But there's no denying the 900% rise in Google ( GOOG) since its 2004 IPO. Same with companies such as Visa ( V) or Mastercard ( MA), which have had incredible runs over the past few years, and have not indicated changing that trend any time soon. I'm in my mid-20s, which is why I've stacked my portfolio with these higher-beta stocks. I want more exposure to big potential winners in the intermediate term. I don't necessarily need the safety and protection of a blue-chip stock, no matter how consistent it is. But that doesn't mean I don't want any exposure to them. Growth is only growth for so long. In five to 10 years, many growth names run themselves irrelevant, or in other words are no longer growing like they once were. On the contrary, blue-chip stocks can consistently churn out moderate growth for decades, while maintaining low valuations. In this case, I want to build a model portfolio consisting of six stocks in total. Because I am young and can afford the consequences of being wrong, I'm going to select four growth names and only two dividend payers. Here's what it looks like:
For my growth names, I have selected stocks that continue to outperform the market year after year. Sure, Starbucks ( SBUX) doesn't have the prettiest chart from 18 months ago, and a recent court ruling has dampened Visa's near-linear run. But these four names have incredibly optimistic outlooks, are the leaders in their respective fields and print money like the Federal Reserve. The three-year performance is undeniable. On the contrary, Coca-Cola ( KO) and McDonald's could have significant headwinds in the short and intermediate terms, especially the latter company. Declining same-store sales growth, along with increased competition and input costs continue to weigh on the stock price. But despite the potential multiyear slump these stocks might have, their brand recognition, international exposure, and strong dividend make them hard to ignore. McDonald's has raised its dividend by 10% or more in each of the last 10 years, with the exception of 2008, when it only raised the payout by 9.33% in the midst of the financial crisis.