Roast mode 🔥

High income junkie portfolio trying to mainline yield from a tech overlord core

Report created on Apr 13, 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 started with a perfectly normal S&P 500 core and then binge-added “income” products until the broker button broke. Over half the money sits in various S&P and Nasdaq wrappers, many doing roughly the same thing but with option overlays slapped on for yield. It’s diversification theater: lots of tickers, very few actually different drivers. Structurally, this is a concentrated US equity bet wearing a balanced-investor mask. The takeaway: the portfolio pretends to be moderate, but underneath it’s a leveraged personality play on big US stocks plus a side quest in fancy option income toys. Nice theme park, but all the rides go in the same direction.

Growth Info

Historically, the numbers actually look annoyingly good for something this chaotic. CAGR of 17.88% versus ~16–16.8% for US and global markets, with a smaller or similar drawdown. So yes, you “beat the market,” but with a max drawdown of -16.37% over a very short window of data. That’s barely two years — basically one weird market mood swing, not a full economic cycle. Think “great first date,” not “ready to meet the parents.” Past performance is yesterday’s weather: useful context, terrible crystal ball. The lesson: enjoy the outperformance, but don’t kid yourself that this setup has proved it can behave when a real storm hits.

Projection Info

The Monte Carlo projection basically says: “Most timelines are okay, but don’t get cocky.” Monte Carlo is just a nerdy way of stress-testing the future by running lots of random return paths based on past volatility — like simulating 1,000 alternate universes for your portfolio. Median outcome of $2,571 from $1,000 over 15 years is a decent real-world-ish 7.39% annualized, but the range from about $1,096 to $6,287 screams uncertainty. There’s a 25% chance you barely move the needle versus cash. The catch: simulations are built on yesterday’s behavior. If your tech-heavy, option-junkie setup hits a regime change, the model’s confidence is more vibe than guarantee.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    85%
  • Bonds
    9%
  • Not classified
    4%
  • Other
    3%

Asset class mix: 85% stocks, 9% bonds, 3% “other,” 4% “not classified.” For something labeled “balanced,” this is more “stocks with a tiny side salad of bonds for decoration.” This is basically an equity portfolio cosplaying as middle-of-the-road. That 9% bond slice won’t meaningfully save you in a real equity crash; it’s more like putting a Band-Aid on a chainsaw wound. And the “other” and “not classified” just remind you there are pieces even the data provider shrugs at. Takeaway: if the goal is true balance, this is too equity-heavy; if the goal is growth, stop pretending this is conservative and accept you signed up for the ride.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    34%
  • Telecommunications
    10%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    9%
  • Health Care
    7%
  • Financials
    7%
  • Industrials
    6%
  • Consumer Staples
    6%
  • Energy
    2%
  • Utilities
    2%
  • Basic Materials
    2%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Sector-wise, this thing is very clearly tech-tilted: 34% technology plus another 10% in telecom and a chunky consumer discretionary presence. Translation: you’re betting heavily on “things that live on a screen and sell you convenience or ads.” It’s fine when growth is in fashion; it’s brutal when markets rotate toward boring, cash-cow stuff. A real sector mix spreads the pain — this one clusters risk around innovation, hype, and earnings expectations staying rosy. The takeaway: you don’t just like tech, you’re emotionally attached. Just remember, sector darlings take the elevator up but also the express elevator down when sentiment turns.

Regions Info

  • North America
    83%
  • Europe Developed
    3%
  • Japan
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Geography: 83% North America, 3% Europe developed, 1% Japan, and basically “Earth? Never heard of it” for the rest. This is the classic “home bias on steroids” setup: if it doesn’t trade in US hours, it barely exists. Sure, the US has dominated recently, but that’s not a law of physics. A more global mix is like not putting every job, friend, and hobby in one city. Here, one economic, political, or regulatory mess in the US affects almost the entire portfolio. The lesson: this isn’t global investing; it’s the financial equivalent of refusing to leave your hometown and calling it “worldly.”

Market capitalization Info

  • Mega-cap
    38%
  • Large-cap
    31%
  • Mid-cap
    13%
  • Small-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

You’re massively skewed to mega- and large-caps: 38% mega, 31% large, 13% mid, 1% small. That’s the blue-chip comfort blanket plus a token nod to smaller companies so the fact sheet looks respectable. You’ve basically said, “I only trust the companies that already won.” That usually means smoother rides than tiny stocks but also less exposure to future up-and-comers. It’s like investing only in stadium-filling bands and ignoring the small venues where the next big thing starts. Takeaway: you’ve traded some potential long-term upside for stability and familiarity — which is fine, just don’t pretend this is edgy or adventurous.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    5.66%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Apple Inc
    5.13%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    3.85%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    3.03%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class C
    2.58%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Broadcom Inc
    2.28%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Meta Platforms Inc.
    2.17%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Tesla Inc
    1.74%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Alphabet Inc Class A
    1.70%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Walmart Inc. Common Stock
    1.24%
    Part of fund(s):
    • Invesco QQQ Trust
    • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares
    • Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
  • Top 10 total 29.37%

The look-through is a shrine to the usual suspects: Nvidia, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, Tesla. You don’t own a portfolio; you own the Magnificent Seven fan club with different membership cards. Nvidia at 5.66%, Apple at 5.13%, Microsoft at 3.85% — and that’s only from top-10 holdings. Overlap is actually higher in reality, because the rest of the ETFs’ guts aren’t even fully counted. Hidden concentration like this means one bad headline for mega-cap tech and your “diversified” lineup gets punched in the same spot repeatedly. Takeaway: if most paths lead back to the same seven companies, that’s conviction, not diversification, no matter how many ETF labels you stack.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Neutral
Data availability: 10%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 87%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
High
Data availability: 7%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
Very high
Data availability: 3%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
Data availability: 91%

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 is screaming a very specific personality: almost no tilt to smaller companies (size very low), plus very high quality, high momentum, high yield, and high low-volatility. Translation: you want winners, that look safe, that trend well, that pay you, and you avoid small stuff. Leaning hard into momentum and yield with high quality is like saying “I want the popular kids, but only if they also do their homework and tuck me into bed at 10.” The upside: this can hold up decently when markets reward stability. The risk: when crowd favorites fall out of fashion, all those factors can flip against you at once.

Risk contribution Info

  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 28.38%
    31.0%
  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    Weight: 21.81%
    24.4%
  • Invesco QQQ Trust
    Weight: 6.94%
    9.8%
  • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    Weight: 7.87%
    9.4%
  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    Weight: 7.74%
    7.2%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 81.7%

Risk contribution exposes who’s actually driving the drama. Vanguard S&P 500 and JEPQ together are over half of total risk, and tossing in QQQ gets you to 65% from just three holdings. The Nasdaq-flavored stuff in particular is punching above its weight — QQQ at 6.94% weight but 9.80% of risk is that loud friend at every party. Risk contribution basically asks, “Who’s shaking the portfolio when markets move?” Here, a few correlated giants dominate the mood. Takeaway: trimming or reweighting doesn’t require new products; it just shifts how much power these core positions have over your emotional and financial life.

Redundant positions Info

  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
    Invesco QQQ Trust
    JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF
    Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    High correlation
  • Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares
    Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares
    High correlation

Your correlation table reads like a group chat where everyone just copies each other’s homework. JEPQ, QQQ, NEOS Nasdaq, NEOS S&P, and VOO are all highly correlated — different wrappers, same underlying US equity engine. When one sneezes, the rest catch a cold at the exact same time. Correlation just measures how similarly things move; high correlation means when the market falls, all these positions jump off the same cliff together. It looks like diversification but behaves like a single big bet. Takeaway: swapping one US large-cap income-flavored ETF for another doesn’t really diversify; it just adds more logos to the same trade.

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 efficient frontier, this portfolio is getting roasted. Sharpe ratio of 0.96 while the optimal mix of the *same* holdings hits 1.92 with *lower* risk and much higher return. Being 10.46 percentage points below the frontier at your risk level is like driving a sports car in first gear on the highway. The efficient frontier just shows the best possible trade-off between risk and return using your existing ingredients. The math is basically yelling, “Reweight this thing.” Takeaway: you don’t need new ETFs; you need less overlap and smarter sizing. Right now you’re paying full volatility but only collecting half the prize.

Dividends Info

  • FT Cboe Vest Gold Target Income ETF 13.80%
  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF 10.70%
  • VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF 1.40%
  • Invesco QQQ Trust 0.50%
  • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 14.40%
  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 12.10%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 2.80%
  • Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares 1.60%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.10%
  • Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares 2.00%
  • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 1.60%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 6.65%

A 6.65% total yield is loud — especially in a world where broad equity markets sit way lower. You’re getting that mostly by engineering income out of option strategies and high-yield wrappers like those double-digit “premium income” funds. That’s not free money; it’s turning some future upside into today’s cash. It’s like selling off part of your lottery ticket for a guaranteed smaller prize now. If the goal is income, fine, but don’t confuse engineered yield with magic. And remember: distributions can fall, especially if volatility or market conditions change. The takeaway: you’re not milking the market, you’re pre-selling some of the growth.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • FT Cboe Vest Gold Target Income ETF 0.85%
  • JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF 0.35%
  • VanEck Morningstar Wide Moat ETF 0.47%
  • Invesco QQQ Trust 0.20%
  • NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 0.68%
  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 0.68%
  • Vanguard FTSE Developed Markets Index Fund ETF Shares 0.05%
  • Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund ETF Shares 0.06%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Vanguard Value Index Fund ETF Shares 0.04%
  • Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF 0.29%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.33%

Costs are… not terrible but also not as low as they could be given how index-y this all is. Total TER at 0.33% is okay, but that’s dragged up by the “fancy” stuff: 0.85% for the gold income play, 0.68% on NEOS funds, 0.35% on JEPQ. Meanwhile, boring Vanguard core funds happily charge basis points that barely register. You’re basically paying extra for option overlays and marketing. Fees are like slow battery drain — not dramatic, but over decades they absolutely matter. Takeaway: if several funds are doing broadly similar things, paying the higher-priced versions is like choosing the same burger at a more expensive restaurant.

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