Why I Picked FANG+, NASDAQ 100, and ACWI for My $2,500/Month Portfolio

In the budget article, I promised I’d explain why I chose each of our three funds. This is that post.

My wife and I invest ¥370,000 (about $2,500) every month. FANG+ gets ¥100,000, NASDAQ 100 gets ¥50,000, an All-Country World Index fund (ACWI) gets ¥200,000, and iDeCo gets ¥20,000. Here’s why each one is there.

Quick explainer for anyone outside Japan: NISA is Japan’s tax-advantaged investment account, roughly equivalent to a Roth IRA — capital gains and dividends are completely tax-free. iDeCo is a defined-contribution pension, think 401(k) with tax-deductible contributions but locked until age 60.

VTI Was Already the Foundation

Before I explain the three new funds, context matters.

I’d been accumulating a US total stock market fund (VTI equivalent) since 2018. That was already my broad base — thousands of stocks, solid diversification, perfectly sensible. When Japan launched the dramatically expanded “New NISA” in January 2024, the question wasn’t “what fund should I start with?” It was “what do I add on top of VTI?”

VTI gave me the foundation. The new funds were supposed to give me something VTI couldn’t.

FANG+ — I Use These Companies Every Single Day

FANG+ was the first pick.

The reason is embarrassingly simple: I wanted to invest in companies whose products I use every day. I wake up, grab my iPhone. Order something on Amazon. Search on Google. Work all day in Microsoft tools. Watch Netflix at night. This routine hasn’t changed in a decade. When I asked myself “will these companies exist in 10 years?” — I couldn’t picture them gone.

FANG+ holds just 10 stocks. Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Microsoft, NVIDIA, Netflix, Tesla, Broadcom, CrowdStrike. That’s it. Any textbook would tell you 10 stocks isn’t diversification. And they’d be right. But I can name every single company in this fund and explain what they do. That clarity was actually reassuring. I know exactly what I own.

With VTI as my safety net already in place, FANG+ was the “offense” allocation. The safe play was already running. Time to swing.

NASDAQ 100 — Filling FANG+‘s Gaps

FANG+ is 10 stocks. I like it, but 10 names means any single blowup hits hard.

NASDAQ 100 was the complement. It includes all 10 FANG+ stocks plus 90 more — semiconductor companies, biotech, fintech, names that FANG+ doesn’t cover. I’m riding FANG+‘s returns while also catching the broader tech sector’s growth. Think of it as insurance that fills the holes FANG+ leaves open.

Yes, there’s massive overlap between these two. I know. But casting a wider net across 100 tech-adjacent companies means I’m picking up growth stories that 10 stocks alone would miss. At ¥50,000 a month it’s the smallest allocation — a supplement, not a core holding.

Why Not S&P 500?

People ask this, so I’ll address it directly.

VTI already covers roughly 80% of what S&P 500 holds. Adding S&P 500 on top would be redundant — like ordering the same dish twice. I wanted something genuinely different. FANG+ gave me concentrated tech exposure. ACWI gave me global diversification. Both added new dimensions that VTI didn’t.

If I didn’t already hold VTI? Yeah, S&P 500 would have been a strong contender. But I already had that base covered.

ACWI — The Defensive Line

The All-Country World Index gets ¥200,000 a month — the single largest allocation. And that’s deliberate.

ACWI doesn’t spike dramatically. It doesn’t crash dramatically either. Compared to FANG+ and NASDAQ 100, it’s boring. That boring stability is exactly what I needed.

Think of it like a soccer team. FANG+ is the striker trying to score goals. NASDAQ 100 is the midfielder. ACWI is the entire back line — defenders and goalkeeper. You can only attack confidently when you know your defense is solid. Without ACWI anchoring the portfolio, I wouldn’t have the guts to put ¥100,000 a month into a 10-stock fund.

Honestly? I’d love to go all-in on offense. Pour everything into FANG+. But offense only works when there’s defense behind it. Get that order wrong and you’ll panic-sell everything during the next crash.

Since New NISA started in 2024, we’ve hit a few rough patches. When FANG+ drops 5% but ACWI only dips 1%, the overall portfolio damage stays manageable. That “okay, we’re fine” feeling is what keeps me contributing every month instead of pulling the plug.

My wife isn’t particularly interested in the details of fund selection — I manage everything as the household fund manager. Having more than half the portfolio in ACWI is what lets me sleep at night.

NISA Slots and iDeCo — Kept Simple

Japan’s New NISA has two slots: a “tsumitate” (regular contribution) slot and a “growth investment” slot. My approach is dead simple — if a fund qualifies for the tsumitate slot, I use that first. When the tsumitate limit is hit, I switch to the growth slot.

iDeCo gets ¥20,000 into a Dow Jones-linked fund. It’s a separate tax play — contributions are fully tax-deductible, so it’s less about conviction in the Dow and more about the tax math.

I’ve Never Changed the Settings

Since setting up this structure, I haven’t adjusted the allocation once. Market dips? Don’t move money from FANG+ to ACWI. NASDAQ surges? Don’t increase the allocation. Set it, don’t fiddle.

This discipline came from eight years of holding VTI without selling. Every time I’ve acted on instinct, it’s cost me. The best investment strategy, it turns out, is the one you execute on autopilot.

No Anxiety — Because It Was Simple

Here’s the thing I didn’t expect: when I finalized these three funds, I felt zero anxiety.

Probably because the whole setup is simple enough to explain in one sentence. FANG+ is 10 companies I use daily. NASDAQ 100 is 100 tech companies. ACWI is the whole world. Each fund has a clear role. I can tell you exactly why I hold each one.

The difference between “I bought this because everyone said to” and “I bought this because here’s my specific reason” is the difference between anxiety and calm. Having a reason for every position — even if the reason is simple — is what makes the portfolio holdable.

Is this the optimal allocation? Almost certainly not. But it’s one I understand completely and can stick with for decades. That matters more than optimization.

This article reflects personal experience and is for informational purposes only — not investment advice. All investment decisions are your own responsibility.