Concentrated growth leaning portfolio with strong recent returns and room to improve risk efficiency
Report created on Apr 17, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.
Positions
-
SP State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
SPYM - US78464A8541 71.96% -
CH Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF
CHPS - US23306X8864 19.24% -
OP WisdomTree Japan Opportunities Fund
OPPJ 5.45% -
PP Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF
PPA - US46137V1008 3.35%
This portfolio is built around one broad US equity ETF as the core, with three smaller satellite positions focused on semiconductors, Japan, and aerospace and defense. The large core position provides general market exposure, while the satellites add targeted growth and thematic tilts. Structurally, this looks like a classic “core and satellite” setup, which many investors use to balance diversification with higher-conviction ideas. The main implication is that overall performance and risk will mostly follow the broad market, but swings can be amplified by the more focused growth areas. In practice, this structure is sensible, but it’s still important to track how much impact those satellites have on total volatility.
Growth
Over the last few years, $1,000 in this mix grew to about $1,804, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 24.08%. CAGR is like calculating your average speed on a long road trip, smoothing out all the bumps. That return comfortably beat both the US and global market benchmarks by over 6 percentage points a year, which is impressive. The trade-off is a max drawdown of about -20%, meaning at one point the portfolio was down a fifth from its peak. That’s a real test of nerves. This pattern suggests strong upside participation but with meaningful short-term swings that require decent risk tolerance. Past returns, though, never guarantee similar future results.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection runs 1,000 simulations using historical patterns to estimate a range of 15‑year outcomes. Think of it as repeatedly “replaying” the market with random variations based on past volatility and returns. The median result grows $1,000 to about $2,726, implying an annualized return around 7.74%. But the range is wide: from roughly $943 at the low end (p5) to $6,745 at the high end (p95). This highlights that long-term investing is about probabilities, not certainties. There’s roughly a 72% chance of ending with more than you started, which is encouraging, but the downside scenarios are still very possible, especially if unlucky timing meets a rough market cycle.
Asset classes
- No data 77%
- Stocks 23%
The asset class breakdown shows 23% clearly identified as stocks and 77% tagged as “No data,” which usually reflects gaps in the dataset rather than anything problematic in the holdings themselves. Since all reported positions are equity ETFs, the economic reality is that this is an equity-driven portfolio, even if the classification table is incomplete. Equity-heavy portfolios tend to benefit strongly from growth and corporate profits over long horizons but can be bumpy in recessions and market panics. The main takeaway is that this setup is more about capital growth than capital preservation. Short-term comfort will depend heavily on how comfortable someone is watching equity markets move up and down.
Sectors
- Technology 19%
- Industrials 3%
On sector data, technology stands out at 19% with a smaller 3% slice in industrials. While the numbers understate the true tech exposure (because of “No data” gaps), the named holdings—especially the semiconductor ETF—make it clear there’s a notable tilt toward tech and adjacent high-growth areas. Tech-heavy allocations usually do very well when innovation, earnings growth, and appetite for risk are strong, but they also tend to be more sensitive to interest rate hikes and changes in investor sentiment. The industrials slice, tied to themes like aerospace and defense, can behave differently, sometimes offering stability when other growth names wobble. Overall, the sector mix leans firmly growth-oriented rather than defensive.
Regions
- North America 15%
- Asia Developed 3%
- Europe Developed 2%
- Japan 2%
The geographic breakdown shows visible allocations to North America, Japan, developed Asia, and developed Europe, though the numbers again underrepresent reality due to missing data. Still, the pattern suggests a primary anchor in North America with a deliberate extra allocation to Japan through the dedicated ETF. This kind of regional spread helps avoid being completely tied to just one economy, which is useful if any single region faces prolonged weakness. Compared with a typical global benchmark, the tilt toward the US and Japan looks pronounced, while other areas are lighter. That can be a strength when those regions outperform but may limit diversification if another part of the world leads the next cycle.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 12%
- Mega-cap 7%
- Mid-cap 3%
- Small-cap 1%
By market cap, exposure skews toward mega‑cap and large‑cap companies, with smaller allocations to mid and small caps. Mega‑caps and large‑caps are the global household names—generally more established, with deeper markets and more analyst coverage. They often bring somewhat more stability and liquidity than smaller companies, which can be more volatile and harder to trade at scale. The modest slice in mid and small caps adds some growth potential and diversification, since smaller firms can behave differently over the cycle. Overall, this size distribution is quite similar to mainstream equity benchmarks, which is a positive sign that the portfolio isn’t overly reliant on illiquid or niche segments.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.45%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 4.79%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.53%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.61%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.15%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.89%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.72%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.61%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.34%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
BR Berkshire Hathaway Inc 1.13%
Part of fund(s):- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
- Top 10 total 26.22%
Looking through the ETFs, the largest underlying exposures are familiar mega-cap names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, and Berkshire Hathaway. These appear across multiple funds, which creates hidden concentration because a single company can effectively show up several times. For example, NVIDIA alone totals around 5.5% of the portfolio based on available top-10 data, and that’s likely understated since only ETF top holdings are counted. This clustering in big tech and growth leaders can supercharge returns when these names do well but will also magnify pain if sentiment turns. It’s important to recognize that this is not just a broad market portfolio; it’s significantly anchored to a handful of global giants.
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 exposure across value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility sits in a neutral, market-like range for each. Factors are like underlying “personality traits” of investments—things like cheapness (value), trend strength (momentum), or stability (low volatility) that research has tied to long-run returns. Here, nothing stands out as a strong tilt either toward or away from any factor. That means the portfolio is behaving broadly like the overall market from a factor perspective, despite the thematic satellites. This is actually a nice alignment: the structure allows for some targeted ideas without heavily distorting the factor profile, which helps avoid unintended bets on any one style, such as pure momentum or deep value.
Risk contribution
-
State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
Weight: 71.96% 60.7% -
Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF
Weight: 19.24% 33.5% -
WisdomTree Japan Opportunities Fund
Weight: 5.45% 3.3% -
Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF
Weight: 3.35% 2.5%
Risk contribution shows how much each position drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. The core S&P 500 ETF is about 72% of the portfolio but contributes around 61% of total risk, meaning it’s relatively stable for its size. The semiconductor ETF, at roughly 19% weight, contributes over 33% of total risk, so it “punches above its weight” volatility-wise. The Japan and aerospace & defense funds add only modest extra risk. With the top three positions accounting for about 98% of overall risk, this is a concentrated risk profile. Adjusting position sizes over time could help align risk impact more closely with intended conviction levels.
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 analysis shows that, at its current volatility level, the portfolio sits about 10 percentage points below the best achievable risk/return trade-off using the same holdings. The Sharpe ratio—return per unit of risk—is 1.08 for the current mix, versus 1.90 for the optimal allocation and 1.56 for the minimum-variance version. In plain terms, the ingredients are good, but the recipe could be tweaked. Reweighting the existing ETFs—without adding any new products—could potentially raise expected return, reduce risk, or both. This is actually encouraging: the structure is solid, and there’s room to refine the balance between the stable core and the punchier satellites to better match desired risk levels.
Dividends
- Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF 0.50%
- Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.40%
- WisdomTree Japan Opportunities Fund 1.60%
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.99%
The overall dividend yield is just under 1%, with individual ETFs ranging from around 0.4% to 1.6%. Dividends are the cash payments companies make to shareholders, and they can be an important part of total return, especially for income‑focused investors. In this case, the yield is relatively low, which lines up with the portfolio’s growth orientation and tech tilt—high‑growth companies often reinvest profits rather than pay large dividends. For someone looking mainly for capital appreciation over time, this is perfectly reasonable. For anyone who needs regular income from their investments, though, this setup would depend more on selling shares periodically rather than living off dividends alone.
Ongoing product costs
- Xtrackers Semiconductor Select Equity ETF 0.15%
- Invesco Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.58%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.05%
On costs, the picture is very strong. The reported total expense ratio (TER) of about 0.05% is impressively low, especially considering the thematic exposure in semiconductors and aerospace & defense, which typically charge more. TER is the annual percentage fee taken by funds—like a small service charge—which quietly chips away at returns over time. Keeping this number low is one of the few things investors can firmly control, and here that box is clearly ticked. Low ongoing costs, combined with broad market exposure, create a solid foundation for compounding. This alignment with low-cost best practices supports better long-term outcomes without sacrificing diversification.
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