◆

PLEX Portfolio Comparison

Mastermind Edition

Four Portfolios, One Question — Which Is Better Collateral?

A side-by-side read of four PLEX portfolios through the three-bucket lens (Bedrock / Cash Flow / Hedge), plus a hard look at how Joseph's Freedom Engine is actually performing. All four columns recomputed together on 2026-08-10 through the same engines, so no column is fresher than another — see “Where Every Number Comes From” below for the source and as-of date of every figure. Reality-check verdict: the high headline payout masks NAV erosion — the engine is sitting below cost; the M1 pie itself labels 65.3% of it Bedrock while our per-holding classifier scores 9.8% Bedrock (it tiers BDCs as cash flow, so the two disagree about labels, not about drift). PLEX target reference: Bedrock 65% / Cash-flow 34% / Hedge 1%.

Last run: Jul 28, 2026

Joseph’s Pie — Current vs PLEX Target (Portfolio Analyzer)

M1 data retrieved: Jul 28, 2026 10:26 AM CT (distinct from page Last run).

Each Portfolio Analyzer element for Joseph's account, computed Current · Target · Projected — where Projected is the value once the Fynanc-recommended optimization is applied (engine optimized output). Academy-framed allocation is the primary read (Bedrock 65 / Cash-flow 34 / Hedge 1); the Fynanc engine's 0–10 sub-scores are an independent cross-check.

Source: PLEX Portfolio Analyzer ↗ · related: PLEX Planning Calculators ↗, PLEX Journey Planner ↗

Element	Current	Target	Projected	Status
Pie structure — the sleeves, as M1 reports them M1 live pull 2026-08-10 04:11 UTC
Bedrock sleevegap +0.3pp	65.3%	65.0%	— (n/a)the engine does not set sleeve targets	✓
Cash-flow sleevegap −0.3pp	33.7%	34.0%	— (n/a)the engine does not set sleeve targets	✓
Hedge sleeveon target	1.0%	1.0%	— (n/a)the engine does not set sleeve targets	✓
Independent holdings classification — our own read, NOT the pie’s sleeve structure
The rows above are the structure: what the sleeves are set to in M1 and what is actually in them today. The rows below are our assessment of the underlying holdings — whether each one behaves like stable collateral. They have no target because they are a reading, not a goal. A sleeve labelled Bedrock can still hold instruments that do not behave like bedrock; that gap is the point.
Behaves like Bedrockour read of the holdings, not a target	9.8%	—	73.4%engine optimized bedrock	—
Behaves like Cash-flowour read of the holdings, not a target	93.5%	—	22.6%engine optimized cashflow	—
Behaves like Hedgeour read of the holdings, not a target	0.0%	—	0.4%engine optimized hedge	—
Fynanc Engine Score — JOSEPH’S OWN pie today vs. the engine-optimized version of HIS pie (5.74/10 → 7.90/10). Not the AI Recommendation, not anyone else’s portfolio.
Weighted yield (engine)🌟 Excellent (higher is better)	10.8% score 10/10	higher is better	10.0% score 10/10-0.9pp	✓
Volatility (engine)✅ Good (lower is better)	13.0% score 6/10	lower is better	9.6% score 8/10-3.5pp (lower better)	✗
Max-drawdown potential (engine)🌟 Excellent (lower is better)	6.2% score 8/10	lower is better	4.5% score 10/10-1.7pp (lower better)	✓
Diversification (engine)⚠️ Needs Improvement (higher is better)	0.34 score 4/10	higher is better	0.48 score 6/10+0.15	✗
Correlation (engine)⚠️ Needs Improvement (lower is better)	0.78 score 2/10	lower is better	— (n/a)	✗
Number of holdings (engine)🌟 Excellent (higher is better)	17 score 8.5/10	higher is better	30 score 10/10+13	✓
Sector count (engine)✅ Good (higher is better)	2 score 6.66667/10	higher is better	4 score 10/10+2	✗
Engine overall score	5.74/10	higher is better	7.90/10	—

If Fynanc optimization applied	Current	Projected	Change
Overall analyzer score	5.74/10	7.90/10	+2.16 if optimized
Weighted yield	10.8%	10.0%	-0.9pp
Volatility	13.0%	9.6%	-3.5pp (lower better)
Category allocation (engine) current → optimized
Bedrock allocation (engine)	12%	73%	engine classification
Cashflow allocation (engine)	84%	23%	engine classification
Hedge allocation (engine)	1%	0%	engine classification
Other allocation (engine)	3%	4%	engine classification

Classification note: the raw Fynanc engine gates Bedrock on yield ≥ 5%, so it reclassifies JAAA/CLOA (~4.9%) as “Other” and reports Bedrock 11.8% with 3.2% in its own “Other” bucket. The classification rows above use the PLEX-bucket definition Joseph actually applies (Bedrock 9.8% of his live holdings). That figure is an assessment of the holdings and is never compared against the sleeve target — the sleeve rows carry their own actual (65.3%) against their own target (65.0%). Source: live M1 pie tree (sleeve percentage = target, sleeve value = actual), pulled 2026-08-10 04:11 UTC. All three are shown honestly — none is silently chosen.

Source: live Fynanc Portfolio Analyzer (public POST). Reran Jul 28, 2026 (America/Chicago).

Related Fynanc tools — go run the whole-picture diagnostics on the toolbox: ARC Loop Intelligence ↗ (scores the asset↔debt↔cash-flow recycling loop) · Wealth Journey Map ↗ (orients you across the Review/Grow → Invest → PLEX phases).

Portfolio A

AI PLEX Recommendation

7 holdings · bedrock-targeted · a model, not an account

JAAA 40% · BKLN 25% (bedrock 65%) · JEPQ 9 / SPYI 9 / QQQI 8 / PDI 5 / JEPI 4 (cash-flow 35%)

Portfolio B

Joseph's M1 Freedom Engine

17 holdings · live M1 pie · as of 2026-08-10

His actual live Freedom Engine pie, walked from M1 today. Scored against the PLEX classification it is 9.8% Bedrock / 90.2% Cash-flow / 0.0% Hedge — 45% of it is a single BDC block (BXSL, BIZD, PBDC, GBDC, ARCC).

Portfolio C

Macarena's Pie

22 holdings · M1 share link decode

Decoded from Macarena's M1 share link — high-yield income tilt with a hedge sleeve.

Portfolio D

Julie's Pie

37 holdings · live M1 share link

Decoded live from Julie’s M1 share link (her pie is named “Freedom Engine” inside M1). A two-sleeve nested pie — Bedrock 65% · Cash Flow 35% — heavily tilted to high-yield credit CEFs and option-income ETFs.

The Comparison — Metric by Metric

Metric	AI Recommendation	Joseph Freedom Engine	Macarena	Julie
Pie structure — the sleeves, as M1 reports them M1 live pull 2026-08-10 04:11 UTC
Holdings	7	17	22	37
Bedrock sleevetarget set in M1 · actual held today	65.0%target only — a model, not an account	65.0%actual 65.3% · +0.3pp drift	n/aflat pie — no sleeve layer	65.0%target only — shared pie, not funded
Cash Flow sleevetarget set in M1 · actual held today	35.0%target only — a model, not an account	34.0%actual 33.7% · −0.3pp drift	n/aflat pie — no sleeve layer	35.0%target only — shared pie, not funded
Hedge sleevetarget set in M1 · actual held today	0.0%target only — a model, not an account	1.0%actual 0.9% · −0.1pp drift	n/aflat pie — no sleeve layer	—no hedge sleeve in this pie
These are two different questions. The rows above are the pie structure — the sleeve targets set in M1 and the dollars actually sitting in each sleeve right now. The rows below are our own independent classification of the underlying holdings: we test every ticker on its own merits and ask whether it behaves like stable collateral. A sleeve can be labelled Bedrock and still be full of instruments that do not behave like bedrock — that gap is the finding, and it only shows up when the two are reported separately.
Independent holdings classification — our own read, NOT the pie’s sleeve structure
Behaves like Bedrockshare of holdings that pass the stable-collateral test	65.0	9.8	22.0	14.3
Behaves like Cash-flowshare of holdings that are income instruments	35.0	90.2	65.0	73.5
Behaves like Hedgeshare of holdings that are hedges	0.0	0.0	13.0	12.3
Income Market data as of 2026-08-10 — same run as the allocation pull.
Weighted yieldheadline — read it next to income quality, not alone	6.6%	10.0%	10.3%	14.8%
Income quality — EARNEDhigher is better	70%	32%	30%	39%
Income quality — likely return-of-capitallower is better	5%	61%	57%	53%
Risk (3-year window vs S&P 500) Market data as of 2026-08-10 — same run as the allocation pull.
Max drawdown (3y)lower is better	−7.08%	−16.29%	−14.91%	−14.99%
Volatility (annualized)lower is better	5.29%	12.28%	10.73%	10.95%
Beta vs S&P 500lower is better	0.327	0.628	0.627	0.629
Return & Score Market data as of 2026-08-10 — same run as the allocation pull.
3-yr total returnHYPOTHETICAL — backtest holding today’s weights for 3y, not a real account	32.38%	35.46%	48.19%	60.26%
Actual account returnsince inception — the real number, and it overrides the backtest	n/aa model, not an account	+2.12%as of 2026-07-19	n/anot our account	n/anot our account
Fynanc analyzer score0–10 — see the caveat below	5.89	5.74	6.93	7.73

Return-of-capital and drawdown are the numbers that matter most when a portfolio is meant to be stable collateral you borrow against. Important: the “3-yr total return” row is a hypothetical backtest (assumes you held today's exact weights for the last 3 years). It is NOT what the account actually did. The “actual account return” row — from Joseph's real M1 account since it was funded — is the truth, and it overrides the backtest.

On Julie’s column (2026-07-28): her 37 holdings were decoded live from her M1 share link and run through the same engines as the other three columns. Two honest caveats. (1) Her pie labels its own sleeves “Bedrock 65% / Cash Flow 35%”, but scored against the PLEX ticker classification only 14.3% of it is genuinely Bedrock — the sleeve she calls Bedrock is mostly high-yield credit CEFs, not stable collateral. (2) Her weighted yield excludes SPYI under the same >50% data-sanity cap applied to the other columns (36/37 holdings priced). She has no account with us, so “actual account return” is n/a — not zero.

On the metric that decides PLEX collateral quality — whether income is earned or is return-of-capital — ranks: AI Rec 62% ➜ Julie 38% ➜ Macarena 25% ➜ Joseph 24% Recomputed 2026-07-28. Joseph’s engine now ranks last on this metric — the earlier ordering was computed on an older version of his pie.

Actual Account Performance — The Reality Check

Backtests flatter this pie. Here is what Joseph's real M1 Individual (Freedom Engine) account has actually done. Every row states its own source and as-of date; the rows marked live 2026-07-28 were recomputed today from his current holdings, the time-weighted return row is stamped with the date of the account-performance pull it came from.

Since inception (funded 2026-02-06)	Joseph's Freedom Engine	Benchmark
Time-weighted total returnsince funded 2026-02-06 · source: M1 account performance, as of 2026-07-19 — NOT recomputed today	+2.12%	VT (total world) +6.31% · AOR (60/40 fund) +3.30% same 2026-07-19 pull
Trailing-12mo distribution ratelook-through on today’s 17 holdings, weight-weighted · 100% coverage · live 2026-07-28	+13.19%	looks great on paper…
Trailing-12mo PRICE returnsame look-through · live 2026-07-28	−12.85%	…but NAV is eroding, hard
⇒ TOTAL return, 1yr (price + distributions)same look-through · live 2026-07-28	−2.83%	a 13.2% payout on a −2.8% total return → return of capital
Current value vs cost basisM1 account, live 2026-07-28 — unrealized only, excludes distributions taken	−2.80% below cost dollar balances withheld	below cost

What this means

The engine is NOT performing well. A 13.2% headline distribution rate is masking NAV erosion: the 1-year total return of his current holdings is −2.83% — far below the payout, which is the signature of return of capital: fat distributions partly funded by shrinking principal. He is underperforming a plain index fund while sitting 2.80% below cost. Worst offenders by weight, recomputed live 2026-07-28: the BDC block — BXSL 13.0%, BIZD 13.0%, PBDC 9.75%, GBDC 9.75%, ARCC 9.75% (45% of the pie) — each paying 10–17% while returning −5% to −19% over the last year, plus PDI (5.1%, pays 16.7%, returns −3.9%) and a tiny BITO sleeve (0.25%, pays 68.7%, returns −47.2%). Note: the names this page previously called out — ECC, SMCY, PLTY, AIPI, FEPI — are no longer in his pie. His holdings changed; the page had not.

The Key Truths

1 · The correction — Joseph's engine is NOT performing well

The earlier read of “best real-world balance” was wrong. The reality, recomputed live 2026-07-28: a 13.2% headline distribution rate masking NAV erosion — the 1-year total return of his current holdings is −2.83%, far below the payout, the fingerprint of return of capital. Only 24% of his income now scores EARNED (the lowest of the four), the M1 pie itself labels 65.3% of it Bedrock against a 65% target while our per-holding classifier scores only 9.8% Bedrock, and the account sits 2.80% below cost basis. As of the 2026-07-19 performance pull the account was +2.12% since inception, underperforming a plain 60/40 index fund (AOR +3.30%) and total-world VT (+6.31%). A backtest of today's weights looks fine; the actual account does not.

2 · Safest collateral — AI Recommendation

For PLEX's real purpose (stable collateral to borrow against), the recommendation is the only portfolio that actually hits the 65% true-bedrock target. It has the lowest drawdown (−7.08%), lowest volatility (5.25%), lowest beta (0.326), and the highest income quality (62% earned) — at the cost of the lowest yield (7.2%). Its income is real, not principal handed back.

3 · The yield leaders are the ROC leaders

Recomputed 2026-07-28, the highest yields belong to Julie (15.2%) and Joseph (11.1%), with Macarena at 10.6% — and those same three carry the worst income quality: Macarena 71% return-of-capital, Joseph 68%, Julie 61%, against 30% for the AI Recommendation. They also carry the deepest hypothetical drawdowns (−15% to −16%) and roughly double the beta. Same disease in all three: the headline yield looks great, but the majority of it is principal being handed back. Weak PLEX collateral.

4 · Caveat — don't trust the Fynanc score here

On the 2026-07-28 recompute the Fynanc analyzer ranks Julie 7.73 · Macarena 6.93 · AI Recommendation 5.89 · Joseph 5.74 — it rewards the high-yield, high-ROC pies and rates the bedrock-heavy recommendation near the bottom, because that engine penalizes true bedrock. It reclassifies low-yield bedrock like JAAA / CLOA as “Other” whenever yield < 5%. So the score is misleading: for a collateral goal, trust the actual account return, drawdown, and income-quality numbers over the Fynanc score.

5 · The real bar & the fix

A good engine's TOTAL return should EXCEED its yield. Joseph's is the reverse (−2.83% total return against a 13.2% payout) — that is the tell that principal is leaking out as distributions. The fix: rotate the return-of-capital names — today that means the BDC block (BXSL / BIZD / PBDC / GBDC / ARCC, 45% of the pie), PDI, and the leftover BITO sleeve — into holdings where total return beats the payout, and shift toward true bedrock (JAAA / BKLN / CLOA), which is currently only 9.8% of the pie against a 65% target. Chase total return, not headline yield.

Every Holding, Every Portfolio — Per-Ticker Detail

All 83 positions across the four portfolios (60 distinct tickers), each run through the same engines as the summary table above — weight, PLEX bucket, trailing yield, expense ratio and income quality. Income quality is the PLEX test that matters for collateral: EARNED = the distribution is covered by what the fund actually earned; LIKELY‑ROC = the payout outran total return, so part of the “income” is your own principal handed back. A dash means the source does not publish that figure — it is never estimated.

Per-ticker market data as of 2026-08-10 — same run as the allocation pull.

AI PLEX Recommendation — 7 holdings · as of static model — not an account

Ticker	Fund	Wt	Bucket	Yield	Expense	Income quality
JAAA	Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF	40.00%	Bedrock	5.35%	20.00%	EARNED
BKLN	Invesco Senior Loan ETF	25.00%	Bedrock	6.51%	0.65%	MIXED
JEPQ	JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF	9.00%	Cash Flow	10.76%	35.00%	EARNED
SPYI	NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF	9.00%	Cash Flow	2.42%	0.68%	EARNED
QQQI	NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF	8.00%	Cash Flow	129.00%excluded from weighted yield (>50% sanity cap)	0.68%	EARNED
PDI	PIMCO Dynamic Income Fund	5.00%	Cash Flow	16.46%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 16.5% vs total return -3.6% (1y)
JEPI	JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF	4.00%	Cash Flow	7.97%	35.00%	EARNED

Joseph's M1 Freedom Engine — 17 holdings · as of 2026-08-10

Ticker	Fund	Wt	Bucket	Yield	Expense	Income quality
BXSL	Blackstone Secured Lending Fund of Beneficial	13.00%	Cash Flow	12.55%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 15.7% vs total return -9.2% (1y)
BIZD	VanEck Vectors BDC Income ETF	13.00%	Cash Flow	12.29%	9.69%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 14.6% vs total return -6.0% (1y)
PBDC	Putnam BDC Income ETF	9.75%	Cash Flow	11.60%	13.49%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 13.5% vs total return -5.8% (1y)
ARCC	Ares Capital Corporation	9.75%	Cash Flow	9.60%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 9.6% vs total return -2.2% (1y)
GBDC	Golub Capital BDC Inc.	9.75%	Cash Flow	10.02%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 10.9% vs total return -1.3% (1y)
SPYI	NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF	8.50%	Cash Flow	2.42%	0.68%	EARNED
QQQI	NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF	8.50%	Cash Flow	129.00%excluded from weighted yield (>50% sanity cap)	0.68%	EARNED
JEPQ	JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF	8.50%	Cash Flow	10.76%	35.00%	EARNED
PDI	PIMCO Dynamic Income Fund	5.10%	Cash Flow	16.46%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 16.5% vs total return -3.6% (1y)
JEPI	JPMorgan Equity Premium Income ETF	3.40%	Cash Flow	7.97%	35.00%	EARNED
SRLN	SPDR Blackstone / GSO Senior Loan ETF	3.25%	Bedrock	7.38%	0.70%	MIXED
JAAA	Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF	3.25%	Bedrock	5.35%	20.00%	EARNED
BKLN	Invesco Senior Loan ETF	3.25%	Bedrock	6.51%	0.65%	MIXED
SH	ProShares Short S&P500	0.25%	Cash Flow	4.19%	0.89%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 5.6% vs total return -14.1% (1y)
PSQ	ProShares Short QQQ	0.25%	Cash Flow	4.26%	0.95%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 6.0% vs total return -18.5% (1y)
TAIL	Cambria Tail Risk ETF	0.25%	Cash Flow	2.99%	0.59%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 4.1% vs total return -10.3% (1y)
BITO	ProShares Bitcoin ETF	0.25%	Cash Flow	61.68%excluded from weighted yield (>50% sanity cap)	0.95%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 46.2% vs total return -46.2% (1y)

Macarena's Pie — 22 holdings · as of 2026-08-10

Ticker	Fund	Wt	Bucket	Yield	Expense	Income quality
QDTE	Roundhill Innovation-100 0DTE Covered Call Str	13.00%	Hedge	5.18%	0.96%	MIXED
PDI	PIMCO Dynamic Income Fund	11.00%	Cash Flow	16.46%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 16.5% vs total return -3.6% (1y)
JFR	Nuveen Floating Rate Income Fund	8.00%	Bedrock	12.03%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 13.8% vs total return 3.3% (1y)
PFN	PIMCO Income Strategy Fund II	8.00%	Cash Flow	12.08%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 12.1% vs total return 5.6% (1y)
SPYI	NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF	7.00%	Cash Flow	2.42%	0.68%	EARNED
BIZD	VanEck Vectors BDC Income ETF	5.00%	Cash Flow	12.29%	9.69%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 14.6% vs total return -6.0% (1y)
JEPQ	JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF	5.00%	Cash Flow	10.76%	35.00%	EARNED
EFR	Eaton Vance Senior Floating-Rate Fund of Benef	5.00%	Cash Flow	7.83%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 9.3% vs total return 0.2% (1y)
CLM	Cornerstone Strategic Investment Fund Inc.	5.00%	Cash Flow	19.31%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 21.0% vs total return 11.4% (1y)
NML	Neuberger Energy Infrastructure and Income Fun	4.00%	Bedrock	8.28%	n/a	EARNED
UTF	Cohen & Steers Infrastructure Fund Inc	4.00%	Bedrock	7.05%	n/a	EARNED
FTSL	First Trust Senior Loan Fund	4.00%	Bedrock	6.34%	0.70%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 6.9% vs total return 3.9% (1y)
QQQI	NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF	4.00%	Cash Flow	129.00%excluded from weighted yield (>50% sanity cap)	0.68%	EARNED
FSCO	FS Credit Opportunities Corp.	4.00%	Cash Flow	15.23%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 16.6% vs total return -22.6% (1y)
SVOL	Simplify Volatility Premium ETF	3.00%	Cash Flow	13.29%	0.66%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 23.8% vs total return 15.7% (1y)
HNDL	Strategy Shares NASDAQ 7 HANDL Index ETF	2.00%	Cash Flow	6.99%	0.95%	EARNED
UTG	Reaves Utility Income Fund of Beneficial Inter	2.00%	Bedrock	6.42%	n/a	EARNED
KIO	KKR Income Opportunities Fund	2.00%	Cash Flow	13.08%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 14.2% vs total return -0.7% (1y)
BBDC	Barings BDC Inc.	1.00%	Cash Flow	11.28%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 15.2% vs total return 8.6% (1y)
RLTY	Cohen & Steers Real Estate Opportunities and I	1.00%	Cash Flow	8.33%	n/a	EARNED
SRET	Global X SuperDividend REIT ETF	1.00%	Cash Flow	7.87%	0.58%	EARNED
ASG	Liberty All-Star Growth Fund Inc.	1.00%	Cash Flow	8.79%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 11.0% vs total return 7.6% (1y)

Julie's Pie — 37 holdings · as of 2026-08-10

Ticker	Fund	Wt	Bucket	Yield	Expense	Income quality
FSCO	FS Credit Opportunities Corp.	7.15%	Cash Flow	15.23%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 16.6% vs total return -22.6% (1y)
EMO	ClearBridge Energy Midstream Opportunity Fund	5.85%	Cash Flow	8.76%	n/a	EARNED
NVDY	YieldMax NVDA Option Income Strategy ETF	5.25%	Hedge	35.27%	1.09%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 59.6% vs total return 22.8% (1y)
GOOY	YieldMax GOOGL Option Income Strategy ETF	5.25%	Hedge	43.31%	1.14%	MIXED
PAXS	PIMCO Access Income Fund of Beneficial Interes	5.25%	Cash Flow	12.51%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 12.5% vs total return 2.8% (1y)
PHK	Pimco High Income Fund	5.25%	Cash Flow	12.20%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 12.2% vs total return 7.3% (1y)
SPYI	NEOS S&P 500 High Income ETF	4.90%	Cash Flow	2.42%	0.68%	EARNED
GHY	PGIM Global High Yield Fund Inc.	4.55%	Cash Flow	10.69%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 11.6% vs total return -1.5% (1y)
JFR	Nuveen Floating Rate Income Fund	4.55%	Bedrock	12.03%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 13.8% vs total return 3.3% (1y)
RLTY	Cohen & Steers Real Estate Opportunities and I	3.90%	Cash Flow	8.33%	n/a	EARNED
NIE	Virtus Equity & Convertible Income Fund of Ben	3.90%	Bedrock	8.79%	n/a	EARNED
DSU	Blackrock Debt Strategies Fund Inc.	3.90%	Cash Flow	12.48%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 13.6% vs total return 1.0% (1y)
TRIN	Trinity Capital Inc.	3.90%	Cash Flow	14.13%	n/a	EARNED
PDI	PIMCO Dynamic Income Fund	3.90%	Cash Flow	16.46%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 16.5% vs total return -3.6% (1y)
KIO	KKR Income Opportunities Fund	3.25%	Cash Flow	13.08%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 14.2% vs total return -0.7% (1y)
JAAA	Janus Henderson AAA CLO ETF	3.25%	Bedrock	5.35%	20.00%	EARNED
CCIF	Carlyle Credit Income Fund Shares of Beneficia	2.80%	Cash Flow	25.35%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 40.1% vs total return -32.2% (1y)
CII	BlackRock Enhanced Large Cap Core Fund Inc.	2.60%	Cash Flow	6.83%	n/a	EARNED
BDJ	Blackrock Enhanced Equity Dividend Trust	2.60%	Cash Flow	7.61%	n/a	EARNED
EXG	Eaton Vance Tax-Managed Global Diversified Equ	2.60%	Cash Flow	7.88%	n/a	EARNED
ETW	Eaton Vance Corporation Tax-Managed Global Buy	2.60%	Cash Flow	8.19%	n/a	EARNED
VVR	Invesco Senior Income Trust (DE)	1.95%	Bedrock	11.80%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 15.8% vs total return -8.0% (1y)
CLM	Cornerstone Strategic Investment Fund Inc.	1.05%	Cash Flow	19.31%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 21.0% vs total return 11.4% (1y)
CRF	Cornerstone Total Return Fund Inc. (The)	1.05%	Cash Flow	19.60%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 21.2% vs total return 9.8% (1y)
AIPI	REX AI Equity Premium Income ETF	1.05%	Cash Flow	6.41%	0.65%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 35.3% vs total return 22.4% (1y)
ULTY	YieldMax Ultra Option Income Strategy ETF	1.05%	Hedge	41.24%	1.30%	MIXED
QQQY	Defiance Nasdaq 100 Weekly Distribution ETF	0.70%	Cash Flow	22.37%	1.01%	MIXED
WDTE	Defiance S&P 500 Weekly Distribution ETF	0.70%	Cash Flow	21.94%	1.03%	MIXED
FRA	Blackrock Floating Rate Income Strategies Fund	0.65%	Bedrock	13.68%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 14.8% vs total return -7.0% (1y)
PFN	PIMCO Income Strategy Fund II	0.65%	Cash Flow	12.08%	n/a	LIKELY‑ROCdist 12.1% vs total return 5.6% (1y)
JEPQ	JPMorgan Nasdaq Equity Premium Income ETF	0.65%	Cash Flow	10.76%	35.00%	EARNED
QQQI	NEOS Nasdaq 100 High Income ETF	0.65%	Cash Flow	129.00%excluded from weighted yield (>50% sanity cap)	0.68%	EARNED
IWMI	NEOS Russell 2000 High Income ETF	0.65%	Cash Flow	3.26%	0.68%	EARNED
STRC	Strategy Inc	0.65%	Cash Flow	6.31%	n/a	MIXED
QQQH	NEOS Nasdaq-100 Hedged Equity Income ETF	0.65%	Cash Flow	9.19%	0.68%	EARNED
YMAX	YieldMax Universe Fund of Option Income ETFs	0.35%	Hedge	44.58%	1.33%	MIXED
AMZY	YieldMax AMZN Option Income Strategy ETF	0.35%	Hedge	20.43%	1.09%	LIKELY‑ROCdist 47.9% vs total return 16.0% (1y)

Yield = trailing distribution yield from the pricing source (m1_yield_tally). Any single holding printing above a 50% yield is treated as a bad data point and excluded from the portfolio weighted yield rather than silently believed. Expense ratio comes from our screened ETF shortlist first, then the fund data source; where neither publishes it the cell is a dash. Income quality is computed per ticker by m1_distribution_sustainability (trailing-12mo distribution rate vs 1-year total return).

Where Every Number Comes From

Nothing on this page is typed in by hand or carried forward from an older run. Every figure below is recomputed from source by the same engines, in the same run, on the date shown.

Portfolio	Holdings	Where the holdings come from	As of
AI PLEX Recommendation	7	model pie (declared weights, data/plex-review/rec-v2.json construction 'JAAA40/BKLN25 bedrock=65, cash_flow=35')decoded snapshot	static model — not an account
Joseph's M1 Freedom Engine	17	M1 live pie tree via lib_freedom_engine.freedom_engine_holdings() (read-only; leaf weight = product of slice pcts down the path)LIVE	2026-08-10
Macarena's Pie	22	M1 node(UserPie) read of the pie itself (read-only) — re-resolved live this runLIVE	2026-08-10
Julie's Pie	37	M1 viewer.sharedPie share-link decode (read-only) — re-resolved live this runLIVE	2026-08-10

Metric on this page	Engine that computes it	Underlying source
Holdings / weights	lib_freedom_engine (Joseph) · m1_shared_pie_resolve (Macarena, Julie)	M1 GraphQL, read-only
Pie structure — sleeve target %	lib_freedom_engine.freedom_engine_sleeves (Joseph)	M1 live pie tree, top-level slice `percentage` — read-only
Pie structure — sleeve actual %	lib_freedom_engine.freedom_engine_sleeves (Joseph)	M1 live pie tree, slice `value.total` ÷ account total
“Behaves like” classification %	plex_review_analyze.bucket_split	our own test of each holding: PLEX tier config, then fund type — an assessment, not the pie’s structure
Weighted yield	plex_review_analyze.analyze_yield → m1_yield_tally	market data (trailing distributions)
Income quality (EARNED / ROC)	plex_review_analyze.analyze_roc → m1_distribution_sustainability	trailing-12mo distribution rate vs 1y total return
Max drawdown / volatility / beta	plex_review_analyze.analyze_drawdown → m1_drawdown_benchmark	3 years of daily closes vs SPY
3-yr total return (HYPOTHETICAL)	plex_review_analyze.analyze_drawdown	backtest of TODAY’s weights — not a real account
Actual account return	M1 account performance (Joseph only)	his real M1 Individual account, time-weighted since funding
Fynanc analyzer score 0–10	fynanc_portfolio_analyzer_call	public PLEX Portfolio Analyzer engine
Expense ratio (per ticker)	screened ETF shortlist, then fund data source	published fund expense ratio; dash if unpublished

M1 pull: 2026-08-10 04:11 UTC — every allocation, value and margin figure on this page comes from that live read. The build refuses to publish if the M1 pull fails or the data is older than 90 minutes, so a stale allocation can never be shown as current.

Two cadences, two dates. The allocation side of this page — holdings, weights, sleeve targets and actuals, account values, margin — is pulled live from M1 on every run and was last pulled 2026-08-10. The market side — trailing yield, expense ratio, income quality, drawdown, volatility, beta, backtested return and the analyzer score — comes from the per-ticker pass, which runs monthly at most, and is from 2026-08-10 (same run). Nothing on either side is carried forward without the date it belongs to.

Allocation pass run 2026-08-10; per-ticker market pass 2026-08-10 (recomputed this run). Built by tools/plex_compare_refresh.py; machine-readable output data/plex-review/compare-all.json.

Data & method. All four columns were recomputed in a single run on 2026-07-28 by tools/plex_compare_refresh.py, through the same engines, so no column is a different vintage from any other. Joseph's Freedom Engine column reflects his actual live M1 pie — the 17 leaf holdings walked from M1 that day via lib_freedom_engine.freedom_engine_holdings, each leaf's overall weight being the product of the pie-slice percentages down its path. Macarena's and Julie's columns are decodes of their M1 share links; the AI Recommendation is a model pie, not an account. Yield, drawdown, volatility, beta and income quality all come from plex_review_analyze; the Fynanc score is from the public Portfolio Analyzer engine. The 3-yr total-return row is a HYPOTHETICAL backtest of today's weights vs SPY — not a real account. In the actual account performance section, the 1-year distribution / price / total-return rows are a live look-through of his current 17 holdings (2026-07-28) and the cost-basis row is live from M1; the time-weighted since-inception return (+2.12% vs VT +6.31% and AOR +3.30%) comes from a separate M1 account-performance pull dated 2026-07-19 and is labelled as such rather than presented as today's number. A weighted expense-ratio figure that previously appeared here was removed: only 13 of the 17 holdings publish a comparable expense ratio, so no honest portfolio-level number could be computed — the per-ticker expense column below shows what each source actually publishes. Bucket classification follows the PLEX config. Educational only — not investment, financial, legal, or tax advice.