Roast mode 🔥

Closet indexer with a value side quest and a serious crush on mega cap tech

Report created on May 14, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is basically two big index blobs wearing a thin value-factor hat. Seventy percent is split between a US index and a global index that already owns a ton of the same stuff, then 30% is sprinkled into two value-factor funds like seasoning added after the meal is cooked. It looks diversified at first glance, but the core is basically “own the world once, then own the US again just to be sure.” Structurally it’s simple, but also a bit redundant — like paying for two all-you-can-eat buffets on the same street. The result is more overlap than originality, with factors added more as a garnish than a defining feature.

Growth Info

Recent performance looks like the kind of chart people screenshot and brag about: €1,000 turning into €1,738 in under three years, beating both US and global markets by almost 4% a year. CAGR — the “average speed” of growth — at 24.5% versus ~20.7% for benchmarks is spicy territory. Max drawdown at -21.1% was sharp but not outrageous, roughly in line with the benchmarks, so the pain level wasn’t unique — just the payoff. Of course, this whole story lives in a ridiculously tech-fueled, AI-hype-heavy window. Past data is like yesterday’s weather: useful context, terrible crystal ball.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “Yeah, this party might continue, but don’t count on fireworks every year.” Monte Carlo is just a nerdy way of running thousands of “what if” return paths to see how things might land. Median outcome of €2,759 after 15 years sounds okay, but that range from €917 to €7,812 is a reminder that the future is more dice roll than script. An 8.1% average simulated return is a lot tamer than the recent 24% joyride. The model is built on past volatility and returns, so it’s still yesterday’s weather dressed up as tomorrow’s forecast.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class “diversification” here is basically a yes-or-no question, and the answer is yes to stocks and no to literally everything else. It’s a 100% equity rollercoaster dressed up with a “balanced investor” label and a 4/7 risk score, which is cute. No bonds, no cash, no alternatives — just pure market beta in different wrappers. That’s fine if the goal is full participation in market drama, but let’s not pretend this has built-in shock absorbers. When everything is one asset class, portfolio behavior in a crisis is simple: it follows the market down and hopes the recovery shows up on schedule.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    34%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    10%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, this thing says “I like value” in the marketing but screams “I live for tech” in the holdings. Technology at 34% is a full-blown addiction, not a tilt. Then come financials and consumer discretionary as backup dancers, while boring but stabilizing areas like utilities and real estate are basically an afterthought at 2% each. For something using value-factor funds, the top look-through names are still the usual mega-cap tech and chip royalty crowd. So the sector profile isn’t really “balanced factor experiment” — it’s “AI-and-chips fanboy with a side serving of traditional sectors to ease the guilt.”

Regions Info

  • North America
    66%
  • Asia Developed
    10%
  • Europe Developed
    9%
  • Asia Emerging
    6%
  • Japan
    5%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Europe Emerging
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%

Geographically, this is a love letter to North America with occasional postcards from everywhere else. Sixty-six percent in North America is “America plus friends,” not global balance. Europe Developed limps in at 9%, Japan at 5%, and the rest of the world is scattered in tiny single-digit scraps — technically present, practically background noise. For a portfolio using global and ACWI funds, the actual distribution still ends up very US-heavy, because that’s how global market-cap indices roll. It’s not wrong, just very dependent on one economic region continuing to carry the show like it has in the last decade.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    48%
  • Large-cap
    36%
  • Mid-cap
    15%
  • Small-cap
    1%

Market cap exposure is heavily skewed to the giants: 48% mega-cap, 36% large-cap, and a token 1% in small-cap that might as well be a rounding error. This is basically “own the global corporate aristocracy and ignore the scrappy upstarts.” The value-factor angle gives it a slight nudge away from pure mega-cap glamour, but not enough to change the personality. In practice, this portfolio will move when the big global names move; smaller and mid-sized companies are just passengers. Great for stability relative to small caps, but not exactly adventurous or imaginative in where growth might come from.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Apple Inc
    3.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    2.22%
    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
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.16%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.83%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.58%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.49%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.25%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
  • Micron Technology Inc
    1.11%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Top 10 total 22.46%

The look-through holdings confirm the obvious: this portfolio pretends to be diversified but secretly worships the same handful of mega-caps everyone else owns. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Meta, TSMC, Broadcom — it’s the usual celebrity guest list spread across multiple ETFs. Overlap is clearly there, even though only ETF top-10s are counted, so the real duplication is definitely higher. Hidden concentration is the key: those names don’t show as single massive positions, but they’re effectively steering the ship from several different seats. It’s diversification theatre — many funds, not many truly independent drivers.

Risk contribution Info

  • State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
    Weight: 35.00%
    36.7%
  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    Weight: 35.00%
    34.8%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 15.00%
    15.1%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    Weight: 15.00%
    13.5%

Risk contribution is refreshingly boring here — and that’s not an insult. The S&P 500 ETF is 35% of weight and 36.7% of risk; ACWI is 35% and 34.8% of risk; the EM value and world value funds more or less pull their weight too. No tiny rogue position secretly driving the volatility, no single fund punching way above its size. The top three funds still account for 86.5% of risk, but that mirrors the allocation rather than exposing some hidden landmine. For a portfolio that’s otherwise a bit lazy and overlapping, the risk spread is at least honest and proportional.

Redundant positions Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    State Street SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF (Acc)
    High correlation

The correlated-assets section politely points out what anyone with eyes could guess: your S&P 500 ETF and your ACWI ETF move almost identically. That’s like owning two slightly different brands of cola and calling it a varied drink menu. Highly correlated assets don’t help much when markets crack — they all go down together, just with slightly different accents. Correlation is basically how synchronized the panic (and euphoria) is. In this setup, the core funds are marching in lockstep, so there’s more psychological comfort (“I own multiple funds!”) than actual diversification benefit when things get ugly.

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 efficient frontier chart is brutally honest: this portfolio is leaving performance on the table with its current mix. For the same 13.45% risk, you could have been roughly 3.6 percentage points closer to the frontier using only these existing holdings in smarter proportions. Sharpe ratio at 1.4 versus 1.96 for the optimal version is like driving a sports car in second gear on the highway — functional, but not exactly making the most of what’s under the hood. Even the minimum-variance mix beats the current setup on risk-adjusted terms. The ingredients are fine; the recipe is just a bit clumsy.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • 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 0.45%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.26%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio doesn’t embarrass itself. A total TER around 0.26% is completely reasonable, especially given some of the factor funds are on the pricier side individually (0.30–0.45%). You’re not exactly flying budget, but you’re also not paying private-jet fees for economy seats. For a structure with multiple ETFs, this is fairly tidy — no obvious fee gouging or “why am I paying this much for beta?” moments. If anything, the slightly higher-cost ACWI and factor funds are the tax for wanting to feel “smart” while essentially holding a slightly tweaked global index.

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