Concentrated high momentum stock picks supported by a large cash buffer and short performance history
Report created on Jun 17, 2026Risk profile
7/7
Diversification profile
5/5
Positions
-
SP Fidelity® Government Money Market Fund
SPAXX - US31617H1023 27.64% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 19.83% -
MO Altria Group
MO - US02209S1033 12.88% -
IT iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF
ITA - US4642887602 10.58% -
VR Vertiv Holdings Co
VRT - US92537N1081 10.25% -
PA Palo Alto Networks Inc
PANW - US6974351057 6.12% -
IN Intel Corporation
INTC - US4581401001 5.44% -
TT Take-Two Interactive Software Inc
TTWO - US8740541094 4.99% -
NV NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 2.27%
This portfolio mixes a big cash-like position with a focused group of individual stocks and two equity ETFs. Around a quarter is in a government money market fund, while roughly three-quarters is in equities spread across a handful of companies and two themed funds. That combination creates an interesting balance: a core of very stable capital plus a much spikier “risk engine” on top. Because there are only nine months of history, today’s mix only shows how this structure behaved in one short window, not across full market cycles. The current setup illustrates how a relatively small set of active stock ideas can dominate behaviour even when a sizable chunk is parked in cash.
Growth
One or more local-currency benchmark funds are unavailable for this report.
Over the nine‑month window, the portfolio’s hypothetical $1,000 grew to about $1,499, far ahead of the global market benchmark. The calculated CAGR of over 300% is eye‑catching, but it’s heavily influenced by a short, very strong period and should not be seen as a steady long‑term pace. Max drawdown, at about –7%, was only slightly larger than the benchmark’s pullback, meaning the ride down has not yet matched the upside surge. Just eight days made up 90% of total returns, showing results were driven by a few powerful moves. With such limited history, this pattern might or might not persist when markets change direction.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses the short historical return and volatility data to simulate many possible 15‑year paths for $1,000. Monte Carlo is basically a “what if” engine: it repeatedly shuffles returns, based on past patterns, to build a range of future outcomes. Here, the median result lands around $2,581, with a wide gap between the more pessimistic and optimistic paths. Because the input data cover only nine months, mostly in a strong market phase, the model almost certainly overstates how smooth or generous long‑term returns might be. These results are best read as a rough illustration of uncertainty rather than a reliable forecast.
Asset classes
- Stocks 72%
- Cash 28%
By asset class, about 72% of the portfolio sits in stocks and 28% in a money market fund treated as cash. That cash-like slice provides stability and reduces day‑to‑day swings, since it barely moves compared with equities. At the same time, over two‑thirds of the portfolio still depends on stock market behaviour, so growth and drawdowns are driven mainly by equity risk. Relative to a fully invested stock portfolio, this mix is more cushioned; relative to a mostly cash setup, it is clearly growth‑oriented. With only a brief history, it’s hard to say how this balance will hold up across more volatile or prolonged downturns.
Sectors
- Cash 28%
- Technology 26%
- Industrials 21%
- Consumer Staples 14%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Discretionary 2%
- Health Care 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is clustered, not broad. Technology is the single largest equity sector, followed by industrials, then consumer staples, with smaller slices in telecom, consumer discretionary, and health care. Combined with the dedicated aerospace and defense ETF and several tech‑related names, this creates distinct thematic tilts rather than a broad, market‑like spread. Tech‑heavy exposures often benefit during periods of innovation optimism and low rates, but can be more sensitive when sentiment turns or borrowing costs rise. The significant cash allocation tempers this somewhat, yet within the invested portion, sector swings can still be pronounced, especially over such a short performance window.
Regions
- North America 72%
- Cash 28%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, the portfolio is straightforward: roughly 72% in North American equities and the rest in cash. This creates a clear home bias toward one major market and currency, which has been favourable in recent years but can cut both ways over longer stretches. The cash position also appears to be denominated in the same currency, so there is little currency diversification overall. Compared with global market indices that spread exposure widely across regions, this is a focused regional stance. With less than a year of history, it’s impossible to see how this concentration would have behaved through periods when other regions outperformed or when local markets lagged.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 41%
- Mega-cap 24%
- Mid-cap 6%
- Small-cap 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans strongly toward larger companies: mega‑caps and large‑caps dominate, with small- and mid‑caps making up only a modest portion. Bigger companies often have more diversified businesses and deeper trading liquidity, which can sometimes make them more resilient than smaller peers during stress, although they still move with markets. The small and mid‑cap exposure introduces some higher‑growth, higher‑volatility potential, but it is not the main driver. Given the short data period, recent strong moves in certain large‑cap names can heavily shape the observed risk and return, so any apparent stability or aggressiveness by size could look quite different over a full market cycle.
True holdings
-
-
-
-
-
-
Part of fund(s):
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
GE GE Aerospace 2.03%
Part of fund(s):- iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF
-
RT RTX Corporation 1.59%
Part of fund(s):- iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 1.41%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
BA The Boeing Company 1.02%
Part of fund(s):- iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF
- Top 10 total 49.61%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through the holdings, a handful of individual stocks account for much of the equity exposure, with limited overlap across ETFs. Only NVIDIA appears both directly and via an ETF, giving it a slightly larger combined footprint than its direct weight alone. Many other big positions, like Altria, Vertiv, and Palo Alto Networks, are held only once, so hidden duplication is modest in the visible top‑10 data. However, ETF look‑through coverage is partial, so some overlap beyond the top holdings is not captured. Overall, the portfolio’s real concentration risk sits in a few single‑name picks rather than widespread duplication across multiple funds.
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 notable tilts. Momentum exposure is very high, meaning the portfolio is tilted toward stocks that have recently performed strongly. Momentum strategies often shine when trends persist but can be hit hard during sharp reversals. Size exposure is very low, which here means a tilt away from smaller companies and toward bigger ones. That can sometimes reduce idiosyncratic risk from tiny firms but keeps the portfolio aligned with large, widely followed names that move with major indices. Other factors sit near neutral or mildly positive, so the standout traits are “recent winners” and “larger companies,” a combination that has helped over this short historical period but may behave differently in choppy markets.
Risk contribution
-
Vertiv Holdings Co
Weight: 10.25% 52.1% -
Intel Corporation
Weight: 5.44% 24.5% -
iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF
Weight: 10.58% 13.4% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 19.83% 10.3% -
Fidelity® Government Money Market Fund
Weight: 27.64% 3.0% - Top 5 risk contribution 103.3%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives overall ups and downs, which can differ a lot from its weight. Vertiv is only about 10% of the portfolio by size but contributes over half of total risk, meaning its price swings dominate the experience. Intel, at around 5%, contributes roughly a quarter of the risk. Together with the aerospace and defense ETF, the top three risk contributors account for about 90% of volatility. Meanwhile, the large money market position is over a quarter of the portfolio yet adds just a few percent of risk. This highlights a concentrated risk core wrapped in a relatively calm cash buffer.
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 efficient frontier analysis compares this current mix with other possible combinations of the same holdings. Right now the portfolio sits well below the frontier, meaning that, based on recent data, other weightings of these same assets could have delivered higher expected return for the same risk or similar return with less risk. The optimal portfolio in this framework shows a much higher Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of volatility. However, these numbers lean heavily on a very short, unusually strong performance period. They highlight theoretical room for improvement in the risk/return balance, without guaranteeing similar opportunities in different future conditions.
Dividends
- iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.40%
- Altria Group 4.50%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Vertiv Holdings Co 0.10%
- Fidelity® Government Money Market Fund 2.60%
- Weighted yield (per year) 1.43%
The overall dividend yield is modest, around 1.43%, and comes from a mix of sources: a relatively high‑yield tobacco stock, small yields from the equity ETFs and Vertiv, plus income from the money market fund. Here, income plays a supporting role rather than being the main driver of total return, which has come largely from price changes in the equities over the short history. Dividends can help smooth returns and contribute to long‑term compounding when reinvested, but in this portfolio’s current shape and timeframe, capital gains and losses from the concentrated equity positions matter far more than the cash flow they generate.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares U.S. Aerospace & Defense ETF 0.40%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Fidelity® Government Money Market Fund 0.42%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.19%
Estimated ongoing costs, captured by the total expense ratio of about 0.19%, are relatively low. That figure is driven by inexpensive equity ETFs combined with a somewhat higher‑cost money market fund. Lower fees mean less performance drag over time, allowing more of the gross returns from the underlying holdings to reach the investor. Over many years, even small differences in expenses can compound into noticeable gaps in ending wealth. Because this portfolio is also heavily influenced by individual stocks, which don’t carry fund‑level TERs, the overall cost picture is especially favourable. The main performance drivers here are security selection and risk‑taking, not fees.
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