RVER vs. LGHT ETF Comparison
Comparison of Advisor Managed Portfolios Trenchless Fund ETF (RVER) to Langar Global HealthTech ETF (LGHT)
RVER
Advisor Managed Portfolios Trenchless Fund ETF
RVER Description
RVER seeks to outperform the S&P 500 Index over all time horizons through a narrow exposure to the US equity market. The fund typically invests in approximately 12 to 30 US-listed stocks of any market capitalization. The portfolio construction starts by screening companies based on valuation metrics such as free cash flow, net income, EBITDA, and revenue. Securities are then assessed using growth factors, including top and bottom-line revenue and net income growth. This analysis seeks to exclude firms with negative outliers and those the sub-adviser believes are likely to miss earnings expectations. The remaining companies are screened based on a review of the number and size of institutional holders. After these three initial screens, the sub-adviser ranks and selects from the remaining companies based on its view of positive price change potential. As an actively managed fund, the sub-adviser has full discretion to make buy, sell, and hold decisions at any time.
Grade (RS Rating)
Last Trade
$29.27
Average Daily Volume
7,494
16
LGHT
Langar Global HealthTech ETF
LGHT Description
LGHT targets the global healthcare technology industry. The fund actively invests in HealthTech companies, which the adviser defines as firms that develop technology designed to create healthcare efficiency by addressing key pain points for patients, providers, payors, and hospitals, including those companies that derive a majority of their revenue from HealthTech products and services. The portfolio construction starts by identifying companies that fit into the advisers HealthTech definition. The remaining companies are screened using a proprietary metric that assesses each firms financial health, involvement in relevant controversies, as well as the strength of its team and culture. Each company is then assigned an industry risk score through an algorithm that defines quantitative and qualitative risk categories and weights them accordingly. Finally, each company is reviewed by an investment committee. However, the portfolio manager still has full discretion over the final selection.Grade (RS Rating)
Last Trade
$10.31
Average Daily Volume
913
31
Performance
| Period | RVER | LGHT |
|---|---|---|
| 30 Days | 4.37% | -3.06% |
| 60 Days | 9.69% | -2.46% |
| 90 Days | 16.69% | -0.81% |
| 12 Months |
0 Overlapping Holdings
| Symbol | Grade | Weight in RVER | Weight in LGHT | Overlap |
|---|
RVER Underweight 31 Positions Relative to LGHT
| Symbol | Grade | Weight | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ISRG | A | -15.39% | |
| GEHC | C | -8.56% | |
| RMD | C | -6.71% | |
| IQV | F | -6.34% | |
| DXCM | C | -5.51% | |
| PODD | B | -5.26% | |
| VEEV | C | -5.15% | |
| PHG | C | -4.87% | |
| ZBH | C | -3.57% | |
| BNTX | D | -3.53% | |
| ALGN | D | -2.85% | |
| MASI | B | -2.46% | |
| DOCS | C | -2.06% | |
| MRNA | F | -1.72% | |
| PRCT | B | -1.27% | |
| ALKS | C | -0.66% | |
| TNDM | D | -0.54% | |
| IRTC | C | -0.44% | |
| PRVA | C | -0.44% | |
| OMCL | C | -0.42% | |
| LFST | C | -0.31% | |
| TDOC | C | -0.28% | |
| PGNY | F | -0.25% | |
| EVH | F | -0.22% | |
| SDGR | C | -0.21% | |
| GDRX | F | -0.2% | |
| ALHC | C | -0.2% | |
| PHR | F | -0.17% | |
| ACCD | F | -0.07% | |
| MODV | C | -0.03% | |
| TBRG | A | -0.03% |
RVER: Top Represented Industries & Keywords
LGHT: Top Represented Industries & Keywords
Compare ETFs
