High income US stock portfolio with strong technology tilt and efficient risk balance
Report created on May 25, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
2/5
Positions
-
QQ NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
QQQI - US78433H6751 50.00% -
VO Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
VOO - US9229083632 25.00% -
VT Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
VTI - US9229087690 25.00%
This portfolio is very streamlined, holding just three US-focused stock ETFs, with half the weight in a Nasdaq 100 high-income fund and the other half split equally between broad US index trackers. That means everything here is in publicly traded companies, with no bonds or alternatives. A concentrated line-up like this is easy to understand and monitor, which many investors appreciate. The flip side is that results are heavily tied to the same underlying group of US stocks, especially large technology names. The balanced 50 / 25 / 25 split lines up well with the stated “balanced” risk label, but the limited number of holdings helps explain the platform’s “low diversity” score.
Growth
Over the period shown, $1,000 grew to about $1,566, which is a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 21.48%. CAGR is like your average speed on a long road trip, smoothing out bumps along the way. This slightly beat both the US and global market benchmarks on return, while having a max drawdown of -19.51%, very similar to the benchmarks’ worst declines. Drawdown measures how far the portfolio fell from a prior peak before recovering. Matching benchmark-level downside while edging them on return is a solid historical outcome, though the period is relatively short and tech-friendly. As always, past performance is no guarantee that future returns will look similar.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses 1,000 simulated future paths, based on historical patterns, to estimate where a $1,000 investment might end up in 15 years. Think of it as running the same “what if” scenario many times, shuffling returns in different orders. The median outcome of about $2,690 implies an annualized return near 8%, but the range is wide: from roughly flat ($987 at the 5th percentile) to over $7,200 at the 95th percentile. This spread shows how uncertain long-term equity returns can be, even when the average looks appealing. These are only mathematical simulations, not forecasts, and real-world events can push results outside these ranges.
Asset classes
- Stocks 100%
All of the portfolio is in stocks, which makes its asset class mix straightforward but also one-dimensional. Stocks tend to offer higher long-term growth potential than cash or bonds, but with larger short-term swings. Having 100% in equities explains why the risk score sits in the middle-to-higher part of the platform’s scale. Compared with “typical” diversified portfolios that mix in some bonds, this one will more closely track stock market ups and downs. On the positive side, the mix across three different equity index approaches—high-income Nasdaq, S&P 500, and total US market—gives some internal variety within that single asset class.
Sectors
- Technology 44%
- Telecommunications 13%
- Consumer Discretionary 11%
- Health Care 7%
- Consumer Staples 6%
- Industrials 6%
- Financials 6%
- Energy 2%
- Utilities 2%
- Basic Materials 2%
- Real Estate 1%
Sector-wise, the portfolio is clearly tech-leaning, with roughly 44% in technology plus another 13% in telecommunications. That’s a noticeably stronger tilt than broad global or US market benchmarks, where tech is large but not quite this dominant. Consumer discretionary and health care are the next biggest groups, while areas like energy, utilities, materials, and real estate are relatively small. Tech-heavy portfolios often shine during periods of innovation and growth optimism, but they can be more sensitive when interest rates rise or when markets rotate toward more defensive or value-oriented areas. The strong alignment with modern index compositions still indicates decent sector coverage overall.
Regions
- North America 99%
- Europe Developed 1%
Geographically, the portfolio is almost entirely tied to North America, with 99% exposure there and only a token slice in developed Europe. That’s even more US-centric than a world equity index, where the US is big but doesn’t dominate to this extent. The benefit is alignment with the market that has driven a lot of recent performance, along with familiar companies and currency. The trade-off is that economic, regulatory, or currency shocks specific to the US can have an outsized impact. While many large US firms earn revenue globally, from a pure holdings standpoint this is very much a single-region portfolio, which the “low diversity” score reflects.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 49%
- Large-cap 34%
- Mid-cap 15%
- Small-cap 2%
- Micro-cap 1%
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans heavily into the largest companies: almost half in mega-caps, another third in large-caps, and the remainder spread across mid, small, and a tiny slice of micro-caps. This is fairly typical of index-based US portfolios, where the biggest companies dominate index weights. Large and mega-caps often bring more stable business models and better liquidity, which can reduce idiosyncratic risk versus owning lots of very small firms. The modest allocation to smaller companies still adds some growth and diversification potential without driving overall risk. Overall, the market-cap mix is well-balanced and aligns closely with common benchmark structures.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 7.58%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc 6.53%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 4.94%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 4.49%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 3.68%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 3.27%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 3.17%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 2.56%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
TS Tesla Inc 2.44%
Part of fund(s):- LS 1x Tesla Tracker ETP Securities GBP
- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 1.71%
Part of fund(s):- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
- Top 10 total 40.37%
Looking through to the top holdings across all ETFs, a handful of big names stand out: NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet (both share classes), Broadcom, Meta, Tesla, and Micron. These positions appear more than once across ETFs, creating overlap that raises effective exposure beyond what any single fund weight might suggest. For example, NVIDIA alone totals about 7.6% of the portfolio, and Apple about 6.5%. Because only ETF top-10s are included, actual overlap is probably somewhat higher. This type of concentration is common in US index-heavy portfolios, but it does mean the portfolio’s results are strongly influenced by a small group of very large technology and growth-oriented companies.
Factors
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.
On factors, size exposure is labelled “very low,” meaning the portfolio strongly tilts away from smaller companies and leans into bigger ones. Factor exposure is basically a way of describing the ingredients driving returns—here, the large-cap ingredient is dominant. The portfolio also shows high tilts toward yield and low volatility. A high yield tilt suggests many holdings either pay dividends or, in the case of the high-income ETF, use strategies that generate cash flow. A high low-volatility tilt means the overall mix has behaved more steadily than the broad market historically. Combined, these readings help explain the mix of strong income with reasonably controlled ups and downs.
Risk contribution
-
NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF
Weight: 50.00% 51.9% -
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 25.00% 24.5% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 25.00% 23.6%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to the portfolio’s overall volatility, which can differ from its weight. Here, the picture is simple: the three ETFs together make up 100% of both weight and risk, and each fund’s share of risk is very close to its share of assets. The Nasdaq 100 high-income ETF is 50% of the portfolio and contributes about 52% of the risk, while the other two ETFs each contribute about a quarter of total risk. This means there are no small positions quietly dominating volatility; risk is spread proportionally. That alignment between weights and risk is a positive structural feature.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationNEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETFVanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF SharesVanguard S&P 500 ETF
The correlation data highlights that the ETFs move very similarly to each other over time. Correlation measures how often and how closely assets move together, from -1 (opposite) to +1 (almost identical). The Nasdaq high-income fund is highly correlated with the S&P 500 ETF, and the S&P 500 ETF is highly correlated with the total stock market ETF. This is not surprising because they all focus on US large-cap stocks. The benefit is a very coherent, US-equity-driven profile. The limitation is that when US stocks fall broadly, these funds are likely to decline at the same time, so diversification benefits across holdings will be limited during big market downturns.
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 analysis suggests the current mix is already very close to optimal, given the existing building blocks. The portfolio’s Sharpe ratio—return per unit of risk, after accounting for a risk-free rate—is about 1.03, while the optimal and minimum-variance combinations of these same ETFs reach 1.26 at slightly lower risk. Being “on or near” the efficient frontier means that, for this specific set of funds, the tradeoff between risk and return is already strong. In other words, the structure is making good use of the chosen holdings, and there’s no major sign of inefficiency in how they are combined.
Dividends
- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 13.50%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 7.25%
The overall dividend yield of roughly 7.25% stands out, driven mainly by the Nasdaq 100 high-income ETF’s very high 13.5% yield. Yield is the cash income you receive each year as a percentage of your investment, not counting price changes. By contrast, the broad Vanguard ETFs yield around 1%, closer to normal market levels. High-distribution strategies often use options or similar tools to generate income, which can change how returns are split between cash payouts and price movement. It’s worth remembering that dividends are just one part of total return, and unusually high yields can fluctuate over time as market conditions and strategy results change.
Ongoing product costs
- NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF 0.68%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 0.03%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.36%
The weighted average ongoing cost (TER) is about 0.36% per year. TER is the annual fee charged by each fund as a percentage of assets, quietly deducted inside the ETF. The two Vanguard funds are extremely low-cost at 0.03%, which is a strong positive and reflects best-in-class fee levels for broad index exposure. The Nasdaq 100 high-income ETF is costlier at 0.68%, which is typical for more complex, income-focused strategies. Overall, this blended cost is still reasonable for an equity portfolio with a specialized high-income component. Lower fees mean more of the gross return stays in your pocket and can compound over time.
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