Highly concentrated growth focused portfolio with standout past returns and significant single stock risk
Report created on Apr 9, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.
Positions
-
AM Amazon.com Inc
AMZN - US0231351067 46.65% -
SP State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
SPYM - US78464A8541 27.24% -
QQ Invesco QQQ Trust
QQQ - US46090E1038 13.54% -
NV NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 10.43% -
RT Raytheon Technologies Corp
RTX - US75513E1010 2.14%
This portfolio is heavily concentrated in a few large US growth names, with almost half in Amazon alone and another big slice in a broad US index fund plus a tech-focused ETF. A structure like this leans hard into a small set of drivers rather than spreading bets widely. That’s relevant because when a couple of holdings dominate, their ups and downs largely decide your overall experience. The upside is clear focus on companies and themes you believe in. The trade-off is that portfolio behaviour will be more extreme than a broad market mix. Anyone using a structure like this should be very comfortable watching big swings without feeling pressured to react.
Growth
Historically, the portfolio has been a rocket: a $1,000 investment grew to about $26,262, with a 38.83% compound annual growth rate (CAGR). CAGR is the “average speed” per year over the full journey. That massively beat both the US market and global market, which grew much slower. The flip side is the maximum drawdown of -51.51%, meaning the portfolio at one point lost over half its value from peak to trough, far steeper than the benchmarks. This combination shows a classic high-risk/high-reward profile. It’s important to remember that past returns at this level are unlikely to repeat forever and don’t guarantee similar future outcomes.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation uses historical return and volatility patterns to generate 1,000 possible 15‑year futures, a bit like running thousands of “what if” market timelines. The median outcome grows $1,000 to about $2,713, with a wide but mostly positive range of possibilities and an average annualized return of 8%. There’s roughly a 73% chance of ending with more than you started. This shows that, even with high past returns, future expectations are much more modest and include meaningful downside scenarios. Simulations are useful for framing possibilities, but they’re built from past data, so real‑world outcomes can be better or worse than these ranges.
Asset classes
- Stocks 73%
- No data 27%
On the asset class side, 73% is clearly identified as stocks, with the rest in a “no data” bucket where the system can’t classify holdings. Equities are typically the main growth engine in long-term portfolios, but they also bring higher volatility than bonds or cash. A high stock share fits an aggressive growth profile but leaves little built‑in cushion during market downturns. The lack of other clearly defined asset classes means risk reduction through bonds, cash-like instruments, or alternatives isn’t evident in the data. Anyone running a setup like this should plan to manage risk mainly through time horizon and personal behaviour, not through asset class mix.
Sectors
- Consumer Discretionary 48%
- Technology 17%
- Industrials 3%
- Telecommunications 2%
- Consumer Staples 1%
- Health Care 1%
Sector-wise, there’s a major tilt to consumer discretionary at about 48%, driven heavily by Amazon, plus a strong technology presence and smaller allocations across a few other sectors. This is very different from a broad market mix, which tends to spread more evenly across areas like financials, healthcare, industrials, and others. A heavy focus on consumer and tech-related areas can do incredibly well when consumer spending is strong and innovation is rewarded, but it can be hit hard by slowdowns, higher interest rates, or shifts in regulation. The relatively low exposure to defensive sectors means less natural protection in weak economic environments.
Regions
- North America 72%
Geographically, about 72% of exposure is in North America, which is roughly in line with many US-based investors’ natural home bias and not wildly off from global market weights. This alignment is a positive: it anchors the portfolio in one of the most diversified and innovative markets in the world. The trade-off is that results will be closely tied to US economic and policy conditions, and you won’t fully capture periods when other regions lead. For many investors, a North America-heavy mix is a reasonable core, but adding more exposure elsewhere is one common way to reduce dependence on a single economic bloc and currency.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 66%
- Large-cap 5%
- Mid-cap 2%
By market capitalization, this portfolio is dominated by mega-cap companies at 66%, with only small slices in large- and mid-cap names. Mega-caps tend to be highly liquid, widely followed, and often more resilient in stress than smaller firms, which is a plus. But relying mostly on giants means you miss some of the diversification and potential growth from smaller companies that can behave differently across cycles. It also means performance is linked to how a relatively small group of global leaders are perceived. When big names lead, this structure shines; when leadership rotates to smaller or more niche companies, the portfolio may lag more diversified mixes.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
Part of fund(s):
- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 2.84%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.10%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.31%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.11%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.11%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.10%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.00%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco QQQ Trust
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
- Top 10 total 74.54%
Looking through the ETFs, the true exposure is even more concentrated than the headline weights suggest. Amazon ends up at about 48% of the portfolio once ETF overlap is included, and NVIDIA sits around 13.6% combined. Several other mega-cap names—Microsoft, Apple, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla—also repeat inside the funds, but at much smaller levels. Overlap like this matters because it reduces the number of independent “bets” you’re actually making; many holdings will move together when big tech and growth sentiment shifts. While this has worked extremely well historically, it means portfolio behaviour is tightly linked to a handful of high-profile companies.
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 low tilt to size and a high tilt to quality. Factors are characteristics like “size” or “quality” that research has linked to return patterns over decades. A very low size exposure means the portfolio strongly favours larger companies over small ones, reducing the classic “small-cap premium” exposure but often adding stability and liquidity. The high quality tilt suggests holdings tend to have stronger balance sheets and profitability, which historically can help during stress periods. At the same time, low momentum and low low‑volatility scores signal that returns may be bumpier and more sensitive to shifts in market mood than a smoother, defensive factor mix.
Risk contribution
-
Amazon.com Inc
Weight: 46.65% 56.2% -
State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF
Weight: 27.24% 16.4% -
NVIDIA Corporation
Weight: 10.43% 15.5% -
Invesco QQQ Trust
Weight: 13.54% 11.1% -
Raytheon Technologies Corp
Weight: 2.14% 0.9%
Risk contribution highlights how much each holding drives overall ups and downs, which can be very different from simple weights. Amazon is 46.65% of the portfolio but contributes about 56% of total risk, and NVIDIA at just over 10% weight contributes more than 15% of risk. Together with the S&P 500 ETF, the top three holdings account for over 88% of volatility. That kind of concentration means a few names essentially dictate the ride; if they soar, the portfolio flies, but if they stumble, there’s nowhere to hide inside this mix. Adjusting position sizes is the main lever to better match risk contribution to intended importance.
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 vs. return chart, the current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.86, while the optimal mix of the same holdings reaches 1.33 and the minimum variance version sits at 0.79. The Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk, so higher is better. Being about 6.3 percentage points below the efficient frontier at the current risk level means there’s room to improve the balance between risk and reward just by changing weights, without adding new investments. In plain terms, the ingredients are strong, but the proportions are aggressive and not fully efficient. A more optimized blend could deliver similar or better returns with a smoother ride.
Dividends
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.50%
- Raytheon Technologies Corp 1.30%
- State Street® SPDR® Portfolio S&P 500® ETF 1.10%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.40%
The overall dividend yield is low at about 0.40%, with modest income from the broad S&P 500 ETF and Raytheon, and a small yield from QQQ. Dividend yield is the yearly cash payout as a percentage of your investment, and low yields like this signal that the strategy is focused on capital growth rather than income. For investors aiming to live off their portfolios, this setup would require selling shares periodically rather than relying on regular cash flow. For growth‑oriented investors with a long horizon, reinvesting small dividends and focusing on price appreciation can be perfectly sensible, but it’s important to be clear about the income trade-off.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.03%
Costs are a real bright spot. The total TER (ongoing fund expense ratio) is about 0.03%, which is extremely low by any standard, and even the QQQ fee of 0.20% is reasonable for a specialized ETF. TER is like an annual “subscription fee” taken as a tiny percentage of your invested amount. Low fees matter because they compound quietly in your favour over many years, leaving more of the returns in your pocket. This cost profile is very well-aligned with best practices and provides a strong foundation; it means performance is driven mainly by market exposure and stock selection, not by drag from expensive products.
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