Foundry Technology Earnings Quality (Accruals) Factor ETF
ETF Foundry Research (hypothetical) · rebalanced monthly
Every other metric on this page is the long-shortstrategy, which needs a short book. This fund is the long leg alone, so these are the figures for what it actually holds. The bottom-bucket number is that basket’s own return — not short P&L.
Hypothetical growth of $1 — long-short backtest
Gross of the placeholder expense ratio and trading costs · not investor results
Holdings
Every constituent of the long leg — sort, search or filter by sector
| Ticker | Company | Sector | Market cap | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1CRM | SALESFORCE INC | Technology | $139.86B | 18.37% |
2NOW | SERVICENOW INC | Technology | $106.44B | 13.98% |
3SNOW | SNOWFLAKE INC | Technology | $93.20B | 12.24% |
4CIEN | CIENA CORP | Technology | $53.00B | 6.96% |
5CRWV | COREWEAVE INC | Technology | $39.94B | 5.24% |
6WDAY | WORKDAY INC | Technology | $35.76B | 4.70% |
7VRSN | VERISIGN INC | Technology | $25.27B | 3.32% |
8MDB | MONGODB INC | Technology | $25.12B | 3.30% |
9CPAY | CORPAY INC | Technology | $23.91B | 3.14% |
10ONTO | ONTO INNOVATION INC | Technology | $13.92B | 1.83% |
11U | UNITY SOFTWARE INC | Technology | $12.66B | 1.66% |
12AUR | AURORA INNOVATION INC | Technology | $11.88B | 1.56% |
13HUBS | HUBSPOT INC | Technology | $11.49B | 1.51% |
14VSAT | VIASAT INC | Technology | $9.76B | 1.28% |
15ALGM | ALLEGRO MICROSYSTEMS INC | Technology | $8.66B | 1.14% |
16ESE | ESCO TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $8.25B | 1.08% |
17DBX | DROPBOX INC | Technology | $7.14B | 0.94% |
18PCOR | PROCORE TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $6.93B | 0.91% |
19CORZ | CORE SCIENTIFIC INC | Technology | $6.66B | 0.87% |
20PATH | UIPATH INC | Technology | $6.30B | 0.83% |
21LYFT | LYFT INC | Technology | $5.89B | 0.77% |
22ENPH | ENPHASE ENERGY INC | Technology | $5.48B | 0.72% |
23PEGA | PEGASYSTEMS INC | Technology | $5.39B | 0.71% |
24KLIC | KULICKE & SOFFA INDUSTRIES INC | Technology | $5.09B | 0.67% |
25IPGP | IPG PHOTONICS CORP | Technology | $4.43B | 0.58% |
26EXLS | EXLSERVICE HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $4.30B | 0.56% |
27PI | IMPINJ INC | Technology | $4.21B | 0.55% |
28ACLS | AXCELIS TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $4.19B | 0.55% |
29POWI | POWER INTEGRATIONS INC | Technology | $3.93B | 0.52% |
30CLBT | CELLEBRITE DI LTD | Technology | $3.81B | 0.50% |
31OLED | UNIVERSAL DISPLAY CORP | Technology | $3.75B | 0.49% |
32RNG | RINGCENTRAL INC | Technology | $3.46B | 0.45% |
33QTWO | Q2 HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $3.43B | 0.45% |
34SEDG | SOLAREDGE TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $3.25B | 0.43% |
35FSLY | FASTLY INC | Technology | $3.24B | 0.43% |
36FRSH | FRESHWORKS INC | Technology | $3.01B | 0.40% |
37BRZE | BRAZE INC | Technology | $2.98B | 0.39% |
38ADEA | ADEIA INC | Technology | $2.80B | 0.37% |
39VISN | VISTANCE NETWORKS INC | Technology | $2.74B | 0.36% |
40NVTS | NAVITAS SEMICONDUCTOR CORP | Technology | $2.68B | 0.35% |
41KD | KYNDRYL HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $2.67B | 0.35% |
42RUM | RUMBLE INC | Technology | $2.51B | 0.33% |
43DGII | DIGI INTERNATIONAL INC | Technology | $2.41B | 0.32% |
44INTA | INTAPP INC | Technology | $2.24B | 0.29% |
45FLYW | FLYWIRE CORP | Technology | $2.24B | 0.29% |
46VERX | VERTEX INC | Technology | $2.07B | 0.27% |
47INOD | INNODATA INC | Technology | $1.99B | 0.26% |
48APPN | APPIAN CORP | Technology | $1.92B | 0.25% |
49MQ | MARQETA INC | Technology | $1.85B | 0.24% |
50BL | BLACKLINE INC | Technology | $1.78B | 0.23% |
51ASAN | ASANA INC | Technology | $1.77B | 0.23% |
52BRUN | BOOST RUN INC | Technology | $1.50B | 0.20% |
53AIP | ARTERIS INC | Technology | $1.43B | 0.19% |
54AI | C3AI INC | Technology | $1.37B | 0.18% |
55CXM | SPRINKLR INC | Technology | $1.37B | 0.18% |
56ADTN | ADTRAN HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $944M | 0.12% |
57MITK | MITEK SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $857M | 0.11% |
58BLZE | BACKBLAZE INC | Technology | $793M | 0.10% |
59IBTA | IBOTTA INC | Technology | $734M | 0.10% |
60PUBM | PUBMATIC INC | Technology | $591M | 0.08% |
61ALIT | ALIGHT INC | Technology | $584M | 0.08% |
62PAYS | PAYSIGN INC | Technology | $478M | 0.06% |
63IBEX | IBEX LTD | Technology | $474M | 0.06% |
64VELO | VELO3D INC | Technology | $316M | 0.04% |
65BKTI | BK TECHNOLOGIES CORP | Technology | $307M | 0.04% |
66OPTX | SYNTEC OPTICS HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $302M | 0.04% |
67ALMU | AELUMA INC | Technology | $267M | 0.04% |
68SVCO | SILVACO GROUP INC | Technology | $260M | 0.03% |
69QUIK | QUICKLOGIC CORP | Technology | $237M | 0.03% |
70KVHI | KVH INDUSTRIES INC | Technology | $178M | 0.02% |
71DMRC | DIGIMARC CORP | Technology | $133M | 0.02% |
72INSG | INSEEGO CORP | Technology | $122M | 0.02% |
73WYY | WIDEPOINT CORP | Technology | $115M | 0.02% |
74TCX | TUCOWS INC | Technology | $114M | 0.01% |
75SSTI | SOUNDTHINKING INC | Technology | $111M | 0.01% |
76TRT | TRIO-TECH INTERNATIONAL | Technology | $103M | 0.01% |
77AEYE | AUDIOEYE INC | Technology | $82M | 0.01% |
78STEM | STEM INC | Technology | $56M | 0.01% |
79TACT | TRANSACT TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $54M | 0.01% |
Full long-leg book as of July 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $761.55B. Hypothetical model holdings — not a registered fund’s portfolio.
Sector Breakdown
Portfolio Style
Size × value map of the long-leg book
Share of long-leg capital by market cap × book-to-market, using terciles of the 421-name universe at July 2026. Rows: Large ≥ $8.9B, Small < $1.9B. Columns: Value ≥ 0.63, Growth < 0.38 B/M. The dot marks the capital-weighted centroid of the book — 87% toward Large, 60% toward Growth. +16% unclassified (10 missing size/value). Hypothetical holdings — descriptive, not realized P&L.
Capital-weighted centroid of the long leg, December 1998 → July 2026; the right-hand end is the same value as the box’s dot. 79 names now. Hypothetical holdings — descriptive, not P&L.
Constraint checks
How this book measures against the concentration and liquidity rules — as implemented here
These are UNCONSTRAINED factor sleeves: the construction pipeline sorts on a signal and cap-weights the top bucket, applying no issuer cap, no industry cap and no liquidity screen beyond the universe filter. A failing test therefore reports a constraint that was never applied during construction — it is not a defect in the strategy and not an error in the data. The same signal can be solved subject to these constraints.
7 independent checks plus 1 arithmetically implied by another check (RIC / IRC 851(b)(3)(A) 50% bucket), which is reported separately so the tally cannot overstate scrutiny.
1 of 7 checks could not be tested. Those are neither passes nor failures — they are gaps in what the data can answer, and they are excluded from the passed count above rather than folded into it.
With respect to 75% of total assets, no more than 5% may be invested in the securities of any one issuer.
Required>= 75.0%Actual68.2%Margin-6.8%
Engineering approximation of the cited rules for a DRAFT / HYPOTHETICAL model portfolio that is not a registered fund. This reports whether the portfolio passes the stated test AS IMPLEMENTED HERE; it is not a compliance opinion and is not a statement that any fund is compliant. Real filings need securities counsel.
No verdict sits within 1.0pp of its limit.
Data version — panel=20260719T025334 rows=2239262 asof=202607 issuers=20260719T014536 rates=20260804T224700
Measured on the 2026-07 formation date across 79 holdings (cap-weighted). A different formation date can produce different verdicts.
Derivatives risk (Rule 18f-4)
Whether this long-only book is subject to the VaR tests at all
This assessment describes the long-only book this fund holds — the top bucket only.
This fund QUALIFIES for the limited-derivatives-user exception, so it is excepted from the VaR tests; the ratio below is informational, not the operative limit.
Rule 18f-4(c)(4): a fund whose derivatives exposure (gross notional, including the value of assets sold short) is <= 10% of net assets is excepted from the VaR tests and the full derivatives risk management program.
No confidence interval: this follows from portfolio construction, not from an estimate.
Rule 18f-4(c)(2)(i): fund VaR at 99% over 20 trading days must not exceed 200% of the designated reference portfolio's VaR on the same basis.
Informational — does not governThis fund is excepted from the VaR tests, so the ratio below is context rather than the operative limit. It is shown because it is still a description of the book’s risk, not because it decides anything.
historical method · 331 monthly observations · about 3.3 in the 99% tail · paired percentile bootstrap over months
The estimators disagree about the verdict, not just the value — the choice of method decides the answer here. Historical VaR gives ratio 2.41 (fail) but Gaussian VaR gives 1.84 (pass). The pass/fail conclusion is an artefact of estimator choice, not a property of the strategy.
Engineering approximation of SEC Rule 18f-4 for research display. Not a compliance opinion and not a determination that any fund is compliant. Hypothetical model portfolio, not a registered fund.
The research long-short construction behind this factor does not qualify for this exception — a dollar-neutral book counts its full short notional, which is 100% of net assets against a 10% threshold. This product sidesteps that by holding the long leg alone, which is also why the long-leg Sharpe is reported separately throughout the site.
See the long-short verdict on the factor page →Since publication
Did the edge survive the paper coming out?
There is no “before” to compare against — the predictor was already public when our data begins, so every month shown is out-of-sample relative to the original study.
Split at January of the year after the factor was published. The post-publication stretch IS genuinely out-of-sample relative to the original study -- the predictor was public by then -- so it speaks to whether the effect survived being known. Nothing is fitted here, so this is performance SINCE PUBLICATION, not validation of a model. Note the 'pre' side is our data before publication (our panel starts ~1999), NOT the study's original in-sample period, which usually ran decades earlier; a decay figure compares before-vs-after within our sample and is not a comparison against the published result.
Consistency across eras
Is this record broadly durable, or one regime?
3-year rolling windows, stepping 1 year (26 windows). Dispersion is the spread of window Sharpes — higher means the record depends more on which era you look at.
Rules-based factors fit no parameters, so these windows are not out-of-sample tests and do not validate a fitted model. They show whether the factor's record is consistent across eras or driven by one regime.
Returns
Long leg is what this fund holds — long-short is shown for reference
| Period | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 1 yearcum. | 40.5% | 12.7% |
| 3 yearsp.a. | 11.8% | -29.6% |
| 5 yearsp.a. | 14.7% | -10.1% |
| 10 yearsp.a. | 21.0% | -7.9% |
| Since inceptionp.a. | 10.1% | -6.6% |
| Year | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 20267 mo | 19.2% | 0.8% |
| 2025 | 6.1% | -25.1% |
| 2024 | 7.9% | -52.7% |
| 2023 | 80.1% | 34.2% |
| 2022 | -28.3% | 23.0% |
| 2021 | 29.1% | -6.6% |
| 2020 | 50.6% | -9.2% |
| 2019 | 32.9% | -12.1% |
| 2018 | -1.3% | 0.5% |
| 2017 | 33.7% | -2.7% |
| 2016 | 26.2% | 0.9% |
| 2015 | 3.6% | 2.5% |
| 2014 | 9.6% | -6.8% |
| 2013 | 46.6% | 1.8% |
| 2012 | 19.0% | 14.7% |
| 2011 | 3.7% | 14.8% |
| 2010 | 30.8% | 17.8% |
| 2009 | 73.4% | 1.2% |
| 2008 | -51.9% | -18.6% |
| 2007 | 10.4% | -15.1% |
| 2006 | 7.7% | -9.4% |
| 2005 | -5.7% | -22.0% |
| 2004 | -1.8% | -10.9% |
| 2003 | 64.2% | 35.2% |
| 2002 | -55.0% | -36.8% |
| 2001 | -31.1% | -26.2% |
| 2000 | -41.6% | -15.2% |
| 1999 | 156.6% | 0.1% |
Long leg = the top bucket this fund holds; long-short additionally shorts the bottom bucket and is not achievable in a long-only vehicle. Trailing figures run through July 2026: 1 year is a plain cumulative 12-month return (cum.), 3 years and longer are annualised (p.a.). Years marked with a month count are partial. These match the fact sheet’s tables by construction. Hypothetical backtest, gross of the placeholder expense ratio and trading costs — not investor results.
Fund Facts
Methodology
The Foundry Technology Earnings Quality (Accruals) Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Technology common stocks each month by a Earnings Quality (Accruals) signal and holds the top quintile with the lowest values. Signals are computed from point-in-time Sharadar fundamentals and total-return prices. The portfolio reconstitutes monthly and is cap-weighted within the long leg.
This is a hypothetical model portfolio for research display only — not a registered fund, not an offer, and not investment advice.
Documents (draft — hypothetical)
Auto-generated from the model’s metrics and current holdings. Every document is labeled DRAFT / hypothetical.
Objective, fees, strategy, and key risks.
Full strategy, model methodology, and risks.
Policies, construction, and governance.
One-page snapshot with top holdings.
Full current constituent list.
DRAFT — HYPOTHETICAL MODEL PORTFOLIO — NOT A REGISTERED FUND, NOT AN OFFER TO SELL SECURITIES, NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE.