© 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)

QNZIX

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

QNZIX

AQR Trend Total Return Fund

Expense Ratio
3.32%
AUM
$525M
Inception
12/16/2021
1Y Return
+30.8%94th %ilevs 251 asset-class peers
·

The fund allocates assets among four major asset classes: commodities, currencies, equities, and fixed income, typically gaining exposure through several hundred futures contracts, swaps, and related instruments. It targets a portfolio beta of approximately 0.5 to the equity market while employing a trend-following approach that utilizes a systematic, quantitative process to capitalize on price trends across these asset classes. The fund may also invest up to 25% of its total assets in a Subsidiary focused on commodity-linked derivative instruments.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
QNZIX
AQR Trend Total Return Fund
30.8%30.8%11.6%2.33-6.6%
ⓘ 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
QNZIX
AQR Trend Total Return Fund
24.6%0.3%0.5%3.8%11.1%14.7%30.8%28.4%29.9%25.5%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
20212022202320242025YTD
QNZIX
AQR Trend Total Return Fund
0.8%*15.5%23.0%35.2%23.3%24.6%
ⓘ 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
QNZIXGlobal Dev
AQR Trend Total Return Fund
1.8%0.42**-0.26*0.71**-0.17-0.49**0.30**0.20*0.56226
ⓘ Methodology

ETF performance based on market prices. Global Dev 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). Fama-French publishes daily factors for developed markets only, so Dev Ex-US is developed markets excluding the US and Global Dev is developed markets including it; emerging markets, a small share of world market capitalization, are not covered by the source data. 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
Mid Value
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
S&P 500 ® Total Return Index
Peer Group
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA (35 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
90
3Y Peer Percentile
95
Expense Ratio
3.32%
AUM
$525M
3Y Flow
+1407.5%
Yield
0.86%
Inception
12/16/2021
Holdings (Reported)
3,877
Turnover
461%
Equity
-2%
Derivatives
-1%
Strategy Summary

The fund allocates assets among four major asset classes: commodities, currencies, equities, and fixed income, typically gaining exposure through several hundred futures contracts, swaps, and related instruments. It targets a portfolio beta of approximately 0.5 to the equity market while employing a trend-following approach that utilizes a systematic, quantitative process to capitalize on price trends across these asset classes. The fund may also invest up to 25% of its total assets in a Subsidiary focused on commodity-linked derivative instruments.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the fund's prospectus fee table. Turnover from the SEC annual report (2/26/2026). 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

LargeMidSmall
16%
13%
9%
15%
9%
8%
17%
10%
3%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
38%
Mid
32%
Small
30%
Style
Value
47%
Core
32%
Growth
21%
ⓘ 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 (-2% 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: Alternatives Funds

Intangible Value16.5
Traditional Value80.3
Small-Cap92.1
Quality15.9
Momentum59.1
ⓘ 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 Alternatives 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: Alternatives Funds

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)5.5
Sales-to-Price (NTM)19.3
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)0.65
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap0.20
Patents / Mkt Cap0.59
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap0.27
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.01
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap1.8
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap5.2
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap8.3
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.59
ⓘ 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

Based on holdings that carry a country (34% of total assets).

65.2%
64.2%
1.0%
Other0.1%
34.7%
11.7%
3.5%
3.2%
2.7%
2.5%
2.1%
1.7%
1.3%
1.3%
1.2%
Other3.5%
Other (1 region)0.1%
ⓘ 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
Industrials20.1%
Technology18.2%
Financials17.0%
Consumer Discretionary11.2%
Healthcare8.8%
Materials6.1%
Consumer Staples5.0%
Utilities3.7%
Real Estate3.4%
Energy3.2%
Communication3.2%
ⓘ 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

AI Composition

Infrastructure17.9%
Early Adopter28.6%
Laggard53.5%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 70.0%
Non-Magnificent 7100.0%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy71.0%
New Economy29.0%

Globalization

Multinational40.7%
Exporter7.1%
Importer19.6%
Domestic32.6%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.2%
Revenue & Operations5.1%
Operations Only12.9%
Revenue Only3.1%
No Material Exposure78.7%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)1.0%
Large ($70–500B)26.1%
Mid ($10–70B)45.0%
Small ($1–10B)27.9%
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 -2% 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▾

3,872 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings)

#NameWeight %Country
1Limited Purpose Cash Investment Fund
35.08
USA
2United States of America
8.98
USA
3United States of America
6.66
USA
4United States of America
5.67
USA
5United States of America
3.31
USA
6United States of America
2.53
USA
7United States of America
2.19
USA
8United States of America
2.02
USA
9United States of America
1.93
USA
10United States of America
1.59
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. Holdings as of 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Alternatives Funds

Total Holdings3,877
Effective Holdings19.1
Top 10 Weight70.0%
Max Position35.1%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)82%
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 6/30/2026.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
QNZIX
AQR Trend Total Return Fund
Peer Group
35 funds
Peer Asset Class
251 funds
YTD Return
24.64%16.01%917.46%93
1Y Return
30.81%19.31%909.54%94
3Y Return (Ann.)
29.93%7.28%959.55%97
5Y Return (Ann.)
---
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
3.32%1.20%31.42%6
ⓘ 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 Similarity97
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1QMHIX
AQR Managed Futures Strategy HV Fund
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA
97-----
2AQMIX
AQR Managed Futures Strategy Fund
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA
94-----
3QLEIX
AQR Long-Short Equity Fund
Alts - Long/Short Equity
Alts - Long/Short Equity
53-----
4QDSIX
AQR Diversifying Strategies Fund
Alts - Alternative Risk Premia
Alts - Alternative Risk Premia
53-----
5QRPIX
AQR Alternative Risk Premia Fund
Alts - Alternative Risk Premia
Alts - Alternative Risk Premia
53-----
6QMNIX
AQR Equity Market Neutral Fund
Alts - Market Neutral
Alts - Market Neutral
53-----
7QSPIX
AQR Style Premia Alternative Fund
Alts - Alternative Risk Premia
Alts - Alternative Risk Premia
53-----
8MAFIX
Abbey Capital Multi-Asset Fund
US Large Core
US Large Core
31-----
9AQRIX
AQR Multi-Asset Fund
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
31-----
10LSAAX
LoCorr Strategic Allocation Fund
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
19-----

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. 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.