This portfolio has only about 4 months of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.

Concentrated European quality stocks with strong semiconductor tilt and potential for more efficient diversification

Report created on Mar 24, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This is a focused, stock‑only growth portfolio built around a handful of European names plus one global ETF. Direct single stocks make up almost 90% of the value, with the Vanguard global equity ETF providing the remaining slice as a broad diversifier. The biggest single position is over 20%, and the top three positions together exceed 50%, so this isn’t a “set and forget” index mix but a conviction-driven basket. That structure can be powerful when stock picking is right, yet it also makes results much more sensitive to what happens to a few companies. Anyone using a setup like this should be comfortable watching some larger swings and reviewing positions regularly.

Growth Info

Over the short backtest, €1,000 grew to about €1,080, a very strong 29.5% annualised gain versus negative returns for both US and global benchmarks. Max drawdown, meaning the largest peak‑to‑trough drop, was about -10% compared with roughly -5% for the benchmarks, so the ride has been bumpier but much more rewarding in this period. A striking detail is that 90% of returns came from just two days, showing how concentrated gains can be in time. Because this history is only a few months, it mainly shows how the portfolio behaved in one specific market phase, not how it might hold up across a full cycle.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection uses the portfolio’s recent ups and downs to simulate 1,000 different 10‑year paths for a €1,000 investment. Think of it as replaying history with the sequence of good and bad days shuffled to show a range of possible futures. The median outcome is strong, with typical scenarios more than tripling, but the 5th percentile shows that large losses are also possible, with some paths losing over 70%. The average annualised return across simulations is very high, yet this is based on only 74 data points, far too little to treat as a dependable forecast. It’s better viewed as a rough risk‑reward sketch, not a plan to bank on.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

All assets are in stocks, with no bonds, cash substitutes, or alternatives above the 2% threshold. That matches a growth‑oriented profile where the priority is long‑term appreciation rather than smoothing short‑term volatility. A 100% equity stance typically outperforms safer mixes over long horizons but can fall much more in market downturns. Compared with broader multi‑asset benchmarks that mix in fixed income and other diversifiers, this approach deliberately accepts higher swings. A practical takeaway is that anyone using a structure like this usually wants a long time horizon and enough psychological and financial flexibility to ride out major equity drawdowns without being forced to sell at bad moments.

Sectors Info

  • No data
    51%
  • Technology
    26%
  • Industrials
    17%
  • Financials
    2%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    1%
  • Telecommunications
    1%
  • Health Care
    1%
  • Consumer Staples
    1%

Sector exposure is heavily tilted toward a single “unknown / unclassified” bucket plus technology and industrials, with only tiny slices in financials, consumer, communication, and healthcare. In practice, those large named holdings point to a strong tilt toward semiconductors, automation, and capital goods rather than a broad cross‑section of the economy. That can work very well when those areas benefit from strong demand cycles or structural trends, but it may lag when capital spending slows or tech sentiment reverses. A more benchmark‑like sector spread tends to even out those cycles, while a concentrated sector bet magnifies them. The current mix is clearly on the high‑conviction side of that spectrum.

Regions Info

  • Europe Developed
    77%
  • North America
    21%
  • Japan
    1%
  • Asia Emerging
    1%
  • Asia Developed
    1%

Geographically, exposure is dominated by developed Europe at about 77%, with roughly 21% in North America and only minimal allocations to Japan and the rest of Asia. Relative to global equity benchmarks, which are usually heavily weighted toward North America, this is a clear European overweight and a notable underweight in US and other regions. That regional focus can be advantageous if European industrial and tech names outperform, but it also ties portfolio fortunes more closely to European growth, regulation, and currency dynamics. A more globally neutral mix would spread country‑specific risks more widely; here, performance will lean quite heavily on how Europe fares versus the rest of the world.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    44%
  • Mega-cap
    28%
  • Mid-cap
    23%
  • No data
    6%

By market capitalisation, the portfolio leans toward large and very large companies: about 44% in big caps, 28% in mega caps, and most of the rest in mid caps. That means most holdings are established businesses with significant market presence and liquidity, which generally makes them easier to trade and somewhat more resilient than very small companies in stressed markets. At the same time, mid‑cap exposure can still add a bit of extra growth potential and volatility. This mix is roughly in line with many broad equity benchmarks, so from a size perspective the structure is quite conventional. The more distinctive traits come from sector and regional tilts, not from size bias.

True holdings Info

  • BE Semiconductor Industries NV
    20.82%
  • ABB Ltd
    16.40%
  • Airbus SE
    15.56%
  • ASML Holding NV
    8.97%
  • Intel Corporation
    7.87%
  • Nestlé S.A
    7.47%
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    6.17%
  • Sika AG
    5.85%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    0.46%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
  • Apple Inc
    0.43%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
  • Top 10 total 90.00%

Looking through all holdings, risk and return are dominated by the direct stock positions rather than the ETF. BE Semiconductor, ABB, Airbus, ASML, Intel, Nestlé, AMD, and Sika account for nearly the entire portfolio; the ETF currently adds only small indirect exposure to mega‑caps like NVIDIA and Apple. Overlap risk from the ETF is low right now because the big single stocks are not major positions in that fund’s top ten. The real “hidden” concentration is simply that the same themes and regions are repeated across many of the direct holdings. That’s fine if intentional, but it’s worth being clear about how much is riding on a few related ideas.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 55%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 94%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 89%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 69%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 89%

Factor exposure shows strong tilts toward quality, yield, and momentum, with moderate value and roughly neutral low volatility and size. Factor investing is about targeting traits that drive returns over time, like buying profitable, stable firms (quality) or stocks with strong recent performance (momentum). A quality‑momentum blend often does well in uptrends and in environments where investors reward earnings strength, while high yield suggests a useful income component from dividends. However, momentum can reverse sharply when market leadership changes, and yield‑oriented stocks may lag in strong growth or rate‑rising cycles. Overall, this factor mix looks thoughtfully aligned with historically rewarded characteristics, which is a positive sign for long‑term risk‑adjusted behaviour.

Risk contribution Info

  • BE Semiconductor Industries NV
    Weight: 20.82%
    44.2%
  • ASML Holding NV
    Weight: 8.97%
    12.9%
  • Intel Corporation
    Weight: 7.87%
    11.4%
  • Airbus SE
    Weight: 15.56%
    10.4%
  • ABB Ltd
    Weight: 16.40%
    9.0%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 87.9%

Risk contribution reveals that BE Semiconductor, at about 21% weight, drives over 44% of total portfolio volatility. ASML and Intel also punch above their weights, so the top three holdings contribute nearly 70% of overall risk. Risk contribution is like asking which instruments are actually the loudest in the orchestra, not just how many there are. When one stock’s risk‑to‑weight ratio is above two, as with BE Semiconductor, portfolio outcomes become highly sensitive to its news flow and cycle. If that’s intentional, it should be a conscious, monitored choice. If not, trimming and reallocating towards other holdings is a classic way to align risk with the desired level of conviction.

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 risk‑return chart, the current portfolio sits below the efficient frontier, meaning it’s not making the most of its risk level given the existing holdings. The efficient frontier is the curve of best possible risk‑return combinations you can get just by changing weights, and the Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of risk taken. With a Sharpe around 1.22 versus a much higher figure for the optimal mix, there’s room to improve by reweighting toward that more efficient point. Importantly, this doesn’t require adding new securities; it’s about balancing what’s already there so that concentration and volatility are better aligned with the desired overall profile.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation 0.19%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.02%

Costs are impressively low, with the only ongoing fee coming from the Vanguard All‑World ETF at about 0.19% and a total portfolio TER around 0.02%. Since most capital is in direct stocks, there’s virtually no drag from fund expenses. Over decades, keeping costs this low can make a surprisingly big difference, because every fraction of a percent saved compounds like extra return. This setup is well‑aligned with best practices for long‑term investing, where low fees are one of the few things that are fully under control. The main cost focus here is more about trading frequency and tax efficiency rather than ongoing product charges.

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