© 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)

TINT

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

Equity Funds · 5,640 total

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

TINT

ProShares Smart Materials ETF

Expense Ratio
0.58%
AUM
$2M
Inception
10/28/2021
1Y Return
+16.8%61st %ilevs 5,640 asset-class peers
·

The fund invests in financial instruments that ProShare Advisors believes, in combination, should track the performance of the index. The index is designed to measure the performance of companies that have business operations in the field of smart materials. Under normal circumstances, it will invest at least 80% of its total assets in components of the index or in instruments with similar economic characteristics. The fund is non-diversified.

Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
TINT
ProShares Smart Materials ETF
16.8%16.8%24.7%0.53-17.5%
ⓘ 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
TINT
ProShares Smart Materials ETF
15.1%-2.4%-0.5%-4.6%-1.8%7.0%16.8%8.0%9.4%0.3%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
20212022202320242025YTD
TINT
ProShares Smart Materials ETF
4.6%*-30.0%20.0%-13.4%16.1%15.1%
ⓘ 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
TINTGlobal Dev
ProShares Smart Materials ETF
-6.5%1.87**0.140.080.59**0.63**0.28**-0.120.68226
ⓘ 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
ETF
Asset Class
Equity
Region
Equity Size & Style
Peer Group Benchmark
Prospectus Benchmark
Solactive Smart Materials Index
Peer Group
Global SMID Value (38 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
54
3Y Peer Percentile
20
Expense Ratio
0.58%
AUM
$2M
3Y Flow
-1.7%
Yield
1.22%
Inception
10/28/2021
Holdings (Reported)
38
Turnover
61%
Equity
96%
Derivatives
0%
Net Equity Exposure
99%
Strategy Summary

The fund invests in financial instruments that ProShare Advisors believes, in combination, should track the performance of the index. The index is designed to measure the performance of companies that have business operations in the field of smart materials. Under normal circumstances, it will invest at least 80% of its total assets in components of the index or in instruments with similar economic characteristics. The fund is non-diversified.

ⓘ Methodology

Expense ratio and its components from the SEC annual shareholder report (8/6/2026). Turnover from the SEC annual report (8/6/2026). Yield as of 10/6/2026, AUM 9/30/2026. Holdings, asset class, style, peer group and exposures as of 5/31/2026. Summary may be from an older prospectus.

Equity Size & Style Map

LargeMidSmall
-
5%
5%
12%
5%
-
36%
15%
21%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
11%
Mid
17%
Small
73%
Style
Value
48%
Core
26%
Growth
26%
ⓘ 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 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite FactorsRef: Equity Funds

Intangible Value60.0
Traditional Value80.8
Small-Cap82.5
Quality11.7
Momentum27.3
ⓘ 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 Equity 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: Equity Funds

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)55.2
Sales-to-Price (NTM)69.0
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)5.5
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap3.8
Patents / Mkt Cap24.3
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap5.6
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.46
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap18.3
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap13.9
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap76.0
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.69
ⓘ 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 (Equity 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.

Country Exposure

Level
41.9%
9.6%
9.4%
6.9%
5.7%
5.5%
4.7%
38.5%
38.5%
19.6%
19.6%
ⓘ 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
68.0%
20.5%
6.9%
4.5%
ⓘ 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

AI Composition

Infrastructure21.0%
Early Adopter0.0%
Laggard79.0%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 75.2%
Non-Magnificent 794.8%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy79.5%
New Economy20.5%

Globalization

Multinational62.5%
Exporter12.4%
Importer5.1%
Domestic19.9%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled0.0%
Revenue & Operations14.9%
Operations Only29.1%
Revenue Only11.7%
No Material Exposure44.3%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)5.2%
Large ($70–500B)0.0%
Mid ($10–70B)22.2%
Small ($1–10B)64.5%
Micro (<$1B)8.1%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 96% 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▾

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

#NameTickerWeight %SectorIndustryCountry
1Zeon4205
5.47
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingJPN
2Akzo NobelAKZA
5.46
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingNLD
3LG DisplayA034220
5.39
TechnologyTechnology HardwareKOR
4SyensqoSYENS
5.26
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingBEL
5CabotCBT
4.97
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingUSA
6SikaSIKA
4.66
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingCHE
7PPG IndustriesPPG
4.49
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingUSA
8NvidiaNVDA
4.42
TechnologySemiconductorsUSA
9RPM InternationalRPM
4.41
MaterialsChemicals & PackagingUSA
10HexcelHXL
4.38
IndustrialsAerospace & DefenseUSA
ⓘ Methodology

Holdings as of 5/31/2026. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

ConcentrationRef: Equity Funds

Total Holdings38
Effective Holdings25.8
Top 10 Weight48.9%
Max Position5.5%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)58%
Top Country (of Net Assets)42%
ⓘ 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 (Equity Funds) 25th–75th percentile, notched at the median. Holdings as of 5/31/2026.

Benchmark DifferentiationRef: Equity Funds

vs ACWIBroad Benchmark
Active Share95.6%
Tracking Error14.0%
Benchmark Correlation0.80
ⓘ 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
TINT
ProShares Smart Materials ETF
Peer Group
38 funds
Peer Region
435 funds
Peer Asset Class
5,640 funds
YTD Return
15.13%11.01%709.70%8211.63%70
1Y Return
16.83%14.26%5411.64%7414.44%61
3Y Return (Ann.)
9.41%14.18%2016.69%1618.50%9
5Y Return (Ann.)
----
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
0.58%0.79%690.90%780.74%64
ⓘ Methodology

Sparkline's own holdings-based peer taxonomy (68 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 Similarity15
Top Overlap
Top Active Tilt
Top Factor Match
Top Return Corr
Top FF Match
FundPeer Group
1PSCM
Invesco S&P SmallCap Materials ETF
Sector - Materials
Sector - Materials
15-----
2FSCHX
Select Chemicals Portfolio
Sector - Materials
Sector - Materials
10-----
3TVOAX
Touchstone Funds Group Trust-Touchstone Small Cap Value Fund
US Small Value
US Small Value
10-----
4PGINX
Impax Global Environmental Markets Fund
Global Large Growth
Global Large Growth
7-----
5CAEIX
Calvert Global Energy Solutions Fund
Global SMID Core
Global SMID Core
6-----
6ETEC
iShares Breakthrough Environmental Solutions ETF
Global SMID Core
Global SMID Core
5-----
7TINY
ProShares Nanotechnology ETF
Sector - Technology
Sector - Technology
5-----
8VERS
ProShares Metaverse ETF
Sector - Technology
Sector - Technology
5-----
9DXSLX
Direxion Monthly S&P 500 Bull 1.75X Fund
Leveraged - Equity
Leveraged - Equity
5-----
10PYZ
Invesco Dorsey Wright Basic Materials Momentum ETF
Sector - Materials
Sector - Materials
5-----

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.