Growth tilted portfolio focused on US large cap technology with moderate diversification and efficient cost structure
Report created on Aug 9, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
QQ Invesco QQQ Trust
QQQ - US46090E1038 41.05% -
VT Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
VTV - US9229087443 25.44% -
QQ Direxion NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index Shares
QQQE - US25459Y2072 20.73% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 12.78%
This portfolio is a concentrated all‑equity mix built from four ETFs. A little over 60% sits in US growth and tech-heavy indices through QQQ and the equal‑weight NASDAQ‑100 fund. Around a quarter is in a broad US value index, and just under 13% is in international stocks outside the US. So most of the risk and return is driven by US equities, with a tilt toward large, innovative companies and a balancing slice of value. Structurally, this is clearly a “growth investors” style portfolio rather than a balanced multi‑asset mix, which helps explain its higher risk score and strong sensitivity to stock market moves.
Growth
From 2016 to 2026, a hypothetical $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $4,734, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 16.89%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths out bumps to show long‑run pace. This comfortably beat both the US market (15.36%) and the global market (12.66%) over the same period. The worst peak‑to‑trough drop was about -30.8% during early 2020, roughly similar to the benchmarks. Returns have also been “lumpy”: just 40 days delivered 90% of gains, showing that missing a small handful of strong days would have made a big difference to outcomes.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses thousands of randomized paths based on historical patterns to estimate a range of future outcomes. Think of it as rolling the dice on market returns 1,000 different ways and seeing where $1,000 could end up after 15 years. The median result is around $2,808, with a “middle” band between about $1,892 and $4,414. That’s an annualized simulated return of 8.48%, well below the backward‑looking 16.89% CAGR, which reminds us that past performance doesn’t guarantee future results. The wide range from roughly $1,078 to $8,469 underlines that equity‑only portfolios can land very differently depending on future market paths.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio is in stocks, with 0% in bonds, cash, or alternative assets. That 100% equity allocation is what drives the “Growth Investors” label and the relatively high risk score. Stocks historically have offered higher long‑term returns than bonds, but with larger and more frequent swings along the way. Having no defensive assets means there’s little built‑in cushion if global equities fall sharply; the portfolio will generally move in the same direction as stock markets, just with its own twists from its growth and tech tilts. This clear, single‑asset‑class structure keeps things simple but also concentrates risk in one return engine.
Sectors
- Technology 39%
- Industrials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 9%
- Financials 9%
- Telecommunications 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Consumer Staples 7%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 3%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 1%
The sector breakdown shows a clear technology tilt at 39%, with the rest spread across industrials, consumer, financials, telecoms, health care, and smaller slices of energy, utilities, materials, and real estate. Compared with broad global indices, tech is meaningfully overweight, while more defensive areas like utilities and consumer staples are relatively small. Tech‑heavy portfolios often benefit when innovation and growth stories are in favor, but can be more sensitive to interest rate changes and shifts in market sentiment around high‑growth companies. The presence of value and international ETFs helps fill out non‑tech sectors, supporting the “moderately diversified” score rather than “highly concentrated.”
Regions
- North America 86%
- Europe Developed 6%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Japan 2%
- Asia Emerging 2%
- Latin America 1%
- Australasia 1%
Geographically, about 86% of the portfolio’s equity exposure is in North America, with only modest slices in Europe, Japan, developed Asia, emerging Asia, Latin America, and Australasia. Compared with a global equity benchmark, which usually has closer to 60% in North America, this is a notable home‑country tilt toward the US. That has helped historically, since US stocks have been strong over the last decade, but it also ties most of the portfolio’s fortunes to one economy, one policy regime, and largely one currency. The international fund adds some global diversification, yet the US still clearly dominates the risk and return picture.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 38%
- Mega-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 24%
- Small-cap 1%
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans heavily to bigger companies: roughly 35% in mega‑caps, 38% in large‑caps, 24% in mid‑caps, and only 1% in small‑caps. Large and mega‑cap companies tend to be more established, with deeper markets and more analyst coverage, which can dampen some extremes of volatility compared with tiny firms. However, it also means less exposure to the sometimes more explosive upside (and downside) of small‑caps. This cap profile is broadly similar to major indices, just nudged further toward the very largest names because of the NASDAQ‑100 focus, so the portfolio’s behavior should broadly resemble a large‑cap‑dominated global equity mix.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 3.47%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 3.04%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc. 3.01%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.43%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.92%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 1.44%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.37%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.31%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.28%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.14%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- Top 10 total 20.40%
The look‑through data, even though it covers only ETF top‑10 holdings, already shows meaningful overlap in a handful of mega‑cap growth names. NVIDIA, Micron, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, AMD, Alphabet, Broadcom, and Meta all appear multiple times, adding up to noticeable effective weights in a small group of companies. Because this only reflects about 30% of the portfolio via top‑10 lists, actual overlap is likely higher. Hidden concentration like this means that while there are four ETFs on the surface, many of them rhyme under the hood: several funds lean on the same leaders. This helps explain both the strong historical performance and potential sensitivity to sentiment around a narrow group of big tech‑related stocks.
Factors
Factor exposure is broadly market‑like across value, size, momentum, quality, and low volatility, all sitting in the neutral band. “Factors” are characteristics like cheapness (value) or recent winners (momentum) that research links to long‑term return patterns. A neutral score suggests this portfolio behaves similarly to a broad market basket on these dimensions, rather than leaning heavily into any specific style. Yield stands out mildly on the low side, consistent with the focus on growth and the modest 1.07% overall dividend yield. In practice, that often means more of the total return historically has come from price changes rather than from regular income payments.
Risk contribution
-
Invesco QQQ Trust
Weight: 41.05% 47.8% -
Direxion NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index Shares
Weight: 20.73% 22.5% -
Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 25.44% 19.5% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 12.78% 10.2%
Risk contribution shows how much each ETF drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. QQQ is 41% of the portfolio but contributes almost 48% of total risk, meaning it punches above its weight. The equal‑weight NASDAQ‑100 ETF is similar, with slightly higher risk per unit of weight than the two Vanguard funds. Together, the top three holdings make up about 87% of capital but nearly 90% of risk, so the international slice has a relatively modest effect on volatility. This pattern is common when several holdings track similar, growth‑oriented segments: they tend to rise and fall together, amplifying their impact on total risk.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationDirexion NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index SharesInvesco QQQ Trust
The correlation data highlights that QQQ and the equal‑weight NASDAQ‑100 ETF move almost identically. Correlation measures how often assets move in the same direction; when it’s very high, holding more than one such asset doesn’t add much diversification. Here, those two funds are effectively two flavors of the same underlying index, so they will typically respond similarly to tech or NASDAQ‑related news. This helps explain why holding both doesn’t dramatically change risk contribution compared with just one. The value and international funds likely introduce more differentiated behavior relative to these two, which is where most of the limited diversification within the equity‑only structure comes from.
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 other possible weightings using only these four ETFs. The current portfolio has an annualized return of about 16.99% and risk of 18.73%, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.69. The “optimal” mix on this frontier has a higher Sharpe of 0.91, meaning better risk‑adjusted returns, and slightly higher risk and return overall. The minimum‑variance portfolio sits at lower risk and lower expected return with a similar Sharpe to the current mix. Because the current portfolio is about 1 percentage point below the frontier at its risk level, the data suggests that simply rearranging weights among the same ETFs could, in theory, improve efficiency without adding new holdings.
Dividends
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.40%
- Direxion NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index Shares 0.60%
- Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares 1.80%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.50%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.07%
The overall dividend yield of the portfolio is about 1.07%, which is on the low side compared with many broad equity income strategies. Dividends are cash payments from companies, and over long periods they can be a meaningful part of total return, especially when reinvested. Here, the yield is dragged down by QQQ and the NASDAQ‑100 equal‑weight ETF, both of which focus on growth‑oriented companies that typically reinvest profits rather than pay high dividends. The value and international funds offer higher yields, but their smaller weights mean they don’t dominate the income profile. This structure is more aligned with capital growth than with generating regular cash flow.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.18%
- Direxion NASDAQ-100 Equal Weighted Index Shares 0.35%
- Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.16%
The portfolio’s total expense ratio (TER) works out to about 0.16% per year, which is impressively low for an equity mix using both growth and international exposure. TER is like a built‑in annual service charge on fund assets; small differences can compound over decades. The bulk of the cost comes from the two NASDAQ‑100 ETFs, especially the equal‑weight version, while the Vanguard funds are extremely cheap at 0.03% and 0.05%. Overall, these costs compare well to typical active funds and even many index peers. Keeping expenses this low supports better long‑term outcomes by letting more of the portfolio’s gross returns stay in the account rather than leaking out as fees.
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