This portfolio has only about 3 months 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.
Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

Leveraged rocket strapped to a three month track record and praying the rails hold

Report created on Jul 15, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio looks like someone discovered leverage and momentum ETFs, then just kept adding spice until their eyes watered. Nearly half the weight is in juiced products and return-stacking toys, while the rest is a grab bag of mega-cap darlings, a tiny crypto garnish, and some “oh right, diversification” sprinkles. Structurally, it’s a barbell where both ends are labeled “risk-on.” For a buy-and-hold setup, it behaves much more like a trader’s playground than a steady growth mix. With only about three months of history, any sense of “this works” is basically first-date chemistry, not a long-term relationship. So far it screams “all gas, no brakes, and the map is still loading.”

Growth Info

The last three months make this portfolio look like a genius: $1,000 turning into $1,257, with a cartoonish 136% annualized return. It even dunks on both the US and global markets, roughly doubling their already strong CAGRs. But this is three months, not a decade — CAGR here is like bragging about your pace after sprinting one block. The max drawdown of -8.4% versus roughly -4.5% for the benchmarks already hints that the pain will scale faster than the joy. Only eight days explain 90% of returns, meaning performance is a handful of lucky fireworks, not a steady glow. Past data this short is basically a market mood swing, not a pattern.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation politely pretends three months of chaos is a solid basis for a 15‑year forecast. Median outcome of $2,758 from $1,000 sounds great, but that’s an 8.2% modeled annual return built on wafer-thin history. The “possible range” from $933 to $7,680 is basically saying, “anything from meh to insane could happen, good luck.” Monte Carlo just runs thousands of what-ifs using recent volatility and returns; here, it’s extrapolating a sprint into a marathon. The 76% chance of a positive result is comforting on paper, but with this little data, the confidence level is more “weather app” than “engineering blueprint.”

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    93%
  • Bonds
    4%
  • Crypto
    2%
  • Cash
    1%

Asset class mix: 93% stocks, 4% bonds, 2% crypto, 1% cash. That “Growth” label is doing a lot of understatements here. The bond slice is more of a decorative garnish than an actual shock absorber, especially given it includes long-duration, leveraged, and stacked strategies rather than sleepy, stabilizing stuff. Crypto at 2% is the chaos cameo, and the 1% cash is barely enough for popcorn during the next drawdown. This is basically an all‑equity portfolio cosplaying as “balanced” because a couple of bond-flavored wrappers show up. For risk, think equity rocket with a souvenir bond sticker on the side.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    39%
  • Telecommunications
    16%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Financials
    8%
  • Industrials
    6%
  • Health Care
    4%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Crypto
    2%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Cash
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector breakdown screams “tech and friends,” with technology at 39% and telecom/communication-style exposure at 16%. That’s more than half the portfolio leaning toward digital, data, and screen-based everything. The rest is scattered sensibly-ish across cyclicals and defensives, but they’re clearly backup dancers. Compared to a broad market mix, this is a pretty loud tilt toward growthy, hype-sensitive areas that throw big parties in bull runs and sulk aggressively in bear markets. Toss in the 2% crypto and you’ve created a feedback loop where most of the big pieces like to move in the same “risk-on” direction. Subtle this is not.

Regions Info

  • North America
    88%
  • Europe Developed
    3%
  • Asia Developed
    2%
  • Japan
    1%
  • Cash
    1%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, this is “America first, second, and third” at 88% in North America. A tiny slice dribbles into developed Europe and Asia, but it’s basically the rounding error of a US mega-cap fan club. The global market actually spreads out far more, yet this setup acts like the rest of the world is an optional DLC pack. That works beautifully when US tech and growth are in fashion; it’s less fun when leadership rotates somewhere else and this portfolio is still staring at the Nasdaq for clues. For now, it’s betting that “the center of the universe” never moves. Historically, that’s a bold assumption.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    43%
  • Large-cap
    23%
  • Mid-cap
    7%
  • Small-cap
    5%
  • Micro-cap
    4%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only. Some holdings may not have full classification data available. Percentages may not add up to 100%.

Market cap exposure is dominated by the giants: 43% mega-cap, 23% large-cap. Mid, small, and micro caps collectively show up, but mostly as seasoning rather than a main dish. That means the portfolio’s fate is largely chained to the biggest names — the same handful of companies driving most broad indexes lately. The 5% small-cap and 4% micro-cap pieces add some wild-card behavior, but not nearly enough to define the ride. In practice, this is a “megacap growth with toys attached” structure, where whatever the top index names decide emotionally will probably dictate the mood of the whole portfolio.

True holdings Info

  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    11.43%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    Direct holding 9.00%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    5.20%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    Direct holding 1.00%
  • Apple Inc.
    4.61%
    Part of fund(s):
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    Direct holding 2.00%
  • Amazon.com Inc
    3.51%
    Part of fund(s):
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    Direct holding 2.00%
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.74%
    Part of fund(s):
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    Direct holding 1.00%
  • Micron Technology Inc
    2.47%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • Roundhill Memory ETF
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
  • Broadcom Inc
    2.03%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
  • Cloudflare Inc
    2.00%
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.25%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
  • SPDR Russell 3000 ETF
    1.05%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Return Stacked Global Stocks & Bonds ETF
  • Top 10 total 36.29%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Look-through holdings reveal that this isn’t just concentrated — it’s concentrated and echoing itself. Alphabet sits at 11.4% total, with a chunk directly owned and the rest hiding inside ETFs. NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, and Microsoft all appear both as direct positions and as stowaways in multiple funds. That’s like putting the same five actors in every movie and calling it a diverse cast. And remember, this is only top‑10 ETF data; real overlap is likely worse. The uncovered 53.7% means the hidden duplication is probably higher, so headline diversification is masking a “Magnificent Handful plus friends” dependency.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 28%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 89%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 33%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 18%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 95%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Low
Data availability: 77%

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 profile is basically “momentum plus quality on steroids, everything else borderline ignored.” Momentum at 78% means piling into whatever’s been working lately — fun until the music stops. Quality at 86% is the saving grace: at least the portfolio prefers companies that can actually read a balance sheet. Size at 9% is the loud message: this thing strongly tilts away from smaller companies and doubles down on bigger names. Value, yield, and low volatility are either neutral-ish or mildly shunned, so don’t expect bargain hunting, high income, or a smooth ride. It’s a high‑quality trend chaser that assumes trends and quality stay best friends forever.

Risk contribution Info

  • ProShares Ultra QQQ
    Weight: 15.00%
    27.6%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    Weight: 15.00%
    17.4%
  • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ
    Weight: 8.00%
    11.9%
  • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    Weight: 15.00%
    8.2%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    Weight: 9.00%
    7.4%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 72.4%

Risk contribution shows who’s actually driving the drama, and surprise: the leveraged stuff is hogging the spotlight. ProShares Ultra QQQ is 15% of the weight but 27.6% of total portfolio risk — that one holding is the lead actor in every plot twist. Add Invesco S&P 500 Momentum and Ultra Top QQQ, and the top three positions create over 56% of all risk. Meanwhile, the “balanced” 90/60 fund is a big weight but comparatively chill on risk contribution. This means headline weights massively understate how much the portfolio’s fate depends on a few high-octane instruments. When they twitch, the whole thing jumps.

Redundant positions Info

  • Return Stacked Global Stocks & Bonds ETF
    WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced
    SCHWAB TOTAL STOCK MARKET INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES
    High correlation

The correlation story is short but telling: some of the supposedly different holdings basically move in lockstep. The 90/60 balanced product and the broad US index fund are behaving like near-clones, and the return-stacked ETF is marching right alongside too. Highly correlated assets are like owning three umbrellas that all break in the same storm — more of them doesn’t mean better protection when markets crack. In strong up moves, that similarity feels great. In sharp down moves, diversification magically vanishes and everything slides together, just with slightly different props on the label. Different wrappers, same underlying dance routine.

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 risk/return chart, this portfolio is not just below the efficient frontier, it’s embarrassingly far below — over 42 percentage points off the best achievable return for its risk level. The Sharpe ratio of 3.49 looks shiny in isolation, but the same ingredients, just differently weighed, could theoretically reach a Sharpe of 5.37. That’s the optimization tool gently saying, “Nice ingredients, chaotic recipe.” Even the minimum-variance version, which tries to be as boring as possible, still beats cash on a risk-adjusted basis. So the current mix is basically taking extra volatility and then leaving some return on the table, just for the thrill of it.

Dividends Info

  • Apple Inc. 0.30%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
  • Microsoft Corporation 0.90%
  • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced 1.10%
  • NVIDIA Corporation 0.10%
  • PIMCO STOCKSPLUS LONG DURATION FUND INSTITUTIONAL 11.10%
  • ProShares Ultra QQQ 0.10%
  • Return Stacked Global Stocks & Bonds ETF 3.20%
  • iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 3.80%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF 0.70%
  • SCHWAB INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES 3.20%
  • SCHWAB TOTAL STOCK MARKET INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES 1.00%
  • Global X Uranium ETF 5.00%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.60%
  • ProShares Ultra Top QQQ 0.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.36%

Income-wise, this portfolio is clearly not here for the dividends. Total yield of 1.36% is what you get when you fill the roster with growthy names, momentum funds, and crypto sprinkles. The one outlier is that PIMCO long-duration strategy flashing a double-digit yield, which looks more like a structural quirk than a stable paycheck. A few bond and international funds try to chip in decent yields, but they’re drowned out by tech and thematic stuff that treat dividends as an afterthought. If this portfolio were a band, “income” would be the roadie, not a member on stage. Capital growth is doing all the singing.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
  • Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Trust 0.25%
  • WisdomTree 90/60 US Balanced 0.20%
  • PIMCO STOCKSPLUS LONG DURATION FUND INSTITUTIONAL 3.65%
  • ProShares Ultra QQQ 0.95%
  • Return Stacked Global Stocks & Bonds ETF 0.41%
  • iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 0.07%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF 0.13%
  • SCHWAB INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES 0.06%
  • SCHWAB TOTAL STOCK MARKET INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES 0.03%
  • Global X Uranium ETF 0.69%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.42%

Fee-wise, the average TER of 0.42% is “not awful” hiding a couple of guilty offenders. Most ETFs and index funds are perfectly reasonable or even cheap — that part looks like someone knew what they were doing. Then there’s the PIMCO fund charging 3.65% a year, which is less an expense ratio and more a subscription to a luxury volatility experience. Leverage and return-stacking products also aren’t free, and costs compound just like returns, only in the wrong direction. Overall, fees won’t sink the ship alone, but a chunk of return is definitely being tithed to complexity and brand names.

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

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

DRAM vs SOXQ AVUV vs SPMO DRAM vs QQQM IDMO vs SPMO

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