Equity-sleeve coverage64.0%64.0% covered of 100.0% retained equity weight.
Total-fund coverage64.0%Company fundamentals as a share of 100.0% reported fund weight; no reallocation.
Non-company exposure0.0%Cash, derivatives, and other non-equity rows are excluded · tradingview_etf_holdings · Jul 17, 2026 · current.
Partial mapped company sleeve28/28 mapped companies have stored fundamentals, covering 64.0% of the retained company sleeve and 64.0% of fund weight. The remaining 0.0% is non-company exposure, not missing companies. Separately, 71 equity holdings (36.0% of fund weight) remain unmapped.
PAVE — Global X U.S. Infrastructure Development ETF factor map
Return factors and risk factors built from stored company fundamentals, price tape, themes, event evidence, liquidity, and flow datasets.
Companies28Ranked inside this universe
Factors5034 ready · 16 partial
Coverage100%Average ready-factor coverage
As ofJul 21, 9:30 PM GMT+8Latest stored factor input
Full factor lab detail queuedThe initial factor map is loaded from the compact snapshot; full histories, heatmaps, validation matrices, and lenses hydrate on demand.
Factor workflow
Navigate the factor engine without scrolling the whole report
Start with attribution quality, move into the action book, then inspect individual factor evidence only when needed.
Factor exposure engine
Explain PAVE — Global X U.S. Infrastructure Development ETF through true factor returns
Daily stock-level cross-sectional regressions estimate factor returns from company returns and reusable economic factor exposures. Sector, industry, theme, and country are reporting lenses, not dummy factors used to force-fit the universe return.
For each stored trading day, company returns are regressed against reusable company-level factor exposures. The common market column captures the broad universe tape; style factors explain tilts around that tape.
Lens policyNo fake fit from buckets
Sector, industry, country, and theme are reporting lenses only; they are not dummy variables used to force-fit returns.
Attribution splitWhat is investable versus only explanatory
8 usable factors · 41 diagnostic factors
Common tape-2.86%Broad universe move before active factor interpretation.Rewarded / usable factors+1.99%4 rewarded · 4 risk-controlDiagnostic factors+6.51%41 diagnostic · 0 blockedResidual-0.02%Idiosyncratic return that should flow into company-level research.
Attribution policy. Separate common tape, investable rewarded factors, diagnostic factors, and residual. Diagnostic factors explain movement but are not portfolio-sizing inputs.
Factor action bookWhat to overweight, hedge, block, or research next
Overweight · +1.01% actionable return
Active tilts4Risk controls4Blocked0Research-only41Regime-adjusted4
Small / validation pendingConviction 61 · risk budget n/a%
Contribution
-0.38%
Factor return
-2.44%
Exposure
+0.16
Earnings revision pressure is a rewarded factor with negative contribution; reduce high exposure until payoff repairs.
Regime-aware sizingSmall / validation pending
No stored regime evidence · best n/a · worst n/a · n/a% survival
No stored regime validation yet; keep sizing small until regime behavior is refreshed.
Coverage passValidation watchPayoff failCrowding passRisk budget watchRegime fit watch
Risk controlLow volatilityRisk-control factor
Hedge / cap exposureConviction 63 · risk budget 5%
Contribution
+1.00%
Factor return
+1.69%
Exposure
+0.59
Low volatility should cap, hedge, or screen fragile exposures rather than drive return chasing.
Regime-aware sizingSmall / validation pending
No stored regime evidence · best n/a · worst n/a · n/a% survival
No stored regime validation yet; keep sizing small until regime behavior is refreshed.
Coverage passValidation watchPayoff watchCrowding failRisk budget passRegime fit watch
Risk controlSizeRisk-control factor
Hedge / cap exposureConviction 61 · risk budget n/a%
Contribution
+0.45%
Factor return
+1.45%
Exposure
+0.31
Size should cap, hedge, or screen fragile exposures rather than drive return chasing.
Regime-aware sizingSmall / validation pending
No stored regime evidence · best n/a · worst n/a · n/a% survival
No stored regime validation yet; keep sizing small until regime behavior is refreshed.
Coverage passValidation watchPayoff watchCrowding watchRisk budget watchRegime fit watch
Use the action book as a review order. Active tilts require validation, breadth, uniqueness, controlled crowding, and regime survival; diagnostic rows remain research-only.
Model fit disciplineWhen factor attribution is reliable enough to use
Fragile factor fit
Current stock-level fit44%Weighted R-squared across latest company returns.Average daily fit41%How often the model explains day-to-day cross-sectional moves.Fit stability39%Share of stored sessions with usable stock-level factor fit.Residual cost+4.76%Average stock-level error; gross residual +4.00%.
Not an accounting identity. R-squared is a stock-level fit diagnostic, not a promise that factors explain every portfolio return dollar. The residual board remains the source of company-specific work.
Residual risk dominates this window, so factor attribution is mainly a triage map for company research.
Factor trust dashboardCan this attribution guide positioning?
Fragile
Trust score52
Use this as a research triage map; require company and catalyst confirmation before sizing.
Positioning guidanceFragile
Use this as a research triage map; require company and catalyst confirmation before sizing.
Weakest fit dayJun 26, 2026
14% fit · RMSE +0.00%
Residual-dominated days22
Latest fit 55% · average 41%
Required checks before sizing1 passed
Stock-level fitwatch41 · Stock-level fit is usable but should be checked against residual outliers.
Residual loadpass22 · Residual sleeve is controlled enough for a factor-first review.
Validation depthwatchn/a · Run forward validation before treating factor payoffs as durable.
Crowding controlfail100 · Top factors or redundant factors dominate; cap position size and avoid double counting.
Diagnostic factor loadfail46 · Diagnostic-only factors explain too much movement; do not size them directly.
Failure modes6 checks
Weak stock-level fitmediumThe cross-sectional model is not consistently explaining stock returns.
Weakest fit dayhigh2026-06-26 had only 14.0% stock-level explanatory fit.
Validation depthmediumForward validation is not strong enough to treat every factor payoff as durable.
Crowding controlhighA small number of sleeves or overlapping factors can dominate the attribution.
Diagnostic factor loadhighToo much movement is explained by diagnostic-only factors that should not be direct sizing inputs.
Residual-dominated daysmedium22 stored sessions had more residual than modeled factor fit.
Factor reliability boardWhich factors are investable, confirming, or noisy
50 average reliability · 0 decision-grade factors
Decision-grade tilts0Validated enough for active factor interpretation
No factor clears all reliability gates yet.
Usable confirmation1Useful when independent evidence agrees
SizeUse as a confirming factor alongside other independent evidence.
Reliability
60
Validation
n/a
Crowding
61
Noisy or incomplete8Needs better validation, coverage, or stability
Drawdown repairUse as a descriptive exposure until forward tests are populated.
Reliability
58
Validation
n/a
Crowding
42
ValueUse as a descriptive exposure until forward tests are populated.
Reliability
57
Validation
n/a
Crowding
55
Shareholder yieldUse as a descriptive exposure until forward tests are populated.
Reliability
57
Validation
n/a
Crowding
62
LiquidityUse as a descriptive exposure until forward tests are populated.
Institutional flowUse only as a warning or confirmation; avoid double-counting this factor.
Reliability
44
Validation
n/a
Crowding
100
Revenue acceleration leadershipUse only as a warning or confirmation; avoid double-counting this factor.
Reliability
44
Validation
n/a
Crowding
100
Price momentumUse only as a warning or confirmation; avoid double-counting this factor.
Reliability
49
Validation
n/a
Crowding
99
Flow-momentum confluenceUse only as a warning or confirmation; avoid double-counting this factor.
Reliability
45
Validation
n/a
Crowding
99
No factor currently clears the decision-grade validation, stability, and uniqueness gates.Some factors are highly correlated with peers, so do not add their attributions together mechanically.Some factors are descriptive only until forward validation or coverage improves.
Tracker