This portfolio has only about 2 months of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

High growth recent performance with strong value tilt and concentrated technology exposure

Report created on Jun 5, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is built almost entirely from stock ETFs, with 50% in a broad US market fund and 20% in a broad international fund as the core. Around 30% is in more focused themes: semiconductors, NASDAQ 100, momentum, space, and a specialised Tema ETF. That mix creates a backbone of diversified index exposure, plus several concentrated “satellite” positions that can move more sharply. Because the data window is only about two months, it’s hard to draw firm conclusions about how this mix behaves over full market cycles. Still, structurally it combines a diversified base with higher-octane growth and thematic overlays, which can increase both upside potential and short-term swings.

Growth Info

Over the short two‑month window, a hypothetical $1,000 grew to about $1,244, far ahead of both the US and global market benchmarks. The reported compound annual growth rate (CAGR) above 270% just reflects annualizing a very brief strong period, not a realistic long‑term expectation. CAGR is like averaging your speed on a tiny stretch of road and assuming you’ll hold it on a cross‑country trip. Max drawdown, the largest peak‑to‑trough drop, was a mild -2.65%. With only 11 days making up 90% of returns, performance was highly concentrated in a few strong sessions. Overall, the numbers look great, but the tiny sample means they mainly show that this portfolio can move quickly in short bursts.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses the short recent history to simulate many possible 15‑year paths, giving a range of future outcomes. Monte Carlo is basically a what‑if engine: it takes past ups and downs, shuffles them thousands of times, and sees where a $1,000 investment might land. Here, the median outcome is about $2,579 after 15 years, with a wide band from roughly $1,000 to over $6,600 in the middle 90% of scenarios. That spread illustrates how uncertain long‑term stock investing can be. Because the inputs come from just two months of unusually strong returns, these projections are especially shaky and should be viewed as rough, educational scenarios rather than realistic forecasts.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    95%
  • No data
    5%

Asset class data shows 95% in stocks and 5% in a “no data” bucket where the system can’t classify holdings. This makes the portfolio overwhelmingly equity‑focused, without a clear allocation to traditionally stabilizing assets like bonds or cash in the data. Asset allocation sets the basic risk profile, since stocks tend to have higher long‑term return potential but larger short‑term swings. A 95% equity mix typically means more sensitivity to market cycles, especially during sharp downturns. The balanced risk score of 4/7 likely reflects that most of the stock exposure is in diversified index funds rather than leveraged or highly speculative instruments, but the lack of non‑equity ballast still points to a growth‑oriented structure.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    37%
  • Industrials
    11%
  • Financials
    11%
  • Telecommunications
    9%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector breakdown shows 37% in technology and the rest spread across industrials, financials, telecom, consumer areas, health care, energy, materials, utilities, and real estate. That tech tilt is higher than many broad global benchmarks, where technology is important but usually not quite this dominant. Sector weights matter because different parts of the economy react differently to things like interest rates, inflation, or economic growth. Tech‑heavy portfolios can benefit more when innovation and growth themes are in favor, but they can also see deeper pullbacks when markets rotate toward more defensive or traditional areas. The rest of the sectors are reasonably spread out, which helps offset some, but not all, of that tech concentration.

Regions Info

  • North America
    74%
  • Europe Developed
    8%
  • Asia Developed
    4%
  • Japan
    3%
  • Asia Emerging
    3%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

Geographically, the portfolio is strongly tilted toward North America at 74%, with more modest exposure to developed Europe, Japan, developed Asia, and small slices of emerging markets and other regions. Many global benchmarks also lean heavily toward North America, but this portfolio is even more concentrated there. Geographic mix matters because different regions can be at different points in the economic cycle and react differently to policy changes or currency moves. A North America‑heavy portfolio can benefit when that market outperforms, as it has in many recent years, but it also means a large share of outcomes is tied to one main economic and currency bloc rather than a more even global spread.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    40%
  • Large-cap
    30%
  • Mid-cap
    16%
  • Small-cap
    6%
  • Micro-cap
    2%

The market cap breakdown is dominated by mega‑cap and large‑cap companies, which together make up about 70% of the look‑through exposure. Mid‑caps add 16%, while small and micro‑caps make up a smaller slice. Market cap is useful because larger companies tend to be more established and less volatile, while smaller ones can move more dramatically in both directions. Compared with a pure small‑cap or mid‑cap strategy, this is more anchored in big, well‑known names, helped by the broad index funds and large‑stock‑oriented ETFs. That structure often smooths some of the wildest swings but can still carry meaningful risk when overall equity markets sell off, especially given the growth and tech themes on top.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    5.78%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Apple Inc
    3.22%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Broadcom Inc
    2.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.07%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    2.02%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Micron Technology Inc
    1.64%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    1.12%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
    • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF
    • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.97%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 23.60%

Looking through ETF top‑10 holdings, a handful of big US technology and growth names show up repeatedly: NVIDIA, Apple, Broadcom, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Micron, AMD, and Meta are all meaningful exposures. NVIDIA alone totals about 5.8%, and Apple, Microsoft, and others add several percentage points each. Because many ETFs hold similar giants, owning several funds can create hidden overlap where the same company appears in multiple places. That overlap magnifies the impact of those firms on overall results: their good or bad days ripple across several holdings at once. Coverage is only about a third of the portfolio, so actual overlap is likely higher than shown, but even these partial numbers illustrate a notable concentration in a small group of mega‑cap growth stocks.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Very high
Data availability: 5%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 95%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 10%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
No data
Data availability: 0%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 95%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 95%

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 value (85%) and a very low tilt to size (8%), with momentum elevated and yield and low volatility roughly neutral. Factors are like the “ingredients” that explain why returns behave the way they do over time. A strong value tilt suggests the holdings, on average, screen cheaper relative to fundamentals than the broad market, which historically has sometimes helped during periods when investors favor discounted stocks. The very low size exposure indicates a bias away from smaller companies and toward larger ones. High momentum means recent winners are more heavily represented, which can amplify gains in strong trends but hurt if leadership suddenly reverses. The lack of quality data simply means that specific factor couldn’t be measured here.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 50.00%
    30.5%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
    Weight: 20.00%
    22.0%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    17.8%
  • Tema ETF Trust
    Weight: 5.00%
    10.6%
  • Procure Space ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    8.7%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 89.6%

Risk contribution, which shows how much each holding drives overall ups and downs, looks more concentrated than the simple weights suggest. The 50% US total market ETF contributes about 30% of risk, less than its weight, while the 20% international ETF contributes roughly 22%, close to proportional. More focused funds punch above their size: the 10% semiconductor ETF accounts for nearly 18% of risk, and the 5% Tema ETF over 10%. In total, the top three positions drive just over 70% of portfolio risk. This illustrates how concentrated or volatile exposures can dominate behavior even when they are not the biggest holdings, much like a single loud instrument standing out in an otherwise balanced orchestra.

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

The efficient frontier chart compares this portfolio’s current mix to the best possible risk‑return trade‑offs using the same holdings. The Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of volatility above a risk‑free rate, is 7.59 for the current portfolio versus 9.92 for the optimal mix and 8.26 for the minimum‑variance mix in this short sample. The current portfolio sits about 35 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, meaning that, based on recent data, a different weighting of the same ETFs would have delivered higher returns for similar or even lower risk. Because this is all based on a very short, unusually strong period, these optimization results should be seen as a mathematical curiosity rather than a long‑term blueprint.

Dividends Info

  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.20%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF 0.70%
  • Procure Space ETF 0.30%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.00%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.70%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 1.13%

The estimated total dividend yield is about 1.13%, with the highest yield coming from the international index ETF at 2.7% and the broad US market ETF around 1%. The more growth‑focused and thematic funds have lower yields, some below 0.5%. Dividend yield is the cash income paid out each year as a percentage of the portfolio value, and for stock‑heavy portfolios it typically sits below yields from bonds or cash. Here, most of the portfolio’s return potential is from price movements rather than income. Over long horizons, reinvested dividends can significantly add to total returns, but in this specific mix and especially over such a short history, dividends are a modest, secondary contributor compared with capital gains.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
  • VanEck Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
  • Invesco S&P 500® Momentum ETF 0.13%
  • Procure Space ETF 0.75%
  • Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
  • Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.11%

Estimated total costs are low, with a blended expense ratio around 0.11%. The broad Vanguard funds are particularly cheap at 0.03% and 0.05%, while the thematic ETFs cost more, up to 0.75% for the space ETF, but they are small enough in weight that they don’t drive overall costs too high. Expense ratios are annual fees taken by the funds, and every 0.1% saved each year leaves more return to compound over time. For an equity portfolio with several specialized strategies, a 0.11% total expense level is impressively low and aligns well with best practices for cost‑conscious investing. Over many years, this kind of pricing can make a meaningful difference.

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