Important security note: Warning of attempted fraud in the name of DWS
We have detected that fraudulent individuals are misusing the "DWS" trademark and the names of DWS employees on the internet and social media. These fraudsters are operating fake websites, Facebook pages, WhatsApp groups and Mobile Apps. Please be aware that DWS does not have any Facebook Ambassador profiles or WhatsApp chats. If you receive any unexpected calls, messages, or emails claiming to be from DWS, exercise caution and do not make any payments or disclose personal information. We encourage you to report any suspicious activity to info@dws.com, including any relevant documents and the original fraudulent email. Additionally, if you believe you have been a victim of fraud, please notify your local authorities and take steps to protect yourself.
Opportunity to capture
investment approach
concentration exposures
The market cap concentration challenge
Concentration risk
whether in individual stocks or market sectors – is a potential concern when investing, as index returns are increasingly driven by a small group of companies, reducing the benefits of diversification.
Valuation risk
is heightened among many mega‑caps, particularly in Technology and Tech-adjacent stocks, where years of strong performance and AI-driven enthusiasm have pushed valuations to stretched levels.
The chart below shows the growth of Tech in the S&P 500 and Russell 1000 over the past 15 years.
This dynamic creates a challenge if you are aiming to diversify beyond a narrow set mega‑cap, Technology‑driven companies and toward a more balanced, risk‑adjusted equity allocation.
Xtrackers provides a suite of rules‑based, quantitative ETFs designed to address these risks. Through equal‑sector weighting, factor‑based construction, and refined market‑cap methodologies, the ETFs seek to reduce both single‑stock and aggregate portfolio concentration—while still offering broad exposure to the full breadth of the U.S. economy.
Diversification through sector-based investing
What is sector investing?
Sector investing involves allocating capital across specific segments of the economy—such as Technology, Healthcare, Energy, or Financials—to target differentiated drivers of growth, innovation, and performance. It enables more deliberate positioning based on macroeconomic trends, industry cycles, and structural opportunities.
How are sectors defined?
The Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS), developed by MSCI and S&P Dow Jones organizes the equity market into:
- 11 sectors
- 25 industry groups
- 74 industries
- 163 sub industries
This framework provides consistent, transparent categorization that supports portfolio construction, benchmarking, and thematic allocation.
The Technology concentration issue: The AI driven expansion amplified the dominance of mega cap Technology and Technology adjacent companies. Names such as Nvidia, Microsoft, Apple, and Alphabet have been key drivers of index returns. Although not classified in the Tech sector, Amazon, Meta, and Tesla also significantly contribute to the concentration in cap weighted indices like the S&P 500.
This imbalance became clear during the April 2025 Liberation Day selloff, when the Magnificent Seven fell far more sharply than the broader market, highlighting the risks of relying on a handful of dominant names.
Key advantages to sector-based strategies
Risk management
Balanced sector allocation helps reduce reliance on a small group of mega‑cap companies. Equal‑weight sector approaches help mitigate single‑stock and sector concentration risk while maintaining broad market exposure.
Enhanced diversification
Combining exposure across multiple sectors lowers dependence on any single economic theme or growth engine. Balanced sector strategies mitigate concentration risk and smooth volatility across market cycles.
Targeted access to growth engines
Sectors expected to grow due to structural trends, innovation, or macroeconomic conditions can be overweight to capture potential performance developments.
Business cycle positioning
Sectors perform differently across economic phases. Sector strategies enable active tilts to cyclicals, defensives, or secular growers as conditions evolve.
Potential for outperformance
Sectors historically exhibit wider return dispersion than styles, creating opportunities to overweight outperforming sectors and underweight laggards.
Strategic and tactical flexibility
Sector investing can support both long-term thematic positioning and shorter-term market rotations, allowing you to fine-tune the personal portfolio.
What are the potential disadvantages to sector investing?
Higher volatility
Sector investing could narrow exposure to a specific part of the economy, which can make portfolios more vulnerable if that sector underperforms.
Inefficient diversification
Over-diversification may dilute high-quality exposure without meaningfully reducing risk.
Timing challenges
Sector performance rotates with economic cycles, but timing those rotations can be difficult.
Reduced benefit from market leaders
Many broad market strategies naturally let winners grow; sector investing can disrupt that.
Xtrackers Sector-based ETF
Xtrackers S&P 500 Diversified Sector Weight ETF SPXD)
SPXD tracks the S&P 500 Diversified Sector Weight Index, which reweights the S&P 500 to moderate concentration and balance sector exposures. Using Syntax’s FIS taxonomy, the approach allows companies to appear in multiple sectors, providing a rules based, diversified framework.
| Xtrackers Sector-Based ETF | Ticker | CUSIP | Gross/Net Expense Ratio | Dividend Distribution Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xtrackers S&P 500 Diversified Sector Weight ETF | SPXD | 23306X795 | 0.09% | Quarterly |
Diversification through factor investing
What is factor investing?
Factor investing is a systematic strategy that seeks to forecast future returns by analyzing a security’s exposure to well‑researched drivers of performance. According to extensive research, factors have historically led to better risk-adjusted returns over time across different time periods and market conditions.[1] There are five well-established factors representing broad, persistent characteristics that aim to influence risks and returns over time.
1 Quality
This factor looks at companies with strong financial health – lower debt levels, stable earnings, and steady growth compared to their peers. Quality companies often show higher returns on equity, better debt coverage, and efficient use of money compared to other companies.
2 Value
The Value factor looks for companies that seem undervalued — meaning their stock price seems low compared to what the business is worth. Value companies often trade at discounts to benchmarks such as price-to-earnings, cash flow, or price-to-book value— with the possibility to outperform more expensive peers.
3 Momentum
This factor is based on the idea that stocks that have done well recently often keep doing well for a while. It looks for companies whose share price has risen more than their peers. Momentum-based strategies systematically buy more of these stocks while reducing exposure to those with weaker recent performance.
4 Low Volatility
The Low Volatility factor seeks to reduce big ups and downs in a portfolio. It focuses on stocks that have shown lower price swings in the past. But it doesn’t simply pick the least volatile stocks. Instead, it constructs a portfolio that aims to keep overall risk low while maintaining broad market exposure. Firms with lower price variability have historically delivered competitive—and often superior—risk‑adjusted returns.
5 Size
The size factor focuses on smaller companies, often called small-cap stocks. Historically, these companies have shown the potential for higher long‑term return premia compared to large‑cap cohorts.[2]
Key advantages of factor investing
Risk management
Defensive factors such as Low Volatility and Quality may help mitigate drawdowns during periods of market stress. These exposures have historically demonstrated resilience and can enhance overall portfolio stability.
Enhanced risk-adjusted returns
Factor strategies target well documented return premia that have demonstrated persistence across economic cycles. In contrast to traditional cap weighted approaches, factor investing seeks to harvest these premia systematically through transparent, rules-based construction.
Superior diversification
Factors typically exhibit low correlations with one another and with traditional asset class exposures. This allows you to diversify not only by sector or geography, but by return driver, thereby reducing concentration risk embedded in cap weighted benchmarks.
Transparency and discipline
Factor portfolios are generally built using rules-based methodologies, offering visibility into exposures and reducing dependence on non-rules-based decision-making.
Cost efficiency
Factor ETFs often provide exposures similar to active quantitative strategies but at a lower cost structure.
Adaptability across market regimes
Because factor performance cycles vary across macro environments, you can tilt toward factors aligned with prevailing conditions—defensives during Volatility, Momentum and Quality in stable expansions, Value in recovery phases—helping improve consistency in risk-adjusted outcomes.
Potential disadvantages to factor investing
Extended Underperformance
Factor premiums are cyclical, meaning that they can lag the market for years at a time.
Crowding reduces effectiveness
Overcrowded factors may potentially diminish excess returns and raise volatility.
Timing difficulty
Knowing when to rotate into or out of a factor can be challenging.
Structural changes
Factors that historically worked may lose relevance as the economy or market changes.
Xtrackers Factor-based ETFs
Xtrackers Russell US Multifactor ETF (DEUS)
DEUS tracks the Russell 1000 Comprehensive Factor Index, using security level scores across quality, value, momentum, low volatility and size. With a 10-year live track record, this rules based approach offers a systematic alternative to cap weighted strategies with a decade of live performance.
Xtrackers FTSE Developed ex US Multifactor ETF (DEEF)
DEEF tracks the FTSE Developed ex US Comprehensive Factor Index, applying Quality, Value, Momentum, Low Volatility and Size factors to developed markets outside the U.S. This rules based approach offers diversified international exposure grounded in factor research.
Xtrackers Russell 1000 US Quality at a Reasonable Price ETF (QARP)
QARP tracks the Russell 1000 2Qual/Val 5% Capped Factor Index, applying a Quality tilted approach to companies that also meet Value criteria. This rules based methodology provides targeted large-cap exposure to firms with strong fundamentals at reasonable valuations.
| Xtrackers Factor-Based ETFs | Ticker | CUSIP | Gross/Net Expense Ratio | Dividend Distribution Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xtrackers Russell US Multifactor ETF | DEUS | 233051481 | 0.17% | Quarterly |
| Xtrackers FTSE Developed ex US Multifactor ETF | DEEF | 233051515 | 0.24% | Quarterly |
| Xtrackers Russell 1000 US Quality at a Reasonable Price ETF | QARP | 233051242 | 0.19% | Quarterly |
Diversification using market cap-based strategies
An additional method to manage concentration risk is through selective reweighting or exclusion of the largest index constituents. This can materially decrease dependency on a narrow set of stocks—primarily in the Technology and Tech adjacent sectors.
By reallocating the weight removed from mega-cap leaders to the remaining large-cap universe, market cap-based strategies can:
Reduce sector concentration exposure
Decreasing the top names in large-cap market indices potentially lowers unintended sector concentration, especially in the Technology sector.
Increase exposure to underrepresented areas
Reducing the weight of mega-cap names can potentially increase weights of Health Care, Financials, Industrials, and other sectors.
Broaden performance drivers
Capture a broader set of earnings and valuation drivers across the U.S. equity market.
Market cap reweighting strategies enable you to maintain large-cap exposure while mitigating the potential structural concentration risk inherent in conventional cap weighted benchmarks.
Potential disadvantages to market cap-based strategies
Structural underweight to the market’s primary performance drivers
Reducing mega-cap holdings from a portfolio can reduce concentration risk, but it could also remove the key drivers of recent U.S. equity returns.
Potential underperformance
Removing mega-cap names can trigger market underperformance, especially in concentrated market regimes.
Sector underweights
Excluding mega-cap names can potentially create structural sector underweights, especially in Technology.
Xtrackers Market-cap-weighted ETF
Xtrackers S&P 100 Ex Top 20 ETF (XOEX)
XOEX tracks the S&P 100 Index while excluding the 20 largest constituents by float adjusted market cap. This focuses the exposure on the remaining 80 large-cap companies, offering a diversified segment of established U.S. firms without the influence of the largest mega-cap names.
| Xtrackers Factor-Based ETFs | Ticker | CUSIP | Gross/Net Expense Ratio | Dividend Distribution Frequency |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Xtrackers S&P 100 Ex Top 20 ETF | XOEX | 23306X407 | 0.15% | Quarterly |
Balanced approach through equal weight investing
Equal-weight strategies have long been viewed as a straightforward solution to large-cap concentration risk, assigning each constituent the same weight—approximately 0.2% in the S&P 500 and 0.1% in the Russell 1000.
Advantages to equal-weight investing
- Reduces concentration risk: Equal-weight strategies neutralize the influence of mega cap companies and elevate the contribution of smaller names.
- Enhances diversification across companies and sectors: Equal-weight portfolios can reduce sector imbalances and broaden market participation.
- Greater exposure to small- and mid-cap Stocks: Equal-weighting allows you to benefit when smaller companies are outperforming larger ones.
- Diversification from mega-caps: An equal-weighted strategy can be a strong hedge against extreme market concentration.
However, the practical implications of this construction reveal several challenges. While equal weighting does reduce concentration risk in a mathematical sense, the approach introduces significant and often undesirable side effects:
- Excessive active tilt: Since equal weighting dramatically increases exposure to the smallest names and sharply cuts exposure to mega caps, it acts more like a high conviction active strategy.
- Material turnover: Maintaining equal weights across hundreds of securities requires constant rebalancing, resulting in high portfolio turnover.
- Elevated transaction costs: Frequent rebalancing increases frictional costs, which can erode returns—particularly in volatile markets or when liquidity in smaller constituents is limited.
- Departure from benchmark characteristics: Instead of presenting a modest adjustment to cap weight concentration, equal weighting becomes a structurally aggressive strategy with risk and return characteristics that diverge meaningfully from traditional large-cap benchmarks.
In short, while equal-weight indices address concentration mathematically, they introduce substantial implementation costs and active factor tilts that may be misaligned with your intended exposures—especially if you are seeking a measured, risk aware alternative to traditional cap weighted allocations.
The Bottom line
For further definitions of financial terms, please visit the Xtrackers glossary.