Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it Roast mode 🔥

Confident US mega cap chaser hiding behind a flimsy value investing name tag

Report created on May 7, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is basically a giant S&P 500 smoothie with two small value-flavored ice cubes tossed in. Sixty‑five percent is straight US large-cap beta, then 20% Europe value and 15% EM value trying to make it look clever and “factor aware.” Structurally, it’s three funds pretending to be a grand strategy. Diversification score 3/5 is generous; this is one big engine with two sidecars. When one ETF is two‑thirds of the portfolio, it stops being “core plus satellites” and starts being “the core plus two optional accessories.” The structure screams “default choice with a late-stage value tweak” more than a consciously engineered mix.

Growth Info

Historically, the numbers look ridiculous in the good way: €1,000 becoming €1,699 in about 2.5 years and a 23.83% CAGR. CAGR is just the smoothed yearly growth rate, like averaging your speed on a road trip with a few speeding tickets. You even beat both the US and global markets by about 4 percentage points a year, which is not nothing. But that came with a near ‑21% drawdown, so it’s not exactly a gentle ride. And 90% of returns showing up in 23 days means the result hinges on a handful of lucky lightning strikes. Past data is yesterday’s weather, not a long‑term climate forecast.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection basically says: “Probably fine, but don’t get cocky.” Monte Carlo is just a fancy way of rolling the dice on thousands of possible future paths using historical volatility and returns as inputs. Median outcome of €2,670 after 15 years on €1,000 is decent, but the range is wide: from roughly break‑even (€981 at p5) to lottery‑ticket‑adjacent (€7,418 at p95). A 73% chance of a positive 15‑year return sounds reassuring until realizing it also means roughly 1-in-4 simulations end flat or worse. The 8.04% annualized across all simulations is nice, but it’s a statistical middle, not a promise.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset-class “diversification” here is the financial equivalent of eating only one food group. You are 100% in stocks, zero in bonds, zero in anything else. For something called “balanced,” this is more caffeinated than the label admits. Being all‑equity means every market tantrum goes straight to the portfolio’s face with no buffer. Asset classes are supposed to be different shock absorbers in the same car; here it’s just four wheels made of the same rubber compound. The good news: the strategy is straightforward and not secretly hiding expensive alternatives. The bad news: when stocks sneeze, this entire portfolio gets pneumonia.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    30%
  • Financials
    15%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Health Care
    9%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Basic Materials
    4%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector-wise, this is tech‑tilted with a sensible costume on. Technology at 30% is a clear addiction, with the rest spread in respectable doses across financials, industrials, health care, and so on. On the surface, it looks roughly benchmark‑ish, but the dominance of US mega‑cap growth names (via the S&P 500) makes that 30% tech anything but mild. Sectors are supposed to diversify business risks; instead this setup leans heavily on the same growth-heavy engines everyone else is chasing, while the “value” sleeves mostly nibble at more cyclical areas. It’s a modern portfolio wearing a value badge while actually paying attention to Big Tech’s every move.

Regions Info

  • North America
    65%
  • Europe Developed
    19%
  • Asia Developed
    8%
  • Asia Emerging
    5%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Europe Emerging
    1%

Geographically, this is “America first, everyone else as a side quest.” North America at 65% absolutely dominates, with Europe Developed at 19% and the rest of the world fighting over crumbs. For a European investor, that’s a very strong home-away-from-home bias: trusting US markets more than your own region and vastly more than emerging ones. Geographic spread is supposed to reduce the impact of any single economy’s problems; here, if the US stumbles, the whole portfolio gets dragged with it. Surprisingly sensible that you at least touched Asia and Latin America, but those allocations are small enough to qualify as tourist visas, not residency.

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    46%
  • Large-cap
    38%
  • Mid-cap
    15%
  • Small-cap
    1%

Market cap exposure is a love letter to giants. With 46% in mega‑cap and 38% in large‑cap, this thing is basically an index‑hugging behemoth fan club. Mid‑caps at 15% and small‑caps at 1% are afterthoughts — like remembering vegetables exist after loading the plate with steak. Size diversification matters because smaller companies often behave differently across cycles; here, that “different” behavior is nearly absent. The portfolio will rise and fall mostly in line with the global mega‑cap narrative. If the corporate titans catch a cold, there’s very little in the portfolio that gets to say, “I do my own thing, thanks.”

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.91%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Apple Inc
    4.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Microsoft Corporation
    3.19%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.36%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.94%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.70%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    1.55%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Tesla Inc
    1.21%
    Part of fund(s):
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
  • Top 10 total 24.18%

The look‑through holdings are the usual suspects: Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, plus friends. Nvidia alone is almost 5%, with Apple above 4% and Microsoft north of 3%. And that’s just counting the top‑10 ETF holdings we can see; real overlaps are almost certainly higher. This is hidden concentration at its finest: one ticker appears in multiple ETFs and quietly hogs risk while pretending to be diversification. The portfolio may look like three funds, but underneath it’s a concentrated bet on the same handful of US tech and platform giants. If those names underperform, the “diversified” ETF wrapper won’t save the day.

Risk contribution Info

  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc EUR
    Weight: 65.00%
    69.6%
  • iShares Edge MSCI Europe Value Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc)
    Weight: 20.00%
    15.7%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 15.00%
    14.7%

Risk contribution tells you which positions actually move the needle, and here it’s basically one voice on the mic. The S&P 500 ETF is 65% of the weight but 70% of total risk, slightly over‑pulling its share. The Europe and EM value funds together contribute just under 31% of risk despite being 35% of the weight, meaning they’re the quieter passengers in the car. When three funds add up to 100% of risk, that’s normal; what’s less flattering is how lopsided the influence is. The headline is simple: this is a US large‑cap risk story with some decorative factor satellites.

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 politely points out that this portfolio is leaving performance on the table using the exact same ingredients. At a risk level of about 13.35%, the current mix sits 3.73 percentage points below the frontier. Translation: for the same volatility, a different weighting of these three ETFs could historically have delivered noticeably higher returns. Sharpe ratio — return per unit of risk — is 1.37 now, versus 1.89 for the optimal combination and 1.71 even for the minimum variance version. Being below the frontier is like driving with the handbrake slightly on: the engine’s fine, but the configuration is just inefficient.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD 0.40%
  • iShares Edge MSCI Europe Value Factor UCITS ETF EUR (Acc) 0.25%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.11%

On costs, you accidentally did something very sane. A total TER of 0.11% for the full mix is impressively low, especially given the 0.25% and 0.40% on the value factor funds. That means the huge S&P 500 position is doing heroic work keeping the blended fee down. TER — Total Expense Ratio — is the yearly drag for the privilege of owning the funds; here, that drag is more like a gentle nudge. You’re not donating much performance to the asset managers, which deserves a reluctant golf clap. The real inefficiencies live in the structure and factor story, not in the fee line.

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