ETF Foundry
DRAFT — HYPOTHETICAL MODEL PORTFOLIO — NOT A REGISTERED FUND, NOT AN OFFER TO SELL SECURITIES, NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE.
investment factor · long-only model fund

Foundry Energy Sales Discipline Factor ETF

ETF Foundry Research (hypothetical) · rebalanced monthly

FSAEHYPOTHETICAL MODEL
Since ’99
−9%
Expense Ratio
0.45%
placeholder
Holdings
25
cap-weighted
Inception
Jun 2021
placeholder
Full Sharpe
0.07
Ann. Return (LS)
1.2%
Ann. Volatility
17.4%
Max Drawdown
-57.2%
Test Sharpe ’19–26
0.29
Test FF5 α (ann.)
8.6%
vs Fama-French 5
Test FF5 α t-stat
1.27
not significant
Monthly turnover
16%
of the long leg, per rebalance
Cumulative return (LS)
-9%
over 331 months
This fund holds the long leg only
Long leg Sharpe
0.47
what this fund holds
Long leg ann. return
13.2%
buyable, long-only
Long-short Sharpe
0.07
requires shorting
Bottom bucket ann. return
12.0%
the basket shorted

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

331 months

Holdings

Every constituent of the long leg — sort, search or filter by sector

25 of 25 · 100.0% of book
TickerCompanySectorMarket capWeight
1EPD
ENTERPRISE PRODUCTS PARTNERS LPEnergy$82.65B
38.45%
2OXY
OCCIDENTAL PETROLEUM CORPEnergy$54.57B
25.38%
3PAA
PLAINS ALL AMERICAN PIPELINE LPEnergy$16.84B
7.83%
4APA
APA CORPEnergy$12.45B
5.79%
5MTDR
MATADOR RESOURCES COEnergy$6.68B
3.11%
6VAL
VALARIS LTDEnergy$5.30B
2.47%
7PAGP
PLAINS GP HOLDINGS LPEnergy$5.07B
2.36%
8CRC
CALIFORNIA RESOURCES CORPEnergy$4.69B
2.18%
9DK
DELEK US HOLDINGS INCEnergy$3.88B
1.80%
10PTEN
PATTERSON UTI ENERGY INCEnergy$3.80B
1.77%
11TALO
TALOS ENERGY INCEnergy$2.49B
1.16%
12NOG
NORTHERN OIL & GAS INCEnergy$2.24B
1.04%
13NGL
NGL ENERGY PARTNERS LPEnergy$1.89B
0.88%
14WKC
WORLD KINECT CORPEnergy$1.87B
0.87%
15GEL
GENESIS ENERGY LPEnergy$1.79B
0.83%
16AESI
ATLAS ENERGY SOLUTIONS INCEnergy$1.76B
0.82%
17PUMP
PROPETRO HOLDING CORPEnergy$1.59B
0.74%
18PBT
PERMIAN BASIN ROYALTY TRUSTEnergy$1.32B
0.62%
19NPKI
NPK INTERNATIONAL INCEnergy$1.21B
0.56%
20HPK
HIGHPEAK ENERGY INCEnergy$931M
0.43%
21CAPL
CROSSAMERICA PARTNERS LPEnergy$856M
0.40%
22EGY
VAALCO ENERGY INCEnergy$553M
0.26%
23PNRG
PRIMEENERGY RESOURCES CORPEnergy$302M
0.14%
24BOOM
DMC GLOBAL INCEnergy$128M
0.06%
25GEOS
GEOSPACE TECHNOLOGIES CORPEnergy$88M
0.04%

Full long-leg book as of July 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $214.96B. Hypothetical model holdings — not a registered fund’s portfolio.

Sector Breakdown

1 sectors
Energy
100.0%

Portfolio Style

Size × value map of the long-leg book

25 classified
Value
Blend
Growth
Large
Mid
Small
31%2
46%2
·
8%4
4%2
3%2
1%5
1%3
2%3

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 — 87% toward Large, 32% toward Growth. +3% unclassified (2 missing size/value). Hypothetical holdings — descriptive, not realized P&L.

Tilt over time
Size tilt87% → Large
SmallLarge
Value ↔ growth tilt32% → Growth
ValueGrowth

Capital-weighted centroid of the long leg, December 1998July 2026; the right-hand end is the same value as the box’s dot. 25 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

How this book was built

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.

Passed
4
Failed
2
Not tested
1
Independent checks
7

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%
    Actual
    42.5%
    Margin
    -32.5%
  • No more than 25% of total assets may be invested in the securities of any one issuer.

    Required
    <= 25.0%
    Actual
    38.4%
    Margin
    -13.4%
Reported separately — arithmetically implied
  • 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%
    Actual
    42.5%
    Margin
    -7.5%

    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.

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 25 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.

Governing rule
Rule 18f-4(c)(4) limited derivatives user exception

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.

Limited derivatives user exceptionby construction

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.

Qualifies
Required
<= 10% of net assets
Exposure
0% of net assets
Margin
+10pp

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 govern

This 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.

Measured
2.0 (95% CI 1.5-2.5)
x reference VaR
Limit
2.00x
<= 2.00x reference VaR
Fund VaR
19.3%
99% / 20d
Reference
9.6%
FF5 market (mkt)

historical method · 331 monthly observations · about 3.3 in the 99% tail · paired percentile bootstrap over months

Same test, three estimators
historical
2.01x
over
parametric
1.80x
within
cornish fisher
1.89x
within

The estimators disagree about the verdict, not just the value — the choice of method decides the answer here. Historical VaR gives ratio 2.01 (fail) but Gaussian VaR gives 1.80 (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?

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?

26 windows
Positive windows
54%
14 of 26 3-year windows made money
Worst window
-0.76
Sharpe, January 2007 – December 2009
January 1999July 2026
Median Sharpe
0.10
Dispersion
0.44
Best window
0.76

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

since January 1999
Trailing
PeriodLong legLong-short
1 yearcum.39.5%20.8%
3 yearsp.a.19.1%11.2%
5 yearsp.a.29.2%11.0%
10 yearsp.a.11.7%2.2%
Since inceptionp.a.9.6%-0.3%
Calendar years
YearLong legLong-short
20267 mo24.6%10.0%
202528.0%29.0%
202412.6%4.1%
202312.2%-2.8%
202264.2%20.7%
202153.1%-4.6%
2020-33.2%-25.4%
20198.1%6.1%
2018-23.9%-0.8%
2017-12.7%-19.6%
201652.4%27.2%
2015-21.6%8.1%
2014-7.3%-2.1%
201331.8%3.8%
201212.8%3.5%
20111.0%6.5%
201015.7%-5.8%
200951.1%-8.9%
2008-59.8%-10.9%
200722.8%-19.3%
200618.8%5.9%
200542.7%-1.6%
200431.2%-13.6%
200320.6%-9.2%
2002-6.2%17.6%
2001-15.2%8.1%
200034.9%-5.1%
199926.1%-7.0%

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

Ticker (pseudo)FSAE
IssuerETF Foundry Research (hypothetical)
SeriesHypothetical Model Portfolio Series (not a registered trust)
Expense ratio0.45% (placeholder)
Inception2021-06-08 (placeholder)
Listing exchangeNot listed (hypothetical)
CUSIPNot applicable (hypothetical model portfolio)
RebalanceMonthly
Holdings as ofJuly 2026
Total mkt cap (long leg)$214.96B

Methodology

The Foundry Energy Sales Discipline Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Energy common stocks each month by a Sales Discipline 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.

Summary Prospectus

Objective, fees, strategy, and key risks.

View →
Prospectus

Full strategy, model methodology, and risks.

View →
Statement of Additional Information

Policies, construction, and governance.

View →
Fact Sheet

One-page snapshot with top holdings.

View →
Daily Holdings

Full current constituent list.

View →

DRAFT — HYPOTHETICAL MODEL PORTFOLIO — NOT A REGISTERED FUND, NOT AN OFFER TO SELL SECURITIES, NOT INVESTMENT ADVICE.