Concentrated growth portfolio with strong US tilt and technology health care and communication exposure

Report created on Apr 21, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is a pure equity growth mix holding only stocks and stock ETFs, with no bonds or cash. About half sits in broad index funds, while the rest is in single large companies and two sector-focused ETFs. Direct single-stock positions in big household names together make up 30% of the portfolio, which is a meaningful chunk. That structure means overall results are driven both by the broad market and by what happens to a small group of individual companies. A setup like this can deliver strong upside when those specific names do well, but it also makes the portfolio’s path more dependent on company‑level news than a fully diversified index-only mix.

Growth Info

From late 2020 to April 2026, a $1,000 investment in this portfolio grew to about $3,066. That works out to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 22.68%, which is how much it grew per year on average, similar to calculating average speed over a long road trip. Over the same period, the US market returned 14.89% a year and the global market 13.04%, so this mix clearly outpaced both. The max drawdown, at -26.73%, was only slightly deeper than the US market’s -24.50%, meaning the extra return came with only modestly higher downside. Just 34 days made up 90% of returns, showing gains were very lumpy and timing mattered a lot. Past returns, of course, don’t guarantee anything going forward.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses the portfolio’s historical behavior to simulate many possible 15‑year futures. Think of it as running 1,000 alternate timelines where returns vary randomly based on past ups and downs. The median outcome turns $1,000 into about $2,836, or 8.21% annualized across all simulations. The “likely” middle band ranges from roughly $1,831 to $4,254, and the wider possible band stretches from $957 to $8,084. About three‑quarters of the simulations end with a positive result, but some paths still finish below the starting value. This highlights how even strong‑return portfolios can have very different outcomes depending on when good and bad years show up, and that simulated numbers are only rough guides, not promises.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

All of this portfolio is in stocks, with 100% equity exposure and no allocation to bonds, cash, or alternative assets. Equities are typically the main driver of long‑term growth, but they also swing more in the short term than bonds or cash. Compared with balanced mixes that include other asset classes, this structure leans firmly into growth and short‑term volatility. Relative to broad global equity benchmarks, the portfolio looks similar in that it is equity‑only, but differs from multi‑asset approaches that use bonds to smooth the ride. This pure‑equity setup has worked well in the backtest, but it also means the portfolio’s value will be tightly tied to stock market cycles without a built‑in stabilizer.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    25%
  • Health Care
    20%
  • Telecommunications
    14%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    11%
  • Financials
    8%
  • Industrials
    7%
  • Energy
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%
  • Utilities
    1%

Sector-wise, the portfolio is clearly tilted toward a few areas. Technology is the largest slice at 25%, and health care is close behind at 20%. Telecommunications (which here mainly captures big communication and internet platforms) adds another 14%, while consumer discretionary, financials, industrials, and energy together make up most of the rest. Dedicated health care and energy ETFs, plus single stocks, add further focus in those segments. Compared with a broad global index, this mix leans more toward growth‑oriented and innovation‑driven fields. That setup can benefit when innovation and digital spending are strong, but it may feel more volatile during periods of regulatory pressure, policy uncertainty, or when markets rotate into more cyclical or defensive sectors.

Regions Info

  • North America
    72%
  • Europe Developed
    10%
  • Asia Emerging
    8%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    4%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geographically, about 72% of the portfolio is in North America, with the remaining 28% spread across developed Europe, Japan, other developed Asia, and several emerging regions. A global market‑cap index also tends to be US‑heavy, but typically with a somewhat lower North American share than seen here. The dedicated total international ETF helps broaden exposure beyond the US and Canada, adding Europe, Japan, and emerging markets into the mix. This creates a moderate but not dominant non‑US slice. The result is a portfolio that still strongly reflects North American economic and currency conditions, while still tapping into growth and diversification from international markets, which can sometimes behave differently during regional booms or slowdowns.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    52%
  • Large-cap
    20%
  • Mid-cap
    14%
  • Small-cap
    9%
  • Micro-cap
    3%

By market capitalization, the portfolio leans toward the very largest companies: about 52% in mega‑caps and another 20% in large‑caps. Mid‑caps and small‑caps together account for around 23%, with a small 3% slice in micro‑caps. Mega‑caps often bring more stability and liquidity, but can be more tied to global trends and index flows. Smaller companies, by contrast, can have higher growth potential but more pronounced price swings and business risk. This mix, anchored in mega‑caps with a meaningful but not dominant allocation to smaller names, lines up pretty well with many broad equity benchmarks. That alignment is generally positive, supporting diversification across company sizes while keeping most exposure in well‑established firms.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    6.34%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 5.00%
  • Eli Lilly and Company
    6.19%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Health Care Index Fund ETF Shares
    Direct holding 5.00%
  • Amazon.com Inc
    5.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 5.00%
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    5.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 5.00%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    5.54%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Direct holding 5.00%
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing
    5.00%
  • Exxon Mobil Corp
    1.14%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund
  • Apple Inc
    1.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
  • Johnson & Johnson
    0.94%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Health Care Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.86%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 38.38%

Looking through the ETFs into their top holdings, there is notable overlap with the portfolio’s individual stocks. NVIDIA, Eli Lilly, Amazon, Meta, and Alphabet all appear both directly and inside ETFs, lifting their true exposures above the 5% headline weights to roughly 5.5–6.3% each. Taiwan Semiconductor also shows up twice, once directly and once under a slightly different listing name in an ETF. This kind of overlap creates hidden concentration, because several funds are effectively backing the same set of winners. While this has helped performance in recent years, it also means that a pullback in these names could hit multiple parts of the portfolio at once. Overlap may actually be higher than shown, since only ETF top‑10 holdings are captured.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Low
Data availability: 85%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 85%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 85%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 95%
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 mild tilts away from value and size. Value at 38% and size at 35% both sit in the “low” range, meaning the portfolio favors higher‑priced growth companies and larger firms more than the market average. Factor exposure is like looking at the underlying “personality traits” of a portfolio. Here, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility all sit near neutral, so they behave broadly like the wider market rather than showing strong tilts. The growth and large‑cap bias can help when investors pay up for earnings growth and dominant platforms, but it may lag if markets rotate into cheaper, smaller, or more cyclical companies. Importantly, these scores are descriptive snapshots, not forecasts.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 25.00%
    18.0%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Weight: 15.00%
    16.8%
  • Vanguard Extended Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 15.00%
    15.8%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    Weight: 5.00%
    10.3%
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    Weight: 5.00%
    7.9%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 68.8%

Risk contribution measures how much each holding adds to the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its simple weight. The three big diversified ETFs together account for 55% of the weight but about 51% of risk, which is pretty proportional. The standout is NVIDIA: at just 5% of capital, it contributes about 10.30% of total risk, with a risk‑to‑weight ratio of 2.06. Meta shows a smaller but similar pattern, adding 7.92% of risk for a 5% weight. This tells us that a handful of volatile growth names drive a significant share of the portfolio’s overall movement. Even though single stocks hold less capital than the ETFs, they punch above their weight in determining how bumpy the ride feels.

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 chart compares the current mix to the best possible combinations of the same holdings. The portfolio’s Sharpe ratio is 0.85, where Sharpe measures risk‑adjusted return by comparing excess return above the risk‑free rate to volatility. The optimal mix of these existing positions reaches a Sharpe of 1.77 with higher return for somewhat higher risk, and even the minimum‑variance mix has a Sharpe of 0.72. The current portfolio sits about 13 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, meaning it’s not using the existing ingredients in the most efficient way. In plain terms, the same holdings, just arranged differently, could historically have achieved a better balance between risk and return.

Dividends Info

  • Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
  • Eli Lilly and Company 0.70%
  • Meta Platforms Inc. 0.30%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 0.80%
  • Vanguard Health Care Index Fund ETF Shares 1.70%
  • Vanguard Extended Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.10%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
  • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund 2.70%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.32%

Overall, this is a low‑yielding portfolio, with a total dividend yield around 1.32%. Several individual holdings either pay no dividend or very small ones, such as Alphabet and Meta, while others like the international index fund and the energy ETF pay higher yields in the 2.7% range. Dividends are simply cash payments from companies, and they can be an important piece of total return over time, especially in more income‑focused strategies. In this case, the lower yield fits with the growth tilt and concentration in large, innovative companies that tend to reinvest earnings. That means most of the portfolio’s historical and expected return comes from price movement rather than regular cash payouts.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • Vanguard Health Care Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Vanguard Extended Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.06%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Energy Select Sector SPDR® Fund 0.09%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%

The portfolio’s costs are impressively low. The individual ETFs all have total expense ratios (TERs) between 0.05% and 0.15%, and the combined weighted TER is just 0.06%. TER is the annual fee charged by a fund, expressed as a percentage of assets, similar to a small management charge that’s quietly taken out each year. This level of cost is well below what many actively managed funds charge and aligns with best‑practice ranges for low‑cost indexing. Over long periods, lower fees leave more of any gross return in the investor’s pocket, and the difference compounds. This cost structure is a real strength of the portfolio and supports better long‑term efficiency.

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