This portfolio has only about 1.2 years of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it Roast mode 🔥

A supposedly balanced portfolio that is actually a stock junkie with a small bond safety blanket

Report created on Dec 15, 2025

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This “balanced” mix is basically 75% global stocks in one big ETF plus a small tilt to small value and a tiny Bitcoin side quest. Calling this balanced is like calling a Porsche with winter tires a family car: technically possible but slightly delusional. The core ETF choice is actually solid and simple, but the equity chunk is doing almost all the heavy lifting while bonds are just there so the risk score looks civilized. If the goal is true balance, think more in terms of 60/40 or 70/30 ranges and use separate building blocks for equity and bonds for clearer control and easier future tweaks.

Growth Info

Historically this thing has been on a very nice ride: a 12.23% CAGR means that 10,000 € hypothetically turning into about 31,800 € over 10 years is not crazy. CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is just “average speed” over the whole trip, ignoring potholes. Max drawdown of -19.77% is actually pretty tame for such an equity-heavy setup, more “brake hard on the autobahn” than “car in the ditch.” But past data is yesterday’s weather: useful but not a prophecy. It’s wise to emotionally budget for deeper drops of -30% to -40% in nasty bear markets, because global stocks absolutely can go there.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo results look like the portfolio has been drinking energy drinks. Monte Carlo just means: randomizing many future paths based on historical ups and downs to see a range of outcomes. A median (50th percentile) result of +483.7% and an average simulated annualized return of 16.65% is very optimistic; that’s more fairy tale than base case. The 5th percentile at +26.9% is the “reality check” line — even the bad scenarios still assume gains, which already tells you the inputs are generous. Treat these numbers as “what if the next decades kindly rhyme with the last,” not as a contract. Planning should be based on more conservative expectations.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    85%
  • Bonds
    10%

Asset mix says “Balanced” on the label but 85% in stocks and only 10% in bonds screams “I like risk but I want a grown-up word on the report.” Stocks are the roller coaster, bonds are the seat belt. Right now the seat belt is more decorative than functional. For a true middle-of-the-road profile, you’d usually see more bond muscle to soften crashes and provide rebalancing ammo when markets tank. Cash at 0% is fine if there’s a separate emergency fund, but if not, this is one market drop away from forced selling. Adjusting the stock‑bond split to match real sleep-at-night comfort is the key lever here.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    22%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    10%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    7%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector spread is basically “slightly cleaned-up world index,” with tech at 22% clearly in the driver’s seat. Not crazy, but definitely tech-flavored. Financials at 15% and cyclicals around 10% add plenty of economic sensitivity. Healthcare and communication services are present but not strong enough to turn this into a defensive fortress. The upside: no ridiculous single-sector obsession and no meme stock circus. The downside: when global growth stumbles, most of this lineup stumbles together. If the plan is to handle recessions without panic, it can help to consciously check that sector weights fit personal risk tolerance and maybe nudge a bit toward more defensive parts instead of just copying the global market blindly.

Regions Info

  • North America
    56%
  • Europe Developed
    12%
  • Japan
    5%
  • Asia Emerging
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    4%
  • Australasia
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Latin America
    1%

Geography is classic “America or bust apparently”: 56% North America, then everyone else fighting for leftovers. This mirrors global market cap pretty well, so it’s not wrong — just very US-dependent. Europe and Japan exist but feel like supporting characters, and emerging markets are more of a cameo than a proper role. The upside: you’re plugged into the most dominant market and its big global companies. The risk: US valuations and politics turn sour and suddenly half the portfolio looks hungover. Slightly beefing up non-US exposure can reduce “one-country” dependency, but it’s always a trade-off between diversification and sticking with where global capital already decided to live.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    36%
  • Large-cap
    26%
  • Mid-cap
    14%
  • Small-cap
    5%
  • Micro-cap
    4%

Market cap mix is mostly grown-ups: 36% mega, 26% big, 14% mid. Then 5% small and 4% micro, with an extra push from the small-cap value ETF. So there is a bit of “I want extra juice” here — small value is like adding chili to your meal: great until your stomach disagrees. Historically, small value can outperform over long periods but is more volatile and can lag painfully for years. The overall tilt is still moderate, not insane, just spicy. This kind of structure suits someone who can ignore the small-cap drama and focus on the boring giant companies quietly doing most of the work.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

Risk–return efficiency here is decent but not textbook “balanced.” In plain English, you’re taking closer-to-aggressive risk while labeling it balanced because there are some bonds and a nice risk score. Efficient Frontier just means the best return you can reasonably expect for a given level of volatility. With 85% equities plus a small value tilt and a bit of Bitcoin chaos, you’re leaning toward the spicier side of that curve. There’s a good chance of strong long-term returns, but you’ve definitely paid for that with higher potential drawdowns. Tightening up the bond share and questioning the Bitcoin add-on would push this closer to a truly efficient middle ground.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Core Global Aggregate Bond UCITS ETF EUR Hedged (Acc) 0.10%
  • Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation 0.19%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.15%

Costs are suspiciously reasonable for such a clean structure: a total TER of around 0.15% is “did you actually read the factsheets?” good. That’s index-like cheap, which quietly saves serious money over decades. Paying 1%+ annually would be like tipping your bank for doing nothing; here the leakage is minimal. But low cost doesn’t automatically make something smart — it just means mistakes are cheaper. The smart part is regularly checking whether the chosen mix still fits goals and risk tolerance. If it does, cost-wise this is nearly on “set and forget” level, just keep an eye on any future ETF changes or sneaky fee hikes.

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