Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it Roast mode 🔥

Turbocharged tech gambler pretending to be a sensible diversified growth portfolio

Report created on Apr 30, 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 looks like two different people built it and never spoke. On one side, there’s a big 28% slab of international value trying to be the grown‑up. On the other, nearly half the portfolio is laser‑focused on semis, tech, and biotech like a kid in a candy store with no parents around. The result is a “growth” portfolio that claims moderate diversification but behaves more like a concentrated thematic bet with a value fund duct‑taped to it. Structurally, it’s neither cleanly core‑satellite nor a simple index plus spice; it’s more like a junk drawer that just happens to have done very well so far.

Growth Info

Historically, the numbers are obnoxiously good: $1,000 turning into $4,242 with a 21.09% CAGR versus 14.28% for the US market and 11.67% globally. That’s rocket‑ship territory. Max drawdown of about -34% was basically the same as the market during COVID, so all that extra return didn’t even charge extra pain in that crash. But 90% of returns coming from just 35 days screams “you live and die by a few wild sessions.” Past performance is like a highlight reel—fun to watch, totally unreliable for predicting the next season, especially for a portfolio this concentrated in hot areas.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is the sober friend at the party. Simulations say that same $1,000 most likely crawls to about $2,723 over 15 years, with an average annual return of 8.04%, nowhere near the backward‑looking 21% fantasy. Monte Carlo basically rolls the dice a thousand times using past volatility and returns to see what could happen—good, bad, and ugly. The “possible” range from $924 to $7,529 is a polite way of saying the future could be amazing or utterly meh. It’s a reminder that this portfolio’s past turbo mode is unlikely to stay permanently engaged.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes: 100% stocks, zero anything else. No bonds, no cash, no real assets—just pure equity roller coaster. That’s fine if the goal is maximum growth volatility, but calling this “Growth Investors” with a 5/7 risk score is a bit cute; it’s basically an all‑equity bet in disguise. Asset allocation is usually the big picture—mixing stocks with more boring stuff to smooth the ride. Here, the big picture is just “stocks, and more of them.” In stormy markets, there’s nothing here playing defense; everything is on the field trying to score at the same time.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    40%
  • Health Care
    17%
  • Financials
    14%
  • Industrials
    6%
  • Telecommunications
    5%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    4%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    1%

Sector-wise, this is tech worship with a medical side quest. About 40% in technology plus nearly 7% in biotech means an enormous chunk of the portfolio depends on innovation hype cycles not dying. Health care at 17% adds more “science project” flavor than stability, and the rest of the sectors are background extras. Compared with a broad index, this is a serious tech overweight dressed up with minor exposure to everything else so it can tick the “diversified” box. When tech and high‑beta growth are hot, it flies; when they’re not, everything will probably sag together like a deflated balloon.

Regions Info

  • North America
    68%
  • Europe Developed
    22%
  • Japan
    8%
  • Asia Developed
    1%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%

Geographically, it’s very much “US is home base and the rest of the world can visit.” Around 68% in North America with 22% in developed Europe and a token spread across Japan and other regions. The one redeeming feature is that international slice is real, not just a rounding error, so this isn’t a totally blind US‑only bubble. Still, the picture is clear: global diversification is there mostly as supporting cast, not co‑stars. If the US stumbles, this portfolio won’t suddenly morph into a calm, worldly gentleman; it will still move heavily with American markets.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    41%
  • Large-cap
    32%
  • Mid-cap
    18%
  • Small-cap
    5%
  • Micro-cap
    2%

On market cap, the portfolio hugs the big names: 41% mega‑cap, 32% large‑cap, and then a taper into mid, small, and micro. That’s a very index‑like size profile for something pretending to be edgy with semis and biotech. The mid and small bits add a whiff of extra risk, but the real story is that most of the money rides on giant companies—just in very spicy sectors. So you get all the volatility of concentrated themes but without a strong small‑cap tilt that would at least justify the drama. It’s basically big companies doing risky things, not scrappy underdogs.

True holdings Info

  • McKesson Corporation
    5.74%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.43%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Apple Inc
    2.82%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.94%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.95%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Amazon.com Inc
    0.54%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    0.39%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.37%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.29%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    0.27%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
  • Top 10 total 16.73%

Look‑through holdings show the usual suspects hogging the spotlight: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla. No single one looks terrifying by weight, but collectively this is a who’s‑who of crowded mega‑cap tech bets hiding inside your various funds. And that’s only with 18.2% portfolio coverage and ETF top‑10s—so the true overlap is almost certainly worse. It’s like buying three different tech‑ish products and being surprised they all own the same stars. The hidden concentration risk is less “one stock blows you up” and more “the same small group of giants drives a huge chunk of outcomes.”

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Low
Data availability: 100%
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 profile is almost suspiciously neutral across value, size, momentum, quality, and low volatility. It’s like this portfolio stumbled into a very average factor mix while loudly concentrating in tech and biotech. Neutral factors mean it behaves broadly like the market’s underlying style mix, just magnified in specific areas. The only real standout is low yield at 28%—this thing isn’t built for income, it’s built for price swings. Factor exposure is basically the ingredients list behind performance, and here the label says “regular market recipe,” even while the sector and security choices scream “experimental chef with a flamethrower.”

Risk contribution Info

  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio
    Weight: 15.59%
    25.3%
  • JPMORGAN INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND CLASS A
    Weight: 28.00%
    20.8%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 13.01%
    15.5%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 13.32%
    12.0%
  • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    Weight: 8.10%
    8.6%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 82.2%

Risk contribution makes the real power dynamics obvious. The semiconductor fund is only 15.59% of assets but a chunky 25.30% of total portfolio risk—risk/weight 1.62, meaning it’s punching way above its weight class. The top three positions together drive over 61% of risk, so the rest of the holdings are mostly set dressing. The big international value fund is heavy in weight but relatively tame in risk contribution, acting like the chaperone at a teenage party. In practice, this isn’t a 9‑position portfolio; it’s 2–3 true drivers surrounded by a small crowd of bystanders pretending they matter.

Redundant positions Info

  • JPMORGAN INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND CLASS A
    FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND
    High correlation
  • FIDELITY ZERO LARGE CAP INDEX FUND
    Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    High correlation
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares
    Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF
    High correlation

Asset correlations here show several pairs basically moving in lockstep: the two international value funds mirror each other, the two large‑cap US funds are clones, and the Nasdaq ETF and Vanguard tech ETF are practically twins. High correlation means when one zigs, the other zigs right alongside it—great when they’re going up, brutal when they all fall together. This isn’t diversification; it’s owning multiple versions of the same idea in slightly different packaging. When markets shake, the “different” funds won’t politely take turns dropping—they’ll likely jump off the same cliff holding hands.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

The efficient frontier absolutely roasts this setup. At its current risk of 21.27%, the portfolio sits about 6.19 percentage points below where it could be using just the existing ingredients. Sharpe ratio of 0.74 versus 1.27 for the optimal mix basically says, “same toys, much worse arrangement.” Even the minimum variance option beats it on risk‑adjusted returns. Translation: this isn’t about needing different funds; it’s about using these funds in a more coherent way. Right now, the weighting scheme wastes risk—taking plenty of volatility without squeezing nearly as much expected return as the same pieces could deliver.

Dividends Info

  • BIOTECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO BIOTECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO 6.70%
  • FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND 2.20%
  • FIDELITY ZERO LARGE CAP INDEX FUND 1.00%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 11.40%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
  • McKesson Corporation 0.40%
  • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF 0.50%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.40%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 2.61%

Yield is a modest 2.61%, and even that number is flattered by some hilariously high figures: 11.40% from semis and 6.70% from biotech scream “unsustainable” more than “steady income machine.” Meanwhile, the core broad‑market and tech holdings barely dribble out dividends. So this isn’t a dividend portfolio; it’s a growth‑and‑hope setup with a few weirdly high yield outliers that look more like statistical noise or special distributions than reliable cash flow. If the price doesn’t cooperate, the income stream alone isn’t stepping in to make anyone feel better during rough patches.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • BIOTECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO BIOTECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO 0.63%
  • FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND FIDELITY INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND 0.80%
  • Fidelity Select Semiconductors Portfolio 0.62%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • JPMORGAN INTERNATIONAL VALUE FUND CLASS A 1.00%
  • Fidelity® Nasdaq Composite Index® ETF 0.21%
  • Vanguard Information Technology Index Fund ETF Shares 0.10%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.46%

Costs land at a total TER of 0.46%, which is… fine, but not exactly sleek for something mixing cheap index funds with chunky active fees. You’ve got ultra‑low 0.02% and 0.10% options sitting next to a full 1.00% JPMorgan fund and 0.80% Fidelity international value. It’s like flying coach but tipping the airline extra for no reason. Over time, that drag quietly siphons off part of the hard‑earned outperformance. The structure basically pays active‑fund prices to do what the cheaper pieces plus smarter weighting could handle at a lower ongoing cost.

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