© 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)

ORILX

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

ORILX

North Square Multi Strategy Fund

Expense Ratio
1.53%
AUM
$38M
Inception
2/26/1999
1Y Return
+10.7%54th %ilevs 251 asset-class peers
·

The fund primarily invests in other mutual funds, including those managed by North Square, and may also invest directly in securities to enhance returns. It allocates assets across equity securities of U.S. and foreign companies of any market capitalization and fixed income securities of various maturities and credit qualities, including high-yield and investment grade debt. The multi-strategy approach incorporates strategic and tactical asset allocation, with no fixed target ranges for asset class exposure, adjusting based on market conditions and risk management.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
ORILX
North Square Multi Strategy Fund
10.7%10.7%10.4%0.67-7.3%
ⓘ 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
ORILX
North Square Multi Strategy Fund
8.7%-0.6%0.8%-1.8%-0.7%9.2%10.7%10.5%15.5%7.5%6.2%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
ORILX
North Square Multi Strategy Fund
10.5%*6.6%-11.9%-22.3%19.5%11.4%7.6%2.6%7.7%-38.3%33.6%7.7%-1.5%11.8%33.4%9.1%4.0%0.4%26.4%-9.9%26.1%17.0%21.2%-16.5%18.0%12.1%12.3%8.7%
ⓘ 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
ORILXUS
North Square Multi Strategy Fund
-2.0%0.75**0.19**0.04-0.03*0.19**0.00-0.06**0.96226
ⓘ 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
Mutual Fund
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Alternatives
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Large Core
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
Russell 3000 ® Index
Peer Group
Alts - Other (38 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
75
3Y Peer Percentile
86
Expense Ratio
1.53%
5Y Tax Drag
3.08%/yr
AUM
$38M
3Y Flow
-34.7%
Yield
1.42%
Inception
2/26/1999
Holdings (Reported)
4,033
Turnover
16%
Equity
79%
Derivatives
0%
Strategy Summary

The fund primarily invests in other mutual funds, including those managed by North Square, and may also invest directly in securities to enhance returns. It allocates assets across equity securities of U.S. and foreign companies of any market capitalization and fixed income securities of various maturities and credit qualities, including high-yield and investment grade debt. The multi-strategy approach incorporates strategic and tactical asset allocation, with no fixed target ranges for asset class exposure, adjusting based on market conditions and risk management.

ⓘ 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 (8/10/2026). 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

Based on equity exposure only (74% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
13%
19%
25%
5%
5%
5%
9%
9%
9%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
58%
Mid
15%
Small
28%
Style
Value
27%
Core
34%
Growth
39%
ⓘ 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 (79% 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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite FactorsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (74% of total assets).

Intangible Value50.4
Traditional Value50.2
Small-Cap65.4
Quality46.7
Momentum50.3
ⓘ 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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (74% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)32.8
Sales-to-Price (NTM)48.9
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)5.2
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap2.4
Patents / Mkt Cap0.91
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap2.8
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.18
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap6.9
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap14.3
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap18.3
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap1.3
ⓘ 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 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.

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
75.8%
74.6%
Other1.2%
20.2%
3.9%
3.3%
2.4%
1.9%
1.8%
1.7%
1.5%
Other3.6%
Emerging Markets4.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level

Based on equity exposure only (74% of total assets).

Financials28.3%
Technology20.9%
Industrials12.6%
Healthcare11.3%
Consumer Discretionary7.1%
Communication4.6%
Consumer Staples4.6%
Materials3.3%
Energy3.3%
Utilities2.4%
Real Estate1.7%
ⓘ 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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Based on equity exposure only (74% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure23.6%
Early Adopter27.1%
Laggard49.2%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 710.1%
Non-Magnificent 789.9%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy62.0%
New Economy38.0%

Globalization

Multinational50.7%
Exporter5.8%
Importer14.2%
Domestic29.2%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled1.1%
Revenue & Operations9.1%
Operations Only13.7%
Revenue Only4.2%
No Material Exposure71.8%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)19.7%
Large ($70–500B)27.6%
Mid ($10–70B)25.8%
Small ($1–10B)22.3%
Micro (<$1B)4.6%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 79% 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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

14 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings) · 99% in funds

#NameTickerWeight %Country
1Exchange Place Advisors TrustORSIX
15.99
USA
2Vanguard Specialized FundsVIG
12.24
USA
3Vanguard Index FundsVIGRX
11.64
USA
4Exchange Place Advisors TrustNSIVX
11.60
USA
5Exchange Place Advisors TrustQTPI
11.04
USA
6Exchange Place Advisors TrustNMKYX
8.01
USA
7Vanguard Index FundsVIVAX
6.76
USA
8iShares TrustEFA
5.41
USA
9Invesco Exchange Traded Fund TrustSPGP
4.15
USA
10Exchange Place Advisors TrustNKMCX
3.48
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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Alternatives Funds

Total Holdings4,033
Effective Holdings10.1
Top 10 Weight90.3%
Max Position16.0%
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 5/31/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
ORILX
North Square Multi Strategy Fund
Peer Group
38 funds
Peer Asset Class
251 funds
YTD Return
8.67%6.34%737.46%55
1Y Return
10.72%8.56%759.54%54
3Y Return (Ann.)
15.47%9.20%869.55%79
5Y Return (Ann.)
7.52%4.23%885.24%68
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.53%1.41%381.42%43
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (72 share classes across 38 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 Similarity57
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1AVMA
Avantis Moderate Allocation ETF
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
57-----
2LGWAX
Ladenburg Growth Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
55-----
3LNGVX
WisdomTree Siegel Longevity Digital Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
53-----
4MGDAX
NYLIM Growth Allocation Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
53-----
5MWFAX
NYLIM Equity ETF Allocation Fund
US Large Core
US Large Core
47-----
6MOEAX
NYLIM Growth ETF Allocation Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
47-----
7LOWAX
Ladenburg Growth & Income Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
47-----
8MDAAX
NYLIM Moderate ETF Allocation Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
47-----
9MAGSX
Madison Aggressive Allocation Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
47-----
10MXSBX
Empower SecureFoundation Balanced Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
47-----

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.