Roast mode 🔥

World index with a secret crush on value and big tech pretending to be simple diversification

Report created on May 11, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

4/5
Broadly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is the investing equivalent of “I’ll have the tasting menu… plus extra fries.” Eighty percent goes into a plain-vanilla global index ETF, then 10% EM value and 10% global value are slapped on top like someone couldn’t resist tinkering. Structurally it’s basically one big fund with two small satellite funds that mostly fish in the same pond. The result is more complexity on paper than in reality: three tickers, but one dominant driver doing all the work. It looks like a carefully crafted strategy, but underneath it’s just “global market plus some value seasoning” that may or may not justify the extra moving parts.

Growth Info

Historically, this mix has done “fine but not flex-worthy.” Turning €1,000 into €2,547 is solid, with a CAGR of 13.4%, but the US market would’ve done noticeably better at 15.78%. Against the global market, it basically tied: a microscopic 0.03% edge that doesn’t exactly scream genius design. The max drawdown of about -33% lined up with broader markets, so there’s no magical downside protection here either. And needing only 32 days to make 90% of returns just confirms it rides the same rollercoaster as everyone else. Past data is helpful, but it’s still yesterday’s weather, not tomorrow’s forecast.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projections say this portfolio’s future is… statistically average. Monte Carlo just means the computer throws thousands of random return paths at it to see a range of outcomes, not predict an exact number. Median €1,000 becomes about €2,674 in 15 years, which is underwhelming versus the spicy backtest. The likely range from €1,762 to €4,102 shows that “balanced” here still comes with plenty of uncertainty, and the 5–95% band from “barely broke even” to “nice jackpot” hammers that home. In short, the past decade’s rocket fuel isn’t baked into the next 15 years.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class “diversification” here is aggressively simple: 100% stocks, 0% anything else. That’s not balanced; that’s just pure equity with a nice label. No bonds, no real defensive assets, no diversifiers – it’s all one flavor, just from slightly different angles. That’s like calling a pizza “food group diversified” because it has cheese and pepperoni. Being all in stocks means returns can be great, but drawdowns will be loud. For something wearing a “balanced” badge, this portfolio behaves much more like a straight equity engine with no real shock absorbers.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    31%
  • Financials
    16%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Under the hood, this thing is very much a tech-leaning creature, whether it admits it or not. Around 31% in technology sets the tone, with financials and industrials trailing far behind. The top look-through names are basically the who’s who of mega-cap tech and chip royalty, so the sector weights are not subtle. This is dressed up as a broad global mix, but the economic bets are tilted toward growth engines and digital infrastructure. If the tech darlings and related businesses sneeze, this portfolio catches a cold, no matter how “global” the label on the tin sounds.

Regions Info

  • North America
    58%
  • Europe Developed
    14%
  • Asia Developed
    10%
  • Asia Emerging
    7%
  • Japan
    6%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%

Geographically, it claims world coverage but clearly has a favorite child: North America at 58% dominates the stage. The rest of the world is sprinkled in just enough to look respectable in a brochure: Europe, Japan, developed Asia, and tiny slices of emerging markets. It’s basically “US-led world tour with a few opening acts.” For a European investor, it’s notably light on home turf and very heavy on one economic and regulatory system. When that main region does well, great; when it stalls, the portfolio looks more like a global passengers list stuck on one flight path.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    50%
  • Large-cap
    35%
  • Mid-cap
    14%

On size, this is a fully paid-up member of the Big Boys Club: 50% mega-cap, 35% large-cap, and only a token 14% mid-cap presence. Small caps might as well not exist. That’s like building a sports team and only signing established superstars, then wondering why there’s little surprise upside or diversification when the usual names wobble. Large and mega-caps are stable-ish and liquid, but they also mean the portfolio is welded to the global index narrative. Any “value tilt” from the satellite funds is trying to move a very heavy, very large ship.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.77%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Apple Inc
    3.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    2.24%
    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
    1.77%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.48%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.26%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.11%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    0.94%
    Part of fund(s):
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Top 10 total 19.42%

The look-through list exposes the not-so-hidden truth: it’s a US mega-tech and semiconductor fan club in disguise. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, TSMC, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla – it’s basically a who’s who of the global index’s celebrity row. The same big names show up via multiple ETFs, creating overlap that concentrates risk while pretending to be diversified. And remember, this is only the top-10 holdings snapshot; actual overlap beneath the surface is definitely worse. For a portfolio with three ETFs, the number of truly independent underlying bets is surprisingly small.

Risk contribution Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    Weight: 80.00%
    80.5%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.8%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.7%

Risk contribution is brutally honest here: the big ACWI fund at 80% weight drives 80.51% of risk, and the two 10% value funds each contribute just under 10%. In other words, risk is almost perfectly proportional to weight — no hidden loose cannons, but also no clever risk engineering. Risk contribution just shows which positions are causing the ups and downs; here, all three holdings pull in line with their size. That’s clean but also boring: the satellites aren’t doing anything dramatic, and the whole portfolio rises and falls almost entirely with that one core ETF.

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 chart, this portfolio actually behaves like it’s read a textbook for once. The current mix sits on or very near the frontier, with a Sharpe ratio of 0.63 versus 0.83 for the “optimal” and 0.82 for minimum variance – but those improvements come from shuffling the same ingredients, not adding new ones. Efficient frontier is basically the best return-for-risk curve given what’s already in the basket. So while the overall design is simple to the point of dull, it’s at least using its three ETFs in a mathematically sensible way. Annoyingly competent.

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 0.12%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.17%

Cost-wise, this portfolio accidentally did something smart. A total TER of 0.17% for a global equity setup with factor tilts is impressively restrained. The satellites at 0.30–0.40% aren’t bargain-bin cheap, but the 0.12% core keeps the blended cost low. Fees are like friction — they quietly eat returns — and here the portfolio at least isn’t paying first-class prices to sit in economy. Still, given how dominant the core fund is, the extra fee layers from the satellites have to work pretty hard to justify their existence beyond “I liked the word value on the label.”

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