© 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)

RSSX

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

RSSX

Non-Diversified

Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Gold/Bitcoin ETF

Expense Ratio
0.67%
AUM
$102M
Inception
6/2/2025
1Y Return
+4.0%23rd %ilevs 251 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests at least 80% of net assets in a U.S. Equity strategy and a Gold/Bitcoin strategy, each targeting approximately 100% exposure. The U.S. Equity strategy focuses on large-capitalization U.S. equities, typically holding 400-500 positions, while the Gold/Bitcoin strategy aims for long-term capital appreciation through gold and bitcoin investments, dynamically adjusting allocations based on volatility. The fund employs a hybrid management approach, utilizing leverage to combine returns from both strategies.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
RSSX
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Gold/Bitcoin ETF
4.0%4.0%36.6%0.01-27.4%
ⓘ 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
RSSX
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Gold/Bitcoin ETF
6.6%-2.2%0.8%-3.0%12.9%13.5%4.0%27.3%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
2025YTD
RSSX
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Gold/Bitcoin ETF
29.8%*6.6%
ⓘ 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
RSSXUS
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Gold/Bitcoin ETF
8.5%1.96**-0.260.07-0.52**0.21-0.58**-1.27**0.71226
ⓘ 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 ProfileNon-Diversified

Fund Documents(opens the fund company’s site in a new tab)
Family
Registrant
Type
ETF
Asset Class
Peer Asset Class
Alternatives
Region
Equity Size & Style
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
Sand P500 Total Return Index
Peer Group
Alts - Global Macro (22 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
14
Expense Ratio
0.67%
AUM
$102M
Yield
0.92%
Inception
6/2/2025
Holdings (Reported)
516
Non-Diversified
Yes
Turnover
61%
Equity
92%
Derivatives
-1%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests at least 80% of net assets in a U.S. Equity strategy and a Gold/Bitcoin strategy, each targeting approximately 100% exposure. The U.S. Equity strategy focuses on large-capitalization U.S. equities, typically holding 400-500 positions, while the Gold/Bitcoin strategy aims for long-term capital appreciation through gold and bitcoin investments, dynamically adjusting allocations based on volatility. The fund employs a hybrid management approach, utilizing leverage to combine returns from both strategies.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the fund's prospectus fee table. Turnover from the SEC annual report (4/9/2026). 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 (72% 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. Size: each holding is scored against its own market's size curve — Large above $61.7B in the US and $21.4B elsewhere, Small below $10.8B worldwide — and a fund sits at the weighted average of its holdings. Style: each holding's Traditional Value score is ranked against stocks of the same region and size, and a fund sits at the weighted average of those ranks. Both are relative measures — where a holding stands among comparable stocks, not an absolute threshold. The dollar lines are recomputed from total market capitalisation each time the data is refreshed; the shares of the market they mark are what stay fixed. Cell shading and percentages: share of classified holdings weight per box. The grid and the dot are built from one set of per-holding scores — the dot is their weighted average — so they describe the same book at two levels of detail. 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: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (72% of total assets).

Intangible Value77.4
Traditional Value28.0
Small-Cap17.2
Quality76.7
Momentum54.0
ⓘ 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 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor DetailsRef: Alternatives Funds

Based on equity exposure only (72% of total assets).

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)19.1
Sales-to-Price (NTM)28.9
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)4.6
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap1.5
Patents / Mkt Cap0.77
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap1.2
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.05
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap3.6
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap9.5
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap14.5
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.98
ⓘ 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 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.

Country Exposure

Level
99.1%
99.0%
Other0.1%
Other (1 region)0.9%
ⓘ 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 (72% 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 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

Based on equity exposure only (72% of total assets).

AI Composition

Infrastructure50.7%
Early Adopter27.1%
Laggard22.2%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 731.7%
Non-Magnificent 768.3%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy39.2%
New Economy60.8%

Globalization

Multinational69.4%
Exporter5.7%
Importer11.6%
Domestic13.3%

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 92% 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▾

6 positions · 80.1% in funds

#NameTickerWeight %Country
1State Street SPDR Portfolio S&SPYM
72.37
USA
2iShares Bitcoin Trust ETFIBIT
7.71
USA
3First American Government Obli-
6.53
USA
4--
0.27
USA
5--
-0.46
USA
6CME Bitcoin Reference Rate (BRR)-
-0.81
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 7/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Alternatives Funds

Total Holdings516
Effective Holdings1.4
Top 10 Weight86.9%
Max Position72.4%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)87%
Top Country (of Net Assets)87%
ⓘ 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 7/31/2026.

Benchmark DifferentiationRef: Alternatives Funds

vs SPYBroad Benchmark
Active Share100.0%
Benchmark Correlation0.73
ⓘ Methodology

One sub-card per benchmark: the market primary, then the style secondary — the gap between them is the style sleeve itself. Both anchors are Sparkline-inferred (market from asset class and region, style from the holdings size-and-style map), not the fund's official prospectus benchmark. Solid blue dot marks the fund; the shaded band spans the reference set's 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median (band follows the Peer Universe selector). Active Share compares the fund's book with the benchmark's, share for share; Tracking Error is the annualized daily deviation over the trailing two years (ruler runs to just past the universe's 95th percentile, or past the fund's own figure where that is larger); Benchmark Correlation is the plain daily correlation over the trailing year. Hover the labels for full definitions.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
RSSX
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Gold/Bitcoin ETF
Peer Group
22 funds
Peer Asset Class
251 funds
YTD Return
6.58%7.04%327.46%45
1Y Return
4.03%8.61%149.54%23
3Y Return (Ann.)
---
5Y Return (Ann.)
---
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.67%1.13%911.42%88
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (57 share classes across 22 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 Similarity72
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
FundPeer Group
1RSST
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Managed Futures ETF
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA
Alts - Managed Futures/CTA
72---
2RSSY
Return Stacked(R) U.S. Stocks & Futures Yield ETF
Alts - Global Macro
Alts - Global Macro
71---
3MSTB
LHA Market State Tactical Beta ETF
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
67---
4CRTPX
Potomac Tactically Passive Fund
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
Allocation - Tactical/Dynamic
66---
5SDAAX
Swan Defined Risk Growth Fund
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
66---
6SPDF
Defender Risk Adaptive 500 ETF
US Large Core
US Large Core
66---
7SHDG
Soundwatch Hedged Equity ETF
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
66---
8SPYT
Defiance S&P 500 Income Target ETF
US Large Core
US Large Core
65---
9HEGD
Swan Hedged Equity US Large Cap ETF
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
Options - Buffer/Defined Outcome
65---
10CRDBX
Potomac Defensive Bull Fund
US Large Core
US Large Core
65---

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.