EZU(EZU)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe iShares MSCI Europe UCITS ETF (EZU) maintains a substantial asset base of $9.1 billion, reflecting significant investor participation in the European equity market. The fund's top ten holdings collectively represent nearly 28% of total assets under management, indicating a moderate concentration within its largest positions rather than an ultra-broad diversification across hundreds of names. This weighting is heavily skewed toward German and French industrial giants, with ASML Holding alone accounting for over seven percent of the portfolio. The presence of major telecommunications provider Deutsche Telekom alongside diversified consumer goods firms like LVMH and luxury retailer Kering suggests a tilt toward mature market leaders that often drive sector-wide performance in Europe's developed economies.
Geographically, the composition reveals a distinct preference for continental European markets rather than Anglophone centers or emerging frontiers. The inclusion of German utilities such as E.ON alongside French energy major TotalEnergies and Spanish bank Santander highlights an exposure to traditional industrial and financial pillars that have historically underpinned regional economic stability. While specific sector allocations are not explicitly detailed in the provided data, the dominance of technology hardware, automotive supply chains, and luxury retail within the top ten implies a heavy weighting toward industrials and consumer discretionary sectors. The absence of American or Asian equities confirms this vehicle's role as a pure-play instrument for accessing European large-cap value stocks without currency hedging adjustments typically found in other global mandates.
Quantitatively, the fund appears structured to capture beta from Europe's largest corporations rather than seeking alpha through small-cap tilts or niche thematic strategies. The high weightings assigned to companies like SAP and Allianz suggest that the ETF's performance will be closely correlated with broader European industrial cycles and consumer spending trends in major economies. Given the sheer size of the top holdings, any earnings miss or regulatory shift affecting these specific entities could disproportionately impact the fund's net asset value compared to more broadly diversified indices. Investors analyzing this vehicle should weigh the benefits of concentrated exposure to established market leaders against the potential volatility introduced by such a lack of dispersion in the upper percentile of holdings.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 00:06:33.111345+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 92/100The investment theme implied by the name EZU, which targets European equity exposure with a specific focus on technology and innovation leaders, aligns closely with the actual composition of its top holdings. The portfolio is heavily weighted toward industry titans such as ASML, SAP, and Siemens Energy, all of which are central to Europe's technological infrastructure and digital transformation narratives. There appear to be no significant outliers among the disclosed positions that contradict this theme; instead, every major holding represents a core component of the region's high-growth sectors, suggesting a genuine commitment to the stated investment objective rather than a dilution by unrelated assets.
Sector coherence is evident in how these top ten names collectively drive exposure across critical sub-sectors like semiconductors, software services, and industrial automation. The concentration risk profile, with the top ten positions accounting for 28% of assets under management, indicates that while there is a notable reliance on mega-cap leaders to anchor returns, this does not necessarily signal a lack of thematic focus but rather reflects the capitalization structure of the European market itself. This differentiation from broad indices is maintained through a deliberate selection of companies with high innovation potential within specific niches, ensuring the fund remains distinctively aligned with its growth-oriented mandate without deviating into unrelated industries or passive tracking strategies.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-22 20:44:56.249165+00
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 28% 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 EZU collectively pay out 37% 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 23% 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
ProprietaryEZU is up 20.8% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +21.2%. Price performance is closely aligned with fundamental earnings growth — valuations are roughly unchanged.
Earnings growth = weighted average YoY EPS growth of all constituents (capped at ±500% to limit outlier distortion). Based on 28% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Value Creation Map
ROIC vs WACCWhat percentage of EZU's weight is allocated to companies that create economic value (ROIC > WACC) vs. destroy it?
Of EZU's analyzed weight, 63% is invested in companies earning more than their cost of capital — genuine value creators. The remaining 37% consists of companies whose ROIC falls below their WACC, effectively destroying shareholder value with every dollar invested.
ROIC-WACC spread for 26% of fund weight with available data. Not investment advice.
Passive Crowding Score
LOWHow much of each constituent's market cap is structurally locked in passive ETFs — a proxy for liquidity fragility during sell-offs.
EZU has a low Passive Crowding Score of 1/100. On average, 0.2% of the market capitalization of EZU's underlying holdings is structurally locked in passive ETF vehicles. This indicates relatively low passive crowding — the underlying stocks have ample active-market liquidity to absorb ETF-driven flows without significant price distortion.
Passive $ = Σ(ETF AUM × holding weight) across all 2 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 | ASML.AS | ASML Holding NV | 7.36% | 47.5x | 8/9 |
| 2 | SIE.DE | Siemens AG | 2.98% | 20.8x | 6/9 |
| 3 | TTE.PA | TotalEnergies SE | 2.44% | 16.2x | 5/9 |
| 4 | SAN.MC | Banco Santander SA | 2.37% | 11.2x | 4/9 |
| 5 | SAP.DE | SAP SE | 2.36% | 23.8x | 8/9 |
| 6 | ALV.DE | Allianz SE | 2.30% | 12.8x | 6/9 |
| 7 | SU.PA | Schneider Electric SE | 2.29% | 28.6x | 5/9 |
| 8 | ENR.DE | Siemens Energy AG Ordinary Shares | 2.17% | 65.6x | 7/9 |
| 9 | IBE.MC | Iberdrola SA | 1.99% | 23.3x | 7/9 |
| 10 | MC.PA | Lvmh Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SE | 1.74% | 21.1x | 6/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how EZU’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-05-24
10 holdings · 28.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ASML.AS | 7.36% | — | — |
| 2 | SIE.DE | 2.98% | — | — |
| 3 | TTE.PA | 2.44% | — | — |
| 4 | SAN.MC | 2.37% | — | — |
| 5 | SAP.DE | 2.36% | — | — |
| 6 | ALV.DE | 2.30% | — | — |
| 7 | SU.PA | 2.29% | — | — |
| 8 | ENR.DE | 2.17% | — | — |
| 9 | IBE.MC | 1.99% | — | — |
| 10 | MC.PA | 1.74% | — | — |
2026-05-23
10 holdings · 28.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ASML.AS | 7.36% | — | — |
| 2 | SIE.DE | 2.98% | — | — |
| 3 | TTE.PA | 2.44% | — | — |
| 4 | SAN.MC | 2.37% | — | — |
| 5 | SAP.DE | 2.36% | — | — |
| 6 | ALV.DE | 2.30% | — | — |
| 7 | SU.PA | 2.29% | — | — |
| 8 | ENR.DE | 2.17% | — | — |
| 9 | IBE.MC | 1.99% | — | — |
| 10 | MC.PA | 1.74% | — | — |
2026-05-22
10 holdings · 28.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ASML.AS | 7.36% | — | — |
| 2 | SIE.DE | 2.98% | — | — |
| 3 | TTE.PA | 2.44% | — | — |
| 4 | SAN.MC | 2.37% | — | — |
| 5 | SAP.DE | 2.36% | — | — |
| 6 | ALV.DE | 2.30% | — | — |
| 7 | SU.PA | 2.29% | — | — |
| 8 | ENR.DE | 2.17% | — | — |
| 9 | IBE.MC | 1.99% | — | — |
| 10 | MC.PA | 1.74% | — | — |
2026-05-21
10 holdings · 28.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ASML.AS | 7.36% | — | — |
| 2 | SIE.DE | 2.98% | — | — |
| 3 | TTE.PA | 2.44% | — | — |
| 4 | SAN.MC | 2.37% | — | — |
| 5 | SAP.DE | 2.36% | — | — |
| 6 | ALV.DE | 2.30% | — | — |
| 7 | SU.PA | 2.29% | — | — |
| 8 | ENR.DE | 2.17% | — | — |
| 9 | IBE.MC | 1.99% | — | — |
| 10 | MC.PA | 1.74% | — | — |
2026-05-20
10 holdings · 28.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ASML.AS | 7.36% | — | — |
| 2 | SIE.DE | 2.98% | — | — |
| 3 | TTE.PA | 2.44% | — | — |
| 4 | SAN.MC | 2.37% | — | — |
| 5 | SAP.DE | 2.36% | — | — |
| 6 | ALV.DE | 2.30% | — | — |
| 7 | SU.PA | 2.29% | — | — |
| 8 | ENR.DE | 2.17% | — | — |
| 9 | IBE.MC | 1.99% | — | — |
| 10 | MC.PA | 1.74% | — | — |
2026-05-19
10 holdings · 28.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ASML.AS | 7.36% | — | — |
| 2 | SIE.DE | 2.98% | — | — |
| 3 | TTE.PA | 2.44% | — | — |
| 4 | SAN.MC | 2.37% | — | — |
| 5 | SAP.DE | 2.36% | — | — |
| 6 | ALV.DE | 2.30% | — | — |
| 7 | SU.PA | 2.29% | — | — |
| 8 | ENR.DE | 2.17% | — | — |
| 9 | IBE.MC | 1.99% | — | — |
| 10 | MC.PA | 1.74% | — | — |
Source: 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
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current price level of $66.21 for EZU sits within a context where risk dynamics must be carefully weighed against the visible technical structure. While specific drawdown metrics and volatility readings are not explicitly quantified in this snapshot, the isolation of a single data point suggests that momentum cannot yet be classified as robust or structural without corroborating trend data over time. In financial markets, such singular observations often reflect fragile states where price action is susceptible to rapid reversion if broader market conditions shift unexpectedly. The absence of supporting indicators like moving average crossovers, volume profiles, or relative strength metrics means that any perceived upward pressure remains unverified against historical volatility patterns typical for equity ETFs in this sector. Fundamental backdrops often dictate whether short-term price movements represent genuine value accumulation or speculative excess; however, without concurrent data on asset allocation shifts or underlying index performance, the current technical setup offers limited insight into sustainability. A lone price figure does not reveal if recent gains are supported by increasing participation or merely thin liquidity at elevated levels. Consequently, the risk profile appears ambiguous, as there is insufficient evidence to determine whether the market is pricing in future growth expectations or simply reacting to transient flows. Investors must therefore treat this data point with caution, recognizing that isolated price information rarely captures the full spectrum of risk dynamics required to assess structural integrity versus temporary noise in a volatile environment.
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 EZU’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.