Roast mode 🔥

A world tracker with a tiny value side quest and surprisingly spicy pricing for what it does

Report created on May 5, 2026

Risk profile Info

4/7
Balanced
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

4/5
Broadly Diversified
Less diversification More diversification

Positions

This portfolio is basically a single all‑world fund with a small “look I did something” tilt bolted on. Ninety percent is one ACWI ETF doing all the heavy lifting, while the 10% emerging markets value fund is like decorative garnish – visible, but not changing the meal much. Structurally it’s simple to the point of boredom, which is fine, except you’re paying mid‑shelf fees for a supermarket index setup. The big picture: this isn’t some clever multi‑engine machine, it’s a one‑engine plane with a fancy sticker on the wing. At least it’s easy to understand: if the global stock market sneezes, this thing catches the full cold.

Growth Info

Historically, this portfolio has done the classic “global equity passenger” thing: turned €1,000 into €2,478, which is solid, but not legendary. The CAGR of 13.02% is basically hugging the global market, just 0.11% ahead, but trails the US market by a chunky 2.39% a year. That’s the cost of not going all‑in on the US rocket ship. The max drawdown at -33.23% matches the usual 2020 faceplant, so there’s no hidden resilience here, just standard equity pain. And needing only 31 days for 90% of returns screams “miss a few good days and the story changes fast.”

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is basically telling a fairytale with a legal disclaimer: past chaos fed into a simulator to guess future chaos. Median outcome takes €1,000 to about €2,700 in 15 years, which is decent but nowhere near the historical joyride. The range from €924 to €7,848 says “anything from mildly disappointing to pleasantly ridiculous could happen.” A 72.6% chance of ending positive sounds comforting until you realise that’s still more than one in four simulations ending flat or worse. As usual, simulations are like weather apps: directionally useful, completely wrong in the details when it actually matters.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    100%

Asset class breakdown: 100% stocks, 0% imagination. This thing is an “all gas, no brakes” vehicle pretending to be “balanced” because a questionnaire said so. There’s no bonds, no cash buffer, nothing that behaves differently when stocks have a tantrum. Being 100% in equities is like living in a house made entirely of windows – great views, but when storms hit, everything shakes at once. Sure, over long stretches stocks tend to outgrow other stuff, but the ride can be violently unfun. If this is “balanced,” the scales are glued to the equity side.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    28%
  • Financials
    17%
  • Industrials
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Energy
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    5%
  • Basic Materials
    5%
  • Utilities
    3%
  • Real Estate
    2%

Sector allocation is basically tech royalty with supporting cast. Technology at 28% is a clear addiction, while financials at 17% and industrials at 10% round out the “business as usual” lineup. Nothing is absurdly concentrated, but don’t kid yourself: one big narrative shift in tech and this portfolio will absolutely feel it. The lower weights in utilities and real estate show there’s almost no ballast – it’s all cyclicals and growthy stories. This is not some careful barbell of boring and exciting; it’s mostly exciting with a tiny sprinkle of “please be stable” around the edges.

Regions Info

  • North America
    60%
  • Europe Developed
    13%
  • Asia Developed
    10%
  • Asia Emerging
    8%
  • Japan
    5%
  • Latin America
    2%
  • Australasia
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%
  • Europe Emerging
    1%

Geographically, this looks like a “world” portfolio that quietly thinks the world means “mostly the US.” Sixty percent in North America does all the talking, with Europe and Asia trying to get a word in. Emerging regions are there, but at single‑digit slices that feel more like a diversity checkbox than real conviction. It’s very aligned with standard global indexes, which is code for: if the US has a bad decade, this thing just politely sinks with it. There’s no real geographic plot twist here, just a slightly polished version of “America plus some background scenery.”

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    50%
  • Large-cap
    35%
  • Mid-cap
    14%

The market cap profile is textbook: 50% mega‑cap, 35% large‑cap, 14% mid‑cap, and essentially zero edge anywhere. This is the “I’ll have what the index is having” approach. Mega‑caps dominate, meaning a small handful of giants decide the mood of the portfolio. Mid‑caps are just there to say the word “diversification” without really meaning it. There’s no deliberate tilt toward smaller companies that might behave differently; this is big, liquid, popular names driving almost everything. When the global mega‑cap darlings wobble, this portfolio doesn’t have much of an alternative storyline.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Apple Inc
    3.73%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.60%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd.
    2.39%
    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
  • Amazon.com Inc
    1.99%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.66%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    1.42%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.39%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.25%
    Part of fund(s):
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    1.05%
    Part of fund(s):
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
  • Top 10 total 21.72%

Look‑through holdings reveal the usual suspects parade: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla – the whole “Magnificent Whatever‑Number‑We’re-On-Now” cast. They appear via ETFs, so overlap is baked in, and that 4.24% NVIDIA plus 3.73% Apple is only from the visible top‑10 slice. With only 23.5% of the portfolio covered by disclosed top holdings, actual concentration is almost certainly higher. The portfolio pretends to be globally diversified, but under the hood it’s heavily tied to a handful of mega‑cap US growth stocks. It’s like buying a buffet and discovering half the trays are just different kinds of potatoes.

Risk contribution Info

  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF
    Weight: 90.00%
    90.3%
  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD
    Weight: 10.00%
    9.7%

Risk contribution is almost comically proportional: the 90% core fund contributes 90.32% of portfolio risk, the 10% tilt adds 9.68%. No hidden landmines, no tiny position secretly causing drama. But that also means the emerging markets value slice is barely more than background noise. All the thrills and spills come from the single ACWI ETF; the rest exists mainly so the holdings list doesn’t look embarrassingly short. Risk contribution is supposed to reveal surprises like small positions punching above their weight – here it just confirms what’s obvious: this is a one‑fund show with a warmup act.

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 chart is almost insulting in its calmness: the current portfolio sits basically on the line. Sharpe ratio of 0.6 versus 0.8 for the mathematically “best” version using the same two funds means it’s close enough that optimization is more nerd vanity than life‑changing. Risk and return are already in the sensible zone; the curve is basically saying, “You didn’t mess this up.” That said, seeing an optimal portfolio with slightly better Sharpe and nearly identical risk shows there’s a bit of free efficiency left on the table, but not the kind worth writing a heroic rebalancing memoir about.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Edge MSCI EM Value Factor UCITS ETF USD (Acc) USD 0.40%
  • SSgA SPDR ETFs Europe I Public Limited Company - SPDR MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF 0.45%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.44%

For a portfolio that’s essentially “two off‑the‑shelf index funds,” a 0.44% total TER is on the spicy side. You’re paying mid‑range active‑flavored fees for completely passive behaviour. Cost‑wise, this is like ordering tap water and being billed like it’s craft gin. The funds themselves aren’t disastrously expensive, but for a plain global equity recipe with one tiny factor twist, the ongoing drag is noticeable. Over long periods, that 0.44% quietly shaves off return each year for no obvious special skill in exchange. The structure is simple enough that cheaper equivalents almost certainly exist in the same style.

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