Roast mode 🔥

Comfortable index hugger pretending to be clever while triple dipping the same global stocks

Report created on Apr 30, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

Structurally this portfolio is three flavors of the same ice cream: global index, US index, and global value, all equity, all public markets, all very… normal. On paper it looks balanced with a 40/30/30 split, but in practice it’s just multiple routes back to the same handful of big global names. The ACWI and S&P 500 funds are basically cousins, and the value ETF sprinkles a slightly different seasoning on top. The end result is more “committee compromise” than clear strategy. It’s not disastrous, just mildly incoherent: lots of overlap, not much true differentiation, and a diversification score flattered by owning the same stuff three times.

Growth Info

Historically the portfolio has ridden a very friendly market wave and surfed it well: €1,000 becoming €1,609 in under three years and a chunky 21.06% CAGR. That’s a touch ahead of both the US and global benchmarks, which is nice, but let’s not frame this as genius. With a max drawdown of -20.82%, when things hurt, they really hurt, and it took six months to claw back. Also, 90% of returns came from just 20 days — that’s not smooth compounding, that’s “don’t blink or you miss it.” Past data is yesterday’s weather: informative, but zero guarantees the storm pattern repeats.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection politely reminds that markets don’t care about backtests. Monte Carlo is basically a thousand alternate universes where returns bounce around randomly based on past volatility. Here, the median outcome after 15 years is €2,775 from €1,000, with a wide “could be fine, could be awkward” band from €976 to €7,593. That’s everything from “barely broke even” to “I’m a market genius by accident.” An 8.12% average simulated annual return is respectable, but the 25% chance of ending up negative in real terms is the quiet punchline. Future returns will not ask this portfolio for permission before misbehaving.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class diversification here is basically a rumor: it’s 100% stocks, zero anything else. No bonds, no cash buffer, no alternatives — just pure equity exposure dressed up as “balanced.” That 4/7 risk score is honest; this thing lives and dies with the stock market mood swings. In calm times, that feels bold and efficient. In ugly times, it’s just undiluted pain. Asset classes are like food groups: this portfolio is all protein shakes and no vegetables. It’s simple and easy to understand, but let’s not pretend it’s structurally cautious or meaningfully layered.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    31%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Health Care
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    9%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Basic Materials
    3%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, this portfolio is clearly enjoying the growth party: 31% in technology, and then a long tail of “everyone else.” Financials at 15% and industrials at 10% keep up appearances, but tech is the main character here. With healthcare, telecom, and consumer sectors sprinkled in single digits, diversification exists, but it’s not exactly evenly shared. This setup shines when the innovation narrative is hot and becomes a lot less charming if sentiment flips away from growth and mega-platforms. It’s like building a band where the lead guitarist is turned up to 11 and everyone else is playing quietly in the background.

Regions Info

  • North America
    71%
  • Europe Developed
    15%
  • Japan
    8%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

Geographically, this is a very predictable love letter to North America: 71% there, then a token nod to the rest of the world. Developed Europe at 15% is basically window dressing, Japan at 8% is respectable but not game-changing, and everything else is spare change. For a European client, this is effectively outsourcing their future to US market dominance continuing forever. That may work, but it’s absolutely a bet, not some neutral, natural state of the world. The rest of the globe is invited to the party but clearly stuck at the kids’ table.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    42%
  • Mega-cap
    40%
  • Mid-cap
    17%

On market cap, this portfolio is shamelessly starstruck: 40% mega-cap, 42% large-cap, and a measly 17% mid-cap. Small caps don’t even show up to the party. This is the financial equivalent of only trusting companies that already have stadium naming rights and their own PR departments. The upside is lower idiosyncratic blow-up risk; the downside is that it behaves a lot like a generic mega-cap index, for better or worse. It’s stability over spice: fewer wobbles, but less chance of doing anything particularly original versus the usual global benchmarks.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.15%
    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
    3.65%
    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
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.63%
    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
    1.97%
    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
  • Micron Technology Inc
    1.63%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.63%
    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
    1.40%
    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
    1.35%
    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.
    1.22%
    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
  • Cisco Systems Inc
    1.05%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Top 10 total 20.70%

The look-through holdings tell the real story: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta — the standard mega-cap tech fan club — all sitting on top. NVIDIA alone at 4.15% and Apple at 3.65% show the overlap problem: the same stocks are being bought through multiple ETFs. That’s not diversification, that’s paying three different waiters to bring the same dish. And remember, this is only from top-10 holdings; real overlap is higher. The portfolio pretends to spread risk across funds but keeps coming back to the same handful of household names driving the show.

Risk contribution Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    Weight: 40.00%
    40.1%
  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    Weight: 30.00%
    32.1%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    Weight: 30.00%
    27.8%

Risk contribution is refreshingly boring: each ETF is pulling risk broadly in line with its weight. The ACWI fund at 40% weight delivers 40.13% of risk, the S&P 500 at 30% weight delivers 32.07% of risk, and the value ETF slightly under-punches at 27.8%. No single position is wildly over-leveraging the portfolio, which is good, but also underlines how homogenous the setup is. When everything behaves similarly, risk distribution is neat on paper, but the entire structure still leans on the same underlying equity engine, with no true shock absorbers anywhere.

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

The correlation story is where the pretending stops: the SPDR S&P 500 and the SPDR MSCI ACWI move “almost identically.” Translation: two of the three funds are basically dancing to the same song. Correlation just measures how often things move together; here, it’s “almost always.” That means when markets fall, these two won’t politely take turns suffering — they’ll both go down in sync. Having both is less like owning two diversifiers and more like wearing two identical helmets and no seatbelt. Comforting visually, functionally redundant.

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 leaving performance on the table with the current mix. The Sharpe ratio — think “return per unit of risk taken” — is 1.21, while the optimal combo of *the exact same holdings* could push that up to 1.56 at similar risk. The portfolio sits about 1.65 percentage points below the frontier at its risk level, meaning it’s paying for volatility it doesn’t fully use. Translation: same ingredients, mediocre recipe. Even the minimum variance version with lower risk still has a Sharpe of 1.5. The math is basically yelling, “Nice funds, clumsy proportions.”

Ongoing product costs Info

  • 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 0.45%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.27%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio doesn’t embarrass itself. A total TER of 0.27% is perfectly reasonable for a three-ETF setup, even with that ACWI fund charging a slightly cheeky 0.45%. You’re not being robbed blind, but you’re not exactly at rock-bottom bargain pricing either. It’s more “sensible supermarket own-brand” than “premium organic markup” or “bare-minimum discount.” For a structure that mostly hugs global indices and repeats exposures, the fees are acceptable — though there’s a faint whiff of paying twice to own the same mega-caps through overlapping wrappers.

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