Section
ETF Analysis
143 articles.
-
The Funds Built Entirely on Swaps Spread Them Across Ten Banks. The Funds That Barely Use Swaps Put Them All With One
137 US funds name the banks on the other side of their swaps in Form N-PORT. Grouped by how much of the fund is swaps, the pattern inverts what you would expect — funds whose swap book is 100% of net assets or more use 6.4 banks on average and give the largest 42.2% of it; funds whose swap book is under 5% of net assets use 2.1 banks and give the largest 84.6%. VOO's swap counterparty is 95.9% Bank of America. It is also 0.2% of VOO.
-
Who Is on the Other Side When Your Index Fund Lends Its Shares? Five Firms Hold Two Thirds of It
742 US funds lend $175.6 billion of stock and name every borrower in their SEC filings. Read the other way round — by borrower rather than by fund — 116 legal entities appear, and once they are grouped into the firms behind them five names hold 64.3% of everything lent. JP Morgan alone is 20.6%. Nobody publishes this; it is in Item B.4.a of every Form N-PORT.
-
962 Funds, $16 Trillion, 56 Countries — Where US Fund Money Actually Sits, Pooled From Every Filing
Every comparable US-registered fund pooled by the issuer country it filed, quarter by quarter since 2019 — 962 funds and $16.04 trillion at 2026 Q2, of which the United States is 79.44%. Taiwan and Korea have doubled their share in three quarters while Japan, Hong Kong, France, Germany and the UK all gave ground. World through ETFs, episode 4.
-
Are Index Funds Less Diversified Than They Used to Be? 482 Equity Funds, Measured Against Their Own 2019 Filings
Two thirds of the equity index funds with a 2019 SEC filing on record behave like fewer holdings today than they did then, and the median fund's ten largest positions went from 27.2% to 35.2%. The sharpest concentration is not in the S&P 500 — it is in emerging-market funds, where the typical fund lost about 70% of its effective holdings. Bond funds moved the opposite way. Measured from 640 funds across 28 quarters of Form N-PORT.
-
IVV vs VUG: 57% Overlap, 507 vs 151 Stocks, and Why Adding VUG to IVV Barely Changes What You Own
The S&P 500 ETF and the Vanguard Growth ETF compared from their SEC Form N-PORT filings for 30 June 2026 — IVV holds 507 stocks and behaves like 51.5 equal ones, VUG holds 151 and behaves like 19.8. They share 57% of their weight, and only 3.55% of VUG is in companies IVV does not already hold.
-
How Much of VT Is the US? 62 Cents of Every Dollar, Up From 52 in 2019 — and Down From 65 Last Year
The Vanguard Total World Stock ETF holds 10,057 stocks in 48 countries, and the United States is 61.97% of it as of its SEC Form N-PORT filing for 30 April 2026. Seven years of filings show that share rising from 52.17% in 2019 to a peak of 65.24% in January 2025, then falling back. What rose with it: Taiwan, Hong Kong, Korea. What gave way: Japan and the United Kingdom. World through ETFs, episode 3.
-
QQQ vs XLK: 57% Overlap, 103 vs 77 Stocks, and Why One Behaves Like 34 Holdings and the Other Like 16
The Nasdaq-100 ETF and the S&P technology sector ETF compared from their SEC Form N-PORT filings for 30 June 2026 — QQQ holds 103 stocks and behaves like 34.1 equal ones, XLK holds 77 and behaves like 16.3. They share 57% of their weight; held together they behave like 24.8, fewer than QQQ alone. What each one holds that the other does not.
-
Russell 2000 ETF Holdings: IWM vs IJR vs VTWO — 2,016 Stocks That Behave Like 840, and a Count That Resets Every June
What the three large small-cap index ETFs held according to their SEC Form N-PORT filings for May–June 2026 — IWM 2,016 stocks behaving like 840 equal holdings, VTWO (same Russell 2000 index, one month earlier) 1,954 behaving like 514, IJR (S&P 600) 655 behaving like 356 — and why two funds on the same index read so differently: the Russell reconstitution every June. Country split, the collateral note, and what IWM and IJR share (47%).
-
IWM Lends $13.3 Billion of Russell 2000 Stock, and One Bank Holds 82% of It — Up From 21% Five Quarters Ago
The iShares Russell 2000 ETF had $13.3 billion of its stock out on loan at 30 June 2026, 16% of the fund, and JP Morgan Securities held $10.9 billion of it — 82.3%, against 21.3% in March 2025. Read from Item B.4.a of the fund's own SEC Form N-PORT filings, with the same measure for IJR, IJH, IVV, IWF and 737 other lending funds.
-
Emerging Markets ETFs by Country: Taiwan 26–32%, Korea 22%, India 12–16%, China Under 30% — What IEMG, VWO and EEM Hold Now
Where a dollar in the large US emerging-markets ETFs sits, from their SEC Form N-PORT filings for April–June 2026 — Taiwan 25.8% of IEMG and 28.9% of VWO, Korea 22.1% of IEMG and zero of VWO, India 11.9% and 16.2%, China 19% and 27% once its three country codes are added together. TSMC alone is one dollar in eight. How the map has moved since 2019, when China was a third and Taiwan an eighth. World through ETFs, episode 2.
-
SMH vs SOXX: 74% Overlap, 25 vs 32 Stocks, and Why Owning Both Is Less Diversified Than SOXX Alone
The two largest semiconductor ETFs compared from their SEC Form N-PORT filings for 30 June 2026 — SMH holds 25 stocks with NVIDIA at 17.6% and TSMC at 9.3% and behaves like 13.9 equal holdings; SOXX holds 32 with no position above 8.5% and behaves like 20.4. They overlap by 74% of weight; held together they behave like 18.0, fewer than SOXX by itself. What each holds that the other does not, and how SMH's concentration doubled between 2022 and 2024.
-
VXUS Holdings by Country: 8,824 Stocks, 49 Countries, and 14 Cents of Every Dollar in Taiwan and Korea
Where a dollar in the Vanguard Total International Stock ETF actually goes, from its SEC Form N-PORT filing for 30 April 2026 — Japan 14.9 cents, the UK 8.7, Canada 8.0, Taiwan 7.9, Korea 5.9 — and how the map has moved since 2019, when Taiwan and Korea together were 6.4 cents and are now 13.8. World through ETFs, episode 1.
-
VOOG Holdings: 150 Stocks, NVIDIA at 14%, and Why the S&P 500 Growth ETF Behaves Like 20 Companies
What the Vanguard S&P 500 Growth ETF held on 31 May 2026 according to its SEC Form N-PORT filing — 150 stocks, every one of them also in VOO, with NVIDIA 14.3%, Microsoft 9.3% and a top ten of 60.1%. Weighted by size the fund behaves like 19.8 equal holdings against VOO's 51.6. How the same index went from 303 stocks behaving like 55 in 2019 to this, and what VOOG adds to VOO, VUG, IVW and SPYG by the overlap arithmetic.
-
TQQQ Holdings: 30% Actual Stocks, 256% in Swaps With 10 Banks, and What the Swaps Cost
What the ProShares UltraPro QQQ actually held on 31 May 2026 according to its SEC Form N-PORT filing — 101 Nasdaq-100 stocks worth 30% of net assets, ten total-return swaps with a notional of $101.9 billion (256% of net assets), one futures contract, and cash. The filing names each bank, each swap's financing spread over the federal funds rate, and its termination date. That is enough to say what 3x costs before any index move.
-
QQQI ETF Holdings: 96% the Same Stocks as QQQ, Plus Two Written Nasdaq-100 Calls Covering 56% of the Fund
What the NEOS Nasdaq-100 High Income ETF held on 30 June 2026 according to its SEC Form N-PORT filing — 102 stocks that overlap QQQ by 96.0% of weight, and two written Nasdaq-100 call contracts with a combined notional of 56% of net assets. The filing shows where the income comes from, how the option book has been sized since 2025, and how the fund has grown from $1.8 billion to $13.1 billion in thirteen months.
-
SCHD Holdings: 99 Stocks, the Top 10 at 44%, and What It Actually Adds to a VOO Portfolio
What the Schwab U.S. Dividend Equity ETF held on 31 May 2026 from its SEC Form N-PORT filing: all 99 stocks with weights, Qualcomm 6.7%, Texas Instruments 5.9%, UnitedHealth 5.1%; the top ten are 43.6% and the fund behaves like 32 equal holdings. Then the question people are really asking — 92% of SCHD's money sits in companies VOO already owns, so what does holding both change? The overlap arithmetic answers it.
-
QQQ Holdings: All 105 Positions, the Top 10 at 45%, and Why It Behaves Like 34 Stocks
What the Invesco QQQ Trust actually held on 30 June 2026, from its SEC Form N-PORT filing: 102 stocks plus three cash and futures lines, the fifty largest with weights, and the arithmetic that turns "105 holdings" into an effective count of 34. Nvidia 7.6%, Apple 6.7%, Micron 5.6%; the top ten are 45.0% and the top fifty 87.5%. Overlap with VOO, VGT, XLK and QQQM, and how the concentration has moved since 2020.
-
Berkshire Hathaway Holdings, Q2 2026: 29 Stocks That Behave Like 8.6
The document behind every search for "Warren Buffett's portfolio" is Berkshire Hathaway's Form 13F. The one for 30 June 2026, filed 14 August, lists 29 US-listed positions worth $299.3 billion. Weighted by value they behave like 8.6 equal holdings; the top ten are 88.5%. What changed against the March filing, share by share, and what a 13F cannot tell you.
-
SOXL Holdings: What the 3x Semiconductor ETF Actually Owns
SOXL's SEC filing lists 42 positions: 30 semiconductor stocks worth 57% of net assets, eight index swaps with a notional of $41 billion (243% of net assets), and 39% in Treasury money funds. The stocks and the swap notional add to exactly 300%. Here is what the 3x semiconductor ETF holds, where the leverage comes from, who the counterparties are, and why its holdings count cannot be read like SOXX's.
-
Why 2,017 IWM Holdings Read as 33: Securities Lending in the Russell 2000 ETF
IWM, the iShares Russell 2000 ETF, files 2,017 holdings but our concentration measure read it as 33. The cause is a 17% cash-collateral position from securities lending, flagged in the filing itself; set it aside and the fund's own investments behave like about 840. Seventy-three funds on this site, including IJH, IJR, RSP, LQD and HYG, had the same problem. What we found, what we changed today, and what is still open.
-
Sharpe, Sortino, or Calmar? Choosing the Right Risk-Adjusted Metric for Your Goal
The three ratios differ only in what they call "risk" in the denominator: Sharpe uses total volatility, Sortino uses downside volatility, Calmar uses...
-
Factor Crowding and Alpha Decay: What Happens to a Premium After Everyone Reads the Paper
Documented return predictors decay after they are published — roughly 58% lower post-publication than in the original sample, per McLean & Pontiff (2016) —...
-
The Low-Volatility Anomaly: Why Boring Stocks Keep Beating the Theory
The low-volatility anomaly — lower-risk stocks earning competitive or better risk-adjusted returns — has survived decades of out-of-sample testing, but the...
-
How Concentrated Is Your Index, Really? Measuring the Effective Number of Holdings
A fund's holding count is a headline number; the effective number of holdings — the count an equal-weighted portfolio would need to match the same...
-
Securities Lending: The Quiet Revenue Stream Inside Your Index Fund — Benefit or Risk?
Most large index ETFs quietly lend out their holdings to short sellers and other borrowers, earning fee income that can partly or fully offset the headline...
-
Premium and Discount to NAV: What It Means When an ETF's Price Drifts From Its Holdings
An ETF's market price and its net asset value (NAV) are two different numbers; the gap between them is the premium or discount, and it is a signal about...
-
How ETFs Barely Pay Capital-Gains Tax: In-Kind Redemption and 'Heartbeat' Trades Explained
ETFs rarely distribute capital gains because they hand appreciated securities to authorized participants "in kind" rather than selling them for cash — a...
-
The Hidden Cost of Turnover: How Rebalancing and Reconstitution Erode Factor-ETF Returns
Factor ETFs carry a cost the expense ratio never shows: the trading friction of periodic reconstitution and rebalancing, which is absorbed inside net asset...
-
Momentum Crashes: The Rare, Violent Drawdowns Hiding Inside MTUM
MTUM has compounded at 16.3% over ten years, but its risk is negatively skewed: the danger sits in rare, sharp reversals rather than in day-to-day...
-
VYMI vs IDV: International Dividend ETFs — Yield, Country Risk, and the Currency Drag
IDV pays a materially higher distribution yield (5.5% vs 3.7%), but that gap did not translate into higher total return over five or ten years — VYMI edged...
-
XLC vs VOX: The Communication-Services Sector — Where Big Tech Hides in Plain Sight
XLC and VOX both label themselves "communication services," but the sector is functionally a large-cap growth vehicle: Meta, Alphabet, and Netflix dominate...
-
HEDJ vs Unhedged International: Should You Hedge Currency in Your Foreign ETFs?
Currency hedging removes exchange-rate volatility from a foreign equity position — the realized data shows it lowered both total volatility and drawdown...
-
AVDV vs AVUV: 0.13% Overlap — Two Small-Cap Value Funds That Share Almost Nothing
Over the trailing five years, AVDV (developed ex-US small-cap value) compounded at 14.3% with 17.4% volatility, while AVUV (US small-cap value) compounded...
-
IEMG vs VWO: Two Emerging-Market Giants — The Index and Country-Weight Differences That Matter
IEMG and VWO are near-twins in size and cost, but they track different index families — and the index provider decides which countries even count as...
-
ITA vs XAR: Defense and Aerospace ETFs When Geopolitical Risk Is Rising
ITA and XAR own the same sector but weight it differently — ITA is capped market-cap and concentrated; XAR is modified equal-weight with a persistent size...
-
XBI vs IBB: Equal-Weight vs Cap-Weight Biotech — Two Very Different Risk Profiles
XBI weights biotech names roughly equally, tilting hard toward small- and mid-cap clinical-stage companies; IBB is cap-weighted and dominated by a handful...
-
CIBR vs BUG vs HACK: Cybersecurity ETFs — Where the Holdings and Fees Diverge
All three funds sell the same story — pure-play cybersecurity exposure — but their five-year realized returns span a wide range (7.2% to 14.7% CAGR), and...
-
URA vs URNM vs NLR: Uranium Miners vs Nuclear Utilities — Two Bets on the Same Thesis
URA and URNM express the uranium thesis through mining equity; NLR blends miners with nuclear utilities and fuel-cycle names, and that structural difference...
-
ICLN vs TAN: Clean-Energy ETFs After the Boom-Bust — What Survived and Why
Over the trailing decade both funds compounded positively — ICLN at 9.8% and TAN at 11.1% annualized — but the last five years erased most of that story,...
-
IJR vs IWM vs VB: Three Small-Cap Blend ETFs and Why Their Indexes Diverge
IJR, IWM, and VB are all called "small-cap blend," but they track three different indexes — S&P SmallCap 600, Russell 2000, and CRSP US Small Cap — and...
-
VO vs IJH: The Overlooked Mid-Cap Allocation — Does It Add Anything to VOO?
VO and IJH both call themselves "mid-cap," but they track different indices with different rules — the S&P MidCap 400 (IJH) applies an earnings screen and...
-
ARKK vs QQQ: Disruptive Innovation vs the Nasdaq-100 — What a Full Cycle Revealed
Over the trailing five years QQQ compounded at 15.6% annually while ARKK compounded at −8.1% — the two funds did not just diverge in degree, they diverged...
-
DBC vs PDBC vs GSG: What a Broad Commodity ETF Actually Holds — and Why Roll Yield Matters
All three hold futures, not physical barrels or bushels — so the return you receive is spot price movement plus (or minus) roll yield, and the roll term is...
-
KWEB vs FXI vs MCHI: Three Very Different Ways to Own China
These three funds share a "China" label but are not three flavors of the same trade: KWEB is an internet-sector fund, FXI is a state-heavy large-cap fund,...
-
QYLD vs JEPI vs DIVO: Three Covered-Call Mechanics and the Return-of-Capital Question
The three funds sell options in structurally different ways, and over the trailing five years the highest-yielding fund (QYLD, 5.9%) delivered the lowest...
-
BNDX vs BND: Does Adding International Bonds Do Anything for a US Portfolio?
BNDX (international bonds) and BND (US bonds) have delivered nearly identical 10-year CAGRs — 1.5% and 1.4% respectively — which is not a coincidence,...
-
Memory, Logic, and Equipment: What's Actually Inside a Semiconductor ETF
A semiconductor ETF is not one bet — it is a weighted basket of four different businesses (memory, logic/design, foundry, equipment) that peak and trough on...
-
The 2026 Semiconductor Selloff, Part 2 — SOXX vs SMH vs SOXQ: Which Chip ETF Actually Fits a Long-Term Portfolio
The three funds look nearly identical on realized volatility and five-year max drawdown, but SMH's 5Y CAGR beat SOXX by roughly 4.9 percentage points a year...
-
LQD vs HYG: Investment-Grade vs High-Yield Credit — What the Spread Actually Pays You For
The credit spread pays you for default risk — but over the last five years, the fund that lost more was the investment-grade one, not the high-yield one....
-
TIP vs SCHP vs VTIP: How Inflation-Protected Bond ETFs Differ by Duration
TIP and SCHP hold the full-maturity TIPS ladder and behave almost identically; the only durable difference between them is a 0.15% fee gap that favors SCHP....
-
TLT vs IEF vs SHY: Building a Treasury Duration Ladder for Different Rate Scenarios
TLT, IEF, and SHY charge the same 0.15% expense ratio, so this decision is not about cost — it is entirely about how much interest-rate duration you want to...
-
XLF vs VFH: Financial-Sector ETFs in a Rate-Cut Cycle — What Actually Drives Returns
Over the trailing five and ten years, XLF and VFH delivered almost identical returns and drawdowns — the 1 basis point fee gap and the difference in...
-
XLV vs VHT: Two Ways to Own Healthcare — Concentration, Fees, and Defensive Behavior
XLV holds roughly 60 large-cap S&P 500 healthcare names; VHT holds around 400 across the full U.S. cap spectrum — the same sector, two different portfolios....
-
VTV vs VUG: The Value-vs-Growth Split Inside the S&P 500 — What 15 Years of Data Show
Over the trailing decade VUG compounded faster (18.1% vs 12.6% 10Y CAGR), but it did so with roughly double the realized volatility and a drawdown more than...
-
RSP vs VOO: Does Equal-Weighting the S&P 500 Actually Beat Cap-Weighting?
Over the trailing five and ten years, cap-weighted VOO beat equal-weighted RSP on total return — and it did so at a lower fee (0.03% vs 0.20%)....
-
DBMF vs CTA: Two Managed-Futures Trend Funds — How They Pick Trends Differently
DBMF replicates a basket of trend-following hedge funds using regression; CTA runs its own multi-model trend engine layered on a Treasury collateral base....
-
DGRO vs SCHD: Two Dividend-Growth Approaches — Breadth vs Concentration
DGRO holds 400+ names with a lower 1.96% yield and a growth lean; SCHD holds roughly 100 with a 3.25% yield and a sharper value-quality tilt — same...
-
CALF vs AVUV: Small-Cap Free Cash Flow vs Small-Cap Value — Two Quality Screens
Both funds screen small-caps for "quality," but on different variables: CALF ranks by free-cash-flow yield, AVUV by valuation crossed with profitability....
-
VGT vs XLK: Two Large Technology ETFs — Where the 0.10% Fee Gap Goes
The fee gap is one basis point (VGT 0.09%, XLK 0.08%), not the ten the headline framing usually implies — cost is not where these two funds actually...
-
AVUV vs VBR: Small-Cap Value — Active Selection vs the Index Approach
Both funds target U.S. small-cap value, but AVUV applies a more aggressive systematic tilt toward value and profitability, while VBR tracks a broad value...
-
OMFL vs FCTR: Dynamic Multi-Factor — Rules-Based Rotation vs AI Optimization
Both funds rotate factor exposure by rule, not by forecast — but OMFL blends several factors against a macro-regime signal while FCTR makes a near-binary...
-
VNQ vs SCHH: Two REIT Index ETFs — Holdings, Yield, and Realized Risk
VNQ and SCHH are both broad U.S. equity REIT index funds with nearly identical realized volatility (~18.8% vs ~18.7% over five years), so the decision...
-
MOAT vs QUAL: Wide-Moat Selection vs the Quality Factor — Two Roads to 'Quality'
MOAT and QUAL both sell "quality," but they reach it by opposite routes: MOAT is a concentrated, valuation-sensitive selection of wide-moat businesses; QUAL...
-
BND vs AGG: The Two Total-Bond Giants — Duration, Yield, and Tracking Difference
BND and AGG charge the identical 0.03% expense ratio, yield within two basis points of each other, and posted max drawdowns within 0.1 percentage points...
-
VT vs VTI: Total World vs Total US — What Global Diversification Actually Adds
VT is not "international" — it is roughly 60% US already, so the real choice is 100% US versus a 60/40 US/ex-US blend in one ticker. Over the trailing...
-
USMV vs SPLV: Two Approaches to Low-Volatility Investing — Which Defense Holds Up?
USMV (optimizer-based minimum variance) and SPLV (simple lowest-volatility ranking) sound similar but are built differently — and the construction gap, not...
-
VYM vs SCHD: High Yield vs Dividend Quality — Two Different Bets on Income
VYM and SCHD both market themselves as dividend funds, but they are built on different screens — VYM ranks the broad market by forward yield; SCHD filters...
-
QRFT vs AMOM: AI-Driven Quality vs AI-Driven Momentum — A Head-to-Head Read
QRFT and AMOM share an issuer, an inception date, and an identical 0.75% expense ratio — so this is a clean test of factor tilt, not cost or structure. Over...
-
VEA vs VWO: Developed vs Emerging Markets — How to Split International Exposure
VEA (developed) and VWO (emerging) are the two halves of total international exposure; held together at market weight they approximate a single...
-
SCHG vs VUG: Large-Cap Growth Twins — Where the Index Construction Diverges
On the realized record, SCHG and VUG are statistically indistinguishable: a 1 basis-point fee gap, near-identical five-year volatility, and drawdowns within...
-
IBIT vs FBTC: Comparing the Two Largest Spot Bitcoin ETFs — Fees, Spreads, and What You Actually Own
IBIT and FBTC hold the same asset — spot bitcoin — at the same 0.25% sponsor fee, so the decision is almost entirely structural, not about return. The real...
-
JEPI vs JEPQ: Equity-Premium Income on the S&P 500 vs the Nasdaq-100
JEPI and JEPQ charge the identical 0.35% expense ratio and run the same machinery — a defensive equity sleeve plus an options-overlay via equity-linked...
-
SPY vs VOO vs IVV: The Three S&P 500 ETFs — Fees, Structure, and Tracking Difference
All three track the same S&P 500 index; over five years their total returns and drawdowns sit within a rounding error of one another. The real separation is...
-
SMH vs SOXX: Two Semiconductor ETFs, Two Very Different Concentration Profiles
SMH and SOXX both track US-listed semiconductor equity, but SMH runs a far more concentrated book — the return gap over five years is mostly a concentration...
-
VGT vs QQQ: Tech Sector vs Nasdaq-100 — How Different Are They Really?
VGT is a pure GICS Information Technology sector fund; QQQ is the Nasdaq-100, a multi-sector index that excludes some of the names most people assume are...
-
QQQ vs QQQM: Same Index, Different Wrapper — When the Cheaper Twin Actually Wins
QQQ and QQQM track the identical index (the Nasdaq-100), so their return difference over five years is a rounding error — 17.2% vs 17.3% CAGR. The real...
-
SCHD vs JEPI: Dividend Growth vs Covered-Call Income — Which Belongs in a Long-Term Core?
JEPI pays more than twice SCHD's yield (8.5% vs 3.3%), but over the trailing five years SCHD delivered the higher total return (8.4% vs 7.3% CAGR). JEPI's...
-
VOO vs VTI: S&P 500 vs Total US Market — What the Difference Actually Costs Over Decades
VOO and VTI carry the identical 0.03% expense ratio, so this decision is not about cost — it is about factor exposure. The only real difference is VTI's...
-
IGV vs WCLD vs QQQ: Breaking Down the 'Tech Beta' Stack
IGV, WCLD, and QQQ are sold as "tech ETFs" but they are not interchangeable. QQQ is a diversified large-cap growth index, IGV is a concentrated software...
-
How Factor Loadings Drift: Watching MTUM, QUAL, and SIZE Over Five Years
The three iShares single-factor ETFs all carry the same 0.15% fee, but their realized 5Y CAGRs differ by 6.0 percentage points — that gap is mostly about...
-
DIVZ vs SCHD vs NOBL: Three 'Quality Dividend' Approaches Compared
Three funds, three different definitions of "quality dividend": SCHD screens on financial strength plus yield, NOBL filters by 25+ years of consecutive...
-
BOTZ vs. ROBO vs. AIQ: Three AI & Robotics ETFs Compared
The three funds share a marketing category but not a portfolio: AIQ's 5-year CAGR of 17.2% comes mostly from mega-cap semiconductors and hyperscalers, not...
-
12 Months of Live AI-Quant ETFs vs the S&P 500 — Honest Data Review
Across the full live track record (5Y through May 2026), none of the five AI-quant or rules-based factor ETFs in this review beat SPY's 13.8% CAGR. The...
-
FCTR vs LRGF: Where AI Actually Changes the Multi-Factor Loading
LRGF has returned 13.5% annualized over the past five years; FCTR has returned 3.0%. A 10.5-percentage-point gap that wide is structural, not noise. FCTR's...
-
QRFT Explained: AI-Driven Multi-Factor — Holdings, Fees, and Live Track Record
Over the past five years, the rules-based iShares U.S. Equity Factor ETF (LRGF) returned 13.5% annualized; the AI-enhanced QRAFT U.S. Large Cap ETF (QRFT)...
-
TTAI Explained: Tactical Theme Rotation — Is the AI Signal Actually Repeatable?
TTAI is not an "AI rotation" fund in any meaningful sense — it is a rules-based free-cash-flow screen on international developed-market large caps, charging...
-
AIEQ vs ROBO: AI-Managed vs AI-Themed — Two Different Bets in the Same Wrapper
AIEQ and ROBO both wear "AI" branding, but they are entirely different products: AIEQ uses an AI system as the process for picking US equities; ROBO is a...
-
DBMF Deep Dive: How AI-Managed Futures Pick Trends Without Forecasting
DBMF doesn't forecast markets. It reverse-engineers the factor positioning of the top managed-futures hedge funds from their reported returns and replicates...
-
AMOM Explained: How AI Weights Momentum Differently from MTUM
MTUM is a $24B rules-based momentum factor ETF charging 0.15%. AMOM is a $30M AI-overlay product charging 0.75%. The construction philosophies are...
-
AIEQ Review: 7 Years of Live AI-Managed ETF — What Actually Worked
After more than eight years of live trading, AIEQ has trailed SPY by roughly 700 basis points per year on a 5Y annualized basis, while running 5.3 points...
-
COWZ vs. FCTR: Free Cash Flow Focus vs. AI Multi-Factor Optimization
Over the trailing five years, COWZ compounded at 10.6% per year while FCTR managed 2.9%, with a deeper drawdown — the simpler rule beat the adaptive model...
-
NOBL vs. DGRW: Dividend Aristocrats vs. AI-Filtered Quality Dividend Growth
Over the past five years, DGRW returned 11.8% annualized versus NOBL's 5.7% — a 6.1-point gap, with DGRW showing slightly lower volatility and drawdown....
-
VUG vs. TTAI: Large-Cap Growth vs. AI-Based Tactical Theme Rotation
VUG and TTAI are not the matchup the legacy title suggests. TTAI today is the Abacus FCF International Leaders ETF — a free-cash-flow-weighted international...
-
GLD vs. DBMF: Gold vs. AI-Managed Managed Futures (Trend Following)
GLD compounded at roughly 20.0% per year over the past five years; DBMF at 8.5%. Reading that gap as "gold won" misunderstands what DBMF is built to do....
-
VNQ vs. PPTY: REITs Index vs. AI-Powered Real Estate Value Analysis
VNQ is the cheap, deep, market-cap-weighted way to own U.S. listed real estate; PPTY is a fundamentals-tilted alternative that markets itself as smarter...
-
AGG vs. BNDI: Total Bond Market vs. AI-Driven Active Fixed Income Strategy
AGG and BNDI hold roughly the same investment-grade bond universe in their core. The difference is one decision: BNDI writes options on top of that core to...
-
VXUS vs. IQIN: International Stocks vs. AI-Driven Global Multi-Factor Asset Allocation
Over the past five years, the "AI-driven" IQIN underperformed plain market-cap VXUS on every dimension we measured — lower CAGR, higher volatility, deeper...
-
AVUV vs. SYLD: Deep Value Small-Cap vs. AI-Driven Shareholder Yield Selection
AVUV is a small-cap-value factor sleeve built on the Fama-French academic playbook. SYLD is an all-cap rules-based screen on dividends, buybacks, and debt...
-
JEPI vs. AIPI: High-Yield Income vs. AI-Powered Options Overlay Strategy
JEPI pays an 8.4% distribution yield against a five-year track record (CAGR 8.2%, max drawdown -13.7%) and runs $44.0B in assets — a credible defensive...
-
VTI vs. AIEQ: Total Market Index vs. IBM Watson’s AI Selection Performance
Over the trailing five years, VTI compounded at 11.8% annually while AIEQ — the IBM Watson-powered active equity ETF — compounded at 4.4%, a gap of roughly...
-
QQQM vs. QRFT: Nasdaq 100 vs. AI-Driven Quality Factor Investing
QQQM and QRFT both invest in U.S. large caps, but the construction logic — index-mechanical versus model-driven multi-factor — produces very different fee,...
-
SCHD vs. DIVZ: Traditional Dividend Growth vs. AI-Enhanced Yield Strategy
Over the trailing five years DIVZ outpaced SCHD by roughly 90 bp per year on total return, with lower realized volatility — but at roughly ten times the...
-
VOO vs. AMOM: Can AI Momentum Outperform the S&P 500? (2026 Analysis)
Over the trailing five years, VOO compounded at 13.1% per year versus AMOM at 9.6% — with roughly 40% more volatility and a maximum drawdown nearly twice as...
-
Best AI-Managed ETFs for 2026: A Deep Dive into AIEQ and AMOM
AIEQ (Amplify AI Powered Equity) and AMOM (QRAFT AI-Enhanced Momentum) both charge 0.75% — roughly 25 times the cost of a broad-market index ETF — for an...
-
SCHD vs VIG: A Quantitative Analysis of Dividend Quality Factors
VIG outpaced SCHD by roughly 160 basis points per year over the trailing five years (10.3% vs 8.7% CAGR), driven by its broader sector reach and...
-
VOO vs. MTUM vs. QUAL: Which Smart Beta ETF Wins Based on Historical Backtests?
Over the trailing 5 years, plain VOO (13.1% CAGR) beat both MTUM (11.5%) and QUAL (11.4%) — the factor premium did not show up in this window. Over 10...
-
VOO vs. MTUM vs. QUAL: Which Smart Beta ETF Wins Numerically? (Backtest Analysis)
Over the trailing five years, the cap-weighted S&P 500 (VOO) actually outperformed both factor ETFs on raw return — 13.1% CAGR versus MTUM's 11.5% and...
-
VXUS vs VOO: 9,336 Stocks Between Them and Exactly One in Common
Over the past decade, VOO compounded at 15.4% annualized; VXUS at 9.7%. The 5.7-percentage-point gap is real, large, and almost entirely a story about one...
-
SGOV vs Gold ETFs: Two Defenses That Hedge Different Risks
SGOV and gold ETFs both get labelled "defensive," but they hedge different risks. SGOV defends against equity drawdowns by holding T-bill principal stable...
-
XLE vs VDE: Which Energy ETF Benefits Most from Oil Shocks?
XLE and VDE deliver nearly identical 5-year results (CAGR 22.7% vs 23.2%) with nearly identical realized risk (max drawdown −26.0% vs −26.6%) — the...
-
Top ETFs for AI Infrastructure in 2026 (Utilities, Energy, Grid)
AI capex is increasingly an electricity story. Data-center load growth has revived a previously sleepy regulated-utility sector and pulled grid-equipment...
-
What "Falling Rates" Actually Does to Equity Categories — A 2026 Framework
"Falling rates" is not a single trade. It is a discount-rate change that affects different equity categories through three distinct channels — duration,...
-
Roles Before Tickers: A Framework for Long-Horizon ETF Allocation
A durable long-horizon portfolio is a system of roles — broad equity, factor tilt, income/quality, defensive cash — not a list of favorite tickers. The five...
-
The Honest Math of Daily-Reset Leverage: What QLD, SSO, and TQQQ Actually Cost in a 4% Rate Regime
A 2x daily-reset ETF such as QLD does not deliver 2x the annual return of the Nasdaq-100. It delivers roughly 2x of each daily return, compounded — a...
-
Asset Allocation in Practice: How 10% Weight Shifts Reshape Long-Term Outcomes
Across the trailing five years (2021-2026), a defensive blend (VOO 50 / SCHD 30 / SGOV 20) produced a roughly 10.1% blended CAGR, while a growth-tilted...
-
The 0.1% Allocation Question: What Small Decisions Actually Change Over 30 Years
A 1% annualized return gap on $100,000 over 30 years compounds to roughly $545,000 of terminal value — real, but rarely created by a single 0.1% fee...
-
TQQQ Analysis: Is a 3x Nasdaq-100 Strategy Viable for a 30-Year Horizon?
TQQQ's 10-year 44.9% CAGR was earned in a specific regime — near-zero financing costs, persistent Nasdaq-100 leadership, manageable realized volatility. The...
-
Leveraged ETFs vs Index ETFs: What Daily Reset Actually Costs a Long-Term Holder
Leveraged ETFs are engineered to deliver a multiple of the index's daily return, then reset every evening. Their multi-year payoff is path-dependent, not...
-
The Honest Math of Leveraged ETFs: What Long-Horizon Investors Need to Understand Before Holding 2x or 3x
Over the trailing five years, TQQQ compounded at 27.0% while QQQ compounded at 17.6%. A 3x daily-reset product captured roughly 1.5x of the underlying — not...
-
QLD vs SSO: What 2x Leveraged ETFs Actually Cost a Long-Term Holder
Over the last five years QLD compounded at 24.9% versus QQQ's 17.6% — meaningful, but well short of the naive "2x" expectation of roughly 35% once...
-
TQQQ vs QQQM: What Live Returns Reveal About 3x Leverage Over a Full Cycle
Over the trailing five years, TQQQ realized only ~1.53× the CAGR of QQQM (27.0% vs 17.6%), not 3×. Daily resets, financing costs, and the 2022 drawdown...
-
VOO vs QQQM vs TQQQ: What 5-Year Volatility and Drawdown Tell Us About Leverage in a Long-Term Core
Over the trailing five years, TQQQ delivered ~27.0% annualized but with 66.6% realized volatility and an 81.7% peak-to-trough drawdown — a hole that...
-
Data Center REITs vs. Infrastructure ETFs: Which One for Consistent Cash Flow?
The "REITs for income, ETFs for growth" framing collapses on contact with five-year data: SRVR yields 2.6% but delivered just 0.3% annualized total return...
-
PSCU vs XLU and VPU: What Five Years of Data Say About Small-Cap Utility Exposure
Over the trailing five years, PSCU (small-cap utilities & communication services) returned roughly 1.5% CAGR versus 9.2% for XLU and 9.0% for VPU — a gap of...
-
Grid Modernization and the GRID ETF: A Calibrated Look at Smart-Grid Equipment vs. Utilities
GRID and XLU are often grouped as "electricity plays," but they own structurally different businesses: GRID holds the equipment makers (transformers,...
-
Infrastructure ETFs in 2026: What XLU, VPU, IFRA, PAVE, and GRID Actually Own
The "infrastructure" label hides three different factor bets: regulated utilities (XLU, VPU), broad cyclical infrastructure (IFRA), and concentrated...
-
BOTZ vs IRBO: Finding the Most Cost-Effective Entry into Automation
Over the trailing five years, IRBO's equal-weighted approach delivered an 11.1% CAGR versus BOTZ's 4.3% — a 6.8-point gap that dwarfs the 21 bp fee...
-
VPU vs XLU: A Fee, Liquidity, and Concentration Comparison for Long-Horizon Utility Exposure
VPU (0.09%) and XLU (0.08%) are functionally near-identical at the top of the basket — the holdings overlap is far more important than the 1 bp fee gap....
-
VOO, XLU, IFRA: What 5-Year Data Says About Three Approaches to the AI Power Build-Out
Over five years, VOO (13.9% CAGR) beat both XLU (9.2%) and IFRA (12.8%) on raw return — the AI tailwind didn't show up in the "picks-and-shovels" trade the...
-
SCHD vs VOO: What the Data Actually Says About Dividend Yield and Total Return
Over the trailing 10 years, VOO compounded at 15.6% annualized vs SCHD at 12.7% — a meaningful gap driven mostly by the post-2020 large-cap growth regime,...
-
VOO, QQQM and SCHD: One Behaves Like 52 Holdings, the Other Two Like 32 Each
QQQM produced the highest five-year CAGR (17.6%), but at 22.3% realized volatility and a −35.0% drawdown — a single-regime number, not a permanent ranking....
-
XLE vs VDE: A Five-Year Audit of the Two Largest US Energy ETFs
XLE and VDE delivered nearly identical 5-year CAGR (22.3% vs 22.6%) at nearly identical volatility — the diversification VDE offers on paper barely...
-
SCHD, AVUV, and VXUS During the Iran–U.S. War Shock Dividend Stability, Small-Cap Risk, and Global Exposure — A Data-Driven ETF Analysis
SCHD, AVUV, and VXUS occupy three different rows of the factor matrix — quality-dividend, small-cap value, and international beta. The realized data...
-
SGOV, VOO, and QQQM Under Geopolitical Stress: What Oil, Yields, and Volatility Reveal
SGOV's effective duration near zero made it behave as designed during the recent oil-driven inflation scare — essentially flat while the equity sleeves...
-
Gold vs Silver in 2026: Which Is the Better Long-Term Investment? (GLD vs SLV ETF Comparison)
Over the trailing 5 years, GLD returned 19.4% CAGR with 17.9% volatility; SLV returned 21.9% CAGR with 36.0% volatility — silver earned roughly 2.5...
-
Silver Through SLV: Volatility, Drawdown, and Role in a Long-Term Portfolio
SLV has delivered a 21.9% 5-year CAGR — but with 36.0% annualized volatility and a 42.5% drawdown along the way, the return-per-unit-of-risk is...
-
FLIN at Five Years: What India ETF Returns Actually Looked Like in USD
FLIN charges 0.19% to track the FTSE India RIC Capped Index, with $2.5B AUM and a 5-year USD CAGR of 5.1% as of mid-May 2026 — meaningful exposure but...
-
KOSPI 200 ETF Strategy: How It Fits in a Long-Term Global Portfolio
KOSPI 200 is not a regional bet — it is concentrated exposure to global memory-chip cycles, export manufacturing, and KRW currency dynamics. Samsung...
-
Do You Really Need International Exposure? (VXUS Explained)
VXUS holds roughly 8,500 non-US stocks at a 0.05% expense ratio, covering developed and emerging markets in one ticker. Through May 2026, VXUS posted a...
-
AVUV and the Case for Small-Cap Value Patience
AVUV is a quality-screened small-cap value ETF: factor exposure with a profitability filter, not pure book-to-market deep value. The five-year record (10.8%...
-
SCHD and the Power of Dividend Discipline
SCHD is not a yield product — it is a quality screen (return on equity, cash flow / debt, five-year dividend growth) that happens to express itself through...
-
SGOV's Role in a Long-Term Portfolio: Yield, Realized Risk, and the Cash Floor
SGOV is an $85B short-Treasury ETF that has compounded at 3.5% per year over its five-year live history with 0.2% annualized volatility and a max drawdown...
-
VOO vs QQQM: 54% of Your Money Is the Same Stocks, and QQQM Behaves Like 32 Holdings to VOO's 52