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

One stock to rule them all and a couple of shiny distractions on the side

Report created on Apr 25, 2026

Risk profile Info

7/7
Speculative
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

4/5
Broadly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This “portfolio” is basically Krka with some decorative ornaments attached. One single stock at 52% drives the entire show, with Novo Nordisk as the understudy and everything else reduced to background extras. Calling this broadly diversified is generous; it’s more like owning a small business and then buying a few lottery tickets and a gold coin collection for fun. The structure screams conviction, but it also screams “if this one thing stumbles, everything stumbles.” In practice, this isn’t a mix of ideas, it’s one big bet plus some side quests. The overall impression: concentrated genius if it works, concentrated pain if it doesn’t.

Growth Info

Historically, this thing has been a rocket: turning €1,000 into €4,908 with a 29.87% CAGR. That absolutely torches both the US market and global market, beating them by double‑digit annual returns. The price for that glory? A brutal -59.47% max drawdown that took almost two years to recover. CAGR is like your average speed on a road trip; drawdown is the part where you drove into a ditch and waited for a tow truck. This portfolio drove fast and survived, but the journey was basically a meme-stock rollercoaster strapped to a pharmaceutical company.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection politely says, “Yeah, this party might be over.” Simulations spit out a median €2,780 after 15 years from €1,000 — decent, but nowhere near the past heroics. Monte Carlo just runs thousands of “what if” futures using past volatility and rough assumptions; it’s weather-forecasting for portfolios, not prophecy. Here the range is wide: from “barely more than you started with” to “nice win if nothing explodes.” Past data is flattering, but the simulations are basically side‑eyeing the risk and quietly lowering their expectations versus your historical joyride.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    78%
  • Crypto
    15%
  • Other
    7%

Asset class mix: 78% stocks, 15% crypto, 7% “other” (gold). On paper it looks adventurous; in reality it’s three different flavors of “hope this works out.” There’s no real ballast here, just varying levels of excitement. Stocks do the heavy lifting, crypto brings chaos, and gold stands in the corner promising to behave when everyone else is drunk. This isn’t a balanced ensemble; it’s a band with three lead guitars and no drummer. When markets are kind, it can sing. When they’re not, there’s nothing steady underneath to keep the noise from turning into a full wipeout.

Sectors Info

  • No data
    63%
  • Crypto
    15%
  • Technology
    8%
  • Financials
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    1%
  • Industrials
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector data is basically “¯\\_(ツ)_/¯” for 63% of the portfolio, thanks to the direct holdings and non‑equity bits. What is visible shows an 8% tilt to technology and a scattered sprinkling across financials, materials, industrials, and real estate via the ETFs. So in sector terms, this is a ghost: most of the true exposure hides behind “no data,” which simply means the classification system can’t neatly tag it, not that it’s a mystery asset. The result is you get both concentration and opacity — a portfolio that looks sparse in sectors but actually just refuses to be neatly categorized.

Regions Info

  • No data
    52%
  • Europe Developed
    11%
  • North America
    7%
  • Australasia
    5%
  • Asia Developed
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geography is hilariously vague: 52% “no data,” which is doing a lot of work hiding the fact that Krka and Novo Nordisk alone dominate the regional reality. The rest adds some developed Europe, North America, Australasia, and a bit of developed Asia via broad ETFs, which is actually a semi‑sensible global sprinkle. So technically there is international diversification, but it’s like adding a world map wallpaper in a room dominated by a single giant statue. The ETFs try to bring global flavor, but the direct holdings make this more like a heavily local bet with a tourist budget.

Market capitalization Info

  • No data
    59%
  • Large-cap
    16%
  • Mega-cap
    9%
  • Mid-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Market cap breakdown is mostly “no data” again, masking the fact that over 60% of the portfolio is in two large companies whose exact buckets aren’t labeled here. The ETF slice adds 16% large-cap and 9% mega-cap plus a lonely 1% mid-cap. So the visible part is tilted to the big end of town, but the classification gaps turn the picture into a half-finished puzzle. Overall, this behaves like a lopsided large‑cap bet with a couple of massive anchors and some broad, sensible giants in the background doing silent risk-dilution behind the scenes.

True holdings Info

  • Krka d.d.
    52.04%
  • Novo Nordisk A/S Class B
    11.15%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    1.71%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P U.S. Technology Select Sector UCITS
  • Apple Inc
    1.46%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P U.S. Technology Select Sector UCITS
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.12%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P U.S. Technology Select Sector UCITS
  • Commonwealth Bank of Australia
    0.62%
    Part of fund(s):
    • L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.60%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P U.S. Technology Select Sector UCITS
  • BHP Group Ltd
    0.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF
  • AIA Group Ltd
    0.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF
  • Westpac Banking Corporation
    0.30%
    Part of fund(s):
    • L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF
  • Top 10 total 69.92%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Look‑through holdings show a funny contrast: the ETFs bring in the usual tech royalty — NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Broadcom — but each barely registers at around 1–2%. Meanwhile, Krka and Novo Nordisk stand over everything like two bosses who refuse to delegate. There’s no serious hidden overlap issue; the problem is the opposite: the diversified ETFs are too small to matter much. Overlap analysis is usually about discovering you secretly own the same thing three times. Here, the insight is simpler: the portfolio doesn’t secretly double-count anything; it just loudly overcounts two names on purpose.

Risk contribution Info

  • Krka d.d.
    Weight: 52.04%
    99.3%
  • Ethereum
    Weight: 9.67%
    0.6%
  • Bitcoin
    Weight: 4.83%
    0.2%
  • SPDR S&P U.S. Technology Select Sector UCITS
    Weight: 7.44%
    0.1%
  • L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF
    Weight: 7.44%
    0.0%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 100.2%

Risk contribution is where the comedy peaks. Krka at 52% weight somehow delivers a ridiculous 99.33% of total portfolio risk. Everything else — crypto, tech ETF, Asia ETF, gold — collectively barely moves the needle. Risk contribution measures who’s actually shaking the portfolio, not who’s just sitting there. Here, it’s a one‑person mosh pit. Ethereum and Bitcoin, allegedly the wild children, are risk wallflowers compared to Krka. This isn’t diversification; it’s a hostage situation where the rest of the portfolio exists mainly to make the dashboard look less embarrassing.

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 is brutal. The current portfolio has a Sharpe ratio of 0.7 with cartoonish 97.37% risk and 72.18% return. The optimal mix — using the same holdings, just reweighted — has a Sharpe of 1.87 with far lower risk and still strong return. That means this isn’t just aggressive; it’s aggressively inefficient. Being 19.69 percentage points below the frontier is like running a marathon with a backpack full of rocks: same route, same shoes, just way more suffering than necessary for the result. The math basically says: same ingredients, much smarter recipe possible.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • L&G Asia Pacific ex Japan Equity UCITS ETF 0.10%
  • iShares Physical Gold ETC 0.25%
  • SPDR S&P U.S. Technology Select Sector UCITS 0.15%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.04%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio doesn’t roast itself. With a total TER of around 0.04%, you’ve basically assembled a Frankenstein monster of risk at bargain-bin pricing. The ETFs are cheap, sensible vehicles: 0.10%, 0.15%, 0.25% — all fine. Costs here are not the villain; they’re the quiet friend who did nothing wrong while everyone else made terrible life choices. It’s actually impressive: this much concentration, this much volatility, and at least you’re not overpaying to experience it. You found the discount aisle, then filled the cart with dynamite.

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