Concentrated high dividend US stock portfolio with strong quality and momentum tilts

Report created on May 31, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

2/5
Low Diversity
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is tightly focused, with just a handful of large individual stock positions and two dividend‑oriented ETFs. The top three holdings alone make up over half of the total weight, and the top six cover around 80%, so most of the behaviour comes from a small core rather than a broad basket. Everything here is in equities, with no bonds or cash included in the mix. A structure like this can feel very “all in” on a few ideas, which is very different from a broad index approach. The upside is clear exposure to chosen names; the trade‑off is that single‑stock moves can have an outsized impact.

Growth Info

Over the period shown, a hypothetical $1,000 invested here grew to about $1,971, which is a 16.26% compound annual growth rate (CAGR). CAGR is like your average speed on a road trip, smoothing out all the bumps along the way. This comfortably beat both the US market and global market CAGRs, so historically the portfolio has been rewarded for taking risk. The largest peak‑to‑trough drop was about -26.7%, slightly deeper than the US market but similar to the global market. It also recovered in less than a year after bottoming. Just 21 days made up 90% of returns, underlining how a few very strong days have driven a big slice of the gains.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection takes the portfolio’s past behaviour and simulates many different future paths to show a range of possible outcomes. It’s a bit like running 1,000 parallel timelines and seeing where a $1,000 stake might land after 15 years. The median result is around $2,785, with a “middle” band from roughly $1,908 to $4,114 and a wider possible range from about $989 to $7,517. The average simulated annual return is 8.05%, with a 76.1% chance of finishing above the starting value. These numbers are not promises; they simply show what might happen if the future rhymes with the past, which it may not.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

All of this portfolio is in stocks, so there’s no built‑in ballast from bonds or cash. That creates a very clear profile: high exposure to company earnings, economic cycles, and stock‑market swings, with no offset from traditionally steadier asset classes. Many diversified portfolios spread across stocks, bonds, and sometimes alternatives to smooth overall ups and downs. Here, any shock to equity markets flows straight through to the total portfolio value. This kind of single‑asset‑class structure can work well in strong equity markets, but it also means drawdowns are entirely driven by stock volatility rather than cushioned by other asset types.

Sectors Info

  • Energy
    28%
  • Technology
    24%
  • Real Estate
    22%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Financials
    8%
  • Consumer Staples
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    1%
  • Health Care
    1%
  • Telecommunications
    1%

Sector‑wise, the portfolio leans heavily into energy, technology, and real estate, which together account for roughly three‑quarters of the exposure. Industrials and financials add another chunk, with only small slices in other areas. Compared with a broad equity benchmark, this is a more concentrated sector profile, with bigger bets on a few economically sensitive segments and less presence in traditionally defensive areas. Sector tilts matter because different parts of the market react differently to interest rates, inflation, and growth scares. Portfolios with more in cyclical sectors tend to swing more when the economic outlook changes, both positively and negatively.

Regions Info

  • North America
    100%

Geographically, everything here is in North America, and effectively all in the US. That makes the portfolio very easy to understand in terms of currency and familiar companies, but it also ties all equity risk to a single region. By comparison, global market benchmarks spread across many countries and currencies. When US markets are strong, this home‑bias can look very rewarding; when the US lags other regions, there is no offset from overseas exposure. It also means that policy changes, regulation, and economic shocks specific to the US have a direct impact across the entire portfolio.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    38%
  • Mega-cap
    30%
  • No data
    15%
  • Mid-cap
    10%
  • Small-cap
    4%
  • Micro-cap
    3%

The market‑cap breakdown shows a strong tilt toward larger companies, with mega‑cap and large‑cap stocks making up most of the invested weight. There is still some exposure to mid, small, and even micro‑caps, but these are relatively modest. Large and mega‑cap companies tend to be more established and are often more liquid, which can dampen some of the extreme swings seen in tiny stocks, though they still move with the broader market. Smaller holdings, while a minority, can still punch above their weight in terms of volatility, especially if they operate in more niche or leveraged business models.

True holdings Info

  • Applied Materials Inc
    23.45%
  • Enterprise Products Partners LP
    15.99%
  • Adamas Trust, Inc
    15.27%
  • Halliburton Company
    10.73%
  • Delta Air Lines Inc
    8.56%
  • Bank of America Corp
    5.79%
  • AG Mortgage Investment Trust Inc
    2.71%
  • Invesco Mortgage Capital Inc
    0.80%
  • American Airlines Group
    0.73%
  • Catalyst Pharmaceuticals Inc
    0.63%
  • Top 10 total 84.66%

The look‑through analysis confirms that the bulk of exposure comes from direct holdings rather than hidden overlaps inside ETFs. The top positions like Applied Materials, Enterprise Products Partners, and Adamas Trust appear only as direct stocks, not doubled up in the ETFs, so there’s limited hidden concentration from index overlap. The ETFs themselves spread risk across many names, but since they are a smaller portion of the portfolio, they don’t dominate the look‑through picture. Coverage for ETFs is only based on their top ten holdings, so there may be additional diversified exposure beyond what’s shown, but it would not change the fact that single stocks drive most of the overall risk.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
High
Data availability: 85%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 85%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
High
Data availability: 100%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 98%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%

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 notable tilts toward value, momentum, quality, and yield, with low‑volatility exposure roughly market‑like. Factors are like underlying “personality traits” of stocks that research has linked to long‑term returns. High value exposure suggests the portfolio leans into cheaper companies based on fundamentals. High momentum means many holdings have been recent winners. Strong quality exposure points toward firms with healthier balance sheets or profitability, and high yield reflects an emphasis on income‑paying stocks. This combination can behave well when markets reward both earnings strength and cash distributions, but momentum tilts can also amplify reversals when trends abruptly change.

Risk contribution Info

  • Applied Materials Inc
    Weight: 23.45%
    42.6%
  • Halliburton Company
    Weight: 10.73%
    13.1%
  • Delta Air Lines Inc
    Weight: 8.56%
    12.0%
  • Enterprise Products Partners LP
    Weight: 15.99%
    7.3%
  • SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500 High Dividend ETF
    Weight: 11.76%
    6.9%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 81.9%

Risk contribution paints a very concentrated picture: Applied Materials alone is 23.45% of the weight but drives 42.61% of total portfolio volatility. That risk/weight ratio of 1.82 means it has a much larger impact on ups and downs than its size suggests. Halliburton and Delta Air Lines also contribute more risk than their weights, so the top three names create about two‑thirds of the total risk. On the other hand, positions like Enterprise Products and the S&P 500 high‑dividend ETF contribute less risk than their weight. This pattern shows that position size and risk are not the same thing; volatility and correlation matter just as much.

Redundant positions Info

  • SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500 High Dividend ETF
    Invesco S&P 500® High Dividend Low Volatility ETF
    High correlation

The correlation data highlights that the two dividend‑focused ETFs move almost identically. Correlation measures how often assets move in the same direction; a very high correlation means they behave like close cousins. When two holdings are so tightly linked, they don’t add much diversification against each other, even if their names sound different. In practical terms, when one of these ETFs goes up or down, the other tends to do something very similar, so holding both only modestly spreads risk. This doesn’t make them “bad” holdings, just means the combined pair behaves more like a single block than two independent diversifiers.

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 risk‑versus‑return chart, the current portfolio sits below the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier is the curve showing the best return you could have historically achieved for each level of risk using only these holdings but with different weights. The current Sharpe ratio of 0.74 (a measure of return per unit of risk) is well below the optimal portfolio’s 1.38 and even a bit below the minimum‑variance portfolio’s 0.78. This suggests that, based on history, a different mix of the same components could have delivered either more return for similar risk, or similar return with less volatility, without adding new investments.

Dividends Info

  • Apple Inc 0.30%
  • Antero Midstream Partners LP 4.30%
  • Applied Materials Inc 0.30%
  • Bank of America Corp 2.10%
  • Delta Air Lines Inc 0.70%
  • Enterprise Products Partners LP 6.00%
  • Ford Motor Company 2.60%
  • Halliburton Company 1.80%
  • Invesco Mortgage Capital Inc 19.30%
  • AG Mortgage Investment Trust Inc 11.50%
  • Microsoft Corporation 0.60%
  • Prospect Capital Corporation 20.50%
  • Invesco S&P 500® High Dividend Low Volatility ETF 4.60%
  • SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500 High Dividend ETF 4.20%
  • Adamas Trust, Inc 9.50%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 3.99%

The portfolio’s overall dividend yield of about 3.99% is meaningfully higher than the broad US market, mainly thanks to high‑yield stocks and the dividend‑focused ETFs. Some holdings, such as mortgage REITs and Prospect Capital, have double‑digit yields, which are generous but often come with higher business or payout risk. Others, like big tech names, offer low but steady dividends that mainly play a supporting role. Dividends contribute a regular cash component to total return alongside price movement, which can be attractive for income‑minded investors, but high yields alone don’t guarantee stability, especially if underlying earnings are more volatile.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Invesco S&P 500® High Dividend Low Volatility ETF 0.30%
  • SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500 High Dividend ETF 0.07%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.01%

Costs are a relative bright spot. The SPDR high‑dividend ETF has a very low total expense ratio (TER) of 0.07%, and even the Invesco high‑dividend low‑volatility ETF at 0.30% is reasonable for a more specialized strategy. Because individual stocks don’t charge ongoing fees, the blended portfolio TER comes out extremely low at about 0.01%. TER is like a small annual “service charge” that quietly reduces returns; keeping it low leaves more of any gains in the investor’s pocket. Over long periods, even small fee differences can compound, so this cost profile is a solid structural advantage.

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

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