Highly concentrated US tech and telecom stock portfolio with strong past gains and very high risk
Report created on Apr 25, 2026Risk profile
7/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
SO SoundHound AI Inc
SOUN - US8361001071 40.70% -
RD Reddit, Inc.
RDDT - US75734B1008 12.90% -
DK DraftKings Inc
DKNG - US26142V1052 11.50% -
PL Palantir Technologies Inc.
PLTR - US69608A1088 9.60% -
RB Roblox Corp
RBLX - US7710491033 9.30% -
GO Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL - US02079K3059 6.30% -
MS Microsoft Corporation
MSFT - US5949181045 5.70% -
ME Meta Platforms Inc.
META - US30303M1027 4.00%
This portfolio is made up entirely of eight individual US stocks, with one company, SoundHound AI, taking up just over 40% of the total. The next four names are mid-sized positions, and the three mega-cap giants at the bottom together make up a relatively small slice. A structure like this is very different from a broad fund: outcomes are driven mainly by a few specific businesses rather than the wider market. That concentrated setup can lead to big swings, both up and down. The high overall risk score and low diversification score simply reflect that most of the portfolio’s fate is tied to a handful of tech‑related companies instead of being spread widely.
Growth
Over the period shown, $1,000 invested in this portfolio grew to about $2,102, which translates to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 42.94%. CAGR is like averaging your speed over a road trip, smoothing out bumps to show the typical yearly gain. That’s far above both the US and global market benchmarks. The trade‑off is visible in the max drawdown of nearly -49%, meaning the portfolio almost halved from peak to trough before recovering. Only nine days made up 90% of total returns, which shows how dependent the outcome was on a handful of very strong sessions. Such a pattern usually signals a high‑octane, boom‑or‑bust profile.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection simulates many possible futures by shuffling and re‑running patterns from past returns, not by trying to guess news or fundamentals. Over 15 years, the median path turns $1,000 into about $2,709, with a wide “likely” range from roughly $1,801 to $4,151. Monte Carlo is useful for visualizing uncertainty: it shows that outcomes cluster but can still vary a lot. Here, the average annualized return across all simulations is 8.04%, with about three‑quarters of runs ending positive. Still, the very broad possible range, going down to almost flat at the low end and very high at the top, underlines that simulations are not promises and depend heavily on past volatility.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio is in stocks, with no allocation to bonds, cash‑like instruments, or alternative assets. Asset classes are broad buckets—like stocks, bonds, and real estate—that tend to behave differently in various environments. A 100% stock allocation removes the natural cushion that bonds or cash can provide during equity downturns but also maximizes exposure to equity growth and volatility. Compared with common diversified mixes that include some defensive assets, this structure leans entirely into market risk. The historical drawdown and large price swings fit this pattern: when stocks surge, the portfolio benefits fully; when they fall, there is no built‑in ballast from other asset classes.
Sectors
- Technology 56%
- Telecommunications 33%
- Consumer Discretionary 12%
Sector‑wise, the portfolio is dominated by technology and telecommunications, together accounting for nearly 90% of exposure, with the remainder in consumer discretionary. Sectors group companies by what they do, and different sectors can react very differently to interest rates, regulation, or economic cycles. A tech‑ and telecom‑heavy mix often means sensitivity to innovation cycles, investor sentiment around growth, and funding conditions. This is quite unlike broad benchmarks, which typically spread weights more evenly across areas such as healthcare, financials, and industrials. The upside of this tilt is strong participation in tech‑driven rallies; the downside is that sector‑specific shocks could impact almost every holding at once.
Regions
- North America 100%
Geographically, the portfolio is 100% in North America, specifically US‑listed companies. Geography matters because different regions face distinct economic policies, regulation, and currency moves. A global benchmark would usually spread exposure across North America, Europe, and Asia‑Pacific, capturing multiple economies. Here, returns are tightly linked to the US market, US interest rates, and the US dollar. This alignment has helped when US stocks have led global performance but also means little offset if another region outperforms or if US policy becomes less favorable to growth‑oriented firms. The clear upside is simplicity; the trade‑off is missing any built‑in diversification by country or currency.
Market capitalization
- Mid-cap 41%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mega-cap 26%
The portfolio spans the market‑cap spectrum from mid‑cap up through mega‑cap, with the largest slice in mid‑caps and the rest spread across large and mega names. Market capitalization groups companies by size, and size often affects stability and growth potential. Mega‑caps like Microsoft, Alphabet, and Meta tend to be more established and, in many periods, somewhat steadier, while mid‑caps can be more volatile but have more room to grow. What stands out is that the mega‑caps are not the dominant weights despite their stability. Instead, the riskier, smaller names hold most of the capital, so the presence of mega‑caps helps but does not fundamentally change the overall high‑risk profile.
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.
The factor profile shows very low exposure to momentum and low volatility, with other factors closer to neutral or only mildly tilted. Factors are like underlying “personality traits” of stocks—such as value, quality, or momentum—that research links to long‑term behavior. A very low momentum tilt suggests the portfolio, as a whole, doesn’t strongly line up with stocks that have recently been strong performers in price terms, which can mean it may lag in classic momentum‑driven rallies. Very low low‑volatility exposure means it leans away from steadier, defensive names and toward more volatile ones. Combined, these traits help explain why returns have been powerful but also quite bumpy.
Risk contribution
-
SoundHound AI Inc
Weight: 40.70% 70.9% -
Reddit, Inc.
Weight: 12.90% 10.5% -
Palantir Technologies Inc.
Weight: 9.60% 6.6% -
DraftKings Inc
Weight: 11.50% 4.1% -
Roblox Corp
Weight: 9.30% 4.1% - Top 5 risk contribution 96.2%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ a lot from simple weights. Here, SoundHound AI is 40.7% of the capital but contributes about 70.9% of total risk, meaning its movements dominate overall volatility. That 1.74 risk/weight ratio is a strong signal of concentrated risk: the portfolio’s experience is heavily tied to this single stock’s path. The next two holdings bring the top three up to nearly 88% of total risk, even though they’re only part of the capital. This pattern shows how a relatively modest number of volatile positions can overshadow the stabilizing effect of larger, more established companies.
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 plots risk against expected return using the existing holdings in different mixes. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.86, which measures return per unit of risk above a risk‑free rate. The optimal mix of these same stocks shows a much higher Sharpe of 2.04 with lower risk, and the minimum‑variance mix has the lowest risk with a still‑positive Sharpe. Because the current allocation sits well below the frontier at its risk level, the data suggests that simply reweighting among these eight names—without adding anything new—could historically have produced a meaningfully better balance between volatility and return, at least over the sample used.
Dividends
- Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
- Meta Platforms Inc. 0.30%
- Microsoft Corporation 0.80%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.07%
Dividend income plays a very minor role in this portfolio. Only three of the eight companies pay dividends at all, and their individual yields are all below 1%, leading to a total portfolio yield of about 0.07%. Dividends are the cash payouts companies return to shareholders, and over long periods they can be a meaningful part of total return. Here, the focus is almost entirely on price appreciation rather than income. That’s typical for growth‑oriented portfolios built around companies that reinvest heavily rather than distributing profits. The implication is that any cash flow from dividends is unlikely to offset volatility or contribute significantly to overall 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