Semiconductor obsession wrapped in a sensible index trying very hard to pretend this is diversified
Report created on May 30, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
SN SCHWAB 1000 INDEX FUND INVESTOR SHARES
SNXFX - US8085171069 63.40% -
SM VanEck Semiconductor ETF
SMH - US92189F6768 10.54% -
SW SCHWAB INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES
SWISX - US8085098304 8.84% -
MU Micron Technology Inc
MU - US5951121038 7.18% -
GO Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL - US02079K3059 4.02% -
DR Roundhill Memory ETF
DRAM 3.89% -
VG Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
VGT - US92204A7028 2.13%
This portfolio is basically a perfectly normal 1000‑stock core index that got drunk and impulse-bought semiconductors. Over 60% is in a broad US index fund, which screams “boring and sensible,” then nearly a quarter is laser‑focused on chips and memory, plus a dab of pure tech. It’s like someone started building a standard core portfolio and then decided it also needed a casino corner. Structurally, it’s a barbell: one big diversified anchor, plus a cluster of highly related, cyclical satellite bets. With only two months of history, it’s impossible to say whether this mash‑up is genius or just volatility cosplay, but the intent seems clear: core on paper, concentrated in practice.
Growth
The recent performance numbers are completely unhinged: a 55x‑style annual growth rate and a $1,000 stake turning into $1,327 in under two months. That’s not “normal outperformance,” that’s “you happened to show up during a tech sugar high.” CAGR, or compound annual growth rate, is just the average speed of growth per year, and here it’s wildly distorted by the tiny sample. Same deal with crushing both US and global markets: it looks heroic, but it’s basically a photo taken at the top of a jump. Past data over eight weeks is yesterday’s weather, not a climate trend. Treat these performance stats as a party trick, not a pattern.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection tries to imagine 1,000 alternate futures for this portfolio, then sums them up in neat stats. Median outcome: your $1,000 becomes $2,575 in 15 years, with a wide possible range from “barely grew” to “rocket ship.” But that engine is built on the last two months of returns, which is like training a weather model on one weird spring. The result: projections that look mathematically precise but rest on wobbly foundations. The big takeaway isn’t the exact dollar amounts; it’s that this thing can swing, both ways, and the upside comes with a non‑trivial chance of a yawn or a faceplant over long stretches.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset classes here are brutally simple: 100% stocks, 0% everything else. No bonds, no cash, no alternatives, just pure equity energy. That’s fine if the goal is maximum market participation, but it’s also like driving without shock absorbers: the road feels great when it’s smooth, and absolutely awful when it isn’t. In asset‑class terms, there’s no built‑in cushioning for bad years, just “ride it out and hope.” With only a couple months of data, the calm so far is not representative. Historically, portfolios this stock‑only tend to experience both the best and the worst of markets, just not on the same convenient chart.
Sectors
- Technology 47%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Financials 10%
- Industrials 8%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Health Care 6%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
On paper, the sector mix looks “diversified”: tech at 47%, then a polite sprinkling of telecoms, financials, industrials, and the rest. In reality, almost half the portfolio is technology, and then the chip-heavy satellites quietly jack that effective tech dependency even higher. This isn’t a balanced sector spread; it’s a tech crush with side characters. Sector diversification matters because different parts of the economy suffer or thrive at different times. Building this much around tech is like running a restaurant that’s 50% desserts. Works when everyone wants cake, less fun when tastes change, interest rates bite, or the hype cycle cools.
Regions
- North America 86%
- Europe Developed 6%
- Asia Developed 4%
- Japan 2%
- Australasia 1%
Geographically, this portfolio is basically “USA first, others if we must.” North America at 86% dominates, with Europe, developed Asia, Japan, and Australasia thrown in as tiny garnish. This skew can be fine when the US is leading, but it’s still one main story line with a few subtitles. A more balanced footprint would spread political, currency, and economic risk; here, those are all heavily tied to one region’s fortunes and policy mood. With only two months of history, recent outperformance versus global markets doesn’t prove that this tilt is brilliant, just that US‑centric risk has recently been rewarded. That changes, and often without much warning.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 52%
- Large-cap 29%
- Mid-cap 14%
- Small-cap 3%
The market cap breakdown screams “index‑core with a mega‑cap fan club”: over half in mega‑caps, another chunk in large‑caps, and barely a nod to small fry. This is classic big‑company bias: safer‑looking giants steering most of the ship while smaller firms get almost no say. That can smooth some idiosyncratic blow‑ups, but it also means the portfolio’s fate is tightly linked to a relatively small club of dominant names that already dominate most benchmarks. Mid and small caps are present more as decoration than drivers. Over the last two months, big‑name strength flatters this setup; that doesn’t tell you how it behaves once market leadership rotates.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Roundhill Memory ETF
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 2.10%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 1.01%
Part of fund(s):- Roundhill Memory ETF
-
TS Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 0.99%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
IN Intel Corporation 0.87%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 0.83%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 0.81%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
-
SS Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 0.72%
Part of fund(s):- Roundhill Memory ETF
-
QC Qualcomm Incorporated 0.53%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Top 10 total 19.97%
The look‑through view confirms what the top line already hinted: this portfolio really, really likes Micron and the broader chip complex. Micron alone is over 8% once you count direct shares plus ETF exposure, making it both a headline position and a stealth repeat. Then there’s NVIDIA, TSMC, SK Hynix, AMD, Samsung, and friends sprinkled across multiple funds. This overlap means the same handful of chip names are quietly stacked in different wrappers, reducing the true diversification more than the fund list suggests. Because we only see ETF top‑10s, the overlap is probably understated, not overstated. The structure may look broad, but under the hood it’s one big semiconductor echo chamber.
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 basically saying: “Forget cheap, forget calm, just give me quality at any price.” It has a very high tilt to quality, which usually means strong balance sheets and profitable businesses, but a very low tilt to size and low volatility. In plain English: big, polished names that can still swing hard. Value is low, so there’s not much of a bargain‑hunter tilt either. Factor exposure is like the ingredient list behind the returns; here, the recipe is “stable companies, unstable stock behavior.” With only two months of data feeding the models, these readings are directionally useful but far from gospel, especially for momentum, where there’s literally no usable data yet.
Risk contribution
-
SCHWAB 1000 INDEX FUND INVESTOR SHARES
Weight: 63.40% 32.2% -
Micron Technology Inc
Weight: 7.18% 25.3% -
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
Weight: 10.54% 17.0% -
Roundhill Memory ETF
Weight: 3.89% 13.2% -
SCHWAB INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES
Weight: 8.84% 6.6% - Top 5 risk contribution 94.4%
Risk contribution is where the quiet drama shows up. The 63% Schwab 1000 core position carries only about a third of total risk, cruising calmly in the background. Meanwhile, Micron, at just 7% weight, contributes a wild 25% of portfolio risk, and the chip ETFs pile on another big chunk. That’s what “punching above your weight” looks like, in a slightly terrifying way. A risk/weight ratio north of 3 means those positions are volatility hogs. In other words, the broad index is the straight‑A student holding the portfolio together, while a few tiny high‑beta names are running around in the hallway with scissors, driving most of the emotional roller coaster.
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, this portfolio is basically leaving free money on the table with its current mix. The Sharpe ratio — a fancy way of saying “return per unit of risk” — is very high numerically but still well below what the same ingredients could deliver with smarter weighting. It sits a chunky ~29 percentage points under the frontier at this risk level, meaning the holdings themselves aren’t the main issue; the proportions are. Even using this silly two‑month data window, the math shouts that volatility isn’t being used efficiently. The min‑variance version would be calmer, and the max‑Sharpe version would be punchier, all without adding a single new asset.
Dividends
- Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
- Micron Technology Inc 0.10%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
- SCHWAB 1000 INDEX FUND INVESTOR SHARES 1.30%
- SCHWAB INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES 3.20%
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.30%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.15%
The yield here is a modest 1.15%, which is basically pocket change by income standards. The main positions — tech and semis — are not exactly dividend royalty, and the “high” payer in the mix barely gets above 3%. This isn’t an income portfolio; it’s a growth‑and‑volatility machine with a tip jar. Relying on these payouts for any meaningful cash flow would be optimistic at best. Over just two months, dividend history tells you almost nothing — payouts are slow, boring, and show up quarterly while prices are bouncing around daily. In this setup, dividends are more like background noise than a central part of the story.
Ongoing product costs
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
- SCHWAB 1000 INDEX FUND INVESTOR SHARES 0.05%
- SCHWAB INTERNATIONAL INDEX FUND SELECT SHARES 0.06%
- Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.08%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio behaves like a responsible adult. A total expense ratio of 0.08% is impressively low, especially given the thematic ETFs in the mix. It’s like building a slightly reckless sports car but at least refusing to overpay for the fuel. The core Schwab and Vanguard pieces do most of the fee heavy lifting by being cheap, while the more expensive semiconductor fund is present but not large enough to wreck the average. Over time, that cost discipline matters more than the last two months of fireworks. At least the fee drag isn’t adding insult to whatever volatility injuries the chips eventually deliver.
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