SSO 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: 82.87% at a quoted market price (level 1), 8 issuer countries.

The largest line in SSO's filing is not a stock but ProShares Genius Money Market ETF, a fund position at 15.54% of net assets. Between the 2026-02-28 and 2026-05-31 filings 11 positions were added and 10 dropped; 15.6% 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.

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.

Measured against every other fund on this site, from the same filings. Combined effective holdings is how the pair behaves held in equal size.

The 15 largest of 524 positions in SSO's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: SSO.csv.gz.

Share of SSO'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 SSO'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 0.09 percentage points over 81 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: SSO.json · all funds.

The fund lends its holdings, and Item B.4.a of the filing names every firm holding them. At 2026-05-31, $1m was out to 9 borrowers, 0.01% of net assets. The largest, MORGAN STANLEY & CO LLC, held 60.7% of it.

Cash collateral reported against the loan: 0.01% of net assets, 67.9% 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 SSO has filed, with each borrower: SSO.json · all funds.

509 positions became 510: 11 added (4.4% of the fund at the later date), 10 dropped (5.0% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 15.6%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of SSO compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

New: United States of America (2.21%), United States of America (0.90%), U.S. Treasury Bills (0.60%), U.S. Treasury Bills (0.30%), Vertiv Holdings Co. (0.12%), Coherent Corp. (0.07%). Gone: United States of America (2.21%), United States of America (1.50%), United States of America (1.13%), Carnival Corp. (0.04%), Coterra Energy, Inc. (0.03%), Hologic, Inc. (0.02%).

82.9% of SSO 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 $8.38B. Notional of an interest-rate or currency swap is not equity exposure.

Financing leg as filed: the fund pays FEDL01 + 0.881% on $10.09B of long swap notional . Issuers fill the spread field differently (some file the all-in rate), so compare within an issuer, not across.

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 SSO (27.5). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.

• 010 Expense ratio
• 010 Maximum drawdown
• 009 Variance drag
• 006 Total return
• 005 Duration
• 005 Standard deviation
• 005 Beta
• 004 Rebalancing bands

• 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.

  14 Sept 2026 5 min ETF Analysis

• Why Variance Drag Quietly Destroys Leveraged ETF Returns

  A daily-rebalanced 2x ETF surrenders roughly one annualized variance to compounding each year — about 2.9 percentage points at S&P 500 volatility levels —...

  31 May 2026 10 min Investment Framework

• 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...

  04 Apr 2026 11 min ETF Analysis

• Why Capital Preservation Is the Secret to Winning with Leveraged Assets

  The case for capital preservation in a leveraged portfolio is not a temperament argument — it is an arithmetic one. Drawdown recovery is non-linear: a 50%...

  29 Mar 2026 9 min Long-Term Strategy

• What Rising Interest Rates Mean for Leveraged ETF Borrowing Costs

  Leveraged ETFs do not borrow on margin. They obtain exposure through total return swaps whose financing leg is reset daily at short-term rates (Fed Funds or...

  28 Mar 2026 12 min Macro & Markets

• 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...

  27 Mar 2026 10 min ETF Analysis

• Can Leveraged ETFs Be Part of a Long-Term Portfolio? Risk Mitigation Strategies

  Daily-reset leveraged ETFs are not buy-and-hold instruments. Holding-period return depends on the realized path of the underlying, not just its start and...

  26 Mar 2026 11 min Long-Term Strategy

• The Honest Math of Leveraged ETFs - Path Dependency, Volatility Decay, and the Behavioral Gap

  Over the last five years, TQQQ delivered a 27.0% CAGR while QQQM delivered 17.6% — a ratio of 1.53x, not the 3x the leverage label implies. Realized...

  26 Mar 2026 10 min Long-Term Strategy

• The Math of Leveraged ETF Decay: Myth vs. Reality in Trending Markets

  Daily-reset leverage produces a return that, over any non-trivial horizon, is not L times the index — it is L times the daily return, compounded, then taxed...

  25 Mar 2026 9 min Long-Term Strategy

• 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...

  24 Mar 2026 11 min ETF Analysis

• 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...

  24 Mar 2026 9 min ETF Analysis

• The Honest Math of Leveraged ETFs: A 5-Year Data Read on TQQQ, SSO, and UPRO

  Over the trailing five years, TQQQ delivered roughly 1.5x the realized CAGR of QQQM — not 3x — while taking on roughly 3x the drawdown and 3x the...

  22 Mar 2026 9 min Investment Framework