Fund · iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF · measured from SEC filings
MTUM holdings
MTUM reports 128 holdings and behaves like 42.4 equally weighted ones, computed from its SEC Form N-PORT filing for 2026-07-31. The fact sheet publishes the first number; this page computes the second, and traces it across 27 quarters of filings.
Measured concentration
as of 2026-07-31Computed 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), 9 issuer countries.
What stands out
as of 2026-07-31MTUM's largest investment is Micron Technology Inc at 5.56% of net assets. Broadcom Inc and Nvidia Corp follow; the three together are 15.6%. Ten companies are 40.01% of the fund; the other 118 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, MTUM behaves like 42.4 holdings against a median of 42.4 — close to the median. Across 27 quarterly filings MTUM has held roughly steady since 2019-10-31 (44.1 then, 40.3 now). Between the 2026-01-31 and 2026-04-30 filings 30 positions were added and 30 dropped; 30.6% 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.
Every filing since 2019
27Between 2019-10-31 and 2026-04-30, MTUM went from behaving like 44.1 equally weighted positions to 40.3 — 9% fewer, while its top ten went from 39.14% to 40.42% of net assets. Read across the funds on the concentration-over-time table.
| Period | Holdings | Effective | Top 10 | Largest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-30 | 127 | 40.3 | 40.42% | 5.56% |
| 2026-01-31 | 127 | 41.9 | 39.1% | 5.09% |
| 2025-10-31 | 127 | 39 | 43.13% | 5.77% |
| 2025-07-31 | 127 | 38.2 | 43.99% | 6.04% |
| 2025-04-30 | 125 | 44.1 | 40.4% | 5.19% |
| 2025-01-31 | 127 | 46.4 | 36.85% | 6.11% |
| 2024-10-31 | 125 | 44.7 | 39.58% | 5.14% |
| 2024-07-31 | 126 | 38.6 | 42.96% | 6.73% |
Earlier filings (19 more, back to 2019-10-31)
| Period | Holdings | Effective | Top 10 | Largest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-04-30 | 125 | 38.8 | 42.92% | 6.61% |
| 2024-01-31 | 125 | 39.8 | 42.93% | 5.64% |
| 2023-10-31 | 124 | 39.6 | 42.1% | 6.43% |
| 2023-07-31 | 127 | 41.4 | 40.41% | 6.86% |
| 2023-04-30 | 127 | 45.1 | 38.66% | 5.73% |
| 2023-01-31 | 127 | 47.7 | 37.01% | 5.32% |
| 2022-10-31 | 125 | 39.3 | 43.06% | 5.74% |
| 2022-07-31 | 126 | 39.4 | 43.25% | 5.74% |
| 2022-04-30 | 122 | 46.2 | 37.53% | 5.24% |
| 2022-01-31 | 124 | 46.5 | 37.04% | 5.16% |
| 2021-10-31 | 127 | 41.6 | 39.62% | 8.39% |
| 2021-07-31 | 127 | 46.9 | 38.14% | 5.63% |
| 2021-04-30 | 126 | 41.2 | 41.5% | 6.29% |
| 2021-01-31 | 127 | 40.5 | 40.97% | 7.38% |
| 2020-10-31 | 126 | 39.8 | 42.19% | 6.12% |
| 2020-07-31 | 127 | 42.5 | 40.37% | 5.94% |
| 2020-04-30 | 126 | 42.6 | 41% | 5.51% |
| 2020-01-31 | 127 | 47.6 | 37.71% | 5.38% |
| 2019-10-31 | 126 | 44.1 | 39.14% | 5.57% |
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.
Compared with, in the essays
4Overlap with other funds
2Measured against every other fund on this site, from the same filings. Combined effective holdings is how the pair behaves held in equal size.
| With | Overlap | Shared | Combined effective |
|---|---|---|---|
| MTUM vs VOO | 36.62% | 105 | 58.8 |
| MTUM vs QUAL | 27.71% | 31 | 59.9 |
Largest positions, as filed
as of 2026-04-30The 15 largest of 128 positions in MTUM's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: MTUM.csv.gz.
| # | Position | Weight | Cumulative |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. | 5.56% | 5.6% |
| 2 | BROADCOM INC. | 5.40% | 11.0% |
| 3 | NVIDIA CORPORATION | 4.64% | 15.6% |
| 4 | ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. | 4.03% | 19.6% |
| 5 | INTEL CORPORATION | 3.83% | 23.5% |
| 6 | JOHNSON & JOHNSON | 3.76% | 27.2% |
| 7 | LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION | 3.61% | 30.8% |
| 8 | EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION | 3.43% | 34.3% |
| 9 | CATERPILLAR INC. | 3.21% | 37.5% |
| 10 | ALPHABET INC. | 2.94% | 40.4% |
| 11 | JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 2.87% | 43.3% |
| 12 | WALMART INC. | 2.75% | 46.0% |
| 13 | GE VERNOVA INC. | 2.53% | 48.6% |
| 14 | ALPHABET INC. | 2.39% | 51.0% |
| 15 | APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. | 2.36% | 53.3% |
By country of issuer
as of 2026-04-30Share of MTUM's own investments by the issuer country the filer reported (incorporation, not revenue). Each country links to every fund that holds it.
| Country | Share |
|---|---|
| United States | 96.66% |
| Ireland° | 2.32% |
| Liberia° | 0.54% |
| Cayman Islands° | 0.24% |
| Singapore | 0.07% |
| United Kingdom | 0.06% |
| Australia | 0.05% |
| Switzerland | 0.05% |
Returns the fund reported
2019-08 – 2026-04Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of MTUM's own filings, 81 months on record. Not computed here and not from a price feed.
Cross-checked against a series computed separately from prices: median difference 0.04 percentage points over 81 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: MTUM.json · all funds.
Who borrows MTUM's shares
2026-07-31The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-07-31, $45m was out to 9 borrowers. The largest, JP MORGAN SECURITIES LLC, held 37.5% of it.
| Borrower | On loan | Share of the loan |
|---|---|---|
| JP MORGAN SECURITIES LLC | $17m | 37.5% |
| BNP PARIBAS PRIME BROKERAGE INTERNATIONAL LIMITED | $10m | 22.5% |
| Wells Fargo Bank, National Association | $5m | 10.3% |
| CITIGROUP GLOBAL MARKETS INC. | $5m | 10.0% |
| National Financial Services LLC | $4m | 9.5% |
The filing reports no cash collateral position against this loan. Collateral taken in a form the fund does not hold as a position does not appear in N-PORT, so this is silence rather than absence. What the collateral figure can and cannot show. Every quarter MTUM has filed, with each borrower: MTUM.json · all funds.
Since the previous filing
2026-01-31 → 2026-04-30127 positions became 127: 30 added (15.8% of the fund at the later date), 30 dropped (22.6% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 30.6%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of MTUM compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.
| Largest increases | 2026-01-31 | 2026-04-30 | Largest decreases | 2026-01-31 | 2026-04-30 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| INTEL CORPORATION | 1.15% | 3.83% | PALANTIR TECHNOLOGIES INC. | 3.52% | 1.52% |
| MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. | 4.19% | 5.56% | JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. | 4.69% | 2.87% |
| LAM RESEARCH CORPORATION | 2.30% | 3.61% | GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY | 2.56% | 1.90% |
| ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC. | 2.99% | 4.03% | INTERNATIONAL BUSINESS MACHINES CORPORATION | 1.77% | 1.20% |
| CATERPILLAR INC. | 2.25% | 3.21% | APPLOVIN CORPORATION | 1.28% | 0.87% |
| BROADCOM INC. | 4.58% | 5.40% | ROBINHOOD MARKETS, INC. | 0.86% | 0.57% |
New: JOHNSON & JOHNSON (3.76%), EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION (3.43%), APPLIED MATERIALS, INC. (2.36%), ANALOG DEVICES, INC. (1.02%), LOCKHEED MARTIN CORPORATION (0.75%), LUMENTUM HOLDINGS INC. (0.56%). Gone: META PLATFORMS, INC. (5.09%), MICROSOFT CORPORATION (3.96%), ORACLE CORPORATION (2.28%), VISA INC. (2.16%), NETFLIX, INC. (1.69%), BOSTON SCIENTIFIC CORPORATION (0.85%).
Asset categories and pricing
as of 2026-07-3199.74% equity, 0.26% 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.
Derivative exposure and counterparties
as of 2026-04-30A 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 $24.18B. 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).
Neighbours by effective holdings, equity funds
10Every measured equity fund lined up by how many holdings it behaves like; these sit either side of MTUM (42.4). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.
| Fund | Reports | Behaves like | Top ten | As of |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| HDEF Xtrackers MSCI EAFE High Dividend Yield Equity ETF | 121 | 41.3 | 41.71% | 2026-05-29 |
| DFAE Dimensional Emerging Core Equity Market ETF | 6,294 | 41.7 | 30.48% | 2026-07-31 |
| PWV Invesco Large Cap Value ETF | 51 | 41.8 | 34.41% | 2026-07-31 |
| XVV iShares ESG Select Screened S&P 500 ETF | 445 | 42 | 40.93% | 2026-06-30 |
| HELO JPMorgan Hedged Equity Laddered Overlay ETF | 156 | 42.4 | 39.41% | 2026-07-31 |
| IDVO Amplify CWP International Enhanced Dividend Income ETF | 54 | 42.5 | 33.53% | 2026-06-30 |
| DFGR Dimensional Global Real Estate ETF | 440 | 42.6 | 40.75% | 2026-07-31 |
| FHEQ Fidelity Hedged Equity ETF | 195 | 42.8 | 39.03% | 2026-07-31 |
| XOP State Street(R) SPDR(R) S&P(R) Oil & Gas Exploration & Production ETF | 53 | 42.9 | 27.95% | 2026-06-30 |
| SKYY First Trust Cloud Computing ETF | 64 | 43.1 | 36.18% | 2026-06-30 |
Measures applied in the essays
8Essays that examine MTUM
16-
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...
-
Momentum Crashes, Explained: Why the Most Crowded Trades Unwind Fastest
Momentum earns a long-run premium but carries deep negative skew: the strategy's worst days cluster together and arrive precisely when a crowded trade...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
The Master Class: How to Use Claude (Anthropic) to Backtest Your Own ETF Strategy
Claude can write the Python and run the math, but it cannot tell you whether your test design is honest. Most retail backtests fail at design, not at code....
-
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...
-
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...
-
The Master Guide to Evidence-Based ETF Portfolios: Using AI to Optimize Allocation (2026)
"AI-driven portfolio optimization" mostly solves a problem long-horizon investors don't actually have. Real-time tilting at retail frequency tends to cost...
-
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...
-
Why "Factor Investing" Still Works: Applying Fama-French Models in the AI Era
The Fama-French factors weren't a trading edge that AI could arbitrage away — they were compensation for risks investors still won't bear cheerfully, plus...
Mentions are detected across the full text of every article, so an appearance may be a passing comparison rather than the subject. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell — see the disclaimer.