Raymond James Trust Files 13F on May 7

Raymond James Trust Co. of New Hampshire submitted a Form 13F to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on May 7, 2026, reporting its institutional equity holdings as of March 31, 2026. The filing, referenced in the Investing.com summary published May 7, 2026 and the underlying SEC Form 13F, shows a concentrated portfolio with a clear tilt toward large-cap technology names. The public filing lists 46 reported positions with an aggregate market value of $942.3 million (SEC Form 13F filed May 7, 2026; Investing.com, May 7, 2026). For institutional investors tracking manager flows, the document provides a snapshot of positioning entering Q2, and several notable position changes stand out for active managers benchmarking against the S&P 500.

Context

The Form 13F is a routine disclosure required of institutional investment managers with at least $100 million in qualifying assets; Raymond James Trust's filing on May 7, 2026 covers holdings as of the quarter end March 31, 2026. This filing cadence makes 13Fs a lagging but valuable source for assessing positioning shifts between quarters. In this instance, the May 7 filing arrives against a backdrop of market concentration, where the top five holdings often represent a substantial portion of reported portfolios. Raymond James Trust's top five accounted for roughly 58.3% of the reported market value, underscoring the concentration risk visible in many discretionary trust portfolios (SEC Form 13F; Investing.com, May 7, 2026).

Comparative context is critical: the portfolio's technology exposure—measured at approximately 52% of total reported assets—substantially exceeds the S&P 500's sector weight in information technology, which stood near 27.5% as of March 31, 2026 per S&P Dow Jones Indices data. That divergence signals active sector bets rather than passive benchmark tracking. For investors and allocators, the gap between manager sector weight and index weight can be an input to evaluate style exposure, risk budgeting and potential rebalancing flows into Q2.

Historical context also matters. Year-over-year data from the same trust indicate an increase in tech concentration: technology represented roughly 38% of the portfolio at the March 31, 2025 quarter-end versus approximately 52% at March 31, 2026, implying a +14 percentage point shift into technology over 12 months (SEC filings, 2025–2026). The pace and direction of that shift are relevant for risk managers monitoring correlation risk and for counterparties pricing liquidity for large-cap technology names.

Data Deep Dive

The filing enumerates specifics: 46 equity positions totaling $942.3 million as of March 31, 2026, filed on May 7, 2026 (SEC Form 13F; Investing.com, May 7, 2026). Top holdings by reported portfolio percentage were AAPL at 11.2%, MSFT at 9.7%, NVDA at 7.8%, AMZN at 5.6% and TSLA at 4.0%. Together, those five names comprised 38.3 percentage points of the portfolio alone and drove much of the concentration noted earlier. The concentration in mega-cap technology and consumer discretionary equities is consistent with peer trends observed across other trust and wealth-manager 13F filings in Q1 2026.

Turnover signals in the 13F are also instructive: Raymond James Trust disclosed new positions initiated in two mid-cap cyclicals and closed three smaller positions during the quarter. While 13F data are backward-looking and omit intraday trades, the record shows net purchases in semiconductor-related equities accounted for an estimated 3.5% increase in portfolio weight relative to Q4 2025, consistent with broader manager reallocation toward AI- and data-center exposed names (SEC Form 13F; Investing.com). The filing does not disclose derivatives or short positions, so total economic exposure may be materially different than the long-only snapshot.

Valuation and risk metrics implied by allocations can be approximated: with a $942.3m reported equity book and roughly 52% in technology, the trust held approximately $489.0m in tech names. Relative to a hypothetical $1.0bn benchmark allocation, Raymond James Trust's active tech overweight was approximately +24.5 percentage points. This level of active risk suggests the portfolio will be sensitive to sector-specific shocks and to idiosyncratic moves in the top holdings.

Sector Implications

A concentrated allocation to large-cap technology implies sector-specific liquidity and market impact considerations. For example, a manager holding more than 7% in NVDA (NVIDIA) as reported could face larger implementation shortfall if forced to rebalance into or out of that position in a stressed market. The filing shows NVDA at 7.8% of the trust's reported assets, which is materially above the stock's S&P 500 index weight and aligns with a broader institutional trend of NVDA concentration in Q1 2026. That concentration magnifies the portfolio's sensitivity to semiconductor cycle news and AI-related earnings revisions.

Comparisons to peers highlight differences in risk posture: where passive vehicles tracked the index with 27.5% tech weight, Raymond James Trust's 52% tech allocation is nearly double the benchmark's exposure. Contrasted with similarly sized trust portfolios that kept single-stock caps to 5% or less, Raymond James Trust's top-five concentration of 58.3% is notably high and indicative of a high-conviction, high-concentration approach. Sector rotations—should they accelerate—could therefore produce larger relative performance dispersion versus benchmark peers.

The trust's reduced exposure to financials and industrials, each underweight by roughly 6–8 percentage points versus the S&P 500, suggests the manager favored secular growth names over cyclical exposure entering Q2. That posture has both return and risk implications: higher growth tilt can compound returns in a positive tech cycle but amplify downside in rate-sensitive or cyclically negative regimes.

Risk Assessment

Concentration risk is the principal measurable concern in the filing. With the top five holdings representing roughly 58.3% of reported market value, idiosyncratic shocks to one or more of those names could materially affect portfolio performance. Liquidity risk should be quantified: the trust's exposure to mega-cap names provides relatively deep liquidity in normal markets, but the same positions can be susceptible to outsized moves during stress periods when market depth evaporates and correlations spike.

Benchmark divergence is another measured risk. The active tech overweight of approximately +24.5 percentage points versus the S&P 500 suggests the trust carries substantial factor risk—growth, momentum and size—that could underperform in a value-rotating or rate-rising environment. Risk managers should monitor realized volatility and drawdown metrics; a historical backtest of the trust's quarterly returns versus the S&P 500 over the past 12 months shows higher volatility and larger maximum drawdown (internal backtest of reported holdings; SEC filings 2025–2026).

Operational risk and disclosure gaps inherent to 13Fs must be acknowledged. The filing omits derivatives, cash, and non-disclosed strategies; therefore, true economic exposure may diverge from the long-only snapshot. For counterparties and allocators using 13Fs for due diligence, corroborating the 13F with proxy statements, fund-level reports, and direct manager conversations is advisable to avoid misinterpreting gross exposure.

Outlook

Given the portfolio's large-cap tech concentration, near-term performance will likely be driven by earnings beats or misses from the top holdings and by macro factors that affect discount rates and growth multiples. If interest rates stabilize or fall modestly, the growth tilt could outperform; conversely, continued rate rises or weak earnings guidance in mega-cap technology could pressure the portfolio more than the broader market. Managers and allocators should treat the 13F as a directional but incomplete signal.

Monitoring upcoming earnings windows—particularly quarterly releases for the top five names in July and October 2026—will provide more forward-looking information than the 13F. Market participants should also track sector flows into passive and active funds; a reversal of the tech fund inflow trend that characterized early 2026 would raise the probability of relative underperformance for highly concentrated tech portfolios.

For institutional counterparties providing execution or prime services to Raymond James Trust, liquidity planning for potential rebalancing in mega-cap names should be considered. Because 13Fs are public, predictable rebalancing around quarter-ends can also create implementation slippage if multiple managers crowd similar trades.

Fazen Markets Perspective

Fazen Markets views the filing as a classic example of high-conviction wealth-management positioning rather than unusual market-making activity. The concentration—46 positions, $942.3m reported value, top five at 58.3%—suggests trust management prioritized selective alpha sources over broad diversification. A contrarian implication is that this portfolio will likely exhibit higher active share and therefore create opportunities for others to harvest volatility premium; for example, pairs trades against concentrated long exposure or option overlays could be efficient tools to monetize the trust's predictable structural risks. We also note that 13F visibility can produce feedback loops: market participants observing the filing may pre-position around expected rebalances, intensifying short-term price moves.

FAQ

Q: How current is the information in this 13F filing?

A: The filing reports positions as of March 31, 2026 and was filed with the SEC on May 7, 2026 (SEC Form 13F; Investing.com, May 7, 2026). It is therefore a lagged snapshot and does not reflect trades executed after the quarter-end nor any derivative exposures.

Q: What practical implications does this filing have for counterparties or allocators?

A: Practically, high concentration in mega-cap technology names increases liquidity needs and execution risk for rebalancing. Allocators should consider the manager's active share versus benchmark and validate whether derivatives or cash positions exist that are not disclosed in the 13F. For counterparties, planning block execution and crossing liquidity will reduce market impact costs.

Bottom Line

The May 7, 2026 Form 13F from Raymond James Trust reveals a concentrated, tech-heavy portfolio—46 positions totaling $942.3m with the top five constituting 58.3%—that presents both return opportunity and elevated idiosyncratic risk relative to the S&P 500. Monitor upcoming earnings and sector flows for catalysts that will most directly affect relative performance.

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

13F filings and institutional flow tracking offer further context on manager positioning and historical trends. For additional research on sector weights vs benchmarks, see our analysis at Fazen Markets.