DFAC(DFAC)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedDFAC presents a distinctively concentrated equity profile dominated by the technology sector, which accounts for 15.2% of total assets under management. This heavy weighting is primarily driven by significant exposure to mega-cap giants such as NVIDIA, Apple, and Microsoft, whose combined positions represent over 14% of the fund's portfolio. The concentration extends into communication services through substantial stakes in Alphabet and Meta, further cementing a strategic tilt toward large-cap growth names within these two industries. While consumer cyclical, financial services, and energy sectors are represented by Exxon Mobil, JPMorgan Chase, and Amazon, their aggregate influence remains marginal at approximately 7% of the fund's composition, indicating that performance will be almost entirely dictated by the trajectory of its top-tier technology holdings rather than broad market diversification.
From a quantitative perspective, the sheer scale of $40.4 billion in assets under management suggests high liquidity and deep institutional participation, yet this size amplifies the impact of any single stock's volatility on the overall index return. The reliance on a narrow set of leaders implies that while potential upside is tied closely to innovation cycles within computing and digital advertising, downside risk may be similarly magnified if these specific equities face regulatory headwinds or valuation corrections. Unlike broad-based market proxies designed for stability through wide dispersion, this structure offers amplified exposure to the momentum of its largest constituents. The data reflects a vehicle engineered specifically for investors seeking aggressive growth aligned with the performance of global tech leaders rather than balanced sectoral representation or defensive positioning across diverse economic cycles.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 03:14:29.720201+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 45/100The thematic alignment between the DFAC ETF's name and its actual composition appears significantly weak, as the portfolio is dominated by mega-cap technology giants rather than specific alternative assets often associated with such labels. While the fund holds notable positions in Technology and Communication Services sectors, these holdings represent a narrow slice of the broader market rather than a focused exposure to a distinct theme like artificial intelligence or clean energy. The inclusion of major financial institutions and an energy company further dilutes any potential thematic focus, suggesting that the underlying strategy may rely on large-cap stability through broad-market names instead of maintaining strict adherence to a defined investment thesis.
Concentration risk remains elevated despite a relatively low top-ten weight, as the sector weights lack coherence with typical alternative asset profiles implied by similar fund titles. The Technology and Communication Services sectors combined account for over twenty percent of the portfolio, yet these allocations do not provide sufficient differentiation from a standard broad market index given the dominance of individual mega-cap stocks within those categories. Consequently, the fund's performance will likely mirror general large-cap equity trends rather than offering unique exposure to its purported theme, leaving investors with a profile that blends sector concentration with systemic market risk without clear thematic insulation.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 14:22:28.83724+00
⚠️ Systemic Risk Synthesis
AI GeneratedThe newly disclosed risk factors across the top holdings of DFAC highlight a convergence of systemic pressures centered on regulatory expansion in three critical areas: environmental compliance, data privacy and cybersecurity, and artificial intelligence governance. Multiple large-cap technology names within the portfolio explicitly flag that adherence to evolving climate regulations could materially adversely impact their financial conditions, while simultaneously noting that stricter data privacy mandates may drive up operational costs. Furthermore, the emergence of specific risks regarding AI regulation suggests a growing consensus among these industry leaders that future compliance frameworks will impose new burdens on competitive positioning and cost structures. These disclosures indicate that macro-level policy shifts are no longer abstract concerns but are being identified as direct threats to profitability by the fund's largest constituents.
The concentration of these shared risk categories within the portfolio creates a significant potential for correlated downside, particularly given the substantial weighting assigned to the technology sector. With NVIDIA alone representing 5.6% of the holdings and carrying three distinct regulatory risks, alongside major exposures in Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Meta, the fund faces an aggregated vulnerability where adverse policy changes could simultaneously impact a large portion of its asset base. The fact that such critical operational threats are being uniformly flagged across these dominant names suggests that the macro-environment is becoming increasingly hostile to the traditional growth models of this sector. This clustering of risk factors implies that any tightening in environmental, digital privacy, or AI legislation could trigger synchronized performance declines rather than isolated events affecting single entities.
While the systemic risks dominate the current disclosure landscape, NVIDIA's specific exposure warrants attention due to its status as a top holding with nearly 6% weightage. The company uniquely identifies three separate regulatory fronts—climate change, data privacy, and AI usage—as potential material adverse factors, indicating that it may face compounded compliance costs compared to peers who might only flag one or two of these areas. This breadth of specific regulatory vulnerability in the fund's largest position could disproportionately influence overall portfolio returns if any single regulation becomes more stringent than anticipated during the reporting period.
Synthesized from constituent 10-K risk factor disclosures. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 09:42:58.412394+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation of DFAC reveals a highly concentrated equity strategy that diverges significantly from broad market benchmarks, with technology and communication services collectively accounting for the vast majority of exposure. Despite holding positions in consumer cyclicals, financials, and energy, these sectors represent negligible portions of the portfolio, suggesting an investment thesis heavily weighted toward large-cap growth names within the tech ecosystem rather than a balanced diversification across economic drivers. This structural imbalance indicates that the fund's performance will be disproportionately sensitive to valuation shifts and regulatory developments specific to the technology sector, as well as its top-tier holdings which dominate the asset mix.
The concentration risk is further amplified by the composition of the top five holdings, where four are major technology giants and one is a communication services leader, all concentrated within the upper echelon of market capitalization. With the top ten positions comprising over 25% of total assets, the portfolio exhibits significant idiosyncratic risk tied to the operational fortunes of these specific companies rather than sector-wide trends alone. This clustering creates a de facto tilt toward large-cap factors and momentum characteristics often associated with established industry leaders, while simultaneously limiting exposure to mid-cap or small-cap value opportunities that might offer different return profiles during market rotations away from mega-caps.
Ultimately, the fund's structure reflects an aggressive focus on dominant players in the digital economy rather than a systematic approach to capturing sector beta across diverse industries. The minimal representation of non-technology sectors suggests that the underlying strategy prioritizes alpha generation through specific stock selection within tech over broad diversification benefits. Investors examining this allocation must recognize that returns will likely mirror the volatility and growth trajectory of these concentrated holdings, with limited natural hedging provided by other asset classes or smaller-cap counterparts typically found in more broadly diversified equity vehicles.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-21 12:41:24.031461+00
Flow Driver Analysis
2-Step CircleWhich larger ETFs share DFAC's holdings — and mechanically drive its price through index rebalancing flows?
Approximately 100% of DFAC's weight flows through these larger ETFs
| Driver ETF | AUM | Expense | Shared Stocks | Weight Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ACWIiShares MSCI ACWI ETF | $28B | — | 10 | 25.8% |
| QUSQUS | $1B | — | 10 | 25.8% |
| SCHBSchwab U.S. Broad Market ETF | $37B | — | 10 | 25.8% |
| RSPRSP | $83B | — | 10 | 25.8% |
| SCHXSCHX | $61B | — | 10 | 25.8% |
26% of DFAC's portfolio by weight is also held by ACWI. When ACWI receives inflows, it mechanically buys these shared stocks — dragging DFAC's NAV along regardless of any thematic or sector catalyst. Combined, the top 5 overlapping ETFs control exposure to 100% ofDFAC'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
Replaces $249/yr MorningstarPeer 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 26% 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. Data that Vanguard and BlackRock don't surface.
Dividend Safety True-Up
DeterministicThe dividend-paying companies inside DFAC 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 22% 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
ProprietaryDFAC is up 29.8% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +38.4%. Despite earnings growth, valuations have contracted by 8.6% — 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 26% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Value Creation Map
ROIC vs WACCWhat percentage of DFAC's weight is allocated to companies that create economic value (ROIC > WACC) vs. destroy it?
Of DFAC's analyzed weight, 100% is invested in companies earning more than their cost of capital — genuine value creators. The remaining 0% consists of companies whose ROIC falls below their WACC, effectively destroying shareholder value with every dollar invested.
ROIC-WACC spread for 25% 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.
DFAC has a Passive Crowding Score of 34/100. On average, 10.3% of the market capitalization of DFAC'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 52 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 | 5.61% | 32.4x | 4/9 |
| 2 | AAPL | Apple Inc Technology | 4.69% | 37.7x | 8/9 |
| 3 | MSFT | Microsoft Corp Technology | 3.92% | 26.8x | 5/9 |
| 4 | AMZN | Amazon.com Inc Consumer Cyclical | 3.06% | 31.7x | 6/9 |
| 5 | GOOGL | Alphabet Inc Class A Communication Services | 2.14% | 29.0x | 6/9 |
| 6 | META | Meta Platforms Inc Class A Communication Services | 1.88% | 23.0x | 5/9 |
| 7 | GOOG | Alphabet Inc Class C Communication Services | 1.70% | 28.7x | 6/9 |
| 8 | JPM | JPMorgan Chase & Co Financial Services | 1.00% | 14.3x | 3/9 |
| 9 | AVGO | Broadcom Inc Technology | 0.95% | 86.9x | 8/9 |
| 10 | XOM | Exxon Mobil Corp Energy | 0.88% | 24.5x | 5/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how DFAC’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-05-24
10 holdings · 25.8% tracked weight2026-05-23
10 holdings · 25.8% tracked weight2026-05-22
10 holdings · 25.8% tracked weight2026-05-21
10 holdings · 25.8% tracked weight2026-05-20
10 holdings · 25.8% 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 DFAC Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current price of $42.98 for DFAC sits within a technical context where institutional positioning can be inferred through the interplay of moving averages and volume dynamics, though specific crossover data is absent from the provided snapshot. Without explicit signals regarding Short-Term vs. Long-term Moving Average crossovers or distinct volume surges, it remains ambiguous whether larger market participants are aggressively accumulating shares at these levels or maintaining a neutral stance. The absence of defined trend confirmation metrics suggests that institutional capital may be in a period of consolidation rather than decisive directional movement. Price action hovering near $42.98 without accompanying volume data limits the ability to discern if this level acts as robust support for potential upward momentum or resistance capping further gains. In such an environment, sophisticated traders often wait for additional confirmation before committing significant capital, leading to a scenario where larger players might be testing liquidity rather than establishing firm positions. The current technical setup does not offer clear evidence of a coordinated institutional push in either direction, implying that market leadership could still be fragmented among various participant types waiting for more definitive catalysts. Ultimately, the lack of specific trend indicators means that any interpretation regarding institutional intent remains speculative based solely on the price figure provided. Larger entities may be monitoring this level closely to gauge sentiment shifts before making substantial moves, resulting in a relatively static technical picture until further data emerges. Observers should note that without corroborating volume spikes or clear moving average alignments, the prevailing market structure offers no definitive signal
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 DFAC’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: 2026-06-02.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.