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

One stock is joyriding the risk budget while everything else quietly pretends to be diversified

Report created on Apr 25, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio looks like it was built by two different people who never spoke to each other. Half of it is sober, index-and-bond ETF land, the other half is “I like this specific company and also crypto.” On paper, allocation looks neat: a chunk of bonds, a few broad equity funds, then random single stocks and Bitcoin/Ethereum stapled on top. In practice, one mid-sized pharma stock is doing almost all the risk heavy lifting while the diversified ETFs sit in the corner wearing safety gear. The structure says “balanced growth,” but the actual behaviour is “hope this one name doesn’t blow up.”

Growth Info

Return-wise, this portfolio has managed a respectable 13.53% CAGR and turned €1,000 into €1,352, which sounds good until the benchmarks walk in. Both the US market and global market beat it by more than 7 percentage points per year. That’s not a gap, that’s a canyon. You’re taking equity-like drawdowns anyway (-19.26%), just with less reward than basic index trackers. Also, 90% of returns came from just three days – so the historical “success” is basically a handful of lucky spins. Past data helps, but this backtest is more “cool story” than solid validation.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is basically a thousand alternate universes for this portfolio. Median outcome: €1,000 grows to about €2,556 in 15 years, with a wide “could be fine, could be awkward” range from around €1,192 to €5,591. A 7.05% average annual return is solid on paper, but the spread screams uncertainty. Simulations assume the future looks statistically like the past, which markets famously ignore whenever they feel like it. The projections say this mix has decent odds of growing, but it’s not a smooth escalator ride — more like a roller coaster that usually ends back at the station, but occasionally stops in a weird place.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    53%
  • Bonds
    32%
  • No data
    9%
  • Crypto
    7%

At the asset class level, this thing is trying very hard to wear a “mature, diversified” badge: 53% stocks, 32% bonds, 7% crypto, and a mysterious 9% “no data” bucket. It’s like a classic growth portfolio with a secret side hustle. The bonds do act as a stabilizer, but their influence gets drowned by a couple of wild positions. Crypto at 7% is not insane, but it absolutely changes the character from “sensible” to “slightly unhinged.” Overall, the headline mix looks textbook; the problem is that hidden under those broad labels, risk is being driven by just a few loud troublemakers.

Sectors Info

  • No data
    16%
  • Technology
    10%
  • Crypto
    7%
  • Industrials
    6%
  • Financials
    5%
  • Telecommunications
    3%
  • Health Care
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    3%
  • Consumer Staples
    1%
  • Energy
    1%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector breakdown here is basically a shrug. “No data” is the biggest slice at 16%, while everything else is thinly spread — a bit of tech, some industrials, financials, health care, and even token amounts of real estate, utilities, and energy. It looks like a sector buffet where every plate got a tiny spoonful of everything, plus a blind spot section no one labeled. This gives a false sense of balance: the chart implies nothing dominates, but the actual risk is concentrated in specific names, not sectors. It’s diversified by category, not by what actually moves the needle when markets get jumpy.

Regions Info

  • North America
    23%
  • Europe Developed
    14%
  • No data
    9%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Latin America
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, this portfolio is doing a half-hearted global tour. About 23% in North America, 14% in developed Europe, 4% in Japan, 2% in Latin America, and a mysterious 9% with no disclosed location. This isn’t “America or bust,” but it’s also not a clean world allocation. It’s more like a patchwork of broad funds plus some personal picks with very specific home addresses. The result is a world-ish portfolio that still feels oddly provincial. It’s globally flavored, but not globally thought-through – the sort of map where some regions matter only because a pet stock happens to live there.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    21%
  • Mega-cap
    15%
  • No data
    7%
  • Mid-cap
    5%
  • Small-cap
    2%
  • Micro-cap
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The market cap breakdown tries to look respectable: 21% large-cap, 15% mega-cap, with smaller dollops of mid, small, and micro caps. In theory, that’s a nice spread from giants to scrappy upstarts. In reality, the calm, boring big companies are not what’s driving the drama. The tiny allocations to small and micro caps might look harmless, but combine them with concentrated stock bets and crypto and suddenly those “cute” positions are potential chaos buttons. The optics say “broad exposure across the size spectrum”; the experience is closer to “giants anchor the boat while one rowdy passenger rocks it anyway.”

True holdings Info

  • Krka d.d.
    7.02%
  • Novo Nordisk A/S Class B
    7.02%
  • Invinity Energy Systems PLC
    1.75%
  • Tharisa plc
    1.75%
  • Sociedad Química y Minera de Chile S.A.
    1.75%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.49%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Apple Inc
    1.05%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Microsoft Corporation
    0.79%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • ASML Holding N.V.
    0.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Xtrackers Stoxx Europe 600 UCITS ETF
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    0.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Top 10 total 23.92%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Look-through holdings reveal a slightly comic twist: all the single-stock picks are standalone — no hidden overlap with the ETFs. Meanwhile, the ETFs quietly load up on the usual suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, ASML, etc. So the portfolio manages to avoid the classic “own the same thing five times” trap, but overcompensates by handpicking totally different risks instead. That means less invisible duplication, but way more idiosyncratic risk in the stock picks. It’s not a pile-up problem; it’s a “carved out a separate lane for concentrated bets” problem. Diversification exists, just not where the portfolio’s temperament actually lives.

Risk contribution Info

  • Krka d.d.
    Weight: 7.02%
    85.1%
  • Ethereum
    Weight: 3.51%
    2.1%
  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    Weight: 10.52%
    2.0%
  • Novo Nordisk A/S Class B
    Weight: 7.02%
    1.7%
  • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
    Weight: 7.02%
    1.6%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 92.6%

Risk contribution is where the punchline lands: Krka at 7.02% weight is contributing 85.12% of total portfolio risk. That’s not a typo; that’s a hostage situation. Risk/weight of 12.13 means this one holding is a volatility super-spreader. Ethereum and the S&P 500 ETF barely register by comparison. Top three positions account for 89.27% of the risk, so all that effort diversifying across bonds, ETFs, and regions gets steamrolled by one name’s behavior. This is the perfect example of why “weight” and “risk” are completely different things — the portfolio looks balanced until you check who’s actually driving the car.

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

The efficient frontier chart basically calls this portfolio out for leaving returns on the table while taking extra punches. A Sharpe ratio of 1.16 versus an optimal 2.16, with the current mix sitting a hefty 14.89 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, is… not flattering. The frontier shows the best risk/return combo possible using these same holdings with different weights. So the story is: even if nothing new is added, just rearranging the pieces could deliver more return with less drama. Right now, the portfolio is paying volatility it doesn’t need for performance it’s not getting.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Inflation Linked Government Bond UCITS 0.09%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.30%
  • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS 0.30%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.30%
  • Xtrackers Stoxx Europe 600 UCITS ETF 0.20%
  • Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C 0.12%
  • Amundi Euro Government Bond 3-5Y UCITS ETF Acc EUR 0.16%
  • Multi Units Luxembourg - Lyxor EuroMTS 5-7Y Investment Grade (DR) UCITS ETF 0.16%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.13%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio behaves like an adult. A total TER around 0.13% is impressively low – like you accidentally picked the cheap options instead of getting upsold. The ESG of fees: boring, efficient, and quietly doing the right thing. Most ETFs sit in the 0.09–0.30% range, which is perfectly reasonable for what they offer. Of course, low fees don’t fix lopsided risk or underwhelming performance, but at least the portfolio isn’t lighting money on fire via expenses. If something is going to sabotage returns here, it won’t be the price tag on the wrappers.

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