© 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)

MBXAX

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

MBXAX

Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund

Expense Ratio
2.25%
AUM
$11.5B
Inception
12/28/2015
1Y Return
+21.3%82nd %ilevs 251 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests 30% to 70% of its assets in a Futures Component, which includes futures contracts, forward and spot contracts, and options on various sectors such as currencies, interest rates, and commodities. It also allocates 30% to 70% of its assets to an Equity Component, focusing on U.S. and international liquid equity securities across all market capitalizations. The sub-advisor employs proprietary trading systems to determine asset allocations, analyzing technical and economic factors over varying time horizons.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
MBXAX
Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund
21.3%21.3%7.2%2.42-3.9%
ⓘ 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
MBXAX
Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund
20.3%0.0%0.8%5.8%4.8%8.1%21.3%13.7%10.6%9.4%9.2%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
20152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
MBXAX
Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund
-0.7%*17.8%13.7%-2.4%13.6%-0.7%16.6%7.5%-0.9%13.2%4.1%20.3%
ⓘ 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
MBXAXUS
Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund
7.6%0.22**0.040.020.000.020.020.010.20226
ⓘ 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
Mutual Fund
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Alternatives
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Large Core
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
S&P 500 ® Index
Peer Group
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA (35 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
59
3Y Peer Percentile
70
Expense Ratio
2.25%
5Y Tax Drag
1.28%/yr
AUM
$11.5B
3Y Flow
+82.9%
Yield
0.00%
Inception
12/28/2015
Holdings (Reported)
26,450
Turnover
11%
Equity
50%
Derivatives
2%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests 30% to 70% of its assets in a Futures Component, which includes futures contracts, forward and spot contracts, and options on various sectors such as currencies, interest rates, and commodities. It also allocates 30% to 70% of its assets to an Equity Component, focusing on U.S. and international liquid equity securities across all market capitalizations. The sub-advisor employs proprietary trading systems to determine asset allocations, analyzing technical and economic factors over varying time horizons.

ⓘ Methodology

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

Equity Size & Style Map

Based on equity exposure only (46% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
10%
15%
26%
7%
7%
9%
8%
11%
7%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
52%
Mid
22%
Small
26%
Style
Value
25%
Core
33%
Growth
42%
ⓘ 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 (50% 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 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (46% of total assets).

None of the selected metrics are scored for MBXAX — 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 (Alternatives 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
85.8%
85.6%
Other0.2%
8.2%
2.6%
2.3%
1.1%
Other2.2%
6.1%
1.4%
1.1%
Other3.5%
ⓘ 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

Based on equity exposure only (46% of total assets).

Technology25.3%
Financials15.9%
Industrials12.8%
Healthcare9.7%
Consumer Discretionary8.7%
Real Estate5.7%
Communication5.3%
Materials4.6%
Consumer Staples4.5%
Energy4.2%
Utilities3.2%
ⓘ 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

Based on equity exposure only (46% of total assets).

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy58.7%
New Economy41.3%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled2.7%
Revenue & Operations8.2%
Operations Only13.2%
Revenue Only3.5%
No Material Exposure72.4%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)18.3%
Large ($70–500B)25.5%
Mid ($10–70B)31.6%
Small ($1–10B)23.7%
Micro (<$1B)0.9%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 50% 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 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

6,558 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings) · 49.8% in funds

#NameTickerWeight %Country
1United States OF America - Bureau OF The Public Debt-
17.06
USA
2United States OF America - Bureau OF The Public Debt-
9.68
USA
3First American Funds-
8.30
USA
4United States OF America - Bureau OF The Public Debt-
7.64
USA
5iShares TrustIJH
6.37
USA
6iShares TrustIWB
6.33
USA
7United States OF America - Bureau OF The Public Debt-
4.90
USA
8iShares TrustIWM
4.23
USA
9iShares TrustUSMV
4.06
USA
10Vanguard International Equity Index FundsVEIEX
3.98
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 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Alternatives Funds

Total Holdings26,450
Effective Holdings14.5
Top 10 Weight72.5%
Max Position17.1%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)102%
Top Country (of Net Assets)98%
ⓘ 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 6/30/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
MBXAX
Catalyst/Millburn Hedge Strategy Fund
Peer Group
35 funds
Peer Asset Class
251 funds
YTD Return
20.34%16.01%797.46%89
1Y Return
21.31%19.31%599.49%82
3Y Return (Ann.)
10.59%7.28%709.39%57
5Y Return (Ann.)
9.41%7.29%605.24%75
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
2.25%1.20%151.42%20
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (75 share classes across 35 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 Similarity41
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1ETFRX
NORTH SQUARE TACTICAL DEFENSIVE FUND
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
41----
2SFBPX
Empower SecureFoundation Balanced ETF Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
37----
3MXSBX
Empower SecureFoundation Balanced Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
37----
4SSDDX
State Street Target Retirement 2045 Fund
Target Date 2040 & 2045
Target Date 2040 & 2045
34----
5XJUN
FT Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - June
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
27----
6XJUL
FT Vest U.S. Equity Enhance & Moderate Buffer ETF - July
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
26----
7SSTIX
State Street Total Return V.I.S. Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
26----
8MDAAX
NYLIM Moderate ETF Allocation Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
26----
9DGSIX
GLOBAL ALLOCATION 60/40 PORTFOLIO
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
26----
10TBFG
The Brinsmere Fund - Growth ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
26----

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. 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.