Strong US growth focus with leveraged S&P 500 core and moderate diversification beyond technology
Report created on May 18, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 67.52% -
SS ProShares Ultra S&P500
SSO - US74347R1077 25.73% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 6.75%
This portfolio is very concentrated in three equity ETFs, with almost everything tied to stock markets. Around two thirds sits in a plain S&P 500 ETF, about a quarter in a 2x leveraged S&P 500 fund, and a smaller slice in a broad international equity ETF. That means most of the portfolio’s behavior is driven by large US companies, with an extra boost from leverage. Structurally, it’s simple and clear: one big core, one leveraged satellite, and a small global diversifier. This kind of setup makes it easy to understand what is driving returns, but it also means that when US stocks move sharply, the portfolio is likely to move in the same direction, often more strongly than the broad market.
Growth
From 2016 to mid‑2026, $1,000 grew to about $5,314, giving a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.25%. CAGR is like average speed on a long road trip, smoothing out the bumps along the way. This beat both the US market and global market CAGRs by a noticeable margin, reflecting the amplified exposure to US stocks. The trade‑off shows up in risk: the maximum drawdown was about ‑42.8%, deeper than the benchmarks’ roughly ‑34% drops. That drawdown happened very quickly in early 2020 and took about five months to recover, which illustrates how a leveraged, growth‑oriented approach can deliver stronger long‑term gains while also feeling more intense during sudden market shocks.
Projection
The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which is basically running thousands of “what if” scenarios based on past volatility and returns. Starting from $1,000 over 15 years, the median outcome lands around $2,652, with a wide “likely” range between roughly $1,717 and $4,173. The possible range is even broader, going from under your starting amount to more than $7,000, and about 73% of simulations finish positive. This highlights that even with strong historical results, future paths can vary a lot. Monte Carlo relies on historical patterns, so it can’t foresee structural shifts or regime changes; it just shows how a portfolio with similar risk and return characteristics might behave over many different market paths.
Asset classes
- Stocks 99%
- Other 1%
Almost the entire portfolio is in stocks, with only a token allocation to “other” assets. That makes the asset‑class mix very straightforward: it’s essentially an all‑equity portfolio with no built‑in ballast from bonds or cash‑like holdings. Equities are typically the main driver of long‑term growth, but they also carry the most pronounced ups and downs, especially in stressed markets. Compared with more diversified mixes that blend in fixed income or alternatives, this setup leans hard into growth and accepts equity‑style volatility in return. From an educational standpoint, this is a textbook example of how asset‑class choices set the basic risk/return profile before you even get into sectors, regions, or factors.
Sectors
- Technology 34%
- Financials 12%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 4%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 2%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is tilted toward technology, which makes up about a third of the equity slice, with financials, telecom, consumer discretionary, and industrials forming the next meaningful chunks. Smaller allocations are spread across health care, staples, energy, utilities, materials, and real estate, so there is some breadth beyond a single theme. Tech‑heavier portfolios tend to benefit when innovation and growth companies are in favor, but they can see sharper swings when interest rates rise or investors rotate toward more defensive areas. Relative to broad global benchmarks, this tech weighting is on the high side, but the remaining sectors still provide a decent cross‑section of the economy, which helps reduce reliance on just one industry group.
Regions
- North America 93%
- Europe Developed 3%
- Asia Developed 1%
- Japan 1%
- Asia Emerging 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, the portfolio is overwhelmingly concentrated in North America at about 93%, with only small slices in developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, and emerging Asia. That means most of the risk and opportunity is tied to one region’s economy, politics, and currency. Compared with global market weights, this is a clear home‑country tilt. The international ETF introduces some non‑US exposure, but it’s modest relative to the US core and the leveraged S&P 500 position. This kind of geographic concentration can work very well when US markets are strong, as they have been over the last decade, but it also means that any period of US underperformance relative to the rest of the world would show up quite strongly in overall portfolio results.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 42%
- Large-cap 31%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 1%
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%.
The market‑cap breakdown leans heavily into mega‑cap and large‑cap stocks, which together make up over 70% of the portfolio. Mid‑caps contribute a decent share, while small‑cap exposure is minimal. Large and mega‑cap companies tend to be more established and liquid, which can make them somewhat more stable than very small firms, though they can still move sharply in downturns. This structure is consistent with broad market capitalization‑weighted indices, where the biggest companies naturally dominate. The limited small‑cap slice means the portfolio is less exposed to the higher volatility and potential higher growth associated with smaller firms, and more aligned with the performance patterns of the largest, most widely followed global businesses.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 6.66%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 5.45%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.19%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.51%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.99%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.70%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.39%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.88%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.48%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.19%
Part of fund(s):- ProShares Ultra S&P500
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 32.45%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings, a big chunk of the visible exposure sits in a handful of well‑known US mega‑caps. Names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, and Meta collectively represent a meaningful percentage of the overall portfolio, even though they appear only indirectly. Some of these companies show up in multiple ETFs, which creates hidden concentration — the same business driving returns through several channels. Because this analysis only covers top‑10 holdings, the actual overlap is likely somewhat higher than shown. This is a common feature of index‑based portfolios today, as many major indices are dominated by the same cluster of large, highly valued companies at the top of the market.
Factors
Factor exposure is fairly close to market‑like across the board, with most factors in the neutral range. There is a mild tilt away from the size factor, meaning a preference toward larger companies, and a mild tilt away from low volatility, so holdings are a bit more volatile than the broad market basket. Factors are like underlying “traits” — such as value, momentum, or quality — that research links to long‑term returns. Here, the story is that the portfolio behaves broadly like a standard large‑cap equity market, rather than making a big bet on any single factor style. The slightly lower low‑volatility score pairs with the leveraged position to explain why the portfolio can move more than a plain vanilla market index.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 67.52% 54.3% -
ProShares Ultra S&P500
Weight: 25.73% 41.2% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 6.75% 4.5%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which isn’t always the same as its weight. The unlevered S&P 500 ETF makes up about 68% of the portfolio but contributes roughly 54% of risk, reflecting its diversification and lower volatility. The leveraged S&P 500 ETF is only about 26% by weight yet contributes over 41% of total risk, with a risk/weight ratio of 1.6. That means it punches above its size in terms of volatility impact. The international ETF has both a smaller weight and lower risk contribution. Overall, this illustrates how a single leveraged fund can dominate day‑to‑day portfolio movement, even when it is a minority position by dollars invested.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationProShares Ultra S&P500Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Correlation measures how closely different holdings move together, on a scale from ‑1 to +1. Here, the leveraged S&P 500 ETF and the standard S&P 500 ETF are almost perfectly correlated, meaning they tend to go up and down at the same time, just with different magnitudes. When correlation is this high, the diversification benefit between the two is very limited during market stress — they behave more like one asset with different “volume knobs” than separate risk sources. The international ETF likely adds some diversification because non‑US markets don’t move in perfect lockstep with the S&P 500, but the main takeaway is that the portfolio’s core pieces are tightly linked, so broad US market moves are the dominant driver of overall behavior.
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 risk vs. return chart plots this portfolio alongside the efficient frontier, which shows the best possible return for each risk level using these same holdings. The key metric here is the Sharpe ratio, a simple way to gauge risk‑adjusted return by comparing excess return to volatility. The current portfolio’s Sharpe ratio of 0.67 is quite close to the minimum variance portfolio’s 0.69 and below the optimal mix’s 0.76, but overall it sits on or very near the efficient frontier. That means, given the chosen building blocks, the current weights are already making effective use of them. Any further optimization would mainly be about fine‑tuning the trade‑off between higher return with more risk versus lower risk with lower expected return.
Dividends
- ProShares Ultra S&P500 0.60%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.01%
The overall dividend yield is about 1.01%, which is relatively modest and consistent with a growth‑oriented, large‑cap equity focus. The international ETF has the highest yield among the three, while the leveraged S&P 500 ETF yields the least. Dividends play a secondary role here compared with price appreciation, especially given the tech tilt and leverage. In practice, this means most of the portfolio’s long‑term return has historically come from rising share prices rather than regular cash payouts. For someone tracking income vs. growth, this is a good example of how a portfolio can be positioned more toward capital gains, with dividends acting as a small but steady bonus rather than a primary return driver.
Ongoing product costs
- ProShares Ultra S&P500 0.91%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.26%
The blended total expense ratio (TER) comes out to about 0.26%, which is low by historical standards and supportive of long‑term compounding. TER is the annual fee charged by the funds, taken out inside the ETF rather than as a separate bill. Two of the ETFs are very inexpensive broad index trackers, while the leveraged S&P 500 fund is noticeably more expensive, pulling the average up. Even so, the overall cost level is still reasonable for an equity portfolio with a specialized component. Keeping costs contained like this means more of the portfolio’s gross returns stay in the investor’s hands, and that effect becomes more meaningful the longer the holding period and the higher the starting balance.
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