it feels like there are 100 ETFs too many
profile image
@Konstantin85 Thank you for your feedback. The number is necessary to implement the granular strategy.

Edit: The number is hardly ever mentioned for shares. The quantity obviously always fits.
1
@Bidax Wouldn't an ACWI IMI do the same?
profile image
@Konstantin85 In principle I agree with you, but the USA is (in my opinion) too highly weighted and small caps too low. The ACWI IMI is based purely on market capitalization and hardly on factors. I have therefore adjusted the exposure for myself. Value, quality, momentum, size and a different approach to regional weighting. With my kit, I can increase or reduce EM, EU and US and remain more flexible in the weighting of the regions. With the ACWI IMI, I have to wait patiently until the index provider implements its correction.
1
@Bidax I understand 😊 I wish you a great performance in the future 🤝 You definitely thought of something, I was just very surprised to see so many ETFs at the beginning.
profile image
@Konstantin85 Thank you, I wish you the same
1
profile image
@Konstantin85 Brief principle:

- Regions
USA max 50%, EM 20%, EU 20%, Japan 5% + rest

- Market capitalization
Large 50%, Mid 30%, Small 20%

Each region is divided into Large/Mid/Small.

- Factors
Basically more focused on value, quality, equal weight, momentum

USA is somewhat special in some cases. The JPM Small Cap is more of a "core", whereas the SPDR is very value-oriented. It's also a bit of a performance comparison. It's similar with EM.

If you open the comparison on Extra ETF and open the market capitalization and the holdings, you will see what I mean.

https://extraetf.com/de/etf-comparison?products=IE00BFXR5Q31-etf,IE00BD1F4K20-etf,IE000JNKVS10-etf,IE00BSPLC413-etf

I'm looking forward to the feedback.