Hi, I'm 23 years old and this is my portfolio at the moment. I make the following monthly savings plans:

$MEUD (-0,11 %) 125€

$XEMD (-0,21 %) 50€

$TSWE (+0,33 %) 100€

$XDWD (-0,08 %) 175€

I have now considered whether I should add 2-3 shares to the portfolio. But I'm not quite sure which ones and would like to know your opinion.

estimated reading time: 4 minutes

Twenty years ago, the new market crash wiped out my first stock market money and my ego. I swore off the stock market, but my pension certificate showed me that ducking out has an expiry date.

So the first attempts to start again followed. Here on Getquin, I have learned from positive critical voices from e.g. @DonkeyInvestor and @Epi that there is more to it than "just picking something". Since my last post 6 months ago, this was followed by extreme late-night brooding, Excel monsters, AI research, reading Kommer and countless "new agains".

I have tried to read up on modern optimization models such as Mean-Variance, Black-Litterman and Fama-French etc. and implement them in the best possible way.

The result was this portfolio!

As thoroughly tested as you can in a private garage, and coupled with the insight that we only have to leave the uncontrollable to chance.

And one thing first. I am convinced of this and will not change it.

I just want to share my thoughts and ideas about the direction with you. It's difficult to really explain every detail here, I'm sure I could do it better in a conversation, but that's not possible here. I can assure you that the selection and combination definitely makes sense - at least for me and the construct. Among other things, it was important to me to be able to control individual regions separately. I think I have achieved that.

Global (30%)

- SPDR MSCI All Country World, $SPYY (-0,06 %)

- L&G Global Equity UCITS ETF, $LGGG (-0,13 %)

- iShares Edge MSCI World Momentum, $IS3R (-0,77 %)

- Xtrackers MSCI World Value, $XDEV (+1,14 %)

- Invesco Global Active ESG Equity, $IQSA (+0,35 %)

- VanEck World Equal Weight Screened, $TSWE (+0,33 %)

- VanEck Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders, $TDIV (-1,01 %)

USA (31.5%)

- L&G US Equity, $LGUG (-0,04 %)

- iShares MSCI USA Mid-Cap Equal Weight, $IUSF (-0,42 %)

- JPMorgan BetaBuilders US Small Cap Equity, $BBCS (-0,84 %)

- SPDR MSCI USA Small Cap Value Weighted, $ZPRV (-0,74 %)

Europe (17.5%)

- HSBC EURO STOXX 50, $H50A (-0,37 %)

- L&G Europe ex-UK Quality Dividends Equal Weight, $LDEG (-0,33 %)

- SPDR MSCI Europe Small Cap Value Weighted, $ZPRX (-0,06 %)

Emerging markets (19%)

- iShares Edge MSCI Emerging Markets Value Factor, $5MVL (+1,29 %)

- UBS LFS MSCI Emerging Markets ETF, $EMMUSA (-0,14 %)

- L&G Emerging Markets Quality Dividends Equal Weight, $LDME (+0,45 %)

- SPDR MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap, $SPYX (-0,61 %)

Japan (2%)

- L&G Japan Equity UCITS ETF, $LGJG (+0,21 %)

Ø TER = 0.25%

In summary, this gives the following breakdown

Regional breakdown

- USA (North America) ~ 48%

- Asia ~ 22%

- Europe ~ 22%

- UK ~ 3.6%

- Japan ~ 4.4%

Market capitalization

- Large Cap ~ 52%

- Mid Cap ~ 26%

- Small Cap ~ 22%

The portfolio deliberately allocates its capital to the regions and - where possible - to all capitalization classes. The world building blocks provide the global beta; value, momentum and quality satellites add factor premiums. In the USA, a complete large/mid/small stack provides a pronounced size bias, while Europe receives a value bias via quality and small value ETFs. The emerging layer combines large-cap value stocks, quality leaders and a small-cap module - a diversification anchor beyond the developed markets.

Due to the almost equal weighting of the 18 positions, the Herfindahl index of ETF weights falls to ~633; indirectly, the portfolio contains several thousand individual stocks. The weighted TER is ≈ 0.25 % p. a., spreads below 0.1 %. This means that, compared to a $GERD (+0,05 %) a favorable multifactor portfolio myself.

The factor tilts (value 42 %, size 35 %, quality/div ≈ 12 %, momentum ≈ 8 %) increase the expected volatility moderately to 18-20 % p.a.; however, historical data on small and value indices indicate 1-2 percentage points additional return over long horizons. Large caps remain present at around 52 %, mid caps at 26 % and small caps at 22 % support the size premium .

With my "multi-factor all-cap portfolio", I combine global market coverage with five proven premiums, without cost or concentration ballast. Of course, I will have to endure additional fluctuations, but I believe that I have created a robust source of returns over the long term.

I have tried to consider everything and leave nothing to chance, except the uncontrollable.

Anyone who has made it this far. Thanks for reading.

I'm looking forward to your feedback.

PS:

YES, I have Bitcoin😉 and also two themed ETFs. They just stay like that.

- ARK AI & Robotics ETF, $AAKI (+0,42 %)

- HanETF Future of Defense ETF, $ASWC (+1,18 %)

- ETC GROUP CORE BITCOIN, $BTC1 (+0,23 %)

---

no investment advice; DYOR

Thanks also to @VPT , @Mister_ultra , @Ph1l1pp , @ShrimpTheGimp , @MoneyISnotREAL , @Staatsmann and @Smudeo for commenting and providing approaches.

Hello everyone,

With today's high, I have cracked my first target of €50,000 for the first time.

The next target is of course €100,000, hopefully by the end of 2026/beginning of 2027.

I would therefore like to present my portfolio to you and hope that you will have any suggestions for improvement and constructive ideas.

Basically, the focus is on buy and hold / growth. But a dividend is also nice.

I started thinking more intensively about the whole topic around the beginning/middle of 2023, at the age of 29. The aim is to possibly reach the millions after all, or in any case to have a more comfortable retirement later on.

Before that, it was more about trying things out or the "safe" investment that you get from your parents. In the meantime, we saved in stories such as DWS funds. I still have one of these "corpses", the DWS Vermögens... $HJUF (+0,75 %) .

However, this is also to be restructured in the near future.

I am currently working on increasing my ETF positions to get to a ratio of 50%/50%. I have not been so successful with this recently, as I have increased many individual stocks due to the low.

Actually, the iShares Core S&P 500 $CSPX (-0,07 %) and FTSE All-World $VWCE (-0,1 %) are in the foreground.

Yes, I am also saving here at the same time $VWRL (-0,06 %) for a few more dividends a year. You are welcome to give your opinion on whether this makes sense or whether you should only take one of the two.

My current monthly ETF savings plans at a glance,

Core S&P 500 $CSPX (-0,07 %) - 150€

All-World $VWCE (-0,1 %) - 70€

All-World $VWRL (-0,06 %) - 70€

MSCI World $IWDA (-0,06 %) - 40€

S&P 500 Information Tech $IUIT (+1,89 %) - 30€

All-World High Divid. $VHYL (-0,25 %) - 30€

VanEck Sustainable World Equal $TSWE (+0,33 %) - 30€

VanEck Developed $TDIV (-1,01 %) - 15€

iShare DJ Global Titan 50 $EXI2 (+0,17 %) - 15€

Here, too, a merger would be conceivable and also make sense.

For example, since I hold the DJ Global Titan 50 $EXI2 (+0,17 %) and the MSCI World $IWDA (-0,06 %) with a small amount for ages, I have not yet been able to part with them.

I still save the following shares weekly at €7 each on the side,

$BRK.B (-0,7 %)

$BLK (-0,11 %)

$PG (-1,84 %)

$PEP (-1,42 %)

$KO (-1,78 %)

In addition to the above, I buy individual shares, ETFs or top up positions worth a further €500, depending on prices.

On average, my monthly savings rate is therefore around €1,000-1,500.

As already mentioned, I would like to ask the community for their opinion, any suggestions for improvement and constructive ideas.

Thank you very much, best regards and happy trading days.

Hi all!!!

I am building a dividend growth oriented portfolio with long term horizon (25-30 years), and I am undecided between two VanEck ETFs:

- $TDIV (-1,01 %) (Morningstar Developed Markets Dividend Leaders): excellent dividend yield (about 3.9%), selects the best companies in developed markets for strength and coupon flow.

- $TSWE (+0,33 %) (Sustainable World Equal Weight): lower yield (about 2.2%) but with rising dividends and ESG approach + equal weight + good global diversification.

The goal is to live on income in the future, but also have good capital growth.

What do you think?

Disclaimer: No investment advice or recommendation, this article is for information purposes only. Before you decide on an ETF, take a closer look at it in terms of positions, sampling, regions, etc. I can't describe everything here as it would go beyond the scope of this article.

Part 1 (Definition, Categories

& Z-score and quality factor): https://getqu.in/RCSY4a/

Part 2 (Value ETF): https://getqu.in/Nfnhqb/

Part 3 (Low Volatility ETF): https://getqu.in/Ub7KpG/

Part 4 (Momentum ETF): https://getqu.in/CNMgGw/

Part 5 (Small- and Growth ETF): https://getqu.in/0NoqmW/

Part 6 (Dividend ETF): https://getqu.in/NJtoF5/

Part 7 (Multifactor ETF): https://getqu.in/qBLxfo/

What are Equal-Weight ETF?

Equal-weight ETFs are - as the name suggests - characterized by the fact that the positions held in the ETF are all equally weighted and not, as is usually the case, according to their market weighting. The investment case for this form of investment is based in particular on the observation of the recent past that the weighting of indices is becoming increasingly concentrated on a few stocks/sectors and countries. For example, the top 10 positions in the S&P 500 already account for 33% of the index weighting. The global comparison is no different: In the Euro Stoxx 600, the top 10 account for around 20 % of the weighting and in the MSCI World around 24 % and this with over 1,400 positions (!). The USA accounts for 70 % of the MSCI World and the technology sector is weighted at around 27 %. The market capitalization often no longer corresponds to the GDP weighting of the respective countries (as a measure of a country's economic strength).

With free trade and globalization, this is not too bad, as companies can generate a large proportion of their profits abroad. However, with increasing protectionism and the reversal of free trade, this discrepancy can become a risk.

Due to the high concentration, the return of the indices essentially consists of a few large companies with a strong US focus. This creates a cluster risk, although this has paid off well in the recent past (

https://stock3.com/boersenwissen/gleich-vs-kapitalisierungsgewichtet-gibt-es-einen-gewinner-13016464)

The Equal-Weight ETFs are therefore created for all those who are concerned about the growing concentration on the markets and want to spread the risk over more shoulders.

Furthermore, there is a natural size-tilt, as both small and large companies are equally weighted in the index, meaning that a much higher weighting is placed on small and mid-caps compared to the normal indices.

Historical returns

The charm of the equal weight approach becomes apparent if we look beyond the recent past to a longer-term horizon:

https://www.betashares.com.au/files/collateral/brochure/QUS-Brochure.pdf

Annualized comparison of annual returns (negative = outperformance of the equal weight approach):

https://stock3.com/boersenwissen/gleich-vs-kapitalisierungsgewichtet-gibt-es-einen-gewinner-13016464

In a study from 1994 to 2000, the returns already converge strongly:

https://www.lynalden.com/equal-weighted-index-funds

Overall, the picture is similar to the size-premium - logically, since size stocks are also more strongly represented - in the long term, the equal-weight approach would be worthwhile, but in the recent past, due to the tech/Us concentration, one would have achieved an underperformance. The higher weighting of smaller stocks also increases volatility, something that would probably not have been expected as many take the equal weight approach to minimize risk.

👉Equal-Weight ETF:

-$TSWE (+0,33 %) (World | TER 0.20 % | TD 0.47 % | EUR 0.8 bn invested volume | 3Y underperformance vs All-World -11 %pt. | 5Y underperformance -14 %pt. | 10Y underperformance -30%pt.)

• Index methodology: Selection of 250 companies according to Moody's sustainability criteria (no alcohol, gambling, military, animal testing for cosmetics etc.), then equal weighting.

-$XDEW (-0,19 %) (US | TER 0.20 % | TD -0.02 % | EUR 12 bn invested vol. | 3Y underperformance vs. S&P 500 -18%pt. | 5Y underperformance -36 %pt. | 10Y underperformance -114 %pt.)

• Index methodology: Equal weighting of all companies included in the S&P 500.

-$MOTV (+0,38 %) (US | TER 0.46 % | TD n.a. | EUR 0.1 bn invested vol. | 6 months outperformance vs. S&P 500 +0.5%pt.)

• Index methodology: Index focuses on Morningstar's "Wide Economic Moat" rating. These are companies that Morningstar analysts believe will outperform over the next 20 years. From these companies, the most undervalued are filtered (delta market price to fair value). The companies are then equally weighted

-$WEBA (+0,66 %) (US | TER 0.07 % | TD n.A. | EUR 0.5 bn invested vol. | 1Y underperformance vs. NASDQ -17 %pt.)

• Index methodology: Equal weighting of NASDAQ100 stocks

-$S6EW (+0,09 %) (Europe | TER 0.30 % | TD 0.06 % | EUR 0.1 bn invested vol. | 3Y underperformance vs. Euro Stoxx 600 -15%pt. | 5Y underperformance -18 %pt. | 10Y underperformance -11 %pt.)

• Index methodology: Screening of the Euro Stoxx 600 according to - UN defined - ESG criteria (no coal, weapons, tobacco,..) and subsequent equal weighting.

Conclusion - what remains?

Equal weight strategy aims to reflect the high concentration of stocks/sectors & countries much less in the conventional indices (which are market capital weighted) by including the stocks in equal proportions. This reduces the cluster risk while at the same time increasing the exposure of smaller and medium-sized companies.

In the long term, however, there has been outperformance in recent times (with the tech boom). In my view, there is a strong performance overlap with the small-cap ETFs, so I would definitely not put both in my portfolio & would rather stick with a small-cap ETF, partly because the current selection of equal-weight ETFs is not yet too broad.

The choice between equal-weight and market-cap ETFs ultimately depends on individual risk tolerance, investment horizon and assessment of future market developments. Equal-weight ETFs can serve as a diversification instrument in a balanced portfolio.

#smartbeta
#etf
#equalweight

Hello dear getquin friends

I would like to expand my portfolio.

Currently my portfolio consists only of the $ISAC (-0,02 %) and $BTC (+0,3 %) (and a little $ETH (+0,39 %) ) ... approx. 70/30.

I would like to add a distributing ETF. Yes, I would also like some dividends. I'm not currently dependent on dividends, but earning a small (or large) amount from dividends in 12 years or more is definitely interesting. So the goal is rather sustainable dividend growth with new ETFs.

If the USA share is no longer like 40%, this would not bother me either, as the share is already at the $ISAC (-0,02 %) is already high.

I have the following ETFs in mind: $TDIV (-1,01 %) / $VHYL (-0,25 %) / $TSWE (+0,33 %) / $FGEQ (-0,24 %)

Whereby the USA share is again very high in the last one.

What do you think? Do you know any other good ETFs?

Equal-Weight ETFs

In recent weeks I have read quite often that equal-weighted ETFs are currently a good strategy, as the S&P500, but also other indices, have become quite expensive and concentrated (e.g. with the "Magnificent Seven").

A strategy where all stocks would be equally weighted would bring more returns in such times.

Barron's also writes in its article that actually over the long term (20 years), equal-weight S&P500 ETFs yield more than the classic market-cap-weighted index (11.5% instead of 10.3%).

My question is then:

- Do you guys follow such strategy?

- What do you think?

- Do you already have such an ETF in your portfolio?

Here are a few examples of distributing ETFs that I have found:

$SPES (-0,12 %)

$TEET (+0,01 %)

$TSWE (+0,33 %)

I honestly don't have an opinion on this yet, but I will certainly research this topic.

Thank you! 😊