Foundry Energy DelCOA 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1BKR | BAKER HUGHES CO | Energy | $55.51B | 37.34% |
2FTI | TECHNIPFMC PLC | Energy | $28.73B | 19.33% |
3APA | APA CORP | Energy | $12.45B | 8.37% |
4NOV | NOV INC | Energy | $7.01B | 4.71% |
5NE | NOBLE CORP PLC | Energy | $6.62B | 4.45% |
6WFRD | WEATHERFORD INTERNATIONAL PLC | Energy | $5.80B | 3.90% |
7RIG | TRANSOCEAN LTD | Energy | $5.74B | 3.86% |
8VAL | VALARIS LTD | Energy | $5.30B | 3.57% |
9OII | OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL INC | Energy | $4.22B | 2.84% |
10PTEN | PATTERSON UTI ENERGY INC | Energy | $3.80B | 2.56% |
11NGL | NGL ENERGY PARTNERS LP | Energy | $1.89B | 1.27% |
12INVX | INNOVEX INTERNATIONAL INC | Energy | $1.77B | 1.19% |
13KRP | KIMBELL ROYALTY PARTNERS LP | Energy | $1.61B | 1.09% |
14HLX | HELIX ENERGY SOLUTIONS GROUP INC | Energy | $1.41B | 0.95% |
15NBR | NABORS INDUSTRIES LTD | Energy | $1.24B | 0.83% |
16NPKI | NPK INTERNATIONAL INC | Energy | $1.21B | 0.81% |
17CAPL | CROSSAMERICA PARTNERS LP | Energy | $856M | 0.58% |
18VTS | VITESSE ENERGY INC | Energy | $664M | 0.45% |
19FET | FORUM ENERGY TECHNOLOGIES INC | Energy | $593M | 0.40% |
20EGY | VAALCO ENERGY INC | Energy | $553M | 0.37% |
21CLB | CORE LABORATORIES INC | Energy | $523M | 0.35% |
22OIS | OIL STATES INTERNATIONAL INC | Energy | $507M | 0.34% |
23PNRG | PRIMEENERGY RESOURCES CORP | Energy | $302M | 0.20% |
24BOOM | DMC GLOBAL INC | Energy | $128M | 0.09% |
25NCSM | NCS MULTISTAGE HOLDINGS INC | Energy | $114M | 0.08% |
26GEOS | GEOSPACE TECHNOLOGIES CORP | Energy | $88M | 0.06% |
Full long-leg book as of July 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $148.65B. 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 137-name universe at July 2026. Rows: Large ≥ $7.1B, Small < $1.8B. Columns: Value ≥ 0.64, Growth < 0.40 B/M. The dot marks the capital-weighted centroid of the book — 79% toward Large, 71% toward Growth. +1% unclassified (1 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. 26 names now. The faded start covers early months with a much thinner universe. 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%Actual50.0%Margin-25.0%No more than 25% of total assets may be invested in the securities of any one issuer.
Required<= 25.0%Actual37.3%Margin-12.3%
At least 50% of total assets must sit in cash, government securities, other RICs, and other securities limited to 5% of assets and 10% of the issuer's voting securities per issuer.
Required>= 50.0%Actual50.0%Margin-0.0%Close to the line. The engine flags this verdict as one a routine data rebuild could flip. Read it as borderline rather than settled — the margin beside it is the whole story.
Arithmetically entailed by '40 Act 5(b)(1) diversification (75%/5% asset leg) — it cannot fail independently, so it is reported outside the tally rather than counted as a separate check.
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.
1 verdict(s) sit within 1.0pp of their limit and can be flipped by a routine data rebuild; do not headline them, and always show the margin.
Data version — panel=20260719T025334 rows=2239262 asof=202607 issuers=20260719T014536 rates=20260804T224700
Measured on the 2026-07 formation date across 26 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 2.08 (fail) but Gaussian VaR gives 1.92 (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?
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. | 48.1% | -3.4% |
| 3 yearsp.a. | 16.6% | 3.6% |
| 5 yearsp.a. | 24.1% | 2.7% |
| 10 yearsp.a. | 6.5% | -3.2% |
| Since inceptionp.a. | 5.7% | -3.2% |
| Year | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 20267 mo | 27.2% | -14.1% |
| 2025 | 29.3% | 22.8% |
| 2024 | -5.5% | 1.4% |
| 2023 | 16.9% | 3.2% |
| 2022 | 46.9% | 1.5% |
| 2021 | 45.4% | 9.5% |
| 2020 | -43.6% | -17.9% |
| 2019 | 10.0% | -11.7% |
| 2018 | -29.1% | -7.4% |
| 2017 | -11.7% | -23.3% |
| 2016 | 38.1% | 17.7% |
| 2015 | -18.8% | 16.9% |
| 2014 | -8.8% | 11.1% |
| 2013 | 21.3% | -4.0% |
| 2012 | -2.4% | -12.7% |
| 2011 | -6.9% | -6.8% |
| 2010 | 17.8% | -7.9% |
| 2009 | 5.7% | -39.7% |
| 2008 | -54.6% | 3.4% |
| 2007 | 33.9% | -8.8% |
| 2006 | 5.9% | -2.4% |
| 2005 | 46.3% | -4.2% |
| 2004 | 33.4% | -5.2% |
| 2003 | 26.4% | 4.8% |
| 2002 | -19.3% | 1.2% |
| 2001 | -8.1% | 17.0% |
| 2000 | 32.7% | -2.3% |
| 1999 | 40.5% | -2.7% |
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 Energy DelCOA Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Energy common stocks each month by a DelCOA 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.