Hello, everyone,

In my portfolio, I'm investing in, among other things, the $DBXD (+0,77 %) with a position of just under 13,000 euros and $ISAC (+0,78 %) with a holding of just under 3,500 euros.

I’ve had $SIE (-1,02 %) shares in my portfolio that have yielded a gain of just under 123% and are currently worth 6,000 euros. I’m no longer adding to these, and they’re just sitting there :-)

When I look at the position sizes in the DAX ETF, Siemens has the highest weighting there, so I’m considering selling my Siemens shares and putting the entire amount into the $ISAC (+0,78 %) .

On the other hand, there’s still the matter of the possible spin-off of $SHL (-1,22 %) and the potential distribution of free shares to Siemens shareholders—which I’d still like to be a part of.

What do you guys think: should I just let things run their course—the ETFs are topped up monthly anyway—or should I sell the Siemens shares, forgo the annual 150-euro dividend, and put the money into the $ISAC (+0,78 %) ?

Hello everyone,

My investment journey began almost 3 years ago. I started my training as a real estate agent and regularly put some of my salary aside.

After that, I set myself a goal: To have 10k deposit at the end of my apprenticeship.

I completed my training in January due to a shortened training period.

Now that I have a "real" salary, I've been able to significantly increase my savings rate ~150 -> ~500€. However, this will only last until September because I will then be studying real estate management on a dual basis and will have a significantly lower salary again.

The 3 years on the stock market were a lot of fun, it was a wild up and down. Initially with typical bad buys like $MPW (-1,39 %) or any stock that was recommended on Insta, I then put together my portfolio. Now I've got my portfolio to the point where I want to hold a maximum of 10 positions, with the $ISAC (+0,78 %) should always remain the largest position.

A few words about my other positions:

Innodata and Nebius in particular have done extremely well recently. Only my profits are still in Innodata. I will use the other 50% to pay for my flight to my vacation (sometimes you have to treat yourself🙈) I will continue to hold both positions in the long term.

The Alphabet position is a free share from Trade Republic. Can only be sold at Christmas.

I picked up BAT at the end of 2023 and am super happy, even though I know that at my age (22) growth is much more important than dividends.

With Novo, like some here, I'm unfortunately still in the red, but I think the position size and the risk/reward ratio are still okay.

I was also able to achieve a good return with the Space Innovators ETF, even though I got in relatively late. I am considering selling here after the SpaceX IPO, which is just under a month away. What is your opinion on this?

I still plan to save the Ai&Big Data ETF for the long term, as I see it as a must-have for the future.

I also don't think it's a bad idea to add BTC to my portfolio, as I was able to take home a €250 bonus after depositing €1000, which has significantly increased the position.

Lastly, my sinfully expensive VWL savings fund, the Deka Fond, which I unfortunately have to let run. The employer saves €14 here and I pay the remaining €26 to take the full saver's allowance.

So now I should have said something about each position, please give me some feedback. Where were you financially at 22 and what are your tips for the future? :)

Hello everyone,

I have a quick question about the three All-country-World ETFs $VWCE (+0,64 %) and $ISAC (+0,78 %) and $SPYI (+0,69 %) .

Often in the targeted portfolios you see the $VWCE (+0,64 %) and much less frequently the other two.

In the commentaries, too, the $VWCE (+0,64 %) is recommended again and again when it comes to "core" investments...

At just-etf, NO clear "favorite" has emerged from the comparison:

https://www.justetf.com/de/academy/ftse-all-world-vs-msci-acwi-imi.html

What are your reasons for choosing the $VWCE (+0,64 %) ? I would be interested to know....

Thank you and have a nice weekend!

is about the accumulating ETF $ISAC (+0,78 %)

Does anyone know whether it is possible to track the returns directly in Getquin or TR or are they only shown in the performance?

If it doesn't work here, do you have another solution?

Thank you 🙌

Hello everyone,

I am 20 and would like to build up a portfolio for long-term growth and security.

The breakdown of my monthly savings plans:

66,7% $ISAC (+0,78 %)

8,3% $WSML (+0,67 %)

8,3% $MEUD (+0,49 %)

8,3% $QDV5 (-0,46 %)

8,3% $IGLN (+1,72 %)

I would like to hear your opinion on whether you think this makes sense or would exchange/add a position or maybe you also say it is smarter to just save the $ISAC (+0,78 %) to save.

Reading time: approx. 5–6 minutes

Many of my recent posts have focused on metrics that help clearly classify business models, risks, and valuations. Beta is one such metric—and it plays a particularly important role. It’s widely available and easy to look up, but it only becomes truly meaningful when viewed in the context of an entire portfolio. This is because beta does not describe the company itself, but rather how a stock behaves in relation to the market.

Mathematically, beta measures the relationship between stock returns and market returns. It is based on the covariance of these returns—which is always derived from historical data. However, the interpretation is inevitably forward-looking, because we use past patterns to infer how a stock will typically behave relative to the market in the future.

Formally, the metric is defined as:

Beta = Covariance(stock return, market return) / Variance(market return)

In practical terms, this means: When the market moves, how strongly does the stock typically move along with it? Values around 1 indicate movements similar to the market; higher values indicate greater volatility, while lower values indicate more stable behavior.

The reason beta is often misinterpreted is that it is not stable. It depends heavily on the time period, the market phase, and the chosen index. A company can continue to perform solidly, but suddenly exhibit a different beta due to changes in interest rates or the risk environment. Beta therefore measures behavior—not quality.

To better illustrate how beta affects a portfolio, it’s worth taking a look at my portfolio. It combines robust, high-quality stocks such as Visa, Alphabet, and Honeywell; growth-oriented technology stocks such as ASML, Nu Holdings, and Innodata; defensive infrastructure and water stocks such as Consolidated Water, Energiekontor, and Energy Recovery; the global ETF tracking the MSCI ACWI; and a uranium block as a cyclical play featuring Cameco, NexGen, Denison Mines, Paladin Energy, and Yellow Cake. Bitcoin rounds out the mix as a standalone, significantly more volatile component.

This mix clearly illustrates why beta is useful to me in my day-to-day investing. Different stocks can be fundamentally strong yet contribute very differently to the portfolio’s volatility profile. Some positions smooth out volatility, while others amplify it—regardless of whether the companies are well-managed or highly profitable. It’s about market behavior, not balance-sheet quality.

For my beta analysis, I use conservative, industry-standard 3–5-year figures from major providers. Most betas are calculated based on daily or monthly returns over precisely these time periods—long enough to be statistically stable and short enough to realistically reflect current market phases. Where official data is unavailable, appropriate sector values are used.

The betas used are as follows:

Large Caps

• $ASML (-2,36 %) : 1.25

• $GOOGL (+1,16 %) : 1.05

• $V (-0,25 %) : 0.95

• $HON (+0,07 %) : 1.00

Mid-Caps / Infrastructure

• $CWCO (-0,6 %) : 0.80

• $EKT (+3,43 %) : 0.75

• $ERII (+0,61 %) : 1.20

• $SOP (+3,11 %) : 1.10

Small-Cap / High Beta

• $INOD (+1,23 %) : 1.80

Uranium Segment (Cyclical)

• $CCO (+4,45 %) : 1.40

• $NXE (+3,6 %) : 1.60

• $DML (+5,78 %) : 1.70

• $PDN (+2,94 %) : 1.50

• $YCA (+1,13 %) 1.30

ETF

• $ISAC (+0,78 %) : 1.00

Crypto

• $BTC (-0,92 %) : 2.50

The only factor that matters for the portfolio beta is the size of each position relative to the portfolio.

Here’s how the portfolio beta is calculated:

You look at the size of each position in the portfolio, multiply that share by the beta of the respective stock, and add up all the contributions. Each position therefore contributes to the overall beta exactly in proportion to its weighting.

Applying the weightings of my portfolio in this context yields the following result: The portfolio has a beta of approximately 1.33. This value aligns with the portfolio’s structure: a stable foundation, several growth-oriented components, a deliberately included uranium block, and Bitcoin as a stronger lever.

A beta at this level indicates a fundamentally more aggressive portfolio.

• During uptrends, it outperforms the market.
• During corrections, it reacts more quickly and more sharply.
• The strongest drivers are Bitcoin, Innodata, NexGen, Denison Mines, and Paladin Energy.
• Visa, Consolidated Water, Energiekontor, and the MSCI ACWI ETF provide counterbalances.

This shows that beta is no substitute for fundamental analysis, but it does reveal how a portfolio moves and why. It helps calibrate expectations, contextualize fluctuations, and manage the portfolio’s structure more consciously. A beta of 1.33 is not a judgment on quality—it’s a description of movement. The only thing that matters is whether this dynamic aligns with your own investment strategy.

Finally, two questions for you:

Do you know your portfolio’s beta?

And does it play a role in your portfolio strategy—or not really?

$IWDA (+0,8 %)
$CSPX (+0,68 %)
$EIMI (+0,19 %)
$CSNDX (+0,84 %)
$ISAC (+0,78 %)
$VUSA (+0,69 %)
$HMWO (+0,78 %)
$XDWD (+0,98 %)
$SPPW (+0,84 %)
$WSML (+0,67 %)

President Trump shakes hands with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

"He is a VERY tough negotiator. That's not good!" 🤣

"Nice to see you again!"

"We're going to have a very successful meeting!"

"We have ALWAYS had a great relationship."

Chinese President Xi Jinping says he is happy to finally meet President Trump.

"It's very nice to see you again! It's been many years. Since your re-election, we have spoken on the phone three times, exchanged several letters and stayed in close contact."

"Given our different national circumstances, we don't always see eye to eye. It's normal for there to be friction between the world's two leading economies."

"In the face of winds, waves and challenges, you and I, who are at the helm of Sino-US relations, should stay the right course and ensure the steady progress of these relations."

Chinese President Xi Jinping declares President Trump the PEACE PRESIDENT of the whole world!

"Mr. President, you care deeply about world peace! You are deeply committed to resolving regional conflicts. I greatly appreciate your significant contribution to the ceasefire in Gaza."

"During your visit to Malaysia, you witnessed the signing of the joint peace declaration along the Cambodian-Thai border, to which you also contributed."

Reading time: approx. 10 minutes

The last article was about leveraged daily ETFs - in other words, about momentum, short-term market movements and strategies where timing is crucial. Today it will be much quieter. It's about what remains when markets fluctuate and hypes fade: the fundamentals.

This article is aimed primarily at beginners and is intended to help them find their way through the ETF jungle - to understand which products are truly global, how they differ and how to build a stable core portfolio.

After all, long-term wealth accumulation does not start with the search for the highest return, but with a solid core. In my case, this core consists of three pillars:

• $ISAC (+0,78 %) (iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF) - as a global equity building block
• $BTC (-0,92 %) (Bitcoin) - as a diversifying, asymmetric building block with its own risk profile
• $SEGA (+0,12 %) (iShares Core Euro Government Bond ETF) - as a defensive counterbalance on the bond side

These three positions form the backbone of my portfolio. The rest - i.e. rotation strategies, thematic investments or leveraged products - complement the foundation.

Why an ETF comparison is important

"World ETF" sounds like global diversification. In practice, however, many of these funds only cover industrialized countries. The difference between $XDWD (+0,98 %) (iShares MSCI World UCITS ETF), $ISAC (+0,78 %) (iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF) and $VWCE (+0,64 %) (Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF) is not a marginal detail, but crucial for your own investment strategy.

Anyone who understands these differences quickly realizes how much the selection of the index determines the actual distribution in the portfolio - and how much "world" is actually in your own ETF.

The $ISAC (+0,78 %)
(iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF)

The $ISAC (+0,78 %) tracks the MSCI All Country World Index - around 2,800 stocks from 47 countries, covering around 85% of global market capitalization.

Regional breakdown (as at October 2025):

• USA: approx. 65 %
• Europe: approx. 15 %
• Asia (incl. Japan & China): approx. 10%
• Emerging markets: approx. 10 %

This combines the $ISAC (+0,78 %) industrialized and emerging markets in one product - exactly what many investors replicate themselves with two ETFs (MSCI World + MSCI Emerging Markets).

The total expense ratio (TER) is currently 0.20% p.a. - extremely favorable for a global fund of this breadth.

I use it as a core building block because it combines global diversification with simplicity: one ETF, one decision, global participation.

$ISAC (+0,78 %)
vs. $XDWD (+0,98 %)
(iShares MSCI World)

The $XDWD (+0,98 %) (iShares MSCI World UCITS ETF) only tracks 23 industrialized countries - no emerging markets, no China, no India. It contains around 1,500 stocks and is heavily dominated by the USA.

The $ISAC (+0,78 %) (iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF) expands this base to include 24 emerging markets and thus has around 2,800 stocks. This means:

• $XDWD (+0,98 %) is more focused, somewhat more stable, but limited to mature markets.
• $ISAC (+0,78 %) is broader, more future-oriented and contains more growth markets.

In recent years, the MSCI World has been slightly ahead because the emerging markets have underperformed. In the long term, these phases tend to even out - and this is precisely where the ACWI shows its strength: It automatically grows with the global economy, even if the regional focus changes.

$ISAC (+0,78 %)
vs. $VWCE (+0,64 %)
(Vanguard FTSE All-World)

The $VWCE (+0,64 %) (Vanguard FTSE All-World UCITS ETF) is the best-known alternative to the $ISAC (+0,78 %) . It also combines industrialized and emerging markets, but according to the FTSE index methodology and with around 4,000 shares - i.e. somewhat broader.

Both funds fulfill the same purpose: global coverage in a single product. The differences lie in the details - for example in the country classification (e.g. South Korea is listed as an industrialized country in FTSE, but as an emerging country in MSCI).

The performance is also almost identical. The TER of the $VWCE (+0,64 %) at 0.19% p.a. is even slightly lower than that of the $ISAC (+0,78 %) . Both funds therefore offer an almost equivalent opportunity to invest globally over the long term.

Concentration in the $ISAC (+0,78 %)

Despite its breadth, the ACWI is also concentrated on a few heavyweights. The top 5 positions account for around 18% of the fund (as at October 2025):

• $NVDA (+1,65 %) (NVIDIA)
• $AAPL (+0,6 %) (Apple)
• $MSFT (+1,8 %) (Microsoft)
• $GOOG (+1,17 %) & $GOOGL (+1,16 %) (Alphabet)
• $AMZN (+1,09 %) (Amazon)

This shows how strongly the US technology sector shapes the global markets. This weighting is not a disadvantage, but a true reflection of global market capitalization. I consciously accept this structure, but balance it out with my other core components: $BTC (-0,92 %) (Bitcoin) as an uncorrelated asset and $SEGA (+0,12 %) (iShares Core Euro Government Bond ETF) as an anchor of stability.

Five-year performance (as at October 2025)

• $XDWD (+0,98 %) (MSCI World): + 90 %
• $ISAC (+0,78 %) (MSCI ACWI): + 84 %
• $VWCE (+0,64 %) (FTSE All-World): + 83 %

The differences are manageable. The MSCI World benefited more from the dominance of the USA, while $ISAC (+0,78 %) and $VWCE (+0,64 %) are more broadly based. This global diversification can lead to more stable returns in the long term because it is less dependent on individual markets.

What newcomers can take away from this

In my opinion, an ETF is often sufficient. A global fund like the $ISAC (+0,78 %) covers almost all markets - ideal for getting started.

Keep an eye on costs. A TER of 0.20 % is very favorable for this breadth.

Global means USA-dominated. Around two thirds of the fund comes from the United States - and that is currently the market reality.

Simplicity is an advantage. Those who manage fewer products remain more consistent in the long term.

Time beats actionism. The compound interest effect unfolds its power over years - not months.

The $ISAC (+0,78 %) (iShares MSCI ACWI UCITS ETF) is the centerpiece of my portfolio. It stands for breadth, simplicity and global participation - and realistically reflects the global economy.

Together with the $BTC (-0,92 %) (Bitcoin) - which not only brings potential returns but also diversification to the portfolio - and the $SEGA (+0,12 %) (iShares Core Euro Government Bond ETF) as a defensive counterpart, a robust core setup is created that covers all dimensions: Growth, stability and risk diversification.

The rest - thematic or individual investments, rotation strategies or leveraged ideas - completes the foundation.

Questions at the end:

• How do you structure your core?
• Do you use an all-in-one ETF like the $ISAC (+0,78 %) or do you prefer to combine your own with $XDWD (+0,98 %) and emerging markets?
• And what role does $BTC (-0,92 %) diversification, return or both play for you?