Roast mode 🔥

Closet global index fund with a weird side quest into value for no obvious reason

Report created on May 4, 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 a global index with commitment issues. Forty‑five percent sits in a world tracker, then 30% piles into the S&P 500 on top, and the remaining 25% gets sprinkled across two value factor funds like seasoning someone forgot to taste. It looks diversified at first glance, but under the hood most of the money is just saying “own the world, but especially the US, again.” Structurally, it’s simple but slightly redundant: paying for a big “own everything” fund and then aggressively overweighting one slice of “everything” plus a style bet is not exactly elegant design. It’s more like layering three almost‑matching outfits.

Growth Info

Historically, this thing has absolutely flown: €1,000 turning into €1,668 in less than three years and a 22.67% CAGR is nosebleed‑good territory. It even beat both the US market and global market by roughly 3 percentage points per year, which is not easy. Of course, that came with a -21% drawdown that took five months to crawl back from, so it’s not exactly a smooth ride. CAGR — the “average speed” of growth — looks great, but past performance is yesterday’s weather: very informative about what already happened, suspiciously quiet about what happens next when the forecast changes.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is like running thousands of alternate universes for this portfolio, and in most of them things turn out “fine, not spectacular.” Median outcome of €2,778 after 15 years from €1,000 sounds okay until you realize that includes both boom years and disaster flicks averaged together. The likely range is hilariously wide: ending roughly between losing purchasing power and “that worked out alright.” With an 8.19% modeled annual return, the engine is decent, but not magical. Simulations are basically very educated guesswork using historical behavior; if markets change character, the model shrugs and just keeps pretending they didn’t.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

On asset classes, this portfolio is a one‑trick pony: 100% stocks, no bonds, no cash, no alternatives, nothing. For something labeled “Balanced Investors” with a 4/7 risk score, this is more “balanced in spirit” than in actual holdings. Asset allocation is supposed to be like a food pyramid; this is the financial equivalent of an all‑protein diet. It can work, but it is absolutely not what people usually mean when they use the word “balanced.” In practice, this means when equities sneeze, the whole portfolio catches pneumonia because there’s nothing calmer in here to dampen the drama.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    31%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    10%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, the portfolio is a tech‑tilted global buffet that pretends to be restrained. With 31% in technology and another chunk in stuff that behaves a lot like tech (consumer discretionary names driven by growth stories), the so‑called diversification is doing a lot less work than the pie chart suggests. Value factor funds usually lean toward more “boring” sectors, but the big look‑through weights still scream “we love mega‑cap tech.” Versus a generic global index, this isn’t totally insane, but it’s definitely leaning into the same winners everyone else is obsessed with, just with a decorative “value” label taped on the side for personality.

Regions Info

  • North America
    65%
  • Asia Developed
    10%
  • Europe Developed
    10%
  • Asia Emerging
    7%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Europe Emerging
    1%

Geographically, this is “US and friends” with cameo appearances from the rest of the world. Sixty‑five percent in North America for a European client is a pretty loud statement: home market? Never heard of it. Europe Developed limps in at 10%, the same as Asia Developed, which is respectable diversification on paper but clearly second fiddle to the US. Emerging regions barely register, collectively making up single‑digit scraps. This isn’t global so much as “US plus token global garnish.” When US large caps are on fire, that works great; if they underperform, the portfolio will learn what “concentration risk” feels like.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    47%
  • Large-cap
    37%
  • Mid-cap
    15%

Market cap exposure is firmly in the “safety in crowds” camp: 47% mega‑cap, 37% large‑cap, 15% mid‑cap, and basically no meaningful small‑cap presence. This is the index‑hugging default — owning whatever has already won the market cap popularity contest. On the plus side, mega‑caps tend to be resilient, diversified businesses; on the minus side, they’re also the bit everyone else owns, so you’re paying for the same party as the entire market. The portfolio is basically saying, “if it’s not in the top corporate league, we’re not that interested,” which is fine but hardly adventurous or original.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.39%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Apple Inc
    3.86%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.77%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    2.23%
    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
    2.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.48%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.43%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.29%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    1.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Top 10 total 22.34%

The look‑through holdings scream hidden concentration in the usual suspects. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, TSMC, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Meta, and Tesla — it’s like a who’s‑who of every other equity portfolio on Earth. The top names alone eat a chunky slice of total exposure despite only seeing top‑10 ETF positions, so the real overlap is almost certainly worse than reported. Stacking an ACWI fund and an S&P 500 fund guarantees duplicates: you’re basically paying twice to own the same headline names, just with different logos on the wrappers. The portfolio looks diversified, but underneath it’s worshipping the same tech gods over and over.

Risk contribution Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    Weight: 45.00%
    44.7%
  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    Weight: 30.00%
    31.5%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 15.00%
    15.0%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    Weight: 10.00%
    8.8%

Risk contribution is where the mask fully slips. The top three positions by weight contribute over 91% of total portfolio risk. Translation: despite four ETFs on the menu, almost all the drama is coming from ACWI, the S&P 500 fund, and the EM value ETF. The world value ETF is basically the quiet kid in the corner, underweight in risk versus its weight. Risk contribution shows which holdings are actually moving the needle, and here the message is blunt: a supposed multi‑fund structure behaves like a three‑engine plane with one engine much bigger than the others. Diversification in name, concentration in practice.

Redundant positions Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    High correlation

The correlation section politely exposes what anyone with a calculator could guess: the S&P 500 ETF and the ACWI ETF move almost identically. When two funds are highly correlated, owning both gives you the illusion of choice without the reality of diversification. In a downturn, they’re going to fall together like synchronized divers, just wearing slightly different swimsuits. Correlation is just a fancy word for “how much they dance in step,” and these two are basically slow‑dancing. So while the allocation table shows multiple positions, the real behavior is closer to one big US‑heavy equity bet with extra paperwork.

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, this portfolio is decidedly not winning any “smart usage of ingredients” contest. With a Sharpe of 1.28 versus an optimal 1.83 using the same building blocks, you’re voluntarily leaving performance on the table for the amount of risk taken. The frontier is the curve showing the best possible return for each risk level; this portfolio sits 3.8 percentage points below it at its current risk. Translation: even without changing a single ETF, just reweighting them differently could have produced a much better risk/return deal. It’s like cooking with great ingredients and still managing a pretty average meal.

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%
  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR 0.03%
  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF 0.12%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.15%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio doesn’t embarrass itself. A total TER of 0.15% is genuinely low, and the S&P 500 ETF at 0.03% is bargain‑bin pricing. Even the two factor funds, at 0.30–0.40%, are relatively reasonable as far as “smart beta” products go. So yes, fees are under control — you must have clicked the right tickers at some point. The mildly annoying bit is that you’re paying multiple layers of fees to own a lot of the same underlying mega‑caps twice. Cheap redundancy is still redundancy; efficient would be cheap and not overlapping so much.

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