Roast mode 🔥

This portfolio pretends to love value but is secretly just a world market tech junkie

Report created on May 8, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

4/5
Broadly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

Structurally this thing is a matryoshka doll of the same idea: “own the whole world… and then own it again.” Over half is a global all‑cap fund, then 15% more in the S&P 500, which the global fund already owns, plus two value factor funds layered on top. It’s like ordering a burger, then adding extra bread and calling it culinary innovation. The end result is more cosmetic complexity than real diversification. Under the hood it’s a world equity index with a mild value garnish and a US over-scoop, not some finely tuned multi-engine machine. Most of the “four funds” story is just different wrappers around the same global stock stew.

Growth Info

Historically, the portfolio has been embarrassingly effective: ~24.4% CAGR since late 2023, turning €1,000 into €1,735. That comfortably beats both the US and global market benchmarks by around 3.6–3.8 percentage points a year. Of course, this sprint happened in a period that was very kind to global equities, especially large tech and quality names, which this portfolio is clearly high on. The max drawdown of about -21% shows it can still punch you in the face when markets wobble, even while slightly less painful than the US benchmark. Past data here is a highlight reel, not a contract — yesterday’s wind at the back can easily become tomorrow’s headwind.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection basically says, “temper those performance screenshots.” Simulations take the historical risk/return profile and shake it through 1,000 alternate futures, spitting out a median 15‑year outcome of about €2,659 from €1,000. The likely range runs from “meh” (€1,753) to “nice surprise” (€4,056), with a not‑insane chance of ending close to where you started or worse. That’s Monte Carlo in plain English: roll the dice on volatility thousands of times and see where the chips usually land. The portfolio’s all‑equity nature gives it decent upside but no safety net, so the results are wide — which is exactly what uncompromising stock exposure looks like over long stretches.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class “diversification” here is easy to summarize: stocks, stocks, and also… stocks. A 100% equity allocation is like driving everywhere in fifth gear — fast when roads are smooth, ugly when there’s gravel. There’s zero ballast from bonds, cash, or alternatives to cushion bad years, so the entire ride lives and dies with global equity markets. For a portfolio labeled “balanced,” this looks suspiciously unbalanced at the asset-class level. The risk score of 4/7 tries to sound moderate, but under the hood this is a full‑equity machine dressed in a responsible‑sounding costume. When downturns hit, everything here gets dragged to the same party, and it’s not the fun kind.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    32%
  • Financials
    16%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, the portfolio talks a big “value” game but is clearly still worshipping at the altar of tech, with technology sitting at 32%. That’s not a sprinkle; that’s domination. Financials in second place at 16% plus decent industrial and telecom exposure give an appearance of balance, but the top holdings list (NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, etc.) tells the real story: this is growth royalty in value clothing. It’s like wearing a thrift-store jacket over a designer suit and insisting you’re a bargain hunter. If tech sentiment cools, a third of the equity exposure catches the flu on the same day, and the portfolio’s factor branding won’t save it.

Regions Info

  • North America
    59%
  • Europe Developed
    12%
  • Asia Developed
    11%
  • Asia Emerging
    8%
  • Japan
    6%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Europe Emerging
    1%

Geographically, this is basically “US with guest appearances.” Around 59% in North America dominates, with Europe Developed and Asia Developed picking up respectable but clearly secondary roles. Emerging markets get a token 8% plus some crumbs elsewhere, mostly thanks to that EM value ETF. For something marketed as “global,” it’s still very much America plus supporting cast, which happens to match global market cap but not exactly “imaginative.” The world is technically represented, but the weight of outcomes still hangs heavily on US policy, US earnings, and US investor mood. It’s a world tour where most of the nights are still spent in New York.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    48%
  • Large-cap
    37%
  • Mid-cap
    15%

Market cap exposure is basically “big or bigger”: 48% mega‑cap, 37% large‑cap, and a lonely 15% mid‑cap. This is the corporate equivalent of only trusting companies that could buy small countries. On the plus side, larger firms tend to be more liquid and somewhat more stable than tiny hopefuls. On the minus side, the portfolio isn’t exactly exploring the rest of the market where different growth and risk dynamics live. It’s hugging the biggest names so tightly that index leadership becomes portfolio destiny. When mega‑caps lead, everything looks genius; when they stall, the “diversification” suddenly feels suspiciously one‑dimensional.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Apple Inc
    3.28%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    2.38%
    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
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.33%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.76%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.46%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.23%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.10%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    0.92%
    Part of fund(s):
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Top 10 total 19.41%

The look‑through holdings are a who’s who of the usual suspects: NVIDIA, Apple, TSMC, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla — basically the Wall Street Mount Rushmore. Despite pretending to run a value tilt, the top exposures are pure growth celebrities that appear across multiple ETFs. That overlap builds hidden concentration: when NVIDIA sneezes, several funds catch the cold at once. And remember, this overlap view only covers ETF top 10s, so the real duplication is worse than it looks. The portfolio ends up diversified by fund name but not by underlying drivers. Different wrappers, same handful of megacaps quietly steering the ship from every deck.

Risk contribution Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    Weight: 55.00%
    55.0%
  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    Weight: 15.00%
    15.6%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 15.00%
    15.6%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    Weight: 15.00%
    13.8%

Risk contribution is refreshingly blunt: the big global fund at 55% weight contributes almost exactly 55% of portfolio risk, so it’s not hiding anything. The S&P 500 and EM value ETFs each sit at 15% weight and contribute about 15–16% of risk, meaning they punch roughly in proportion to size. No single position is secretly hijacking volatility, which is nice, but it also means the overall risk profile is just “pure global equity beta plus a couple of loud accents.” Top 3 positions adding up to over 86% of risk confirms that the rest of the lineup is mostly decorative — if this thing swings, it’s because the big three decided to move.

Redundant positions Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    High correlation

Correlation-wise, the “shocking” finding is that a global equity ETF and an S&P 500 ETF move almost identically. Who could have guessed that a world index dominated by US stocks and a pure US index would dance the same choreography? Holding both is like owning two umbrellas for the same storm: slightly different colors, same wetness outcome. High correlation means that when things go wrong in the US, both of these chunks slip at the same time, giving no real diversification when it actually matters. The portfolio doesn’t reduce market risk so much as repeat it with slightly different accents and ticker symbols.

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 is pretty blunt: the current portfolio is 3.03 percentage points below what’s achievable with the same ingredients. In English, that means the risk/return tradeoff is leaving noticeable performance on the table for the level of volatility taken. The optimal mix of these four funds could reach a Sharpe ratio of 1.96 versus the current 1.4 — that’s a big gap in how much return you squeeze out per unit of pain. Even the minimum‑variance combo beats today’s Sharpe with slightly lower risk. This isn’t about adding fancy products; just rearranging existing weights could land closer to the “best possible” curve. Right now, it’s basically a good pantry used with a slightly clumsy recipe.

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%
  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR 0.03%
  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF 0.12%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.18%

Costs are the least roastable part of this setup — a total TER of around 0.18% is pretty chill. The global and S&P funds are cheap workhorses, while the factor ETFs add a bit of fee drag but nothing outrageous. It’s like flying economy with one slightly overpriced snack; annoying in principle, not lethal in practice. The real joke is that you’re paying for smart factor tilts that end up partly diluted by the big vanilla global ETF. So the fee story is “good” but not “surgical.” Still, for a portfolio that accidentally mimics a world index with extra drama, at least it isn’t charging luxury prices for the experience.

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