Durable Capital Partners, LP 13F holdings and portfolio analysis

已就绪Durable Capital Partners, LP · Henry Ellenbogen

登录后可基于当前选中的策略克隆一个新分支，继续在新分支里调整参数与权重。

官方策略
用户分支
返回基金列表

Baseline

分析消息
分支：
Baselinetested
策略问答参考3 条参考问答

基于这只基金最新一期数据预生成的问答，可直接作为对话上下文使用。

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?
登录后即可基于上方策略与右侧数据，直接与 AI 对话分析。
登录后开始对话…
可参考左栏策略与右栏数据。