© 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)

MIMPX

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

Asset Allocation Funds · 1,365 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

MIMPX

Global Strategist Portfolio

Expense Ratio
0.90%
AUM
$82M
Inception
1/2/1997
·

The fund primarily invests in a blend of equity and fixed-income securities from U.S. and non-U.S. issuers. It may allocate up to 25% of total assets to a wholly-owned subsidiary in the Cayman Islands, which provides exposure to commodities through commodity-linked derivatives. The investment approach is top-down, focusing on asset class, sector, region, country, and currency, with evaluations based on fundamental market research and quantitative models, allowing for investments in below investment grade securities and derivatives.

Time Series

Performance

No return history for MIMPX (Global Strategist Portfolio). The returns, correlation and regression cards are hidden.
SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund Profile

Fund Documents(opens the fund company’s site in a new tab)
Registrant
Type
Mutual Fund
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Asset Allocation
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Large Core
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
MSCI All Country World Index
Peer Group
Allocation - Moderate (277 peers)
Expense Ratio
0.90%
AUM
$82M
3Y Flow
-30.2%
Inception
1/2/1997
Holdings (Reported)
1,572
Turnover
95%
Equity
50%
Derivatives
1%
Strategy Summary

The fund primarily invests in a blend of equity and fixed-income securities from U.S. and non-U.S. issuers. It may allocate up to 25% of total assets to a wholly-owned subsidiary in the Cayman Islands, which provides exposure to commodities through commodity-linked derivatives. The investment approach is top-down, focusing on asset class, sector, region, country, and currency, with evaluations based on fundamental market research and quantitative models, allowing for investments in below investment grade securities and derivatives.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the fund's prospectus fee table. Turnover from the SEC annual report (3/5/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 6/30/2026. 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 (57% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
31%
23%
33%
4%
4%
4%
1%
-
-
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
87%
Mid
12%
Small
1%
Style
Value
36%
Core
27%
Growth
37%
ⓘ 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.

Composite FactorsRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Based on equity exposure only (57% of total assets).

Intangible Value60.0
Traditional Value55.3
Small-Cap26.4
Quality52.7
Momentum62.1
ⓘ 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 Asset Allocation Funds class 25th–75th percentile of scores, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Based on equity exposure only (57% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)39.2
Sales-to-Price (NTM)45.1
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)6.0
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap1.8
Patents / Mkt Cap0.55
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap1.9
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.04
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap4.5
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap8.8
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap11.5
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap1.4
ⓘ 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 (Asset Allocation 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 6/30/2026.

Asset Class Exposure

Equity48.6%
Fixed Income41.6%
Cash & Short-Term7.9%
Other1.9%
Short positions of 1.8% of net assets are not shown.ⓘ Methodology

Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. The short book is stated under the card and never netted into a slice: a pie cannot draw a negative, and folding a hedge into the class it offsets would make it look like more of that class. Other is everything we could not name as an asset class: holdings the filing itself labels as other, derivative positions at the market value the filing reports rather than at notional, and funds held inside this fund whose own holdings we could not read.

Country Exposure

Level
52.7%
52.5%
Other0.2%
39.2%
12.3%
4.5%
4.1%
3.2%
2.6%
2.1%
1.9%
1.7%
1.6%
1.6%
Other3.6%
8.1%
3.8%
2.2%
Other2.1%
ⓘ 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 (57% of total assets).

32.6%
22.1%
9.6%
8.6%
7.1%
6.8%
3.8%
3.5%
2.7%
2.0%
1.2%
ⓘ 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 (57% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure31.6%
Early Adopter43.1%
Laggard25.3%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 716.3%
Non-Magnificent 783.7%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy62.4%
New Economy37.6%

Globalization

Multinational50.7%
Exporter4.5%
Importer27.3%
Domestic17.5%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.6%
Revenue & Operations12.7%
Operations Only15.2%
Revenue Only5.3%
No Material Exposure66.3%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)25.5%
Large ($70–500B)53.3%
Mid ($10–70B)20.5%
Small ($1–10B)0.7%
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 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▾

1,523 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings)

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1Morgan Stanley & Co.-
8.01
--USA
2United States Treasury-
2.85
--USA
3NvidiaNVDA
2.65
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
4AppleAAPL
2.20
TechnologyTechnology HardwareUSA
5Letra Tesouro Nacional-
2.20
--BRA
6United States Treasury-
1.62
--USA
7United States Treasury-
1.57
--USA
8Bundesobligation-
1.52
--DEU
9MicrosoftMSFT
1.45
TechnologySoftwareUSA
10Amazon.comAMZN
1.22
Consumer DiscE-CommerceUSA
ⓘ 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. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Total Holdings1,572
Effective Holdings86.8
Top 10 Weight25.3%
Max Position8.0%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)49%
Top Country (of Net Assets)61%
ⓘ 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 (Asset Allocation Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 6/30/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
MIMPX
Global Strategist Portfolio
Peer Group
277 funds
Peer Asset Class
1,365 funds
YTD Return
---
1Y Return
---
3Y Return (Ann.)
---
5Y Return (Ann.)
---
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.90%0.90%480.80%40
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (878 share classes across 277 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 Similarity97
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
FundPeer Group
1MPBAX
Global Strategist Portfolio
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
97---
2ISEAX
VOYA INDEX SOLUTION 2035 PORTFOLIO
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
56---
3FBIFX
Fidelity Freedom Index 2040 Fund
Target Date 2040 & 2045
Target Date 2040 & 2045
56---
4VFORX
VANGUARD TARGET RETIREMENT 2040 FUND
Target Date 2040 & 2045
Target Date 2040 & 2045
55---
5ELDFX
ELFUN DIVERSIFIED FUND
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
55---
6VTTHX
VANGUARD TARGET RETIREMENT 2035 FUND
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
54---
7IDXFX
VOYA INDEX SOLUTION 2030 PORTFOLIO
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
54---
8AOA
iShares Core 80/20 Aggressive Allocation ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
54---
9FIHFX
Fidelity Freedom Index 2035 Fund
Target Date 2030 & 2035
Target Date 2030 & 2035
54---
10SSDDX
State Street Target Retirement 2045 Fund
Target Date 2040 & 2045
Target Date 2040 & 2045
54---

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. 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.