April's management report XPSF11 gave three news reports that change the reading of the thesis — and none of them were priced in the unit of R$ 6,71. . O CRI Econ has been fully prepaid, returning R$ 5,9 million to the fund cashier. The fund manager Resumed KNIP11 and BRCO11 After having zeroed them in December, capturing better price. And the result by unit went back to overcome the dividend for the first time since November 2025 — R$ 0,071 against R$ 0,070 distributed.
For a hybrid FoF that's been picking up since the peak of 2020, that trio matters. It does not change the thesis from one time to another, but it shows that management is doing what it needs to do: to realize gain when it appears, to buy cheap when the price delivers and to protect the cashier against debt securities incorporated.
What changed in the April ID?
The April report opened with the news that most stirs the balance sheet: CRI Econ has been fully prepaid. . They were R$ 5,9 million — equivalent to 1,69% of PL. The debtor anticipated payment before maturity and the fund cash expanded to PL 4%. In a portfolio of CRIs where five of the six debtors are incorporated, seeing an early discharge instead of a renegotiation is exactly the sign that the market asks for.
The full cashier was partially used in movements that are worth highlighting. The fund manager recompensed KNIP11 (R$ 0,6 Mi) and BRCO11 (R$ 0,5 Mi), two names that had been zeroed in December 2025. Reentering positions that were sold a few months ago is less common than it seems — and it signals price discipline. If the fund manager zeroed in December and recompensed in April, it's because the price dropped enough to justify re-entry.
There was also increased GARE11 in R$ 1,2 Mi and strengthening of BBIG11 in R$ 0,4 Mi. On the other side, Partial sale of TEPP11: 285 thousand shares in the market, with R$ 2,5 Mi of realised capital gain. This achievement is important because it helps to sustain the DPS at times when the current Yield of the invested FIIs would not manage alone.
The thesis of the double discount, without invention
XPSF11 negotiates R$ 6,71 when the equity value is R$ 8,05. This is P/VP of 0,83 — or 17% direct discount. But the story doesn't end there. The XPSF VP is calculated by the sum of the value of the shares of the 43 FIIs it holds. And these invested FIIs are, on a weighted average, the 88% of VP itself.
In practice: the unit holder who buys XPSF11 today pays R$ 6,71 for a package whose effective equity value of the underlying properties and CRIs is in the home of the R$ 9,15. If Selic follows the path projected by Focus (14,5% → 11% in 12 months), the discount of invested FIIs tends to close first — because brick follows box in fall. Then, the discount of the XPSF's own unit tends to compress against the recomposed VP.
The potential for arithmetic upperside adds up two legs. First: FIIs invested returning to VP 100% deliver ~13% XPSF VP Valuation. . Second: XPSF returning to P/VP ZQX0ZX delivery ~20% additional in unit. . Bring them together and the theoretical ceiling is in the order of 30% in 12-18 months, with Selic helping — not counting dividends on the way.
CRIs as defensive load
The 9% of the PL allocated in six CRIs (after the discharge of the Econ, in fact there are five) yields CDI + 1,82%. . It has no relevant market marking — pays monthly interest and returns principal on maturity. In a FoF portfolio that suffers from marking the invested FIIs, these CRIs are the stable piece of the result.
Five of the remaining five CRIs have corporate debtors. It is a concentration of sector that deserves attention, but all have fiduciary disposal of the stock and reserve fund. Selic in fall relieves exactly the financial cost of these developers — so the macro scenario plays in favor.
Where the thesis has a loose end
Not everything is optimism. Seven points deserve direct warning before any contribution decision.
| Point | Why does it matter? | Severity |
|---|---|---|
| 20% performance rate over IFIX | In 2025 IFIX rose 21,1%. Any year of high strength generates relevant drag in the liquid of the unit. | medium |
| Double rate layer (~1,8% effective) | 1,00% from admin XPSF + ~0,8-1,2% from invested FIIs fees. Expensive vs. building your own wallet. | medium |
| Gradually falling DPS | R$ 0,08 (2022) → R$ 0,07 (2026). Smaller DY reflect on the market and relocation to CRIs. | medium |
| VP/recovery unit after minimum | It fell from R$ 8,66 (Dec/23) to R$ 7,27 (Dec/24); it returned to R$ 8,05 in Apr/26 with profit of R$ 19 Mi in 4Q25. | low |
| PL 19% below peak R$ 428 Mi (2020) | In April it retreated R$ 8 Mi vs March — recovery is not yet linear. | low |
| Average volume in relevant fall | R$ 331 thousand/day in Apr/26 vs R$ 1,45 Mi in Dec/25 (fall of 59%). R$ 1 Mi output requires ~15 business days. | medium |
| 5 out of 5 CRIs with incorporating debtor | Sector concentration after Econ discharge. All with fiduciary alienation and reserve fund. | medium |
The performance rate is the most debatable point
Management charges 1,00% administration and 20% on excess IFIX. . In the year of the side market, the structure works — the fund manager delivers alpha and divides the gain. But IFIX went up 21,1% in 2025, and any FoF that just followed the index would end up paying performance without delivering real alpha.
The counterpoint is that XPSF delivered relevant total return in 2025 (unit + dividends) and the result of R$ 19 Mi in 4Q25 showed that management has the ability to extract value — see the sale of TEPP11 with R$ 2,5 Mi of gain made in April. But the quotaist who looks at the rate needs to know: the effective cost of XPSF is around 1,8% per year counting the rates of FIIs invested. It is expensive for a product that, in side year, delivers approximately IFIX.
Macro plays in favor now
Three macro back winds worth recording:
- Seal on 14,5% and Focus on 11% for 12 months — directly relieves the pressure on discounted FIIs. Each 25 bps of cutting brings the VP's unit closer.
- Office vacancy in SP at least 14 years (13,4%) — XPSF has exposure to FIIs of corporate slabs. Favorable structural trend.
- U.S.-Iran voltage begins to accommodate — geopolitical risk leaving the price unlocks risk premium in local variable income assets.
Where XPSF11 is in the FoF bucket
XPSF competes with other 26 FoFs. In the absolute note map, it is in the upper median position — fifth placed out of 27:
| Position | Ticker | Note | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| 3 | BTHF11 | 7,6 | COMPRA |
| 4 | BBFO11 | 7,5 | COMPRA |
| 5 | XPSF11 | 7,3 | ACUMULAR |
| 6 | BCIA11 | 7,2 | ACUMULAR |
The structural differential of XPSF is the hybrid composition: 88% in FIIs, 9% in Direct CRIs, 4% in box. The pure pairs of FoF don't have CRIs as a defensive piece. It is a hard product to replicate by building your own portfolio — buying 43 FIIs and six CRIs requires relevant capital, individual due diligence and transaction costs that erode the gain.
What holds the absolute note a little below BTHF and BBFO is precisely the performance rate on IFIX (peers use less demanding benchmarks) and the DPS in gradual fall since 2022.
Verdict
XPSF11 — Note 7,3 ACUMULAR
For whom it is: investor who wants diversified exposure to FIIs with a defensive piece of CRIs without mounting own portfolio. Accepts to pay management prize for the work of selection and roto. It has a horizon of at least 24-36 months for the thesis of the double discount to take place with the fall of Selic.
For those who are not: who optimizes by cost (FoF is expensive by structure), who needs increasing DPS every month (volatility of the result is part of the design) and who would need to move positions above R$ 2 Mi quickly (average volume dropped to R$ 331 thousand/day).
Thesis in one line: Double discount (unit to 0,83 of VP + FIIs invested to 88% of VP) + load of CDI+1,82% + Selic CRIs falling. Real Trade-off is the performance rate 20% over IFIX and the drop volume.
The relative note in the FoF bucket is 7,3 (heading 5 of 27). The absolute note is 7,5 — purchase. The difference comes from the higher requirement within the bucket, where BTHF and BBFO deliver the same concept with more friendly fee structure. For those who already have one of these in their wallet, XPSF is justified as a complement because of the piece of direct CRI. For those who do not yet have FoF, it is worth comparing with the two placed better before deciding.
