© 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)

RALIX

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

RALIX

Lazard Real Assets Portfolio

Expense Ratio
0.83%
AUM
$7M
Inception
12/30/2016
1Y Return
+14.3%77th %ilevs 1,365 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests at least 80% of its assets in real assets investments, which include natural resources, real estate, equipment and industrials, infrastructure, and commodities, as well as companies deriving significant revenue from these assets. It may also invest in equity securities of U.S. and non-U.S. companies, fixed income securities of any maturity or credit quality, and ETFs, with allocations varying over time. The investment selection process incorporates fundamental analysis, qualitative evaluations, and quantitative models tailored to different real asset categories.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
RALIX
Lazard Real Assets Portfolio
14.3%14.3%9.0%1.18-5.5%
ⓘ 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
RALIX
Lazard Real Assets Portfolio
10.4%-0.6%0.2%-3.8%-1.4%-0.3%14.3%10.8%14.4%6.2%6.7%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
RALIX
Lazard Real Assets Portfolio
9.9%-7.6%16.1%0.6%22.3%-9.0%4.4%5.9%16.8%10.4%
ⓘ 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
RALIXGlobal Dev
Lazard Real Assets Portfolio
7.3%0.65**-0.110.43**0.22*0.18-0.22**-0.38**0.53226
ⓘ 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
Asset Allocation
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Mid Core
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
MSCI World Index
Peer Group
Allocation - Aggressive (327 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
78
3Y Peer Percentile
37
Expense Ratio
0.83%
5Y Tax Drag
2.60%/yr
AUM
$7M
3Y Flow
-86.1%
Yield
10.09%
Inception
12/30/2016
Holdings (Reported)
184
Turnover
32%
Equity
78%
Derivatives
2%
Net Equity Exposure
75%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests at least 80% of its assets in real assets investments, which include natural resources, real estate, equipment and industrials, infrastructure, and commodities, as well as companies deriving significant revenue from these assets. It may also invest in equity securities of U.S. and non-U.S. companies, fixed income securities of any maturity or credit quality, and ETFs, with allocations varying over time. The investment selection process incorporates fundamental analysis, qualitative evaluations, and quantitative models tailored to different real asset categories.

ⓘ 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 (2/27/2026). 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

Based on equity exposure only (71% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
8%
22%
12%
8%
18%
10%
4%
15%
4%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
43%
Mid
35%
Small
22%
Style
Value
20%
Core
54%
Growth
26%
ⓘ 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 (78% 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 (71% of total assets).

Intangible Value7.5
Traditional Value55.8
Small-Cap63.6
Quality24.5
Momentum19.3
ⓘ 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 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 (71% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)47.9
Sales-to-Price (NTM)30.9
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)4.5
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap1.2
Patents / Mkt Cap0.04
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap1.6
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.02
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap0.93
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap2.6
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap11.5
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.16
ⓘ 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 9/30/2026.

Asset Class Exposure

Equity74.5%
Cash & Short-Term21.6%
Commodities1.6%
Other2.3%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. Cash & Short-Term includes 3.3% of net assets the filing does not itemise. 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

Based on holdings that carry a country (79% of total assets).

64.6%
64.5%
Other0.1%
31.9%
7.1%
6.5%
4.3%
4.1%
2.3%
2.1%
1.4%
1.3%
Other2.8%
3.5%
1.7%
Other1.8%
ⓘ 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 (71% of total assets).

51.9%
24.9%
11.7%
7.8%
3.4%
0.3%
0.1%
ⓘ 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 (71% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure25.1%
Early Adopter1.4%
Laggard73.5%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 70.0%
Non-Magnificent 7100.0%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy100.0%
New Economy0.0%

Globalization

Multinational8.9%
Exporter1.9%
Importer15.0%
Domestic74.3%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled2.2%
Revenue & Operations0.2%
Operations Only0.2%
Revenue Only0.7%
No Material Exposure96.7%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)0.3%
Large ($70–500B)24.3%
Mid ($10–70B)54.6%
Small ($1–10B)20.8%
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 78% 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▾

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

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1Lazard Govt MNY MMKT Ins-
18.25
--USA
2Goldman Sachs International-
2.32
--USA
3American TowerAMT
2.18
Real EstateGrowth REITsUSA
4PrologisPLD
2.12
Real EstateGrowth REITsUSA
5WelltowerWELL
1.90
Real EstateTraditional REITsUSA
6iShares Gold TrustIAU
1.63
--USA
7Simon Property GroupSPG
1.58
Real EstateTraditional REITsUSA
8Crown CastleCCI
1.55
Real EstateGrowth REITsUSA
9SBA CommunicationsSBAC
1.39
Real EstateGrowth REITsUSA
10AmerenAEE
1.31
UtilitiesRegulated UtilitiesUSA
ⓘ 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 Holdings184
Effective Holdings23
Top 10 Weight34.2%
Max Position18.3%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)36%
Top Country (of Net Assets)69%
ⓘ 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
RALIX
Lazard Real Assets Portfolio
Peer Group
327 funds
Peer Asset Class
1,365 funds
YTD Return
10.40%8.65%647.49%69
1Y Return
14.35%11.06%789.48%77
3Y Return (Ann.)
14.45%15.42%3714.23%52
5Y Return (Ann.)
6.23%7.12%336.38%49
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.83%0.94%610.80%46
ⓘ 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 Similarity60
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1AAAAX
DWS RREEF Real Assets Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
60-----
2PDPAX
Virtus Duff & Phelps Real Asset Fund
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
60-----
3REIX
NYLIM CBRE Real Assets ETF
Global SMID Core
Global SMID Core
60-----
4PDRDX
Diversified Real Asset Fund
Global Large Value
Global Large Value
53-----
5RAPAX
Cohen & Steers Real Assets Fund, Inc.
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
52-----
6NMFIX
Multi-Manager Global Listed Infrastructure Fund
Sector - Infrastructure
Sector - Infrastructure
52-----
7ASGI
abrdn Global Infrastructure Income Fund
Sector - Infrastructure
Sector - Infrastructure
45-----
8RGCIX
Global Infrastructure Fund
Sector - Infrastructure
Sector - Infrastructure
45-----
9AVRE
Avantis Real Estate ETF
Sector - Real Estate (US)
Sector - Real Estate (US)
45-----
10DFREX
DFA REAL ESTATE SECURITIES PORTFOLIO
Sector - Real Estate (US)
Sector - Real Estate (US)
45-----

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.