Factor salad with extra S&P 500 and a side of hidden tech worship
Report created on May 3, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
3/5
Positions
-
SP SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
SPYL - IE000XZSV718 60.00% -
5M iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
5MVL - IE00BG0SKF03 15.00% -
CE iShares Edge MSCI Europe Momentum Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
CEMR - IE00BQN1K786 15.00% -
IS iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
IS3S - IE00BD45HH35 10.00%
This “balanced” portfolio is 100% stocks with a 60% S&P 500 anchor and three factor ETFs bolted on like aftermarket spoilers. It looks like someone wanted to be smart with factors but couldn’t quite let go of the basic market index comfort blanket. The result is more “S&P 500 with seasoning” than genuinely diversified strategy. Most of the heavy lifting comes from one broad US fund while the satellite positions quietly nudge exposures around the edges. Structurally, this is simple enough, but it’s also slightly confused: is it a plain vanilla core, or a factor-driven experiment? Right now, it’s basically doing both, halfway, at the same time.
Growth
Historically, this Franken-factor mix has actually crushed it: 23.33% CAGR versus roughly 19% for both US and global markets. CAGR is just the “average yearly speed” of growth, and this thing has been speeding. Max drawdown at -20.8% was a bit kinder than benchmarks, but still a gut-check. The €1,000 turning into €1,689 over the period is flashy, but the usual warning applies: past data is yesterday’s weather, not tomorrow’s forecast. Also, notice that 90% of returns came from just 22 days — miss those and the victory lap disappears. This portfolio has been rewarded for its quirks so far, but luck and timing are very much in the credits.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “This could work out nicely, or it could just... not.” Monte Carlo simulations throw the portfolio through 1,000 alternate futures, shuffling returns randomly based on historical patterns. Median outcome of €2,794 from €1,000 over 15 years is decent, but that “possible range” from €982 to €7,756 screams uncertainty. In other words, the optimistic future and the “you went nowhere for 15 years” future are both firmly on the menu. An 8.23% annualized return across simulations sounds sensible, but again, it’s all extrapolated from a short, very favorable window. Past data here is more hype reel than full documentary.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset-class “diversification” here is a multiple-choice test with only one option: equities. All of them. A “balanced” risk score sitting on 100% stocks is a bit like calling an all-chili diet “moderately spicy.” There’s zero exposure to other asset classes that might behave differently when stocks sulk — no ballast, no counterweights, just one big equity roller coaster. In good times, that concentration makes everything look brilliant and simple. In bad times, it makes everything fall at the same time, also very simple, just less enjoyable. The portfolio isn’t pretending to be anything else, but the label “balanced” is doing some very heavy marketing work here.
Sectors
- Technology 30%
- Financials 17%
- Industrials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Health Care 8%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Energy 4%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 3%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, around 30% in technology screams “I believe in chips, code, and vibes.” The rest is spread across financials, industrials, and a supporting cast of everyone else, but tech clearly has main-character energy. This isn’t wildly out of line with broad indexes, but combined with those growth-heavy mega-cap names at the top, it makes the portfolio more dependent on a specific style of market leadership. If the tech darlings keep winning, everything looks genius. If they revert to being just normal good businesses instead of demigods, the shine comes off fast. Sector balance is technically passable, but the hero worship is obvious.
Regions
- North America 65%
- Europe Developed 18%
- Asia Developed 8%
- Asia Emerging 5%
- Japan 2%
- Latin America 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Europe Emerging 1%
Geographically, this portfolio is basically saying “North America or bust” with 65% there and a polite nod to the rest of the world. Europe developed at 18% and chunks of Asia, Japan, and emerging markets fill in the map so it doesn’t look totally one-sided, but the message is clear: US-driven outcomes dominate. For a European investor, it’s an extra layer of “please let the dollar and US markets behave.” The non-US exposure is enough to avoid total home-country tunnel vision, but not enough to stop global shocks from feeling very US-shaped. It’s international in theory, but practically it’s a US-led tour with brief layovers elsewhere.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 46%
- Large-cap 38%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 1%
Market cap exposure is mega-cap royalty all the way down: 46% in mega, 38% in large, and mid/small caps just sprinkled like garnish. This is basically a “corporate giants only” club with a 1% token invite to small caps. The upside is stability relative to tiny companies; the downside is this behaves a lot like a headline index: when the big names move, everything moves, and when they stall, so does the portfolio. There’s almost no room here for nimble smaller companies to matter. You’re getting the global billboard names over and over, with very little exposure to the more local, weird, or idiosyncratic parts of the market.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.53%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
AA Apple Inc 3.99%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.94%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.18%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.79%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.57%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 1.55%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.44%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.34%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.12%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- Top 10 total 22.44%
The look-through holdings are a who’s-who of the usual mega-cap suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla — the standard tech blockbuster lineup. NVIDIA at 4.53% and Apple at 3.99% total exposure show how much this portfolio is secretly riding a handful of names repeated across multiple ETFs. Overlap analysis only uses ETF top-10s, so real duplication is likely even bigger than it looks. This isn’t a subtle mosaic of different ideas; it’s the same mega-cap poster plastered on several walls. The portfolio pretends to be a clever factor blend, but the underlying reality is a crowded party hosted by the Magnificent Whatever-Number-We’re-On-Now.
Risk contribution
-
SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
Weight: 60.00% 62.6% -
iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
Weight: 15.00% 14.5% -
iShares Edge MSCI Europe Momentum Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
Weight: 15.00% 14.2% -
iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
Weight: 10.00% 8.7%
Risk contribution politely confirms what everyone suspected: the S&P 500 ETF owns the room. At 60% weight, it contributes 62.63% of the total risk — basically doing exactly its weight and then some. The two 15% satellite funds each add around 14% of risk, so the top three positions pump out over 91% of total volatility. Risk contribution is like asking, “Who’s actually shaking the portfolio?” and the answer is: the core index plus a couple of factor sidekicks. The world value ETF barely moves the needle. Structurally, this is more “one big bet with three small flavor extenders” than four equal co-stars.
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 quietly yelling that this portfolio is leaving performance on the table. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 1.32, clearly below both the max-Sharpe option at 1.81 and even the minimum variance portfolio at 1.63. Sharpe is “return per unit of pain,” and this setup is earning less per unit of volatility than it could with just better weights. Being 3.25 percentage points below the frontier at this risk level means the same ingredients could be rearranged into something meaningfully more efficient. It’s like cooking with good ingredients and still serving an okay-but-not-great meal — the recipe, not the pantry, is the issue.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD 0.40%
- iShares Edge MSCI Europe Momentum Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) 0.25%
- iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.30%
- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.15%
Costs are actually the most well-behaved part of this circus. A total TER around 0.15% is respectably low, helped massively by the 0.03% S&P 500 anchor dragging the average down while the factor funds quietly skim more. It’s like flying budget airlines for most trips but occasionally splurging on a slightly pricier ticket for no-frills extras. You’re not getting gouged, but you are paying a noticeable premium for the clever-factor costume over plain cap-weighted exposure. Fees aren’t the villain in this story, though — they’re just an ongoing cover charge for a strategy that may or may not be earning its drama.
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