High income stock heavy blend with a stabilizing cash like core
Report created on Aug 28, 2026Risk profile
3/7
Diversification profile
4/5
Positions
-
SG iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF
SGOV - US46436E7186 25.00% -
SP SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
SPYI - US78433H3030 25.00% -
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 built from four ETFs in equal 25% chunks, creating a simple but purposeful structure. Three positions are equity-focused, tied to broad US stock indices and an income-oriented S&P 500 strategy. The remaining 25% sits in a 0–3 month Treasury bond ETF, which behaves a lot like cash and adds stability. This mix means three-quarters of the portfolio is growth-oriented through stocks, while a quarter is there to dampen volatility and provide liquidity. The equal-weight approach avoids overcomplicating things and keeps position sizes easy to understand. At the same time, because the equity pieces are quite similar in their underlying exposure, most of the real action comes from a relatively narrow slice of the market.
Growth
Over the period shown, $1,000 grew to about $1,753, which works out to a 15.16% Compound Annual Growth Rate (CAGR). CAGR is like your average speed on a long road trip, smoothing out all the ups and downs. Compared with the US and global market benchmarks, the portfolio grew more slowly, underperforming by around 4 percentage points per year versus the US market. However, its worst peak-to-trough drop, or max drawdown, was smaller at -14.53%, meaning declines were less deep than the benchmarks. The recovery from that drawdown took about three months, which is relatively quick. This pattern fits a cautious-leaning portfolio: some growth is traded away for shallower dips and a gentler ride.
Projection
The Monte Carlo projection uses the portfolio’s past behavior to simulate 1,000 different future paths for the next 15 years. Think of it as rolling the dice many times using historical volatility and returns to see a range of possible outcomes, not a single prediction. The median result turns $1,000 into about $2,581, with a wide “likely” band from roughly $1,907 to $3,723. There are also more extreme but still plausible outcomes on both the low and high ends. The average simulated annual return is 7.22%, and about three-quarters of simulations end positive. This highlights both the power of compounding over time and the uncertainty: even with a cautious tilt, outcomes can still vary a lot.
Asset classes
- Stocks 75%
- Cash 25%
Asset class-wise, the portfolio is straightforward: roughly 75% in stocks and 25% in short-term Treasuries categorized here as cash. That split lines up well with its cautious risk score, because the cash-like slice tends to move very little, buffering the ups and downs of the equity portion. Compared with a pure stock portfolio, this structure usually gives up some long-term return potential in exchange for lower volatility and smaller drawdowns. For many broad equity benchmarks, stock exposure is closer to 100%, so this 75/25 mix is meaningfully more conservative. The key implication is that most growth will be driven by the stock portion, while the Treasury ETF mainly contributes stability and short-term income rather than big capital gains.
Sectors
- Technology 28%
- Cash 25%
- Financials 9%
- Telecommunications 7%
- Consumer Discretionary 7%
- Health Care 7%
- Industrials 6%
- Consumer Staples 3%
- Energy 3%
- Utilities 2%
- Real Estate 2%
- Basic Materials 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Sector exposure is dominated by technology at 28%, followed by meaningful allocations to financials, telecom, consumer areas, health care, and industrials, plus smaller slices in energy, utilities, real estate, and materials. The 25% “cash” portion sits outside traditional sectors, acting as a stabilizer. For the stock sleeve alone, this looks similar to a modern broad US index, where technology and related areas carry a large weight. Tech-heavy allocations often benefit during periods of innovation and growth, but can be more sensitive when interest rates rise or market sentiment turns. The spread across many other sectors, though, helps avoid being entirely dependent on one theme, supporting the portfolio’s broadly diversified rating.
Regions
- North America 75%
- Cash 25%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Geographically, the equity portion is almost entirely focused on North America, with 75% in that region and the remaining 25% effectively in cash-like Treasuries. This creates a clear home bias toward the US market, which matches the fact that the underlying ETFs track US indices. Compared with a global benchmark, which includes large slices of Europe and Asia, this portfolio is notably concentrated in one region and currency. That has worked well during periods when US stocks outperformed the rest of the world, but it also means results are tightly tied to the US economy, policy decisions, and dollar movements. The structure is very clear: US-centric growth, buffered by a sizable safe asset allocation.
Market capitalization
- Mega-cap 33%
- Large-cap 25%
- Mid-cap 14%
- Small-cap 2%
- Micro-cap 1%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
By market capitalization, the portfolio leans strongly toward mega- and large-cap companies, which together make up more than half of the exposure. Mid-caps add another meaningful chunk, while small- and micro-caps remain only a minor part. This pattern is typical for index-based US equity portfolios, as larger companies dominate the market. Bigger firms often have more diversified businesses and stronger balance sheets, which can make them relatively resilient during stress. On the flip side, the limited small-cap exposure means there is less participation in potential higher-growth but more volatile segments. Overall, this tilt supports the cautious profile: more emphasis on established names, less on the edges of the market where swings can be sharper.
True holdings
-
NV NVIDIA Corporation 5.52%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AA Apple Inc. 4.90%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MS Microsoft Corporation 3.65%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AM Amazon.com Inc 2.78%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class A 2.30%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
AV Broadcom Inc 2.03%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
XT BlackRock Cash Funds Treasury SL Agency 1.84%
Part of fund(s):- iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF
-
GO Alphabet Inc Class C 1.84%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
ME Meta Platforms Inc. 1.39%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
-
MU Micron Technology Inc 0.92%
Part of fund(s):- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
- Top 10 total 27.17%
This breakdown covers the equity portion of your portfolio only.
Looking through the ETFs’ top holdings, several big names appear repeatedly, like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Alphabet, and Meta. Because these companies sit in the top positions of major US indices, they naturally show up across both S&P 500 and total market funds, creating overlap. For example, NVIDIA alone accounts for over 5% of the portfolio in aggregate, with Apple and Microsoft also sizeable. This “hidden” concentration means that, even though there are many underlying companies, the portfolio’s performance is heavily influenced by a small group of very large firms. Overlap is probably even higher than shown, since only top-10 ETF positions are included, so real concentration in these giants is likely somewhat understated.
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.
Factor exposure is broadly market-like across value, size, momentum, quality, and low volatility, with all of these sitting in the neutral range. Factor investing is about leaning into certain characteristics—like cheapness (value) or price trends (momentum)—that research links to returns over time. Here, the main standout is yield, which is at 63%, indicating a mild tilt toward higher income. That’s consistent with the dedicated high-income S&P 500 ETF and the sizable short-term Treasury position. A higher yield tilt often means more of the return shows up as cash distributions, which can be attractive for income-focused strategies but may also tie results more closely to dividend and option-income dynamics than pure price appreciation alone.
Risk contribution
-
Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares
Weight: 25.00% 36.5% -
Vanguard S&P 500 ETF
Weight: 25.00% 35.3% -
SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF
Weight: 25.00% 28.2% -
iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF
Weight: 25.00% 0.0%
Risk contribution shows how much each holding drives the portfolio’s overall ups and downs, which can differ a lot from simple weights. Even though all four ETFs are 25% by size, the total stock market ETF and the S&P 500 ETF together account for about 72% of the risk. The high-income S&P 500 ETF adds another 28%, while the short-term Treasury fund contributes effectively zero risk. This makes sense: very short Treasuries are typically very stable, so nearly all volatility comes from the equity trio. The stock funds also have risk contributions above their weights, reflecting that they are more volatile than cash-like instruments and tightly linked to each other and the broad market.
Redundant positions
-
High correlationSHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETFVanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF SharesVanguard S&P 500 ETF
The portfolio’s core equity holdings are highly correlated, meaning they tend to move in the same direction at the same time. The S&P 500 ETF and the total market ETF, in particular, behave almost identically, and the high-income S&P 500 ETF closely tracks the main S&P fund as well. Correlation is basically a measure of how synchronized assets are; high correlation reduces the diversification benefit between them, especially in downturns. In this setup, the main diversification comes from the split between stocks and short-term Treasuries, not from differences among the equity ETFs themselves. So when markets rise or fall sharply, the three equity funds will likely move together, with the Treasury position acting as the primary shock absorber.
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 efficient for its chosen risk level. The Sharpe ratio—risk-adjusted return, comparing extra return above cash to volatility—is 0.94 for the current portfolio, and the report notes it sits on or very near the frontier. The “optimal” and minimum-variance portfolios, based only on these four holdings, are extremely low risk and cluster around cash-like returns, which is why their Sharpe ratios look unusually high in this setup. The key takeaway is that, given these four ingredients, the way they’re combined balances risk and return well. Changing outcomes would mainly come from adjusting overall risk level, not from squeezing much more efficiency out of the same components.
Dividends
- iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 3.70%
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF 11.80%
- Vanguard S&P 500 ETF 1.00%
- Vanguard Total Stock Market Index Fund ETF Shares 1.00%
- Weighted yield (per year) 4.38%
The portfolio’s overall dividend yield is about 4.38%, comfortably above the 1% yield of the plain S&P 500 and total market ETFs inside it. This elevated income mainly reflects two pieces: the 11.8% yield on the high-income S&P 500 ETF and the 3.7% yield on the short-term Treasury ETF. A higher yield means a bigger share of total return is likely to come as cash distributions rather than just price gains. For income-oriented setups, that can feel more tangible and may help smooth the experience over time. It’s also worth remembering that yields can change with markets, interest rates, and fund strategies, so today’s level isn’t a promise about future income.
Ongoing product costs
- iShares 0-3 Month Treasury Bond ETF 0.07%
- SHP ETF Trust - NEOS S&P 500 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) 0.20%
Average ongoing costs, measured by Total Expense Ratio (TER), are about 0.20% per year across the portfolio. That’s low in absolute terms and supportive of long-term compounding, because less is being shaved off returns each year. The main cost driver is the high-income ETF at 0.68%, while the broad Vanguard index funds charge just 0.03% and the Treasury ETF 0.07%. This mix keeps the overall fee level modest despite one pricier holding. Over many years, even a difference of a few tenths of a percent can add up, so starting from a low-cost base is a real positive. Here, the cost structure is generally a strength, especially for a portfolio focused on diversified US exposure and income.
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!
Compare your holdings
How much do the funds you hold actually overlap with the ones people weigh them against?
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