Durable Capital Partners, LP 13F holdings and portfolio analysis

준비됨Durable Capital Partners, LP · Henry Ellenbogen

선택한 플랜에서 새 브랜치를 복제하려면 로그인하고, 새 브랜치에서 계속 최적화하세요.

공식
사용자 브랜치
펀드로 돌아가기

Baseline

분석 메시지
브랜치:
Baselinetested
전략 Q&A 참조3개 참조 Q&A

이 펀드에 대한 사전 생성된 Q&A. 자신의 분석을 위한 참조 컨텍스트로 사용하세요.

baseline13FChat AI
What does directly following the disclosed baseline portfolio expose an investor to?

Directly following the baseline exposes an investor to a concentrated portfolio with low market beta but meaningful single-name and sector dependence. The top 5 holdings are 37.05%, the top 10 are 57.75%, and the top 20 are 84.01%, with RBC alone at 10.72%, DASH at 8.27%, and MELI at 6.32%. Sector exposure is concentrated in Industrials (35.48%) and Consumer Discretionary (28.73%), with another 12.5% in Financials. Even with beta of just 0.31, the baseline still experienced a -18.12% max drawdown, 375 recovery days, 403 trades overall, and 0.7054 in estimated total cost, so the low-beta profile does not remove concentration and filing-lag risk.

↳Can you stress-test the baseline by showing what happens if the top 3 holdings underperform the rest of the book?
baseline13FChat AI
Which recent baseline periods best explain the risk-return trade-off?

The recent baseline trade-off is explained by a mix of defensive downside periods and weak upside capture. Positive relative periods included 2024-12-31, when the baseline returned -0.68% versus SPY at -3.63% for +2.95% excess, and 2025-09-30, when it returned 1.63% versus 1.49% for +0.14% excess. But several growth-led periods show the cost of low beta and concentration: 2023-12-31 returned -3.98% versus SPY +4.96% (-8.94% excess), 2025-03-31 returned 2.74% versus 9.22% (-6.48% excess), and 2025-06-30 returned -1.46% versus 4.20% (-5.66% excess). Turnover was also elevated in some weak periods, such as 21.07 at 2024-09-30 and 17.22 at 2024-06-30, reinforcing that trading activity did not consistently produce upside capture.

↳Can you separate the recent baseline periods into defensive wins versus growth-lagging quarters and tie them back to holdings?
baseline13FChat AI
What should a user inspect next before deciding whether the baseline is acceptable?

A user should inspect three things next: concentration, sector dependence, and the lagged quarterly pattern. Concentration is high, with top 10 holdings at 57.75% and top 20 at 84.01%, so the next check should be whether names like RBC, DASH, MELI, CPNG, and APG reflect risks you actually want. Sector concentration is also meaningful, with Industrials at 35.48% and Consumer Discretionary at 28.73%, which together make up 64.21% of the baseline. Finally, inspect the period-level record, especially the weak SPY-relative quarters like 2023-12-31 (-8.94% excess), 2025-03-31 (-6.48%), and 2025-06-30 (-5.66%), because the baseline summary already flags weak benchmark consistency despite positive alpha.

↳Can you walk me through whether the baseline’s weak SPY-relative quarters came from sector allocation, top holdings, or the 13F reporting lag?
이 펀드의 전략, 보유 종목 및 리스크에 대해 AI와 채팅하려면 로그인하세요.
채팅을 시작하려면 로그인하세요…
이 페이지의 모든 전략 또는 데이터 포인트를 참조하세요.