Surprisingly sensible world tracker with a random Apple shrine bolted onto the front
Report created on Mar 28, 2026Risk profile
- Secure Speculative
The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.
Diversification profile
- Focused Diversified
The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.
Positions
-
EU iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
EUNL - IE00B4L5Y983 85.00% -
IS iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
IS3N - IE00BKM4GZ66 10.00% -
AP Apple Inc
APC - US0378331005 5.00%
Structurally this thing is “two big boring bricks plus one fanboy flyer.” About 85% is a global developed ETF, 10% emerging markets, and then a 5% side bet on Apple because apparently having Apple inside the ETF already wasn’t emotional enough. For a “balanced” label, it’s hilariously unbalanced across asset classes: it’s just stocks, then more stocks, and then extra Apple. The good news: it’s simple and mostly coherent, so at least the chaos is limited. The bad news: that 5% single-stock bet adds concentration without really changing your life. If someone wanted clean simplicity, dropping the shrine and sticking to broad funds would do it.
Growth
Performance-wise, this portfolio has been the kid who does their homework and sometimes even gets extra credit. Turning €1,000 into €3,227 with a 12.34% CAGR is solid. CAGR, by the way, is just your average yearly growth rate over time, like your average speed on a long road trip. You slightly lagged the US market but comfortably beat the global market, which is basically what happens when you’re diversified but still heavily US-flavored. Max drawdown around -33% means it can definitely punch you in the face during crashes, but not harder than the benchmarks. Past data is like yesterday’s weather though: useful, but it won’t swear on anything about the next storm.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
Asset-class “diversification” here is basically: 100% stocks and zero of everything else. For something labeled “balanced,” this is more “all-in on the stock market and vibes.” No bonds, no real defensive assets, nothing that traditionally acts as a cushion when markets tank. That’s fine for someone with a long horizon and strong stomach, but let’s not pretend this is some carefully balanced symphony. It’s just the equity section played very loudly. The takeaway: if big drops make you panic-sell, a pure-stock setup like this is asking for behavioral disasters, not because the structure is bad, but because humans are.
Sectors
- Technology 31%
- Financials 16%
- Industrials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 9%
- Health Care 8%
- Telecommunications 8%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 3%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this is a tech-leaning portfolio wearing a “diversified” name tag. About 31% in technology is a solid tech addiction, with financials, industrials, and consumer areas sprinkled in to look respectable. The rest of the sectors show up like supporting characters, not stars. This is what happens when you hug broad market indices in a world where tech dominates everything. It’s not a disaster, but it does mean your fate is heavily tied to one type of business model: high-margin, capital-light, innovation-heavy firms. When that works, you look clever. When tech has a multi-year sulk, you just look overexposed and late to adjust.
Regions
- North America 69%
- Europe Developed 14%
- Japan 5%
- Asia Developed 5%
- Asia Emerging 4%
- Australasia 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
Geographically, this portfolio is basically: “USA, then some token global garnish.” Around 69% in North America means your fortunes are glued to one economic bloc, with Europe, Japan, and the rest of the world picking up scraps. For a German-based investor, that’s a full send into foreign exposure and currency risk, with home turf playing a tiny role via global ETFs. It’s very “America or bust,” which has worked brilliantly for the last decade but is still a bet. If the US keeps dominating, you’ll look smart. If not, this will just be a global fund that forgot diversification isn’t supposed to mean “mostly one country plus decoration.”
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 51%
- Large-cap 32%
- Mid-cap 16%
- Small-cap 1%
Market cap exposure is classic big-index fan behavior: 51% mega-cap, 32% large-cap, mid-caps and small-caps thrown in as a polite afterthought. You’re basically outsourcing everything to the giants of the world and letting them steer the ship. That means stability relative to smaller companies, but also a strong dependence on a few mega corporations already dominating headlines, ETFs, and everyone else’s portfolio. It’s like owning a “diverse” sports team made of only the top 20 players in the world; impressive, but not exactly broad. If those giants underperform for a decade, your portfolio is going to feel very slow and very ordinary.
True holdings
-
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 4.29%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
AA Apple Inc 3.87%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 2.76%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.01%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.81%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.51%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.43%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.41%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
-
23 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. 1.16%
Part of fund(s):- iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
- Top 10 total 25.25%
The look-through holdings scream “I love big US tech and I will not be subtle about it.” Apple shows up twice: once as a 5% direct chunk and again inside the ETF top holdings, so yes, you’ve paid to hold Apple and then tipped extra on top. Add NVIDIA, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Broadcom and you’ve basically built a who’s-who of “stocks every ETF owns already.” Overlap is likely even higher than shown since only top-10 holdings are counted. Hidden concentration like this is sneaky: it feels diversified, but the same giants are running the show in the background, making the portfolio far more dependent on a narrow group of market darlings.
Factors
Factor exposures are estimated using statistical models based on historical data and measure systematic (market-relative) tilts, not absolute portfolio characteristics. Results may vary depending on the analysis period, data availability, and currency of the underlying assets.
Factor exposure is where the portfolio quietly reveals its personality. Factor exposure is like reading the ingredients list instead of trusting the marketing on the box. You’ve got a high tilt to value and a very high tilt to low volatility. Translation: you’re leaning toward cheaper, steadier stuff rather than lottery tickets. Low volatility at 88% is basically “I want stocks, but I’d prefer they don’t scream too much.” The yield tilt is low, so you’re not chasing dividends, just total return. Overall, it’s a pretty sensible combo: boring-but-reasonable factors that tend to hold up better when markets get moody, without screaming any extreme or contradictory bet.
Risk contribution
-
iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR
Weight: 85.00% 84.3% -
iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS
Weight: 10.00% 9.4% -
Apple Inc
Weight: 5.00% 6.2%
Risk contribution here is refreshingly simple and slightly funny. Risk contribution measures which positions are actually causing the ups and downs — the ones hogging the drama. Your global ETF is 85% of the weight and roughly 84% of the risk, so no secret landmines there. Emerging markets are 10% weight for about 9% risk, so again, proportional. Then Apple: 5% of the portfolio but 6.23% of total risk — a small but spicy overachiever. That single stock is doing more volatility lifting than its size suggests. It’s not catastrophic, just a reminder that individual names, even small ones, can swing harder than a big dull ETF.
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 map, this portfolio is weirdly efficient for something that looks so basic. The Sharpe ratio — your return per unit of risk, like performance divided by drama — is 0.68, basically tied with the minimum variance portfolio at 0.69. And the current allocation sits right on or very near the efficient frontier, meaning for these specific ingredients, you’ve mixed them about as sensibly as possible at this risk level. No glaring free lunch left on the table. You could chase the “optimal” portfolio with a higher Sharpe, but that comes with way more risk. So, begrudgingly: the structure is plain, but it’s not dumb.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares Core MSCI World UCITS ETF USD (Acc) EUR 0.20%
- iShares Core MSCI Emerging Markets IMI UCITS 0.18%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.19%
Costs are the one area where this portfolio is almost suspiciously well-behaved. A total TER of 0.19% is pleasantly low — like you somehow managed not to tip the financial industry 2% a year for doing index hugging. TER (total expense ratio) is basically the annual “rent” you pay for holding the funds, and under 0.2% is comfortably in the cheap-and-cheerful zone. You dodged the classic trap of expensive active funds pretending to be smart while copying the index. So while the structure has some quirks, at least you’re not lighting money on fire through fees. You actually kept this part impressively clean.
What next?
Create your own report?
Join our community!
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