Concentrated growth portfolio focused on US technology and semiconductors with strong historic returns
Report created on May 1, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
QQ Invesco QQQ Trust
QQQ - US46090E1038 70.00% -
SM VanEck Semiconductor ETF
SMH - US92189F6768 30.00%
This portfolio is very simple and highly focused: two equity ETFs make up 100% of the holdings. Around 70% sits in a broad US growth and tech-heavy ETF, while roughly 30% is in a dedicated semiconductor ETF. That structure leaves no exposure to bonds, cash, or alternative assets. A two-holding setup is easy to understand and track, and the 70/30 split creates a clear tilt toward one specific industry. The trade-off is that portfolio behavior is dominated by the fortunes of technology and chip-related companies, so outcomes will likely feel more amplified than in a more broadly spread mix of funds.
Growth
Over the period shown, a $1,000 investment grew to about $11,107, which is exceptionally strong compared with both the US and global markets. The portfolio’s CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate, a “speedometer” for long-term growth) was 27.36% versus 15.16% for the US market and 12.52% globally. Max drawdown, the largest peak-to-trough fall, reached -39.27%, a deeper drop than the benchmarks. Returns were also concentrated in 52 trading days that produced 90% of gains, highlighting how missing a small number of strong days could have mattered a lot for long-term outcomes.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses past returns and volatility to simulate many possible 15‑year futures and then summarizes them. Think of it like running 1,000 “what if” market paths based on historical behavior. The median outcome grows $1,000 to about $2,731, with a wide central range from roughly $1,731 to $4,155, and more extreme paths spanning about $942 to $7,618. The average annual return across simulations is 8.04%, much lower than the historical CAGR, reflecting the model’s more conservative assumptions. As always, these projections are not promises; they just map the range of outcomes that could plausibly happen if the future roughly rhymes with the past.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio is in stocks, with no allocation to bonds or cash-like assets. That creates a very growth-oriented profile, where outcomes are tightly linked to equity markets. Equities tend to offer higher long-term return potential but also larger and more frequent swings in value compared with interest-bearing investments. Because 100% equity allocations lack the stabilizing role bonds can play, the overall risk score coming out relatively high is consistent with the asset mix. This all‑stock structure is straightforward and transparent, but it also means the ride is likely to be bumpier during market stress than in more mixed asset class portfolios.
Sectors
- Technology 67%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 9%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Health Care 3%
- Industrials 2%
- Utilities 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
Sector exposure is heavily tilted toward technology, which makes up about 67% of the portfolio, with semiconductors a big part of that. The rest is scattered across areas like telecommunications, consumer discretionary, consumer staples, health care, and a few smaller sectors. Compared with broad market indices, this is a strong concentration in one growth-oriented area. Tech-heavy portfolios often do well when innovation and digital spending are booming, but they can be particularly sensitive to interest rate changes, regulatory pressures, or downturns in corporate IT and hardware spending. The current mix aligns with a clear growth theme rather than a balanced cross‑sector approach.
Regions
- North America 93%
- Asia Developed 4%
- Europe Developed 3%
Geographically, about 93% of the portfolio is in North America, with only small slices in developed Asia and Europe. That’s a much stronger US tilt than global indices, where the US is large but not quite this dominant. This home‑region focus means portfolio performance is closely tied to the US economy, policy, and currency. It has been beneficial over the last decade because US large growth companies have led global returns, especially in technology. The flip side is that if leadership rotates toward other regions, this portfolio would not capture much of that shift. Currency risk is also mostly concentrated in the US dollar.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 49%
- Large-cap 39%
- Mid-cap 11%
Most of the portfolio sits in very large companies: roughly 49% in mega‑caps and 39% in large‑caps, with about 11% in mid‑caps. This size distribution is somewhat similar to many broad market growth indices, where big, well‑established names dominate. Larger firms can offer more stability than tiny, speculative companies because they often have diversified revenues and stronger balance sheets. At the same time, they can be more sensitive to broad macro trends and index flows. The modest allocation to mid‑caps adds some additional growth potential and volatility, but the overall feel of the portfolio is “big‑company‑driven” rather than focused on smaller, more niche businesses.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 11.59%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.93%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AV Broadcom Inc 4.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.51%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
TS Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 3.20%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.48%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.47%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.33%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.31%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- Top 10 total 41.61%
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings, a few big names account for a meaningful chunk of the portfolio. NVIDIA alone is about 11.6%, while Apple, Broadcom, Microsoft, Amazon, TSMC, Alphabet (both share classes), Meta, and Tesla appear prominently. Some companies show up in both ETFs, creating overlap and hidden concentration even though there are only two funds. Because the data covers only the top 10 ETF holdings, this overlap is actually a floor, not a ceiling. This clustering in a handful of mega‑cap technology and internet firms helps explain the strong growth but also means portfolio behavior will closely mirror their ups and downs.
Factors
Factor exposure shows a very low tilt to value, meaning the portfolio leans strongly away from cheaper “value” stocks and toward more expensive growth and momentum names. Factor exposure is like analyzing the ingredients behind returns rather than just looking at the final dish. A very low value score suggests the portfolio is concentrated in companies with higher valuations relative to fundamentals such as earnings or book value. That can work well when markets favor growth stories and are willing to pay up for future potential, but it may lead to sharper setbacks if investors rotate toward cheaper segments or if expectations for high‑growth firms reset.
Risk contribution
-
Invesco QQQ Trust
Weight: 70.00% 62.3% -
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
Weight: 30.00% 37.7%
Risk contribution shows how much each ETF drives the portfolio’s overall swings. Although Invesco QQQ is 70% of the weight, it contributes about 62.3% of total risk, slightly less than its size alone would suggest. The VanEck Semiconductor ETF is 30% by weight but adds around 37.7% of risk, meaning it is more volatile relative to its share. This happens because semiconductors tend to move more sharply than broader tech holdings. In general, risk contribution helps reveal where the “emotional impact” of the portfolio comes from: here, both funds matter, but the semiconductor slice punches above its weight in shaping daily and monthly performance.
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 suggests the current mix is already on or very close to the optimal curve for these two holdings. The Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above a risk‑free rate, is 0.89 for the current portfolio compared with 1.08 for the theoretical maximum and 0.93 for the minimum‑volatility mix. That means, using only these two ETFs, there isn’t a huge improvement available without accepting noticeably different risk levels. It’s a useful confirmation that, within this narrow toolkit, the chosen 70/30 split is an efficient way to balance return and volatility based on the historical data used.
Dividends
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.40%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.34%
Dividend yield is relatively low at around 0.34% for the portfolio, reflecting the growth‑oriented nature of its holdings. QQQ yields roughly 0.40%, and the semiconductor ETF about 0.20%. Dividends represent cash paid back to investors, but for fast‑growing companies, more of the value often comes from price appreciation rather than income. In this structure, dividends provide only a small part of total return, consistent with a focus on firms that tend to reinvest profits into research, expansion, and new products. For someone evaluating this portfolio, it makes more sense to think of it as a capital‑growth engine than an income‑generating setup.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.24%
Costs are relatively low, with a blended TER (Total Expense Ratio, the annual fee charged by funds) of about 0.24%. The main ETF charges 0.20%, and the semiconductor ETF 0.35%. Over long horizons, lower fees help more of the portfolio’s gross return stay in the investor’s pocket, and this cost level compares favorably to many actively managed alternatives. Fees compound over time just like returns do, so even modest differences can add up. Here, the pricing supports the strong growth profile rather than dragging heavily on performance, which is a positive alignment with best practices around keeping ongoing investment charges under control.
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