Is that a chart of how much we think there is (model fitting based on observations) or how much we think there should be based on how it is created?

With Neutrinos we know how they are created and have a very good upper limit on how much there should be and it's not nearly enough to explain the observed effects. Same for the CMBR.

I'm not saying there couldn't be much more Dark matter/energy than neutrinos or photons but it's a bit too convenient to introduce a variable that is allowed to take any value and match it to observations without an explanation of what it is (besides having mass) or how it is created.