The shape of the universe
As of 30 July 2026, the tracked universe spans 1,796 companies across eight sectors. Counting names — not dollars — the concentration is immediate: Technology leads with 522 companies (about 29%), followed by Industrials (356, ~20%) and Healthcare (305, ~17%). Those three sectors alone account for roughly two-thirds of every ticker we follow.
The long tail is where the universe gets international. Basic Materials (201) and, again, Industrials are dense with names outside the usual US mega-cap roster — Xiamen Solex, China XLX Fert, Galantas Gold, Argentina Lithium, Arch Meter. If you scan the sample lists, the pattern is unmistakable: the breadth of the universe is driven less by household names and more by a wide float of miners, fertilizer makers, and industrial component suppliers listed in Shanghai, Taipei, Hong Kong, and Toronto.
Where the famous names actually live
The recognizable mega-caps cluster in a few smaller-by-count sectors. Communication Services holds just 73 companies, yet that short list includes Alphabet, Meta, Netflix, Disney, and Tencent. Financials (104) carries Berkshire, JPMorgan, Visa, and Mastercard. Consumer Cyclical (134) anchors on Amazon and Tesla. In other words, a sector's headcount tells you almost nothing about the weight of the businesses inside it — the biggest names sit in some of the thinnest buckets.
One quirk worth noting: cross-listings inflate the raw counts. Tesla appears as TSLA, TL0.F, and TL0.DE; Alphabet as both GOOGL and GOOG; Novo Resources as NVO.TO and NVO.AX; Obsidian Energy as OBE and OBE.TO. Some fraction of every sector's tally is the same underlying company listed on multiple exchanges, so treat the counts as a measure of ticker coverage, not distinct issuers.
A caveat on the market-cap column
The aggregate market-cap figures in this dataset do not hold up to scrutiny, and I would not build a view on them. Communication Services — which contains Alphabet, Meta, and Tencent — reports roughly $5.3T, while Basic Materials (gold and fertilizer names) reports about $44T and Financials some $159T. That ordering inverts what the constituent names imply and, in the case of Financials, exceeds plausible real-world totals. The most likely culprits are double-counted cross-listings and mixed reporting currencies. Until that column is reconciled, company counts are the more trustworthy lens.
What an investor might watch
- Concentration risk in the coverage itself. Two-thirds of the universe sits in three sectors; a Tech or Industrials drawdown would move a broad swath of tracked names at once.
- The international small-cap tail. Basic Materials and Industrials skew toward foreign-listed, smaller issuers — thinner liquidity and different disclosure regimes than the US mega-caps.
- Data hygiene. The cross-listing duplication and the questionable cap figures are a reminder to verify per-name fundamentals before acting, rather than trusting rolled-up sector aggregates.
The headline is simple: this is a Technology-heavy, globally-listed universe with a broad materials-and-industrials base — and a market-cap column that needs a cleanup pass before it earns anyone's trust.