Roast mode 🔥

Two index funds pretending to be diversified while secretly worshipping the same US megacap tech gods

Report created on May 11, 2026

Risk profile Info

3/7
Cautious
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is basically a two-fund matryoshka doll: one big US index fund wrapped inside an all-world fund that’s mostly… the same US index. On paper it looks diversified and grown-up; under the hood it’s “S&P 500 plus S&P 500 with decorations.” For a cautious profile and a 3/7 risk score, 100% equities with a giant US core is a little ambitious. Structurally it’s clean and simple, but also weirdly redundant: you’re paying for “global” while already owning the thing that dominates that global slice. The result is a portfolio that looks more complex than it is, like calling chips and fries two different food groups.

Growth Info

Historically this thing has flown, turning £1,000 into £1,646 in under three years with a smoking 18.94% CAGR. That’s beating both the US market and the global market, so the recent past has been kind. But notice the -18.72% max drawdown: for something labelled “cautious,” it behaved like it didn’t read its own risk label. Also, 90% of returns came from just 22 days — that’s “miss a few parties and you miss the whole story” territory. And like all performance charts, this is yesterday’s weather: helpful context, zero guarantee the storm tracks stay this friendly.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo simulation is the financial equivalent of running thousands of alternate universes and averaging the chaos. Median outcome of £2,796 from £1,000 over 15 years is decent, but the possible range of £985 to £8,063 screams “buckle up.” About 76% of simulations end positive, which is good odds but not a free win. The 8.36% annualized return across simulations is solid, yet it hides how wildly paths can differ. Some paths crawl, some boom, some just sit there and sulk. As always, simulations are excellent storytellers and terrible fortune-tellers.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset classes: there’s just one. This is 100% stocks, zero bonds, zero cash, zero anything else. For a portfolio tagged “cautious,” that’s like calling a roller coaster “slightly bumpy transport.” Equities are the growth engine, but they’re also where the drama lives — crashes, spikes, and those fun moments where everything falls together. Having only one asset class means no built-in shock absorbers; if stocks sneeze, the whole portfolio catches pneumonia. The upside is simplicity and clarity; the downside is that the risk rating looks more like branding than an accurate reflection of what’s actually going on.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    31%
  • Financials
    14%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    10%
  • Telecommunications
    10%
  • Industrials
    9%
  • Health Care
    9%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, this portfolio is a tech fan club with supporting characters. Technology at 31% is the lead singer, with financials and consumer discretionary playing backup, and everything else sharing the last slice of pizza. The sector mix isn’t absurd relative to big indexes, but let’s be honest: a third in tech means when that crowd has mood swings, so does the whole portfolio. Defensive sectors like utilities and real estate are basically cameos, not stabilizers. This setup works as long as the growth narrative keeps singing; if not, it’s a lot of eggs rocking in the same high-volatility basket.

Regions Info

  • North America
    87%
  • Europe Developed
    5%
  • Japan
    2%
  • Asia Developed
    2%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%
  • Australasia
    1%

Geography here is “USA plus a sightseeing tour.” North America at 87% means almost nine out of every ten pounds are betting on one region’s fate. Europe, Japan, and the rest of the world might as well be a garnish. For something carrying an “All-World” fund, the result is still overwhelmingly America-first — because that’s what global cap-weighting does. It’s not wrong, it’s just very concentrated in one economic and political system. If that system shines, great. If it stumbles, there isn’t much of the portfolio that didn’t get the memo at the same time.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    47%
  • Large-cap
    35%
  • Mid-cap
    17%
  • Small-cap
    1%

Market cap exposure is basically a megacap red carpet: 47% mega, 35% large, 17% mid, and a lonely 1% in small. This portfolio clearly doesn’t trust anything that doesn’t already have a corporate jet. That tilt means stability in the sense of “fewer total blow-ups,” but also heavy reliance on a small group of huge companies to keep carrying the story. Smaller companies barely exist here, so any potential small-cap premium is left on the table. It’s very index-standard, very smooth-looking — and very much at the mercy of a few giants not tripping over themselves.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    6.51%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Apple Inc
    5.76%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Microsoft Corporation
    4.26%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Amazon.com Inc
    3.15%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    2.59%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Broadcom Inc
    2.27%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    2.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.93%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Tesla Inc
    1.63%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Berkshire Hathaway Inc
    1.04%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
  • Top 10 total 31.21%

The look-through holdings read like the Magnificent Seven plus friends convention: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (twice), Broadcom, Meta, Tesla, Berkshire. These names are turning up via both funds, meaning there’s overlap on top of overlap. With only top-10 data, the actual duplication is probably worse than it looks. So while the portfolio pretends to be two separate funds, the underlying reality is a narrow crowd of US megacap growth doing the heavy lifting. If that clique decides to take a break, the portfolio doesn’t have many truly independent voices backing them up.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc
    Weight: 66.00%
    67.2%
  • Invesco FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumalation
    Weight: 34.00%
    32.8%

Risk contribution is refreshingly boring here: the S&P 500 fund is 66% of the weight and about 67% of the risk, while the All-World sits at 34% weight and 33% risk. No secret troublemaker hiding in the corner — just two big, highly similar engines sharing the load. The problem isn’t imbalance, it’s redundancy: all the risk comes from the same basic equity beta dressed in slightly different flags. For something meant to feel “cautious,” the risk is both concentrated in one asset class and amplified by the tight relationship between the two funds.

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, this portfolio is annoyingly competent. Sharpe of 1.15 versus 1.42 for the optimal mix, and the note says it’s on or very near the frontier. Translation: for these exact ingredients, the risk/return tradeoff is actually pretty efficient. The gap to the optimal portfolio is there, but it’s a tuning issue, not a disaster. So the roast isn’t about inefficiency — it’s about what’s missing. You’ve optimized within a very narrow universe of two highly correlated equity funds, like perfectly arranging deckchairs on a single ship instead of deciding whether you wanted a lifeboat too.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 UCITS Acc 0.07%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.05%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio behaves like a responsible adult. A total TER of 0.05% is impressively low — index-level cheap, no complaints. It’s almost suspiciously good, like you accidentally did the right thing while just clicking the first popular ETFs you saw. The only mild jab is that you’re paying (a little) twice for exposure that overlaps heavily, but at these fee levels the inefficiency is more conceptual than financial. In the grand scheme of things, expenses are not the villain here; the asset mix and concentration are doing that job just fine.

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