IWO(IWO)
AI Look-Through Summary
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation of IWO is remarkably concentrated in Other, with nearly 80% of its holdings falling into this category, which suggests a focus on smaller or less conventional companies. The remaining sectors are relatively underrepresented, with Healthcare and Industrials tied at 0.7%, and Technology accounting for just 0.6%. This unusual sector mix may indicate that the fund is targeting niche opportunities.
The top holdings of IWO are equally concentrated, with five stocks each holding approximately 0.7% of the portfolio. The dominance of these individual names raises concerns about concentration risk, as a significant portion of the fund's performance will be tied to their fortunes. Compared to the broader market, this sector mix appears to be skewed towards smaller-cap and more specialized companies, which may perform well in certain macro environments but struggle in others. A favorable environment for IWO would likely involve continued growth in these niche sectors, while a downturn could expose the fund's concentrated position.
Generated by Qwen-32B from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-07-14 08:33:13.114245+00
🔍 Theme Alignment Audit
AI GeneratedPurity: 45/100The investment theme implied by the ticker IWO is typically associated with small-cap growth, yet the provided sector breakdown reveals a significant misalignment. The portfolio's largest weightings are concentrated in Industrials and Technology sectors, which constitute only about eight percent of the total allocation combined when looking at top holdings alone. More critically, several prominent names within the top ten list lack specific industry classification data or appear to be unrelated to standard small-cap growth narratives, suggesting a potential disconnect between the fund's branding and its actual composition. The presence of companies with "N/A" classifications alongside established industrial and tech firms indicates that the underlying holdings may not strictly adhere to a cohesive thematic strategy, raising questions about whether the fund truly targets the specific niche suggested by its name or if it relies on broad market names for stability.
Concentration risk appears elevated relative to typical small-cap growth indices, as evidenced by the top ten concentration metric of 12.5 percent despite the relatively low individual weights shown in the list. The sector coherence is further challenged by the sparse representation of Industrials and Technology compared to what one might expect from a fund with such a specific thematic label; usually, these sectors would dominate or be more evenly distributed across smaller caps rather than appearing as minor components alongside unclassified entities. This structure suggests the fund may lack genuine differentiation from broader market indices, potentially using thematic naming conventions while maintaining an asset mix that does not fully reflect its stated investment philosophy. The data indicates a portfolio where sector weights and holding classifications do not align neatly with traditional expectations for this specific theme, leaving investors to determine if the current composition serves the intended strategic purpose or represents a deviation from standard small-cap growth characteristics.
AI analysis of holdings alignment vs fund theme. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-22 00:44:59.531967+00
🏢 Sector Analysis
AI GeneratedThe sector allocation data for IWO presents a notable divergence from the fund's typical industrial-focused profile, as Industrials and Technology together comprise only 8.4% of total assets. This minimal exposure to these core sectors suggests that the current portfolio is heavily weighted toward industries outside the standard manufacturing or tech hardware classifications, potentially indicating a strategic shift driven by recent market dynamics rather than an intentional tilt in this specific snapshot. The presence of significant holdings such as BE and IONQ within top positions further complicates the traditional sector narrative, highlighting a reliance on companies that may operate across multiple industrial sub-sectors or represent emerging technological applications not fully captured by standard industry categorizations.
Concentration risk appears elevated given that the top five holdings account for approximately 8.6% of assets, while the top ten collectively reach 12.5%. This level of concentration implies a strategy dependent on specific large-cap leaders rather than broad diversification across hundreds of smaller entities, which could amplify volatility if these key names underperform relative to their peers. The inclusion of firms like CRDO and FN in the technology slice alongside industrial giants creates an idiosyncratic factor tilt that blends growth characteristics with operational exposure, deviating from a pure value or momentum profile often associated with broader industrial indices. Ultimately, this allocation structure reflects a nuanced approach where sector definitions may be fluid based on business model evolution, requiring investors to assess whether the current distribution aligns with their views on long-term industry consolidation versus fragmentation.
AI-generated sector analysis from constituent-level data. Not investment advice. Updated: 2026-05-23 12:02:09.899974+00
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 70% 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 6% 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.
Earnings vs. Price Decomposition
ProprietaryIWO is up 29.2% over the last 12 months. The underlying weighted earnings growth of its constituents is +38.3%. Despite earnings growth, valuations have contracted by 9.2% — 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 5% of fund weight with earnings data. Not investment advice.
Under the Hood — Top 10 Constituents
| # | Ticker | Company | Weight | P/E | F-Score |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | Moog Inc Class A | 0.73% | 35.7x | 7/9 |
| 2 | BTSG | BrightSpring Health Services Inc Healthcare | 0.68% | 87.0x | 7/9 |
| 3 | MXL | MaxLinear Inc | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | Argan Inc Industrials | 0.66% | 54.9x | 6/9 |
| 5 | FROG | JFrog Ltd Ordinary Shares | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | Krystal Biotech Inc | 0.58% | 36.0x | 7/9 |
| 7 | ESE | ESCO Technologies Inc Technology | 0.56% | 57.1x | 3/9 |
| 8 | FCFS | FirstCash Holdings Inc | 0.53% | 25.6x | 7/9 |
| 9 | QBTS | D-Wave Quantum Inc | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | StoneX Group Inc | 0.52% | 17.4x | 4/9 |
Historical Holdings Snapshots
Browse how IWO’s holdings have changed across SEC filing dates. Showing top holdings per snapshot.
2026-07-19
10 holdings · 6.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | 0.73% | — | — |
| 2 | BTSG | 0.68% | — | — |
| 3 | MXL | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | 0.66% | — | — |
| 5 | FROG | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | 0.58% | — | — |
| 7 | ESE | 0.56% | — | — |
| 8 | FCFS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 9 | QBTS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | 0.52% | — | — |
2026-07-18
10 holdings · 6.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | 0.73% | — | — |
| 2 | BTSG | 0.68% | — | — |
| 3 | MXL | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | 0.66% | — | — |
| 5 | FROG | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | 0.58% | — | — |
| 7 | ESE | 0.56% | — | — |
| 8 | FCFS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 9 | QBTS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | 0.52% | — | — |
2026-07-17
10 holdings · 6.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | 0.73% | — | — |
| 2 | BTSG | 0.68% | — | — |
| 3 | MXL | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | 0.66% | — | — |
| 5 | FROG | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | 0.58% | — | — |
| 7 | ESE | 0.56% | — | — |
| 8 | FCFS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 9 | QBTS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | 0.52% | — | — |
2026-07-16
10 holdings · 6.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | 0.73% | — | — |
| 2 | BTSG | 0.68% | — | — |
| 3 | MXL | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | 0.66% | — | — |
| 5 | FROG | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | 0.58% | — | — |
| 7 | ESE | 0.56% | — | — |
| 8 | FCFS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 9 | QBTS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | 0.52% | — | — |
2026-07-15
10 holdings · 6.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | 0.73% | — | — |
| 2 | BTSG | 0.68% | — | — |
| 3 | MXL | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | 0.66% | — | — |
| 5 | FROG | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | 0.58% | — | — |
| 7 | ESE | 0.56% | — | — |
| 8 | FCFS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 9 | QBTS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | 0.52% | — | — |
2026-07-14
10 holdings · 6.0% tracked weight| # | Ticker | Weight | Shares | Market Value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MOG-A | 0.73% | — | — |
| 2 | BTSG | 0.68% | — | — |
| 3 | MXL | 0.66% | — | — |
| 4 | AGX | 0.66% | — | — |
| 5 | FROG | 0.59% | — | — |
| 6 | KRYS | 0.58% | — | — |
| 7 | ESE | 0.56% | — | — |
| 8 | FCFS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 9 | QBTS | 0.53% | — | — |
| 10 | SNEX | 0.52% | — | — |
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
What Drove IWO Today?
Daily return attribution — which holdings contributed most (and least) to the fund's move.
Top Detractors
Attribution = holding weight × stock daily return. Only the top contributors and detractors are shown.
Technical Setup
AI GeneratedThe current price of $372.34 for the IWO index represents a specific snapshot in its ongoing market trajectory, yet without access to historical moving average data or Relative Strength Index values, a definitive assessment regarding momentum direction cannot be constructed from the provided figures alone. Determining whether the asset is trading above or below key trend lines requires comparative analysis with prior price action over various timeframes, which remains absent here. Similarly, evaluating short-term momentum through RSI necessitates knowledge of recent percentage changes in volume and price to establish if the market exhibits signs of overbought conditions or oversold states. In the absence of these critical technical parameters, any attempt to characterize the immediate trend as bullish or bearish would be speculative rather than factual. The static data point offers no insight into whether buying pressure is currently dominating selling interest or vice versa within the broader context of rolling averages. Consequently, while the price level itself indicates where the asset stands at this precise moment, it does not inherently confirm a strengthening upward trend nor suggest an imminent reversal without supporting indicators such as slope analysis or oscillator readings. Market participants must therefore rely on additional data points to form a complete picture of the technical setup before drawing conclusions about potential future movements. The current information limits observation to the absolute price value, leaving the dynamic relationship between price and its moving averages entirely undefined in this summary.
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 IWO’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: 2026-07-17.
SecuritiesDB is for informational purposes only. Not investment advice.