Growth focused US stock portfolio with strong large cap tilt and modest international diversification
Report created on Aug 24, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 60.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 10.00% -
SP Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
SPMO - US46138E3392 10.00% -
VX Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 10.00% -
GO Alphabet Inc Class A
GOOGL - US02079K3059 5.00% -
MS Microsoft Corporation
MSFT - US5949181045 5.00%
This portfolio is a concentrated, all‑equity mix with a clear core‑satellite structure. About 60% sits in a broad US large‑cap index fund, forming a simple core. Around it, three ETFs add focused tilts: US dividends, US momentum, and international equities. Two single stocks, Microsoft and Alphabet, make up the final 10%, sitting on top of the index exposure that already includes them. This kind of structure matters because it defines how much of your outcome is driven by broad markets versus a small set of specific positions. Here, broad US equities clearly dominate, but the satellites and individual stocks add extra flavour, risk, and potential deviation from standard benchmarks.
Growth
Over the 2016–2026 period, $1,000 grew to about $4,582, which is a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 18.07%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths out bumps to show steady yearly progress. This return beat both the US market (16.69%) and global market (13.75%), so historically the mix has been rewarded. The worst peak‑to‑trough drop was about –33% during early 2020, similar to broad markets, but the portfolio recovered within about four months, showing resilience. Only 40 days made up 90% of returns, which underlines how a handful of strong days can drive long‑term performance and why staying invested through swings often matters more than timing. Past success, of course, does not guarantee similar future results.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses many randomised paths based on historical behaviour to estimate possible futures. Think of it as replaying the last decade thousands of different ways to see a range of outcomes, not a single prediction. Over 15 years, the median path grows $1,000 to about $2,683, with a broad “likely” range from roughly $1,722 to $4,079. The spread from about $953 (p5) to $8,341 (p95) shows that outcomes could vary a lot, even if the average annualised return across simulations is 8.03%. This gap between typical and extreme paths highlights uncertainty: long‑term investing often means accepting a wide cone of possibilities, not a narrow target.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All 100% of this portfolio is invested in stocks, with no bonds or cash‑like diversifiers in the mix. Asset classes are broad buckets like stocks, bonds, and real estate that tend to behave differently in various market environments. Being fully in equities historically offers higher growth potential but also larger and more frequent swings in value, especially during market stress. Compared with a more mixed‑asset approach, this structure leans firmly toward growth and volatility rather than stability or income smoothing. It also means that any risk‑reducing effects must come from how the stocks differ from each other, not from fundamentally different asset types that might zig when equities zag.
Sectors
- Technology 36%
- Telecommunications 13%
- Financials 11%
- Health Care 9%
- Industrials 8%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is tilted toward technology‑related areas at 36%, with additional weight in communications at 13%, then financials and healthcare following behind. Sectors group companies by what they do, and they often react differently to interest rates, economic growth, or regulation. A tech‑heavy portfolio can benefit strongly during innovation booms or when growth companies are in favour, but it may feel more volatile if interest rates rise or sentiment turns against high‑growth names. The spread across consumer, industrial, energy, and defensive areas like staples and utilities still provides some balance, and it broadly resembles modern market benchmarks where technology is a major driver. Overall, this is a growth‑tilted yet reasonably diversified sector mix.
Regions
- North America 91%
- Europe Developed 4%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Japan 2%
- Asia Emerging 1%
Geographically, around 91% of the portfolio is in North America, with small slices in developed Europe, Japan, developed Asia, and a very small allocation to emerging Asia. Geography matters because different regions face distinct economic cycles, currencies, and political environments. This portfolio is therefore heavily tied to US and Canadian markets and the US dollar, similar to many global benchmarks but even more concentrated than a typical world index. That strong home‑region focus has aligned well with recent history, given US market strength, and it simplifies currency risk. At the same time, it means most outcomes are driven by one major economy, while only a modest amount benefits from growth or recovery in the rest of the world.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 45%
- Large-cap 36%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 1%
By market capitalisation, which reflects company size, the portfolio leans clearly to the largest firms: about 45% in mega‑caps and 36% in large‑caps, with just 18% combined in mid and small‑caps. Larger companies often have more diversified business lines and more stable earnings, which can make their share prices somewhat steadier than smaller, more niche firms. This pattern is consistent with broad global benchmarks that are also dominated by mega‑caps. The relatively small exposure to mid and small‑caps means the portfolio is less sensitive to the sometimes outsized gains and losses seen in smaller companies. Overall, this size mix supports a more blue‑chip, mainstream equity profile rather than a small‑company or speculative tilt.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
Part of fund(s):
- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.39%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc. 3.95%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 2.30%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.29%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.17%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.15%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.10%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 35.23%
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings reveals some meaningful overlap. Microsoft and Alphabet each reach total exposures of about 7.5% and 7.4% once both direct and ETF positions are combined, making them two of the largest underlying names. Other major tech names like NVIDIA, Apple, Amazon, Broadcom, and Meta also appear prominently through the funds. Overlap matters because owning the same company in multiple funds quietly concentrates risk, even when headline position sizes look modest. Here, the direct stakes in Microsoft and Alphabet sit on top of already sizable index weights, amplifying their influence on returns. The coverage stats note that only ETF top tens are included, so true overlap may be somewhat higher than shown.
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 is balanced and close to market‑like across all six reported factors: value, size, momentum, quality, yield, and low volatility. Factors are characteristics, like “cheap vs expensive” or “stable vs volatile,” that research has linked to long‑term performance. A neutral profile, around 50% on this scale, suggests the portfolio behaves broadly like a standard market index rather than aggressively tilting into any one style such as deep value or high momentum. The slightly lower size score matches the dominance of mega‑ and large‑caps, but it’s still within a mild range. This even factor mix means that day‑to‑day movements are mostly driven by broad market direction and specific stock exposures, not by pronounced style bets.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 60.00% 60.7% -
Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
Weight: 10.00% 10.7% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 10.00% 8.3% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 10.00% 8.1% -
Alphabet Inc Class A
Weight: 5.00% 6.2% - Top 5 risk contribution 93.9%
Risk contribution shows how much each position drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. Here, the 60% S&P 500 ETF contributes about 61% of total risk, almost one‑for‑one with its size. The momentum ETF, at 10% weight, adds slightly more than its share of risk, while the dividend and international funds contribute a bit less than their weights. Alphabet stands out: a 5% weight contributes over 6% of risk, signalling above‑average volatility or concentration. The top three holdings by weight together generate nearly 80% of portfolio risk, underlining that, despite multiple positions, a handful of core exposures really dominate how the portfolio behaves day to day.
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 vs. return chart compares the current mix with an “efficient frontier” built only from the existing holdings. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.76, meaning it delivers a certain return per unit of volatility after accounting for a 4% risk‑free rate. The optimal mix of these same assets, by contrast, reaches a Sharpe of 1.08, while the minimum‑variance mix runs at 0.75 with less risk. Because the current point sits about 2.4 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, the existing weights are not mathematically “efficient.” In plain terms, the same ingredients could be rearranged to target either higher expected return for similar risk, or similar return with somewhat lower volatility.
Dividends
- Alphabet Inc Class A 0.20%
- Microsoft Corporation 0.60%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.00%
- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF 0.70%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.50%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.26%
The overall dividend yield is about 1.26%, which is on the lower side for an equity portfolio, reflecting its growth tilt. Dividend yield is the annual cash payout as a percentage of price, and it can be a meaningful component of long‑term total return, especially when reinvested. Here, the dedicated dividend ETF stands out with around a 3% yield, while the broad market and momentum funds sit closer to 1%. The two individual growth stocks pay small or no dividends, so most of their return potential comes from price appreciation instead of cash payouts. This structure leans more toward capital growth with a modest income stream, rather than prioritising regular cash flow.
Ongoing product costs
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF 0.13%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%
The portfolio’s costs are impressively low, with a combined TER around 0.04%. TER (Total Expense Ratio) is the annual fee charged by funds, taken out of returns before they reach you, similar to a small service charge on the account. The individual ETFs here are all in a very competitive range, from 0.03% to 0.13%, which is well below many actively managed alternatives. Low costs are important because they compound over time: even small differences can add up over decades. In this case, fees are unlikely to be a major drag on long‑term performance. The cost structure aligns closely with index‑based best practices and forms a strong foundation for efficient 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!
Compare your holdings
How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?
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