What Did Rajiv Jain Own in Q4 2025? GQG’s $60.72B 13F Put 51.3% in Its Top 10

GQG Partners does not run a closet index, and its Q4 2025 13F makes that impossible to miss. Rajiv Jain’s firm reported $60.72B in U.S. long holdings across only 87 positions. More strikingly, the top 10 names consumed 51.3% of the filing, and Philip Morris alone accounted for 14.56%. This is what a conviction portfolio looks like when a global equity manager keeps position count low and insists on making every slot matter.

TL;DR

• GQG reported $60.72B in Q4 2025 13F AUM across just 87 positions.
• PM was the largest disclosed holding at 14.56%, while the top five reached 34.9% and the top 10 hit 51.3%.
• The portfolio leaned toward defensive cash flow and non-U.S. growth exposure through ENB, PGR, IBN, CI, T, AEP, HDB, KO, and VZ.
• That fits Rajiv Jain’s 2025 public commentary, where he highlighted lower-beta positioning, caution on crowded U.S. tech, and more interest in utilities, infrastructure, and selective emerging-market franchises.

Why this filing matters

GQG is often described as a global quality manager, but the more useful phrase may be selective concentration. Jain is willing to hold fewer names than most giant asset managers as long as the underlying businesses are liquid, durable, and cash-generative. The Q4 2025 filing still carries that signature. You do not need hundreds of small positions when you think you already know which franchises deserve the capital.

External context reinforces that view. In 2025 updates, GQG discussed running lower-beta portfolios, staying relatively cautious on U.S. technology, and preferring higher-certainty earnings. A year-end UCITS portfolio update for GQG’s global strategy showed only 47 holdings versus a benchmark with more than 2,500 constituents. The 13F is not identical to those products, but the same philosophy shows through: limited slots, high conviction, and a clear preference for resilient cash flow over headline momentum.

What did GQG buy in Q4 2025?

The most important answer is not one stock. It is the shape of the list. Philip Morris sat at the top with an $8.84B stake, far ahead of the next disclosed lines. After that came a mix of defensives, insurers, telecom, utilities, and India-linked financial exposure: Enbridge, Progressive, ICICI Bank, Cigna, AT&T, American Electric Power, HDFC Bank, and Coca-Cola.

That basket is revealing. Instead of chasing the biggest U.S. AI winners, GQG emphasized businesses with recurring demand, pricing power, regulated assets, or advantaged deposit franchises. Even further down the top 20, the pattern continues with Verizon, Petrobras, Johnson & Johnson, British American Tobacco, Altria, AIG, CME Group, Allstate, Duke Energy, and Exelon.

Concentration is the story, not a side note

Metric	Q4 2025	Why it matters
Reported 13F AUM	$60.72B	Large enough to compare with the biggest active managers
Position count	87	Far fewer names than a typical diversified giant
Top holding	PM at 14.56%	True single-name conviction
Top five	34.9%	Nearly a third of the book in five ideas
Top 10	51.3%	More than half the filing concentrated at the top

This is why GQG’s 13F should be read differently from a multi-manager hedge fund or broad active mutual fund. The filing is not simply a record of positions. It is a map of how Rajiv Jain allocates belief. When one holding can exceed 14% and 10 positions can absorb more than half the book, every ranking change matters.

The AUM trend shows pressure, but not style drift

GQG’s reported 13F AUM peaked at $70.28B in 2025Q2, then fell to $65.09B in Q3 and $60.72B in Q4. That is a 6.7% quarter-over-quarter decline in the latest period and a visible cooldown from the midyear high. But style drift is not the lesson. Even as the reported book shrank, the portfolio remained compact and conviction-heavy.

The holdings count moved from 95 in Q3 to 90 in Q4 in the historical series, which supports the same conclusion. GQG was not broadening out to dilute risk. It stayed selective. That matters because managers under pressure often respond by hugging the benchmark. Jain did the opposite: the filing still reads like a manager who would rather be directionally right with fewer names than cosmetically diversified with too many.

How Rajiv Jain’s public views show up in the filing

Rajiv Jain spent much of 2025 warning about volatility, tariffs, and the importance of certainty of earnings. He also emphasized lower beta and relative caution toward parts of U.S. technology. The Q4 2025 13F looks consistent with that framework. Heavy weights in PM, KO, T, AEP, and VZ are not momentum-chasing choices. They are cash-flow and defensiveness choices.

At the same time, positions in IBN, HDB, and PBR show that GQG still wants growth and resource exposure outside the narrow U.S. mega-cap narrative. That is classic Jain: avoid the most crowded trade, but do not become timid.

Analyst’s take

The strongest read on this quarter is that GQG remained exactly what investors think it is: a concentrated global equity shop willing to look unfashionable if the cash-flow profile is better. The portfolio did not need 200 names to say something interesting. It said enough with 87. Philip Morris at 14.56% is the headline, but the broader message is that the firm still trusts a handful of durable franchises to do the heavy lifting.

That approach will always look uncomfortable next to benchmark-aware peers. But discomfort is part of the edge. If Rajiv Jain is right about lower-beta, cash-generative businesses and select emerging-market franchises, concentration is not a bug in this filing. It is the whole strategy.

Frequently asked questions

What did GQG buy in Q4 2025?

Its largest disclosed Q4 2025 holdings included PM, ENB, PGR, IBN, CI, T, AEP, HDB, KO, and VZ.

How concentrated was GQG’s Q4 2025 13F?

Very concentrated. The top position was 14.56%, the top five were 34.9%, and the top 10 represented 51.3% of the filing.

Why does GQG own so many defensive names?

The mix fits Rajiv Jain’s public emphasis on lower beta, certainty of earnings, infrastructure, utilities, telecom, and resilient consumer businesses during a volatile 2025 backdrop.

Did GQG abandon international exposure in Q4 2025?

No. Holdings such as IBN, HDB, ENB, and PBR show the portfolio still leaned into non-U.S. and emerging-market-linked themes.