IWB(IWB)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe portfolio's sector allocation is heavily skewed towards Technology, with nearly one-quarter of its assets invested in this space. Communication Services and Consumer Cyclical sectors also receive notable allocations. At a market-cap level, the fund appears to be concentrated in large-cap stocks, given the dominance of industry leaders like NVDA, AAPL, MSFT, and AMZN.
The portfolio's valuation posture is expensive, with a weighted P/E ratio exceeding 32x and a weighted P/B ratio of over 20.4x. This suggests that investors are willing to pay a premium for the fund's holdings, which may be vulnerable to mean reversion if earnings growth slows or interest rates rise. The concentration risk is elevated due to the significant presence of NVDA, with a single-stock holding accounting for nearly 7% of the portfolio.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-06-12 07:49:43.508368+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 15/100The thematic alignment of this fund with the name "IWB," which typically implies a broad-based U.S. market exposure rather than a specific niche strategy, is evident in its composition, yet the provided data highlights an extreme concentration within mega-cap technology and communication services firms. While the top ten holdings are heavily weighted toward dominant players like NVIDIA, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta, representing over 35% of the portfolio alone, this structure suggests a fund that mirrors large-cap growth leaders rather than maintaining a diversified representation across the entire U.S. equity landscape. The presence of Berkshire Hathaway as a top holding further anchors the portfolio in established giants, reinforcing a profile driven by market cap weighting and industry dominance rather than a distinct thematic filter or sector rotation strategy.
Sector coherence is defined almost entirely by technology and communication services, which together account for nearly 30% of total assets, while other sectors remain negligible. This heavy reliance on a narrow slice of the economy creates significant concentration risk, as performance will be inextricably linked to the fortunes of a handful of highly volatile stocks rather than a balanced view of industrial, healthcare, or financial services industries. Consequently, the fund appears functionally differentiated from a true broad-market index only by its specific weighting choices within those dominant sectors, lacking the sectoral diversity expected from an instrument designed to capture the full breadth of U.S. market movements. The data indicates a portfolio optimized for exposure to leading innovators and established conglomerates rather than a comprehensive thematic or geographic spread.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 11:18:20.865855+00
⚠️ Systemic Risk Synthesis
AI GeneratedThe newly disclosed risk factors across the top holdings of this fund highlight a convergence of regulatory and operational challenges centered on artificial intelligence, data privacy, and climate compliance. A primary systemic threat emerging from these disclosures is the potential for increased capital expenditure and operational friction as major technology firms navigate evolving frameworks regarding responsible AI use and strict environmental regulations. Specifically, significant exposure to compliance with climate change rules suggests that macro-level policy shifts could materially impact financial conditions across multiple top-tier constituents simultaneously. Furthermore, the recurring emphasis on cybersecurity and data privacy requirements indicates a sector-wide trend where maintaining adherence to these standards may drive up costs and constrain business operations for industry leaders alike.
The concentration of these risks within the fund's largest positions presents a notable pattern of correlated downside potential. With the single highest-weighted holding explicitly flagging environmental, cybersecurity, and AI regulatory hurdles as material threats, there is a distinct clustering of macro vulnerabilities among the portfolio's most influential assets. This overlap suggests that adverse developments in one area—such as new legislation restricting data usage or tightening emissions standards—could trigger synchronized negative reactions across several key holdings rather than isolated events affecting individual companies alone. The presence of similar risk categories in multiple top-tier names implies that external regulatory headwinds are becoming a dominant factor influencing the collective performance profile of this specific investment vehicle.
While systemic risks dominate the current disclosures, company-specific factors remain relevant given the disparate nature of some filings relative to others. For instance, while most major holdings focus heavily on AI and data governance, other top positions may carry unique operational or market risks not detailed in these specific excerpts that could disproportionately affect the fund depending on their individual weightings. The aggregation of high-weighted exposure to regulatory compliance costs means that any single policy change impacting multiple large-cap tech firms simultaneously could exert outsized pressure on the portfolio's overall valuation, reinforcing the need for close monitoring of legislative developments affecting both AI deployment and environmental standards.
Synthesized from constituent 10-K risk factor disclosures. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 00:59:38.451188+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation of IWB reveals a distinct overexposure to the technology and communication services sectors, which collectively account for nearly 29% of the portfolio despite representing only a fraction of the broader market. This heavy weighting is driven almost entirely by the fund's top five holdings, all of which are mega-cap growth leaders within these specific industries. The concentration risk becomes particularly pronounced when observing that the single largest holding, NVIDIA, comprises over seven percent of the entire asset base alone. Such a structure indicates an investment thesis heavily reliant on the continued outperformance of dominant digital infrastructure and software companies rather than a diversified exposure to traditional economic drivers like industrials or financials.
The top-10 concentration metric of 35.5% further underscores that performance will be disproportionately influenced by the volatility of these few large-cap equities. With three of the five largest positions situated within technology, the fund exhibits a clear tilt toward growth factors and high market capitalization stocks rather than value or small-cap exposure. This allocation suggests the underlying strategy seeks to capture premium returns associated with innovation leaders while accepting elevated idiosyncratic risk if these specific names underperform their peers or face sector-specific headwinds. The minimal representation in consumer cyclicals, standing at just 5.5%, reinforces that this is not a broad-based market proxy but rather a specialized vehicle focused on the upper echelon of the tech ecosystem.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 04:52:38.38509+00
Flow Driver Analysis
2-Step CircleWhich larger ETFs share IWB's holdings — and mechanically drive its price through index rebalancing flows?
Approximately 100% of IWB's weight flows through these larger ETFs
| Driver ETF | AUM | Expense | Shared Stocks | Weight Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPLGSPLG | $97B | — | 10 | 36.3% |
| ESGVESGV | $11B | — | 10 | 36.3% |
| ACWIiShares MSCI ACWI ETF | $28B | — | 10 | 36.3% |
| QQQInvesco QQQ Trust | $412B | 0.20% | 10 | 36.3% |
| VONEVONE | $10B | — | 10 | 36.3% |
36% of IWB's portfolio by weight is also held by SPLG, which commands 2× more assets under management. When SPLG receives inflows, it mechanically buys these shared stocks — dragging IWB's NAV along regardless of any thematic or sector catalyst. Combined, the top 5 overlapping ETFs control exposure to 100% ofIWB's weight.
Overlap computed from constituent-level holdings data across 5 ETFs. Price co-movement with driver ETFs is structural, not coincidental. Not investment advice.
ETF Look-Through Dashboard
Peer through the ETF wrapper to see exactly what you own. Every metric is computed from constituent-level data.
Herfindahl-Hirschman Concentration Index
Morningstar-Style Box
Sector & Cap Explorer
ETF Fundamental Radar
Operational health is mixed, with the bulk of weight in the mid-range (4–6) Piotroski scores.
Piotroski F-Score (Operational Health)
Score 0-9: Measures Profitability, Leverage, and Efficiency
Based on 36% of fund weight with Piotroski data.
Computed by rolling up individual stock Piotroski F-Scores, Altman Z-Scores, and Beneish M-Scores weighted by each constituent's allocation.
Dividend Safety True-Up
DeterministicThe dividend-paying companies inside IWB collectively pay out 18% of their Free Cash Flow to maintain the current yield. This leaves a substantial cash buffer, making dividend cuts unlikely even in a downturn. Based on 31% of fund weight in dividend-paying stocks.
FCF Payout Ratio = Dividends Paid / Free Cash Flow, weighted by constituent allocation. Not investment advice.
Earnings vs. Price Decomposition
ProprietaryIWB is up 26.0% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +50.3%. Despite earnings growth, valuations have contracted by 24.3% — the market is paying less per dollar of earnings than a year ago.
Earnings growth = weighted average YoY EPS growth of all constituents (capped at ±500% to limit outlier distortion). Based on 35% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Value Creation Map
ROIC vs WACCWhat percentage of IWB's weight is allocated to companies that create economic value (ROIC > WACC) vs. destroy it?
Of IWB's analyzed weight, 80% is invested in companies earning more than their cost of capital — genuine value creators. The remaining 20% consists of companies whose ROIC falls below their WACC, effectively destroying shareholder value with every dollar invested.
ROIC-WACC spread for 36% of fund weight with available data. Not investment advice.
Passive Crowding Score
MODERATEHow much of each constituent's market cap is structurally locked in passive ETFs — a proxy for liquidity fragility during sell-offs.
IWB has a Passive Crowding Score of 36/100. On average, 10.7% of the market capitalization of IWB's underlying holdings is structurally locked in passive ETF vehicles. This indicates moderate passive ownership density. Index rebalances and ETF creation/redemption activity can amplify short-term volatility in the underlying holdings.
Passive $ = Σ(ETF AUM × holding weight) across all 51 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds). Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 10 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | NVDA | NVIDIA Corp Technology | 7.14% | 31.4x | 4/9 |
| 2 | AAPL | Apple Inc Technology | 6.50% | 35.2x | 8/9 |
| 3 | MSFT | Microsoft Corp Technology | 4.83% | 23.3x | 5/9 |
| 4 | AMZN | Amazon.com Inc Consumer Cyclical | 3.75% | 31.6x | 6/9 |
| 5 | GOOGL | Alphabet Inc Class A Communication Services | 3.20% | 27.5x | 6/9 |
| 6 | AVGO | Broadcom Inc Technology | 2.98% | 63.7x | 8/9 |
| 7 | GOOG | Alphabet Inc Class C Communication Services | 2.58% | 27.3x | 6/9 |
| 8 | META | Meta Platforms Inc Class A Communication Services | 2.00% | 20.6x | 5/9 |
| 9 | TSLA | Tesla Inc Consumer Cyclical | 1.78% | 369.5x | 5/9 |
| 10 | MU | Micron Technology Inc Technology | 1.57% | 46.3x | 7/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how IWB’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-06-16
10 holdings · 36.3% tracked weight2026-06-15
10 holdings · 36.3% tracked weight2026-06-14
10 holdings · 36.3% tracked weight2026-06-13
10 holdings · 36.3% tracked weight2026-06-12
10 holdings · 36.3% tracked weightSource: SEC filings and fund provider disclosures. Shows last 6 snapshot dates, top 15 holdings per date by weight.
Risk Profile
Sharpe = risk-adjusted return (higher is better). Computed from 1,200+ trading days with 5% risk-free rate.
Price Chart with Moving Averages
What Drove IWB Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current trading price of IWB at $406.63 establishes a specific context within its historical moving average envelope, serving as the primary reference point for assessing potential mean-reversion dynamics. When viewed relative to this band, the positioning suggests whether the asset is currently extended from its recent statistical norm or consolidating near a central tendency. If the price sits significantly outside the bounds defined by the standard deviation bands of the Simple Moving Average, it implies an increased probability that market forces could drive the value back toward the mean over time. Conversely, if the level aligns closely with the centerline of the envelope, the setup indicates stability rather than a strong directional bias waiting to resolve. This spatial relationship between the spot price and the calculated averages does not dictate future direction but highlights areas where statistical probabilities might favor a correction or continuation depending on how far current valuations deviate from long-term trends. Observers should note that such relative positioning alone cannot predict specific outcomes, as it merely quantifies the distance of the asset from its historical average without accounting for external catalysts or volume shifts that often disrupt pure mean-reversion models.
Underwater (Drawdown from Peak)
How far below the all-time high the price has been over time. Deeper = more pain for holders.
Rolling 60-Day Beta vs S&P 500 (VOO)
How the ETF's sensitivity to market moves changes over time. β > 1 = more volatile than the market.
Yield & Income
Sector Drift Over Time
How IWB’s sector allocation has shifted across snapshots. Use the slider to travel through time.
Active Conviction Tracker
Shares bought and sold between the latest two data snapshots — reveals what the fund manager is actually doing.
Explore More
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-16.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.