Highly concentrated mega cap US growth portfolio with strong historic returns and significant downside swings
Report created on May 2, 2026Risk profile
6/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 21.22% -
GO Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL - US02079K3059 20.20% -
AM Amazon.com Inc
AMZN - US0231351067 13.13% -
TS Tesla Inc
TSLA - US88160R1014 13.13% -
AA Apple Inc
AAPL - US0378331005 12.12% -
ME Meta Platforms Inc.
META - US30303M1027 11.11% -
MS Microsoft Corporation
MSFT - US5949181045 9.09%
This portfolio is made up of just seven individual US mega-cap growth stocks, with no funds or bonds. The largest position is a little over one-fifth of the portfolio, and the top three holdings together make up more than half of the total value and almost two-thirds of the risk. This kind of tight concentration means each company’s news, earnings, and sentiment can noticeably move the overall portfolio. A structure like this is very different from a broad index: it behaves more like a focused bet on a specific group of large, dominant firms. That focus has the potential for big moves both up and down, compared with a more spread-out mix of holdings.
Growth
Over the last decade, a $1,000 investment growing to about $61,566 shows extremely strong historic performance. The portfolio’s compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 51.21% far exceeds both the US market and global market CAGRs. CAGR is like the average speed on a long road trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. The flip side is the max drawdown of -56.26%, meaning the portfolio lost over half its value at one point before recovering. That’s a much deeper drop than the benchmarks. With only 66 days driving 90% of returns, outcomes were heavily influenced by a small set of very strong days, which underlines how timing and staying invested mattered historically.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses past data to simulate many possible future paths for the portfolio, like running 1,000 “what-if” scenarios. After 15 years, the median outcome for $1,000 is around $2,730, with a wide possible range from roughly $1,028 to $7,537 between the 5th and 95th percentiles. The average annualized return across simulations is 8.11%, which is far lower than the historical 51.21% CAGR. This gap highlights that past outperformance is not assumed to continue indefinitely. Simulations are still based on history, so they’re only an educated guess, not a promise. They mainly illustrate that outcomes could vary a lot, especially with a concentrated, aggressive stock mix.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio is in stocks, with 0% in bonds, cash, or other asset classes. That means the entire outcome is tied to equity markets, with no built-in cushioning from traditionally steadier assets. Stocks historically offer higher long-term return potential than bonds but also come with larger swings. A 100% equity allocation tends to move more sharply during market stress, which aligns with the portfolio’s “aggressive” risk label. Compared with broad multi-asset benchmarks that mix in fixed income and sometimes real assets, this portfolio is taking a much more focused path. It’s essentially a concentrated, pure equity growth play with no structural dampener on volatility.
Sectors
- Technology 42%
- Telecommunications 31%
- Consumer Discretionary 26%
Sector-wise, the portfolio leans heavily toward technology at 42%, with the rest in telecommunications and consumer discretionary. That means results are highly linked to trends in digital platforms, online services, and consumer spending on non-essentials. Compared with broad benchmarks, which spread across areas like healthcare, financials, and industrials, this portfolio skips many parts of the economy. Sector concentration can amplify both positive and negative cycles: tech and consumer growth names often benefit from innovation and strong demand, but they can also be more sensitive when interest rates rise or when investors rotate toward more defensive or value-oriented areas.
Regions
- North America 100%
Geographically, the portfolio is 100% in North America, specifically US-listed mega-cap companies. This creates a clear home bias toward one economy, currency, and regulatory environment. While these firms are global businesses, the performance of their stocks is still closely tied to US market sentiment, policy, and interest rates. In contrast, global equity benchmarks typically spread exposure across multiple regions, which can help smooth out country-specific shocks. Here, if US markets underperform other regions or experience a period of stress, there is no offset from holdings in other countries. The flip side is that the portfolio fully participates in US market leadership when it persists.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 100%
All holdings fall into the mega-cap category, meaning they are among the largest companies in the market by value. Mega-caps often have strong balance sheets, established business models, and global reach, which can support resilience in some downturns. At the same time, they are widely followed and heavily represented in major indices, so their prices tend to move with broader market narratives. A portfolio with only mega-caps misses the different behavior smaller companies can bring; small and mid caps can sometimes offer higher growth or different cycles. Here, performance is tightly linked to how this elite group of giants fares relative to the rest of the market.
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 very low tilt to size and a very high tilt to quality. Factors are like underlying “traits” of stocks that research links to returns: size, value, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility. A very low size score (6%) reflects the exclusive focus on mega-caps and the absence of smaller firms that might behave differently. The very high quality score (87%) suggests strong profitability, solid balance sheets, and stable earnings. High quality stocks have often been more resilient during stress, even when they’re still volatile. Overall, this tilt means the portfolio is concentrated in large, financially robust companies, rather than speculative or distressed names.
Risk contribution
-
NVIDIA Corporation
Weight: 21.22% 29.7% -
Tesla Inc
Weight: 13.13% 17.8% -
Alphabet Inc Class A
Weight: 20.20% 15.6% -
Amazon.com Inc
Weight: 13.13% 11.1% -
Meta Platforms Inc.
Weight: 11.11% 10.4% - Top 5 risk contribution 84.6%
Risk contribution shows how much each stock drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. NVIDIA, at roughly 21% weight, contributes about 30% of the total risk, with a risk-to-weight ratio of 1.40. Tesla shows a similar pattern, contributing more risk than its share of the portfolio. This indicates that these names are particularly volatile or less diversified versus the others. When the top three positions create over 60% of the risk, day-to-day results are especially sensitive to their moves. It’s a reminder that in concentrated portfolios, position size and volatility together shape the real risk picture more than weight alone.
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 chart compares the current portfolio’s risk and return to other mixes of the same holdings. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 1.16, meaning its return per unit of risk is solid but below the optimal mix’s Sharpe of 1.39. The portfolio sits 2.53 percentage points below the frontier at its current risk level, implying that a different weighting of the same seven stocks could have historically delivered better risk-adjusted performance. There’s also a lower-risk minimum-variance mix with a Sharpe of 1.08. This doesn’t say anything about future outcomes, but it shows that, historically, the chosen weights weren’t the most efficient combination mathematically.
Dividends
- Apple Inc 0.40%
- Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
- Meta Platforms Inc. 0.30%
- Microsoft Corporation 0.90%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.20%
Dividend yield across the portfolio is very low, around 0.20% in total, despite a few holdings paying modest dividends. Dividends are cash payments from profits, and for some portfolios they can be an important part of total return. Here, most of the historic growth has come from price appreciation rather than income. Several holdings either don’t pay dividends or pay very small ones, reflecting a focus on reinvesting profits into growth opportunities. This profile is typical for aggressive, growth-focused strategies. It also means that in flat markets where prices don’t move much, the portfolio doesn’t have a strong income component to support returns.
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