Foundry Energy 6-Month Momentum 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1VLO | VALERO ENERGY CORP | Energy | $91.95B | 21.72% |
2MPC | MARATHON PETROLEUM CORP | Energy | $91.26B | 21.55% |
3TRGP | TARGA RESOURCES CORP | Energy | $60.72B | 14.34% |
4VG | VENTURE GLOBAL INC | Energy | $34.28B | 8.10% |
5FTI | TECHNIPFMC PLC | Energy | $28.73B | 6.79% |
6TPL | TEXAS PACIFIC LAND CORP | Energy | $28.67B | 6.77% |
7DINO | HF SINCLAIR CORP | Energy | $15.97B | 3.77% |
8LB | LANDBRIDGE CO LLC | Energy | $8.89B | 2.10% |
9PBF | PBF ENERGY INC | Energy | $7.42B | 1.75% |
10AROC | ARCHROCK INC | Energy | $6.51B | 1.54% |
11KGS | KODIAK GAS SERVICES INC | Energy | $5.79B | 1.37% |
12SEI | SOLARIS ENERGY INFRASTRUCTURE INC | Energy | $4.43B | 1.05% |
13INSW | INTERNATIONAL SEAWAYS INC | Energy | $4.29B | 1.01% |
14WBI | WATERBRIDGE INFRASTRUCTURE LLC | Energy | $4.29B | 1.01% |
15OII | OCEANEERING INTERNATIONAL INC | Energy | $4.22B | 1.00% |
16DK | DELEK US HOLDINGS INC | Energy | $3.88B | 0.92% |
17PARR | PAR PACIFIC HOLDINGS INC | Energy | $3.82B | 0.90% |
18PTEN | PATTERSON UTI ENERGY INC | Energy | $3.80B | 0.90% |
19CLMT | CALUMET INC | Energy | $3.73B | 0.88% |
20NGL | NGL ENERGY PARTNERS LP | Energy | $1.89B | 0.45% |
21AESI | ATLAS ENERGY SOLUTIONS INC | Energy | $1.76B | 0.42% |
22LPG | DORIAN LPG LTD | Energy | $1.76B | 0.41% |
23PUMP | PROPETRO HOLDING CORP | Energy | $1.59B | 0.38% |
24PBT | PERMIAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUST | Energy | $1.32B | 0.31% |
25NBR | NABORS INDUSTRIES LTD | Energy | $1.24B | 0.29% |
26HPK | HIGHPEAK ENERGY INC | Energy | $931M | 0.22% |
27GTE | GRAN TIERRA ENERGY INC | Energy | $233M | 0.06% |
Full long-leg book as of July 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $423.40B. 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 — 93% toward Large, 75% toward Growth. +2% unclassified (3 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. 27 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%Actual50.7%Margin-24.3%
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%Actual50.7%Margin0.7%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 27 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 2.19 (fail) but Gaussian VaR gives 1.83 (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. | 23.2% | -23.9% |
| 3 yearsp.a. | 18.9% | 5.4% |
| 5 yearsp.a. | 21.4% | -4.1% |
| 10 yearsp.a. | 11.8% | -2.7% |
| Since inceptionp.a. | 12.0% | -2.8% |
| Year | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 20267 mo | 30.0% | -12.3% |
| 2025 | -4.9% | -12.1% |
| 2024 | 41.4% | 44.7% |
| 2023 | -8.3% | -20.2% |
| 2022 | 29.4% | -24.4% |
| 2021 | 93.5% | 34.4% |
| 2020 | -13.3% | -8.4% |
| 2019 | 6.5% | -6.8% |
| 2018 | -23.6% | 5.4% |
| 2017 | -8.0% | -10.0% |
| 2016 | 29.4% | -26.0% |
| 2015 | -13.8% | 31.6% |
| 2014 | -2.0% | 26.1% |
| 2013 | 28.6% | -4.2% |
| 2012 | 4.3% | -2.6% |
| 2011 | 5.2% | 9.3% |
| 2010 | 46.2% | 25.2% |
| 2009 | 21.1% | -39.0% |
| 2008 | -51.8% | 9.4% |
| 2007 | 20.2% | -0.7% |
| 2006 | 14.4% | 9.3% |
| 2005 | 55.0% | 20.9% |
| 2004 | 57.2% | 7.3% |
| 2003 | 47.6% | 15.0% |
| 2002 | -7.9% | 20.8% |
| 2001 | -9.6% | -26.5% |
| 2000 | 54.0% | -22.6% |
| 1999 | 5.1% | -46.2% |
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 6-Month Momentum Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Energy common stocks each month by a 6-Month Momentum signal and holds the top quintile with the highest 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.