Roast mode 🔥

Hyperactive US fan with factor side quests and a suspiciously efficient yet still improvable setup

Report created on Apr 14, 2026

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.

Positions

This thing is basically a three‑fund soup pretending to be sophisticated. Sixty percent plain S&P 500, then a big 25% bet on Europe momentum and 15% on emerging markets value. It’s like mixing vanilla ice cream with spicy salsa and calling it “balanced cuisine.” The structure is simple but not exactly subtle: one core market ETF plus two loud factor tilts bolted on top. The result is a portfolio that looks “balanced” on a brochure but is really a concentrated bet on large US stocks, with a side order of quirky factor experiments. Takeaway: the design is coherent, just aggressively opinionated rather than genuinely neutral.

Growth Info

Performance-wise, this portfolio has been on a sugar high. A 22.36% CAGR since late 2023 versus ~18% for both US and global markets is very impressive, bordering on “don’t get used to this.” CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is your average speed over the whole journey, even if the road was bumpy. The max drawdown of -20.43% was sharp but actually a bit milder than the US market’s -23.32%, which is a pleasant surprise. But remember: this is a short, very lucky window dominated by a specific market regime. Past data is like yesterday’s weather: useful to look at, terrible to rely on for life decisions.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation basically rolls the dice on thousands of alternate futures using historical‑style behavior. Median outcome of €2,730 from €1,000 over 15 years with a 7.92% annualized return across simulations is reasonable, not magical. The “possible” range of €901 to €7,503 is Monte Carlo’s way of saying, “Anything from meh to fantastic, good luck.” And 72.6% odds of ending positive means almost one in four timelines is still disappointing. Simulations are just glorified guesswork based on old patterns; markets don’t sign contracts to repeat them. Takeaway: long term looks probabilistically fine, but not guaranteed fairy‑tale territory.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes: 100% stocks, zero of anything else. That’s not “balanced,” that’s “I’ve heard of bonds and decided they’re for other people.” Equities only means full exposure to growth and volatility, with nothing in the mix whose main job is to behave differently when markets panic. It’s like building a team of only strikers and then being surprised when nobody defends. For a genuinely balanced risk profile, mixing in other asset classes usually helps smooth the ride. Here, the approach is clear: embrace equity risk, hope the time horizon and nerves can handle the inevitable big drops.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    27%
  • Financials
    19%
  • Industrials
    13%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    8%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Utilities
    4%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector breakdown screams “Tech is my personality” at 27%, with financials second at 19% and everything else following behind in smaller, more sensible doses. It’s not obscene concentration, but the tilt toward tech and growth‑heavy names is obvious. If tech has another golden decade, this is great; if it takes a holiday, the portfolio’s mood will tank with it. Sectors like utilities, staples, and real estate are tiny rounding errors here — they exist, but mostly as wall decoration. Takeaway: sector risk leans toward excitement instead of resilience, which is fun until volatility actually starts to hurt.

Regions Info

  • North America
    60%
  • Europe Developed
    25%
  • Asia Developed
    7%
  • Asia Emerging
    5%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Europe Emerging
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

Geography is basically “US first, everyone else can queue.” Sixty percent in North America, 25% in developed Europe, and tiny scraps thrown at Asia, Latin America, and Africa/Middle East. For a European investor, that’s a very strong home *away* from home bias — trusting Wall Street more than your own backyard or the rest of the planet. This is roughly in line with broad global indexes, just with a slightly louder US accent. The upside: you ride the dominant market. The downside: if US valuations crack or the world’s growth shifts elsewhere, your portfolio politely ignores it.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    50%
  • Large-cap
    36%
  • Mid-cap
    14%

Market cap exposure is aggressively mainstream: 50% mega‑cap, 36% large‑cap, and a token 14% mid‑cap. This is basically the corporate version of only following the biggest celebrities and pretending smaller names don’t exist. The good news: mega‑caps tend to be more stable and liquid, so you’re not joyriding in meme‑stock land. The bad news: you’re heavily tied to how the giants move; there’s little room for smaller, potentially more explosive growth stories. Takeaway: this is a “blue chip and chill” setup — safe‑ish by equity standards, but not exactly creative or diversified across company size.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Apple Inc
    4.00%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.95%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.18%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.80%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.57%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    1.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.44%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.34%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Banco Santander S.A.
    1.22%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Edge MSCI Europe Momentum Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
  • Top 10 total 22.59%

The look‑through is basically a shrine to mega‑cap US tech, even with only partial holdings coverage. NVIDIA at 4.55%, Apple at 4%, Microsoft at 2.95%, then Amazon, Alphabet, Meta — the usual “Magnificent Everything” cast. And that’s *only* from top‑10 ETF holdings, so real exposure is higher. This isn’t diversification; it’s a fan club with extra paperwork. Hidden overlap means what looks like three funds is really one giant bet plus two supporting acts that still hold the same global giants. Takeaway: if the top names keep winning, you’ll look smart; if they ever choke, the whole portfolio coughs with them.

Risk contribution Info

  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    Weight: 60.00%
    61.5%
  • iShares Edge MSCI Europe Momentum Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
    Weight: 25.00%
    24.3%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 15.00%
    14.3%

Risk contribution is the “who’s really driving the drama” metric, and the answer is: everyone in proportion to their weight. The S&P 500 ETF is 60% of the portfolio and 61.5% of the risk, Europe momentum is 25% weight and 24.25% risk, EM value 15% weight and 14.25% risk. Risk contribution basically measures which holding is hogging the volatility spotlight. Here, nothing is secretly punching above its weight — the boring truth is that the big positions cause the big swings, as expected. Takeaway: if the ride feels wild, trimming the core S&P 500 chunk would matter most.

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 is quietly roasting you. With the current mix, you’re running a Sharpe ratio of 1.25, while the best achievable combo of these same funds could hit 1.72. Sharpe ratio is risk‑adjusted return, basically “how much pain per unit of gain.” You’re also sitting 1.66 percentage points below the frontier at your risk level, meaning the portfolio is leaving free performance on the table purely because of suboptimal weights. Even the minimum variance combo has a better Sharpe than you. Translation: with literally the *same* three ETFs, just different proportions, the whole thing could be smoother and more rewarding.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD 0.40%
  • iShares Edge MSCI Europe Momentum Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) 0.25%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.12%

Costs are refreshingly sane. A total TER of 0.12% is basically bargain‑bin pricing for a global, tilted portfolio. The EM value ETF at 0.40% and Europe momentum at 0.25% aren’t free, but the heavy 60% weight in a cheap S&P 500 ETF drags the blended cost right back down. You’re not lighting money on fire for the privilege of owning big brand‑name funds. Think of it as flying economy but still landing at the same destination as the folks who paid four times more for identical funds. Takeaway: costs aren’t the problem here, they’re one of the few clean wins.

What next?

Create your own report?

Analyze your portfolio

Join our community!

Join Discord

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