Version 3.0, published Oct 21, 2026: 1 observation, 3 sources.

Cathie Wood's philosophy, applied to ETFs

In the tradition of Cathie Wood, this seat prints 1 observation from ETFIQ data, each dated, and gives no verdict, version 3.0 of Oct 21, 2026. Is the theme one ARK names?

Bio

Catherine D. Wood was born in 1955. She received her B.S., summa cum laude, in finance and economics from the University of Southern California in 1981.

Philosophy

The approach Wood leads at ARK starts from one idea, disruptive innovation, which ARK defines in its fund prospectus (quoted below). ARK states that it believes the companies relevant to the theme are those that rely on or benefit from new products and services, technological improvements and advances in scientific research.

Key works

- ARK ETF Trust, prospectus and summary prospectuses (for example, post-effective amendment no. 43 to Form N-1A, filed Nov 26, 2025), which set out ARK's definition of disruptive innovation. - Cathie Wood, open letter to the Federal Reserve, published by ARK Invest, Oct 10, 2022, as reported by Fortune.

What we cannot know

This profile rests on SEC filings and press reports, and the internal models ARK uses to value companies are not public.

Source quality

Thin. The facts and record come from ARK's own SEC prospectus, which is strong, but Wood's own published words appear here only as a newspaper reported them.

In ARK ETF Trust’s words

“The Adviser defines 'disruptive innovation' as the introduction of a technologically enabled new product or service that potentially changes the way the world works.”

The Wood-style Disruptive Innovation seat

Wood-style Disruptive Innovation is one seat of the IQ Investment Committee. It applies ARK Invest's published research to ETFIQ data.

What the investor published

In ETFIQ’s words, with the source of each. Sourced to ARK Invest's published research.

Research behind the measures

Peer-reviewed research on how each measure is taken. It never adds a criterion, and where it weakens one the criterion says so.

Bela Nagy, J. Doyne Farmer, Quan M. Bui and Jessika E. Trancik (2013), Statistical Basis for Predicting Technological Progress, PLoS ONE 8(2), e52669 (doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0052669). Hindcasting costs for 62 technologies, Wright's law (cost falling with cumulative production) forecasts most accurately, with Moore's law close behind; the two are nearly indistinguishable because production tends to grow exponentially.

What the seat observes

The ARK idea or ARK fund theme the fund's theme maps to (the innovation platform: For a theme or coin fund, the idea in ARK's Big Ideas 2026 (p. 3), or the theme of a fund ARK itself runs as its registration statement defines it, that the fund's ETFIQ theme maps to; "none" where it maps to none. The map is ETFIQ's and is printed in full on the seat's page.) An observation, never a verdict: ARK publishes a definition of disruptive innovation, its flagship's 65% commitment and a list of ideas, but no test that can be applied to another firm's fund. A theme on the map is one ARK has written about; a theme off it is one ETFIQ has not matched, not one ARK rejects. Research, context, not a test of the measure: Bela Nagy, J. Doyne Farmer, Quan M. Bui and Jessika E. Trancik (2013), Statistical Basis for Predicting Technological Progress, PLoS ONE 8(2), e52669. Wright's law, which ARK's research leans on, forecasts falling technology costs well across 62 technologies; it bears on ARK's premise, not on any fund.

Compare and model modes

In model mode: The seat builds nothing: it gives no state to order funds by.

How the seat is tested

The cases this seat must pass before it ships, with the result each must give.

A broad innovation fund on a theme ARK names: no state, as the seat observes. The seat notes the match and gives no state: ARK publishes no test.

A gold miners fund: no state, as the seat observes. No match is noted, and no state is given.

ARKW: no state, as the seat observes. ARK's own internet fund: noted as ARK's Next Generation Internet theme, with no state.

Changes to this seat

Version 1.0, Oct 21, 2026: First version.

Version 2.0, Oct 21, 2026: ARK's own fund themes join the map and the crypto desk joins the scope; a theme off the map never vetoes.

Version 3.0, Oct 21, 2026: The seat observes and does not vote. ARK publishes no test that can be applied to another firm's fund, and the share owned by ARK's funds measured ARK's trading rather than the fund, so it is removed.

Where to next

The Investment Committee

Low Cost

Margin of Safety

Quality

Growth at a Reasonable Price

Global Contrarian

All-Weather

Cycles & Risk

Macro & Liquidity

Diversification

Trend Following

The Skeptic

Every method

Scope

Theme funds, and coin funds, since ARK names Bitcoin among its ideas and runs a spot bitcoin fund. Any other fund reads Not enough data, outside this seat's scope.

This seat observes and does not vote. ARK publishes what it means by disruptive innovation and which ideas it follows, and no test that can be applied to another firm's fund. So the seat notes whether a fund's theme is one ARK names or runs a fund on, and gives no state. An earlier version read how much of a fund ARK's own funds owned; that measures ARK's trading, not the fund, and it is gone.

Source strength: Thinner: the firm’s published research, so the seat uses fewer criteria. ARK Invest's own published research and its funds' own statements of strategy, not Wood's personal writing. They define the theme and give no test, so the seat observes and does not vote.

Lenses apply publicly known investing principles to ETFIQ data. No investor named is affiliated with or endorses ETFIQ. Not investment advice.

Sources

The published work each criterion is sourced to

What this cannot tell you

How to check any of this

This seat’s criteria, thresholds, weights and cases are in the committee file, the same file the committee reads.