As of 7 September 2026, the Headmars universe spans 2,246 tracked companies across eight sectors. How you rank them depends entirely on whether you count names or dollars — and the two answers disagree sharply.
Breadth: A Technology-Heavy Roster
By company count, Technology is the runaway leader with 604 names — roughly 27% of the entire universe. The megacaps you'd expect anchor the list: Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), and NVIDIA (NVDA), alongside chip and software peers AMD, Intel (INTC), and Salesforce (CRM).
Industrials follow at 432 companies (~19%), a genuinely global mix ranging from Honeywell (HON) to shipping's ZIM and eVTOL hopeful Archer Aviation (ACHR). Healthcare (372) and Basic Materials (316) round out the top four by breadth. The tail — Consumer Cyclical (165), Financials (137), Energy (131), and Communication Services (89) — is thinner on names but, as we'll see, not on weight.
Weight: A Very Different Podium
Rank instead by aggregate tracked market capitalisation, and the picture inverts. Financials sits on top at roughly $159 trillion of the ~$358 trillion total — about 45% of all tracked cap — from just 137 companies. Energy is second at ~$107 trillion (30%), and Basic Materials third at ~$47 trillion (13%). Technology, despite its commanding headcount, accounts for only ~$23 trillion, or about 6%.
That inversion is the story. The sectors with the fewest names carry the heaviest aggregate weight, while the most crowded corner of the universe punches comparatively light on a cap basis. Financials' concentration is unsurprising given anchors like Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B), JPMorgan (JPM), Visa, and Mastercard — but the sheer scale of the divergence is notable.
A Data Caveat Worth Naming
Before over-reading these totals, note that the roster clearly includes cross-listings: Alphabet appears as both GOOGL and GOOG, Tesla as TL0.F and TL0.DE, Novo Resources as NVO.TO and NVO.AX, Galantas Gold as GAL.V and GAL.L, and Obsidian Energy as OBE and OBE.TO. Duplicate listings inflate company counts and can distort aggregate cap figures. The extreme cap totals in Financials and Energy relative to Technology suggest these numbers should be treated as a directional map of the tracked set — not as clean, real-world sector valuations.
What an Investor Might Watch
Three things stand out. First, breadth concentration: with over a quarter of names in Technology, universe-level moves will be sensitive to that sector's fortunes. Second, the count-versus-weight gap — a portfolio equal-weighting names looks nothing like one weighting by cap. Third, data hygiene: reconciling cross-listed duplicates would sharpen every figure above. Until then, read the rankings as two honest but different lenses on the same set.