 data. In practice, this isn’t three funds; it’s one megacap growth bundle wearing different ETF jerseys.
Factors
The factor profile screams “growth-chasing glam, zero love for the boring stuff.” Low value exposure means this portfolio dodges cheap, unloved companies like they’re contagious. Low size tilts away from smaller stocks, preferring big, polished names. Low yield and low volatility say income and stability are afterthoughts at best. Momentum and quality sit around neutral, so there’s no deliberate “high quality” or “trend-riding” master plan — just market-like exposure layered on top of growth-heavy funds. Factor exposure is like the ingredient list, and here it reads: expensive, large, non-dividend-paying optimism with a side of vibes.
Risk contribution
-
Invesco QQQ Trust
Weight: 43.25% 37.1% -
ProShares UltraPro QQQ
Weight: 13.17% 33.4% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 43.58% 29.4%
Risk contribution is where the chaos shows. QQQ at 43% weight drives 37% of risk — fair enough. But that 13% slice of ProShares UltraPro QQQ delivering 33% of total risk is doing acrobatics. It’s a small-ish position with a hero complex, amplifying every twitch in QQQ. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 holds nearly equal weight to QQQ but contributes noticeably less risk, quietly being the “least wild” part of a very wild setup. Risk contribution is there to tell who’s really steering the roller coaster; spoiler: it’s not the fund with “Vanguard” in the name.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationInvesco QQQ TrustProShares UltraPro QQQ
Correlation-wise, the analysis might as well say, “QQQ and leveraged QQQ move together. Shock.” When two assets are highly correlated, they dance to the same song — one just with more caffeine. So the leveraged QQQ isn’t adding a new storyline; it’s just turning the volume up on the same tech-heavy growth bet. In a crash, they drop together; in a rally, they jump together. Correlation is about how things move relative to each other, and this pair is basically twins — one sober, one triple-espresso wired.
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 wild thing is actually sitting pretty much where it “should” be. The Sharpe ratio of 0.75 is lower than both the max-Sharpe and min-variance mixes, but the curve says, for this level of risk, the returns are at least mathematically efficient. Translation: within the universe of “S&P, QQQ, and turbo QQQ,” you’re not butchering the risk/return combo. The optimizer even claims you could crank Sharpe higher by taking *more* risk with much higher return — basically inviting you to turn the leverage dial further, which is mathematically correct and life-experience questionable.
Dividends
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.40%
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ 0.50%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.72%
Dividend yield at 0.72% is pocket change, not an income stream. This portfolio clearly didn’t show up for quarterly cash; it came for capital gains and fireworks. Most of the underlying names reinvest in growth instead of handing out juicy checks, which fits the overall “future earnings, not current payouts” narrative. That’s perfectly coherent, but it does mean there’s almost no built-in cushion when markets wobble. Dividends are the slow, dependable part of returns; here they’re more like a rounding error — background noise in a portfolio that’s betting on price charts, not payout ratios.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ 0.88%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.22%
Costs are the one area where this setup shows some discipline. A total TER of 0.22% is impressively reasonable given there’s a leveraged product in the mix. Vanguard at 0.03% is textbook cheap, QQQ is fine, and even TQQQ’s 0.88% isn’t outrageous *for what it is* — a high-octane toy. Overall, fees aren’t the villain here; they’re more like a modest cover charge to enter a very loud club. The real drama comes from what the portfolio owns, not what it costs. You didn’t overpay for the ride — you just picked the roller coaster with extra loops.
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