IJH(IJH)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe provided data presents a fragmented snapshot that appears inconsistent with the typical profile of an S&P 500 Index Fund, such as IJH. The listed top holdings include entities like FLEX and FTI, which do not align with standard constituents of this benchmark, suggesting either a specific subset analysis or a potential discrepancy in the source data provided for these particular positions. Sector weights are notably sparse, showing minimal exposure to Energy at 0.9%, Industrials at 0.8%, and Technology at only 0.7%. This distribution implies that if accurate for this specific view, the fund's primary weightings lie outside the disclosed sectors or within a highly diversified set of industries not explicitly detailed in the excerpt.
With an Assets Under Management figure exceeding $106 billion, the vehicle operates on a massive scale, which typically correlates with high liquidity and tight tracking error relative to its index. However, the concentration metrics derived from this specific list are difficult to interpret due to the low percentages assigned to individual names; each of the top ten holdings represents less than 1% of the portfolio individually. This structure suggests an inherent lack of single-stock dominance within the visible portion of the data, a characteristic often desired for risk mitigation in broad-market strategies. The geographic tilt cannot be determined from the provided text, as no country-specific allocations are listed alongside the sector breakdowns or holding names.
Quantitatively, the combination of substantial asset size and low individual stock weights points toward a portfolio designed to capture broad market movements rather than specific sector trends or individual company performance. While the explicit technology exposure is minimal in this view, the presence of firms like TWLO hints at underlying tech participation that may be categorized differently elsewhere in the full index. Investors must reconcile these limited data points with their broader knowledge of the fund's actual methodology to fully understand its risk-return profile and diversification benefits beyond what this isolated list reveals.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-22 23:52:00.655651+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 15/100The investment theme implied by the ticker IJH, which typically denotes a broad U.S. large-cap index strategy, is entirely consistent with the provided holdings list containing major established companies across various sectors such as Energy and Technology. However, the data reveals significant gaps in sector classification for several top constituents, including Flex Ltd., XPO Logistics, and Twilio Inc., where specific industry tags are missing despite their inclusion in a diversified portfolio. This lack of granular categorization makes it difficult to verify if these positions strictly adhere to any narrow thematic definition beyond general large-cap exposure. Furthermore, the presence of firms like P&G alongside sector-specific names suggests a reliance on mega-caps that often serve as stabilizers rather than drivers of a distinct investment thesis, potentially indicating that the fund's performance is more closely tied to broad market movements than a specialized strategy.
The concentration risk profile appears moderate given that the top ten holdings collectively represent only 7.5% of the portfolio, which suggests effective diversification across many other unseen constituents not listed here. Yet, the sector breakdown provided shows negligible weights for Energy at 0.9%, Industrials at 0.8%, and Technology at 0.7%, with no data available for major sectors like Financials or Healthcare that usually dominate large-cap indices. This sparse reporting creates ambiguity regarding whether the fund maintains a coherent industry focus or if the disclosed percentages represent only a subset of holdings rather than the total portfolio allocation. Consequently, it remains unclear how genuinely differentiated this structure is from a standard broad-market index, as the visible data points to either an incomplete disclosure or a highly fragmented sector distribution that does not clearly support a specific thematic narrative without further context on the remaining assets.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-18 21:32:54.722472+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe provided data for the IJH ETF presents a significant anomaly when compared to its established identity as a broad U.S. large-cap equity index fund, which typically exhibits diversified exposure across numerous sectors including Financials and Healthcare. The sector allocation figures listed show negligible representation in Energy, Industrials, and Technology, with each comprising less than one percent of the portfolio. This distribution suggests that either the dataset reflects an incomplete snapshot where major holdings are omitted or represents a hypothetical scenario rather than actual market weights for this specific instrument. In a standard large-cap framework, such low sector percentages would imply extreme dilution of traditional industry drivers, yet the top five holdings listed include entities like FTI and CW which map to Energy and Industrials respectively, creating a disconnect between the aggregate sector sums and the individual stock classifications provided.
This discrepancy highlights potential data integrity issues or a misunderstanding of how the fund's composition is currently structured versus what is being reported here. The top-10 concentration metric of 7.5% indicates that no single holding exerts dominant influence, which theoretically aligns with an index-tracking strategy designed to minimize idiosyncratic risk through diversification. However, without clear visibility into the remaining holdings or accurate sector weighting for major categories like Technology and Financials, it is impossible to assess true factor tilts regarding growth versus value or market cap sensitivity. The presence of specific names in the top five alongside near-zero aggregate sector weights creates an ambiguous picture where standard analytical frameworks for evaluating concentration risk and industry exposure may yield misleading conclusions if applied directly to these figures without verification against primary source data.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-24 08:43:03.218561+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 7% 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.
Earnings vs. Price Decomposition
ProprietaryIJH is up 25.6% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +40.7%. Despite earnings growth, valuations have contracted by 15.1% — 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 7% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 10 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | FLEX | Flex Ltd | 0.98% | 65.0x | 6/9 |
| 2 | FTI | TechnipFMC PLC Energy | 0.89% | 26.2x | 9/9 |
| 3 | CW | Curtiss-Wright Corp Industrials | 0.78% | 54.6x | 8/9 |
| 4 | XPO | XPO Inc | 0.75% | 71.7x | 5/9 |
| 5 | UTHR | United Therapeutics Corp | 0.72% | 21.0x | 6/9 |
| 6 | FN | Fabrinet Technology | 0.72% | 56.2x | 2/9 |
| 7 | MTZ | MasTec Inc | 0.71% | 60.5x | 7/9 |
| 8 | NVT | nVent Electric PLC | 0.67% | 43.9x | 6/9 |
| 9 | TWLO | Twilio Inc Class A | 0.66% | 553.6x | 6/9 |
| 10 | P | Everpure Inc Class A | 0.65% | 125.8x | — |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how IJH’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-05-24
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-05-23
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-05-22
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-05-21
10 holdings · 7.5% tracked weight2026-05-20
10 holdings · 7.5% 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 IJH Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current price of $72.90 for IJH sits within a context where institutional positioning can be inferred through the interplay of moving averages and volume dynamics, though specific crossover data is not provided in this snapshot to confirm directional shifts. In the absence of explicit SMA crossovers or volume spikes in the immediate description, larger market participants may be maintaining existing allocations rather than aggressively accumulating or distributing shares at these levels. The stability implied by a single price point without accompanying trend indicators suggests that major players are potentially waiting for clearer confirmation before committing significant capital to either long or short sides of the trade. Volume trends often serve as the primary gauge for institutional intent, yet without specific volume metrics here, one must rely on general market principles where sustained trading activity at current levels could indicate steady interest from fund managers monitoring sector exposure. If price action were to deviate significantly from $72.90 while accompanied by divergent volume patterns, it might signal a shift in the balance of power between buyers and sellers among these larger entities. The lack of immediate technical triggers such as clear trend reversals or breakout confirmations implies that institutional behavior remains cautious, possibly treating this price zone as a neutral holding area pending broader macroeconomic signals or sector-specific catalysts to justify repositioning strategies.
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 IJH’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.