Stock Portfolio Analyzer: See Concentration Risk Across All Your Accounts

Updated September 26, 2026.

A stock portfolio analyzer should add your direct shares to the same companies held inside funds, then show how much each exposure contributes across the accounts you select. Separate brokerage accounts do not, by themselves, create diversification.

The first useful question is not whether you exceed a universal “safe” percentage. It is how much a plausible loss in a concentrated holding could affect the money you need, and what you could change within your tax, liquidity, and trading constraints.

Mezzi brings connected investment accounts and broader household context into one place. Its Free plan includes Exposure X-Ray; paid plans add ongoing personalized guidance. This article explains what to measure, how to check the arithmetic, and how to turn a concentration report into an implementable review. Current Mezzi plans.

Concentration has more than one source

You can depend heavily on a company through direct stock, funds that own it, employer equity, and salary. A screen showing only the ticker in your brokerage account may miss some of that dependence.

Concentration can also involve a sector, country, currency, property market, or economic theme. Several differently named companies can share an important risk. Conversely, a broad fund's sector label alone does not describe every source of business revenue or risk.

FINRA's concentration-risk guidance highlights both overlapping investments and employer-stock exposure. The aim of a review is to understand those dependencies, including the ones you intend to keep.

An investment report and a household risk review are related, but they are not interchangeable. Keep them connected without forcing unlike risks into one apparently precise score.

Do not add percentages from separate accounts

Suppose your 401(k) is worth $200,000 and has 20% technology exposure, your IRA is $100,000 with 15%, and your taxable account is $300,000 with 10%.

The combined weight is $85,000 ÷ $600,000, approximately 14.17%. It is not 45%. Each account's percentage has a different denominator.

This is why a household analyzer should preserve account values when aggregating results. The same rule applies to stock, sector, country, and asset-class percentages. Ask the tool to show both dollars and weights so you can reproduce the calculation.

A company-level example with direct and indirect ownership

Consider a different, hypothetical $500,000 portfolio. The fund weights below are invented for illustration and do not describe current ETF holdings.

Company A is 12.6% of the selected portfolio: $63,000 divided by $500,000. Direct shares account for 10%; funds add 2.6 percentage points.

A useful analyzer shows the contributors, not just a warning badge. If the concentration is mostly direct stock, replacing a small fund may barely change it. If most exposure sits in retirement funds, the practical choices may involve the plan menu rather than your taxable brokerage.

Translate concentration into a loss scenario

Percentages become more meaningful when connected to dollars and goals. Suppose Company A in the example falls 40%, while every other exposure is held constant for a deliberately simple illustration.

This applies the shock only to Company A’s direct and indirect slices, not to the full value of every fund holding it.

The loss attributable to Company A would be $63,000 × 40% = $25,200, or 5.04% of the starting portfolio. This is a sensitivity calculation, not a forecast or a worst-case estimate. Other investments could move at the same time, and a company can lose more than 40%.

Ask what a $25,200 decline would change. Would it delay a planned purchase, affect retirement withdrawals, or simply remain within an intentionally accepted range? If your salary and future stock awards depend on the same employer, the household consequences could extend beyond the portfolio loss.

Use more than one scenario. A modest decline, a severe company-specific decline, and a broader market decline can expose different vulnerabilities. Avoid describing one scenario as a reliable maximum loss.

There is no single percentage that makes every household safe

A concentration threshold can serve as a personal review trigger. It is not a universal guarantee. The same holding can have different consequences for someone drawing retirement income, someone with a large cash reserve, and someone whose future earnings depend on the issuer.

A useful policy records:

• What portfolio or account the threshold applies to.
• Whether indirect fund exposure is included.
• Why the threshold fits your goals and capacity for loss.
• What happens when it is crossed: a review, a planned contribution change, or another action.
• Which constraints could prevent an immediate trade.

The review trigger should be explicit enough to revisit. “Discuss this position after the next vesting event” is more actionable than a vague instruction to stay diversified. An adviser can help establish a policy where the situation is complex; a tool can help apply and revisit it.

What a reliable analyzer should show

Before judging the risk, judge the inputs.

Account completeness. Reconcile included accounts with statements. Watch for an old account that stopped refreshing, a spouse's account outside the selected view, or a manual asset that duplicates a linked holding.

Look-through coverage. Check whether the exact ETF, mutual fund, or retirement-plan investment is recognized. A fund-of-funds may need multiple layers of holdings. Our portfolio X-ray guide shows the calculation. An unresolved fund should not silently become zero exposure.

Dates and classifications. Market values and underlying holdings may have different dates. Sector classifications should be consistent across the comparison; a renamed category can change a chart without changing the investments.

Transparent arithmetic. Trace one large exposure from position size to underlying weight to total dollars. In a spreadsheet, each indirect contribution is position value multiplied by the company weight, with direct shares added separately.

Decision context. Keep cash needs, account restrictions, cost basis, and trading windows beside the exposure. A polished heatmap cannot replace those details.

These are evaluation questions for any provider, including Mezzi. If a particular field is unavailable, verify it from account statements, issuer data, or support before acting.

How to use Mezzi for a concentration review

Start by checking the connected investment accounts and the available Exposure X-Ray information. Confirm the account scope and look through supported funds to understand the sources of a company position. The exact data available depends on the connected accounts and securities.

Mezzi can include checking and savings accounts, credit cards, and other assets such as manually entered real estate. This broader picture matters when a concentration decision also involves an emergency reserve, a mortgage, or a planned cash outlay. Keep liquid investment exposure distinct from total net worth in the discussion.

Add relevant rules and circumstances to AI Personalization: a future expense, employer trading restrictions, a deliberate holding preference, or an account you cannot change. Those details give the analysis context beyond the holdings list.

For example: “Review my direct and indirect exposure to this company. State the accounts and missing data. Compare keeping the position, redirecting new contributions, and a staged sale. Include liquidity and tax considerations before suggesting next steps.” This is an illustrative prompt, not a promise of a complete answer for every account.

Advisory costs $399 annually or $39 monthly. Concierge costs $999 annually or $99 monthly and adds the support described on the pricing page. Free includes X-Ray; a paid plan is not required merely to begin reviewing exposure. Mezzi provides guidance, and you remain responsible for reviewing and implementing transactions through your financial institution.

Compare options before selling

A concentration report should produce a set of choices, not an automatic sell instruction.

New contributions are not always a realistic fix. In the $500,000 example, keeping Company A fixed at $63,000 while adding $50,000 elsewhere would bring its weight to approximately 11.45%. Reaching an illustrative 10% would require a $630,000 total portfolio, or $130,000 of additions elsewhere, assuming all prices remain unchanged. Ten percent is used here only to demonstrate the arithmetic.

That calculation can help a household compare the pace of contributions with the urgency of a decision. It does not determine which choice is suitable.

Taxes and implementation belong in the same review

An exposure percentage does not show the tax cost of selling. Retrieve the relevant lots and cost basis, distinguish realized from unrealized gains, and confirm any account restrictions before implementing a change.

For loss sales, the IRS wash-sale rules require attention to qualifying replacement purchases within 30 days before or after the sale. A fund-overlap score alone does not decide whether securities are substantially identical. Net capital losses can offset capital gains; the familiar $3,000 limit generally concerns excess losses deducted against other income, with a lower limit for married filing separately.

Do not treat diversification as synonymous with replacing stocks with a specific bond fund or obtaining similar returns with less risk. A different allocation changes the portfolio's behavior. Document the expected tradeoff and any advice needed to implement it properly.

Save a decision record you can revisit

For each important concentration, record the selected account scope, current direct and indirect exposure, data gaps, illustrative loss scenarios, relevant household needs, and chosen next step.

For the example above, a decision note could read: “Scope: $500,000 investment portfolio; Company A: $63,000, including funds; missing data: none assumed in this illustration; next step: account owner verifies lots and compares contribution and staged-sale options before the next vesting event.” This is a suggested personal record, not an automatically generated product output.

Set a review occasion that fits the position: a vesting event, a planned contribution, a material account change, or a periodic review. Frequent checking is not the same as a useful process. The goal is to notice when the facts that supported your earlier decision have changed.

A tool earns its place when it makes this process easier to repeat and understand. A spreadsheet may be sufficient for a simple portfolio. An adviser may be valuable when implementation and planning are complex. Mezzi fits investors who want connected-account analysis and ongoing context while retaining control of their accounts.

Frequently asked questions

How do I calculate a stock's exposure across accounts?

Add direct shares to each fund position multiplied by that company's weight in the fund. Sum those dollar exposures, then divide by the value of the selected portfolio. Do not add percentages that use different account or fund denominators.

Is 10% in one stock always too much?

No universal percentage determines suitability. Consider potential loss, cash needs, time horizon, employer dependence, restrictions, and why you hold the position. A percentage can be a review trigger without being a guaranteed safety boundary.

Does Mezzi include banking and property in the discussion?

Mezzi can connect banking and credit-card accounts and include other assets such as manually entered real estate. These provide household context. Keep an investment concentration calculation distinct from a net-worth calculation that includes illiquid assets and liabilities.

Can I reduce concentration without selling immediately?

Possibilities include redirecting new contributions, reviewing retirement-account allocations, or making a staged plan. Their usefulness depends on the size and location of the position and your constraints. Calculate how much each option changes the exposure before choosing it.