Global tracker with a tiny value side quest pretending to be fancy diversification
Report created on Apr 24, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
SP SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
SPYY - IE00B44Z5B48 90.00% -
5M iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
5MVL - IE00BG0SKF03 10.00%
This “two fund masterpiece” is basically one big global tracker with a 10% emerging markets value garnish. Structurally it’s fine but hilariously overengineered for what is effectively “buy the world and add a quirky footnote.” The 90/10 split barely moves the needle versus just holding the core fund, so the second ETF mostly adds admin and basis points rather than meaningful differentiation. It’s like ordering a plain burger and then insisting the sesame seeds justify a new menu item. The portfolio looks balanced on a brochure, but under the hood it’s a single global beta bet with a small style tilt trying to justify its existence.
Growth
Historically, this thing has done what a global equity portfolio is supposed to do: grow strongly and scare you occasionally. Turning €1,000 into €2,471 with a 13.04% CAGR is solid, but nothing magical compared with the global market’s 13.03% — that’s statistical background noise, not genius. Against the US market, it lagged by 2.28% a year, which is the price of not going full “America or bust.” The -33% max drawdown is textbook 2020 crash behavior, so no special resilience either. In short, this portfolio performed like a generic global index with a slightly more complicated story than the results justify.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation basically says: welcome to the rollercoaster, hope you like uncertainty. Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of running thousands of “what if” futures based on past volatility and returns, like re-simulating weather using yesterday’s climate. Median outcome of €2,663 after 15 years on €1,000 is fine, but the possible range from “barely above break-even” to “7x money” screams “no one actually knows.” The 71.8% chance of a positive result is comforting until you remember that means roughly 1 in 4 futures don’t impress. All very normal for 100% equities, but nothing in here is defying gravity.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset class “diversification” here is just a euphemism for “stocks and only stocks.” A 100% equity allocation dressed up with a “Balanced Investors” label is a bit rich; balanced usually implies at least one non-equity grown-up in the room. Instead, everything rides the same risk engine: global shares, with no ballast from bonds, cash, or alternatives. It’s like calling a one-ingredient recipe “fusion cuisine.” There’s nothing inherently wrong with going all-in on equities, but it does mean the portfolio’s fate is completely tied to the stock market mood swings, with no backup plan when things get ugly for longer than a marketing slide.
Sectors
- Technology 28%
- Financials 17%
- Industrials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Health Care 8%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Energy 5%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Basic Materials 5%
- Utilities 3%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this is a tech-flavored global stew, with technology sitting at 28% and clearly hogging the spotlight. Financials and industrials get a respectable second row, but everything else is more supporting cast than co-star. This mirrors broad global indexes, so it’s not reckless stock picking — more like passively inheriting the world’s current obsession with chips, cloud, and code. The risk is simple: if the global tech narrative stumbles, a big chunk of this portfolio’s personality goes missing overnight. The smaller allocations to energy, staples, and utilities mean there isn’t much of a defensive cushion when the more exciting parts of the market decide to throw a tantrum.
Regions
- North America 60%
- Europe Developed 13%
- Asia Developed 10%
- Asia Emerging 7%
- Japan 5%
- Latin America 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Australasia 1%
- Europe Emerging 1%
Geographically, this is “US plus everybody else trying to matter.” Around 60% in North America means the portfolio’s accent is unmistakably American, with Europe and Asia reduced to supporting roles. Again, this is broadly in line with global market caps, but let’s not pretend it’s truly balanced in economic influence or currency exposure. When the US sneezes, this portfolio catches the flu, and the rest of the regions are just there for narrative spice. The tiny slices in Latin America, Africa/Middle East, and Europe Emerging barely register — they’re more like token stamps in a passport that never really leaves the main hub airports.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 50%
- Large-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 14%
Market cap exposure is unapologetically top-heavy: 50% mega-cap, 35% large-cap, and a modest 14% mid-cap dusting. So this is basically “own the giants and sprinkle a bit of everyone else.” It’s textbook index behavior — the world’s biggest companies dominate the stage while smaller firms are invited but kept safely at the back of the room. That means returns are driven by mega-cap narratives, not broad entrepreneurial dynamism. If the corporate behemoths slow down or get politically targeted, this portfolio doesn’t have big exposure to scrappy smaller players that sometimes shine when titans trip. In effect, it’s a blue-chip popularity contest disguised as “the whole market.”
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.24%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 3.73%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.60%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 2.39%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.99%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.66%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.42%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.39%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.25%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.05%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
- Top 10 total 21.72%
The look-through list is just the usual megacap celebrity lineup: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, TSMC, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla, Broadcom. No single stock is insane on its own, but collectively they tell you who’s really running the show. And remember, this is only from the top-10 holdings of each ETF, covering just 23.5% of the portfolio — overlap is almost certainly higher under the hood. Hidden concentration is the fun part here: you think you own “thousands of stocks,” but your fate is still welded to a handful of giant names showing up again and again like the same headliners on every festival poster.
Risk contribution
-
SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
Weight: 90.00% 90.3% -
iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
Weight: 10.00% 9.7%
Risk contribution is the “who’s really causing the mood swings” metric, and here the answer is: exactly what you’d expect. The ACWI ETF is 90% of the portfolio and contributes about 90% of the risk, so at least there are no surprises or sneaky troublemakers. The EM value slice isn’t secretly blowing things up; its risk/weight ratio is basically 1.0, meaning it behaves proportionally. The “top 3 holdings contribute 100% of risk” line is technically funny here since there are only two positions — this is just a polite way of saying, “everything you own is causing all your volatility because you didn’t diversify beyond two funds.”
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 actually behaves like it passed math class. It sits on or very near the efficient frontier, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.6 versus around 0.8 for the optimal mixes using the same two funds. The efficient frontier is just the best possible trade-off between risk and return using those ingredients, and you’re basically already on that curve. That means the inefficiency roast is off the table: reweighting the same holdings only tweaks things slightly. Annoyingly competent, in other words. The only real joke is that such a mathematically neat portfolio is still basically a one-note “100% stocks” story in a balanced costume.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD 0.40%
- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF 0.45%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.44%
Costs are the sneaky part: a total TER of 0.44% for what is mostly one broad global tracker is… not flattering. You’re paying near active-fund-lite prices for a strategy that is 100% passive and nearly vanilla. There are very similar global equity solutions out there that do this job for far less, which makes this setup feel like ordering tap water and getting billed like it’s vintage wine. The EM value add-on at 0.40% isn’t outrageous alone, but combined with the 0.45% core fund, the overall fee drag is doing more work than that tiny factor tilt deserves to. Efficient portfolio, mildly expensive wrapping.
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