A nicotine fueled tech rollercoaster pretending to be diversified and calling it a growth strategy
Risk 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.
What type of investor this portfolio is suitable for
Growth Investors
This portfolio screams “high tolerance for pain with a soft spot for dividends and a weakness for big narratives.” It suits someone with a long time horizon who can watch a -40% drawdown without panic-selling everything at the bottom. The personality here is part gambler, part yield enjoyer, willing to ride aggressive growth stories but still comforted by a monthly or quarterly payout. Long-term wealth growth is clearly the main aim, not short-term stability. This kind of setup fits someone who can commit for 10+ years, accept wild swings, and is more scared of missing upside than enduring a few nasty bear markets along the way.
Positions
-
Altria Group
MO - US02209S1033 20.82% -
Advanced Micro Devices Inc
AMD - US0079031078 14.89% -
iShares Semiconductor ETF
SOXX - US4642875235 13.02% -
Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares
VXUS - US9219097683 10.42% -
AT&T Inc
T - US00206R1023 8.69% -
NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 8.46% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 6.69% -
Intel Corporation
INTC - US4581401001 4.67% -
SoFi Technologies Inc.
SOFI - US83406F1021 4.15% -
Oracle Corporation
ORCL - US68389X1054 2.80% -
Realty Income Corporation
O - US7561091049 2.10% -
Redwire Corp
RDW - US75776W1036 2.07% -
BlackBerry Ltd
BB - CA09228F1036 1.22%
This setup looks like two different people built it: one dividend-chasing boomer and one chip-obsessed zoomer. Nearly half the money is in tech and semis, but then a fifth is parked in Altria, plus big chunks in AT&T and a smattering of other names. The broad ETFs (S&P 500 and total international) are trying their best, but they’re basically garnish around a few oversized bets. Structurally, this is more “barbell chaos” than clean growth portfolio. Tightening position sizes, setting a max percentage per single stock, and deciding whether this is a growth engine or an income side hustle would make the whole thing a lot less confused.
Growth
A 24% CAGR sounds like the kind of number people brag about at parties. CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is just “your average yearly speed” over time. If you’d started with $10,000 and actually hit that over several years, you’d have grown it aggressively compared to something like a plain S&P 500 index. But then there’s the -38% max drawdown, which is code for “you watched almost four-tenths of your money evaporate at some point.” Past performance is basically yesterday’s weather: useful background, terrible crystal ball. Treat the strong returns as proof the risk can pay off, not as a promise that this circus keeps performing forever.
Projection
The Monte Carlo results are like running 1,000 alternate universes of this portfolio and seeing how often you cry. Best guess (the 50th percentile) is strong growth, and the high percentiles look like “retire early and brag on Reddit.” But that 5th percentile at -73% is brutal: that’s “I misclicked my life savings” territory. Monte Carlo is just fancy randomizing based on past volatility; it’s a glorified weather forecast, not prophecy. The general takeaway: this setup has big upside and equally big face-plant potential. Dialing in position sizes and smoothing out the sector and regional bets would help make the future less binary boom-or-bust.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
- Cash 0%
- Other 0%
- No data 0%
Asset classes: 100% stocks, 0% cash, 0% bonds, 0% anything else. This isn’t asset allocation; it’s an enthusiasm problem. Being fully in equities is fine for long horizons and strong stomachs, but it turns every correction into a front-row seat on the volatility rollercoaster. No bonds, no cash buffer, no alternatives means when markets tank, everything goes down together and there’s nothing calm in the corner to rebalance from. Over time, sprinkling in at least one more asset class can make returns less bumpy. It’s like adding rice to a spicy curry: still good, just less likely to melt your face off during bad markets.
Sectors
- Technology 49%
- Consumer Staples 22%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Financials 7%
- Industrials 4%
- Real Estate 3%
- Consumer Discretionary 2%
- Health Care 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
- Energy 1%
- Utilities 0%
This portfolio is basically: “Tech and semis are my personality now,” with a side of defensive and telecom. Roughly half in technology, and semiconductors layered on top, is a concentration issue wearing a “growth” nametag. The rest is scattered over consumer defensive, communication services, and a few tiny token allocations that barely move the needle. Compared to broad indexes, this is seriously tilted toward one narrative: chips and more chips. When that theme works, you look like a genius; when it doesn’t, your returns take synchronized swan dives. Loosening the chokehold that tech and semis have, and allowing other sectors more breathing room, would make this less of a single-bet story.
Regions
- North America 88%
- Europe Developed 5%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Asia Emerging 2%
- Japan 2%
- Australasia 0%
- Africa/Middle East 0%
- Latin America 0%
- Europe Emerging 0%
Geographically, this is “America first, second, and third,” with 88% in North America and just a polite nod to the rest of the world. There is some international exposure via the Vanguard fund, which is actually one of the more sensible parts here, but it’s still basically seasoning, not the main dish. This home bias is common in US investors: it feels safer because the companies are familiar, but that doesn’t mean it’s actually safer. Global markets don’t all move in perfect lockstep, and sometimes non-US regions lead. Nudging more toward a genuinely global mix could reduce the “US or bust” risk if American markets hit a rough multi-year patch.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 48%
- Mega-cap 42%
- Mid-cap 6%
- Small-cap 3%
- Micro-cap 0%
Market cap-wise, this thing is leaning heavily on the big kids: about 90% in mega and big caps. So while the sector and stock-level risks are spicy, at least you’re not all-in on tiny speculative names. The mid and small-cap slice is tiny, which means you’re barely tapping into that higher-risk, potentially higher-return part of the market. Right now, you’re taking a lot of thematic and single-position risk without getting much of the classic “small-cap growth” potential. A more deliberate mix across mega, large, mid, and small would give you a healthier spread of growth drivers instead of just oversized bets on a few famous tickers.
Dividends
- Altria Group 6.30%
- Realty Income Corporation 4.60%
- Oracle Corporation 1.30%
- iShares Semiconductor ETF 0.50%
- AT&T Inc 3.90%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 2.90%
- Weighted yield (per year) 2.22%
The dividend side is trying to be grown-up: Altria, AT&T, Realty Income, plus the broad ETFs, add up to a 2.22% yield. That’s decent, but let’s be honest: this is not an income portfolio, it’s a growth-tilted collection that happened to grab some high-yield smokers and phone bills. Overrelying on fat yield names like Altria is like eating only bacon for protein: tasty until the health check. Dividend yield can cushion returns a bit, but it doesn’t magically cancel out business or price risk. If income is really a goal, build a clear, consistent income sleeve instead of letting it be the accidental by-product of a few outsized bets.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Semiconductor ETF 0.35%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total International Stock Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.05%
On costs, you actually didn’t mess this up. A total TER of 0.05% is impressively low; you clearly picked some cheap ETFs, maybe on purpose, maybe by sheer luck. The issue is that the cheap building blocks are overshadowed by the chaotic stock picking layered on top. Low fees are like having a car that gets great mileage; it still doesn’t help if you keep driving it at 120 mph into potholes. Keeping costs low is a solid win, so don’t ruin it by overtrading or constantly tinkering with individual names. Let the low-fee core actually be the core, not the supporting act.
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.
From a risk–return angle, this thing is leaving free money on the table. The optimization output basically says: with the same risk, you could have a higher expected return, and the “optimal” mix even improves the trade-off further. Think of the Efficient Frontier as the menu of best possible combos of risk and reward; you’re ordering something that’s more expensive and somehow tastes worse. Chasing concentrated bets while ignoring cleaner diversification is classic “I like the story more than the math” behavior. Tightening the portfolio around broad, complementary exposures instead of random hero stocks would push it closer to that efficient sweet spot.
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.
