© 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)

MTRAX

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

MTRAX

NYLIM Income Builder Fund

Expense Ratio
1.02%
AUM
$1.1B
Inception
12/30/1994
1Y Return
+15.7%86th %ilevs 1,365 asset-class peers
·

The fund normally invests a minimum of 30% of net assets in equity securities and 30% in debt securities. It employs a flexible asset allocation strategy, with equity investments focused on companies generating increasing free cash flow and debt investments in both investment grade and below investment grade securities, including high-yield bonds. The investment process incorporates material ESG factors, with a broad range of securities diversified by company, industry, and type, while also utilizing derivatives for risk management and return enhancement.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
MTRAX
NYLIM Income Builder Fund
15.7%15.7%9.3%1.29-6.7%
ⓘ 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
MTRAX
NYLIM Income Builder Fund
13.5%-0.5%1.1%-2.1%-0.6%9.7%15.7%13.6%17.8%7.6%7.2%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
1995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
MTRAX
NYLIM Income Builder Fund
28.7%13.2%18.2%26.9%16.5%-4.6%-11.9%-17.8%19.1%6.5%6.1%9.2%6.7%-26.9%22.5%14.3%3.6%14.6%18.4%7.7%-3.7%9.1%12.2%-5.6%18.1%6.9%10.1%-13.6%9.7%11.1%16.7%13.5%
ⓘ 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
MTRAXUS
NYLIM Income Builder Fund
5.7%0.70**-0.010.050.020.32**0.00-0.08**0.84226
ⓘ 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
Asset Allocation
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Large Value
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
MSCI World Index (Net)
Peer Group
Allocation - Aggressive (327 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
86
3Y Peer Percentile
75
Expense Ratio
1.02%
5Y Tax Drag
1.25%/yr
AUM
$1.1B
3Y Flow
-26.8%
Yield
2.66%
Inception
12/30/1994
Holdings (Reported)
747
Turnover
50%
Equity
61%
Derivatives
0%
Strategy Summary

The fund normally invests a minimum of 30% of net assets in equity securities and 30% in debt securities. It employs a flexible asset allocation strategy, with equity investments focused on companies generating increasing free cash flow and debt investments in both investment grade and below investment grade securities, including high-yield bonds. The investment process incorporates material ESG factors, with a broad range of securities diversified by company, industry, and type, while also utilizing derivatives for risk management and return enhancement.

ⓘ 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 (1/9/2026). 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 (58% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
35%
23%
16%
7%
9%
2%
2%
6%
-
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
74%
Mid
18%
Small
8%
Style
Value
44%
Core
38%
Growth
18%
ⓘ 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 (61% 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: Asset Allocation Funds

Based on equity exposure only (58% of total assets).

Intangible Value66.1
Traditional Value68.9
Small-Cap44.1
Quality41.0
Momentum42.5
ⓘ 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 Asset Allocation 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: Asset Allocation Funds

Based on equity exposure only (58% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)34.1
Sales-to-Price (NTM)57.7
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)6.6
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap2.6
Patents / Mkt Cap1.1
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap2.7
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.10
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap6.6
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap13.0
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap21.7
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap1.7
ⓘ 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 (Asset Allocation 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

Equity59.9%
Fixed Income36.7%
Cash & Short-Term2.7%
Other0.7%
Short positions of 0.4% of net assets are not shown.ⓘ Methodology

Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. Cash & Short-Term includes 2.1% of net assets the filing does not itemise. 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
75.8%
75.1%
Other0.6%
21.2%
5.6%
3.4%
2.9%
2.0%
1.2%
1.1%
1.0%
Other3.8%
3.1%
1.4%
Other1.7%
ⓘ 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 (58% of total assets).

21.8%
19.5%
10.4%
8.6%
8.5%
7.8%
7.2%
6.3%
4.1%
3.5%
2.2%
ⓘ 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 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Based on equity exposure only (58% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure21.4%
Early Adopter40.8%
Laggard37.8%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 73.5%
Non-Magnificent 796.5%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy67.2%
New Economy32.8%

Globalization

Multinational55.8%
Exporter1.8%
Importer16.1%
Domestic26.3%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.7%
Revenue & Operations3.6%
Operations Only15.6%
Revenue Only7.5%
No Material Exposure72.6%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)12.0%
Large ($70–500B)49.5%
Mid ($10–70B)30.1%
Small ($1–10B)8.4%
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 61% 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▾

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

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1United States of America-
2.62
--USA
2United States of America-
1.60
--USA
3Hewlett Packard EnterpriseHPE
1.44
TechnologyTechnology HardwareUSA
4MicrosoftMSFT
1.41
TechnologySoftwareUSA
5Cisco SystemsCSCO
1.37
TechnologyTechnology HardwareUSA
6Dell TechnologiesDELL
1.32
TechnologyTechnology HardwareUSA
7CVS HealthCVS
1.29
HealthcareInsurers & ProvidersUSA
8Taiwan Semiconductor ManufacturingTSM
1.29
TechnologySemiconductorsTWN
9BroadcomAVGO
1.27
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
10Texas InstrumentsTXN
1.14
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
ⓘ 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 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Asset Allocation Funds

Total Holdings747
Effective Holdings179.1
Top 10 Weight14.7%
Max Position2.6%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)34%
Top Country (of Net Assets)72%
ⓘ 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 7/31/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
MTRAX
NYLIM Income Builder Fund
Peer Group
327 funds
Peer Asset Class
1,365 funds
YTD Return
13.54%8.65%877.49%89
1Y Return
15.72%11.06%869.48%86
3Y Return (Ann.)
17.77%15.42%7514.23%75
5Y Return (Ann.)
7.56%7.12%566.38%64
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.02%0.94%390.80%27
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (945 share classes across 327 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 Similarity64
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1EPSYX
NYLIM Epoch Global Equity Yield Fund
Global Large Value
Global Large Value
64-----
2MMRAX
NYLIM Moderate Allocation Fund
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
53-----
3MCKAX
NYLIM Conservative Allocation Fund
Allocation - Conservative
Allocation - Conservative
50-----
4CIPAX
American Funds Conservative Growth and Income Portfolio
Allocation - Conservative
Allocation - Conservative
50-----
5MODRX
WisdomTree Siegel Moderate Digital Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
43-----
6JGYAX
Global Shareholder Yield Fund
Global Large Value
Global Large Value
43-----
7EPLCX
NYLIM Epoch U.S. Equity Yield Fund
US Large Value
US Large Value
43-----
8LNGVX
WisdomTree Siegel Longevity Digital Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
43-----
9AMECX
Income Fund of America
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
41-----
10FCFWX
American Funds Retirement Income Portfolio - Enhanced
Target Date Retirement
Target Date Retirement
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.