Foundry Technology Return on Assets 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1NVDA | NVIDIA CORP | Technology | $4.91T | 25.16% |
2AAPL | APPLE INC | Technology | $4.90T | 25.12% |
3MSFT | MICROSOFT CORP | Technology | $2.93T | 14.99% |
4AVGO | BROADCOM INC | Technology | $1.76T | 9.04% |
5MU | MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC | Technology | $958.80B | 4.91% |
6AMAT | APPLIED MATERIALS INC | Technology | $420.53B | 2.16% |
7LRCX | LAM RESEARCH CORP | Technology | $391.80B | 2.01% |
8PLTR | PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $317.36B | 1.63% |
9KLAC | KLA CORP | Technology | $277.91B | 1.42% |
10TXN | TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC | Technology | $258.48B | 1.32% |
11ANET | ARISTA NETWORKS INC | Technology | $212.31B | 1.09% |
12SNDK | SANDISK CORP | Technology | $200.63B | 1.03% |
13QCOM | QUALCOMM INC | Technology | $181.06B | 0.93% |
14STX | SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PLC | Technology | $176.62B | 0.91% |
15WDC | WESTERN DIGITAL CORP | Technology | $164.49B | 0.84% |
16UBER | UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $147.50B | 0.76% |
17APP | APPLOVIN CORP | Technology | $142.62B | 0.73% |
18FTNT | FORTINET INC | Technology | $118.40B | 0.61% |
19ACN | ACCENTURE PLC | Technology | $95.88B | 0.49% |
20ADBE | ADOBE INC | Technology | $94.31B | 0.48% |
21INTU | INTUIT INC | Technology | $79.62B | 0.41% |
22MPWR | MONOLITHIC POWER SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $64.46B | 0.33% |
23TEL | TE CONNECTIVITY PLC | Technology | $59.35B | 0.30% |
24ALAB | ASTERA LABS INC | Technology | $52.04B | 0.27% |
25TER | TERADYNE INC | Technology | $50.46B | 0.26% |
26GRMN | GARMIN LTD | Technology | $48.13B | 0.25% |
27ADSK | AUTODESK INC | Technology | $46.07B | 0.24% |
28CRDO | CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP HOLDING LTD | Technology | $37.80B | 0.19% |
29UI | UBIQUITI INC | Technology | $33.04B | 0.17% |
30NTAP | NETAPP INC | Technology | $32.11B | 0.16% |
31FICO | FAIR ISAAC CORP | Technology | $29.15B | 0.15% |
32ZM | ZOOM COMMUNICATIONS INC | Technology | $26.72B | 0.14% |
33VRSN | VERISIGN INC | Technology | $25.27B | 0.13% |
34FSLR | FIRST SOLAR INC | Technology | $22.78B | 0.12% |
35TOST | TOAST INC | Technology | $17.45B | 0.09% |
36BR | BROADRIDGE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $17.34B | 0.09% |
37FN | FABRINET | Technology | $17.14B | 0.09% |
38NXT | NEXTPOWER INC | Technology | $15.49B | 0.08% |
39LOGI | LOGITECH INTERNATIONAL SA | Technology | $14.76B | 0.08% |
40PTC | PTC INC | Technology | $14.37B | 0.07% |
41RMBS | RAMBUS INC | Technology | $10.97B | 0.06% |
42VICR | VICOR CORP | Technology | $10.83B | 0.06% |
43JKHY | JACK HENRY & ASSOCIATES INC | Technology | $10.78B | 0.06% |
44MANH | MANHATTAN ASSOCIATES INC | Technology | $9.66B | 0.05% |
45ESE | ESCO TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $8.25B | 0.04% |
46DBX | DROPBOX INC | Technology | $7.14B | 0.04% |
47CRUS | CIRRUS LOGIC INC | Technology | $6.98B | 0.04% |
48ESTC | ELASTIC NV | Technology | $6.40B | 0.03% |
49APPF | APPFOLIO INC | Technology | $6.36B | 0.03% |
50PATH | UIPATH INC | Technology | $6.30B | 0.03% |
51DUOL | DUOLINGO INC | Technology | $6.24B | 0.03% |
52LYFT | LYFT INC | Technology | $5.89B | 0.03% |
53QLYS | QUALYS INC | Technology | $5.61B | 0.03% |
54DAVE | DAVE INC | Technology | $5.60B | 0.03% |
55PEGA | PEGASYSTEMS INC | Technology | $5.39B | 0.03% |
56BMI | BADGER METER INC | Technology | $4.36B | 0.02% |
57LIF | LIFE360 INC | Technology | $4.36B | 0.02% |
58EXLS | EXLSERVICE HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $4.30B | 0.02% |
59TDC | TERADATA CORP | Technology | $2.87B | 0.01% |
60ADEA | ADEIA INC | Technology | $2.80B | 0.01% |
61VISN | VISTANCE NETWORKS INC | Technology | $2.74B | 0.01% |
62GRND | GRINDR INC | Technology | $2.71B | 0.01% |
63RAMP | LIVERAMP HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $2.28B | 0.01% |
64INOD | INNODATA INC | Technology | $1.99B | 0.01% |
65SKYT | SKYWATER TECHNOLOGY INC | Technology | $1.54B | 0.01% |
66GCT | GIGACLOUD TECHNOLOGY INC | Technology | $1.40B | 0.01% |
67RDVT | RED VIOLET INC | Technology | $920M | 0.00% |
68PD | PAGERDUTY INC | Technology | $794M | 0.00% |
69CCSI | CONSENSUS CLOUD SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $689M | 0.00% |
70OSPN | ONESPAN INC | Technology | $574M | 0.00% |
71IBEX | IBEX LTD | Technology | $474M | 0.00% |
72NVEC | NVE CORP | Technology | $418M | 0.00% |
73MPTI | M-TRON INDUSTRIES INC | Technology | $328M | 0.00% |
74OSS | ONE STOP SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $313M | 0.00% |
75BKTI | BK TECHNOLOGIES CORP | Technology | $307M | 0.00% |
76EGAN | EGAIN CORP | Technology | $180M | 0.00% |
77TRAK | REPOSITRAK INC | Technology | $160M | 0.00% |
78INSG | INSEEGO CORP | Technology | $122M | 0.00% |
79WFCF | WHERE FOOD COMES FROM INC | Technology | $63M | 0.00% |
80STEM | STEM INC | Technology | $56M | 0.00% |
81ACFN | ACORN ENERGY INC | Technology | $51M | 0.00% |
Full long-leg book as of July 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $19.51T. 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 — 100% toward Large, 87% toward Growth. 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. 81 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%Actual45.7%Margin-29.3%No more than 25% of total assets may be invested in the securities of any one issuer.
Required<= 25.0%Actual25.2%Margin-0.2%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.
Days required to liquidate the largest position at 20% of one day's dollar volume.
Required<= 7.0 daysActualunboundedMargin—
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%Actual45.7%Margin-4.3%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 81 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 agree, which is mild evidence the number isn’t an artefact of one method.
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?
Publication date unknown. We don’t have a source year for this signal, so we can’t split its record into before and since publication. That’s a gap in our reference data — not a statement about how the factor performed.
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. | 22.1% | -44.4% |
| 3 yearsp.a. | 25.8% | -13.6% |
| 5 yearsp.a. | 19.9% | 3.4% |
| 10 yearsp.a. | 25.7% | -0.1% |
| Since inceptionp.a. | 12.8% | 5.4% |
| Year | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 20267 mo | 11.7% | -29.3% |
| 2025 | 21.7% | -16.3% |
| 2024 | 37.8% | 13.1% |
| 2023 | 60.8% | -5.0% |
| 2022 | -30.2% | 55.5% |
| 2021 | 42.3% | 39.0% |
| 2020 | 48.8% | -27.4% |
| 2019 | 55.1% | 27.1% |
| 2018 | -4.7% | -26.1% |
| 2017 | 38.3% | -2.9% |
| 2016 | 17.9% | 14.4% |
| 2015 | -6.2% | -6.8% |
| 2014 | 23.0% | 10.1% |
| 2013 | 20.1% | -25.8% |
| 2012 | 16.4% | 0.1% |
| 2011 | 8.5% | 17.8% |
| 2010 | 16.3% | -14.9% |
| 2009 | 61.2% | -5.6% |
| 2008 | -42.9% | 21.6% |
| 2007 | 23.4% | 21.5% |
| 2006 | 8.2% | -6.8% |
| 2005 | -2.2% | -11.9% |
| 2004 | -4.4% | 0.3% |
| 2003 | 30.0% | -29.4% |
| 2002 | -25.0% | 110.3% |
| 2001 | -8.2% | 105.1% |
| 2000 | -34.2% | 49.4% |
| 1999 | 88.8% | 3.8% |
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 Return on Assets Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Technology common stocks each month by a Return on Assets 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.