I haven’t found a thread like this yet..
SO: What kind of geographical diversification do you have in your stock portfolio? How have you implemented it?
Below is my current diversification:
Finland (45%)
Other Europe (20%)
USA (30%)
Japan (2%)
Rest of the World (3%)
Diversification is done with direct stock investments and ETFs.
My target allocation is as follows:
Finland (30 %)
USA (30%)
Sweden (20 %)
Rest of Europe (10 %)
Rest of the world (10%)
Mainly through direct stock investments, max. 30 stocks. Additionally, ETFs at some point once the direct stock portfolio is so-called finished.
At the moment, I’ve had to keep shuffling buys and sells (which is a bit painful for a holder), so Finland’s share is currently too high (70%) and there are now only 24 stocks in the portfolio. Gradually, I’m moving back toward the target portfolio, but one can always use a bit of temporary creativity on the way to the goal. It keeps the general interest up.
It is also worth considering a company’s business as a whole, not just its domicile. Personally, when it comes to Finnish stocks, I mainly favor those where a significant portion of revenue comes from abroad. And for example, the US big tech giants are all global. Domicile alone doesn’t tell the whole story about geopolitical risks or actual diversification.
In principle, you would have to dig into the financial data of every company to see how much revenue comes from which continent.
For that reason, I don’t see much need to diversify in stocks beyond S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 ETFs. I have been trying to reduce direct stock holdings, although lately I haven’t been able to resist the temptation to buy Finnish stocks! They seem so cheap.
Answering the thread title so this doesn’t go completely off-topic:
USA 68.8% (or listed on Nasdaq, including ETFs)
Gold approx. 15%
Finland 12%
Denmark 2%
UK 1.4%
Sweden 0.8%
Is the Helsinki risk too concentrated? 
Helsinki 50%
Tampere 20%
Kajaani 10%
Vantaa 10%
Espoo 10%
This is a good point and I certainly take it into account myself, but I still diversify based on domicile as well. I no longer invest at all in companies whose main market is Finland or that have, for example, production or other key operations only in Finland. As a result of this policy, for instance, Ponsse (all production in Finland) and L&T (main market Finland) were sold.
I figure I have quite enough “Finland-risk” as it is, since I live and work here 
Geographical diversification also involves reducing exposure to high-risk countries.
For example, a portfolio full of Kone (over 30% of sales from China), Nvidia (completely dependent on Taiwanese subcontractors), Apple (China is a massive market for the company), and pulp companies (China holds a leading position as the price setter for pulp).
And if—or when—China invades Taiwan, all hell will break loose for a portfolio like that.
In general, focusing solely on geographical fragmentation in a portfolio is not advisable. Perhaps even more important is diversifying across different industries.
The majority is currently in funds, and I intend to focus on them going forward. The portfolio also includes some direct ‘bro-stocks’ to serve as a reminder! I don’t count these as diversification, but as a failure 
USA 54.3%
Norway 16.3%
Sweden 15%
Finland 14.4%
I plan to expand further, with the focus being more on the so-called big ones and less on the small ones.
Briefly in full percentages:
USA 61 %
Finland 29 %
Other Europe 5 %
Canada 5 %
Suomi100. If it refers to the company’s domicile. They are all indeed global players.
Yes. Finland 30%, capital region 70%.
My stock/ETF portfolio is now approximately as follows (± 2%):
40% domestic laggards (a couple of small firms, the rest large caps)
50% US
10% others (EM)
In a couple of years, the Finland weighting has increased quite a bit - the last time I looked at this properly was in 2021-06, when it was 21%. This has been a conscious choice because I see Finland as a relatively cheap market right now. (Most of the purchases were made this autumn, and in the spring I trimmed my US holdings again – some at the wrong time.)
Part of the reason is also the opening of an investment insurance policy – I plan to hold larger Finnish companies there because, for tax purposes, I prefer to keep dividends compounding (and there is no withholding tax on domestic ones; large caps because they can be bought at a sensible price when there is volume), and on the other hand, I don’t particularly want to appear on shareholder lists or generate unnecessary capital gains.
Is there a statistic somewhere showing which Finnish listed companies generate the most revenue from abroad?
A completely pure index portfolio. 85% world ETF and the remaining 15% split evenly between Nordnet’s Finland and Sweden funds. Regular monthly investments are rolling along. I realize I’m likely losing out on a few euros by overweighting the Nordics, but I like following the investment scene, especially domestically, out of curiosity. However, I don’t feel like I’m capable of picking stocks, so this way I get to satisfy my thirst for knowledge while maintaining a relatively stable return outlook.
This isn’t really available except by reading annual reports. Not everyone even reports that.
I found a couple of examples from 2022.
Huhtamäki: 2% of revenue from Finland
Kone: 2% of revenue from Finland
UPM: 8% of revenue from Finland
It is not completely up to date, but here is the geographical allocation of the entire investment portfolio, which is quite close. I need to compile all the portfolio figures into a single table again during the Christmas break.
The portfolio consists mainly of low-cost index funds and a slice of PYN Elite. Direct stock investments are almost entirely in the Helsinki Stock Exchange (Pölhex) and thus in the Europe sector of the pie chart. I have also tried to acquire high-quality, dividend-paying companies that already have operations abroad or a strong focus on expanding there.
Direct stock investments are about 20% of the total package.
Roughly like this
World 12.16%
Americas 47.75%
Europe 30.21%
Asia 1.77%
Emerging markets 2.58%
Fixed Income 7.23%
Fixed income in the portfolio
Americas 3.56%
Emerging markets 1.63%
World 0.91%
Europe 0.47%
Book-entry account:
Finland 55%
World 30%
Asia 15%
Equity savings account:
Finland 100%
Overall:
Finland 73.5%
World 17.5%
Asia 9%
The share of World and Asia will grow faster than individual stocks thanks to monthly savings in index funds, so the Finland percentage of the book-entry account will gradually decrease.
The equity savings account features only Finnish dividend payers, both now and in the future.
Canada 47 %
Sweden 22 %
Finland 20 %
USA 9 %
Some of it is lost to rounding, and naturally, cash is not included in the calculations. The portfolio is highly concentrated, so individual fluctuations occur, but I am okay with it as the expected returns look bright. The weight of Finland, on the other hand, is far too high; the intention is to reduce it significantly over time. I still haven’t really found anything to buy here that one could hold for a decade without worry, aiming for steady and continuous growth and excellent capital allocation that is profitable for the owner.
I have found this, but if a more detailed list exists, I would appreciate a link. Miten saada maantieteellistä hajautusta sijoittamalla Helsingin pörssiin? - Viisas raha
I’ve been looking into the geographical distribution of my equity funds for a while now; Asia has accumulated quite a bit of weight as I’m currently avoiding a sluggish Europe in particular, and also shying away slightly from the highly valued USA.
Vietnam is overweight due to PYN, and I’m fine with that; I’ll add more US exposure to the portfolio eventually when valuations start to look more reasonable. Europe has shot itself in the foot and hampered its competitiveness with regulation etc. so diligently that increasing Europe’s share is not on the horizon.
If direct stock investments (Digia and Renkaat) are included, Finland rises on the list to about the same level as Japan.
