Mostly sensible index mix with a bonus semiconductor obsession hiding in the corner
Report created on May 10, 2026Risk profile
3/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
VU Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
VUAA - IE00BFMXXD54 33.98% -
EX Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C USD EUR
EXUS - IE0006WW1TQ4 29.13% -
AE Amundi Index Solutions - Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR
AEME - LU1437017350 24.27% -
4G Xetra-Gold
4GLD 9.71% -
SE iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
SEC0 - IE000I8KRLL9 2.91%
Structurally this portfolio looks like someone started with a very reasonable three-fund global equity setup and then panic-bought a bit of gold and a semiconductor toy on the side. Around 90% sits in broad stock index funds, sliced into US, ex-US developed, and emerging markets with almost textbook proportions, then 10% disappears into “no data,” which is basically the portfolio equivalent of “miscellaneous drawer.” It’s simple and mostly coherent, but that little 3% semiconductor satellite is doing cosplay as a “small tilt” while actually packing outsized punch. Overall, it’s a solid skeleton with a couple of vanity muscles flexing harder than they look.
Growth
Historically, this thing has been on a heater: €1,000 turned into about €1,506, which is a 20.9% annual growth rate. CAGR — Compound Annual Growth Rate — is basically the average speed of the trip, and here it’s faster than both the US market and global market by more than 5 percentage points per year. That’s a big gap. But it did not get there smoothly: a -17% max drawdown in a short test period shows it can still punch you in the stomach. Also, this is a very short window in a very weird market environment, so treating this run as “normal” would be like assuming every Sunday drive is the Formula 1.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection — fancy name for “let’s roll the dice on possible futures 1,000 times” — paints a more boring picture than the recent performance. Median outcome of €2,650 from €1,000 over 15 years is about 7.5% a year, which is normal-world good, not recent-history insane. The range is wide: ending values from roughly €1,000 to €6,600 remind that markets are generous but moody. Simulations are basically weather forecasts for money: helpful for planning, useless for certainty. The portfolio’s projected outcomes say it’s taking real risk but not casino-level risk, just enough to see both very nice and very “why is everything red” scenarios.
Asset classes
- Stocks 90%
- No data 10%
Asset-class-wise, this is “stocks with a side of mystery.” About 90% is clearly in equities, and the remaining 10% is stuck in the “no data” bucket that includes holdings like Xetra-Gold. That means almost the entire ride depends on stock markets doing their thing, with a small sliver trying to be the adult in the room when everything else melts down. The balance is simple and honest: this is an equity-led portfolio that pretends to be cautious mainly on paper. The upside is clarity — no clutter of random stuff. The downside is that if global stocks sneeze, this portfolio catches a cold, gold or not.
Sectors
- Technology 26%
- Financials 16%
- Industrials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 8%
- Health Care 7%
- Telecommunications 6%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Energy 4%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector exposure is quietly tech-hungry: 26% in technology, then a more normal spread through financials, industrials, and the rest. And that’s before adding the extra semiconductor ETF, which turns “standard tech tilt” into “let’s double down on the most cyclical nerd corner of the market.” Semiconductors are basically the caffeine of the portfolio: small volume, big effect, and occasionally cause shakes. The rest of the sectors look fairly index-like, so all the excitement comes from one area. This kind of sector tilt can feel genius when chips are hot and incredibly bad when the cycle turns — it’s like building a balanced diet and then living mostly on energy drinks anyway.
Regions
- North America 40%
- Europe Developed 17%
- Asia Developed 12%
- Asia Emerging 9%
- Japan 6%
- Africa/Middle East 2%
- Australasia 2%
- Latin America 2%
Geographically, it’s surprisingly sane: 40% in North America with the rest spread across Europe, Japan, developed Asia, emerging Asia, and smaller regions. This is not the usual “America or nothing” drama; it actually acknowledges that the rest of the planet exists and has stock markets. For a Germany-based investor, the home-country bias is basically invisible — if anything, it’s more loyal to the global market than to the local flag. The trade-off is that the portfolio is fully signed up to global economic reality: whatever drama hits major regions, it’s in there somewhere. That’s the price of proper diversification — you always own something that’s currently annoying you.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 47%
- Large-cap 31%
- Mid-cap 11%
Market cap exposure screams “index hugger with a mild mega-cap crush.” About 47% in mega-caps and 31% in large-caps means the giants dominate the show, with mid-caps playing a background role and anything smaller basically invisible. This is standard for cap-weighted indexes but still worth roasting: the portfolio is basically a popularity contest where the biggest companies get the mic and the smaller ones never make it on stage. It’s safe-ish in a conventional way, but it also means innovation and higher-growth smaller names barely move the needle. When mega-caps stumble, this portfolio feels it instantly because the elephants are doing all the dancing.
True holdings
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 3.42%
Part of fund(s):- Amundi Index Solutions - Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR
- iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 2.81%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
AA Apple Inc 2.27%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 1.67%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.24%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
-
00 Samsung Electronics Co Ltd 1.22%
Part of fund(s):- Amundi Index Solutions - Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.12%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
- iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.02%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
-
07 Tencent Holdings Ltd 0.93%
Part of fund(s):- Amundi Index Solutions - Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR
-
AS ASML Holding N.V. 0.85%
Part of fund(s):- Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C USD EUR
- iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
- Top 10 total 16.55%
Look-through holdings show a greatest-hits tech-and-Asia playlist: TSMC, NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, ASML, Samsung, Tencent. That’s a lot of the same global titans showing up through multiple routes, especially once you add a dedicated semiconductor ETF. Overlap means the portfolio is less diversified than it looks at first glance — several of these names are basically getting invited to the party three times. And remember, this is only based on top-10 ETF holdings, so real overlap is probably higher. It’s the classic index problem: it pretends to spread risk widely while quietly building a very crowded VIP section in a handful of giant companies.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
Weight: 33.98% 35.4% -
Amundi Index Solutions - Amundi Index MSCI Emerging Markets UCITS ETF DR
Weight: 24.27% 28.1% -
Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C USD EUR
Weight: 29.13% 27.0% -
Xetra-Gold
Weight: 9.71% 4.8% -
iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc)
Weight: 2.91% 4.7%
Risk contribution makes the hierarchy brutally clear: the three big broad equity ETFs carry over 90% of total portfolio risk, and the emerging markets fund is punching a bit above its weight. The semiconductor ETF is the weird one: less than 3% weight but almost 5% of the risk — that’s a tiny position making a lot of noise. Risk contribution is like checking who’s actually causing the drama in a group chat, not just who’s technically in it. Gold looks chill, contributing only half as much risk as its weight would suggest. Overall, most of the wild swings come from a few plain-vanilla index funds plus one small but excitable satellite.
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 absolutely drags the current mix. With a Sharpe ratio of 1.33 — that’s return per unit of risk — the portfolio sits a full 6.66 percentage points below what could be achieved using the exact same ingredients, just in different weights. The “optimal” version has a Sharpe over 2.0 and much higher return for only modestly more volatility, while the minimum variance version gets similar returns with lower risk. Translation: this is not a bad set of funds, just a clumsy arrangement. It’s like owning a well-equipped kitchen and still burning toast — the tools are fine, the proportions are off.
Ongoing product costs
- Xtrackers MSCI World ex USA UCITS ETF 1C USD EUR 0.15%
- Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc 0.07%
- iShares MSCI Global Semiconductors UCITS ETF USD (Acc) 0.35%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.08%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio behaves like it knows what it’s doing. A total TER of around 0.08% is impressively low — that’s “did you mistype this?” territory. Even the semiconductor ETF at 0.35% is mildly pricey but not offensive given how niche it is. Fees are the slow leak that normally flattens performance over time; here, the leak is more like a pinprick. You’re essentially getting a global equity portfolio plus some thematic spice at budget airline costs, without the usual “hidden surcharge” feeling. If something underperforms here, it won’t be because the funds were quietly eating the returns.
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