ONEV(ONEV)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe portfolio has a relatively balanced sector mix, with no single sector dominating the allocation. However, it does exhibit some notable tilts towards Industrials and Healthcare, which together account for over 23% of the fund's weight. These sectors are complemented by a smaller allocation to Consumer Cyclical stocks, suggesting a moderate growth bias. Geographically, we can infer that the portfolio has significant exposure to developed markets, as the top holdings are all large-cap US-based companies.
The sector mix diverges from the broader market, which is more heavily weighted towards Technology and Financial Services. This creates an interesting dynamic, where the fund's Industrials and Healthcare exposures could be beneficial in a macro environment characterized by economic growth and healthcare spending. Conversely, if interest rates rise or the global economy slows down, the portfolio's valuation posture (17.7x P/E and 5.86x P/B) may become less attractive. Concentration risk is relatively low, with no single stock accounting for more than 1.7% of the portfolio.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-06-12 10:03:57.064808+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 15/100The investment theme implied by the ticker ONEV suggests a singular, cohesive focus on energy or technology sectors, yet the actual portfolio composition reveals a stark divergence from such a narrow definition. The top holdings list includes significant positions in healthcare providers like CAH and MCK alongside financial services firms ACGL and TROW, which are entirely unrelated to an energy or tech-centric narrative. Furthermore, while the name might imply exposure to volatile growth sectors, the fund exhibits no over-reliance on mega-cap stocks; instead, it maintains a highly diversified structure with individual top holdings capped at approximately 1.6%, indicating that broad-market names are not being used merely as stabilizers but rather reflecting a genuine attempt at wide dispersion across unrelated industries.
Sector coherence analysis indicates that the fund functions more like an ultra-broad market index than a thematic vehicle, lacking clear differentiation from standard benchmarks. The sector breakdown shows substantial weightings in Industrials and Consumer Cyclical sectors alongside Healthcare and Utilities, creating a fragmented profile where no single industry dominates or aligns with a specific name-based thesis. With exposure spread across twelve distinct sectors including Real Estate, Basic Materials, and Energy at mere 1%, the portfolio fails to demonstrate the concentrated risk usually associated with thematic investing. The low top-ten concentration of 9.5% reinforces this observation, suggesting that returns are likely driven by general market movements rather than specific sectoral outperformance or a unified strategic theme.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-22 19:05:05.603666+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation of ONEV reveals a distinct divergence from the broader market, characterized by significant underweightings in Growth and Cyclical sectors relative to Defensive and Income-oriented industries. With Industrials comprising nearly 13% of assets followed closely by Healthcare at over 10%, the fund establishes a foundational bias toward established economic drivers rather than high-growth technology or speculative energy plays. This structure is further reinforced by substantial positions in Utilities, Financial Services, and Consumer Defensives, each holding between 7% and nearly 8%. The notably low exposure to Technology at just over 5% and Energy at merely 1% suggests the investment thesis prioritizes stability and predictable cash flows over capital appreciation driven by rapid innovation or commodity cycles.
Regarding concentration risk, the portfolio exhibits a deliberate dispersion strategy despite its heavy reliance on specific defensive sectors. Although Industrials and Healthcare dominate the weightings, the presence of these categories does not result in extreme single-name exposure; instead, the fund holds 53 industrial names and 27 healthcare entities respectively. This broad distribution within top sectors helps mitigate idiosyncratic risk associated with individual company performance. The low Top-10 concentration metric of 9.5% indicates that no small group of stocks dictates the majority of portfolio movements, implying a reliance on sector-level beta rather than alpha generation from a handful of large-cap winners.
The factor tilts inherent in this allocation point toward value and quality characteristics while actively avoiding volatility associated with growth factors. By minimizing Communication Services and Energy, the fund reduces sensitivity to consumer discretionary spending swings and macroeconomic inflation shocks tied to fossil fuels. Conversely, the heavy weighting in Utilities and Consumer Defensives introduces a natural hedge against economic downturns, as these sectors often maintain demand during periods of recessionary pressure. The inclusion of Financial Services adds leverage potential but also ties performance closely to interest rate environments. Ultimately, this configuration constructs a portfolio designed for capital preservation and steady income generation rather than aggressive total return chasing in volatile market conditions.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 10:12:11.185986+00
Flow Driver Analysis
2-Step CircleWhich larger ETFs share ONEV's holdings — and mechanically drive its price through index rebalancing flows?
Approximately 100% of ONEV's weight flows through these larger ETFs
| Driver ETF | AUM | Expense | Shared Stocks | Weight Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ONEOONEO | $25M | — | 427 | 98.9% |
| SPTMSPTM | $12B | — | 413 | 96.0% |
| VONVVONV | $18B | — | 233 | 74.8% |
| QUSQUS | $1B | — | 194 | 67.1% |
| SPLGSPLG | $97B | — | 210 | 67.0% |
99% of ONEV's portfolio by weight is also held by ONEO. When ONEO receives inflows, it mechanically buys these shared stocks — dragging ONEV's NAV along regardless of any thematic or sector catalyst. Combined, the top 5 overlapping ETFs control exposure to 100% ofONEV'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.
Weighted metrics calculated based on 87% of fund assets with available 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 76% 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 ONEV collectively pay out 92% of their Free Cash Flow to maintain the current yield. Warning: constituent companies are paying out nearly all cash flow. A wave of dividend cuts may be imminent if earnings decline. Based on 54% 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
ProprietaryONEV is up 13.5% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is -4.1%. The remaining +17.6% of performance is driven by multiple expansion (P/E inflation) — prices rose faster than earnings grew.
Earnings growth = weighted average YoY EPS growth of all constituents (capped at ±500% to limit outlier distortion). Based on 76% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Value Creation Map
ROIC vs WACCWhat percentage of ONEV's weight is allocated to companies that create economic value (ROIC > WACC) vs. destroy it?
Of ONEV's analyzed weight, 50% is invested in companies earning more than their cost of capital — genuine value creators. The remaining 50% consists of companies whose ROIC falls below their WACC, effectively destroying shareholder value with every dollar invested.
ROIC-WACC spread for 69% 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.
ONEV has a Passive Crowding Score of 47/100. On average, 14.2% of the market capitalization of ONEV'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 38 tracked ETFs. Actual passive ownership is higher (includes mutual funds, pension funds). Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 15 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | CAH | CARDINAL HEALTH INC Healthcare | 1.77% | 34.1x | 6/9 |
| 2 | HUM | HUMANA INC Healthcare | 1.30% | 40.5x | 3/9 |
| 3 | FLEX | FLEX LTD | 1.07% | 64.0x | 6/9 |
| 4 | JBL | JABIL INC | 0.94% | 37.1x | 4/9 |
| 5 | ACGL | ARCH CAPITAL GROUP LTD Financial Services | 0.88% | 7.1x | 5/9 |
| 6 | HPE | HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE | 0.86% | 43.7x | 4/9 |
| 7 | COR | CENCORA INC Healthcare | 0.84% | 21.6x | 5/9 |
| 8 | NTAP | NETAPP INC | 0.82% | 17.0x | 8/9 |
| 9 | MCK | MCKESSON CORP Healthcare | 0.80% | 20.4x | 5/9 |
| 10 | CI | THE CIGNA GROUP Healthcare | 0.78% | 11.9x | 6/9 |
| 11 | TROW | T ROWE PRICE GROUP INC Financial Services | 0.77% | 11.8x | 4/9 |
| 12 | OMC | OMNICOM GROUP Communication Services | 0.74% | — | 3/9 |
| 13 | REGN | REGENERON PHARMACEUTICALS Healthcare | 0.73% | 14.9x | 4/9 |
| 14 | CMI | CUMMINS INC Industrials | 0.71% | 34.2x | 5/9 |
| 15 | SNX | TD SYNNEX CORP | 0.70% | 15.7x | 7/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how ONEV’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-06-17
15 holdings · 13.7% tracked weight2026-06-16
15 holdings · 13.6% tracked weight2026-06-15
15 holdings · 13.6% tracked weight2026-06-14
15 holdings · 13.6% tracked weight2026-06-13
15 holdings · 13.6% tracked weight2026-06-12
15 holdings · 13.5% 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 ONEV Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
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 ONEV’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.
Positions Increased (1)
Positions Decreased (50)
Explore More
Quant metrics computed deterministically from financial statements and price data. Updated: 2026-06-17.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.