© 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)

RDMAX

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

RDMAX

Return Stacked Balanced Allocation & Systematic Macro Fund

Expense Ratio
2.27%
AUM
$37M
Inception
10/12/2016
1Y Return
+12.8%59th %ilevs 251 asset-class peers
·

The fund targets a 100% exposure to both a Balanced Allocation Strategy and a Systematic Macro Strategy, utilizing derivative contracts to stack returns from both strategies. The Balanced Allocation Strategy aims for a mix of approximately 50% U.S. equities and 50% U.S. bonds, while the Systematic Macro Strategy provides exposure to global asset classes, including equities, bonds, currencies, and commodities through various futures contracts and derivatives. The fund employs leverage to enhance exposure, with up to 50% of net assets in U.S. Treasury bills and cash equivalents for liquidity and collateral.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
RDMAX
Return Stacked Balanced Allocation & Systematic Macro Fund
12.8%12.8%10.8%0.83-6.1%
ⓘ 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
RDMAX
Return Stacked Balanced Allocation & Systematic Macro Fund
13.3%-0.3%1.1%0.6%1.6%5.9%12.8%9.6%7.3%4.7%4.3%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
2016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
RDMAX
Return Stacked Balanced Allocation & Systematic Macro Fund
-2.7%*3.6%-7.8%17.9%0.4%10.9%-3.3%-0.8%9.6%4.8%13.3%
ⓘ 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
RDMAXUS
Return Stacked Balanced Allocation & Systematic Macro Fund
1.2%0.51**-0.110.10-0.110.08-0.02-0.030.37226
ⓘ 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
Alternatives
Region
Equity Sleeve Style
Large Core
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
SP500 Index TR Index
Peer Group
Alts - Capital Efficient (Multi-Asset) (13 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
70
3Y Peer Percentile
0
Expense Ratio
2.27%
5Y Tax Drag
2.69%/yr
AUM
$37M
3Y Flow
+7.7%
Yield
0.00%
Inception
10/12/2016
Holdings (Reported)
556
Turnover
87%
Equity
53%
Derivatives
1%
Strategy Summary

The fund targets a 100% exposure to both a Balanced Allocation Strategy and a Systematic Macro Strategy, utilizing derivative contracts to stack returns from both strategies. The Balanced Allocation Strategy aims for a mix of approximately 50% U.S. equities and 50% U.S. bonds, while the Systematic Macro Strategy provides exposure to global asset classes, including equities, bonds, currencies, and commodities through various futures contracts and derivatives. The fund employs leverage to enhance exposure, with up to 50% of net assets in U.S. Treasury bills and cash equivalents for liquidity and collateral.

ⓘ 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 (3/10/2026). 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 (49% of total assets).

LargeMidSmall
14%
24%
49%
5%
4%
3%
-
-
-
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
88%
Mid
12%
Small
0%
Style
Value
19%
Core
29%
Growth
52%
ⓘ 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 (53% 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.

Factor DetailsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (49% of total assets).

None of the selected metrics are scored for RDMAX — switch the picker to All, or add metrics under Metrics (top right).

ⓘ 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 (53% of total assets).

98.4%
98.4%
Other0.1%
Developed Ex-US1.6%
ⓘ 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 (49% of total assets).

Technology38.1%
Financials11.9%
Communication9.8%
Consumer Discretionary9.4%
Healthcare8.9%
Industrials8.6%
Consumer Staples4.4%
Energy3.0%
Utilities2.2%
Materials1.8%
Real Estate1.8%
ⓘ 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 (49% of total assets).

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy39.2%
New Economy60.8%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.0%
Revenue & Operations16.3%
Operations Only17.0%
Revenue Only4.1%
No Material Exposure62.7%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)46.3%
Large ($70–500B)38.9%
Mid ($10–70B)14.6%
Small ($1–10B)0.1%
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 53% 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▾

49 positions (top 10 shown, create for full holdings) · 48.8% in funds

#NameTickerWeight %Country
1iShares TrustIVV
48.80
USA
2First American Funds-
43.09
USA
3Chicago Mercantile Exchange-
0.71
USA
4Chicago Board of Trade-
0.45
USA
5Chicago Mercantile Exchange-
0.29
USA
6Ice Futures U.S.-
0.22
USA
7Chicago Board OF Trade-
0.17
USA
8Ice Futures Europe-
0.15
GBR
9New York Mercantile Exchange-
0.13
USA
10Chicago Mercantile Exchange-
0.10
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 6/30/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Alternatives Funds

Total Holdings556
Effective Holdings2.1
Top 10 Weight94.1%
Max Position48.8%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)94%
Top Country (of Net Assets)94%
ⓘ 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
RDMAX
Return Stacked Balanced Allocation & Systematic Macro Fund
Peer Group
13 funds
Peer Asset Class
251 funds
YTD Return
13.32%0.31%777.46%73
1Y Return
12.84%7.52%709.49%59
3Y Return (Ann.)
7.28%12.71%09.39%35
5Y Return (Ann.)
4.66%-5.24%40
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
2.27%0.95%01.42%19
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (25 share classes across 13 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 Similarity56
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Return Corr
FundPeer Group
1CRDBX
Potomac Defensive Bull Fund
US Large Core
US Large Core
56---
2MAFIX
Abbey Capital Multi-Asset Fund
US Large Core
US Large Core
56---
3MKAM
MKAM ETF
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
55---
4RNEAX
Rational/RGN Hedged Equity Fund
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
28---
5GMMA
GammaRoad Market Navigation ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
28---
6IRGMX
Voya Retirement Moderately Aggressive Portfolio
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
28---
7LSAAX
LoCorr Strategic Allocation Fund
Allocation - Moderate
Allocation - Moderate
28---
8RSSY
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Futures Yield ETF
Alts - Global Macro
Alts - Global Macro
28---
9TSPX
Twin Oak Active Opportunities ETF
Allocation - Aggressive
Allocation - Aggressive
28---
10BLNDX
STANDPOINT MULTI-ASSET FUND
US Large Core
US Large Core
28---

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. 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).