Globally diversified stock portfolio with strong US tilt and room to sharpen risk and return
Report created on Mar 23, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.
Positions
-
SP SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
SPYL - IE000XZSV718 56.14% -
EX Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C USD EUR
EXUS - IE0006WW1TQ4 27.84% -
SX iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
SXR8 - IE00B5BMR087 8.90% -
XM Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
XMME - IE00BTJRMP35 4.83% -
NO Novo Nordisk A/S
NOV - DK0062498333 2.29%
The portfolio is a straightforward all‑equity mix, dominated by broad ETFs. Two S&P 500 funds together make up around two‑thirds of the allocation, complemented by a sizeable developed‑markets ex‑US fund, a smaller emerging‑markets ETF, and a single stock position in Novo Nordisk. This structure is very simple, cheap, and easy to maintain, which is a real strength. Being 100% in shares means growth is the clear objective, with no bonds or cash to dampen volatility. For someone comfortable with ups and downs, this kind of equity‑only mix can work well, but anyone needing short‑term stability might normally blend in some lower‑risk assets.
Growth
Over the recent period, €1,000 grew to about €1,209, giving a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 10.36%. CAGR is the “average speed” of growth per year, smoothing out the bumps. That is slightly behind the global market benchmark but ahead of the US benchmark end value, while max drawdown — the worst peak‑to‑trough fall — reached about ‑21%, similar to global markets and much steeper than the US. Only six days delivered 90% of returns, showing how a handful of strong days really matter. This pattern is quite normal for an equity portfolio, but it underlines why staying invested through volatility is usually crucial.
Projection
The Monte Carlo simulation projects many possible 10‑year paths for a €1,000 investment by remixing past returns in thousands of random scenarios. It uses historical behaviour as raw material, but it does not “know” the future. In this case, the distribution is skewed, with a median (50th percentile) outcome that is negative and many scenarios showing large losses. That looks surprisingly pessimistic, likely because the short and volatile data window feeds in a lot of downside noise. It’s a good reminder that simulated numbers are rough sketches, not forecasts. The practical takeaway is to expect a wide range of potential outcomes and avoid over‑relying on any single projection.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio sits in one asset class: stocks. That maximises long‑term growth potential but also means you feel the full force of equity bear markets. In contrast, broad benchmarks often mix in bonds or other defensive assets to reduce volatility, especially for balanced risk profiles. For a growth‑focused investor with a long horizon and stable income, a pure‑equity structure can still be appropriate. However, if capital preservation or smoother returns are priorities, even a modest allocation to lower‑risk assets could meaningfully reduce drawdowns without necessarily sacrificing long‑term goals, especially if contributions continue over time.
Sectors
- Technology 26%
- Financials 16%
- Health Care 12%
- Industrials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 9%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 3%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector exposure is nicely spread, with technology the largest slice at 26%, followed by financials, healthcare, industrials, consumer cyclicals, communication services, and smaller allocations elsewhere. This broad coverage aligns well with global equity benchmarks and is a strong indicator of healthy diversification. A tech‑heavier tilt is normal for modern global indices and has benefited from recent market leadership, but it also tends to amplify sensitivity to interest‑rate moves and growth expectations. The balanced presence of defensive areas like healthcare and consumer staples helps cushion some of that cyclicality, which is a positive feature of this setup.
Regions
- North America 68%
- Europe Developed 18%
- Japan 6%
- Asia Developed 3%
- Asia Emerging 2%
- Australasia 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
Geographically, the portfolio leans heavily toward North America at 68%, with 18% in developed Europe and smaller slices in Japan, developed Asia, emerging Asia, Australasia, and Africa/Middle East. This is broadly in line with global market weights, where the US dominates. That alignment is beneficial because it mirrors how global capital is actually allocated, and historically it has captured the strong performance of US markets. The trade‑off is a meaningful dependence on one region’s economic and policy environment. Some investors choose to deliberately tilt a bit more toward non‑US regions if they want to diversify away from that single‑region dominance.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 48%
- Large-cap 37%
- Mid-cap 14%
- Small-cap 1%
Most exposure is in mega and big companies: about 48% mega‑cap, 37% large‑cap, 14% mid‑cap, and only 1% small‑cap. Large, established firms usually offer more stability, deeper liquidity, and better resilience in crises, which helps keep volatility more manageable. This structure is very much in line with standard global indices and is therefore a solid, mainstream approach. The flip side is that you have minimal participation in potential small‑cap growth, which can sometimes outperform over very long periods but tends to be much bumpier. For many investors, this large‑cap bias is a sensible core foundation.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.74%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AA Apple Inc 4.29%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.21%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
NO Novo Nordisk A/S 2.29%
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.25%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.99%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.66%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.59%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.55%
Part of fund(s):- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.24%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
- Top 10 total 24.82%
Looking through the ETFs, the biggest underlying exposures are the usual large global names: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Broadcom, Tesla, and Novo Nordisk. Several of these appear across multiple ETFs, creating hidden concentration even though you only hold a few funds. For example, NVIDIA and Apple together already account for roughly 9% of the look‑through exposure, all via ETFs. Because only top‑10 ETF holdings are included, actual overlap is probably higher. This kind of concentration is common in market‑cap‑weighted funds, but it means your results will be heavily influenced by a relatively small group of mega‑cap growth companies.
Factors
Factor exposure — the portfolio’s tilt to characteristics like value, size, momentum, quality, low volatility, and yield — shows quality, yield, and low‑volatility as dominant, but coverage for those signals is very low. Factor investing targets these traits because they’ve historically driven returns, but here the data is incomplete, so the picture is fuzzy. Size and momentum signals cover most of the portfolio and indicate a bias toward larger, reasonably strong‑performing stocks. Overall, this looks quite close to a broad market‑cap index, without extreme style bets. That’s consistent with a simple ETF‑based strategy, but it means you’re not strongly leaning into any specific factor premium.
Risk contribution
-
SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
Weight: 56.14% 61.0% -
Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C USD EUR
Weight: 27.84% 22.5% -
iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Weight: 8.90% 9.7% -
Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C
Weight: 4.83% 4.2% -
Novo Nordisk A/S
Weight: 2.29% 2.6%
Risk contribution measures how much each position adds to overall portfolio ups and downs, which can differ a lot from simple weights. Here, the two S&P 500 ETFs plus the World ex‑US ETF dominate, with the top three holdings contributing over 93% of total risk. Novo Nordisk, despite its small weight, has a slightly higher risk‑to‑weight ratio, meaning it punches a bit above its size in volatility terms. The S&P 500 funds also contribute more risk than their proportional weights. Adjusting allocations between these funds could better align risk with your intended emphasis without changing the underlying building blocks.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationSPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EURiShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
The two S&P 500 ETFs are highly correlated, which means they tend to move almost in lockstep. Correlation describes how assets move together; when correlation is high, diversification benefits shrink because everything rises and falls at the same time. From a risk‑management point of view, holding two very similar funds can add complexity without delivering much extra diversification. That said, the presence of developed ex‑US and emerging‑market exposure still provides some diversification away from US‑only moves. Simplifying overlapping positions can sometimes clean up the structure and make it easier to understand what is really driving performance.
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 risk‑return chart, the current portfolio sits below the efficient frontier. The efficient frontier shows the best achievable return for each risk level using just your existing holdings but in different weights. Your current Sharpe ratio — return per unit of risk — is 0.56, while the optimal mix reaches about 0.94, with higher expected returns for slightly more risk. Even at the same risk level, an adjusted allocation could materially lift expected return. That means there is room to fine‑tune weights, especially around overlapping US exposures, to get closer to the frontier without adding any new funds or increasing overall volatility dramatically.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Core S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD (Acc) 0.12%
- Xtrackers MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF 1C 0.18%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.02%
The costs are impressively low, with headline expense ratios around 0.12–0.18% for the disclosed funds and a total TER estimate of just 0.02% across the portfolio. The total expense ratio (TER) is the annual fee charged by funds, quietly deducted from returns. Keeping this number low is one of the few levers investors fully control, and over decades it has a huge impact on ending wealth. Here, the cost profile is strongly aligned with best practice and supports better long‑term performance. Any future changes should aim to preserve this low‑fee advantage, as it’s a major strength of the current structure.
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