Would a unified Scandinavia really be a Sweden-wank? It wouldn't be Sweden as we recognize it. Its capital would almost certainly not be in Mälaren Valley; Copenhagen and Malmö are more natural locations, and this would have knock-on effects on the standard language and such. The ruling dynasty may come from Sweden, but, well, in the Union of the Crowns, the English crown passed to a Scottish royal house, and I doubt anyone would consider the past 400 years to have been a Scotland-wank.
Usually, when I think about wanks, I think about wealth, and secondarily territory. Well, you can't wank Sweden's wealth level, because it's already one of the richest countries in the world. Most you can do is little tweaks, like give Sweden a share of Norway's oil revenues (Norway offered this to Sweden in exchange for technical help when it was exploring; Sweden refused, Norway found the oil anyway, and now Norway is way richer).
Ad territory... what could be Swedish territory that isn't? Finland, maybe... but it would not survive modern nationalism. I have a TL in which a union with Finland does survive, but only in the context of a pan-Nordic federal state. The same is true of Livonia and 17c Swedish territory in Poland and Germany - those aren't staying Swedish once industrialization hits. Within Europe, the only way you get more territory is ethnic cleansing, and at no point in its history is Sweden capable of doing that. Outside Europe, Sweden is just about the worst-located European state with a coastline for trans-Atlantic expansion - it has the worst coastline for it among the Scandinavian countries, and Scandinavia generally faces the most agriculturally useless part of the Americas and wouldn't have any incentive to get to the interesting parts.