Foundry Technology Return on Equity 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 | 24.57% |
2AAPL | APPLE INC | Technology | $4.90T | 24.54% |
3MSFT | MICROSOFT CORP | Technology | $2.93T | 14.64% |
4AVGO | BROADCOM INC | Technology | $1.76T | 8.83% |
5MU | MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC | Technology | $958.80B | 4.80% |
6AMAT | APPLIED MATERIALS INC | Technology | $420.53B | 2.10% |
7LRCX | LAM RESEARCH CORP | Technology | $391.80B | 1.96% |
8ORCL | ORACLE CORP | Technology | $364.12B | 1.82% |
9PLTR | PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $317.36B | 1.59% |
10KLAC | KLA CORP | Technology | $277.91B | 1.39% |
11TXN | TEXAS INSTRUMENTS INC | Technology | $258.48B | 1.29% |
12ANET | ARISTA NETWORKS INC | Technology | $212.31B | 1.06% |
13SNDK | SANDISK CORP | Technology | $200.63B | 1.00% |
14IBM | INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORP | Technology | $199.89B | 1.00% |
15APH | AMPHENOL CORP | Technology | $186.01B | 0.93% |
16QCOM | QUALCOMM INC | Technology | $181.06B | 0.91% |
17STX | SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS PLC | Technology | $176.62B | 0.88% |
18WDC | WESTERN DIGITAL CORP | Technology | $164.49B | 0.82% |
19UBER | UBER TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $147.50B | 0.74% |
20APP | APPLOVIN CORP | Technology | $142.62B | 0.71% |
21FTNT | FORTINET INC | Technology | $118.40B | 0.59% |
22ADBE | ADOBE INC | Technology | $94.31B | 0.47% |
23MSI | MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $68.61B | 0.34% |
24LITE | LUMENTUM HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $57.01B | 0.29% |
25TER | TERADYNE INC | Technology | $50.46B | 0.25% |
26ADSK | AUTODESK INC | Technology | $46.07B | 0.23% |
27CRDO | CREDO TECHNOLOGY GROUP HOLDING LTD | Technology | $37.80B | 0.19% |
28UI | UBIQUITI INC | Technology | $33.04B | 0.17% |
29NTAP | NETAPP INC | Technology | $32.11B | 0.16% |
30JBL | JABIL INC | Technology | $31.54B | 0.16% |
31CPAY | CORPAY INC | Technology | $23.91B | 0.12% |
32BR | BROADRIDGE FINANCIAL SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $17.34B | 0.09% |
33CDW | CDW CORP | Technology | $17.02B | 0.09% |
34RBRK | RUBRIK INC | Technology | $16.25B | 0.08% |
35GEN | GEN DIGITAL INC | Technology | $16.11B | 0.08% |
36NXT | NEXTPOWER INC | Technology | $15.49B | 0.08% |
37LOGI | LOGITECH INTERNATIONAL SA | Technology | $14.76B | 0.07% |
38PTC | PTC INC | Technology | $14.37B | 0.07% |
39LDOS | LEIDOS HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $13.39B | 0.07% |
40GDDY | GODADDY INC | Technology | $12.49B | 0.06% |
41DOCN | DIGITALOCEAN HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $12.41B | 0.06% |
42MANH | MANHATTAN ASSOCIATES INC | Technology | $9.66B | 0.05% |
43IT | GARTNER INC | Technology | $9.39B | 0.05% |
44YOU | CLEAR SECURE INC | Technology | $7.49B | 0.04% |
45PAYC | PAYCOM SOFTWARE INC | Technology | $7.05B | 0.04% |
46CORZ | CORE SCIENTIFIC INC | Technology | $6.66B | 0.03% |
47ESTC | ELASTIC NV | Technology | $6.40B | 0.03% |
48APPF | APPFOLIO INC | Technology | $6.36B | 0.03% |
49DUOL | DUOLINGO INC | Technology | $6.24B | 0.03% |
50CVLT | COMMVAULT SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $6.10B | 0.03% |
51LYFT | LYFT INC | Technology | $5.89B | 0.03% |
52QLYS | QUALYS INC | Technology | $5.61B | 0.03% |
53DAVE | DAVE INC | Technology | $5.60B | 0.03% |
54PEGA | PEGASYSTEMS INC | Technology | $5.39B | 0.03% |
55SAIC | SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP | Technology | $4.88B | 0.02% |
56LIF | LIFE360 INC | Technology | $4.36B | 0.02% |
57VNT | VONTIER CORP | Technology | $4.25B | 0.02% |
58NATL | NCR ATLEOS CORP | Technology | $3.50B | 0.02% |
59ONDS | ONDAS INC | Technology | $3.23B | 0.02% |
60TDC | TERADATA CORP | Technology | $2.87B | 0.01% |
61ADEA | ADEIA INC | Technology | $2.80B | 0.01% |
62GRND | GRINDR INC | Technology | $2.71B | 0.01% |
63INOD | INNODATA INC | Technology | $1.99B | 0.01% |
64NN | NEXTNAV INC | Technology | $1.78B | 0.01% |
65PRCH | PORCH GROUP INC | Technology | $1.75B | 0.01% |
66SKYT | SKYWATER TECHNOLOGY INC | Technology | $1.54B | 0.01% |
67BRUN | BOOST RUN INC | Technology | $1.50B | 0.01% |
68BLKB | BLACKBAUD INC | Technology | $1.49B | 0.01% |
69AIP | ARTERIS INC | Technology | $1.43B | 0.01% |
70GCT | GIGACLOUD TECHNOLOGY INC | Technology | $1.40B | 0.01% |
71SECZ | SECURITIZE CORP | Technology | $1.11B | 0.01% |
72ARRY | ARRAY TECHNOLOGIES INC | Technology | $940M | 0.00% |
73PD | PAGERDUTY INC | Technology | $794M | 0.00% |
74CCSI | CONSENSUS CLOUD SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $689M | 0.00% |
75OSPN | ONESPAN INC | Technology | $574M | 0.00% |
76YEXT | YEXT INC | Technology | $535M | 0.00% |
77IBEX | IBEX LTD | Technology | $474M | 0.00% |
78QMCO | QUANTUM CORP | Technology | $419M | 0.00% |
79BKTI | BK TECHNOLOGIES CORP | Technology | $307M | 0.00% |
80EGAN | EGAIN CORP | Technology | $180M | 0.00% |
81TCX | TUCOWS INC | Technology | $114M | 0.00% |
Full long-leg book as of July 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $19.98T. 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, 84% 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%Actual47.4%Margin-27.6%No more than 25% of total assets may be invested in the securities of any one issuer.
Required<= 25.0%Actual24.6%Margin0.4%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.
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%Actual47.4%Margin-2.6%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 differ materially in value but agree on the verdict. Historical and Gaussian fund VaR differ by 15%; both still land on the same side of the 2x limit.
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. | 16.9% | -56.6% |
| 3 yearsp.a. | 25.4% | -19.7% |
| 5 yearsp.a. | 19.4% | -6.0% |
| 10 yearsp.a. | 25.9% | -2.0% |
| Since inceptionp.a. | 12.0% | 1.7% |
| Year | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 20267 mo | 9.0% | -50.0% |
| 2025 | 21.9% | -7.5% |
| 2024 | 39.8% | 7.9% |
| 2023 | 56.5% | 9.0% |
| 2022 | -28.6% | 11.6% |
| 2021 | 40.8% | 34.4% |
| 2020 | 47.3% | -9.9% |
| 2019 | 54.3% | 27.2% |
| 2018 | 0.8% | -16.9% |
| 2017 | 37.5% | -2.8% |
| 2016 | 18.3% | 17.4% |
| 2015 | -7.6% | -10.6% |
| 2014 | 22.8% | 4.8% |
| 2013 | 21.1% | -29.8% |
| 2012 | 16.2% | 0.3% |
| 2011 | 3.7% | 12.4% |
| 2010 | 11.6% | -13.9% |
| 2009 | 61.4% | -1.4% |
| 2008 | -40.4% | 14.3% |
| 2007 | 19.9% | 19.3% |
| 2006 | 11.4% | -3.4% |
| 2005 | -4.6% | -16.3% |
| 2004 | 1.1% | 7.1% |
| 2003 | 20.6% | -37.7% |
| 2002 | -24.0% | 83.2% |
| 2001 | -10.1% | 74.4% |
| 2000 | -36.1% | 41.4% |
| 1999 | 74.6% | -13.1% |
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 Return on Equity Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Technology common stocks each month by a Return on Equity 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.