Mostly US large company stocks with strong income tilt and efficient risk adjusted performance
Report created on Jun 17, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 70.00% -
SC Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
SCHD - US8085247976 20.00% -
JE JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
JEPQ - US46654Q2030 10.00%
This portfolio is built from three broad US stock ETFs, with about 70% in a mainstream large‑cap index fund, 20% in a US dividend equity fund, and 10% in a Nasdaq income‑focused fund. That means it’s almost entirely public equities, without separate bond or alternative holdings. Structurally, this is a fairly simple, easy‑to‑track setup, which can make it easier to understand what’s driving performance. The “balanced” risk label and 4/7 risk score mainly reflect stock‑market risk rather than a mix of safer assets. With three funds, position‑level complexity stays low, but most risk and return will follow US stock market moves, with an extra tilt toward dividend and option‑derived income.
Growth
One or more local-currency benchmark funds are unavailable for this report.
Over the period shown, a hypothetical $1,000 grew to about $1,781, implying a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 15.14%. CAGR is like your average yearly “speed” over the full trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. This slightly outpaced the global market benchmark, which grew at 14.86%, so historically the portfolio has tracked broad markets closely while edging ahead. The max drawdown of -17.9% shows the worst peak‑to‑trough fall, very similar to the benchmark’s -17.44%. Needing 19 days to generate 90% of returns underlines how a small number of strong days drive long‑term outcomes, which makes timing the market especially hard.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses many simulated paths, based on historical volatility and returns, to estimate a range of future outcomes. Think of it as running the next 15 years 1,000 different ways to see what could plausibly happen, not what will happen. The median outcome shows $1,000 potentially growing to around $2,740, with a wide “likely” range between roughly $1,794 and $4,323. There’s also a meaningful chance of much higher or lower results, shown by the 5th–95th percentile band. The implied average annual return of 8.13% is lower than recent history, a reminder that past performance can be stronger than what’s realistic to expect over longer horizons.
Asset classes
- Stocks 98%
- Not classified 2%
Asset‑class exposure is overwhelmingly in stocks (about 98%), with a small “not classified” slice where the data provider can’t tag the asset type. That makes this a straightforward equity portfolio rather than a traditional multi‑asset mix including bonds or cash. Equity‑heavy allocations usually have higher potential growth over long periods, but they can also swing more during market stress because there’s little ballast from more stable assets. Compared to many generic “balanced” mixes that spread more into bonds, this portfolio behaves more like an equity‑centric strategy. The clear takeaway is that most risk and reward here comes from owning shares in companies rather than from income‑oriented fixed‑income securities.
Sectors
- Technology 35%
- Telecommunications 10%
- Health Care 10%
- Financials 10%
- Consumer Discretionary 10%
- Consumer Staples 8%
- Industrials 8%
- Energy 6%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 1%
- Basic Materials 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is led by technology at 35%, with meaningful slices in telecommunications, health care, financials, consumer areas, and smaller portions in energy, utilities, real estate, and basic materials. This is broadly similar to many US‑focused equity indices, but the tech weight sits toward the higher side, which can increase sensitivity to innovation cycles and interest‑rate moves. Portfolios with bigger tech and related exposures often experience stronger gains in growth‑driven markets and sharper pullbacks when sentiment turns against high‑growth names. At the same time, having allocations to more defensive sectors like consumer staples and utilities provides some balance, as those areas historically can be somewhat steadier when economic conditions soften.
Regions
- North America 99%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, about 99% of the portfolio sits in North America, effectively giving it a strong US home‑bias. That means company earnings, currency exposure, and market behavior are all largely tied to one region. This concentration can work well when US markets outperform global peers, as they have at various points in recent decades. However, it also means performance will differ from more global benchmarks that include larger slices of Europe, Asia, and emerging markets. When other regions lead, a heavily US‑tilted portfolio may lag broad world indices. The upside is simplicity: news about the US economy, policy, and corporate earnings will be the dominant drivers of how the portfolio behaves.
Market capitalization
- Large-cap 41%
- Mega-cap 37%
- Mid-cap 18%
- Small-cap 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans strongly toward mega‑cap and large‑cap companies, with 78% combined in those categories, 18% in mid‑caps, and only about 1% in small‑caps. Larger firms tend to be more established, with diversified businesses and more analyst coverage, which can reduce company‑specific risk compared with smaller, more volatile stocks. This pattern aligns closely with broad US indices where the largest companies dominate index weights. The relatively modest small‑cap exposure means the portfolio is less sensitive to the sometimes sharper cycles of smaller companies, both on the upside and downside. Overall, the market‑cap mix supports a more blue‑chip style equity profile rather than a small‑company‑heavy approach.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 6.24%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 5.55%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.02%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 3.23%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 2.42%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.39%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.28%
Part of fund(s):- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.74%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.67%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
-
TS Tesla Inc 1.56%
Part of fund(s):- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 31.10%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through to the top holdings across the ETFs, there are repeated exposures to big names like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Broadcom, Meta, Micron, and Tesla. Because these appear in multiple funds, they add up to meaningful total weights, even though no single ETF explicitly concentrates in just one stock. This “overlap” is a form of hidden concentration: several funds can end up owning the same giants. As only ETF top‑10 holdings are included, actual overlap is likely higher. The implication is that portfolio behavior will be strongly influenced by the performance of a relatively small group of leading US mega‑cap technology and communication‑related companies.
Factors
Factor exposure is overall quite balanced, sitting near “neutral” for value, size, momentum, quality, and low volatility. Factor exposure is basically how much the portfolio leans into traits like cheapness (value) or price trends (momentum) that academic research links to returns. The notable tilt here is yield, at 61%, indicating a mild lean toward higher‑dividend or income‑producing stocks, supported especially by the dividend and option‑income ETFs. This can make total returns less reliant on price appreciation alone, as a chunk comes from income distributions. A mostly neutral profile across other factors suggests the portfolio should behave similarly to broad markets, with the main difference being its stronger income orientation.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 70.00% 74.8% -
Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF
Weight: 20.00% 15.3% -
JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
Weight: 10.00% 9.9%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s ups and downs, which can differ from its weight. Here, the S&P 500 ETF is 70% of the allocation but contributes about 75% of total risk, so it slightly dominates volatility. The dividend ETF, at 20% weight, contributes about 15% of risk, meaning it’s somewhat less volatile relative to its size. The Nasdaq income ETF’s risk contribution, roughly matching its 10% weight, indicates it behaves in line with expectations. Together, all three explain 100% of portfolio risk, with no single ETF wildly out of proportion. The key takeaway is that overall risk is effectively that of a large US equity index with an income tilt.
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 risk vs. return chart shows the portfolio sitting on or very near the efficient frontier, which is the curve of the best achievable returns for each risk level using the current holdings. The portfolio’s Sharpe ratio of 0.72, a measure of risk‑adjusted return, is solid, though lower than the optimal mix’s 0.95 and the minimum‑variance portfolio’s 0.8. Importantly, those alternative points use the same three ETFs with different weights, not new products. Being effectively on the frontier means, given these ingredients, the current mix already uses risk quite efficiently. Any theoretical improvements from reweighting are relatively modest, so structurally the allocation is working well from a risk‑return standpoint.
Dividends
- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF 10.10%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.20%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 2.35%
The overall dividend yield is about 2.35%, with a wide spread between the underlying funds: roughly 1.0% for the S&P 500 ETF, 3.2% for the dividend equity ETF, and a high 10.1% for the Nasdaq income ETF driven by its option‑premium strategy. Yield is the income paid out relative to your investment, and over time it contributes meaningfully to total return, especially when reinvested. In this portfolio, most of the yield uplift versus a plain S&P 500 fund comes from the two income‑oriented ETFs. That means a noticeable slice of returns may arrive as cash distributions rather than only through price growth, supporting the income‑tilted factor profile.
Ongoing product costs
- JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF 0.35%
- Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.07%
Estimated total ongoing costs (TER) sit around 0.07%, with the core S&P 500 ETF at 0.03%, the dividend ETF at 0.06%, and the Nasdaq income ETF higher at 0.35%. TER, or total expense ratio, is the annual fee charged by the funds, quoted as a percentage of assets. This overall cost level is impressively low by industry standards, especially for a portfolio that includes a more complex options‑based strategy. Low fees help investors keep more of their returns, and the benefit compounds over time as avoided costs stay invested. From a cost perspective, this structure is a clear strength and provides a solid foundation for long‑term compounding.
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