Chaos with a side of leverage this portfolio sprints uphill then base jumps off the other side
Report created on Apr 24, 2026Risk profile
7/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
EW iShares MSCI South Korea ETF
EWY - US4642867729 20.00% -
GD VanEck Gold Miners ETF
GDX - US92189F1066 20.00% -
SO Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X Shares
SOXL - US25459W4583 20.00% -
TQ ProShares UltraPro QQQ
TQQQ - US74347X8314 20.00% -
XL Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
XLE - US81369Y5069 20.00%
This “portfolio” is basically five big bets in a trench coat pretending to be diversified. Equal 20% chunks in Korea, gold miners, leveraged semis, leveraged Nasdaq, and old-school energy is not balance; it’s a bar fight between themes. There’s no ballast, no core, just a stack of volatility engines pointed in different directions and told to get along. Structurally, it’s closer to a trader’s playground than a long-term mix. When everything here decides to move together, it will move a lot, and “moderately diversified” starts to look like a generous participation trophy rather than an accurate label.
Growth
The historic performance looks like a video game on easy mode: $1,000 turning into $19,832 with a 34.99% CAGR makes the US and global markets look like they were standing still. But then you see the -82.55% max drawdown and the 39 months it took to crawl back and realize this wasn’t a smooth ride; it was a faceplant followed by a long, awkward recovery. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is the “average speed,” but it hides the fact that most of the magic came from just 36 days. Miss those, and the whole heroic story gets a lot less epic.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says: “Expect chaos, but probably in your favor… probably.” A median outcome of $2,857 over 15 years sounds okay until you remember the backtest did $19,832 over 10. Simulations are just thousands of what-if runs using past behavior as a guide, like replaying an old storm to guess the next one. The 5–95% range from $1,097 to $7,604 screams uncertainty: big upside, but a real chance of “meh” returns after a wild ride. Past data is yesterday’s weather report — helpful, but the next hurricane doesn’t have to hit the same place twice.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is simple: 100% stocks, zero of anything remotely calming. There’s no bonds, no cash sleeve, no real diversifier outside some indirect commodity flavor from miners and energy. It’s like building a car entirely out of engine and forgetting brakes, suspension, and seatbelts. Being all-equity isn’t automatically bad, but pairing that with leveraged equity on top turns volatility from “expected” into “core feature.” In practical terms, when markets sneeze, this portfolio catches pneumonia, and there’s nothing in the mix designed to bring the fever down.
Sectors
- Technology 40%
- Basic Materials 21%
- Energy 20%
- Industrials 5%
- Telecommunications 4%
- Consumer Discretionary 4%
- Financials 2%
- Consumer Staples 2%
- Health Care 2%
Sector exposure is basically “tech and chaos-adjacent stuff.” Technology at 40% plus a massive bet on semiconductors through a 3x leveraged ETF means chips are not just on the table, they are the table. Then 21% in basic materials via gold miners and 20% in energy layers on two of the most cyclical, mood-swing-prone areas. The remaining slivers in other sectors are background noise. Compared to a broad index, this is like skipping the main course and ordering only hot sauce. When these sectors line up, returns explode; when they don’t, it’s just a very concentrated way to learn about downside.
Regions
- North America 73%
- Asia Developed 21%
- Europe Developed 2%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
- Asia Emerging 1%
Geographically, the portfolio pretends to be global but is mostly North America (73%) with a big side bet on developed Asia via South Korea. Everything else shows up in 1–2% sprinkles that barely matter. So it’s basically “US-heavy with a Korea kicker and a world tour for decoration.” This isn’t insane, but it’s not exactly a thoughtful global map either; it’s what you get if you chase themes and let geography be an accident. If one region hits a rough patch, there’s no real counterweight — just more volatility wearing a different flag.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 32%
- Mega-cap 29%
- Mid-cap 18%
- Small-cap 1%
Some holdings may not have full classification data available. Percentages may not add up to 100%.
The market cap mix leans heavily into mega and large caps, which sounds safe until you remember those exposures are supercharged by leverage. Around 61% in mega and large caps might normally imply stability, but not when you’re holding 3x leveraged products tied to them. It’s like driving a tank at 150 mph — big and “stable,” but still catastrophic if you hit a wall. Mid-caps have a decent 18% chunk, while small caps are basically an afterthought at 1%. The supposed blue-chip foundation is there, but someone wired it to a rocket.
True holdings
-
00 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 4.69%
Part of fund(s):- iShares MSCI South Korea ETF
-
XO Exxon Mobil Corp 4.57%
Part of fund(s):- Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 3.95%
Part of fund(s):- iShares MSCI South Korea ETF
-
CV Chevron Corp 3.43%
Part of fund(s):- Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
-
AE Agnico Eagle Mines Limited 2.40%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Gold Miners ETF
-
NE Newmont Goldcorp Corp 2.20%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Gold Miners ETF
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 1.58%
Part of fund(s):- Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X Shares
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
-
B Barrick Mining Corporation 1.51%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Gold Miners ETF
-
CO ConocoPhillips 1.41%
Part of fund(s):- Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.13%
Part of fund(s):- Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X Shares
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ
- Top 10 total 26.87%
Look-through holdings show a fun little overlap story. Samsung, SK Hynix, and NVIDIA pop up, meaning the semiconductor obsession is not just in the 3x ETF, it’s quietly echoed elsewhere. Exxon, Chevron, and ConocoPhillips dominate the energy look, so a lot of that 20% energy slice boils down to a handful of giants. Gold miners are similarly concentrated in a few big names like Newmont and Barrick. With only ETF top-10s included, this likely understates the doubling-up, but even this partial view says one thing: the same themes and names keep repeating, just wearing different ETF labels.
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-wise, this portfolio is a momentum junkie with very low patience for value or calm. A 62% momentum tilt means it’s chasing what’s been working lately — like always showing up to the party that was hot six months ago. Low value exposure says there’s little interest in “cheap,” and low size plus low low-volatility means no love for smaller or steadier names either. Factor exposure is basically the ingredient list, and here it reads: “fast, flashy, and fragile.” When trends run, this sings; when they reverse, there’s not much quality, yield, or defensiveness to cushion the hangover, despite a neutral quality score on paper.
Risk contribution
-
Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X Shares
Weight: 20.00% 45.1% -
ProShares UltraPro QQQ
Weight: 20.00% 29.6% -
iShares MSCI South Korea ETF
Weight: 20.00% 9.9% -
Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
Weight: 20.00% 8.1% -
VanEck Gold Miners ETF
Weight: 20.00% 7.3%
Risk contribution is where the mask really slips. The 20% semi 3x position contributes about 45% of total risk, and the 20% 3x QQQ adds another ~30%. So 40% of the portfolio is doing roughly 75% of the freaking out. In total, the top three holdings carry ~85% of the risk load. Risk contribution shows who’s actually shaking the portfolio, and here the leveraged holdings are basically thrashing everyone else around. Korea, energy, and gold miners may look like equal partners, but in volatility terms they’re side characters while the leverage duo runs the show.
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 efficient frontier chart, the portfolio sits a couple of percentage points below the curve at its risk level, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.87 versus 1.0 for the “best possible” mix using the same toys. The efficient frontier is just the set of best risk/return trade-offs; being below it means this is an unnecessarily wobbly way to get its return. Even without adding any new holdings, just reweighting what’s already here could, in theory, give a smoother ride or better payoff. Instead, the current setup insists on maximum drama per unit of return, like it’s offended by the idea of efficiency.
Dividends
- iShares MSCI South Korea ETF 1.40%
- VanEck Gold Miners ETF 0.70%
- Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X Shares 0.10%
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ 0.50%
- Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund 2.60%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.06%
The total yield of 1.06% confirms that nobody built this with income in mind. Between 0.1% from the semi 3x fund, 0.5% from the leveraged QQQ, and modest yields from Korea and gold miners, the only one really trying is the energy ETF at 2.6%. This is a capital gains or bust portfolio: returns are expected to come from price swings, not steady cash flow. Dividends can act like a tiny stabilizer over time; here, they’re basically pocket change tossed on top of a rollercoaster, not a serious part of the design.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares MSCI South Korea ETF 0.59%
- VanEck Gold Miners ETF 0.51%
- Direxion Daily Semiconductor Bull 3X Shares 0.76%
- ProShares UltraPro QQQ 0.88%
- Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund 0.09%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.57%
A total TER of 0.57% is… not catastrophic, but also not cheap for a handful of ETFs, especially when the main cost driver is leverage products that already make you pay in volatility. The 0.88% and 0.76% fees on the 3x funds are like cover charges to enter a nightclub where the dress code is “whiplash.” Energy at 0.09% proves low fees are possible, so the rest is just the surcharge for drama. Over time, those extra basis points quietly nibble away at returns, which is ironic given how loudly the portfolio shouts everywhere else.
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