Growth focused US centric portfolio with strong technology tilt and higher than average recent returns
Report created on May 6, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 40.00% -
SM VanEck Semiconductor ETF
SMH - US92189F6768 30.00% -
AV Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
AVUV - US0250728773 10.00% -
IC iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
ICLN - US4642882249 10.00% -
SE Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF
SETM - US85208P4028 10.00%
This portfolio is built entirely from five equity ETFs, with a clear tilt toward growth and thematic areas. Around forty percent sits in a broad US large‑cap index, giving it a diversified backbone. Roughly a third is concentrated in one industry through the semiconductor ETF, while the remaining three positions target US small‑cap value, clean energy, and energy transition materials. This mix combines a broad market core with three narrower “satellite” themes. Structurally, that means overall results are heavily influenced by how US stocks perform, and especially by the technology and energy transition areas. The design leans toward capital growth rather than stability, which aligns with the stated “growth” risk classification and moderate diversification score.
Growth
Over the period from early 2023 to early 2026, a hypothetical $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $2,427. That translates into a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 31.5%, well ahead of both the US market (19.9%) and global market (18.2%). CAGR is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths out the bumps to show long‑run pace. The trade‑off has been deeper swings: the portfolio’s maximum drawdown, or largest peak‑to‑trough drop, reached about -25%, compared with roughly -19% and -17% for the benchmarks. Just 25 days made up 90% of returns, underlining how reliant the outcome has been on a small number of very strong days. As always, these strong results don’t guarantee similar future performance.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses past return and volatility patterns to simulate 1,000 possible 15‑year paths for a $1,000 investment. Think of it as rolling the dice many times using historical behavior as the guide. The median outcome lands around $2,701, with a wide “likely” band from roughly $1,728 to $4,244. That spread shows how uncertain long‑term equity outcomes can be, even when the average annualized return across simulations (about 8.2%) looks appealing. The chance of finishing positive after 15 years is around 72%, which is typical for a growth‑oriented all‑stock mix. These numbers are not promises; they simply illustrate the range of plausible futures if markets behave somewhat like they have in the past.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All holdings here are equities, so the asset‑class mix is 100% stocks and 0% bonds or cash‑like assets. Equities are typically the main engine of long‑term growth, but they also tend to be more volatile over shorter periods. Many broad market benchmarks blend stocks with bonds, which can smooth the ride but usually lower long‑term return potential. By staying entirely in stocks, this portfolio fully accepts equity market ups and downs in exchange for higher expected growth. This design helps explain the relatively high risk score of 5/7 and the sharper drawdowns observed versus diversified stock‑bond mixes. It also means short‑term market shocks are more likely to show up noticeably in the account value.
Sectors
- Technology 47%
- Basic Materials 9%
- Industrials 8%
- Financials 7%
- Energy 6%
- Consumer Discretionary 6%
- Utilities 5%
- Telecommunications 4%
- Health Care 4%
- Consumer Staples 3%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector‑wise, technology stands out at about 47% of the equity exposure, much higher than typical broad market weights. Energy‑related themes (including materials and utilities tied to transition) also appear meaningfully, while areas like health care, consumer staples, and real estate are relatively modest. Sector allocation matters because different parts of the economy react differently to interest rates, regulation, and economic growth. A tech‑heavy mix tends to benefit when innovation and growth stories are rewarded, but it can be more sensitive when rates rise or sentiment turns against high‑growth names. The balanced presence of financials, industrials, and other cyclical sectors adds some diversification, yet overall sector risk remains clearly tilted toward technology and the energy transition theme.
Regions
- North America 84%
- Asia Emerging 4%
- Asia Developed 4%
- Europe Developed 4%
- Australasia 3%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, around 84% of the portfolio is in North America, with smaller slices in emerging Asia, developed Asia, Europe, Australasia, and Latin America. That’s a stronger US tilt than global equity benchmarks, where the US typically sits closer to 60% of market value. Geographic exposure shapes how sensitive a portfolio is to different economies, currencies, and policy environments. A US‑centric structure benefits when US markets and the dollar do well, as they have for much of the last decade. The trade‑off is less diversification across other major regions, which might perform differently at various points in the global cycle. The smaller allocations outside North America do introduce some global flavor but don’t fully mirror worldwide market weights.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 34%
- Large-cap 33%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 9%
- Micro-cap 6%
By market capitalization, this portfolio spans the spectrum: roughly a third in mega‑caps, another third in large‑caps, with meaningful mid‑, small‑, and even micro‑cap exposure. Market cap describes company size, and size matters because smaller firms often move more sharply, both up and down, than giant established companies. The big‑cap exposure from the S&P 500 ETF provides stability and liquidity similar to broad indices. Meanwhile, the small‑cap value ETF and certain thematic holdings bring in smaller and mid‑sized companies, which can add return potential and diversification of business models. This mix creates a blend of the steadier behavior of large corporations with the higher volatility and growth potential typical of smaller firms.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 8.07%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.44%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing 3.14%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 2.66%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
IN Intel Corporation 2.21%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 1.97%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 1.87%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.53%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
TX Texas Instruments Incorporated 1.50%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.46%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 27.86%
Looking through ETF top‑10 holdings, a few companies appear multiple times, especially in the semiconductor and US large‑cap exposures. NVIDIA alone accounts for just over 8% of the portfolio via ETFs, with Broadcom, TSMC, Apple, Intel, Microsoft, AMD, and others adding further concentration in leading chip and tech names. Overlap is likely understated because only top‑10 holdings are counted, but even this partial view reveals a cluster in a handful of mega‑cap technology and semiconductor stocks. This kind of “hidden concentration” means the portfolio may respond strongly to news affecting those specific companies, even though there is no single‑stock position held directly. The diversified ETF wrappers help, but underlying correlations among these leaders remain important.
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.
On factor exposure, the portfolio shows high momentum and noticeably low value, with other factors near neutral. Momentum measures how much the holdings lean into stocks that have recently performed well, which can boost returns in trending markets but may hurt more during sharp reversals. A low value score means there is less emphasis on cheaper, out‑of‑favor companies relative to the broader market. That fits with the large technology and growth themes present. Quality, size, yield, and low volatility all sit closer to market‑like levels, suggesting no major tilt there. Overall, this factor profile supports a growth and trend‑following flavor, which can be powerful in strong markets but may lead to more pronounced swings when leadership rotates.
Risk contribution
-
VanEck Semiconductor ETF
Weight: 30.00% 45.7% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 40.00% 26.6% -
Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF
Weight: 10.00% 12.4% -
Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF
Weight: 10.00% 7.7% -
iShares Global Clean Energy ETF
Weight: 10.00% 7.6%
Risk contribution highlights how much each ETF drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from its simple weight. The semiconductor ETF is 30% of the portfolio but contributes roughly 46% of total risk, a risk‑to‑weight ratio of 1.52. That means it punches above its size in terms of volatility impact. In contrast, the S&P 500 ETF makes up 40% of the weight but about 27% of risk, acting as a stabilizing anchor. The two 10% energy transition and small‑cap value positions each add single‑digit risk contributions, despite being more volatile individually, because they’re smaller slices. With the top three holdings driving about 85% of risk, overall behavior is tightly linked to those core positions.
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 compares the current mix with two reference portfolios built only from these same ETFs: the optimal (highest Sharpe ratio) and the minimum variance option. The Sharpe ratio measures risk‑adjusted return, comparing excess return over a risk‑free rate to volatility. Here, the current portfolio has a Sharpe of 1.14, while the optimal version reaches 1.45 and the minimum‑risk mix sits at 1.19. The current allocation lies about 2.9 percentage points below the efficient frontier, meaning there are alternative weightings of these same five ETFs that would have delivered better historical risk/return trade‑offs. That doesn’t invalidate the current structure; it simply shows that, in theory, reshuffling weights could have improved efficiency without changing the underlying building blocks.
Dividends
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 1.30%
- iShares Global Clean Energy ETF 1.30%
- Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF 1.30%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.89%
The total indicated dividend yield for the portfolio is around 0.89% per year, which is relatively modest. Yield is the cash income paid out as dividends, expressed as a percentage of the portfolio value. Here, income comes mainly from the S&P 500 ETF and the three non‑semiconductor satellites, while the semiconductor ETF contributes very little yield. That pattern is typical for growth‑oriented and thematic strategies, which often reinvest more earnings rather than paying them out. In practice, this means total return is expected to rely more on price appreciation than on regular cash income. For investors tracking income, the low yield is an important characteristic; for those focused on growth, dividend level is less central.
Ongoing product costs
- Avantis® U.S. Small Cap Value ETF 0.25%
- iShares Global Clean Energy ETF 0.41%
- Sprott Energy Transition Materials ETF 0.65%
- VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.25%
The portfolio’s total expense ratio (TER) averages about 0.25% annually across the five ETFs. TER is the ongoing fee charged by funds, expressed as a yearly percentage of assets; it’s taken out within the fund, not as a separate bill. Costs matter because they compound over time, quietly reducing net returns. Here, the core S&P 500 ETF is very low cost at 0.03%, while the more specialized thematic and small‑cap funds range from 0.25% to 0.65%. This pattern is typical: broad market exposures are cheapest, targeted strategies cost more. Overall, a blended TER of 0.25% is reasonably efficient for a portfolio with several niche exposures, helping more of the underlying gross returns show up in the final performance.
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