© 2026 Sparkline Capital LP. All rights reserved.

For informational purposes only. Not investment advice or a recommendation of any security or fund. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | Disclosures | Methodology |

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Selection

Selected (1/4)

ANV

Seeded with the selected fund at 100%

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

Options Funds · 830 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

ANV

Sector

GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF

Expense Ratio
1.07%
AUM
$7M
Inception
2/4/2026
·

The fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes) in derivatives contracts that utilize the autocallable on the Underlying Asset as their reference asset. It is non-diversified.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
ANV
GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF
12.9%19.8%8.9%1.86-2.8%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Drag on chart to select period. Sharpe Ratio uses the one-month T-bill as the risk-free rate. From 2/4/2026 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
ANV
GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF
11.9%-1.0%-1.1%-0.1%4.3%9.5%11.9%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Returns for periods greater than one year are annualized. As of 10/7/2026.

Annual Returns

Name
YTD
ANV
GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF
11.9%
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. As of 10/7/2026.

Correlation Matrix

Benchmark

Select a second series, or to correlate with the seven research factors.

Factor Regression

Name
Ann. αβ MKTβ SMBβ HMLβ RMWβ CMAβ UMDβ iHMLR²Obs
ANVUS
GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF
14.8%**0.30**0.07-0.040.09-0.19**0.10*-0.060.48144
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. US factor set. Daily OLS of excess return (fund − T-bill) on factor spread returns over the selected date range, intersected with each series' history. Bold with * |t| ≥ 1.96, ** |t| ≥ 2.58. Cell shading tracks each loading's t-stat. Betas are returns-based — compare with the holdings-based factor scores below. Factor returns are long-short spread returns (© Ken French, Dartmouth). From 2/4/2026 to 8/31/2026.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund ProfileSector

Family
Registrant
Type
ETF
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Options
Region
Peer Group Benchmark
Peer Group
Options - Income (295 peers)
Expense Ratio
1.07%
AUM
$7M
Inception
2/4/2026
Holdings (Reported)
5
Turnover
0%
Equity
100%
Derivatives
100%
Net Equity Exposure
99%
Strategy Summary

The fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (plus any borrowings for investment purposes) in derivatives contracts that utilize the autocallable on the Underlying Asset as their reference asset. It is non-diversified.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from market data (10/6/2026). Turnover from market data (10/6/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 6/30/2026. Summary may be from an older prospectus.

Composite Factors

Not scored — ANV’s holdings don’t clear the coverage floor for composite factor scores.

Factor DetailsRef: Options Funds

None of the selected metrics are scored for ANV — switch the picker to All, or add metrics under Metrics (top right).

ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Solid blue dots mark the fund's position within the clean equity fund universe (5th–95th percentile scale); the shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Options Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 9/30/2026.

Country Exposure

Level
100.0%
100.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level
100.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified holdings — every position we can identify, with cash and unidentified positions excluded — not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy0.0%
New Economy100.0%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)100.0%
Large ($70–500B)0.0%
Mid ($10–70B)0.0%
Small ($1–10B)0.0%
Micro (<$1B)0.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 100% of net assets) — they are not portfolio weights. Company size bands by holding market cap: Mega >$500B, Large $70–500B, Mid $10–70B, Small $1–10B, Micro <$1B. Old vs New Economy partitions Sparkline's 48 industries: New = technology, internet platforms and entertainment, e-commerce, payments, pharma/biotech/medtech, and renewable energy; Old = everything else. Shares are of classified holdings and sum to 100%. Size shares are of scored holdings weight. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

5 positions

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1NvidiaNVDA
20.08
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
2NvidiaNVDA
20.04
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
3NvidiaNVDA
20.02
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
4NvidiaNVDA
20.01
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
5NvidiaNVDA
19.99
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
ⓘ Methodology

Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Options Funds

Total Holdings5
Effective Holdings5
Top 10 Weight100.1%
Max Position20.1%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)100%
Top Country (of Net Assets)100%
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for definitions. Solid blue dots mark the fund: percentage rows on a 0–100% scale, holdings counts log-scaled across the clean-universe 5th–95th percentile range. The shaded band spans the fund's broad class (Options Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026.

Benchmark DifferentiationRef: Options Funds

vs SPYBroad Benchmark
Active Share92.5%
Benchmark Correlation0.60
ⓘ Methodology

One sub-card per benchmark: the market primary, then the style secondary — the gap between them is the style sleeve itself. Both anchors are Sparkline-inferred (market from asset class and region, style from the holdings size-and-style map), not the fund's official prospectus benchmark. Solid blue dot marks the fund; the shaded band spans the reference set's 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median (band follows the Peer Universe selector). Active Share compares the fund's book with the benchmark's, share for share; Tracking Error is the annualized daily deviation over the trailing two years (ruler runs to just past the universe's 95th percentile, or past the fund's own figure where that is larger); Benchmark Correlation is the plain daily correlation over the trailing year. Hover the labels for full definitions.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
ANV
GraniteShares Autocallable NVDA ETF
Peer Group
295 funds
Peer Asset Class
830 funds
YTD Return
11.92%6.95%737.62%84
1Y Return
---
3Y Return (Ann.)
---
5Y Return (Ann.)
---
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.07%0.99%150.79%7
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (329 share classes across 295 funds). One share class shown per fund — the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class; percentile ranks and medians are computed against the same deduped set. Quartile chips fill the layer the fund's rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). Funds without a full return history rank only on the horizons they cover.

Similar Funds

See more rows — create a free account▾

Nearest funds across the whole universe, by holdings and behavior — the peer taxonomy is ignored, so matches can come from any category.

Top Similarity35
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
FundPeer Group
1FSPTX
Select Technology Portfolio
Sector - Technology
Sector - Technology
35--
2FSELX
Select Semiconductors Portfolio
Sector - Semiconductors
Sector - Semiconductors
35--
3MXXVX
Matthew 25 Fund
US Large Growth
US Large Growth
35--
4SMPIX
SEMICONDUCTOR ULTRASECTOR PROFUND
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
35--
5FELAX
Fidelity Advisor Semiconductors Fund
Sector - Semiconductors
Sector - Semiconductors
35--
6NVDL
GraniteShares 2x Long NVDA Daily ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
35--
7NVDW
Roundhill NVDA Weeklypay ETF
Options - Income
Options - Income
35--
8GXPT
Global X PureCap MSCI Information Technology ETF
Sector - Technology
Sector - Technology
35--
9NVDO
Leverage Shares 2x Capped Accelerated NVDA Monthly ETF
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
35--
10TRUT
VanEck Technology TruSector ETF
Sector - Technology
Sector - Technology
34--

The method columns are members-only — create a free account to see these figures.

ⓘ Methodology

Rows are the consensus top matches (a fund must place in at least two methods' top 250 to qualify, and matches missing more than one of this fund's own methods are not ranked — a row scored on fewer methods is a noisier estimate, not a better match). Click a method column to see that method's own top matches across the whole universe instead. Gray (N) beside each method's metric is that fund's rank in the whole universe on that method. Similarity is a percentile among match-grade fund pairs, 0–100 — 87 means the pair is closer than 87% of the strongest matches in the universe, averaged across the methods — so it compares across funds: index clones tie at the top with thousands of other clone pairs, so scores top out in the high 80s to 90s, while a one-of-a-kind fund's best match can score in the 30s. Rows are ordered by the Consensus Rank — the geometric mean of those universe ranks, shown in each cell's tooltip — and the score is held down the list to the level of the closest match above it, so equal scores mean equally close and the number reads as a floor. A dash means that method has no figure for the pair at all (one of them lacks the holdings or return history it needs). Hover a column header for each method's definition. The “Top…” strips above compare against every fund's own top match across the whole universe (they deliberately don't follow the Peer Universe selector); Top Similarity is simply the best match's score, with no reference band; the Holdings and Active Tilt strips carry no reference band because computing every fund's best book overlap would require a full holdings scan per fund — the dot stands alone on its natural 0–100% scale. One share class shown per fund, and a fund's own sister share classes are excluded from its Top-match strips. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Consensus Rank is the geometric mean of the match's universe-wide rank across the methods (#1.0 = top match on every one). Holdings Overlap = common-holdings weight (sum of the minimum weight across shared positions, long only). Active Tilt Overlap = the same statistic on active weights (holdings minus the fund's own default benchmark, floored at 0), which strips the benchmark ballast that dominates raw overlap.