An updated version of our “classic” post, originally published in 2021, where we drew parallels between football and investing. The 2026 World Cup gave Spanish fans the dream final: Spain versus Argentina, Lamine Yamal versus Leo Messi, and a 120-minute lesson in investing.
The Big Play (Once Again)
Every World Cup follows the same pattern: fans try to predict who the next heroes will be. Mbappé, Messi, Dembélé and even Lamine Yamal topped most predictions. The same happened with the national teams: France, Argentina, Germany and Brazil were, as always, among the favourites. Spain, however, was not.
The same thing happens in investing. Someone tells us that a person “made a fortune investing in…” or that they backed a particular company and “made a huge amount of money in no time.” Everyone is chasing the “big play.”
We don’t doubt that this can happen. But these “bets” are usually short-term and often have a lot to do with luck. And if it’s luck, it can just as easily turn against you on the next play and wipe out your gains.
That’s why, rather than betting on a winning horse, it’s better to have a system that works. One that not only delivers in the short term but can consistently produce good results over the medium and long term.
One of the best ways to achieve this is by building an investment portfolio. And what better way to explain it than through the World Cup final we have just witnessed?
Neither Messi nor Lamine Could Win Alone—and the Final Proved It
In the days leading up to the final, it was presented as an individual showdown: the greatest player of all time against the talent expected to inherit his throne. But the 120 minutes in East Rutherford told a different story.
Spain won 1-0 in extra time, and the goal perfectly summed up what a team is all about: Pedro Porro crossed from the right, Nico Williams won the header, and Ferran Torres finished past Dibu Martínez. Three different players, none of them “the star.” And the tournament’s Golden Ball didn’t go to the top scorer or the best dribbler—it went to Rodri, the player who makes everyone else perform better.
Lamine sacrificed himself for the team. Those expecting to see his usual dazzling attacking play saw something different: a disciplined Lamine tracking back, helping his full-back, and throughout the tournament—and especially in the final—playing a role that was unusual for him, all for the benefit of the collective plan. He gave up individual glory so the team could control the match. It was the least spectacular decision, but the one most likely to lead to victory.
And Messi, the greatest player of all time, was neutralised without his team. Let no one misunderstand this: Messi is unique, incomparable, and this final changes absolutely nothing about his legacy. But football offered a powerful lesson. After Enzo Fernández was sent off at the end of regular time, Argentina were reduced to ten men and lost the midfielder responsible for moving the ball forward. Without a team capable of controlling the game and delivering the ball into dangerous areas, Messi simply couldn’t influence the match. His extraordinary qualities—the qualities of the greatest player in history—were neutralised, not because he lacked talent, but because he lacked the right context.
The Lesson for Investors: Even the Best Asset Needs a Portfolio
This is exactly what separates buying a “star” stock or asset from building an investment portfolio: a well-diversified portfolio.
You may own the “Messi” of financial assets—the best company in the world, with outstanding fundamentals. But if the rest of your wealth doesn’t support it, if there are no assets to reduce volatility, stabilise the portfolio when markets become difficult, and provide the right context, that star asset may spend years “out of the game”: purchased at the wrong time, with an excessive allocation, and with nothing to cushion the inevitable 30% or 40% declines that even the best companies experience.
Conversely, a well-built portfolio doesn’t need its star to shine every single day. In the final, it wasn’t the superstar who made the difference—it was the strength of the team: defensive solidity (Spain conceded just one goal throughout the tournament), control of midfield, and goals scored by different players. In investing, this is called diversification: bonds, different sectors, different regions, each doing its job so the whole portfolio can continue progressing even when one component has a bad day.
What Does an Investment Portfolio Have to Do with Football?
We can think of an investment portfolio as a group of assets working together to achieve a financial objective by balancing expected returns and expected volatility.
When a national team coach decides on a strategy to win the World Cup, they may build a team designed to score many goals, even if that means conceding a few. In other words, they accept greater risk, knowing that they may struggle in some matches but ultimately have a better chance of lifting the trophy.
The financial equivalent would be an investor who isn’t afraid of market corrections or volatility because they know that maintaining a significant allocation to equities increases the probability of success over the long term.
Another coach may choose the opposite approach: a more defensive team designed not to lose. That would be equivalent to a portfolio with a lower allocation to equities and therefore lower volatility. On average, it may score fewer goals, but it is also less likely to concede them.
Both approaches are perfectly valid, in football and in investing. Interestingly, Spain’s World Cup-winning team combined both: exceptional defensive strength and 14 goals scored. What matters is that the team works as a cohesive unit and that the objective—and the associated risks—are clearly understood.
The 26-Man Squad and Asset Allocation
This was the biggest World Cup in history, featuring 48 national teams. But each coach could only select a squad of 26 players and field just 11 of them in every match. Choosing the right squad was the most important decision of the tournament.
In investing, this decision is known as asset allocation.
First comes squad selection: the range of asset classes available to face different situations throughout the “season” (global equities, fixed income, different geographical regions and currencies). Then comes the starting lineup: how much weight we assign to each asset according to our investment horizon and financial goals.
There’s another important point: the best teams don’t play with eleven strikers. Spain’s coach, Luis de la Fuente, didn’t field Lamine, Nico Williams and nine more forwards. He needed players with different qualities who complemented each other. Rodri didn’t score spectacular goals, but he won the Golden Ball. In portfolio management, this is called correlation: ideally, assets should have low correlation and move differently from one another, just as a defensive midfielder and a winger contribute in different ways toward the same objective.
The Result Shouldn’t Have Changed Your Plan
After the final whistle, millions of fans drew definitive conclusions from a single match. In investing, this is one of the classic mistakes: judging a strategy based on the outcome of a single “play.”
A final can be decided by a red card, a disallowed goal or a finish in the 110th minute. Long-term investing cannot. That’s why we prefer the system over the individual play: diversification doesn’t guarantee you’ll win every match, but it maximises your chances of winning the tournament—or, in our case, achieving your financial goals.
At the end of the match, Messi and Lamine embraced: the greatest player in history and the one who aspires to follow in his footsteps. Both know better than anyone that no star wins alone.
At inbestMe, we place great importance on asset allocation to build the best low-cost indexed portfolios for our clients. Portfolios that, through automation, are like Spain’s World Cup-winning team: they don’t depend on a single star but on a system that works as consistently as a metronome—or as close to one as possible.
