Value-flavoured global index that keeps flirting with tech and pretending it is a bargain hunter
Report created on Jul 10, 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 70.00% -
5M iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
5MVL - IE00BG0SKF03 15.00% -
IS iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
IS3S - IE00BD45HH35 15.00%
Structurally this portfolio is a three-fund matryoshka doll: one big plain-vanilla global tracker with two value-factor sidekicks bolted on at 15% each. It’s basically ACWI with a personality crisis, trying to be both “own everything” and “smart value geek” at the same time. The result is more tweak than strategy. You’re not constructing some intricate masterpiece; you’ve just nudged a global index a bit toward cheap-looking stocks. That’s fine, but it’s hardly a grand design. It behaves like a slightly value-tilted global equity fund that could be replicated by anyone mildly awake with a brokerage account.
Growth
Historically, the portfolio turned €1,000 into €2,712, which is a 14.03% CAGR. CAGR — compound annual growth rate — is the “average speed” of your money on a roller coaster. You lagged the US market by 2.18% a year but edged the global market by 0.24%, so you basically hugged “the world” with a tiny victory lap. Max drawdown of -33.18% shows this thing dropped like everything else in early 2020 and then needed about ten months to crawl back. Nothing heroic, nothing disastrous — just “index with a hat on.” Past data is yesterday’s weather: helpful context, zero promises about tomorrow.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation takes your historical risk/return stats and stress-tests them in 1,000 alternate futures, like throwing the portfolio into a financial washing machine. Median outcome: €1,000 grows to about €2,778 over 15 years, with a 72% chance of being above water. That “possible range” of €996 to €7,939 is the model’s way of saying “anything from flat to very nice, good luck.” The average simulated annual return of 8.23% is notably duller than your backtest glory days. As usual, simulations are educated guesses dressed up as charts, not a binding contract with the universe.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset-class “diversification” here is simple: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. This isn’t a balanced blend; it’s an equity monolith wearing a “risk score 4/7” sticker. Equities are the drama queens of investing: great when the lights are on, brutal when the music stops. There’s no ballast from bonds, cash, or anything remotely stabilizing, so when stocks decide to throw a tantrum, everything in this portfolio goes to the same party. The upside is clarity — you know exactly what you own. The downside is that “balanced” on the label is doing a lot more marketing work than risk-smoothing work.
Sectors
- Technology 36%
- Financials 16%
- Industrials 9%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Health Care 7%
- Energy 4%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this is a tech-heavy value tourist. Technology at 36% is a proper addiction, with the rest of the sectors playing backup band. Financials at 16% and industrials at 9% help, but let’s be real: the chips and silicon set run this show. Calling this a value tilt while NVIDIA, Apple, TSMC, and Microsoft sit at the top is like calling a Ferrari “budget-conscious” because you bought it used. Sector spread is decent on paper, but when tech coughs, this portfolio catches the flu. Compared with broad indexes, it’s just a slightly more tech-amped, cheaper-stocks cosplay session.
Regions
- North America 54%
- Europe Developed 14%
- Asia Developed 13%
- Asia Emerging 7%
- Japan 7%
- Latin America 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Australasia 1%
- Europe Emerging 1%
Geographically, the portfolio is firmly “US and friends.” North America at 54% drives the bus, with Europe Developed and Asia Developed hanging on at 14% and 13%. Japan and Asia Emerging add some flavour, but Latin America, Africa/Middle East, and Emerging Europe are tiny seasoning, not real components. So while the brochure says “ACWI” and the map looks very global, the economic story is still mostly big developed markets, especially the US. It’s a very standard bias: the world index is already US-heavy, and your setup doesn’t fight that trend at all. Some would call it global; it’s really US-led with a passport.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 49%
- Large-cap 33%
- Mid-cap 15%
On market cap, you’re living in mega-cap world with 49% mega and 33% large. Mid-caps at 15% are a side quest, and anything smaller might as well not exist. This is a “follow the giants” portfolio, dominated by companies so big they sometimes move the index more than entire countries. That’s fine for stability and liquidity, but it does mean you’re basically outsourcing your return drivers to the usual mega-cap suspects. If market leadership ever rotates hard toward smaller companies, this setup will be the last to notice, like someone still quoting last decade’s winners at a new-year’s party.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 3.43%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
AA Apple Inc. 3.11%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 3.11%
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
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.14%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.80%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.77%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.46%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
00 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 1.46%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.37%
Part of fund(s):- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
-
00 SK Hynix Inc 1.36%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
- Top 10 total 21.01%
The look-through holdings are a who’s-who of the chip-and-big-tech aristocracy: NVIDIA, Apple, TSMC, Microsoft, Micron, Amazon, Alphabet, Samsung, Broadcom, SK Hynix. The tool only sees top-10 ETF positions and still finds over 3% in NVIDIA and just over 3% in Apple and TSMC each, all via ETFs. That’s overlap on training wheels; the real duplication is almost certainly higher. You’re not just diversified across funds; you’re repeatedly buying the same celebrity stocks with different wrappers. It’s less “three funds” and more “one global tech-led basket seen from three slightly different camera angles.”
Risk contribution
-
SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
Weight: 70.00% 69.8% -
iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
Weight: 15.00% 15.4% -
iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
Weight: 15.00% 14.8%
Risk contribution is where we see who’s really shaking the portfolio, not just taking up space. Here it’s embarrassingly straightforward: the 70% ACWI ETF contributes about 70% of the total risk, and each 15% value ETF kicks in roughly 15%. Basically, risk is almost perfectly proportional to weight, which is what happens when everything is one big equity blob. There’s no sneaky 5% rocket stock contributing 30% of the drama — just three chunky funds pulling their fair share. It’s boringly linear, but it also means any emotional swings you feel will come straight from broad stock market moves, not weird outliers.
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 chart, the portfolio is basically sitting right on the curve, behaving like a well-tuned but slightly unimaginative machine. Sharpe ratio — return per unit of volatility — is 0.67 for the current mix, while the max-Sharpe option hits 0.86 and the minimum-variance version 0.85. The amusing part: both of those “better” portfolios use the exact same ingredients you already hold, just shuffled differently. So you’re efficient in a broad sense, but not squeezing the most juice per unit of risk. It’s like arranging the same three pieces of furniture in a slightly less optimal layout.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD 0.40%
- iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.30%
- SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF 0.12%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.19%
Costs are the one unambiguous win: a total TER around 0.19%. That’s solidly cheap — not monk-level ascetic, but definitely not the “pay 1% to track the index badly” nonsense. TER, or total expense ratio, is the annual skim the fund takes for existing. Here the skim is modest enough that it doesn’t eat your returns alive. The only mild roast is that you’re paying for a couple of factor funds to nudge an already diversified ACWI core, so you’re basically renting a small tilt instead of a major transformation. Still, fee-wise, you clicked the right side of the menu.
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