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.
Gross of the placeholder expense ratio and trading costs · not investor results
Every constituent of the long leg — sort, search or filter by sector
| Ticker | Company | Sector | Market cap | Weight |
|---|---|---|---|---|
1QCOM | QUALCOMM INC | Technology | $189.54B | 42.93% |
2FISV | FISERV INC | Technology | $32.72B | 7.41% |
3SWKS | SKYWORKS SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $21.14B | 4.79% |
4FTV | FORTIVE CORP | Technology | $20.20B | 4.57% |
5FSLR | FIRST SOLAR INC | Technology | $18.52B | 4.19% |
6LDOS | LEIDOS HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $15.99B | 3.62% |
7IT | GARTNER INC | Technology | $12.04B | 2.73% |
8VSAT | VIASAT INC | Technology | $9.92B | 2.25% |
9DBX | DROPBOX INC | Technology | $7.49B | 1.70% |
10SAIC | SCIENCE APPLICATIONS INTERNATIONAL CORP | Technology | $6.34B | 1.44% |
11ACIW | ACI WORLDWIDE INC | Technology | $6.14B | 1.39% |
12OTEX | OPEN TEXT CORP | Technology | $5.99B | 1.36% |
13VNT | VONTIER CORP | Technology | $5.73B | 1.30% |
14PSN | PARSONS CORP | Technology | $5.26B | 1.19% |
15PEGA | PEGASYSTEMS INC | Technology | $5.24B | 1.19% |
16BMI | BADGER METER INC | Technology | $4.39B | 0.99% |
17ITRI | ITRON INC | Technology | $4.23B | 0.96% |
18OLED | UNIVERSAL DISPLAY CORP | Technology | $4.05B | 0.92% |
19KD | KYNDRYL HOLDINGS INC | Technology | $3.72B | 0.84% |
20QBTS | D-WAVE QUANTUM INC | Technology | $3.66B | 0.83% |
21NATL | NCR ATLEOS CORP | Technology | $3.57B | 0.81% |
22ENPH | ENPHASE ENERGY INC | Technology | $3.54B | 0.80% |
23CIFR | CIPHER DIGITAL INC | Technology | $3.26B | 0.74% |
24TDC | TERADATA CORP | Technology | $3.12B | 0.71% |
25OSIS | OSI SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $3.08B | 0.70% |
26NVTS | NAVITAS SEMICONDUCTOR CORP | Technology | $2.58B | 0.58% |
27POWI | POWER INTEGRATIONS INC | Technology | $2.57B | 0.58% |
28BLKB | BLACKBAUD INC | Technology | $2.41B | 0.55% |
29NTCT | NETSCOUT SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $2.31B | 0.52% |
30DXC | DXC TECHNOLOGY CO | Technology | $2.31B | 0.52% |
31CNXC | CONCENTRIX CORP | Technology | $1.95B | 0.44% |
32AI | C3AI INC | Technology | $1.94B | 0.44% |
33CRCT | CRICUT INC | Technology | $1.77B | 0.40% |
34PLAB | PHOTRONICS INC | Technology | $1.64B | 0.37% |
35EFOR | EVERFORTH INC | Technology | $1.47B | 0.33% |
36NN | NEXTNAV INC | Technology | $1.47B | 0.33% |
37WBTN | WEBTOON ENTERTAINMENT INC | Technology | $1.37B | 0.31% |
38IBTA | IBOTTA INC | Technology | $1.36B | 0.31% |
39VYX | NCR VOYIX CORP | Technology | $1.35B | 0.31% |
40CRSR | CORSAIR GAMING INC | Technology | $1.34B | 0.30% |
41PD | PAGERDUTY INC | Technology | $1.24B | 0.28% |
42EVCM | EVERCOMMERCE INC | Technology | $1.23B | 0.28% |
43HLIT | HARMONIC INC | Technology | $1.13B | 0.25% |
44RPD | RAPID7 INC | Technology | $987M | 0.22% |
45BMBL | BUMBLE INC | Technology | $931M | 0.21% |
46AOSL | ALPHA & OMEGA SEMICONDUCTOR LTD | Technology | $926M | 0.21% |
47CCSI | CONSENSUS CLOUD SOLUTIONS INC | Technology | $771M | 0.17% |
48MLAB | MESA LABORATORIES INC | Technology | $760M | 0.17% |
49YEXT | YEXT INC | Technology | $757M | 0.17% |
50NTGR | NETGEAR INC | Technology | $527M | 0.12% |
51RMNI | RIMINI STREET INC | Technology | $518M | 0.12% |
52IIIV | I3 VERTICALS INC | Technology | $491M | 0.11% |
53MEI | METHODE ELECTRONICS INC | Technology | $443M | 0.10% |
54CLFD | CLEARFIELD INC | Technology | $425M | 0.10% |
55MKTW | MARKETWISE INC | Technology | $350M | 0.08% |
56ALIT | ALIGHT INC | Technology | $338M | 0.08% |
57HCKT | HACKETT GROUP INC | Technology | $333M | 0.08% |
58XPER | XPERI INC | Technology | $300M | 0.07% |
59TBCH | TURTLE BEACH CORP | Technology | $296M | 0.07% |
60AVNW | AVIAT NETWORKS INC | Technology | $218M | 0.05% |
61ASYS | AMTECH SYSTEMS INC | Technology | $218M | 0.05% |
62IMXI | INTERNATIONAL MONEY EXPRESS INC | Technology | $193M | 0.04% |
63TSSI | TSS INC | Technology | $189M | 0.04% |
64DMRC | DIGIMARC CORP | Technology | $167M | 0.04% |
65EGAN | EGAIN CORP | Technology | $160M | 0.04% |
66ALMU | AELUMA INC | Technology | $146M | 0.03% |
67TCX | TUCOWS INC | Technology | $139M | 0.03% |
68TRAK | REPOSITRAK INC | Technology | $134M | 0.03% |
69SSTI | SOUNDTHINKING INC | Technology | $109M | 0.02% |
70UEIC | UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS INC | Technology | $85M | 0.02% |
71WFCF | WHERE FOOD COMES FROM INC | Technology | $85M | 0.02% |
72RTB | RTB DIGITAL INC | Technology | $78M | 0.02% |
73NRDY | NERDY INC | Technology | $76M | 0.02% |
74CSPI | CSP INC | Technology | $73M | 0.02% |
Full long-leg book as of November 2026 · cap-weighted · total market cap $441.56B. Hypothetical model holdings — not a registered fund’s portfolio.
Size × value map of the long-leg book
Share of long-leg capital by market cap × book-to-market, using terciles of the 394-name universe at November 2026. Rows: Large ≥ $10B, Small < $2.2B. Columns: Value ≥ 0.64, Growth < 0.35 B/M. The dot marks the capital-weighted centroid of the book — 81% toward Large, 39% toward Growth. +8% unclassified (5 missing size/value). Hypothetical holdings — descriptive, not realized P&L.
Capital-weighted centroid of the long leg, December 1998 → November 2026; the right-hand end is the same value as the box’s dot. 74 names now. The faded start covers early months with a much thinner universe. Hypothetical holdings — descriptive, not P&L.
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.
No more than 25% of total assets may be invested in the securities of any one issuer.
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=20261113T032607 rows=2198308 asof=202611 issuers=20261113T052248 rates=20261113T052248
Measured on the 2026-11 formation date across 74 holdings (cap-weighted). A different formation date can produce different verdicts.
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 · 335 monthly observations · about 3.4 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 2.11 (fail) but Gaussian VaR gives 1.93 (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 →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.
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.
Long leg is what this fund holds — long-short is shown for reference
| Period | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 1 yearcum. | 61.5% | 41.0% |
| 3 yearsp.a. | 31.4% | -21.1% |
| 5 yearsp.a. | 23.9% | -6.9% |
| 10 yearsp.a. | 26.2% | -7.0% |
| Since inceptionp.a. | 13.1% | -3.5% |
| Year | Long leg | Long-short |
|---|---|---|
| 202611 mo | 62.3% | 42.5% |
| 2025 | 17.5% | -28.2% |
| 2024 | 6.2% | -54.5% |
| 2023 | 69.9% | 8.5% |
| 2022 | -17.9% | 34.3% |
| 2021 | 4.2% | -32.4% |
| 2020 | 54.1% | -8.1% |
| 2019 | 67.0% | 22.6% |
| 2018 | -5.4% | -0.4% |
| 2017 | 38.6% | -8.7% |
| 2016 | 18.2% | 6.4% |
| 2015 | -7.6% | -5.9% |
| 2014 | 16.4% | -1.1% |
| 2013 | 40.8% | 21.3% |
| 2012 | 10.0% | -19.2% |
| 2011 | -0.8% | -5.1% |
| 2010 | 15.9% | -17.9% |
| 2009 | 53.3% | -12.5% |
| 2008 | -51.8% | 8.8% |
| 2007 | 14.1% | 1.4% |
| 2006 | 13.6% | 15.4% |
| 2005 | -6.1% | -13.8% |
| 2004 | -10.4% | -23.5% |
| 2003 | 83.2% | 20.0% |
| 2002 | -49.3% | 8.5% |
| 2001 | -0.5% | 53.9% |
| 2000 | -14.1% | 4.8% |
| 1999 | 117.7% | -31.5% |
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 November 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.
The Foundry Technology Sales Discipline Factor ETF tracks a rules-based model that ranks Technology 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.
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.