Integrated Investment Consultants Built a Style-Box ETF Core With a UWM Outlier in Q4 2025

Marcus Chen

Integrated Investment Consultants reported a Q4 2025 filing dominated by style-box ETFs, with UWMC standing out as the largest non-ETF exception.

Integrated Investment Consultants filed a Q4 2025 book that practically announced its own portfolio-construction philosophy. The largest lines were IWF, IWP, NEAR, IWD, and IEFA. The standout exception was UWMC, which ranked as the third-largest position and broke up an otherwise style-box ETF-heavy top tier.

TL;DR

  • Core structure: the top of the portfolio was overwhelmingly ETF-driven.
  • Growth and value split: IWF, IWP, and IWD gave the book an explicit style-box framework.
  • Defensive sleeve: NEAR added short-duration bond exposure near the top of the filing.
  • Outlier: UWMC was the biggest non-ETF position in the first cluster of holdings.
  • Best interpretation: this was a model-portfolio architecture first, with selective stock exceptions layered in.

Filing Snapshot

Holdings262 displayed positions
Top-1 weight7.1%
Top-5 weight24.4%
ETF-heavy top 10Yes
Largest non-ETFUWMC at 4.6%

Integrated Investment Top Holdings - Q4 2025 ($M)

Loading Chart...

The book is a framework before it is a stock list

This filing is a classic example of a manager expressing views through style buckets rather than through a small set of favorite stocks. large-cap growth, mid-cap growth, large-cap value, international developed equities, and dividend equities all sat near the top. That tells you the manager cared about factor balance and allocation scaffolding.

The interesting wrinkle is UWMC. It is large enough to count as a real active choice, not just an incidental small stock. That kind of outlier is exactly why ETF-heavy filings should still be read carefully rather than dismissed.

Integrated Investment Top-10 Mix: ETFs vs Single Stocks

Loading Chart...

What this filing is really saying

The filing says the manager wanted a structured growth-value-international-income mix, with a few selective single-name deviations. That is a very different message from a pure stock-picker portfolio, and it is why readers should combine this with the ETF-dominant guide and the same-stock-opposite-reasons guide.

Q&A

Is UWMC the main signal here?

It is the main non-ETF signal, but the larger message is still the ETF framework surrounding it.

Why does NEAR matter?

Because having a short-duration bond ETF near the top changes how you should read the whole risk posture.

Does this look active or passive?

It looks like active allocation expressed through passive building blocks.

What should investors watch next quarter?

Watch whether the ETF style box stays stable and whether the stock-specific exceptions get larger or smaller.

Explore all research