Dividend FundAll model portfoliosExplore the broad models, simplified live accounts, the experimental CLO portfolio and Steve’s personal holdings. Each $100,000 model adapts its dated source to no more than 20 holdings and 1–10% position sizes.
A $100,000 model selected from the September 1, 2026 Core Model spreadsheet’s 40 candidates. We assign unequal weights between 1% and 10%. The source supplies the holdings and dated income data; selection and sizing are Income Lens judgments because it contains no position weights.
20 selections from the 26-company Taxable Model. Income Lens assigns larger anchors and smaller complementary positions because the source has no weights.
The 20 largest positions in the saved Fidelity Core account, adapted to the 1–10% position limits.
All 14 positions in the simplified Core source, with relative account sizes adapted to the 1–10% limits.
The ten source positions plus HTD from the broader Taxable Model. The extra holding makes a fully invested, unequal allocation possible without exceeding 10% per position.
All 12 credit-only source positions, with relative account sizes adapted to the 1–10% limits.
All 11 positions in the experimental CLO source, with relative account sizes adapted to the 1–10% limits. The source describes a demonstration, not a recommendation.
The 20 largest positions in Steve’s 70-position disclosure, with published percentages used as priorities within the 1–10% limits. This adaptation is not Steve’s full account.
The Core and Taxable lists use explicit Income Lens allocation judgments. The other plans use source position sizes as priorities, retaining at most 20 holdings and applying 1–10% limits. Taxable KISS & DRIP adds HTD from the broader Taxable Model, making unequal weights possible alongside its ten source positions.
“Live” is the publisher’s account label. These pages use saved snapshots, not a live connection. Income figures use dated distribution rates and are not forecasts. Each plan has a separate $100,000 budget; combining them would introduce overlapping exposures.
The original $1M selections, weights and rationale remain unchanged for historical comparison.
View original AI recommendation