This portfolio has only about 4 months of historical data, based on the youngest asset in the portfolio. Some metrics, projections, and AI insights may be less reliable and should be interpreted with caution.
Get this analysis for your own portfolio Paste your holdings — the first report is free and takes about a minute. Analyze mine

High income growth portfolio with strong value tilt and concentrated risk in option strategies

Report created on May 28, 2026

Risk profile Info

5/7
Growth
Less risk More risk

Diversification profile Info

3/5
Moderately Diversified
Less diversification More diversification
Curious how your own portfolio scores? Same analysis, your holdings. First report free — no card needed. Analyze mine

Positions

This portfolio is built almost entirely from equity ETFs, with a heavy tilt toward option-income and high-yield strategies. The largest single holding is the YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF at 30%, followed by broad US exposure through the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF at 25% and international equities at 15%. Several smaller positions focus on high-income or crypto-related strategies. Because the youngest holding defines the history, all metrics are based on about four months of data, which is a very short window. That means any patterns seen here may reflect temporary market conditions rather than stable long-term behavior. Structurally, the mix balances broad index exposure with aggressive yield-focused overlays.

Growth Info

Over the short analysis period, $1,000 in this portfolio grew to about $1,075, implying a 26.32% annualized return. CAGR, or Compound Annual Growth Rate, is like average speed on a road trip: it smooths the path despite bumps along the way. The portfolio’s max drawdown was around -10.06%, meaning the largest peak-to-trough drop over this period. That’s slightly deeper than the US market but close to the global market’s drawdown. The portfolio slightly outpaced both US and global benchmarks on this limited history. With only about four months of data and just two days driving 90% of returns, these results are highly sensitive to timing and may not describe long-term performance.

Projection Info

The forward projection uses a Monte Carlo simulation, which basically runs thousands of “what if” scenarios using the limited recent history as input. It shows a median outcome of about $2,658 from $1,000 over 15 years, with a wide range from roughly $984 to $6,998 in most cases. Monte Carlo helps illustrate uncertainty: instead of one forecast, it gives a distribution of possible paths. Here, the average simulated return is 7.78% a year with about 72% of simulations ending positive. Because the underlying data covers only around four months, the model may be capturing a specific market mood rather than a full cycle, so these long-horizon numbers should be viewed as rough illustrations, not precise forecasts.

Asset classes Info

  • Stocks
    97%
  • Other
    2%
  • Bonds
    1%

By asset class, this portfolio is overwhelmingly in stocks at about 97%, with only tiny allocations to bonds and “other” assets. Stocks represent ownership in companies and typically carry higher long-term return potential but also higher volatility than bonds or cash. A stock-heavy mix like this naturally leans toward growth and larger swings in value. Compared with more balanced mixes that include meaningful bond positions, this structure offers limited built-in shock absorbers when equity markets fall. The short performance window so far has not fully tested the portfolio across different macro environments, so actual long-run ups and downs could differ from what’s been observed over these few months.

Sectors Info

  • Technology
    35%
  • Financials
    10%
  • Industrials
    8%
  • Telecommunications
    8%
  • Consumer Discretionary
    7%
  • Health Care
    6%
  • Basic Materials
    5%
  • Consumer Staples
    4%
  • Energy
    3%
  • Utilities
    1%
  • Real Estate
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only. Some holdings may not have full classification data available. Percentages may not add up to 100%.

Sector-wise, technology stands out at 35%, clearly the largest slice, with financials, industrials, telecom, and consumer-focused sectors making up much of the rest in smaller chunks. Sector exposure matters because different parts of the economy react differently to interest rates, inflation, and growth trends. Tech-heavy portfolios can benefit when innovation and growth stocks are in favor but may feel sharper drops when rates rise or sentiment turns. Compared with broad market benchmarks, this allocation looks more tech-tilted while still maintaining representation across many other sectors. Given that the underlying data spans only a short period, it is hard to judge how this particular sector mix behaves in more stressed or slower-growth environments.

Regions Info

  • North America
    74%
  • Europe Developed
    6%
  • Asia Developed
    3%
  • Japan
    2%
  • Australasia
    2%
  • Asia Emerging
    2%
  • Latin America
    1%
  • Africa/Middle East
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only. Some holdings may not have full classification data available. Percentages may not add up to 100%.

Geographically, about 74% of the portfolio is in North America, with the rest spread across developed and emerging regions, including Europe, Asia, and smaller allocations to Latin America and Africa/Middle East. Geography matters because economic cycles, currencies, and policy choices differ across regions. A North America tilt aligns closely with many global equity benchmarks, which are also US-heavy, and this alignment generally supports familiarity and liquidity. The remaining global exposure broadens the opportunity set and reduces the portfolio’s dependence on a single economy. With only around four months of returns, though, the diversification benefits across regions have not been tested through a full cycle or major regional downturn.

Market capitalization Info

  • Large-cap
    33%
  • Mega-cap
    31%
  • Mid-cap
    24%
  • Small-cap
    2%
  • Micro-cap
    1%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only. Some holdings may not have full classification data available. Percentages may not add up to 100%.

By market capitalization, the portfolio is split across mega-cap (31%), large-cap (33%), and a meaningful mid-cap slice at 24%, with only small allocations in small- and micro-caps. Market cap describes company size, and size affects risk and behavior: mega- and large-caps often move more steadily, while smaller firms can be more volatile but sometimes grow faster. This mix is relatively balanced between very large and mid-sized companies, which can help avoid overreliance on just a handful of the world’s biggest firms. Compared with some broad indices that skew more heavily to mega-caps, this structure introduces a bit more mid-cap exposure, but again, the limited return history means we haven’t seen how that balance holds up over tougher markets.

True holdings Info

  • NVIDIA Corporation
    4.19%
    Part of fund(s):
    • NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Amazon.com Inc
    2.86%
    Part of fund(s):
    • NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Apple Inc
    2.33%
    Part of fund(s):
    • NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Advanced Micro Devices Inc
    1.77%
    Part of fund(s):
    • NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Microsoft Corporation
    1.72%
    Part of fund(s):
    • NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
    • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
  • Lam Research Corp
    1.68%
    Part of fund(s):
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Fortinet Inc
    1.67%
    Part of fund(s):
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Astera Labs, Inc.
    1.60%
    Part of fund(s):
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Analog Devices Inc
    1.46%
    Part of fund(s):
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • IREN Ltd
    1.45%
    Part of fund(s):
    • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
  • Top 10 total 20.73%

This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.

Looking through to the ETFs’ top-10 holdings, about 35.7% of the portfolio is covered, so there’s still a lot we can’t see in detail. Within what’s visible, there is clear concentration in a handful of large tech and growth names like NVIDIA, Amazon, Apple, Microsoft, and various semiconductor and cybersecurity firms. Overlap occurs when the same company appears across multiple ETFs, which quietly increases exposure to that name beyond any one fund’s weight. For example, NVIDIA at 4.19% of the portfolio appears strictly via ETFs. Because only top-10 ETF holdings are captured, actual overlap is likely higher. Over time, this kind of hidden concentration can amplify the impact of a few large companies on overall returns, both positive and negative.

Factors Info

Value
Preference for undervalued stocks
Very high
Data availability: 10%
Size
Exposure to smaller companies
Very low
Data availability: 90%
Momentum
Exposure to recently outperforming stocks
No data
Data availability: 0%
Quality
Preference for financially healthy companies
No data
Data availability: 0%
Yield
Preference for dividend-paying stocks
High
Data availability: 100%
Low Volatility
Preference for stable, lower-risk stocks
High
Data availability: 55%

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.

Factor exposure shows a very high tilt to value at 85%, plus high exposure to yield and low volatility at 76% and 74% respectively, while size is very low at 0%. Factors are like underlying “ingredients” that help explain how a portfolio behaves: value, yield, and low volatility often point to stocks that look cheaper, pay more income, or move less than the market. A strong value and yield tilt is consistent with the income-oriented, option-based ETFs here, which aim to generate substantial cash flows. The very low size factor suggests a strong lean away from smaller companies. Because factor stats are also based on a short return history, these tilts describe current characteristics rather than proven long-term behavior.

Risk contribution Info

  • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF
    Weight: 30.00%
    30.1%
  • COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    19.0%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    Weight: 25.00%
    15.2%
  • YieldMax™ MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF
    Weight: 5.00%
    14.2%
  • iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF
    Weight: 15.00%
    12.6%
  • Top 5 risk contribution 91.1%

Risk contribution looks at how much each holding adds to total volatility, not just how big the weight is. Here, the YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF is 30% of the portfolio and contributes about 30.12% of the risk, roughly in line with its size. More notably, the 5% COIN WeeklyPay ETF contributes about 19% of total risk, with a risk/weight ratio of 3.8, and the 5% YieldMax MSTR fund contributes over 14% of risk. This means a relatively small slice of the portfolio drives a large portion of the ups and downs. The top three positions together generate around 64% of total risk. With only a few months of data, these numbers could shift, but they already highlight concentrated risk in the crypto-linked and option-income strategies.

Redundant positions Info

  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
    Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
    NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF
    High correlation

Correlation measures how closely different holdings move together; a value near 1 means they often rise and fall in tandem. The data shows very high correlation between the NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF, the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF, and the NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF. When holdings are strongly correlated, they provide less diversification benefit during market swings because they tend to react similarly to big events. Here, the correlated funds all anchor around major US equity indices, which makes this alignment understandable and not inherently negative. However, because the correlation analysis is based on only about four months, it mostly reflects one short market phase and might look different across full bull and bear cycles.

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.

Open the Portfolio Builder Reshape your holdings and watch every metric recalculate live. Try it

The risk vs. return chart shows the current portfolio below the efficient frontier, which is the curve of the best possible risk/return combinations using these same holdings with different weights. The Sharpe ratio, a simple measure of return per unit of risk, is 1.15 for the current mix versus 3.16 for the optimal and 2.68 for the minimum-variance portfolio. In plain terms, historical data suggests that, over this brief period, a different weighting of the same ETFs could have delivered either higher returns for similar risk, or similar returns with less volatility. Because the lookback is only around four months, these optimization results are quite sensitive to short-term patterns and should be seen as illustrative rather than a firm blueprint.

Dividends Info

  • iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF 2.80%
  • YieldMax™ MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF 216.30%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 3.20%
  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 11.70%
  • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF 107.70%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
  • COIN WeeklyPay™ ETF 210.50%
  • NEOS Boosted Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF 6.10%
  • Weighted yield (per year) 55.53%

Dividend data and distribution yields here are dominated by extremely high reported figures from the option-income and crypto-linked ETFs, leading to a total yield estimate above 55%. Option-income strategies often distribute large cash flows by selling options, which shows up as income but partly comes from trading gains and potentially from capital. Dividend yield is simply annual cash distributions divided by price, but yields above 100% typically signal a very specialized strategy and may not be stable over time. Traditional index and dividend ETFs in the mix show more familiar yields around 1–3%. With only a few months of history, it’s especially important to treat these current yields as snapshots, not guaranteed ongoing income levels.

Ongoing product costs Info

  • iShares Core MSCI Total International Stock ETF 0.07%
  • YieldMax™ MSTR Option Income Strategy ETF 0.99%
  • Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF 0.06%
  • SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 0.68%
  • YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF 1.14%
  • Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 0.03%
  • Weighted costs total (per year) 0.45%

The portfolio’s total expense ratio (TER) averages about 0.45%, blending very low-cost core funds with higher-cost option income ETFs. TER is the annual fee charged by a fund, expressed as a percentage of assets, and it quietly chips away at returns year after year. On the low end, the broad US and international index funds charge between 0.03% and 0.07%, which is impressively cheap and aligns well with best-in-class passive products. At the higher end, some option-income and specialized funds sit close to or above 1%. Over long horizons, even a 0.5% difference in annual fees can compound meaningfully, though this portfolio’s overall cost level remains moderate given its use of complex income strategies.

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

Compare your holdings

How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?

AVDV vs VOO SCHD vs SGOV DRAM vs VOO SPMO vs VOO

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