Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine Roast mode 🔥

Cautious label wild heart this portfolio pretends to be shy while flirting with chaos

Report created on May 2, 2026

Risk profile Info

3/7
Cautious
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

5/5
Highly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio looks like it was built by committee: half sensible multi-asset core, half “hold my beer” side bets. There’s a neat spread of global equity ETFs, a ladder of short-to-medium euro government bonds, and then… single-stock Novo Nordisk, a Slovenia ETF, gold, and two cryptos stapled on. Structurally, it’s like a balanced fund that keeps sneaking out the window at night. The “cautious” label is doing heroic amounts of work here. Composition-wise, it’s neither clean core-satellite nor a clear theme; it’s more like someone kept adding ideas over time without deleting old ones. The end result is functional, but aesthetically and logically messy.

Growth Info

Historically, the portfolio has delivered a very punchy 20.48% CAGR, turning €1,000 into about €1,540 in under three years. That’s strong, but still manages to underperform both the US market and the global market, which did even better while taking harder hits. Max drawdown of -13.35% is actually pretty tame compared with the benchmarks’ -21% to -23%, so it traded some upside for a softer ride. Only 27 days created 90% of returns, which means outcomes hinged on a tiny handful of good days. Past data here is flattering, but it’s still yesterday’s weather report, not a forecast.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projections take the portfolio’s personality and run 1,000 alternate futures, dice-roll style. Median outcome after 15 years is around €2,479 from €1,000, with a wide possible range from “mildly disappointing” €1,244 to “that actually worked” €4,634. The simulated annualized return of 6.43% is a lot more boring than the recent 20%+ party, reminding that markets do not normally hand out three-year sugar highs forever. Roughly three-quarters of scenarios end positive, which is good, but a one-in-four shot at ending flat or worse is still non-trivial. In short, the simulation quietly says: calm down, this thing bleeds like any other risk asset.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    42%
  • Bonds
    30%
  • No data
    18%
  • Other
    5%
  • Crypto
    5%

On the surface, the asset class mix looks “grown-up”: 42% stocks, 30% bonds, 5% other, 5% crypto, and a mysterious 18% “No data” black box. For something tagged as cautious, having as much in crypto as in “other” is a choice. The bond chunk does help to dull the edges, but then a slice of Bitcoin and Ethereum shows up like energy drinks in a health smoothie. The big “No data” bucket keeps things opaque — it’s diversification you can’t actually see. Overall, it’s a halfway sensible stock–bond balance with just enough weirdness to make risk labels feel slightly optimistic.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    16%
  • No data
    5%
  • Crypto
    5%
  • Financials
    5%
  • Industrials
    4%
  • Telecommunications
    3%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    3%
  • Health Care
    2%
  • Consumer Staples
    1%
  • Energy
    1%
  • Basic Materials
    1%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, the portfolio is clearly a bit tech-smitten, with technology sitting at 16% of exposure. That’s not full-blown addiction, but it’s definitely a crush. Then there’s a scatter of financials, industrials, telecoms, and the usual token allocations to everything else so nothing feels too lonely. Crypto gets its own 5% line, basically the “chaos” sector. The 5% “No data” leaves some sector risk unlabelled, like ingredients hidden behind “secret spice mix.” It’s not an outrageous tilt, but this isn’t sector-agnostic either — it’s leaning into growthy, cyclic stuff more than the sleepy, utility-style ballast that a truly cautious setup might flaunt.

Regions Info

  • North America
    24%
  • Europe Developed
    9%
  • Japan
    4%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geographically, the portfolio screams “developed-markets comfort zone.” Around 24% in North America versus only 9% in developed Europe looks funny for a Europe-based client, like preferring takeout from across the ocean over the restaurant downstairs. Japan and other developed Asia get small but polite nods, while emerging Asia clocks in at a token 2%. There’s no sense of genuine global balance here; it’s more “US first, then some local seasoning, then tiny sprinkles of the rest.” For something branded highly diversified, it still manages to look suspiciously like a slightly European-flavored global benchmark clone.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    19%
  • Mega-cap
    18%
  • No data
    5%
  • Mid-cap
    5%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Market cap exposure is basically a mega/large-cap fan club: 18% mega, 19% large, 5% mid, with a “No data” 5% just to keep things mysterious. This is classic index behavior — big established names everywhere — so don’t expect hidden small-cap rocket ships doing exciting (or disastrous) things. On one hand, that’s boring in a good way: giants tend to wobble less than tiny hopefuls. On the other hand, it means the portfolio is piggybacking on the same crowded mega-cap trade as everyone else, with little exposure to the parts of the market that actually behave differently when the big kids get into trouble.

True holdings Info

  • Novo Nordisk A/S Class B
    5.00%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    2.29%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Apple Inc
    1.83%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.32%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    0.83%
    Part of fund(s):
    • iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    0.83%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • ASML Holding N.V.
    0.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    • Xtrackers Stoxx Europe 600 UCITS ETF
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    0.52%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Micron Technology Inc
    0.51%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
    • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    0.38%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
  • Top 10 total 14.14%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look-through data only covers about 20% of the portfolio, but even that small peek shows the usual mega-cap suspects running the show: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, TSMC, Alphabet, Meta, and friends. Novo Nordisk stands out as a lone 5% single-stock bet with no ETF backup — a proper solo diva position. Hidden overlap is guaranteed higher than reported because only ETF top-10s are captured, so those big tech names are likely double- or triple-dipping exposure. The result is a portfolio that looks diversified on the surface but quietly overfeeds the same global titans underneath, making it less independent than the ticker list pretends.

Risk contribution Info

  • SPDR S&P 500 UCITS ETF USD Acc
    Weight: 10.00%
    12.6%
  • Novo Nordisk A/S Class B
    Weight: 5.00%
    12.1%
  • Expat Slovenia SBI Top UCITS ETF
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.9%
  • Ethereum
    Weight: 2.50%
    9.2%
  • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C
    Weight: 5.00%
    9.1%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 52.9%

Risk contribution really exposes who’s actually driving the drama. Novo Nordisk at 5% weight chewing up 12.13% of total risk is doing main-character energy. Ethereum at 2.5% weight contributing 9.21% of risk is basically a tiny position with a megaphone. The S&P 500 ETF is reasonably proportional, but that 5% tech ETF delivering over 9% of risk underlines how concentrated that slice is. When the top three positions generate about a third of total portfolio risk, this stops looking as diversified as the brochure claims. Weight and risk are clearly not on speaking terms in this setup.

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.

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

The efficient frontier chart absolutely roasts the current setup. With a Sharpe ratio of 1.47 versus an optimal 2.94 using the *same* ingredients, this portfolio is 11 percentage points below what could be achieved just by rearranging weights. That means no new holdings, no fancy products — just less clumsy mixing. The minimum-variance option shows you could be way calmer at 2.07% risk, or way more effective at 11.30% risk, yet the current point manages to be neither here nor there. It’s like driving a decent car in second gear on the motorway: capable machine, mediocre usage.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares MSCI EM Asia UCITS ETF 0.20%
  • Invesco Euro Government Bond 1-3 Year UCITS ETF 0.10%
  • iShares Inflation Linked Government Bond UCITS 0.09%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Quality Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.30%
  • iShares MSCI World Momentum Factor UCITS 0.30%
  • iShares Edge MSCI World Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.30%
  • Xtrackers MSCI World Information Technology UCITS ETF 1C 0.25%
  • iShares Physical Gold ETC 0.25%
  • Xtrackers MSCI Japan UCITS ETF 1C 0.12%
  • Amundi Euro Government Bond 3-5Y UCITS ETF Acc EUR 0.16%
  • Multi Units Luxembourg - Lyxor EuroMTS 5-7Y Investment Grade (DR) UCITS ETF 0.16%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.12%

Costs are the one area where this portfolio accidentally looks like it knows what it’s doing. A total TER around 0.12% is impressively low given the number of moving parts and branded factor products floating around. It’s basically getting active-ish tilts and a zoo of ETFs at index-like pricing. That said, the complexity-to-cost ratio is still odd: a lot of different funds, sectors, and factors for an outcome that underperforms simple global or US benchmarks. Cheap confusion is still confusion; it’s just not overpaying for the privilege, which is at least a small moral victory.

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