Methodology note
Fund look-through: compositions, staleness and unknown residuals
Look-through replaces a fund holding with its share of the fund's own holdings, so a limit sees the real exposure. A 500 holding in a fund that is 60% equities adds 300 to the equity weight. It depends on the composition: a missing or stale one, or one covering less than 100%, leaves the result unsettled.
look_through_exposure · Cash minimum and maximumcash_rangeHow the expansion works
Each fund position is multiplied through its composition: fund weight times entry weight. A 500 holding in a fund that is 60% stocks contributes 300 to stocks, beside any stocks held directly.
The registry's look-through template expands the named fund classes, through nested funds up to a stated depth of one to five levels. The cash template can count the cash sleeves of funds in the same way.
When a composition cannot be used
A fund with no composition, a stale composition or a cycle is not expanded, and the result discloses it. The rule states its own staleness limit in days, and an older composition is ignored.
The example dates a composition 31 December 2025 and evaluates on 30 June 2026 against a 90-day limit. The fund stays unexpanded, so the stocks weight is not settled.
Pitfall: partial coverage
Fund reports may cover less than the whole fund. When coverage is below 100%, the residual is unknown exposure, and it blocks a compliant reading.
Ask fund managers for full compositions. Where they cannot supply one, record how the residual is to be treated as an author decision on the rule.
Pitfall: the fund's date is not your date
A composition is a snapshot of the fund on its own reporting date, often a month or a quarter old. Your positions are today's.
Set the staleness limit to the fund's reporting cycle plus a margin, and show the composition date on every result that uses it.
Worked example
The fund's composition is dated 31 December 2025, beyond the rule's 90-day limit at the 30 June 2026 evaluation, so the fund is not expanded and the stocks weight is not evaluated.
Rule template:look_through_exposure dimension: classgroup: StocksfundClassNames: FundsmaxDepth: 3compositionStaleAfterDays: 90
Bounds: hard max 70%
| Holding | Class | Market value |
|---|---|---|
| Direct equities | Stocks | 400 |
| Balanced fund | Funds | 500 |
| UK gilt | Bonds | 100 |
| Fund | Underlying sleeves | As of |
|---|---|---|
| FUND | Equity sleeve: 50% (Stocks); Bond sleeve: 50% (Bonds) | 31 December 2025 |
| Group | Status | Value | Bounds | Headroom to the hard bound | Code |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stocks | Not evaluated: data quality | – | ≤ 70% | – | MISSING_POSITION_DATA |
MISSING_POSITION_DATA: One or more positions had no readable value, and the partial numbers do not prove the outcome either way.
Computed at build time by the Acclimetry rule engine (backend commit 8197063); the same code runs in the product.
Questions
How deep should look-through go?
As deep as the policy needs and the data allows. The registry's template accepts one to five levels, and each level adds a composition that must be current.
Can a fund's own limits replace look-through?
Only if the policy says so. A fund's prospectus limits say what it may hold, not what it holds today.