ELM holdings

Computed by this site from the fund's SEC Form N-PORT filing; what the measure does not tell you · every fund in one table · hold it with other funds? X-ray the mix. Pricing: 100% at a quoted market price (level 1), one issuer country.

The largest line in ELM's filing is not a stock but Vanguard 0-3 Month Treasury Bill ETF, a equity position at 24.57% of net assets. Ten companies are 90.37% of the fund; the other 8 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, ELM behaves like 6.7 holdings against a median of 42.4 — 6.3 times more concentrated than the median. Across 6 quarterly filings ELM has become more concentrated: it behaved like 10.2 at 2025-03-31 and 6.7 at 2026-06-30. Between the 2026-03-31 and 2026-06-30 filings 1 positions were added and 0 dropped; 22.4% of the weight moved.

Each sentence is read from the fund's own SEC filing; the class median is computed across the comparable equity funds on this site. Nothing here is a view on the fund.

Between 2025-03-31 and 2026-06-30, ELM went from behaving like 10.2 equally weighted positions to 6.7 — 34% fewer, while its top ten went from 88.46% to 90.37% of net assets. Read across the funds on the concentration-over-time table.

One row per filed reporting period, newest first, read from EDGAR. Quarterly because that is the public filing cadence. Rows marked * are published but held out of the comparison above; the methodology page says when and why.

ELM's filing lists 19 positions including 17.05% of net assets in securities-lending cash collateral. Counted as filed the fund reads 5.7 effective holdings with a top ten of 104.68%; on its own investments — the figure above — it reads 6.7 with a top ten of 90.37%. The collateral is matched by a liability and is not a holding the fund chose; since 2026-09-18 every figure on this site sets it aside (methodology). Both numbers are in the data.

The 15 largest of 18 positions in ELM's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: ELM.csv.gz.

Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of ELM's own filings, 18 months on record. Not computed here and not from a price feed.

Cross-checked against a series computed separately from prices: median difference — percentage points over 0 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: ELM.json · all funds.

The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-06-30, $92m was out to 7 borrowers, 15.96% of net assets. The largest, JP MORGAN SECURITIES LLC, held 63.4% of it.

Cash collateral reported against the loan: 17.05% of net assets, 106.8% of the amount lent. That is a floor on the collateral, not the whole of it — collateral the fund does not hold as a position is not in this filing, so a figure under 100% is not evidence of under-collateralisation. How that figure behaves across all funds. Every quarter ELM has filed, with each borrower: ELM.json · all funds.

17 positions became 18: 1 added (2.2% of the fund at the later date), 0 dropped (0.0% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 22.4%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of ELM compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

New: Vanguard Real Estate ETF (2.23%).

85.33% equity, 14.67% short-term investment as filed; 100.0% carried at a quoted market price (fair-value level 1). Categories and levels are the filer's; what a low level-1 share does and does not mean is in the measure's page.

Every measured equity fund lined up by how many holdings it behaves like; these sit either side of ELM (6.7). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.