Where is this manager's return actually coming from — replicable market and sector exposure, or genuine stock selection? Pulled live from the latest 13F and decomposed through the ERM3 cascade. The stock-selection residual is the one component that persists out of sample.
Modeled AUM
$5.6B
Holdings
69
Top-10 weight
33%
As of
2020-03-31
Filed
2020-06-14
Selection signature
Exposure-driven
11% of EMINENCE CAPITAL, LP's risk is stock-specific — the structural read. Stock selection added 33% of the trailing return (which swings with the window). The rest is buyable market, sector, and style exposure — a descriptive read, not a recommendation.
Risk decomposition
This manager
85%
11%
Tracked-pension composite · 12 mgrs
73%
22%
▸Key
Market
Sector
Subsector
Style tilt
Stock selection
At a glance
Selection signature
11% of risk
Exposure-driven
Replicable exposure
89%
Mostly buyable
Mandate style
Mid-Cap Blend
Multi-style
Concentration
eff. N 45.8
Diversified
Peer rank · Large tier
#42 / 1432
Return attribution
AIEMINENCE CAPITAL, LP's -17.1% trailing-year return was led by market beta (-8.4% market); stock selection contributed -5.6%.
Layer
Detail
1M
3M
6M
1Y
Gross return
total realized
-22.4%
-32.6%
-26.4%
-17.1%
− Market
broad-market beta
-14.8%
-23.7%
-14.8%
-8.4%
− Sector
sector timing
+0.4%
-0.9%
-0.5%
2 · Residual skill score
The stock-selection residual — return left after market, sector, subsector, and style are stripped away. This is the component the research shows persists out of sample (forward Q5−Q1 +2.3pp, t≈3.4), while sector- and style-timing do not.
Stock-selection return
-5.6%
trailing, gross — residual after market / sector / subsector
Residual risk share
11%
stock-specific share of portfolio variance
Return from selection
33%
of gross return this window
Out-of-sample persistence
+2.3pp · t≈3.4
forward Q5−Q1 across the study cohort — not this manager
Gross ranking signal within mandate; net-of-fee outcomes depend on fees and implementation. Not a claim of net-of-fee outperformance. See the evidence →
4 · Mandate fit
Dominant style
Mid-Cap Blend
Style concentration (HHI)
0.36
Effective styles
2.8
Effective N (positions)
45.8
5 · Peer context
#42 / 1432
In the Large AUM cohort by aum erm3 (1m).
98% of reported AUM is in the ERM3 model universe; attribution and skill shares cover that sleeve.
Run this on your managers
This is a live example. Send us a roster — 13F managers or your own holdings sleeves — and we'll return a Manager Skill Review and a board-ready IC memo for each. Print or PDF this page for the memo format.
Live data from SEC Form 13F via the RiskModels ERM3 model, filed 2020-06-14. Figures are gross, holdings-derived, and within-mandate. Informational use only — not investment advice.
Manager Skill Review
EMINENCE CAPITAL, LP
Where is this manager's return actually coming from — replicable market and sector exposure, or genuine stock selection? Pulled live from the latest 13F and decomposed through the ERM3 cascade. The stock-selection residual is the one component that persists out of sample.
Modeled AUM
$5.6B
Holdings
69
Top-10 weight
33%
As of
2020-03-31
Filed
2020-06-14
Selection signature
Exposure-driven
11% of EMINENCE CAPITAL, LP's risk is stock-specific — the structural read. Stock selection added 33% of the trailing return (which swings with the window). The rest is buyable market, sector, and style exposure — a descriptive read, not a recommendation.
Risk decomposition
This manager
85%
11%
Tracked-pension composite · 12 mgrs
73%
22%
▸Key
Market
Sector
Subsector
Style tilt
Stock selection
At a glance
Selection signature
11% of risk
Exposure-driven
Replicable exposure
89%
Mostly buyable
Mandate style
Mid-Cap Blend
Multi-style
Concentration
eff. N 45.8
Diversified
Peer rank · Large tier
#42 / 1432
Return attribution
AIEMINENCE CAPITAL, LP's -17.1% trailing-year return was led by market beta (-8.4% market); stock selection contributed -5.6%.
Layer
Detail
1M
3M
6M
1Y
Gross return
total realized
-22.4%
-32.6%
-26.4%
-17.1%
− Market
broad-market beta
-14.8%
-23.7%
-14.8%
-8.4%
− Sector
sector timing
+0.4%
-0.9%
-0.5%
2 · Residual skill score
The stock-selection residual — return left after market, sector, subsector, and style are stripped away. This is the component the research shows persists out of sample (forward Q5−Q1 +2.3pp, t≈3.4), while sector- and style-timing do not.
Stock-selection return
-5.6%
trailing, gross — residual after market / sector / subsector
Residual risk share
11%
stock-specific share of portfolio variance
Return from selection
33%
of gross return this window
Out-of-sample persistence
+2.3pp · t≈3.4
forward Q5−Q1 across the study cohort — not this manager
Gross ranking signal within mandate; net-of-fee outcomes depend on fees and implementation. Not a claim of net-of-fee outperformance. See the evidence →
4 · Mandate fit
Dominant style
Mid-Cap Blend
Style concentration (HHI)
0.36
Effective styles
2.8
Effective N (positions)
45.8
5 · Peer context
#42 / 1432
In the Large AUM cohort by aum erm3 (1m).
98% of reported AUM is in the ERM3 model universe; attribution and skill shares cover that sleeve.
Run this on your managers
This is a live example. Send us a roster — 13F managers or your own holdings sleeves — and we'll return a Manager Skill Review and a board-ready IC memo for each. Print or PDF this page for the memo format.
Live data from SEC Form 13F via the RiskModels ERM3 model, filed 2020-06-14. Figures are gross, holdings-derived, and within-mandate. Informational use only — not investment advice.
-0.6%
− Subsector
industry timing
-2.7%
-2.8%
-3.4%
-4.2%
= Buyable exposure
replicable in ETFs
-17.1%
-27.4%
-18.7%
-13.2%
Stock selection
residual skill · persists OOS
-6.9%
-6.9%
-9.3%
-5.6%
Risk attribution
AI11% of the book's risk is stock-specific; the rest is broad-market (85%) and sector exposure.