Riding the Nvidia rollercoaster with a fake sense of diversification from duplicate world trackers
Report created on May 28, 2026Risk profile
5/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
CS iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
CSPX - IE00B5BMR087 60.00% -
SM VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
SMH - IE00BMC38736 20.00% -
VW Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
VWRA - IE00BK5BQT80 20.00%
This portfolio is basically three funds in a trench coat pretending to be diverse. Underneath, it’s one big US equity bet with an extra scoop of semiconductors chucked on top. The two broad funds overlap heavily, so it’s like owning the same house through two different estate agents and calling it a property empire. Structurally, 60/20/20 looks tidy, but the “diversification” score is flattering; the S&P and All-World legs are close cousins, not distant relatives. The result is a portfolio that looks like a growth strategy on paper, but in practice just shouts “US mega-cap plus chips” with slightly different accents.
Growth
Historically, this thing absolutely smoked the benchmarks: ~19.8% CAGR versus ~15.1% for US and ~12.7% global. That’s the good news. The bad news is the way it earned that glory: a near -30% drawdown and a recovery slog that took over a year. CAGR (compound annual growth rate) is the “average speed” of the trip, but it politely ignores how many times the car nearly crashed. Outperformance here is basically a leveraged bet on what’s been hot recently. Past data is like yesterday’s weather — nice to brag about, not great for planning your next decade.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection politely tells the truth your performance chart is hiding: the future is way messier than the backtest. Monte Carlo just runs thousands of “what if” paths using historical volatility and returns, then spits out a range. Here the median £1,000 becomes about £2,705 in 15 years, but the plausible range runs from “barely broke even” to “lottery-ish.” That £979 at the low end after 15 years is the awkward reminder that high-growth toys can underwhelm for painfully long stretches. Simulations are basically financial fan fiction — informative, but not a script the market is obliged to follow.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset-class breakdown is refreshingly simple and slightly reckless: 100% equities, 0% anything else. No bonds, no cash buffer, no diversifiers — just pure “stocks go up eventually” energy. That’s fine if the goal is maximum drama: big upside potential, big drawdowns, and zero built-in shock absorbers when markets decide gravity still exists. Asset classes are like food groups; living only on protein shakes can work for a while, but small problems become big ones very fast. Here, every bump in the stock market road goes straight through to total portfolio value with nothing to cushion it.
Sectors
- Technology 47%
- Financials 10%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Industrials 7%
- Health Care 7%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this portfolio is basically Technology and Friends. With tech pushing toward half the exposure and a separate semiconductor ETF sitting on top, it’s a silicon dependency dressed up as a diversified equity mix. The other sectors — financials, telecom, industrials, etc. — are token background characters, not real drivers. This is fine when chips and software are winning; less fun when the market decides to rediscover boring things like utilities or boringly profitable businesses. Sector balance is supposed to make different parts of the portfolio shine at different times. Here, most of the spotlight points at one very moody sector.
Regions
- North America 89%
- Europe Developed 5%
- Asia Developed 3%
- Japan 1%
- Asia Emerging 1%
Geographically, this portfolio is basically “America or bust” with 89% in North America and the rest sprinkled around like garnish. For a UK-based setup, it’s almost aggressively uninterested in the rest of the world. The developed world outside North America barely registers, and emerging markets might as well not exist. Global diversification is about not letting any single economy or currency own your financial fate. Here, the US dollar and US policy get a starring role, while every other region is a walk-on extra. If global markets ever rotate away from the US, this portfolio will feel it the hard way.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 49%
- Large-cap 36%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 1%
Market cap exposure is heavily skewed to the giants: roughly half in mega-caps and most of the rest in large-caps. Mid-caps are a supporting act, and small-caps are a rounding error. This gives the portfolio a “blue-chip index with turbo chips” personality: very dependent on a small club of enormous companies to drive returns. Size factor-wise, it’s hugging the top of the market and skipping much of the potential diversification smaller names can offer. When mega-caps lead, this feels brilliant. When they lag, the portfolio doesn’t have much else in its size spectrum to pick up the slack.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.12%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AA Apple Inc 4.78%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.88%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.58%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.97%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.54%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 2.35%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
-
AM Advanced Micro Devices Inc 2.34%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.03%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
IN Intel Corporation 1.77%
Part of fund(s):- VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
- Top 10 total 33.36%
The look-through holdings scream hidden concentration. Nvidia at over 7% and Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, AMD, Micron, and Intel all piled up means the same names are lurking inside multiple ETFs. Overlap is understated because only top-10 data is used, which is a polite way of saying the true concentration is probably worse. This isn’t three independent ideas; it’s one tech-heavy mega-cap bet sliced three ways. When these names move together — which they often do — the whole portfolio dances to the same tune, no matter how many tickers appear on the holdings list.
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 exposure shows a strong tilt away from size (only 4%) and low yield (34%), with neutral low volatility. In plain English: heavy bias toward big, growthy names that don’t pay much income, and not much exposure to smaller companies. Factor exposure is like reading the ingredient list instead of the marketing on the box. Here the recipe is “large, growth leaning, not especially generous on dividends.” The very low size tilt means the portfolio is highly tied to whatever mood large-cap growth is in. When that style wins, returns pop; when it doesn’t, there’s not much stylistic backup available.
Risk contribution
-
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Weight: 60.00% 51.2% -
VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF
Weight: 20.00% 32.6% -
Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
Weight: 20.00% 16.2%
Risk contribution reveals the real star troublemaker: the semiconductor ETF. With only 20% weight, it’s contributing almost a third of total portfolio risk, nearly double its fair share. Risk contribution measures how much each holding drives volatility — which holdings are actually shaking the portfolio, not just sitting there. Here, the S&P 500 is the big, steady ballast and the semiconductor slice is the caffeinated teenager doing wheelies in the car park. Nearly all risk comes from just three positions — because those are the only positions — and one of them is clearly punching above its weight in the drama department.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationiShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
The correlation section might as well say, “Yes, your two big ‘different’ funds move almost the same.” The S&P 500 and All-World ETFs are highly correlated, meaning they mostly go up and down together. Correlation is just a fancy way of saying how often things move in the same direction at the same time. When your main building blocks track each other closely, you don’t really have a team; you have clones. In a crash, both broad funds are likely to fall together, and the semiconductor ETF will just exaggerate the move rather than offer any meaningful offset.
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 efficient frontier, this portfolio actually behaves itself: it’s on or very close to the curve, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.82. The Sharpe ratio is “how much return you get for each unit of risk,” like checking miles per gallon instead of top speed. Yes, there’s an “optimal” mix that would crank risk and return up much higher, and a minimum-variance mix that would chill things out a bit, but given the existing ingredients, the current blend is surprisingly efficient. This is one of the few areas where the portfolio earns a reluctant nod instead of a full roast.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) 0.12%
- VanEck Semiconductor UCITS ETF 0.35%
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation 0.19%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.18%
Costs are one of the few boringly good things here. A total TER of 0.18% is comfortably low, especially given the extra spice of a niche sector ETF. That’s like getting away with business class legroom for close to economy pricing. Costs won’t be the reason this portfolio underperforms; the risks are all in the concentration and style bets, not in fee drag. Still, paying extra for a semiconductor tilt while also loading up on the same names through broad funds is a bit like tipping heavily for a meal you already cooked at home.
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