Concentrated US equity mix with strong tech tilt and efficient risk adjusted performance
Report created on Sep 10, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
FX Fidelity 500 Index Fund
FXAIX - US3159117502 70.00% -
QQ Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
QQQM - US46138G6492 30.00%
This portfolio is built from just two holdings: a broad US large‑cap index fund at 70% and a NASDAQ 100 ETF at 30%. So everything is in stocks, and all of it is US‑listed equities, with no bonds or cash in the mix. Structurally, this creates a core‑and‑satellite feel, where the large index fund forms the base and the NASDAQ ETF adds a growth‑oriented tilt. Having only two positions makes the portfolio very simple to understand and track. The trade‑off is lower diversification across regions, asset classes, and styles than a more mixed lineup, which helps explain the “Low Diversity” score despite broad coverage within the US market.
Growth
Over the period from October 2020 to September 2026, a hypothetical $1,000 invested in this portfolio grew to about $2,444. That translates to a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 16.43%, meaning the investment grew as if it gained roughly 16.43% per year on average. This slightly beat the US market benchmark and more clearly outpaced the global market. The portfolio experienced a maximum drawdown of about -27.5%, a drop from peak to trough, which is somewhat deeper than the US benchmark’s. It took around 14 months to recover, showing that while returns were strong, the ride included meaningful volatility typical of equity‑heavy, tech‑tilted exposures.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses thousands of simulated paths based on historical return and volatility patterns to estimate a range of possible 15‑year outcomes. It’s like running 1,000 alternate futures and seeing where a $1,000 investment might land. The median result of about $2,775 implies an annualized return near 8%, with a wide “likely” range from roughly $1,760 to $4,303. There’s a 72.8% chance of ending with more than the starting $1,000 in these simulations. These numbers illustrate both the growth potential and uncertainty of an all‑equity portfolio. Still, simulations rely on past data and assumptions, so real‑world results can end up outside even the 5–95% range.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of this portfolio sits in a single asset class: stocks, at 100%. There’s no allocation to bonds, cash, or alternative assets such as real estate via dedicated vehicles. From an educational standpoint, asset classes behave differently in various market environments: stocks usually drive growth but can be volatile, while bonds and cash often help smooth the ride. Because this lineup is entirely equity‑based, it leans fully into growth potential and also fully into stock‑market swings. Compared with a multi‑asset benchmark that mixes in bonds, this structure naturally carries more return potential and more short‑term risk, which aligns with the moderate‑to‑higher risk score of 4 out of 7.
Sectors
- Technology 44%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Financials 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Industrials 7%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Consumer Discretionary 3%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 1%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector‑wise, the portfolio is clearly tilted toward technology, which makes up about 44% of equity exposure. Telecommunications and financials follow, but at much smaller weights, and other sectors like health care, industrials, consumer areas, energy, utilities, and real estate are present only in modest slices. Compared with broad market benchmarks, this is a tech‑heavier profile, in part due to the NASDAQ 100 allocation. Tech‑heavy portfolios can benefit strongly during innovation‑driven rallies and periods of low interest rates, but may swing more when growth stocks fall out of favor or when rates rise. Still, having a spread across many non‑tech sectors helps avoid being a pure single‑theme bet.
Regions
- North America 99%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, the portfolio is almost entirely focused on North America, with about 99% exposure there and only a token allocation to developed Europe. That means performance is highly tied to the US economy, US corporate earnings, and the US dollar. Global benchmarks usually have substantial exposure outside North America, so this portfolio is more concentrated than a typical world index. The upside is clear alignment with a market that has been very strong over the last decade. The downside is less participation if other regions outperform and more sensitivity to US‑specific shocks. This geographic focus also helps explain the “Low Diversity” score despite holding many underlying companies.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 48%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 1%
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans heavily toward larger companies: about 48% in mega‑caps, 34% in large‑caps, 17% in mid‑caps, and just 1% in small‑caps. Market cap describes a company’s size on the stock market, and bigger firms often have more stable earnings and deeper liquidity. A large‑cap tilt tends to reduce company‑specific risk compared with a portfolio packed with smaller, more volatile names. However, it may capture less of the sometimes explosive growth that small‑caps can offer during strong economic upswings. Relative to a pure total‑market portfolio, this mix is more anchored in established giants, which pairs well with the emphasis on broad US index exposure.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 2.64%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc. 2.30%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 1.81%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.42%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.33%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 0.98%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 0.95%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 0.90%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 0.88%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 0.86%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
- Top 10 total 14.07%
Looking through to underlying holdings, the top exposures are familiar large US tech and growth names like Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Tesla. These positions appear via both the S&P 500 index fund and the NASDAQ 100 ETF, so overlap is embedded, even though only the ETF top‑10 data is shown. This overlap means those big names likely drive more of the portfolio’s movement than their visible percentages alone suggest. It’s worth noting that coverage here is only about 14%, so hidden concentration may be higher than it appears. Still, this pattern of repeated mega‑cap holdings is very typical for US‑focused index and NASDAQ‑style portfolios.
Factors
Factor exposure is fairly balanced overall, with most traits sitting near neutral. Factor investing looks at characteristics like value, size, momentum, quality, low volatility, and yield that help explain returns, like different ingredients in a recipe. Here, value, momentum, quality, and low volatility are all close to market‑like levels, suggesting no strong tilt in those areas. Size shows a mild tilt away from smaller companies, which matches the dominance of large and mega‑caps. Yield is also low, consistent with growth‑oriented tech exposure. This pattern implies behavior close to the broad market but with a bit more emphasis on growth and lower dividends, especially when growth stocks lead.
Risk contribution
-
Fidelity 500 Index Fund
Weight: 70.00% 63.8% -
Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF
Weight: 30.00% 36.2%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ from simple weights. The S&P 500 index fund is 70% of the portfolio but contributes about 63.8% of total risk, a little less than its size would suggest. The NASDAQ 100 ETF is 30% of the weight yet contributes about 36.2% of the risk, more than proportional. This happens because the NASDAQ segment is more volatile and tech‑concentrated. The risk/weight ratios (0.91 vs 1.21) highlight this difference: each dollar in the NASDAQ ETF adds more variability than a dollar in the broad index fund, even though both are large, diversified vehicles.
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 shows this portfolio sitting right on or very close to the curve of best possible risk‑return combinations that can be achieved with these two holdings. The Sharpe ratio, which measures return per unit of risk above the risk‑free rate, is 0.72 for the current mix. The optimal and minimum‑variance portfolios, using only these same funds, would have a higher Sharpe of 0.93 with slightly lower volatility. However, the current allocation already lies near that efficient point, indicating a well‑balanced use of the chosen building blocks. Any potential improvement would come from reweighting, not necessarily from adding new positions.
Dividends
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.00%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.40%
- Weighted yield (per year) 0.82%
The combined dividend yield is relatively modest at about 0.82%, with the S&P 500 fund yielding around 1.0% and the NASDAQ 100 ETF about 0.4%. Dividend yield is the annual cash payout as a percentage of price, and it can be an important part of total return, especially in income‑focused portfolios. In this case, most of the historical return has come from price appreciation rather than dividends, which is very typical for growth‑oriented US equity and tech‑tilted exposures. The lower yield aligns with the factor data showing a mild tilt away from high‑yield stocks and toward companies that tend to reinvest earnings rather than paying out large dividends.
Ongoing product costs
- Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
- Invesco NASDAQ 100 ETF 0.15%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.06%
Overall costs are impressively low. The S&P 500 index fund charges a total expense ratio (TER) of just 0.02%, and the NASDAQ 100 ETF charges 0.15%, for a blended portfolio TER around 0.06%. TER is the annual fee taken by the fund manager as a percentage of assets, and even small differences can compound significantly over long periods. These figures sit well below the cost of many actively managed funds and even undercut some index products in the same categories. Low ongoing fees mean more of the portfolio’s gross return can stay invested, which supports better long‑term performance without adding extra risk.
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