Aggressive growth portfolio blending broad US equity exposure with concentrated bitcoin and tech positions
Report created on Apr 13, 2026Risk profile
6/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 58.65% -
BT Bitcoin
BTC 23.06% -
MS Microsoft Corporation
MSFT - US5949181045 8.88% -
CN Canadian Natural Resources Ltd
CNQ - CA1363851017 5.72% -
SN Sandisk Corp
SNDK - US80004C2008 3.69%
The portfolio is heavily tilted toward growth assets, with about 77% in stocks and 23% in bitcoin. Over half sits in a broad US market ETF, while the rest is in a few individual names, mainly large tech and one energy company. This mix creates an aggressive growth profile: a solid diversified core plus a big, high‑volatility bet in bitcoin and some concentrated stock picks. With only about a year of data, it’s too early to call this a stable long‑term pattern, but the current setup clearly prioritizes upside potential over smooth returns. Anyone using a structure like this should be emotionally and financially prepared for sharp swings.
Growth
Over the 1.1‑year window, $1,000 grew to about $1,881, implying a very high compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 73.48%. CAGR is the “average speed” of growth per year, smoothing out bumps along the way. The portfolio also saw a max drawdown of about -19.6%, similar to US and global benchmarks, meaning it has already shown it can drop quickly. It strongly outpaced both the US and global markets in this brief period, but that outperformance is based on a short, bitcoin‑friendly stretch. With such limited history, these numbers are more like a snapshot than a reliable guide to the next decade.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses many random “what if” paths based on recent data to estimate future ranges. Here, $1,000 is projected to land around $2,716 in 15 years in the median scenario, with a very wide range of roughly $761 to $11,054 in the middle 90% of outcomes. Monte Carlo is like replaying the last year’s behavior thousands of ways, but with only about a year of history, the inputs are shaky. The simulated annual return of about 9.24% should be seen as an illustrative scenario, not a forecast. It mainly highlights how wide the potential outcomes can be for an aggressive portfolio.
Asset classes
- Stocks 77%
- Crypto 23%
Asset‑class wise, the portfolio is a pure growth engine: 77% in equities and 23% in crypto, with no bonds or cash shown. Equities are ownership stakes in companies, while crypto like bitcoin is more speculative and historically much more volatile. This setup leans hard into long‑term growth at the expense of near‑term stability or income. Versus a typical diversified benchmark that mixes stocks and bonds, this structure sits firmly on the aggressive end. For someone with a long horizon and strong risk tolerance, that can be acceptable, but it offers little cushion if markets or bitcoin hit long rough patches.
Sectors
- Technology 32%
- Energy 8%
- Financials 7%
- Telecommunications 6%
- Consumer Discretionary 6%
- Health Care 6%
- Industrials 5%
- Consumer Staples 3%
- Utilities 1%
- Real Estate 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is dominated by technology at about 32%, with energy, financials, telecom, consumer names, healthcare, and industrials making up smaller slices. A tech‑heavy tilt often benefits from innovation and growth trends, but it can get hit hard when interest rates rise or sentiment turns against high‑growth names. The presence of energy and other sectors adds some balance, and the spread across many economic areas via the ETF is a positive, aligning reasonably well with broad market patterns. Still, between tech stocks and bitcoin, the portfolio is structurally geared toward “risk‑on” environments rather than defensive conditions.
Regions
- North America 77%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, roughly 77% of exposure is in North America, mainly the US, with no meaningful allocation shown elsewhere. This home‑region bias is very common and has worked well recently, especially for US tech leaders, but it also ties fortunes closely to one economy and currency. Global benchmarks usually have more non‑North‑American exposure, capturing other developed and emerging markets. Sticking mostly to one region can amplify both the good and bad times there. Over a full cycle, adding more geographic variety can sometimes smooth the ride, though the short 1‑year history here doesn’t yet reveal how this specific mix behaves under different global conditions.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 36%
- Large-cap 30%
- Mid-cap 10%
- Small-cap 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Market‑cap exposure is skewed toward the giants, with about 36% in mega‑caps and 30% in large‑caps, then modest allocations to mid‑ and small‑caps. Market capitalization just means company size in the stock market; bigger firms often have more stable earnings but can be slower‑growing than smaller ones. This tilt toward mega and large names is typical of broad index funds and is generally a sign of mainstream, benchmark‑like construction. The upside is that it anchors the portfolio in globally important companies. The trade‑off is less exposure to smaller, sometimes faster‑growing but more volatile businesses, which can limit both extremes of outcomes.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.29%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 3.89%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.04%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.81%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.51%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.44%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.41%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 37.59%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through the ETF, the biggest combined exposure is Microsoft at about 11.8% when you add the direct holding and its slice inside the ETF. Other meaningful look‑through names include NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, and Meta, all via the ETF. This shows a hidden concentration in mega‑cap tech even beyond the visible stock picks. Because only ETF top‑10 holdings are captured, real overlap is probably a bit higher. Hidden concentration matters because multiple funds can all zig or zag together when those big names move. For someone wanting smoother diversification, this kind of clustering is worth monitoring over time.
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 shows a very high tilt toward quality and a very low tilt toward size. Factors are characteristics like “quality” or “momentum” that research links to returns, like ingredients in a recipe. A strong quality tilt suggests the holdings skew toward profitable, financially solid companies, which can help during downturns. The very low size exposure means a bias toward large companies over smaller ones. That usually reduces extreme volatility but may miss some small‑cap rallies. Momentum looks somewhat underweight, so the portfolio isn’t strongly chasing recent winners. With just over a year of data, these tilts may shift, but today it behaves like a high‑quality, large‑company growth engine.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 58.65% 43.4% -
Bitcoin
Weight: 23.06% 37.2% -
Sandisk Corp
Weight: 3.69% 8.7% -
Microsoft Corporation
Weight: 8.88% 7.1% -
Canadian Natural Resources Ltd
Weight: 5.72% 3.5%
Risk contribution reveals how much each holding drives total volatility. Bitcoin is 23% of the weight but about 37% of the risk, showing it punches far above its size. The S&P 500 ETF, while 59% of the weight, contributes around 43% of risk, acting as a stabilizing core. Sandisk, despite being under 4% of the portfolio, adds nearly 9% of the risk, reflecting its higher volatility. In total, the top three holdings generate almost 90% of overall ups and downs. This concentrated risk pattern is fine if intentional, but anyone using a similar structure should understand that bitcoin and a couple of stocks largely set the portfolio’s mood.
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 risk‑return chart shows the current mix sitting below the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier is the curve of best possible returns for each risk level using the existing ingredients, and the Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk. Here, the portfolio’s Sharpe of 0.65 is lower than both the minimum‑variance mix and the max‑Sharpe mix, suggesting the same holdings could be rearranged for a better trade‑off. The “optimal” point shown has extremely high simulated returns and risk, which are likely distorted by the short, bitcoin‑boosted history. Still, the big takeaway is that reweighting — not adding new assets — could potentially improve efficiency once more data accumulates.
Dividends
- Canadian Natural Resources Ltd 3.70%
- Microsoft Corporation 0.90%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.94%
Dividend yield for the overall portfolio sits under 1%, with modest contributions from Canadian Natural Resources, Microsoft, and the S&P 500 ETF. Dividend yield is the annual cash payout relative to price, like a small paycheck from owning the shares. This low yield is totally consistent with an aggressive growth approach that focuses on capital appreciation rather than income. For someone seeking regular cash flow, this setup wouldn’t be ideal, but for a long‑term growth‑oriented investor, it’s not a problem. Over just one year of history, dividend behavior hasn’t had much time to matter; price moves and bitcoin swings overwhelmingly dominate the results so far.
Ongoing product costs
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.02%
Costs are a real strength here. The total expense ratio (TER) across holdings is around 0.02%, driven mainly by the ultra‑low‑fee S&P 500 ETF at 0.03%. TER is the annual percentage fee charged by funds, and keeping it low means less drag on returns every single year. Over long periods, even small fee differences compound into meaningful sums, so this cost profile is a big positive. The presence of direct stocks and bitcoin also avoids fund‑level fees on those portions. With only a short performance history, it’s still early days, but structurally the low‑cost foundation is exactly what supports better long‑term compounding.
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