High income growth focused portfolio with heavy technology tilt and concentrated risk sources
Report created on Mar 27, 2026Risk 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
-
QQ NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
QQQI - US78433H6751 85.00% -
SG iShares Trust
SGOV - US46436E7186 15.00%
The structure is very focused: about 85% in a Nasdaq 100 high-income ETF and 15% in an iShares bond ETF. That means one equity fund is driving almost all of the portfolio’s behavior, while the smaller bond slice is mainly there as a stabilizer. For a “balanced” risk profile, this leans clearly toward growth and equity risk rather than a 60/40-type mix. The big positive is simplicity and easy monitoring. The flip side is that outcomes are tightly tied to how one specific strategy and index perform. Anyone using a setup like this should be very sure they genuinely want equity-style ups and downs in exchange for high income.
Growth
From early 2024 to March 2026, $1,000 grew to about $1,314, a Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR) of 13.83%. CAGR is like average speed on a long car trip: it smooths out all the bumps. Over this short period, the portfolio slightly lagged both the U.S. market and global market by around 1–2% per year but had a similar max drawdown of about -17%. That drawdown level is real “equity-like” volatility, not mild bond-type movement. With only about two years of data, it’s too little history to judge the strategy long-term, and past returns never guarantee future results, especially for income-focused derivatives-based ETFs.
Asset classes
- Stocks 84%
- Bonds 15%
- Other 1%
Asset allocation is strongly equity-heavy: around 84% stocks, 15% bonds, and 1% “other.” For someone labeled “balanced,” that’s more aggressive than a classic split, which would usually have more bonds or cash. The upside is higher expected long-term growth and more income potential. The trade-off is sharper swings, especially in equity bear markets or tech selloffs, because the 15% bond sleeve does not meaningfully buffer large drawdowns. This allocation is intentional if the goal is income plus growth rather than capital stability. If someone truly needs smoother returns or short-term access to cash, a higher percentage in high-quality bonds or cash-like assets would usually be considered.
Sectors
- Technology 43%
- Telecommunications 14%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Consumer Staples 7%
- Health Care 4%
- Industrials 3%
- Utilities 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
- Energy 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is dominated by technology at 43%, with telecommunications and consumer discretionary also meaningful, while areas like utilities, energy, and basic materials are tiny. This tech-heavy skew is common for Nasdaq-linked strategies and often aligns with recent market leadership, which has boosted returns historically. However, tech-driven portfolios tend to be more sensitive to interest rate changes, innovation cycles, and regulatory news. They can shine in growth-friendly environments but may underperform when value or defensive sectors lead. This sector composition is modern and growth-oriented, and it does broadly resemble large growth benchmarks, but the tilt means bigger booms and busts than a more evenly spread sector mix.
Regions
- North America 83%
- Europe Developed 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, about 83% sits in North America with only a token allocation to developed Europe and effectively none to the rest of the world. That’s a very home-biased setup and, in recent years, has been beneficial because U.S. large-cap growth has led global markets. But it also means strong dependence on one economy, one central bank, and one currency. If non-U.S. regions outperform for a decade, or if the dollar weakens, this kind of portfolio will likely lag more globally balanced approaches. The positive side is alignment with the world’s deepest equity market; the trade-off is limited diversification against regional shocks or different growth cycles abroad.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 46%
- Large-cap 29%
- Mid-cap 10%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Market cap exposure is anchored in mega-caps at 46%, plus 29% large-cap and 10% mid-cap. That’s a clear bias toward the very largest companies, which often provide stability, liquidity, and strong business models. It also means less exposure to smaller, potentially faster-growing but more volatile firms. Mega-cap dominance can help in risk-off periods when investors flock to well-known names, but it can drag if leadership rotates to smaller or more cyclical companies. This structure mirrors many major growth indices, which is a strong indicator of broad market alignment. However, it reduces the classic small-cap “size” effect that sometimes boosts returns over very long horizons.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.36%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 6.27%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.93%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.80%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 3.23%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.04%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 3.03%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.82%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
WM Walmart Inc. Common Stock 2.78%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.55%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Top 10 total 39.81%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through the ETFs, the top exposures are heavily skewed toward mega-cap growth names: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla, Alphabet, Meta, Walmart, and Broadcom. Many of these show up in multiple underlying funds, creating hidden concentration even though it’s a “two-ETF” portfolio. Because only top-10 ETF holdings are captured, true overlap is probably higher than reported. This means headline diversification can be misleading: on paper there are hundreds of holdings, but performance is still dominated by a handful of big tech and consumer platforms. Anyone using a structure like this should accept that their fate is closely tied to these giants’ earnings cycles and sentiment.
Factors
The strongest factor tilts are toward yield and momentum. Factors are like investing “ingredients” such as value, quality, or volatility that research links to long-term return patterns. A big yield tilt fits the 13%+ income profile, but high yield often comes with trade-offs: limited price appreciation or more complex option strategies. Strong momentum means holdings that have done well recently, which can boost returns in trending markets but hurt when trends abruptly reverse. Limited signal coverage beyond these factors suggests the portfolio is not strongly tilted toward defensive traits like low volatility or quality. That can mean greater sensitivity to sentiment swings and macro shocks, in exchange for higher potential upside.
Risk contribution
-
NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
Weight: 85.00% 100.0% -
iShares Trust
Weight: 15.00% 0.0%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, not just its size. Here, the Nasdaq 100 high-income ETF, at 85% weight, contributes essentially 100% of the total risk, while the bond ETF’s risk share is effectively zero. It’s like an orchestra where one instrument plays at full blast and everyone else is whispering. This concentrated risk is fine if that one ETF is exactly the risk engine someone wants. If not, rebalancing toward a higher bond weight or adding other uncorrelated assets could spread risk more evenly. The current setup is very clear: almost everything rides on one equity-income strategy.
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.
On the risk/return chart, the current portfolio has an expected return of 13.89% with 14.74% volatility and a Sharpe ratio of 0.81. The Sharpe ratio compares return to risk, like how many miles you travel per gallon of gas. The “optimal” and minimum-variance portfolios, using the same building blocks, show much lower risk and similar returns, hence extremely high Sharpe ratios, suggesting the current mix sits below the efficient frontier. That means reweighting the same holdings—mainly upping the low-risk bond slice—could improve risk-adjusted returns or drastically reduce volatility at similar expected returns. The same-risk optimized version even shows room for slightly higher return at comparable or modestly higher risk.
Dividends
- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 15.10%
- iShares Trust 4.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 13.44%
The income profile is the standout feature. A total yield around 13.44%, driven by about 15.1% from the Nasdaq 100 high-income ETF and 4% from the bond ETF, is extremely high versus traditional equity or balanced portfolios. That’s attractive for investors needing substantial cash flow, but such yields are usually powered by option-writing or similar strategies that can cap upside or behave differently in extreme markets. Dividends and distributions can also vary over time with volatility and interest rate changes. Still, this is a powerful income engine, and for someone prioritizing cash flow over maximum pure price growth, this structure is strongly aligned with that objective.
Ongoing product costs
- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 0.68%
- iShares Trust 0.07%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.59%
The weighted ongoing fee (TER) is about 0.59%, with 0.68% on the high-income ETF and 0.07% on the iShares bond ETF. Costs are higher than ultra-low-cost index funds but relatively reasonable for an options-based income strategy plus a cheap bond component. Over long periods, lower fees compound into higher net returns, much like paying fewer recurring service charges on a bank account. Here, the key question is whether the extra yield and structure justify the slightly higher fee level. If the income and risk profile match the investor’s needs, these costs are not excessive and are broadly in line with many actively managed or enhanced-income products.
What next?
Ready to invest in this portfolio?
Select a broker that fits your needs and watch for low fees to maximize your returns.
Create your own report?
Join our community!
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