High growth focused global equity mix with strong tech tilt and efficient risk allocation
Report created on Jul 17, 2024Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
SX iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
SXR8 - IE00B5BMR087 44.15% -
EQ Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
EQQB - IE00BFZXGZ54 31.66% -
EU iShares Core MSCI Europe UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
EUNK - IE00B4K48X80 10.59% -
VW Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
VWCE - IE00BK5BQT80 7.70% -
IS iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
IS3N - IE00BKM4GZ66 3.19% -
EU iShares Core MSCI Japan IMI UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
EUNN - IE00B4L5YX21 2.71%
The portfolio is a pure equity mix built entirely from broad stock ETFs, with a clear tilt toward large US companies. Two big building blocks dominate: a core US large-cap fund and a Nasdaq-focused growth ETF, together making up around three quarters of the allocation. The rest is split across developed Europe, Japan, emerging markets, and a global fund, which adds extra diversification. A 100% equity construction usually means more ups and downs than a mix with bonds, but also higher long‑term growth potential. For someone classified as a balanced investor, this is on the growthier side, so the key takeaway is that this setup fits people who can tolerate meaningful volatility for better return prospects.
Growth
Over the last few years, a €1,000 starting value grew to about €1,536, giving a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.89%. CAGR is like your average “speed” over the full period, smoothing out all the bumps. This beat both the US market and a global market benchmark by a small but clear margin. The maximum drawdown of around -23% was very similar to the US market, showing that the portfolio does fall hard in tough times. Most returns came from just 15 days, which is typical for equities and shows why staying invested matters. Past results are no guarantee, but historically the risk/return trade‑off has been attractive.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the money is invested in stocks, with no allocation to bonds, cash, or alternative assets. That makes the portfolio straightforward and growth‑oriented, but it does remove the stabilizing effect that bonds or cash can provide during market stress. In many blended benchmarks labelled “balanced,” bonds often sit around 30–50%, so this setup is definitely more aggressive than a traditional balanced mix. The benefit is higher expected returns over long horizons; the trade‑off is bigger and more frequent drawdowns. For someone comfortable with equity-like swings and investing for many years, this can be fine. For anyone worried about large short‑term losses, adding some defensive assets could reduce the ride’s intensity.
Sectors
- Technology 35%
- Telecommunications 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Financials 10%
- Industrials 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 3%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is clearly tilted toward technology, which sits at about 35%, well above many global benchmarks. Telecommunications and consumer discretionary are also meaningful, while financials, industrials, and healthcare provide additional balance. Staples, energy, materials, utilities, and real estate are smaller slices. A tech‑heavy profile often benefits strongly when growth stocks and innovation themes are in favour, especially in low‑rate or optimistic environments. However, it can feel painful during periods of rising interest rates, regulatory pressure, or rotations into more cyclical or value‑oriented areas. The positive note is that other sectors are still meaningfully represented, which cushions the extremes somewhat, even though the tech factor remains a major performance driver.
Regions
- North America 80%
- Europe Developed 12%
- Japan 3%
- Asia Emerging 2%
- Asia Developed 2%
Geographically, the portfolio is dominated by North America at about 80%, with Europe developed, Japan, and parts of Asia making up the remainder. This US‑centric stance is common and has been beneficial in the last decade, as US companies, especially in tech, outperformed many other markets. Compared with global benchmarks, the US slice here is on the heavy side, while emerging markets are relatively modest. That means the portfolio is more sensitive to US economic and policy developments, but captures the strength of world‑leading companies. Introducing more non‑US exposure would typically smooth country‑specific risks, yet the current tilt is still within what many global investors would consider a strong but not extreme US bias.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 50%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 1%
The market‑cap mix is very skewed to the largest companies: about half in mega‑caps and a third in large‑caps, with limited mid‑cap and almost no small‑cap exposure. This closely mirrors big mainstream indexes and is aligned with how global equity markets are actually weighted, which is a positive sign of diversification by size. Larger companies tend to be more stable, profitable, and widely followed, which can reduce extreme volatility compared with a heavy small‑cap tilt. On the flip side, smaller and mid‑sized firms sometimes deliver higher long‑term returns, though with more bumpiness. Here, the focus is clearly on stability and scale, using the world’s biggest companies as the main growth engine.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 6.21%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AA Apple Inc 5.64%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.22%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.08%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.62%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.35%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.24%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.18%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.18%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
WM Walmart Inc. Common Stock 1.07%
Part of fund(s):- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
- Top 10 total 31.79%
Looking through the ETFs, the largest underlying exposures are big US tech and consumer names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Broadcom, Tesla, and Walmart. Many of these show up in more than one ETF, so their true impact is bigger than any single fund suggests. This kind of overlap creates hidden concentration in a handful of mega‑caps, even though the portfolio appears broadly diversified at the fund level. Because only top‑10 positions are captured, the actual overlap is likely higher. The main takeaway is that overall results will be strongly influenced by how a small group of leading global companies performs, especially in the tech ecosystem.
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 very high tilt to low volatility at around 89%, meaning the holdings behave more like historically steadier stocks compared with the overall market. Low volatility as a factor aims to capture stocks that have smaller price swings while still delivering reasonable returns. Research suggests these types of stocks can sometimes offer better risk‑adjusted performance, though they can lag in strong risk‑on rallies. Value exposure is mildly high, hinting at some preference for companies priced more attractively relative to fundamentals. Other factors are close to neutral, so they don’t meaningfully distort behaviour. Overall, the strong low‑vol tilt complements the 100% equity stance by slightly taming downside risk without sacrificing much long‑term return potential.
Risk contribution
-
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Weight: 44.15% 42.7% -
Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc
Weight: 31.66% 39.7% -
iShares Core MSCI Europe UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
Weight: 10.59% 7.0% -
Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
Weight: 7.70% 6.6% -
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
Weight: 3.19% 2.2% - Top 5 risk contribution 98.2%
Risk contribution shows how much each position drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. The broad US ETF roughly matches its weight in risk, but the Nasdaq‑100 ETF contributes far more risk than its share of assets: about 40% of total risk from only 32% of capital. That reflects its growth and tech bias. Together with the Europe ETF, the top three funds drive nearly 90% of overall volatility. This concentration is not necessarily bad, but it means those positions deserve the most attention when thinking about risk. Adjusting their sizes would have the biggest impact if the goal is to make the ride smoother or to dial the risk level up or down.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationVanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD AccumulationiShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Correlation measures how closely different assets move together; 1.0 would mean they move almost identically. Here, the core S&P 500 ETF and the global all‑world ETF have a very high correlation of 0.97, meaning they usually rise and fall together. That makes sense because the global fund has a large US component. Holding both still adds some diversification from non‑US stocks, but the marginal benefit is limited. In practice, they behave more like close cousins than totally different holdings. The message is not that one must be removed, but that diversification improvements will more likely come from assets that move differently, rather than from highly overlapping large‑cap global equity 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.
The risk–return optimization shows the current allocation sitting on or very close to the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier represents the best possible return for each level of risk using only the existing holdings, and the Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of volatility. The portfolio’s Sharpe of 0.62 is close to the optimal 0.71 and better than the minimum‑risk mix per unit of risk. That means, with the chosen ingredients, the weights are already doing a good job. Reweighting could squeeze out a bit more risk‑adjusted efficiency, but the improvement would likely be modest. Structurally, this is an efficient, well‑tuned implementation of the selected ETFs.
Ongoing product costs
- Invesco EQQQ NASDAQ-100 UCITS ETF Acc 0.35%
- iShares Core MSCI Europe UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) 0.20%
- iShares Core MSCI Japan IMI UCITS ETF USD (Acc) 1.00%
- iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS 0.18%
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) 0.12%
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation 0.19%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.23%
The average ongoing cost (TER) across the ETFs is low at about 0.23%, which is a strong point. Index funds with low TERs keep more of the market’s return in the investor’s hands, and over many years even a 0.2–0.3 percentage point saving can compound into a noticeable difference. Most holdings are cheap core products; only the Japan ETF stands out as more expensive, which slightly pulls up the average but not to a worrying level. Overall, this cost structure is impressively lean and aligns well with best practices for long‑term investing, supporting better net performance without needing to chase higher‑fee active strategies.
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