Mayport 13F Reveals Shift to Tech and Energy

Mayport's Form 13F, filed on April 21, 2026 and reporting positions as of March 31, 2026, shows a concentrated repositioning toward large-cap technology and energy names. The filing, summarized by Investing.com and posted to the SEC's EDGAR database, reports a total long equity market value of $420.6 million, with the top five holdings constituting roughly 62% of reported equity exposure (Investing.com; SEC Form 13F, Apr 21, 2026). Quarter-over-quarter, the filing indicates a 12% increase in reported market value versus the December 31, 2025 13F snapshot, driven primarily by fresh purchases in semiconductor and integrated energy majors. For institutional investors monitoring shifts in active managers' sector bets, Mayport's 13F represents a notable redeployment of capital into higher-volatility, higher-beta names at a moment when macro volatility remains elevated. This article provides a data-driven breakdown of the filing, situates it versus benchmarks and peers, and assesses potential market implications and risks.

Context

Mayport is one of a cohort of mid-sized asset managers whose quarterly 13F disclosures can illuminate directional flows into large-cap U.S. equities. The April 21, 2026 filing covers the quarter ended March 31, a period that included two Fed rate decisions (Jan 29 and Mar 18, 2026) and a 5.2% rise in the Nasdaq Composite during Q1 2026 (Bloomberg, Q1 2026). Against that backdrop, Mayport's pivot toward technology and energy reflects both sectoral rebound dynamics and tactical positioning around cyclical reopening and AI-driven capex. The 13F is backward-looking — it captures positions at quarter-end — but is valuable for understanding what active exposures managers carried into the volatility window that followed.

The 13F format restricts reporting to long holdings of U.S.-listed equities and certain ADRs valued above $100,000; cash, derivatives, and short positions are not disclosed. As such, the $420.6 million number reported in Mayport's filing represents a subset of the firm's total economic exposures (Investing.com; SEC Form 13F). Institutional readers should therefore interpret the filing as a partial visibility tool: it discloses concentrated equity bets but omits hedging and non-reportable instruments. Mayport's disclosed top-five concentration (approximately 62%) suggests a high active share within the reported portion of the portfolio, which typically correlates with higher idiosyncratic risk.

Comparatively, Mayport's reported 48% allocation to technology (by market value) as of March 31 stands well above the S&P 500's technology sector weighting of approximately 28% at the same date (S&P Dow Jones Indices, Mar 31, 2026). That differential — a 20 percentage point overweight — signals intentional sector tilting rather than passive tracking. For benchmark-aware investors, a manager with this profile will materially drive relative returns both to the upside in tech rallies and to the downside in sector-specific drawdowns.

Data Deep Dive

The filing provides three headline numbers worth underscoring: total reported long equity market value of $420.6 million; top-five holdings representing c.62% of that value; and a disclosed cash-equivalent or minimal cash position (non-reportable in 13F but evident from low turnover within reported names). The $420.6 million figure represents a 12% increase versus the December 31, 2025 13F snapshot — a quarter-over-quarter expansion that investing.com explicitly cites (Investing.com, Apr 21, 2026). This pace of increase outpaced median growth among comparable managers in our dataset, where the typical QoQ change ranged between +2% and +8% in Q1 2026 (Fazen Markets internal dataset).

Top individual positions reported include significant weightings in Apple Inc. (AAPL), Microsoft Corp. (MSFT), Nvidia (NVDA), Exxon Mobil (XOM), and Chevron (CVX), which together form the top-five concentration. These five tickers accounted for c.62% of the portfolio's reported market value at quarter-end. The presence of both FAAMG-style mega caps and integrated energy majors indicates a hybrid strategy: core tech growth exposure complemented by commodity cyclicals — a mix that can perform asymmetrically depending on growth versus inflation risk repricing.

Turnover signals in the filing show increased activity in semiconductors (notably NVDA and an unnamed supplier) and fresh position initiations in integrated energy (XOM, CVX). Mayport's semiconductor exposure expanded to c.18% of reported market value from c.10% the prior quarter, driven by new purchases and market appreciation (Investing.com; SEC Form 13F). These changes suggest a tactical overweight to the AI-capex thematic while reintroducing energy cyclicals to hedge against inflationary or commodity-price upside.

Sector Implications

Mayport's tech overweight (48% reported) has two immediate implications. First, it amplifies the portfolio's sensitivity to idiosyncratic technology risk — company-specific earnings surprises, regulatory actions, or supply-chain disruptions will have outsized impact. Second, in aggregate, manager-level increases in tech exposure contribute to market breadth signals: when active managers re-concentrate into a few mega caps or high-growth sectors, it can reduce cross-market liquidity and raise volatility in single-stock trading.

The reported energy exposure (combined XOM and CVX positions among top holdings) functions as a macro hedge: integrated energy names historically display stronger revenue resilience during inflationary episodes and commodity-price upcycles. Mayport's combination of tech and energy is, therefore, a structural hedge pair — growth on one axis, commodity cyclicals on the other — albeit one that requires active risk management given divergent correlation regimes. For example, between March and April 2026, Brent crude rose c.9% (Bloomberg), which would have supported Mayport's energy legs while tech performance depended heavily on AI earnings revisions.

Relative to peers, Mayport's concentration ratio (top-five = 62%) is significantly higher than the median among similarly sized managers, where top-five concentrations average c.40–45% for the reported equity sleeve (Fazen Markets internal analysis, Q1 2026). This greater concentration may provide outsize return potential but also increases tracking error versus broad benchmarks such as the S&P 500 (SPX), which had a year-to-date performance variance of ±6% relative to the Nasdaq through Q1 2026. Investors should monitor liquidity metrics of the top holdings to assess execution risk in stressed market conditions.

Risk Assessment

The primary risk evident in Mayport's 13F is concentration risk. With top-five holdings comprising c.62% of reported market value and a near-half allocation to a single sector (technology), the firm is exposed to sector-specific shocks. A negative technology sector event — regulatory penalties, major downgrades, or supply-chain shocks — could disproportionately affect reported NAV. Historical precedent includes the 2022 tech drawdown where heavily concentrated funds experienced drawdowns exceeding 30% from peak (Bloomberg; 2022 market data).

A second risk vector is liquidity and market-impact cost. Although AAPL and MSFT are highly liquid, heavier positions in semiconductor suppliers and mid-cap energy service providers can amplify slippage during forced exits. The 13F format does not disclose derivative hedges or short positions: Mayport may have offsetting exposures not visible in the filing, which creates uncertainty. Institutional counterparties should therefore consider contacting fund managers or using broker analytics to reconstruct potential unreported hedges when assessing true net exposure.

Macro dependency is a third risk factor. Mayport's energy allocation ties performance to commodity cycles; a sharp commodity price reversal could pressure the energy leg while not benefiting the concentrated tech positions, producing asymmetric drawdowns. Stress-testing portfolios under a range of macro scenarios — rapid Fed tightening, a sharp growth slowdown, or a supply-driven commodity shock — will help quantify plausible loss distributions for investors with exposure to managers exhibiting similar tilts.

Fazen Markets Perspective

Fazen Markets' analysis finds two contrarian points worth noting. First, high concentration in a mid-sized manager like Mayport can be a signal of conviction rather than recklessness when combined with active liquidity management. Not all concentrated exposures equal imprudent risk — if Mayport uses liquid large-cap anchors (AAPL, MSFT) as core holdings and sizes semiconductor bets opportunistically, the structure may be rational and returns-enhancing. Our liquidity-adjusted return models show that a 62% top-five concentration comprised mostly of mega-cap names can reduce forced liquidation risk materially versus the same concentration in mid-cap names.

Second, the simultaneous overweight to tech and energy can be an underappreciated risk diversification strategy in regimes where growth and commodity prices rise together — historically a favorable environment for cyclical tech spending increases (notably enterprise AI capex) concurrent with commodity-driven inflation. In Q1 2026, the co-movement between tech hardware demand and energy prices suggested a regime where such a pairing could outperform. That said, this is regime-dependent and would underperform in stagflation or pure growth-collapse scenarios.

Investors should therefore distinguish between headline concentration and the composition and liquidity of that concentration. Engaging directly with managers for transparency around undisclosed derivatives, gross exposure, and liquidity buffers remains best practice. See our equities research hub for methodology on liquidity-adjusted concentration metrics topic and manager engagement frameworks topic.

Outlook

Looking forward, Mayport's disclosed posture suggests outperformance potential if the AI spending cycle accelerates and commodity prices remain supportive into H2 2026. The 12% QoQ expansion in reported market value through March 31 implies the manager carried bullish positioning into the spring — a period that historically favors cyclical rallies. If the macro backdrop shifts toward higher nominal GDP growth and sustained corporate capex, the portfolio mix could capture asymmetric upside.

Conversely, downside scenarios include technology-specific mean reversion, regulatory disruptions, or a growth shock that disproportionally affects high-beta names. In such cases, the portfolio's concentration could translate into outsized drawdowns relative to diversified benchmarks; stress test scenarios where tech retraces 20–30% would materially affect a 48% tech-weighted portfolio. Active risk controls, such as dynamic sizing and liquidity buffers, will be critical for Mayport to navigate such outcomes.

For allocators, the immediate action is not an automatic reallocation but rather a structured reassessment: request updated holdings beyond the 13F window, interrogate liquidity management practices, and assess correlation dynamics between disclosed holdings and the rest of the investor's portfolio. Our sector and factor overlays can help simulate prospective contributions to return and volatility for institutional portfolios — contact Fazen for bespoke modeling or consult our equities methodology topic.

FAQ

Q: Does the 13F show Mayport's full risk exposures, including shorts and derivatives?

No. Form 13F discloses only long positions in U.S.-listed equities and certain ADRs above $100,000. Short positions, cash balances, options, swaps, and other derivatives are not reported. Investors should therefore treat the filing as partial visibility and follow up for gross exposure and hedging details when assessing total risk.

Q: How should allocators interpret a 62% top-five concentration compared with industry norms?

A 62% top-five concentration is high relative to median manager behavior (median top-five ~40–45% for comparable size in Q1 2026). High concentration signals concentrated risk/reward and typically higher tracking error versus benchmarks such as the S&P 500. However, the impact depends on the liquidity profile of the concentrated names; mega-cap concentration carries different execution risk than mid-cap concentration.

Q: Could Mayport's sector tilt be opportunistic rather than structural?

Yes. The expansion in semiconductor exposure from c.10% to c.18% quarter-over-quarter suggests tactical reallocation to thematic opportunities (AI capex). Investors should request post-quarter holdings to determine whether these moves were opportunistic entries or indicative of a strategic shift.

Bottom Line

Mayport's Apr 21, 2026 13F reveals a pronounced tilt into technology and energy with high top-five concentration, increasing both upside potential and idiosyncratic risk for the reported equity sleeve. Institutional investors should seek additional transparency on unreported hedges and liquidity management before drawing portfolio-level conclusions.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.