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

Monster returns built on mega caps momentum and a whole lot of concentration risk

Report created on May 3, 2026

Risk profile Info

6/7
Aggressive
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is basically a “who’s who” of mega-cap darlings with a random insurance boss sitting on top. One stock at almost 11% is doing main-character cosplay while everything else hovers around 3–5%. It looks less like a portfolio and more like an expensive fan club for global blue chips plus a pet favorite. The structure screams stock-picking pride: 100% single names, zero buffers, no diversifiers, just vibes. When one position is that big, the whole thing catches its mood swings. The end result: elegant on paper, but one or two bad stock-specific headlines can blow through the whole “Aggressive” risk label and head straight into “hope you like volatility.”

Growth Info

Historically, this thing hasn’t just beaten the market; it lapped it, stopped for coffee, and kept running. A 40.71% CAGR vs ~19% for the US market is cartoonish. Turning $1,000 into $16,270 in a decade is meme-stock-level performance without the actual memes. But the −38% max drawdown says the ride down wasn’t cute, just slightly worse than the market, and it took 18 months to fall and claw back. Also, 90% of returns came from just 58 days — that’s the “miss a handful of good days and you’re cooked” problem on steroids. Past data is helpful, but this level of outperformance rarely repeats forever without some kind of bill coming due.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is the universe reminding the portfolio it’s mortal. Simulations take the historical chaos, shake it up a thousand different ways, and see where things land. Instead of 40%+ fairy-tale returns, the median outcome is a boring 7.9% per year, with $1,000 most likely crawling to about $2,732 in 15 years. The range is wide: about $900 on the low side and $7,200 on the high, which is code for “this could still go very right or very wrong.” It’s a reality check: markets don’t care that this portfolio crushed the last decade; the next one runs on fresh dice rolls, not rearview mirrors.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes? There is exactly one: stocks. This isn’t a portfolio; it’s an equity monolith. No bonds, no cash buffer, no alternatives — just 100% exposure to the stock market rollercoaster, locked in and strapped tight. That’s fine if the only risk that matters is equity risk, but it also means zero shock absorbers when things get ugly. When stocks sneeze, this portfolio gets the flu. Using one asset class for everything is like building a house entirely out of glass: looks nice in good weather, but a single storm tests the whole architecture. Here, the “Aggressive” label is not marketing, it’s an accurate description of the structural setup.

Sectors Info

  • Financials
    26%
  • Technology
    25%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    14%
  • Telecommunications
    9%
  • Energy
    9%
  • Consumer Staples
    7%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Industrials
    3%

Sector-wise, this is a love triangle between financials, tech, and consumer names, with everything else just making up the numbers. Financials at 26% is a chunky bet on one economic engine, and 25% in tech means a huge chunk is tied to innovation hype cycles and rate sensitivities. The rest — staples, health care, industrials — feel like side characters tossed in for respectability. That 9% in energy and some telecom-ish exposure just add more economically sensitive flavor. Instead of a balanced dinner plate, this is two big piles of “growth and leverage” with a side salad of “defensives” pretending to matter. Sector risk here is not subtle; it’s proudly wearing a name tag.

Regions Info

  • North America
    79%
  • Europe Developed
    16%
  • Asia Emerging
    4%

Geographically, this portfolio clearly thinks the sun rises and sets over North America: 79% at home, sprinkled with a polite 16% in developed Europe and a token 4% in emerging Asia. For something labeled “Aggressive,” it’s surprisingly shy about actually leaving the US-centric comfort zone. The global economy is a lot bigger and messier than this breakdown suggests, but this lineup behaves like the rest of the world is just bonus content. When local markets and currencies wobble, there’s not much offset from other regions. It’s basically a slightly internationalized US heavy hitter basket, not a truly global operator. “World-class companies, home-biased portfolio” is the general vibe.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    75%
  • Large-cap
    25%

Market cap exposure is a mega-cap fan convention: 75% mega, 25% large, basically zero room for anything smaller. This is the stock-market equivalent of only trusting companies you’ve seen in TV ads, billboards, and earnings headlines. That does give some business quality and liquidity comfort, but it also means the portfolio is handcuffed to the fate of the biggest, most crowded trades on earth. When the mega-cap trade is in fashion, it looks genius. When it isn’t, this setup can lag more balanced size mixes without mercy. There is no “hidden gem” exposure here — just polished, fully-discovered giants marching in lockstep with mainstream investor sentiment.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 100%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 100%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 96%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
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-wise, this portfolio is a quality addict with a side of “too big to be interesting.” Quality at 89% is a strong tilt toward profitable, stable, generally well-run companies — basically the honor roll of the market. Low volatility at 64% adds another layer of “please don’t whipsaw me,” suggesting a bias toward smoother operators relative to the circus. Then size comes in at 4%, screaming “very low” — an intentional or accidental snub of smaller companies. That combination — huge, high-quality, relatively tame stocks — behaves like a premium blue-chip club. It should hold up better than junk in rough patches, but it also rides the fate of the most expensive, widely owned names.

Risk contribution Info

  • American Financial Group Inc
    Weight: 10.89%
    11.5%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    Weight: 3.72%
    6.9%
  • Broadcom Inc
    Weight: 4.61%
    6.6%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    Weight: 5.45%
    6.1%
  • Microsoft Corporation
    Weight: 5.21%
    5.8%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 36.7%

Risk contribution reveals who’s actually driving the drama. American Financial Group is 10.89% of the portfolio and 11.46% of the risk — basically a one-to-one bully. More worrying, NVIDIA at 3.72% is contributing 6.85% of the risk, almost double its weight, while Broadcom also punches above its share. That’s the combo of high-volatility growth names taking the wheel even when they look “moderately weighted.” The top three risk contributors alone make up nearly a quarter of the total risk, which is wild for such a long tail of other holdings. On paper this looks diversified; in reality a handful of names are pulling the emotional rollercoaster’s levers.

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 basically leaving money on the table while bragging about past wins. The Sharpe ratio of 1.16 is solid, but the optimizer says you could hit a Sharpe of 1.66 using the same ingredients, just arranged better. At the current risk level, it’s 6.71 percentage points below the frontier — that’s not a rounding error; that’s structural inefficiency. The minimum variance mix still has almost the same Sharpe with much lower risk, while the optimal one massively boosts return for more risk. Translation: even without changing any holdings, the weighting scheme is objectively subpar. This is like buying great groceries and then cooking a very confused meal.

Dividends Info

  • AbbVie Inc 2.40%
  • American Financial Group Inc 5.30%
  • Allianz SE 3.10%
  • ASML Holding NV 0.50%
  • Broadcom Inc 0.60%
  • Booking Holdings Inc 0.90%
  • Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
  • International Business Machines 2.90%
  • Johnson & Johnson 2.30%
  • LVMH Moët Hennessy - Louis Vuitton Société Européenne 2.90%
  • Mastercard Inc 0.50%
  • McDonald’s Corporation 2.50%
  • Meta Platforms Inc. 0.30%
  • 3M Company 2.10%
  • Microsoft Corporation 0.90%
  • Realty Income Corporation 4.60%
  • PepsiCo Inc 3.60%
  • Procter & Gamble Company 2.20%
  • S&P Global Inc 0.90%
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 0.70%
  • TotalEnergies SE ADR 4.10%
  • Visa Inc. Class A 0.80%
  • Exxon Mobil Corp 2.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.95%

The dividend story is “income-lite with a few loud voices.” Overall yield at 1.95% is basically pocket change for a portfolio this powered-up, especially when some holdings throw off serious income and others pay almost nothing. You’ve got a 5.3% payer front and center, some 3–4% contributors, and then the big-name growth stocks sprinkling in token fractions of a percent just to say they tried. It’s a strange mix: part income, part growth rocket, with no consistent theme. If someone looked only at the yield, they’d think this was cautious and sleepy; the underlying volatility and concentration say otherwise. The income profile and risk profile are not exactly on speaking terms.

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