This portfolio has only about 1.3 years of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

Momentum junkie portfolio leaning on tech rockets and praying yesterday’s party never ends

Report created on Jul 11, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio is basically “broad index with a side of turbo boosters.” Two big total-market funds do the boring heavy lifting, then you’ve bolted on small-cap value, a momentum dart, a semiconductor laser beam, and a quality overlay. It looks like someone started with a sensible core and then couldn’t resist adding every shiny factor ETF they scrolled past. Structurally, it’s 100% stocks with no shock absorbers anywhere. That’s fine as long as everyone remembers this thing is built for speed, not comfort. The mix screams growth-chaser with a small nod to value, but the tilt cocktail is more aggressive than the plain-vanilla “growth” label suggests.

Growth Info

The backtest makes this look like genius: $1,000 becoming $1,556 in about 1.3 years, a 41% CAGR while the US and global markets plod along in the mid‑20s. That’s lottery-ticket territory, not a normal baseline. But with only a bit over a year of data, this is basically judging a movie from the trailer. Max drawdown around -14% is only slightly worse than broad markets, which is shockingly mild given the rocket fuel under the hood. The big warning sign: 90% of returns came from just 15 days. Miss a handful of those and the legend vanishes. This is momentum’s highlight reel, not its full career stats.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection tries to turn this short party into a 15‑year life plan. Median outcome of $2,732 from $1,000 sounds decent, but notice how the range stretches from barely above flat ($1,058) to full fantasy land ($7,870). Monte Carlo is basically a financial weather simulator: feeding past storms into a model and rolling the dice thousands of times. Here, the past is a tiny, unusually sunny window, so the model is guessing with overconfidence. The 74.6% chance of a positive outcome is comforting, but with only 1.3 years of history, that’s more “vibe check” than forecast. Treat these numbers as mood music, not a schedule.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes? That section is easy: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. This isn’t a portfolio; it’s an equity monologue. No bonds, no cash buffer, no real diversifiers — just one asset class turned up to eleven. That’s fine if the goal is pure growth exposure, but it does mean when stocks sneeze, this portfolio catches pneumonia every single time. In asset-class terms, there’s zero Plan B. It’s like running a restaurant that only serves one dish: amazing if you always crave it, deeply inconvenient when the market decides it’s time for a different cuisine.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    35%
  • Financials
    14%
  • Industrials
    12%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, this thing clearly has a technology crush: tech at 35% plus a dedicated semiconductor ETF is basically saying, “I like chips, but could I have extra chips on the side?” Financials and industrials show up, but they’re background characters, not leads. The rest of the sectors are sprinkled in like garnish to keep the diversification score from crying. Compared to a plain broad market, this leans harder into cyclical, growthy areas that party when the economy and innovation narratives are hot and sulk when sentiment flips. It’s a sector profile that works beautifully in a boom and does a convincing impression of dead weight in a tech-led downturn.

Regions Info

  • North America
    74%
  • Europe Developed
    10%
  • Asia Developed
    5%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Asia Emerging
    4%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geographically, this portfolio is very much “home is where the stocks are.” Around three‑quarters in North America, with Europe, Japan, and the rest of the world getting polite but minimal invitations. There is international exposure, so it’s not totally passport-phobic, but the global tilt is more “US plus some accessories” than genuinely worldwide. When the US leads, this looks brilliant; when other regions outperform, it will lag and pretend that’s a rounding error. It’s a classic home-bias setup: comfortingly familiar, but not exactly taking full advantage of the global opportunity set.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    35%
  • Large-cap
    28%
  • Mid-cap
    19%
  • Small-cap
    11%
  • Micro-cap
    6%

Market cap exposure is mostly mega and large caps (about 63%), but with a noticeable 36% in mid, small, and even micro caps. So the portfolio pairs steady corporate giants with a meaningful sleeve of scrappy upstarts. That smaller-cap allocation is where volatility likes to hang out, especially when markets get stressed. It’s like mixing blue-chip CEOs with a bunch of ambitious interns and expecting the meeting to run smoothly. The top-heavy presence of mega caps keeps the ship pointed with the overall market, but the smaller names quietly add extra wobble when things get choppy.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.99%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Apple Inc.
    2.89%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.16%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Micron Technology Inc
    1.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.46%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.44%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.22%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.03%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.99%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    0.96%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 16.65%

Look‑through holdings show the usual suspects headlining: Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta — basically the Magnificent-Whatever-Number-We’re-On-Now. Nvidia at ~3% and Apple just behind means a decent chunk of risk is tied to a handful of mega-cap tech celebrities. The overlap is almost certainly bigger than it appears because only ETF top‑10 lists are captured, so this is the underestimation version of concentration. The story: ostensibly diversified via multiple funds, secretly leaning hard on the same tech royalty over and over. Many wrappers, same core cast, which works until the main characters stop carrying the plot.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 28%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 18%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 8%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 75%

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.

The factor profile says this portfolio is trying to be both the honor student and the class daredevil. Very high quality (85%) means it leans into profitable, stable companies — the “grown-ups in the room.” High momentum (75%) means it also chases what’s been working lately — the “run toward the loudest music” factor. Size is very low (17%), so despite that small-cap value fund, the overall portfolio still clings to bigger names. Factor exposure is basically: “I want sturdy businesses, but only the ones currently on a heater.” That combo can crush in strong uptrends but tends to feel very exposed when leadership rotates or momentum snaps.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 40.00%
    35.9%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 25.00%
    21.1%
  • Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF
    Weight: 7.50%
    14.9%
  • MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    10.1%
  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.1%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 91.1%

Risk contribution reveals which holdings are actually steering this roller coaster. The two big Vanguard funds plus the semiconductor ETF make up the top three risk drivers, accounting for about 72% of total portfolio risk. Semiconductors are the real troublemaker: 7.5% weight but nearly 15% of the risk, meaning it’s punching at roughly double its size. That’s the kid in the back of the class causing most of the noise. The core broad‑market funds behave more proportionally, but the add‑on tilts aren’t just flavor — they move the needle. When semis wobble, the whole portfolio feels it far more than the allocation headline suggests.

Redundant positions Info

  • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF
    Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Correlation-wise, the broad US market ETF and the USA Quality GARP ETF are basically twins. When one moves, the other tags along, which is what “high correlation” means in plain language. Holding both is less like diversification and more like watching the same show on two different screens. Sure, the quality fund has a different stock mix under the hood, but in terms of day‑to‑day motion, it’s largely echoing the main US exposure already in the portfolio. That makes the satellite position feel more like an expensive accent on an outfit that already had the same color.

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

On the efficient frontier, this portfolio is… not quite flunking, but it’s definitely not top of the class either. With a Sharpe ratio of 1.58 while the optimal mix of the same holdings hits 2.31, it’s leaving a lot of risk-adjusted return on the table. Being 1.8 percentage points below the frontier at its current risk level means the existing ingredients could be rearranged to get more expected return for the same volatility — or similar return with a calmer ride. In simple terms: the car has the right engine parts but the tuning is off. This is suboptimal by construction, not by lack of tools.

Dividends Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
  • Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF 0.30%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.00%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.60%
  • MarketDesk Focused U.S. Momentum ETF 0.20%
  • iShares MSCI USA Quality GARP ETF 0.30%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.24%

The total yield of around 1.24% confirms this portfolio isn’t here for steady paychecks; it’s here for price action. The yield is dragged a bit higher by international stocks, while momentum and semis contribute pocket change on the income front. Think of dividends here as background noise — a few coins rattling in the cup while the real story plays out in capital gains. Relying on this portfolio for income would be like expecting tips from a startup founder: possible, but wildly missing the point of what they’re actually trying to do.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
  • Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF 0.15%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%

Costs are almost suspiciously low, with a total TER of 0.06%. That’s “did you accidentally choose the cheap share class?” territory. The Vanguard core funds are dirt cheap, and even the factor and semiconductor satellites are reasonably priced. For a portfolio this spicy factor‑wise, the fee drag is more like a speed bump than a wall. The only downside from a roasting perspective is that there isn’t much to slam here — the expense ratios are doing exactly what they should: staying quiet, staying small, and not sabotaging returns. You accidentally made a cost-efficient Franken-portfolio.

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

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

FMTM vs SGRT AVUV vs SPMO SPMO vs VXUS AVUV vs XMMO

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