VOT 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.

VOT's largest investment is Vertiv Holding-a at 2.83% of net assets. Western Digital and Seagate Technolo follow; the three together are 7.63%. Ten companies are 21.31% of the fund; the other 116 share the rest. Among the 721 equity funds measured here, VOT behaves like 82.2 holdings against a median of 42.4 — 1.9 times the median. Across 28 quarterly filings VOT has become more concentrated: it behaved like 124.7 at 2019-09-30 and 82.2 at 2026-06-30. Between the 2026-03-31 and 2026-06-30 filings 6 positions were added and 14 dropped; 15.5% 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 2019-09-30 and 2026-06-30, VOT went from behaving like 124.7 equally weighted positions to 82.2 — 34% fewer, while its top ten went from 13.49% to 21.31% 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 126 positions in VOT's Form N-PORT, weight as a share of net assets, securities-lending collateral excluded. Every position, every quarter: VOT.csv.gz.

Monthly total returns from Item B.5 of VOT's own filings, 84 months on record. Not computed here and not from a price feed.

Cross-checked against a series computed separately from prices: median difference 0.05 percentage points over 84 months, which is roughly the distributions. Every month with the filing it came from: VOT.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, $142m was out to 16 borrowers, 0.41% of net assets. The largest, GOLDMAN SACHS & CO., held 22.8% of it.

Cash collateral reported against the loan: 0.31% of net assets, 75.9% 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 VOT has filed, with each borrower: VOT.json · all funds.

132 positions became 124: 6 added (3.1% of the fund at the later date), 14 dropped (4.9% at the earlier date). Half the sum of all weight changes, a turnover proxy: 15.5%. Positions are matched on identifiers, so a security whose identifier changed shows as one drop and one add. Every filing of VOT compared this way, as a feed: changes.xml · all funds: filings received.

New: Astera Labs Inc (0.82%), Carnival Corp Ltd (0.78%), Flex Ltd (0.65%), Republic Services Inc (0.47%), AST SpaceMobile Inc (0.28%), Cerebras Systems Inc (0.15%). Gone: Marvell Technology Inc (1.12%), Carnival Corp (0.75%), Corning Inc (0.68%), Coterra Energy Inc (0.66%), Interactive Brokers Group Inc (0.37%), NVR Inc (0.23%).

99.55% equity, 0.45% 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.

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 $34.82B. Notional of an interest-rate or currency swap is not equity exposure.

Financing leg as filed: the fund pays OBFR01 + 0% on $27M 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 VOT (82.2). Same filings, same arithmetic. Position in this list says nothing about which fund is better.