1G·

New strategy

Hello everyone,

I have been thinking and considering for some time now. After my portfolio presentation, I looked again and thought about how and which strategy I want to pursue exactly.

Here is my first approach for the new strategy:

📊 60% Core - ETF savings plans

$IWDA (+0,26%) -> 25 %

$VHYL (+1,36%) -> 15 %

$DGIT (+0,29%) -> 20 %

🧭 30 % satellite savings plan

$MSFT (-0,07%) -> 10 %

$KO (-0,86%) -> 10%

$PEP (-0,1%) -> 5%

$ASML (+0,24%) ->5 %

🎯 10% opportunity satellites - savings plan

$NVO (-1,61%) -> 5%

$BTC (+0,74%) -> 2,5 %

$ARCA (+35,96%) -> 2,5%

What do you think of this setup? I would let the current shares continue to run and sell them at a profit when the opportunity arises.

This would be my second attempt to build a proper portfolio. My budget is not that big but I am making the best of it. I am open to suggestions and ideas. If you know a better setup then just post it in the comments. 😊

I'm still relatively at the beginning so please be forgiving 😅.

27 Commenti

PikaPika0105@PikaPika0105

Very boring overall, but if that's the way you want it, then it's ok. Do you have any arguments for the individual stocks you mentioned? Why Pepsi, for example? What is the opportunity with Novo? And what is this -99% stock in the end? I also find a digitalization ETF difficult. Especially because the world indices are already mostly tech anyway. So if you want to go the boring route, just go for the classic world ETF, the other stuff doesn't make sense to me. But at 31, you could actually take a bit more risk..... You should only ever invest what you don't need anyway. Or you can do it partly. However, I think it's usually a shame and a waste of time to go for ETFs and dividend stocks, but that's just my opinion.

•

Laro@Laro

19H

@PikaPika0105 Thank you for your feedback!

I am consciously pursuing a long-term core-satellite strategy:

60% core ETFs, 30% satellites (individual stocks with fundamentals), 10% opportunity satellites
The selection may seem "boring" to some - but that's exactly my goal: stability, diversification and long-term wealth accumulation.

For me, Pepsi is a defensive dividend stock with a strong market position, stable cash flows and high pricing power - that suits my satellite share.

Novo Nordisk is still under review, but I find it exciting (obesity, GLP-1, strong moat).

The digitalization ETF is deliberately staying in - despite the tech component in the MSCI World. It focuses more strongly on future trends and complements my core investment in a targeted manner.

And the -99% share: There is currently nothing in my portfolio in this area, perhaps there was a misunderstanding or transposed figures?

It's okay that you prefer more risk. I prefer to be solid and consistent. I have deliberately limited small "gamble positions" to 10%.
In the end, it's the same as always: everyone has their own strategy - mine is long-term, rational and disciplined.

••

PikaPika0105@PikaPika0105

17H

@Laro Because of -99%, I mean this $ARCA, but maybe the code is also wrong....

••

Laro@Laro

17H

@PikaPika0105 I don't see -99% but +35%. Possibly a display error on your end?
I'll check again but I think it's more of a display error. Have you ever looked at the share?

••

PikaPika0105@PikaPika0105

17H

@Laro Is probably not K33 AB?

••

Laro@Laro

17H

@PikaPika0105 I think I know what the problem is. Have you set your chart to max?

Because when I go to the daily, weekly or monthly chart, I see a plus. I also see a plus for YTD and 1Y.

••

PikaPika0105@PikaPika0105

17H

@Laro so really K33? Yes, I set it to Max to get an overall picture. Has something happened to them or is that not true?

••

Laro@Laro

17H

@PikaPika0105 That's already true. They changed their name at the end of 2024. They were previously listed on the stock exchange under a different name. I just can't think of it at the moment.

And when I saw them, I thought €4 as "play money" for 234 shares wouldn't hurt when they were gone 😅.
That's why I'm not adding any more, just letting it run and seeing what happens. As you can see, the price has risen considerably in the last week.
That's more in the category of if it works it's great, if it backfires it's just that 😅.

••

PikaPika0105@PikaPika0105

15H

@Laro but what's the story behind it? I think you can leave €4 alone. Even if they increase a hundredfold, you only have €400.

••

D.S.@Cato_Bamboo

23H

You should urgently revise this setup again......🤷‍♂️

•

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

19H

I already gave you my opinion in your last post.
Coca Cola and Pepsi together is not necessary. I also view the sector skeptically and not as a top performer.

•

Laro@Laro

19H

@Tenbagger2024 Yes, you have.

That's why I sat down again and thought about the best way to build it. At the moment it's just a rough draft, if I may say so.

So it's not definite that I'm going to build it like this.

With Coca Cola and Pepsi I'm honest, I can't decide which one goes and which one stays. And I like both because both have been on the market for a very long time and have a strong brand. Even in the survey I once did, both are on a par. Of course, that doesn't make it any easier for me 😅.

So I'm still working on the design above. 😊

••

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

18H

@Laro
Good morning my dear,
The stock market is a constant process.
Even with a buy and hold strategy, it is important to be able to part ways in certain situations.
Even if it is perhaps painful.
I also wrote something about Coca Cola in some of the comments.
There are many different companies here.
Bottlers, licensors and franchise partners where I see more potential.
Rising inflation due to the current geopolitical situation and rising oil prices could put further pressure on the sector.
I believe that a price increase is hardly possible for Coca Cola because it would be detrimental to sales. So rising raw material prices would put pressure on margins.
On the other hand, Coca Cola's robustness speaks in its favor.
I also see opportunities in the defense and aerospace sectors.
Airbus is doing extremely well at the moment.
Some suppliers are also benefiting from this.
There are so many examples I could give you.
But at the end of the day, I don't want to impose anything on you, because you have to stand behind your decision yourself.

••

Laro@Laro

18H

@Tenbagger2024 I find the arguments you're making against Coke quite convincing. Of course the company can't continue to raise product prices because then fewer people would buy. Which in turn would lead to a drop in sales.

But this would also theoretically be the case with Pepsi. However, Pepsi has an advantage. They are not only in beverages but have a somewhat broader base. And could always bring new things onto the market quite quickly, which in turn leads to more sales.

I understand what you're saying, by and large you want to keep Pepsi in but take Coke out and maybe bring another one on board? Did I understand you correctly?

••

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

18H

@Laro
Difficult decision,
As you saw in the poll, there is no clear winner
At the beginning of the Ukraine war, for example, the price of potato chips rose drastically and the contents of a bag were reduced to just 175g.
And yet it still had a negative impact on margins.
Pepsi continues to struggle with this problem as a potato chips supplier.
As far as I could read, the last potato harvest was not very good either.
However, we often only see the impact of all this on companies when it comes to earnings.
That is why I am somewhat cautious about companies that are dependent on commodity prices and environmental factors.
Rising cocoa prices have weighed on Hershey and Mondelez, for example.
The stock market also means looking left and right

••

Laro@Laro

18H

@Tenbagger2024 I hadn't even thought of that. I also noticed that the contents of the bags have become less.

But I completely lost sight of the fact that Pepsi's potato harvests also play a role. I hadn't even thought about it. You've definitely raised a good point.

But as you said, this is the case everywhere in the sector that is dependent on raw materials and environmental influences. My idea of going into the food sector is based more on the fact that people are always eating or drinking. And it doesn't matter how high the prices go. People have to eat and drink.

••

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

18H

@Laro
That's true, but Nestlé has hardly generated any performance in recent years.
Perhaps because of the problems I mentioned.
As far as I have been able to follow, companies in the sector that were innovative have tended to benefit.
Like Celsius, for example, which in turn was not entirely convincing.
Or a $MNST monster.
Small organic and chicken farms were also hyped from time to time.
Then Lotus Bak. $LOTB was always in demand.
All the way to $2897 nissin food.
Many of these were flash in the pan

And the investors like the last time
$KRI very well

••

Laro@Laro

17H

@Tenbagger2024 yes, the food sector is mmn a difficult area. On the one hand, you have the argument that people are always eating and drinking. And on the other hand, you have commodity prices and environmental influences that could drive prices up and sales down.

These are two arguments that cannot be ignored. Perhaps it is also because the performance of individual companies is stagnating rather than going up.

I'm rather ambivalent about $MNST. I drink Monster myself and relatively often, but I also think that sales are less likely to go up because it's aimed more at young target groups. More young people drink energy drinks than older people. It's different with $PEP and $KO where you can find enough people in all age groups who buy these products.

Then $NLM might be worth considering. Frozen meals are becoming more and more popular because they are quick to prepare. And especially in today's society, where hardly anyone has the time to sit down and cook for hours like grandma did back then, I think this could possibly be an upward trend. But this is also influenced by the price of raw materials.

••

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

17H

@Laro
In the end, companies like $ENVI also benefit enormously from consumption.
Or also $DOL Dollarama $WMT walmart $SFM Farmers etc.
Perhaps an alternative.
Otherwise, I think your portfolio lacks industry and energy stocks.
Electricity is gaining in importance.
And water is becoming the new gold

••

Laro@Laro

17H

@Tenbagger2024 I'll take a look at the 4 you mentioned and see.

I hadn't thought about electricity either, which is always needed in any case. And with the prices, end consumers can't do much either.

Do you have any suggestions for industry and electricity?

••

Tenbagger2024@Tenbagger2024

17H

@Laro
Electricity has already done very well and is no longer so cheap. Like $VST or $CEG.
There are many interesting companies in the industrial sector, and it would go beyond the scope of this article to list them all.
As I have already written, I see the following as growth sectors
Defense and Aerospace
There are still a few favorable US companies here.
But also $AIR $MTX $RR. $AVIO etc. are very interesting.
Also suppliers such as $KIT and $JBL
In the water
$BMI and $XYL

••

Visualizza un'altra risposta

ShrimpTheGimp🦐@ShrimpTheGimp

23H

Your focus is more on dividends, so I would go for $HMWO or $VWRL rather than $IWDA. $VHYL is not my cup of tea either :) I would prefer $TDIV. I don't think much of $DGIT. If you want to take some risk, the dividend-paying NASDAQ might be an option.

The satellites would be a bit too highly weighted for me. Personally, I would only go for about 5% max. $MSFT is rock solid, but I prefer $GOOGL. Cola / Pepsi can be done as risk diversification, but then I would only do 2.5%/2.5%. $NOVO B I would take the right stock, not the ADR :)

I would stay away from $ARCA and increase the BTC share instead :)

But most importantly, if you've thought through your strategy and feel comfortable with it, it's all good. :)

••

ShrimpTheGimp🦐@ShrimpTheGimp

23H

@ShrimpTheGimp with a lower savings rate, please don't make everything unnecessarily complicated. Keep it simple

••

Laro@Laro

19H

@ShrimpTheGimp Thank you for your feedback - it's really exciting to see how different the approaches are!

I'm currently pursuing a core-satellite approach. $PEP & $KO are deliberately staying in both - yes, similar industry, but I just like the mix. $MSFT is a solid foundation for me, I'll have a think about $GOOGL.

$DGIT is perhaps a matter of taste, but I see it as a small addition - I like the focus on digitalization. Of course, tech is heavily weighted in the World ETF anyway, but I find it exciting to diversify a bit thematically.

$ARCA was a "slip-up mini-position" that simply runs along and no longer plays a role. It shouldn't actually be included in the new strategy. Somehow slipped in between.
$BTC However, we will continue to actively save.

As for the weighting - yes, 30% satellites sounds like a lot, but it's not evenly distributed. I'm deliberately weighting more heavily towards the stocks that I really support.

In the end, the whole thing should be stable in the long term - with a bit of seasoning. 😉
Thank you for your thoughts - always good to hear other perspectives!

••

Fl_ow@Fl_ow

23H

@Laro I would save a maximum of one ETF and add individual shares depending on the size of the portfolio.

$MSFT is a good pick in my opinion, and $ASML, $KO and $PEP are too much in my opinion, if only one of them.

Chances satellites ok but if then only $BTC with 10%

••

TaxesAreTheft@TaxesAreTheft

13H

Maybe reconsider, looks a lot like diworsification

••