High income equity portfolio with concentrated technology exposure and strong focus on quality and yield
Report created on May 6, 2026Risk profile
4/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
SP SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
SPYI - US78433H3030 22.86% -
DI Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
DIVO - US0321084099 22.76% -
NV NVIDIA Corporation
NVDA - US67066G1040 15.34% -
SG iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF
SGOV - US46436E7186 14.14% -
ID Amplify International Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
IDVO - US0321087225 13.72% -
QD Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
QDVO 11.18%
This portfolio is built around equity income funds with a single large stock position on top. Around 86% sits in stocks via ETFs and one direct holding, while roughly 14% is in an ultra-short Treasury ETF that behaves a lot like cash. The biggest slices are three high‑income equity ETFs plus a sizable stake in NVIDIA, which makes this a relatively focused equity mix rather than a broad index approach. Because the structure leans on income‑oriented products, total return will likely come from both price moves and distributions. With only about 1.7 years of history, it’s important to see this as an early snapshot, not a long-term pattern.
Growth
Over the short 1.7‑year window, $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $1,342, a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) near 19.2%. CAGR is like average speed on a road trip — it smooths out the bumps along the way. The portfolio’s biggest drop (max drawdown) was about -15.2%, smaller than the US market’s -18.8% over the same period and slightly milder than the global market. It edged the US market on return but lagged the global benchmark by a small margin. Only 11 days delivered 90% of gains, showing returns were quite lumpy. Given the brief track record, these numbers show recent behavior, not a reliable long-run trend.
Projection
The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which basically reruns many possible futures based on how the portfolio has behaved so far. It generated 1,000 different 15‑year paths for a $1,000 investment and summarized the range of outcomes. The median result ends around $2,616, with a broad “likely” band stretching from roughly $1,837 to $3,838. About three‑quarters of the simulations finished positive, and the average simulated annual return was around 7.3%. Because the starting data covers only about 1.7 years, the model is extrapolating from a very short and favorable period, so these projections should be seen as rough illustrations rather than firm expectations.
Asset classes
- Stocks 86%
- Cash 14%
By asset class, this portfolio is mostly in equities (about 86%) with the remaining 14% in an ultra‑short Treasury ETF that functions like cash or cash‑equivalents. That mix fits a “balanced but growth‑oriented” flavor, where most of the engine is still in stocks, and the cash‑like slice offers some stability and dry powder. Compared with broad global benchmarks, the equity share is relatively high, as many blended indices include more bonds. This means overall ups and downs are still largely dictated by stock markets. The cash‑like portion can help cushion short‑term swings a bit, but it also generally grows slower over the long run. Again, the limited history means we’ve only seen this mix through one market phase.
Sectors
- Technology 34%
- Cash 14%
- Financials 11%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Industrials 7%
- Health Care 6%
- Telecommunications 6%
- Consumer Staples 4%
- Energy 4%
- Basic Materials 4%
- Utilities 2%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector‑wise, technology dominates at about 34%, boosted by the direct NVIDIA position plus tech holdings inside the ETFs. Financials, consumer discretionary, industrials, and health care form a secondary layer, each in the single‑digit to low‑teens range. Other sectors like telecoms, energy, staples, materials, and utilities appear in smaller slices, suggesting reasonably broad coverage beyond tech. Compared with a global or US broad market, this is a clear tech tilt. Tech‑heavy portfolios often experience stronger moves — both up and down — around interest rate changes and growth expectations. The 14% cash‑like allocation slightly offsets this, but sector risk is still driven mainly by technology and related growth areas.
Regions
- North America 76%
- Cash 14%
- Europe Developed 4%
- Latin America 2%
- Asia Developed 1%
- Asia Emerging 1%
- Japan 1%
- Africa/Middle East 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, about 76% of this portfolio’s equity exposure is tied to North America, with smaller allocations to developed Europe and bits of Latin America, Asia, Japan, and Africa/Middle East. That creates a noticeable home‑country tilt relative to a world index, where the US is big but not this dominant. A strong regional focus tends to concentrate economic, political, and currency risk in that area, even when the underlying companies are global. On the other hand, the presence of international dividend‑oriented ETFs does introduce some non‑US diversification, though at modest levels. With only 1.7 years of data, the regional mix hasn’t yet been stress‑tested across very different global cycles.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 47%
- Large-cap 29%
- Mid-cap 7%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans heavily into large established companies: about 47% in mega‑caps and 29% in large‑caps, with a smaller 7% slice in mid‑caps. This is broadly aligned with major equity benchmarks, which are also dominated by the biggest global companies. Such firms typically have more diversified revenues and stronger balance sheets, which can temper downside risk compared with smaller, more volatile stocks. At the same time, this tilt means the portfolio’s fortunes are linked closely to how the largest names perform. The sizable NVIDIA position reinforces this, as it’s both a mega‑cap and a growth leader. The absence of a notable small‑cap allocation keeps risk largely centered in the large‑company universe.
True holdings
-
Part of fund(s):
- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
-
AA Apple Inc 3.74%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.36%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 1.78%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 1.67%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
-
AV Broadcom Inc 1.26%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
-
CA Caterpillar Inc 1.22%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
-
RT Raytheon Technologies Corp 1.19%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
-
AX American Express Company 1.16%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
-
GS Goldman Sachs Group Inc 1.16%
Part of fund(s):- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
- Top 10 total 34.99%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings, NVIDIA stands out as a major overlap: it’s about 18.4% of the portfolio in total, with 15.3% held directly and roughly 3.1% via ETFs. Other big names like Apple, Microsoft, Alphabet, Amazon, and Broadcom appear only through funds, each around 1–4%. This overlap means that even though you own multiple ETFs, a chunk of risk is tied to a relatively small set of mega‑cap tech and financial companies. Because we only see ETF top‑10 positions, total overlap is probably higher than reported. Hidden concentration like this is common in equity income and quality‑tilted ETFs, and it helps explain why a few names can drive performance.
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 investment factors, this portfolio shows very high exposure to quality and yield, with high exposure to low volatility, low exposure to value, and very low exposure to size. Factors are like underlying “traits” — for example, quality captures strong balance sheets and profitability, while yield focuses on higher income payouts. Here, the strong quality and yield tilts line up well with the income‑oriented ETFs. Very low size exposure means there’s little in smaller companies; the emphasis is on larger, more established names. High low‑volatility exposure suggests a bias toward stocks that historically moved less than the market. With only 1.7 years of data, these factor tilts are early estimates, but they paint a consistent income‑and‑quality picture.
Risk contribution
-
NVIDIA Corporation
Weight: 15.34% 40.6% -
SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
Weight: 22.86% 20.4% -
Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
Weight: 22.76% 14.3% -
Amplify International Enhanced Dividend Income ETF
Weight: 13.72% 12.4% -
Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF
Weight: 11.18% 12.3% - Top 5 risk contribution 100.0%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding adds to overall portfolio ups and downs, which can differ a lot from simple weights. NVIDIA is the clearest example: it’s 15.3% of the portfolio by weight but contributes about 40.6% of total risk, meaning its movements dominate day‑to‑day volatility. The top three holdings together account for roughly 75% of overall risk, so the portfolio’s behavior is heavily shaped by a few positions. In contrast, some ETFs have risk contributions below or near their weights, reflecting broader diversification inside those funds. This pattern — a concentrated single stock sitting on top of diversified income ETFs — helps explain why tech news and NVIDIA’s share price can have an outsized impact.
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 compares this portfolio’s risk/return mix with the best combinations possible using the same holdings. The current portfolio shows a Sharpe ratio of about 1.02, where Sharpe measures return earned per unit of volatility above a risk‑free rate. The “optimal” and “minimum variance” portfolios, using different weights of these same assets, sit much closer to the frontier and show far higher Sharpe ratios, mainly because they dial risk way down. The current mix is about 5.1 percentage points below the efficient frontier at its risk level, meaning reweighting these holdings could theoretically improve risk‑adjusted returns without adding new assets. That said, these optimizations are based on a short data window, so the picture could change with more history.
Dividends
- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF 4.40%
- Amplify International Enhanced Dividend Income ETF 5.40%
- iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 3.90%
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 11.80%
- Amplify CWP Growth & Income ETF 10.30%
- Weighted yield (per year) 6.14%
Income is a defining feature here. The estimated total yield is around 6.1%, driven by high‑distribution ETFs: one US equity income fund near 11.8%, another growth‑and‑income ETF above 10%, and international and enhanced dividend funds in the 4–5% range. Dividend yield is the annual cash paid out relative to the price, like rent from owning a property. This level of yield is much higher than broad market indices and plays a big role in total return. It also means a larger share of return arrives as cash rather than pure price gains. Because yield figures and payout policies can change over time, the current numbers shouldn’t be assumed to stay constant over many years.
Ongoing product costs
- Amplify CWP Enhanced Dividend Income ETF 0.56%
- Amplify International Enhanced Dividend Income ETF 0.66%
- iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 0.07%
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 0.68%
- Weighted costs total (per year) 0.38%
On costs, the portfolio’s weighted ongoing fee (TER) is about 0.38% per year. Individual ETF expenses range from a very low 0.07% for the short‑term Treasury fund up to around 0.66–0.68% for some of the enhanced income ETFs. A total cost near 0.38% is moderate: higher than plain vanilla index funds, but typical for actively managed or options‑based income strategies. Costs matter because they come off returns every year, and even small differences compound over time. Here, the fees look reasonable relative to the specialized income focus, and the overall cost level is not out of line for the type of products being used.
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