© 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)

ARP

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

Alternatives Funds · 251 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

ARP

PMV Adaptive Risk Parity ETF

Expense Ratio
1.42%
AUM
$86M
Inception
12/23/2022
1Y Return
+17.3%75th %ilevs 251 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests in a variety of asset classes, including U.S. equities, non-U.S. developed market equities, emerging market equities, U.S. Treasuries, broad commodities, physical gold, currencies, and cash. It employs a TrueDiversification process that balances and diversifies the portfolio through market cycles by targeting assets with low correlations and similar risk profiles, while also considering momentum trends for weighting decisions. The portfolio is actively managed and updated periodically, with allocations varying based on prevailing market conditions.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
ARP
PMV Adaptive Risk Parity ETF
17.3%17.3%15.2%0.89-10.1%
ⓘ 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 10/7/2025 to 10/7/2026.

Trailing Returns

Name
YTD1D5D1M3M6M1Y2Y3Y5YMAX
ARP
PMV Adaptive Risk Parity ETF
13.6%-0.4%0.8%-0.3%5.9%7.9%17.3%15.7%16.8%12.8%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
2022202320242025YTD
ARP
PMV Adaptive Risk Parity ETF
-0.6%*3.7%13.8%18.3%13.6%
ⓘ Methodology

* partial year — the series ran for only part of it (its first year, or the year it closed); the figure is the return over the part it did run. 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
ARPUS
PMV Adaptive Risk Parity ETF
11.3%0.76**-0.22**0.10-0.20**0.20*-0.05-0.47**0.67226
ⓘ 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 10/7/2025 to 8/31/2026.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund Profile

Fund Documents(opens the fund company’s site in a new tab)
Family
Registrant
Type
ETF
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Alternatives
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Large Core
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
Morningstar US Core Bond Index (USD) (TR)
Peer Group
Alts - Capital Efficient (Multi-Asset) (13 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
80
3Y Peer Percentile
67
Expense Ratio
1.42%
AUM
$86M
3Y Flow
+263.3%
Yield
5.80%
Inception
12/23/2022
Holdings (Reported)
4,878
Turnover
203%
Equity
60%
Derivatives
3%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests in a variety of asset classes, including U.S. equities, non-U.S. developed market equities, emerging market equities, U.S. Treasuries, broad commodities, physical gold, currencies, and cash. It employs a TrueDiversification process that balances and diversifies the portfolio through market cycles by targeting assets with low correlations and similar risk profiles, while also considering momentum trends for weighting decisions. The portfolio is actively managed and updated periodically, with allocations varying based on prevailing market conditions.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the fund's prospectus fee table. Turnover from the SEC annual report (1/8/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 7/31/2026. Strategy summary from the fund's prospectus.

Equity Size & Style Map

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
12%
29%
45%
3%
3%
3%
2%
2%
1%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
86%
Mid
8%
Small
6%
Style
Value
17%
Core
34%
Growth
50%
ⓘ Methodology

Equity size and style definitions: Large vs. Small based on market cap, where Large > $70B, Mid $10-70B, and Small < $10B. Value vs. Growth based on percentile ranking on Traditional Value score within the fund's region and size cohort (equal thirds among its true equity-fund peers). This fund is not an equity fund, so the box describes its equity sleeve only (60% of assets): the sleeve's holdings are scored and ranked against equity funds of the same region and size cohort. The rest of the portfolio (bonds, cash, other assets) is not represented here. Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box, from stock-level classification (size on the same $70B/$10B lines; value by Traditional Value terciles across scored stocks). The dot is the average holding ranked against other funds, so dot and weights can differ at the margin. The Size and Style bars are the grid's row and column totals. Holdings as of 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite FactorsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

Intangible Value53.0
Traditional Value39.0
Small-Cap33.8
Quality62.0
Momentum74.0
ⓘ Methodology

Hover or click for factor definitions. Weighted average of underlying company-level values with weights equal to position size. Ranked within the clean equity fund universe, one entry per fund series (lowest: 0, highest: 100; the middle of the range is denser than the ends). Blue dots mark the fund; the shaded band spans the Alternatives Funds class 25th–75th percentile of scores, notched at the median. Holdings as of 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)26.3
Sales-to-Price (NTM)32.9
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)5.2
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap1.7
Patents / Mkt Cap1.2
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap2.0
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.05
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap3.7
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap6.3
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap6.9
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.89
ⓘ 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 (Alternatives Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 9/30/2026.

Asset Class Exposure

Alternatives100.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Taken from what this fund IS rather than from what it files. Its exposure is carried in swaps or futures that mark at close to nothing, so the book it reports is the collateral behind them and a pie of that book would describe a margin account. Gearing is not expressed here - a 3x fund reads 100% of its asset class, not 300%. An alternative strategy is counted by what the fund is, not by what it holds: a long/short or managed futures book is ordinary stocks and Treasury collateral, and neither describes the exposure the fund gives. A fund that is short is counted here too, rather than in the asset class it is short of.

Country Exposure

Level
72.9%
72.9%
22.9%
5.0%
3.1%
2.8%
1.8%
1.7%
1.6%
1.5%
1.3%
Other4.2%
4.1%
2.5%
Other1.6%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

Technology39.8%
Financials12.1%
Industrials9.8%
Consumer Discretionary8.9%
Communication8.4%
Healthcare6.0%
Consumer Staples5.5%
Materials3.7%
Energy2.6%
Utilities2.2%
Real Estate1.1%
ⓘ 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 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Based on equity exposure only (59% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure47.1%
Early Adopter22.5%
Laggard30.4%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 719.7%
Non-Magnificent 780.3%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy43.8%
New Economy56.2%

Globalization

Multinational64.8%
Exporter8.5%
Importer9.3%
Domestic17.4%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled1.3%
Revenue & Operations18.7%
Operations Only13.1%
Revenue Only8.6%
No Material Exposure58.4%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)32.8%
Large ($70–500B)41.4%
Mid ($10–70B)20.5%
Small ($1–10B)5.2%
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 60% of net assets) — they are not portfolio weights. China exposure: domiciled = incorporated in China or Hong Kong, falling back to the filing's country for holdings outside the stock model. Among the rest, revenue = ≥15% of revenue derived from China; operations = ≥3% of LinkedIn-tracked workforce in China, or ≥2 identified Chinese suppliers making up ≥12% of those identified. China revenue is estimated where segment reporting is absent. 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%. China shares are of total equity weight. Size shares are of scored holdings weight. Holdings as of 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

7 positions · 99.8% in funds

#NameTickerWeight %Country
1Harbor Commodity All-Weather Strategy ETFHGER
33.58
USA
2Invesco QQQ Trust Series 1QQQ
25.54
USA
3Vanguard Tax Managed Fund FTSE Developed Markets ETFVTMGX
24.61
USA
4Vanguard 500 Index FundVFINX
8.93
USA
5WisdomTree Bloomberg US Dollar Bullish FundUSDU
2.91
USA
6Vanguard Long Term Treasury ETFVLGIX
2.78
USA
7Vanguard International Equity Index Funds - Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock IndeVEIEX
1.47
USA
ⓘ Methodology

Sector, country and factor detail need a security match; the share of weight that matched is a member figure, so the rows without one appear here with those columns blank. "In funds" adds up the rows tagged Fund — holdings that are themselves funds this app covers, which is what look-through can expand; a held vehicle that files no holdings of its own (a commodity or currency trust, a money-market fund) is not counted and stays a single line. Holdings as of 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Alternatives Funds

Total Holdings4,878
Effective Holdings4
Top 10 Weight99.8%
Max Position33.6%
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 (Alternatives Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 7/31/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
ARP
PMV Adaptive Risk Parity ETF
Peer Group
13 funds
Peer Asset Class
251 funds
YTD Return
13.63%0.31%857.46%73
1Y Return
17.28%7.52%809.54%75
3Y Return (Ann.)
16.77%12.71%679.55%83
5Y Return (Ann.)
---
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.42%0.95%231.42%49
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (25 share classes across 13 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 Similarity56
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1OCIO
ClearShares OCIO ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
56-----
2SMIDX
SOUND MIND INVESTING DYNAMIC ALLOCATION FUND
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
49-----
3MOOD
Relative Sentiment Tactical Allocation ETF
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
41-----
4RAA
SMI 3Fourteen REAL Asset Allocation ETF
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
41-----
5NDAA
Ned Davis Research 360 Dynamic Allocation ETF
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
41-----
6RSEE
Rareview Systematic Equity ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
41-----
7TBFC
The Brinsmere Fund - Conservative ETF
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
41-----
8EARAX
Eaton Vance All Asset Strategy Fund
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
41-----
9ELDFX
ELFUN DIVERSIFIED FUND
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
41-----
10TRND
Pacer Trendpilot Fund of Funds ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
41-----

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 7/31/2026. 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. Factor Similarity = 100 − a signature-weighted RMS gap across the composite factor scores (0–100 ranks within the clean equity fund universe), each axis weighted by how far this fund sits from the universe median of 50. Return Correlation = correlation of market-hedged daily returns over the trailing two years (CAPM residuals), so only market-beta co-movement is removed; requires ~18 months of daily history (378 of the window's 504 trading days). Fama-French Similarity = 1/(1+d), where d is the Euclidean distance between factor betas (market, size, value, profitability, investment, momentum, intangible value) from up to three years of daily returns (min 378 daily observations and regression R² of at least 0.25); 1.00 = identical loadings.