© 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)

Build a portfolio from scratch — the page previews it live

Benchmark

Pick one fund or composite — returns and exposures render in excess of it

Peer Universe

Reference set for percentile ranks and factor bars

No percentile overlays — plain values and bars

ANALYTICS
AnalysisScreenerGroups

Global SMID Core

Composite

Peer Group

Expense Ratio
1.03%
#NameTickerAUM
1SMALLCAP World FundSMCWX$91.4B
2Invesco Global Opportunities FundOPGIX$2.1B
3Goldman Sachs Multi-Manager Real Assets Strategy FundGRASX$1.5B
4Templeton Global Smaller Companies FundTEMGX$786M
5GMO Climate Change FundGCCHX$532M
6Hartford Global Impact FundHGXAX$343M
7VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETFGPZ$221M
8Calvert Global Energy Solutions FundCAEIX$173M
9Invesco Global Small Cap Equity FundESMAX$159M
10Inspire Global Hope ETFBLES$158M
Time Series
–

Performance

NameCumulative ReturnAnn. ReturnAnn. VolSharpeMax DD
Peer Group
3.0%3.0%14.7%-0.05-10.3%
ⓘ Methodology

Peer composites equal-weight the group's share-class representatives' daily returns, including delisted members' alive-era history via the frozen year-end snapshots — though our coverage of closed funds is partial, so composite levels at older dates may run slightly high. Membership is the latest known — style migrators carry their full history. 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
Peer Group
3.4%-1.1%0.3%-4.8%-3.6%4.8%3.0%6.8%11.7%1.0%7.8%
ⓘ Methodology

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

Annual Returns

Name
198119821983198419851986198719881989199019911992199319941995199619971998199920002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022202320242025YTD
Peer Group
-9.3%*30.6%25.1%-5.3%20.5%12.5%-17.3%14.9%12.6%-16.3%25.2%-7.0%32.0%-7.2%7.0%18.2%11.7%5.2%52.0%-8.4%-14.6%-12.9%54.5%28.9%18.5%24.3%13.9%-51.7%48.6%16.0%-16.2%20.1%34.5%-2.6%1.0%6.8%30.1%-14.7%27.6%21.5%13.9%-26.4%13.8%2.2%15.5%3.4%
ⓘ 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
Global Dev
Peer Group
-11.9%**1.18**0.01-0.02-0.36**0.17**-0.13**-0.060.91226
ⓘ 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.

Factor History

Global SMID Core Composite

No metrics selected — use Add metric to chart factors over time.

SnapshotAs ofvsⓘ

Fund Profile

Type
61% Mutual Fund, 39% ETF
Asset Class
Equity
Region
Equity Size & Style
Peer Group Benchmark
Peer Group
Global SMID Core (36 peers)
1Y Peer Percentile
48
3Y Peer Percentile
48
Expense Ratio
1.03%
5Y Tax Drag
0.86%/yr
Median Member AUM
$58M
3Y Flow
+4.4%
Yield
0.77%
Inception
5/29/1981
Holdings (Reported)
2,728
Turnover
41%
Equity
98%
Derivatives
0%
Net Equity Exposure
99%
ⓘ Methodology

Every figure on this card is an equal-weight aggregate over the composite's share-class-deduped members: the median across the members reporting each field, blank where too few of them do. Three rows depart from that, because a median of them would say nothing: Inception is the group's OLDEST member — where its combined history can start; 3Y Flow is the group's own net flow over its own assets, not the middle member's rate; and Type, Asset Class and Region are compositions by member count. Holdings is the merged look-through book — distinct positions across the members' holdings.

Equity Size & Style Map

LargeMidSmall
1%
6%
10%
4%
13%
14%
11%
26%
16%
Large
ValueCoreGrowth
Size
Large
17%
Mid
30%
Small
52%
Style
Value
17%
Core
45%
Growth
39%
ⓘ 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). 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. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Composite Factors

Intangible Value24.9
Traditional Value52.8
Small-Cap75.0
Quality30.3
Momentum22.8
ⓘ 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's universe-normalized score; percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Factor Details

Valuation
Book-to-Price (NTM)36.3
Sales-to-Price (NTM)48.8
Earnings-to-Price (NTM)4.8
Innovation/IP
R&D / Mkt Cap2.1
Patents / Mkt Cap0.81
Brand
Sales & Marketing / Mkt Cap2.7
Trademarks / Mkt Cap0.16
Human Capital
PhD Employees / Mkt Cap5.4
Top University Alumni / Mkt Cap10.9
Politics
Lobbying Spend / Mkt Cap10.7
AI
AI Employees / Mkt Cap0.65
ⓘ 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); percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Asset Class Exposure

Equity96.0%
Cash & Short-Term3.3%
Other0.7%
Short positions of 0.3% of net assets are not shown.ⓘ Methodology

Shares of the fund's long book, from the asset category each position is filed under. Cash & Short-Term includes 0.6% of net assets the filing does not itemise. The short book is stated under the card and never netted into a slice: a pie cannot draw a negative, and folding a hedge into the class it offsets would make it look like more of that class.

Country Exposure

Level
United States53.9%
United States52.8%
Other1.1%
Developed Ex-US37.7%
Japan6.8%
United Kingdom6.6%
Canada3.4%
France2.8%
Germany2.4%
Sweden2.3%
Switzerland1.8%
Australia1.6%
Italy1.3%
Netherlands1.3%
Other7.3%
Emerging Markets8.4%
China2.6%
South Korea1.2%
Taiwan1.0%
Other3.6%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the holdings that carry a country, not portfolio weights. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Sector Exposure

Level
Industrials22.2%
Technology16.3%
Financials14.6%
Consumer Discretionary11.4%
Healthcare7.5%
Real Estate6.7%
Communication5.4%
Materials4.9%
Utilities4.7%
Energy3.3%
Consumer Staples3.0%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified holdings — every position we can identify, with cash and unidentified positions excluded — not portfolio weights. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Thematic Exposure

AI Composition

Infrastructure15.9%
Early Adopter16.5%
Laggard67.6%

Magnificent 7

Magnificent 71.2%
Non-Magnificent 798.8%

Old vs New Economy

Old Economy69.9%
New Economy30.1%

Globalization

Multinational35.6%
Exporter10.2%
Importer16.8%
Domestic37.4%

China Exposure

China/HK Domiciled3.6%
Revenue & Operations6.3%
Operations Only9.4%
Revenue Only3.0%
No Material Exposure77.7%

Company Size

Mega (>$500B)2.2%
Large ($70–500B)11.3%
Mid ($10–70B)39.8%
Small ($1–10B)44.3%
Micro (<$1B)2.4%
ⓘ Methodology

Shares are percentages of the fund's classified equity book, renormalized so each split sums to 100% (the equity book is 98% 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. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Holdings

See more rows — create a free account▾

10 of 36 funds (top 10 shown, create for all 36)

#NameTickerWeight %AUM
1SMALLCAP World FundSMCWX
2.78
$91.4B
2Invesco Global Opportunities FundOPGIX
2.78
$2.1B
3Goldman Sachs Multi-Manager Real Assets Strategy FundGRASX
2.78
$1.5B
4Templeton Global Smaller Companies FundTEMGX
2.78
$786M
5GMO Climate Change FundGCCHX
2.78
$532M
6Hartford Global Impact FundHGXAX
2.78
$343M
7VanEck Alternative Asset Manager ETFGPZ
2.78
$221M
8Calvert Global Energy Solutions FundCAEIX
2.78
$173M
9Invesco Global Small Cap Equity FundESMAX
2.78
$159M
10Inspire Global Hope ETFBLES
2.78
$158M
ⓘ Methodology

The funds this composite is made of, each counting once (100 ÷ 10 — the same equal weighting behind its returns and its median exposures), listed largest first by assets. Tick Look-Through to expand them into the stocks they hold. Holdings Concentration beside this card always describes that looked-through book, not this list — it is a statement about exposure, not about the roster. Stock-level data as of 8/31/2026.

Concentration

Total Holdings2,728
Effective Holdings831
Top 10 Weight4.5%
Max Position0.6%
Top Sector (of Net Assets)22%
Top Country (of Net Assets)53%
ⓘ 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; percentile overlays are off (Peer Universe: None). Every row on this card describes the composite's merged look-through book — the stocks its members hold — not the list of member funds, whatever the Holdings card is showing.

Peer Group Rank

See All Peer Groups
Metric
Global SMID Core Composite
36 funds
Peer Asset Class
5,640 funds
YTD Return
3.72%11.63%17
1Y Return
3.41%14.46%14
3Y Return (Ann.)
11.46%18.47%14
5Y Return (Ann.)
1.14%8.64%11
Expense Ratiohigher = cheaper
1.03%0.74%24
ⓘ Methodology

Global SMID Core Composite is a Sparkline peer composite — its members are the share-class representatives of the funds in the group (one class per fund: the exchange-listed class where the SEC series has one, else its longest-history class). This card ranks it against its asset class, Equity, which is the only pool a composite has: there is no peer group of peer groups, and the region tier is a fund-level grouping. Typical Member rows are medians across those representatives — the value is the group’s median, and the percentile is the median of the members’ own ranks within Equity, so both describe the middle fund rather than the group as a whole. Quartile chips fill the layer the rank falls in (top layer = best quartile). A dash is a window the group is younger than, or one too few Equity funds have a history for to rank against — hover it for which.