6G·

Presentation of portfolio logic - feedback welcome!

Hello dear community,


Recently my portfolio and its logic was presented in an article by Business Insider and analyzed by Konrad Kleinfeld from SPDR. There was some exciting feedback, but of course I would also like to activate your swarm intelligence and get your feedback 🙂


First of all: Although I am pursuing a core-satellite strategy, the "satellite" does not aim to outperform, but is simply for fun and offers room for investments that do not fit into the logic of the core. The satellite consists largely of ETFs (e.g. in commodities, real estate, private equity, REITs, etc.), but only accounts for <10% of the overall portfolio and is not included here.


My goal is broad diversification that goes beyond a pure market capitalization-based index as well as long-term returns.


In doing so, I rely on a rule-based approach and diversify along factors based on the selection criteria of the indices. As I deliberately do not want to make any sector or regional bets in the "core", but instead focus purely on the selection criteria of the indices, the relatively significant dividend block serves to reduce the US lump, as high-dividend companies are more frequently found in Europe.


Since the portfolio is quite granular, the portfolio overview function would be very confusing, so I hope it is easy to understand in text form:


1. MSCI World Block (40%):


$SPPW (-0,55%) MSCI World (10%)

$XDEM (-0,4%) MSCI World Momentum (10%)

$XDEQ (-0,83%) MSCI World Quality (10%)

$XDEV (-1,02%) MSCI World Value (5%)

$WSML (-1,26%) MSCI World Small Cap (5%)


Momentum, Quality and Size in the sense of the "normal", market-capitalized MSCI World are weighted slightly higher, as they have historically performed better and should logically perform better in a long-term positive market environment.


2. emerging markets block (20%):


$SPYM (-0,93%) MSCI Emerging Markets (6.67%)

$SPYX (-1,41%) MSCI Emerging Markets Small Cap (6.67%)

$5MVL (-1,24%) MSCI Emerging Markets Value (6.67%)


⚠ There are currently no ETFs on the MSCI EM Quality and MSCI EM Momentum indices that are available in UCITS form and tradable in Europe. Therefore, the logic of the EM block does not yet exactly reflect the structure of the World block. As soon as these ETFs are available, the block will be adjusted accordingly. Consequently, the "normal" MSCI EM as well as the value factor and small caps are currently equally weighted here.


3rd Dividend block (30%):


$VHYL (-1,38%) FTSE All-World High Dividend Yield (5%)

$TDIV (-1,39%) Developed Markets Dividend Leaders (10%)

$ISPA (-0,57%) Global Select Dividend 100 (10%)

$ZPRG (-1,29%) S&P Global Dividend Aristocrats (5%)


As mentioned, this block serves 1) to reduce the US lump, is also distributing and thus provides cash flow, which 2) is used for rebalancing at the end of the year (so I don't have to spend any additional capital on this, which has a psychological effect for me) and 3) the monthly distributions motivate me to continue investing intensively. In addition, 4) the tax-free allowance is utilized without having to actively sell shares in the other "blocks". The top 10 holdings of the individual ETFs differ greatly here despite the common denominator of "high yield". However, the financial sector is a large lump. The weighting here is derived from the high yield and diversification in the sense of complementing the other "blocks" (i.e. little tech and little US).


4. hedge bonds (10%):


$IBCI (+0,02%) Euro Inflation Linked Government Bond (10%)


My equity allocation is (roughly) based on the rule "120 minus age", so 10% is currently left for bonds. The purpose of a bond block in the portfolio is stabilization and further diversification. With shares, I give a company capital, i.e. I become a stakeholder in the company. Corporate bonds have the same logic, because here I am also giving capital to companies. That's why I opted for government bonds in the eurozone. TIPS have performed comparatively well here in the past and the logic of inflation-linked interest rates also appeals to me.


📈 Additional considerations:


1. i deliberately do without the "Low / Min Volatility" factor, as i assume a rising market in the long term and would like to participate more in the positive phases instead of reducing the vola.


2) I don't see overlaps between ETFs as a problem, but rather as a deliberate overweighting of companies that fulfill several criteria at the same time. Of course, many companies currently overlap in the classic MSCI World and the Quality and Momentum variants. However, the selection criteria are different and as soon as a company no longer meets the quality criteria, for example, it automatically drops out of the index and the weighting is reduced without me having to actively do anything about it.


3) I have actively decided not to invest in a multi-factor ETF because I want to have transparent control over the allocation of the individual factors and many of the factor ETFs available combine the selection criteria underlying the individual factors in such a way that the corresponding product would have performed well in the past, which of course represents a hindsight bias and does not necessarily correlate with future performance.


💡 To those of you who have read this far:


First of all, thank you for your time! The portfolio is intended to dynamically reflect a section of the market that could develop positively in a diversified manner based on the different selection criteria of the indices, without taking bets on specific sectors or regions. What do you think of the allocation and the strategy? Do you see any room for improvement or things you would do differently?


Thanks for reading, showing interest and thinking along. 😊

#etfs
#portfolio
#portfoliocheck

13
22 Commenti

immagine del profilo
I like it, I would only revise the dividend block 😊
3
immagine del profilo
@Iwanowitsch why can't i visit your profile
immagine del profilo
@Iwanowitsch Hi Kate, thanks for your feedback! Would you change the selection or the weighting? :)
1
immagine del profilo
@Memo0606 because I blocked you months ago 😆
4
immagine del profilo
@DrummerMC the selection 🤓
immagine del profilo
@DrummerMC what do you think of $TDIV $GGRP $FUSD and or $FGEQ?
immagine del profilo
@Iwanowitsch What would you change? 😅
immagine del profilo
@DrummerMC what do you think of $TDIV $GGRP $FUSD and or $FGEQ ?
immagine del profilo
@Iwanowitsch $TDIV we have included, I think the ratio of chart performance to distributions is great. $GGRP has an IT lump, $FUSD and $FGEQ each have a US lump. IT and US are already quite strongly represented in the "MSCI World" block 🤓
3
immagine del profilo
@Iwanowitsch Hey Kate, why do you like the $TDIV? I'm thinking about adding it to my portfolio.......
immagine del profilo
Interesting approaches that make perfect sense the way you have explained them. Personally, it would be too time-consuming for me, but that doesn't mean it's not good.
Do you have a benchmark over several years where you can see the comparison to a "carefree package" dev.world/EM. What is the performance deviation?

What would also be interesting is how the analysis by BI came about and what was their feedback?
3
immagine del profilo
@TomTurboInvest The detailed backtest is actually still pending, I assume that the performance compared to the benchmark (I would compare with the MCWI IMI) is comparable or slightly worse due to the bond and dividend part. But more diversified. In recent years, you have done quite well if you simply track the global economy by market capitalization. That doesn't have to be the optimum in the future. I submitted the logic to BI for the portfolio check and was happy that they selected my portfolio from the submissions :) The feedback from the gentleman at SPDR was to increase bonds and reduce the number of ETFs in the dividend block. However, as these hardly overlap, I personally don't see the point. In addition, a few sectors are underrepresented, but IT and finance are overrepresented. As I don't want to make any sector bets, I'll probably have to make do with that. Thanks for your feedback!
1
immagine del profilo
interesting - diversified at ETF level. It would also be interesting to analyze individual stocks cumulatively across all ETFs - is there a "cliff risk" for individual stocks (NVIDIA, Apple, ...) or for sectors (technology)?
1
immagine del profilo
@Thorsten_1974 Hi Thorsten, fortunately getquin allows us to do such analyses, that was one of the reasons why I signed up :) Of course, the magnificent seven or tech and dividend kings such as Apple, Nvidia, Verizon, Meta, HSBC, IBM, etc. are represented with up to 2% in some cases. Currently, the most represented stock is Apple with 1.56%. I'm fine with that.
1
immagine del profilo
All in $XDEM is completely sufficient. This gives you the crème de la crème of the MSCI World Index. It is regularly reallocated and is much more concentrated with 350 positions.
immagine del profilo
@Thetrendisyourfriend Interesting, thanks for your feedback! How did you come to the conclusion that momentum in particular represents the crème de la crème? The MSCI equal weight in particular has outperformed momentum, sometimes for years. 2008-2014 for example.
immagine del profilo
@DrummerMC I did a 60-year backtest and it turned out that the momentum factor has the best p.a. result. It is the crème de la crème because it only has the 350 companies in the index that have outperformed in the last year, ranked by market cap.
immagine del profilo
@Thetrendisyourfriend I am aware of the past performance, but it sounds very much like a hindsight bias. After all, no one can guarantee that this trend will continue. But I take it from your username that you assume it will ;)
immagine del profilo
@DrummerMC Oh, and the max. Drowdown is only marginally greater than for the normal MSCI World.
1
immagine del profilo
@DrummerMC What trend? That the global economy is growing? So I assume yes. With the ETF, we're just making sure that we take the respective trend or momentum with us. If AI is strong at the moment, then a particularly large number of tech. Companies are represented. When cyclical stocks are booming, they are weighted higher. All this really means is that we are almost always on the side of the winners. (Starting to form a bubble 😅)
immagine del profilo
@Thetrendisyourfriend We invest in a growing global economy with market capitalization indices. The factors are based on a section of these that meets certain criteria. In the case of momentum, these are indices that have shown a positive chart performance over the last 6 or 12 months. Of course, this is a pretty good way to get involved in any bubble formation; in fact, you are only "betting" on the psychology of the masses, and as far as I know there is no scientific basis for momentum. Despite everything, it has performed well (which is no indication of whether it will continue to do so in the future, again: hindsight bias). But the information about the max. drawdown is new to me, thanks!
Partecipa alla conversazione