FHEQ 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), 5 issuer countries.

FHEQ's largest investment is Nvidia Corp at 8.04% of net assets. Apple Inc and Microsoft Corp follow; the three together are 19.6%. Ten companies are 39.03% of the fund; the other 185 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, FHEQ behaves like 42.8 holdings against a median of 42.4 — close to the median. Across 9 quarterly filings FHEQ has become more concentrated: it behaved like 53.9 at 2024-04-30 and 42.2 at 2026-04-30. Between the 2026-01-31 and 2026-04-30 filings 47 positions were added and 32 dropped; 21.0% 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 2024-04-30 and 2026-04-30, FHEQ went from behaving like 53.9 equally weighted positions to 42.2 — 22% fewer, while its top ten went from 33.73% to 40.06% 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.

The 15 largest of 195 positions in FHEQ's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: FHEQ.csv.gz.

Share of FHEQ's own investments by the issuer country the filer reported (incorporation, not revenue). Each country links to every fund that holds it.

Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of FHEQ's own filings, 24 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: FHEQ.json · all funds.

The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-04-30, $1m was out to 1 borrower, 0.18% of net assets.

Cash collateral reported against the loan: 0.18% of net assets, 102.2% 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 FHEQ has filed, with each borrower: FHEQ.json · all funds.

148 positions became 163: 47 added (11.3% of the fund at the later date), 32 dropped (10.1% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 21.0%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of FHEQ compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

New: LINDE PLC (0.86%), GE VERNOVA INC (0.82%), RTX CORP (0.69%), ABBOTT LABORATORIES (0.67%), HOWMET AEROSPACE INC (0.57%), MOTOROLA SOLUTIONS INC (0.52%). Gone: TJX COMPANIES INC (0.76%), BOOKING HOLDINGS INC (0.72%), WELLTOWER INC (0.68%), BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORP (0.67%), GENERAL DYNAMICS CORP (0.64%), NEXTERA ENERGY INC (0.62%).

100.0% of FHEQ is carried at a quoted market price (fair-value level 1). Categories and levels are the filer's, from Form N-PORT; what a low level-1 share does and does not mean is in the measure's page.

A position count cannot describe a fund that uses derivatives, because a swap is filed at its unrealised gain, not its exposure. These are the notionals the fund itself reported, against net assets of $829M. Notional of an interest-rate or currency swap is not equity exposure.

Full detail for every fund that files derivatives: leverage.json (CC BY 4.0).

Every measured equity fund lined up by how many holdings it behaves like; these sit either side of FHEQ (42.8). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.