A one ETF portfolio cosplaying as balanced while secretly going full throttle on global stocks
Risk 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.
What type of investor this portfolio is suitable for
Balanced Investors
This setup suits someone who says they’re “balanced” but secretly loves drama. Think long time horizon, decent tolerance for seeing double-digit drops on a screen, and a preference for “set it and forget it” simplicity over tinkering. The personality here is minimalist, slightly impatient, and comfortable with volatility as long as the long-term story looks good. Goals are likely growth-focused—building wealth over decades rather than cash flow in the next few years. It fits someone who trusts global capitalism to keep grinding upward and is willing to sit through ugly market phases without smashing the panic button.
Positions
-
Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation
VWCE - IE00BK5BQT80 100.00%
This setup is the IKEA version of investing: one big box that allegedly contains everything. You’ve slapped 100% into a single global stock ETF and then called it “balanced,” which is like calling a sports bike a family car because it has two seats. The structure is simple and clean, which is good, but it’s also completely dependent on one product and one asset type. That’s concentration risk in disguise. A more robust setup would spread exposure across at least a few uncorrelated components, like mixing in different asset buckets rather than worshipping a single do-it-all fund.
Growth
Historically, a 12.45% CAGR is the kind of number that makes people think they’re financial geniuses. CAGR (Compound Annual Growth Rate) is basically your average speed over a long drive, ignoring all the potholes. Meanwhile, a max drawdown of -33.45% is the “oh no” moment when the portfolio faceplants. Against a balanced benchmark with bonds, this likely ran hotter on both upside and pain. Also, needing just 23 days for 90% of returns screams “rollercoaster”—miss those days, and the story changes a lot. Past performance is yesterday’s weather: useful, but not a forecast.
Projection
The Monte Carlo results are flattering enough to bruise your ego later. Monte Carlo just reruns many alternate histories using past volatility and returns to show possible futures; it’s like simulating 1,000 parallel universes. Median outcome at around +301.6% (ending at 401.6% of start) with a 5th percentile still at 73.6% looks great, but that 5th percentile is your “life happens during a bad decade” scenario. And 997 out of 1,000 positive paths tells you more about the assumptions than reality. Market regimes change, and simulations don’t know about future wars, tax changes, or political chaos.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
- Other 0%
- No data 0%
- Cash 0%
“Broadly diversified” here means “broadly diversified inside one asset class.” You’ve gone 100% equities, 0% bonds, 0% cash, 0% anything else. That’s not balanced; that’s an equity maximalist cosplay. It might be fine for long horizons, but in risk terms, it’s closer to an aggressive growth profile than a true moderate mix. When stocks tank, there’s no shock absorber here, just pure impact. A more rounded setup would mix in some stabilizers—things that don’t move exactly like global stocks—so that not every market tantrum feels like a full-body hit to the portfolio.
Sectors
- Technology 27%
- Financials 17%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Industrials 10%
- Telecommunications 9%
- Health Care 9%
- Consumer Staples 5%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 3%
- Real Estate 2%
Sector-wise, this thing is a tech-heavy world tour: 27% technology, 17% financials, then the usual supporting cast. That’s pretty similar to global benchmarks, but let’s not pretend it’s neutral in risk. Tech and communication services together are a big growth bet, which is fantastic in bull markets and extra-spicy in downturns. If innovation stalls or valuations compress, you’re taking that punch straight to the face. A more controlled setup would keep an eye on how much of the ride depends on “growth darlings” versus boring, steady sectors that don’t need a hype cycle to exist.
Regions
- North America 65%
- Europe Developed 15%
- Asia Emerging 6%
- Japan 6%
- Asia Developed 5%
- Australasia 2%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
- Latin America 1%
- Europe Emerging 0%
Geographically, this is “America or get out of the way”: about 65% in North America, mostly the US, with Europe and Asia getting table scraps. To be fair, that’s roughly how global market cap looks, so it’s not reckless—but it’s still a giant bet on one economic and political system behaving nicely for decades. If US dominance softens or its currency swings hard, the portfolio feels it directly. A more globally balanced stance might put a bit more weight on diversification by region, not just following market cap blindly like an index-fund autopilot.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 48%
- Large-cap 35%
- Mid-cap 17%
- Small-cap 0%
- Micro-cap 0%
Market cap tilt is pure mega-and-big-cap worship: 48% mega, 35% big, 17% mid, and small caps are basically banned. Large companies are stable-ish and highly scrutinized, which reduces some risk, but it also leans into “the usual suspects” that already dominate headlines and indices. You’re not giving smaller companies much chance to contribute, even though they often drive long-term growth (with more drama, of course). A more intentional structure might allow room for smaller caps in a controlled way, instead of leaving your fate entirely to the corporate giants already in the spotlight.
Ongoing product costs
- Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF USD Accumulation 0.19%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.19%
Costs are probably the least roasteable part: 0.19% TER is “respectably cheap.” You’ve basically avoided the classic mistake of paying champagne fees for tap-water returns. Still, putting 100% into a single ETF just because it’s cheap is like eating only rice because it’s affordable and filling. Low cost doesn’t fix all problems; it just means you’re not overpaying while you take on concentrated equity risk. A sharper approach would keep costs low but also shape risk exposure more intentionally, instead of letting one off-the-shelf global wrapper define your entire financial personality.
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.
