Concentrated growth portfolio tilted to US mega cap technology and highly efficient for its risk level

Report created on Jun 1, 2024

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

2/5
Low Diversity
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

The portfolio is heavily concentrated in just four ETFs, with about three-quarters in Nasdaq-100 style exposure and the rest in broad US equity indexes. That means almost everything here is one asset class and one country, and even within that, the style is pretty similar across funds. This kind of focused structure makes it easy to understand and manage, but it also means the portfolio’s fate is tied closely to one part of the market. For someone comfortable with bigger swings, this tight focus can be acceptable, but anyone wanting smoother, more diversified behavior might consider adding other asset types or regions over time.

Growth Info

From late 2020 to early 2026, $1,000 grew to about $1,962, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 13.2%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip, smoothing the ups and downs into one yearly number. Performance slightly beat the US market and clearly beat the global market, which is a strong outcome. The tradeoff is a max drawdown of roughly -32%, meaning at one point the portfolio was about a third below its peak. That level of drop is typical for growth-focused stock portfolios, and anyone using a setup like this needs to be ready emotionally and financially to hold through such declines.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Everything here is in stocks, with no bonds, cash, or alternatives. That makes the portfolio simple and growth-oriented, but also maximizes exposure to equity market swings. Asset class diversification—mixing stocks with bonds, cash-like instruments, or other assets—usually reduces volatility and can soften the impact of big drawdowns. The pure-equity approach matches a growth mindset and longer horizons, but it’s less forgiving in sharp downturns or prolonged bear markets. If the goal is maximum long-term growth and the investor can ride through big ups and downs without selling, this can work; anyone needing more stability might layer in other asset classes later.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    46%
  • Telecommunications
    15%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    12%
  • Consumer Staples
    8%
  • Health Care
    6%
  • Industrials
    5%
  • Financials
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Basic Materials
    1%
  • Energy
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

Sector-wise, almost half the exposure is in technology, with sizable allocations to telecommunications and consumer areas, and relatively small slices in financials, energy, and real estate. This tech-heavy profile has been a powerful driver of returns in recent years, especially in a world driven by software, chips, and digital platforms. The flip side is that tech tends to be more sensitive to interest rate moves, sentiment shifts, and earnings expectations, which can translate into sharper drawdowns. The portfolio’s sector mix is clearly growth-tilted rather than evenly balanced, which is great if that focus is intentional and the investor can stomach tech cycles.

Regions Info

  • North America
    98%
  • Europe Developed
    1%

Geographically, the portfolio is almost entirely in North America, with minimal exposure elsewhere. That makes it heavily dependent on one economy, currency, and policy environment. The US has been a standout performer for more than a decade, so this tilt has been rewarding. However, global diversification can help if US markets underperform or face unique headwinds. Common global stock benchmarks usually hold more non-US exposure than this, so the concentration here is notable. Keeping this focus is fine if the investor has strong conviction in the US, but adding even modest international exposure could smooth country-specific risks over time.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    51%
  • Large-cap
    34%
  • Mid-cap
    13%
  • Small-cap
    1%

Market cap exposure is dominated by mega- and large-cap companies, with only tiny allocations to mid- and small-cap names. Big companies generally have more stable businesses, deeper investor coverage, and better access to capital, which can reduce idiosyncratic risk compared to smaller firms. At the same time, long-term equity studies often show that smaller companies can offer higher potential returns, albeit with more volatility and bigger drawdowns. This portfolio behaves much more like a “blue-chip plus Big Tech” portfolio than a total-market blend. That’s totally okay as long as the goal is to ride with large, well-known leaders rather than capturing the full size spectrum.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    8.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Apple Inc
    7.12%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Microsoft Corporation
    5.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Amazon.com Inc
    4.21%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    3.37%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Tesla Inc
    3.31%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    3.25%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    3.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Broadcom Inc
    2.91%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Walmart Inc. Common Stock
    2.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
  • Top 10 total 43.18%

Looking through the ETFs, a big chunk of risk is tied to a handful of mega-cap names: Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Tesla, Meta, and Broadcom. Several of these appear in multiple funds, creating “hidden” concentration even though everything is in diversified ETFs. For example, Apple and Microsoft show up repeatedly across Nasdaq and broad US index funds, amplifying their influence. This clustering can turbocharge returns when these giants lead, but it also means portfolio performance is heavily dependent on their fortunes. Even if each fund is diversified internally, the combined picture behaves more like an index of a few dominant companies than a broad, evenly spread portfolio.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Low
Data availability: 100%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Low
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
Low
Data availability: 100%

Factor exposure is tilted away from value, size, yield, and low volatility, with neutral exposure to momentum and quality. Factors are like personality traits of stocks—value, for example, favors cheaper companies, while low volatility focuses on steadier ones. Here, the mild tilts away from value and low volatility mean the portfolio leans toward more expensive, growthy names that can be more volatile. The low yield tilt fits the profile of companies that reinvest profits rather than paying them out. This setup can shine in growth-led bull markets but may lag in periods when cheaper, steadier, or high-dividend stocks are in favor.

Risk contribution Info

  • Invesco QQQ Trust
    Weight: 65.00%
    69.7%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    10.7%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 13.00%
    10.4%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 12.00%
    9.3%

Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, and it’s often different from its simple weight. Here, the main Nasdaq ETF at 65% weight contributes nearly 70% of total risk, and the top three funds together contribute over 90% of risk. That means the smaller broad-market positions barely move the needle on overall volatility. When one position’s risk contribution is this dominant, the portfolio’s behavior is essentially tied to that holding. If that’s intentional, it’s fine, but if a more balanced risk profile is desired, adjusting position sizes or diversifying into less-correlated exposures can help spread risk more evenly.

Redundant positions Info

  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    Invesco QQQ Trust
    High correlation
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    High correlation

The core pairs here are extremely highly correlated: QQQ and the other Nasdaq-100 ETF move almost identically, and the S&P 500 and total US market ETF are also near-perfectly aligned. Correlation measures how similarly assets move; near 1.0 means they tend to go up and down together. Holding two almost-identical exposures doesn’t add much diversification; it mostly changes fees or minor implementation details. The good news is that, despite duplication, the portfolio stays efficient from a risk/return standpoint. Still, if simplicity or clarity is a priority, consolidating overlapping positions without changing the overall exposure pattern could make the structure cleaner and easier to monitor.

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.

On the risk–return chart, the current allocation sits right on or very close to the efficient frontier, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.61. The Sharpe ratio compares excess return to volatility—higher means better return per unit of risk. The optimal and minimum-variance portfolios here both have higher Sharpe ratios (0.77) with lower volatility and slightly lower expected return. That means, using the same ingredients, it’s possible to get a smoother ride without giving up much growth. Still, being on the frontier is a big positive: the mix is already using these specific funds efficiently, even if a slightly less volatile combination is mathematically possible.

Dividends Info

  • Invesco QQQ Trust 0.50%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.50%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.20%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.20%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 0.68%

The blended dividend yield is modest at around 0.68%, reflecting a strong tilt toward growth companies that prefer reinvesting cash rather than paying it out. Dividend yield is the annual income from holdings divided by price, and it matters most for investors who want regular cash flow. Here, most of the expected payoff is in price appreciation, not income. That lines up well with a growth-oriented strategy focused on capital gains, especially for investors who don’t need the portfolio to fund current expenses. Those who eventually want income could later shift a slice of the portfolio toward higher-yielding assets as their goals change.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.15%

Average costs look very reasonable, with a total expense ratio around 0.15%. TER is the annual fee charged by funds, and even small differences compound over decades. Having most of the allocation in low-cost Vanguard ETFs is especially helpful, and even the Nasdaq-focused funds are priced competitively. This cost profile is a real strength: money not paid in fees stays invested and working, which supports better long-term outcomes. There’s always temptation to chase niche or higher-fee products, but this lineup shows that broad, liquid, low-cost vehicles can deliver strong performance without unnecessary drag on returns.

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