Thesis

No forward-looking thesis was provided.

Goal

Study single-name concentration risk; maximize return within that bad rule

Primary metric: After-tax total return vs built-in SPY benchmark on the same cashflow schedule

Period

Simulation range

2016-01-05 -> 2026-06-12

Starting value

203,057.19

Principal contributed

515,000.00

Ending cash

132.76

Strategy Rules

Single-Name Mega-Cap Concentration 1.0

• Hold exactly one name: the largest market cap observable as of the sim date
• No forward knowledge; mechanical monthly check
• Negative-control experiment to map failure modes

Result

Ending value

1,601,230.35Portfolio value at the final available date

Total gain/loss

+1,086,230.35+210.92%

Avg yearly gain

+15.23%Money-weighted annualized return using the recorded deposit schedule

SPY yearly gain

+15.39%SPY ending value: 1,620,487.41

Max drawdown

-32.84%1 open positions at the end of the run

Run Facts

Largest position

100.00%

Cash position

132.76 (0.01%)

Unique stocks traded

5

Tax Profile

Unrealized gain exposure

+369,241.18

Long-term tax

33,399.05

Short-term tax

142,897.10

Dividend tax

5,290.26

Total estimated tax

181,594.09

Strategy Check

• The strategy followed the trading-universe rule: 5 user-selected stocks were traded, with 162 buys and 148 sells.
• The strategy met the capital-growth goal in absolute terms, finishing with a 210.92% return on contributed principal.
• The portfolio did not fully satisfy the anti-concentration goal: the largest ending position reached 100.00% of the portfolio.
• The path was volatile: maximum drawdown reached -32.84%.

Note

Negative-control suite: CLI-only, 1-10 day hops, monthly contribution, data-grounded notes, clean stop at data boundary.

Positions At Report Date

As of 2026-06-12