© 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)

MDPL

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

Equity Funds · 5,640 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

MDPL

Monarch Dividend Plus Index ETF

Expense Ratio
1.19%
AUM
$56M
Inception
3/8/2024
1Y Return
+5.3%18th %ilevs 5,640 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests at least 80% of total assets in the constituents of an index comprising 30 equally weighted U.S. dividend-paying value stocks from the Russell 1000 Index. The index follows a proprietary rules-based methodology that screens for dividend growth and free cash flow metrics, selecting the highest scoring companies, and is reconstituted weekly. The sub-adviser employs a replication indexing strategy to manage the fund, investing in the securities of the index in approximately the same proportions.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
MDPL
Monarch Dividend Plus Index ETF
5.3%5.3%16.9%0.09-12.4%
ⓘ 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
MDPL
Monarch Dividend Plus Index ETF
4.2%0.0%1.7%-8.4%5.9%7.6%5.3%3.3%4.6%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
20242025YTD
MDPL
Monarch Dividend Plus Index ETF
0.3%*7.6%4.2%
ⓘ 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
MDPLUS
Monarch Dividend Plus Index ETF
6.3%0.75**0.24**0.20**-0.030.24**-0.55**0.050.70226
ⓘ 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

Family
Registrant
Type
ETF
Asset Class
Equity
Region
Equity Size & Style
Peer Group Benchmark
Peer Group
US Mid Value (273 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
12
Expense Ratio
1.19%
AUM
$56M
Yield
1.49%
Inception
3/8/2024
Holdings (Reported)
30
Turnover
89%
Equity
100%
Derivatives
0%
Net Equity Exposure
100%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests at least 80% of total assets in the constituents of an index comprising 30 equally weighted U.S. dividend-paying value stocks from the Russell 1000 Index. The index follows a proprietary rules-based methodology that screens for dividend growth and free cash flow metrics, selecting the highest scoring companies, and is reconstituted weekly. The sub-adviser employs a replication indexing strategy to manage the fund, investing in the securities of the index in approximately the same proportions.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the fund's prospectus fee table. Turnover from the fund's prospectus. Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 5/31/2026. Strategy summary from the fund's prospectus.

Equity Size & Style Map

LargeMidSmall
26%
3%
-
30%
7%
-
30%
3%
-
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
29%
Mid
37%
Small
34%
Style
Value
86%
Core
14%
Growth
0%
ⓘ Methodology

Equity size and style definitions. Size: each holding is scored against its own market's size curve — Large above $61.7B in the US and $21.4B elsewhere, Small below $10.8B worldwide — and a fund sits at the weighted average of its holdings. Style: each holding's Traditional Value score is ranked against stocks of the same region and size, and a fund sits at the weighted average of those ranks. Both are relative measures — where a holding stands among comparable stocks, not an absolute threshold. The dollar lines are recomputed from total market capitalisation each time the data is refreshed; the shares of the market they mark are what stay fixed. Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box. The grid and the dot are built from one set of per-holding scores — the dot is their weighted average — so they describe the same book at two levels of detail. The Size and Style bars are the grid's row and column totals. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite FactorsRef: Equity Funds

Intangible Value92.4
Traditional Value90.6
Small-Cap66.1
Quality60.1
Momentum5.5
ⓘ 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 Equity Funds class 25th–75th percentile of scores, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Equity Funds

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)38.6
Sales-to-Price (NTM)83.1
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)8.6
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap2.4
Patents / Mkt Cap1.2
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap3.3
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.07
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap14.2
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap46.9
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap65.7
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap8.7
ⓘ 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 (Equity Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026. Expense ratio, yield, and turnover as of 10/6/2026. AUM as of 9/30/2026.

Country Exposure

Level
96.7%
93.1%
3.7%
3.3%
3.3%
ⓘ Methodology

Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level
32.8%
21.1%
13.1%
9.7%
7.3%
6.0%
3.4%
3.3%
3.3%
ⓘ Methodology

Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

AI Composition

Infrastructure7.6%
Early Adopter47.2%
Laggard45.2%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 70.0%
Non-Magnificent 7100.0%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy68.5%
New Economy31.5%

Globalization

Multinational41.8%
Exporter6.6%
Importer19.1%
Domestic32.4%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.0%
Revenue & Operations0.0%
Operations Only3.2%
Revenue Only3.7%
No Material Exposure93.1%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)0.0%
Large ($70–500B)25.8%
Mid ($10–70B)40.4%
Small ($1–10B)33.8%
Micro (<$1B)0.0%
ⓘ Methodology

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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

30 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings)

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1Cognizant Technology SolutionsCTSH
3.83
TechnologyIT ConsultingUSA
2KBRKBR
3.76
IndustrialsDiv IndustrialsUSA
3Factset Research SystemsFDS
3.74
FinancialsInvestment ManagementUSA
4GenpactG
3.67
FinancialsPayments & Cons FinBM
5AccentureACN
3.59
TechnologyIT ConsultingIRL
6Booz Allen Hamilton HoldingBAH
3.53
TechnologyIT ConsultingUSA
7OshkoshOSK
3.49
IndustrialsHeavy MachineryUSA
8Anglogold AshantiAU
3.40
MaterialsPrecious MetalsGBR
9ZoetisZTS
3.39
HealthcarePharmaceuticalsUSA
10SS&C Technologies HoldingsSSNC
3.38
TechnologySoftwareUSA
ⓘ Methodology

Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Equity Funds

Total Holdings30
Effective Holdings29.9
Top 10 Weight35.8%
Max Position3.8%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)33%
Top Country (of Net Assets)83%
ⓘ 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 (Equity Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026.

Benchmark DifferentiationRef: Equity Funds

vs SPYBroad Benchmark
Active Share98.6%
Tracking Error16.8%
Benchmark Correlation0.25
vs IWSStyle Benchmark
Active Share97.0%
Tracking Error12.7%
Benchmark Correlation0.52
ⓘ 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
MDPL
Monarch Dividend Plus Index ETF
Peer Group
273 funds
Peer Region
3,133 funds
Peer Asset Class
5,640 funds
YTD Return
4.16%11.19%1312.22%1311.63%19
1Y Return
5.26%13.15%1214.40%1514.44%18
3Y Return (Ann.)
----
5Y Return (Ann.)
----
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.19%0.69%120.75%150.74%16
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (609 share classes across 273 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 Similarity38
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1COWS
Amplify Cash Flow Dividend Leaders ETF
US Mid Value
US Mid Value
38-----
2MCVAX
Transamerica Mid Cap Value Opportunities
US Mid Value
US Mid Value
26-----
3HCOW
Amplify COWS Covered Call ETF
Options - Income
Options - Income
26-----
4CILGX
Clarkston Fund
US Small Value
US Small Value
26-----
5DSTL
Distillate U.S. Fundamental Stability & Value ETF
US Mid Value
US Mid Value
24-----
6COWZ
Pacer US Cash Cows 100 ETF
US Large Value
US Large Value
23-----
7BVALX
Brown Advisory - Beutel Goodman Large-Cap Value Fund
US Large Value
US Large Value
23-----
8OAKBX
Oakmark Equity and Income Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
22-----
9BUSA
Brandes U.S. Value ETF
US Large Value
US Large Value
22-----
10RUNN
Running Oak Efficient Growth ETF
US Mid Value
US Mid Value
22-----

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 5/31/2026. 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.