Cautious label chaotic reality this portfolio is a closet thrill seeker in index fund clothing
Report created on Mar 30, 2026Risk profile
3/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
XU iShares MSCI World ex-USA UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
XUSE - IE000R4ZNTN3 38.89% -
VU Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
VUAA - IE00BFMXXD54 22.22% -
SX iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
SXRV - IE00B53SZB19 16.67% -
IU iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
IUSN - IE00BF4RFH31 11.11% -
BT Bitwise Physical Bitcoin ETC EUR
BTCE - DE000A27Z304 5.56% -
EI iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
EIMI - IE00BKM4GZ66 5.55%
Structurally this thing looks like a “world index for grown-ups” that sneaked out at night and bought Bitcoin. You’ve got a big chunk in broad developed ex‑US, a decent slice of S&P 500, a turbo-charged NASDAQ tilt, some small caps, a token emerging markets allocation, and then a 5% side bet on digital chaos. For something tagged “cautious”, this is basically a sensible core with a small casino in the back room. The mix leans heavily on stocks with only a modest nod to diversification beyond that. Takeaway: the skeleton is fine, but the risk label is lying through its teeth.
Growth
In 11 months, turning €1,000 into €1,171 with an 18.62% CAGR sounds heroic, but calm down — that’s one choppy year, not a new law of physics. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is just “average speed”, and here it’s basically neck-and-neck with the US market and slightly behind the global market. Max drawdown at -7.14% is mild, but again, only across a short window where nothing truly horrible happened. And needing just 8 days for 90% of gains shows how random the ride is. Past data here is yesterday’s weather, not a 30-year climate study.
Asset classes
- Stocks 56%
- No data 39%
- Crypto 6%
On paper, 56% stocks, 6% crypto, and a chunky 39% in “no data” looks like a diversification fever dream. The one solid takeaway: this is overwhelmingly growth-asset driven, not some sleepy bond-heavy cautious mix. The “no data” bucket is the big mystery box; we’re not told what’s inside, so we don’t pretend to know. Crypto sitting at 6% is enough to matter in a crash and in a bubble, but not enough to define the portfolio. Overall, asset class balance isn’t exactly conservative — it’s more “I like returns and I’ll worry about stability later.”
Sectors
- Technology 19%
- Consumer Discretionary 6%
- Telecommunications 6%
- Financials 5%
- Industrials 5%
- Health Care 4%
- Consumer Staples 3%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Energy 2%
- Real Estate 1%
- Utilities 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector-wise, this is tech-tilted without going full addict. Technology at 19% plus chunky exposure through those mega-cap names means a lot of your narrative is tied to growth darlings behaving. Consumer discretionary and telecom are next in line, with more boring stuff like utilities and real estate barely invited to the party. It’s not a one-sector death wish, but if the high-growth, high-expectation crowd stumbles, this portfolio will feel it. The roast: you’ve got just enough diversification to claim you’re balanced, and just enough growth concentration to get smacked when optimism dies.
Regions
- North America 46%
- Asia Developed 2%
- Asia Emerging 2%
- Europe Developed 2%
- Japan 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, this is “US and friends, plus some postcards from everywhere else.” North America dominates at 46%, while Europe, Asia, Japan, Latin America, and Africa/Middle East are each tiny side characters. For a European-based investor, it’s almost allergic to its own neighborhood. This is basically a bet that the US-led global system keeps being the main show, with emerging and other regions as token seasoning. Not a disaster, just very conventional and slightly lazy. Takeaway: if the US stumbles or lags for a decade, this setup won’t be winning originality prizes or performance awards.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 22%
- Large-cap 15%
- Mid-cap 11%
- Small-cap 6%
- Micro-cap 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Market cap breakdown: heavy mega-cap at 22% and large at 15%, then stepping down through mid, small, and even a hint of micro. So you’ve got the massive blue chips driving the bus, with a sprinkling of smaller stuff to pretend this is edgy. In reality, the giants are still in charge of the mood swings. The small-cap allocation is just big enough to introduce extra volatility and potential long-term juice, but not big enough to define the character. It’s like ordering a risky drink and then watering it down — you want excitement, but not full chaos.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 3.03%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AA Apple Inc 2.75%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.05%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.50%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.28%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.15%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.10%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.08%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.06%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 0.65%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
- Top 10 total 15.65%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
The look-through holdings scream “I let the indexes do the stock-picking, and they all picked the same stuff.” NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla… this is basically the usual mega-cap celebrity lineup appearing in multiple ETFs. That’s overlap: the same companies show up through different doors, creating hidden concentration even though each individual ETF looks diverse. And remember, this is only top-10 coverage, so true overlap is probably higher. Takeaway: it feels diversified by fund count, but under the hood it’s a fan club for a small group of giant companies.
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-wise, this thing is confused but interesting. Very low size exposure means it’s dodging smaller companies and hugging bigger names — so much for being edgy. Low value tilt says “I’m not into bargains; I like the expensive popular kids.” Meanwhile, high momentum and high low-volatility together is hilarious: chasing what’s been winning while also pretending to like stability. Factor exposure is basically the secret ingredient list; here it says you’re paying up for strong recent performers that haven’t been too wild yet. That can look great in nice markets and really awkward when sentiment flips hard.
Risk contribution
-
iShares MSCI World ex-USA UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Weight: 38.89% 29.5% -
Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
Weight: 22.22% 22.3% -
iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Weight: 16.67% 21.2% -
iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
Weight: 11.11% 11.8% -
Bitwise Physical Bitcoin ETC EUR
Weight: 5.56% 10.2% - Top 5 risk contribution 94.9%
Risk contribution is where the quiet trouble shows up. It tells you which positions actually drive the portfolio’s drama, not just which ones are biggest. Your NASDAQ 100 slice is 16.67% of weight but over 21% of risk — it’s your loud, overcaffeinated friend. Bitcoin at 5.56% weight contributing 10.2% of risk is doing double duty as the chaos engine. Meanwhile, the big ex‑US holding is relatively tame for its size. Takeaway: the riskiest kids aren’t the heaviest, they’re just the noisiest. Trimming the high risk/weight offenders can calm things down without changing the cast.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationVanguard S&P 500 UCITS AcciShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
The NASDAQ 100 and S&P 500 moving almost identically is the “copy my homework but change a word” version of diversification. Correlation just means they usually go up and down together; owning both still helps with specific stock risk, but in a big crash they’re likely crying in sync. So while it looks like two different slices, in crisis mode you effectively own one big US-growth-flavored blob. This is fine if that’s the plan, but don’t expect one to rescue the other when markets really tank — they’re more like siblings, not distant cousins.
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.
On the risk–return chart, this portfolio is basically leaving free money on the table. The efficient frontier is the curve of best possible trade-offs with your current ingredients; you’re a chunky 6.31 percentage points below it at your current risk. Sharpe ratio (return per unit of risk) at 1.33 looks fine until you see the optimal mix of your own holdings hits 1.95, and even the minimum variance version beats you at 1.72. Translation: just rearranging the weights between what you already own could give you more return for similar risk, or less risk for similar return. Right now, it’s suboptimal on purpose.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares MSCI World Small Cap UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.35%
- iShares NASDAQ 100 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) 0.36%
- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc 0.07%
- iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS 0.18%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.12%
Costs are suspiciously reasonable, which is almost disappointing for a roast. A total TER around 0.12% across those ETFs is very low — that’s “I actually checked the facts before clicking buy” territory. The more expensive pieces are still perfectly normal for what they are, and nothing here looks like a boutique-fee trap. That said, saving on fees while running a risk profile that doesn’t match the “cautious” label is like buying cheap fuel for a sports car you weren’t planning to drive fast. At least the leak isn’t from costs — it’ll come from market moves instead.
What next?
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