The curated database of hedge funds that publish investor letters. Research by geography, strategy, and schools of thought.
| # | Fund | Strategy | Style | Geography | AUM | Latest Letter |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mairs & Power Fund maintains a bottom-up philosophy focused on purchasing high-quality, durable businesses at attractive valuations. During the first half of 2026, the fund achieved a 9.20% return, trailing the S&P 500 Total Return Index's 10.21% but aligning closely with its large-blend peer group. Performance was driven by positive sector allocation, particularly an overweight stance in Industrials, though stock selection in Information Technology served as a drag. While speculative AI hardware and memory stocks drove broader market gains, the fund remained disciplined, avoiding boom-and-bust cycle names in favor of resilient downstream beneficiaries like Entegris, nVent Electric, and Palo Alto Networks. Elevated interest rates and persistent inflation driven by Middle Eastern geopolitics pose macro risks. In response, the managers capitalized on market volatility to establish new positions in underappreciated software and service providers with proprietary data and high barriers to displacement, notably Bentley Systems, Arthur J. Gallagher, and CME Group, positioned to benefit as the AI investment cycle matures.
To build long-term wealth by investing in high-quality, bottom-up businesses with durable competitive advantages and strong balance sheets, while remaining disciplined on valuation and avoiding speculative hype.
The managers expect market volatility to remain, with a clear focus on how long massive technology capital expenditures can continue before shifting into real-time monetization. They aim to construct resilient, downside-mitigated portfolios filled with durable businesses that can withstand market cycles, rather than chasing short-term trends or timing the market.
As of Jun 30, 2026
Andrew R. Adams, CFA, serves as Chief Investment Officer and Lead Manager of the Mairs & Power Growth Fund, having joined the firm in 2006 and assumed the CIO role in 2018, succeeding Mark L. Henneman. Adams began his investment career in 1997 and earned degrees from the University of Wisconsin, Madison, where he participated in the Applied Security Analysis Program. Under his leadership since 2015, the fund has maintained its disciplined long-term approach while gradually expanding beyond traditional regional boundaries. The fund is co-managed by Peter Johnson, CFA, and operates within Minnesota's oldest privately owned investment firm established in 1931. The management team oversees a concentrated portfolio of typically 40-50 holdings with exceptional low turnover rates reflecting their conviction-weighted, long-term investment philosophy.
Mairs & Power employs a disciplined, long-term investment approach focused on companies rather than markets, with a regional emphasis on Minnesota and the Upper Midwest. The firm seeks companies that demonstrate consistent above-average growth, strong returns on invested capital, and durable competitive advantages, evaluated through proprietary analysis including Porter's Five Forces. The investment process emphasizes over 150 annual meetings with company management to build conviction, maintains low portfolio turnover typically less than 10%, and focuses on companies headquartered in a region the firm believes fosters high quality companies with excellent management teams. The fund objective is to provide shareholders with a diversified portfolio of common stocks with potential for above-average, long-term appreciation.
Lead Portfolio Manager
Andrew R. Adams
Managing Partner
Moderate Conviction Bullish
Market Conviction
A conviction score of 0.70 represents moderate to high conviction. The portfolio holds highly concentrated top positions like Microsoft (7.88%) and NVIDIA (9.35%) and explicitly maintains structural confidence in them during periods of underperformance, while still holding a diversified tail.
Growth Outlook
The market outlook score of 0.65 represents a constructive but cautious stance. The fund recognizes broadening earnings growth and rising productivity but remains mindful of sticky inflation, high interest rates, and geopolitical tensions.
Risk Appetite
The risk appetite score of 0.55 indicates a highly balanced posture. The fund actively manages risk by avoiding speculative momentum names and focusing on robust balance sheets and downside protection.
Capital Deployment
A score of 0.65 indicates moderate capital deployment. The fund actively initiated three new positions (Bentley Systems, CME Group, and Arthur J. Gallagher) during the quarter to capitalize on valuation dislocations, but remains highly selective.
Forward Guidance
A score of 0.60 shows a mild deployment bias. The managers are closely monitoring beaten-up software and financial names for potential entry points, while intentionally steering clear of hot, highly cyclical hardware names.
Language Signal
The language signal scores 0.65, reflecting constructive, long-term optimism. The letters are focused on high-quality compounders and durable downstream beneficiaries, balanced by risk-oriented vocabulary regarding Middle East conflicts and AI capital spending hurdles.
Perceived Risk
A score of 0.60 shows elevated but manageable risk awareness. The manager clearly outlines key threats, specifically highlighting geopolitical risks to oil supply chains and a potential cooling of capital expenditure cycles.
Opportunity Density
An opportunity density of 0.70 is assigned because the managers observe a fertile playing field in underappreciated, high-quality software and service names that are suffering from broad AI displacement fears.
Time Horizon
A time horizon score of 0.85 reflects a classic multi-year investment focus. The managers state their intention to hold companies that can benefit for 'years, not quarters' and repeatedly champion patience and bottom-up discipline.
Top Conviction Themes
Key Catalysts
Every insight in this database connects to the original source. Read the actual thesis, see the actual concerns, and make your own call.
Buyside Digest has no business relationship, partnership, agency, sponsorship, endorsement, or affiliation with Mairs & Power – Power Fund or any other manager whose content appears on the Service, except where expressly stated. We do not receive Manager Content directly from managers in most cases; content is collected from publicly available sources. Managers have not necessarily reviewed, approved, authorized, or endorsed our display of their content, our editorial commentary, our metadata extraction, or our classifications. Use of a manager’s name is for accurate attribution and identification purposes only, under principles of nominative fair use.
Buyside Digest does not independently verify the regulatory status, registrations, licensing, qualifications, credentials, or professional standing of managers whose content appears on the Service. We do not represent that managers are properly registered with applicable regulatory bodies, that their content complies with applicable securities laws, or that their performance representations are accurate. Inclusion of a manager in our database is based on the publicly available nature of their content, not on our verification of their regulatory status or content compliance. Users are responsible for conducting their own due diligence on any manager.
Performance data, returns, assets under management (“AUM”), and similar figures displayed on this page are sourced from publicly available manager communications (including investor letters), public filings, or other third-party sources. Buyside Digest does not independently verify performance figures, calculate returns, or audit manager-reported data. Such figures: May be selectively reported by the manager; May use non-standard calculation methodologies; May not reflect fees, expenses, taxes, or other costs; May be inconsistent across reporting periods; May be outdated. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Performance figures should not be relied upon for investment decisions without independent verification. Users should request audited performance data directly from the manager and conduct their own due diligence.
