Roast mode 🔥

Chasing yield with training wheels on and three copies of the same Nasdaq bet

Report created on Apr 21, 2026

Risk profile

  • Secure
    Speculative

The risk profile, derived from past market volatility, reflects the level of risk the portfolio is exposed to. This assessment helps align your investments with your financial goals and comfort with market fluctuations.

Diversification profile

  • Focused
    Diversified

The diversification assessment evaluates the spread of investments across asset classes, regions, and sectors. This ensures a balanced mix, reducing risk and maximizing returns by not concentrating in any single area.

Positions

This portfolio looks like someone tried to build an income machine out of a tech rocket and then duct-taped a trash company and a mall REIT to the side. Over 60% sits in three funds that all rhyme with “S&P or Nasdaq,” plus a giant solo bet on Waste Management that’s way too big for a single stock cameo. The tiny sprinkle of international dividend ETF at 0.05% is pure decoration, like parsley on a steak. Overall, it’s pretending to be diversified while three positions actually drive the show and everything else is background noise.

Growth Info

Historically, this thing has done the classic “looks good, could’ve been better” routine. A $1,000 investment became $1,402, which sounds nice until you notice the US and global markets both did it faster. CAGR of 16.58% is solid on paper, but underperforming by 2.5–3.2 percentage points per year is a quiet tax for the privilege of this Frankenstein structure. Max drawdown at -16.49% wasn’t even milder than the big indexes, so there’s no clear “safety premium” showing up. And 90% of returns coming from just 15 days is basically a reminder this portfolio is riding the same roller coaster as everyone else.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection is where the portfolio gets gently exposed. Monte Carlo is basically a thousand “what if” timelines for the next 15 years, like running a financial multiverse. Median outcome takes $1,000 to $2,747, which is fine but not exactly heroic for an equity-heavy, yield-chasing setup. The likely range from about $1,755 to $3,912 says the outcomes are all over the place, and the low end nearly hugging $1,000 after 15 years shows real downside mediocrity. Past data fuels these simulations, so it’s more “yesterday’s weather extended into next decade” than any real prophecy.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    96%
  • Not classified
    4%

Asset class “diversification” here is basically: stocks, and then some stuff the data provider couldn’t label. With 96% in equities, calling this “Balanced” is generous; it’s a stock portfolio cosplaying as balanced because a questionnaire said 4/7. There’s zero real offset from bonds, real assets, or anything that behaves differently when markets get moody. When everything is equity, risk lives and dies with the stock market cycle. In plain terms, this isn’t a multi-engine plane; it’s just one big engine with a few stickers on the side and a slightly cushioned seat.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    34%
  • Industrials
    16%
  • Telecommunications
    11%
  • Consumer Staples
    8%
  • Health Care
    8%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Financials
    5%
  • Energy
    4%
  • Real Estate
    3%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    3%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Basic Materials
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, tech is clearly the main addiction at 34%, with a strong supporting cast from industrials and a random telecom chunk that probably snuck in through the indexes. For something that screams “dividends” and “income,” the tech weight is still doing the growth-bro thing underneath. The sector mix looks less like a carefully designed balance and more like whatever the S&P 500 and Nasdaq decided was trendy, with a mild attempt at adult supervision via dividend funds. The tiny allocations to utilities and basic materials show almost no interest in the boring, stabilizing corners of the market.

Regions Info

  • North America
    99%
  • Europe Developed
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geography is simple: the portfolio thinks the world ends at the US border. With 99% in North America and a token 1% in developed Europe, global investing is basically a checkbox someone ticked once and forgot about. For an equity-heavy mix, ignoring most of the planet is a pretty bold “America or nothing” stance. That tiny sliver of international high dividend ETF at 0.05% might as well not exist; it’s not moving any needle. The result is a portfolio whose fortunes are handcuffed to one region’s policies, currency, and corporate cycle whether that’s intentional or not.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    51%
  • Mega-cap
    33%
  • Mid-cap
    11%
  • Small-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Market cap exposure is a full-on love letter to the giants. Around 84% in mega and large caps means this portfolio is basically big-brand, index-favorite corporations with almost no meaningful exposure to mid or small caps. That’s not necessarily a disaster, but it does mean growth drivers are largely the same crowded names everyone else owns. The 1% in small caps is cosmetic, like saying a burger is healthy because there’s lettuce. When markets get dominated by megacap narratives, this portfolio goes along for the ride, with almost no seat at the more niche or idiosyncratic parts of the market.

True holdings Info

  • Waste Management Inc
    10.93%
  • NVIDIA Corporation
    3.65%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Apple Inc
    2.90%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Realty Income Corporation
    2.78%
  • Microsoft Corporation
    2.37%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    2.08%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    1.54%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    1.33%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    1.31%
    Part of fund(s):
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
  • Top 10 total 30.98%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

The look-through holdings just confirm the obvious: huge overlap in the same megacap darlings. NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Broadcom, Tesla — all showing up through the funds like a greatest-hits album played on loop. Real concentration is hiding inside the wrappers, even if each ETF looks diversified on its own. Waste Management at 10.93% plus additional index exposure to it outside the top-10 data just amplifies that single-name bet. And since coverage only sees ETF top-10s, the actual overlap is almost certainly worse. This isn’t diversification; it’s redundant ownership dressed up in different ticker symbols.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
High
Data availability: 31%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 74%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 14%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 14%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
Very high
Data availability: 58%

Factor exposures are estimated using statistical models based on historical data and measure systematic (market-relative) tilts, not absolute portfolio characteristics. Results may vary depending on the analysis period, data availability, and currency of the underlying assets.

The factor profile screams “I want smooth yield and quality, but I still like excitement.” Quality is very high at 90% and low volatility at 88%, which is like insisting on seatbelts and airbags in a sports car. At the same time, yield is high at 71%, so this portfolio leans hard into income, even if that income often comes from covered-call strategies with tradeoffs buried under the hood. Size at effectively 0% shows a big tilt away from smaller companies — this thing wants stability and brand names, not scrappy upstarts. Momentum at 68% adds a bit of trend-chasing on top, a slightly contradictory “play it safe but chase what’s hot” blend.

Risk contribution Info

  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    Weight: 26.80%
    31.0%
  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    Weight: 25.61%
    29.8%
  • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    Weight: 16.80%
    20.6%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
    Weight: 17.02%
    12.5%
  • Waste Management Inc
    Weight: 10.93%
    5.3%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 99.1%

Risk contribution exposes who’s actually driving the drama. The top three holdings — JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income, Fidelity 500, and NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income — together weigh 69.21% but contribute a hefty 81.37% of total risk. That’s a lot of power concentrated in a small club. Each of those funds pulls more risk than its weight, especially the NEOS ETF at a risk/weight of 1.23. Meanwhile, single-stock darling Waste Management carries almost 11% weight but only about 5% of risk, doing a surprisingly quiet job. The message: the big index and Nasdaq income products are running the volatility show.

Redundant positions Info

  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    Fidelity 500 Index Fund
    High correlation

The correlation picture is basically three clones walking into the same party wearing slightly different shirts. Fidelity 500, JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income, and NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income all move almost identically. Different marketing, similar underlying behavior. In normal markets that feels fine, even comforting. But when a real drawdown hits, this setup doesn’t give much in the way of offset — everything slumps together. Correlation is just a fancy way of saying “do these things zig and zag differently?” and here the answer is: not really. It’s a chorus, not a diversified band.

Risk vs. return

This chart shows the Efficient Frontier, calculated using your current assets with different allocation combinations. It highlights the best balance between risk and return based on historical data. "Efficient" portfolios maximize returns for a given risk or minimize risk for a given return. Portfolios below the curve are less efficient. This is informational and not a recommendation to buy or sell any assets.

Click on the colored dots to explore allocations.

The efficient frontier chart absolutely roasts the current setup. With a Sharpe ratio of 0.94 while the optimal mix of the same holdings hits 1.65, this portfolio is leaving a ridiculous amount of risk-adjusted return on the table. The optimal portfolio has almost the same risk (13.12% vs 13.40%) but a much higher expected return at 22.58%. Even the minimum variance version beats it on Sharpe at 1.37 with less volatility. Being 6.37 percentage points below the frontier at the same risk level is like paying for a performance car and then driving everywhere in second gear.

Dividends Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 1.10%
  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF 10.50%
  • Realty Income Corporation 5.00%
  • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 13.90%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.40%
  • Vanguard International High Dividend Yield Index Fund ETF Shares 3.40%
  • Waste Management Inc 1.50%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 6.31%

Dividends are the main personality trait here — TotalYield at 6.31% is loud. Two funds alone, JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income and NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income, are yielding double digits, which is not “normal steady dividend” territory; that’s option-premium and tradeoff territory. Realty Income and Schwab Dividend add more yield spice on top, while the S&P 500 index and Waste Management quietly show more modest payouts. The portfolio clearly prioritizes cash flow now, even if that may cap participation in big upside moves. It’s less “growth engine” and more “income vending machine with a complex backstory.”

Ongoing product costs Info

  • Fidelity 500 Index Fund 0.02%
  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF 0.35%
  • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 0.68%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • Vanguard International High Dividend Yield Index Fund ETF Shares 0.22%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.22%

Costs are the rare area where this portfolio behaves like a grown-up. A total TER of 0.22% is perfectly reasonable, especially with some higher-fee income products hiding inside. The NEOS ETF at 0.68% is the diva in the room, charging real money for its high-yield tricks, while Fidelity’s 500 index fund at 0.02% is practically paying to be here. Fees aren’t the problem child this time; structure and overlap are. Still, paying for three heavily correlated equity income and index exposures is like subscribing to multiple streaming services to watch the same show.

What next?

Ready to invest in this portfolio?

Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.

Select broker

Create your own report?

Analyze your portfolio

Join our community!

Join Discord

The information provided on this platform is for informational purposes only and should not be considered as financial or investment advice. Insightfolio does not provide investment advice, personalized recommendations, or guidance regarding the purchase, holding, or sale of financial assets. The tools and content are intended for educational purposes only and are not tailored to individual circumstances, financial needs, or objectives.

Insightfolio assumes no liability for the accuracy, completeness, or reliability of the information presented. Users are solely responsible for verifying the information and making independent decisions based on their own research and careful consideration. Use of the platform should not replace consultation with qualified financial professionals.

Investments involve risks. Users should be aware that the value of investments may fluctuate and that past performance is not an indicator of future results. Investment decisions should be based on personal financial goals, risk tolerance, and independent evaluation of relevant information.

Insightfolio does not endorse or guarantee the suitability of any particular financial product, security, or strategy. Any projections, forecasts, or hypothetical scenarios presented on the platform are for illustrative purposes only and are not guarantees of future outcomes.

By accessing the services, information, or content offered by Insightfolio, users acknowledge and agree to these terms of the disclaimer. If you do not agree to these terms, please do not use our platform.

Instrument logos provided by Elbstream.

Help us improve Insightfolio

Your feedback makes a difference! Share your thoughts in our quick survey. Take the survey