Fund · QRAFT AI-Enhanced U.S. Large Cap ETF · measured from SEC filings
QRFT holdings
QRFT reports 299 holdings and behaves like 34.2 equally weighted ones, computed from its SEC Form N-PORT filing for 2026-04-30. The fact sheet publishes the first number; this page computes the second, and traces it across 25 quarters of filings.
Measured concentration
as of 2026-04-30Computed by this site from the fund's SEC Form N-PORT filing; what the measure does not tell you · every fund in one table . Pricing: 100% at a quoted market price (level 1), 9 issuer countries.
What stands out
as of 2026-04-30Ten companies are 43.96% of the fund; the other 289 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, QRFT behaves like 34.2 holdings against a median of 42.4 — close to the median. Across 25 quarterly filings QRFT has held roughly steady since 2020-04-30 (39.2 then, 34.2 now). Between the 2026-01-31 and 2026-04-30 filings 79 positions were added and 81 dropped; 22.1% 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 2020
25Between 2020-04-30 and 2026-04-30, QRFT went from behaving like 39.2 equally weighted positions to 34.2 — 13% fewer, while its top ten went from 38.96% to 43.96% of net assets. Read across the funds on the concentration-over-time table.
| Period | Holdings | Effective | Top 10 | Largest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-04-30 | 299 | 34.2 | 43.96% | 9.21% |
| 2026-01-31 | 301 | 35.9 | 44.95% | 9.07% |
| 2025-10-31 | 302 | 33.1 | 45.82% | 9.46% |
| 2025-07-31 | 304 | 50.1 | 34.68% | 7.39% |
| 2025-04-30 | 351 | 48.7 | 36.68% | 7.04% |
| 2025-01-31 | 351 | 54.6 | 32.28% | 8.09% |
| 2024-10-31 | 350 | 54.8 | 32.08% | 8.85% |
| 2024-07-31 | 351 | 37.7 | 40.73% | 9.46% |
Earlier filings (17 more, back to 2020-04-30)
| Period | Holdings | Effective | Top 10 | Largest |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024-04-30 | 352 | 36 | 41.36% | 9.34% |
| 2024-01-31 | 350 | 71.7 | 30.32% | 4.72% |
| 2023-10-31 | 351 | 110.3 | 20.09% | 3.37% |
| 2023-07-31 | 351 | 109.2 | 20.19% | 3.5% |
| 2023-04-28 | 351 | 112.8 | 19.45% | 3.42% |
| 2023-01-31 | 352 | 128 | 17.62% | 3.06% |
| 2022-10-31 | 349 | 114.9 | 19.43% | 3.25% |
| 2022-07-29 | 352 | 113.2 | 19.78% | 3.28% |
| 2022-04-29 | 354 | 110.6 | 19.11% | 3.31% |
| 2022-01-31 | 351 | 97.4 | 21.76% | 3.92% |
| 2021-10-29 | 351 | 108.4 | 20.26% | 3.45% |
| 2021-07-30 | 351 | 107.2 | 20.21% | 3.05% |
| 2021-04-30 | 349 | 105.2 | 21.1% | 3.35% |
| 2021-01-29 | 351 | 133.4 | 17.96% | 3.03% |
| 2020-10-30 | 351 | 68.9 | 28.96% | 6.76% |
| 2020-07-31 | 351 | 84.4 | 27.04% | 4.65% |
| 2020-04-30 | 334 | 39.2 | 38.96% | 8.18% |
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
2By country of issuer
as of 2026-04-30Share of QRFT'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 | 96.89% |
| Ireland° | 2.13% |
| Switzerland | 0.40% |
| Curaçao° | 0.19% |
| Netherlands° | 0.17% |
| Panama° | 0.08% |
| United Kingdom | 0.07% |
| Jersey° | 0.04% |
Returns the fund reported
2020-02 – 2026-04Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of QRFT's own filings, 75 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: QRFT.json · all funds.
Since the previous filing
2026-01-31 → 2026-04-30301 positions became 299: 79 added (10.4% of the fund at the later date), 81 dropped (20.9% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 22.1%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of QRFT 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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| AMAZON.COM INC | 4.80% | 6.29% | META PLATFORMS INC | 3.22% | 2.96% |
| APPLE INC | 7.46% | 8.61% | ELI LILLY & COMPANY | 2.03% | 1.95% |
| BROADCOM INC | 3.24% | 4.37% | SALESFORCE INC | 0.41% | 0.36% |
| ALPHABET INC | 4.05% | 4.95% | S&P GLOBAL INC | 0.33% | 0.29% |
| INTEL CORP | 0.46% | 1.06% | MEDTRONIC PLC | 0.28% | 0.23% |
| ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES INC | 0.80% | 1.28% | LOCKHEED MARTIN CORP | 0.31% | 0.27% |
New: COSTCO WHOLESALE CORP (1.00%), NETFLIX INC (0.88%), PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY (THE) (0.76%), COCA-COLA COMPANY (THE) (0.75%), LINDE PLC (0.52%), PEPSICO INC (0.48%). Gone: Microsoft Corp. (6.18%), Tesla Inc (2.95%), Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (1.36%), Oracle Corp. (0.98%), Palantir Technologies Inc (0.69%), International Business Machines Corp. (0.60%).
Asset categories and pricing
as of 2026-04-3099.57% equity, 0.43% 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.
Neighbours by effective holdings, equity funds
10Every measured equity fund lined up by how many holdings it behaves like; these sit either side of QRFT (34.2). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.
| Fund | Reports | Behaves like | Top ten | As of |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ARTY iShares Future AI & Tech ETF | 63 | 33.8 | 42.81% | 2026-06-30 |
| VFH Vanguard Financials Index Fund | 417 | 33.9 | 46.07% | 2026-05-31 |
| IGE iShares North American Natural Resources ETF | 153 | 34 | 40.02% | 2026-06-30 |
| QQQ Invesco QQQ Trust, Series 1 | 103 | 34.1 | 45.03% | 2026-06-30 |
| FDEM Fidelity Emerging Markets Multifactor ETF | 208 | 34.2 | 36.71% | 2026-07-31 |
| QQQI NEOS Nasdaq-100(R) High Income ETF | 103 | 34.3 | 45% | 2026-06-30 |
| USCA Xtrackers MSCI USA Climate Action Equity ETF | 408 | 34.3 | 46.11% | 2026-05-29 |
| NUKZ Range Nuclear Renaissance Index ETF | 46 | 34.4 | 36.4% | 2026-05-31 |
| IBB iShares Biotechnology ETF | 251 | 34.6 | 44.63% | 2026-06-30 |
| EWC iShares MSCI Canada ETF | 87 | 34.6 | 43.06% | 2026-05-31 |
Measures applied in the essays
8Essays that examine QRFT
13-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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)...
-
The Ultimate 2026 Hybrid Portfolio: How to Mix Classic ETFs with AI Quant
The hybrid framework — a low-cost passive core plus a small AI-quant satellite — only earns its keep when the satellite delivers exposure the core does not....
-
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...
-
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...
-
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...
-
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,...
-
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...
-
Renaissance Technologies vs. Berkshire Hathaway: Two Different Paths to Infinite Wealth
Berkshire Hathaway and the Medallion Fund are both extreme-success stories, but they are not two paths a single retail investor can choose between — only...
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.