ck0000898745-20230831
PRINCIPAL
FUNDS, INC.
(“PFI”
or the “Registrant”)
Statement
of Additional Information
Dated
December 31, 2023
This
Statement of Additional Information ("SAI") is not a prospectus. It contains
information in addition to the information in the Registrant's Prospectus. The
Prospectus, which may be amended from time to time, contains the basic
information you should know before investing in a Fund. You should read this SAI
together with the Prospectus dated December 31, 2023.
Incorporation
by Reference: The
audited financial statements, schedules of investments, and auditor’s report
included in the Registrant’s Annual
Report to Shareholders,
for the fiscal year ended August 31, 2023, are hereby incorporated by reference
into and are legally a part of this SAI.
For
a free copy of the current Prospectus, Semi-Annual Report, or Annual Report,
call 1-800-222-5852 or write:
Principal
Funds
P.O. Box 219971
Kansas City, MO 64121-9971
The
Prospectus may be viewed at www.PrincipalAM.com/Prospectuses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Ticker
Symbols by Share Class |
Fund |
A |
C |
J |
Inst. |
R-1 |
R-3 |
R-4 |
R-5 |
R-6 |
S |
Blue
Chip |
PBLAX |
PBLCX |
PBCJX |
PBCKX |
| PGBEX
|
PGBFX |
PGBGX |
PGBHX |
|
Bond
Market Index |
|
| PBIJX |
PNIIX |
PBIMX |
PBOIX |
PBIPX |
PBIQX |
| |
Capital
Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PCSFX |
Diversified
Real Asset |
PRDAX |
|
| PDRDX |
| PGDRX |
|
| PDARX |
|
Edge
MidCap |
PEMCX |
|
| PEDGX |
|
|
|
| PEDMX |
|
Global
Multi-Strategy |
PMSAX |
|
| PSMIX |
|
|
|
| PGLSX |
|
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
|
|
| PGSLX |
|
|
|
|
| |
International
Equity Index |
|
|
| PIDIX |
PILIX |
PIIOX |
PIIPX |
PIIQX |
PFIEX |
|
International
Small Company |
|
|
| PISMX |
|
|
|
| PFISX |
|
Opportunistic
Municipal |
PMOAX |
|
| POMFX |
|
|
|
|
| |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
POEYX |
|
| POEIX |
|
|
|
| POEFX |
|
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
PMDAX |
PMDDX |
| PMDIX |
|
|
|
| PMDHX |
|
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
PPSAX |
PRFCX |
PPSJX |
PPSIX |
PUSAX |
PNARX |
PQARX |
PPARX |
PPREX |
|
HISTORY
OF THE FUNDS
Principal
Funds, Inc. (“PFI” or the “Registrant”) was organized as Principal Special
Markets Fund, Inc. on January 28, 1993, as a Maryland corporation. The
Registrant changed its name to Principal Investors Fund, Inc. effective
September 14, 2000 and to Principal Funds, Inc. effective June 13,
2008.
On
January 12, 2007, the Registrant acquired WM Trust I, WM Trust II, and WM
Strategic Asset Management Portfolios, LLC.
Classes
offered by each series of the Registrant (each, a “Fund” and, together, the
“Funds”) are shown in the following table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
Share
Class |
Fund |
A |
C |
J |
Inst. |
R-1 |
R-3 |
R-4 |
R-5 |
R-6 |
S |
Blue
Chip |
X |
X |
X |
X |
| X |
X |
X |
X |
|
Bond
Market Index |
|
| X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
| |
Capital
Securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| X |
Diversified
Real Asset |
X |
|
| X |
| X |
|
| X |
|
Edge
MidCap |
X |
|
| X |
|
|
|
| X |
|
Global
Multi-Strategy |
X |
|
| X |
|
|
|
| X |
|
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
|
|
| X |
|
|
|
|
| |
International
Equity Index |
|
|
| X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
International
Small Company |
|
|
| X |
|
|
|
| X |
|
Opportunistic
Municipal |
X |
|
| X |
|
|
|
|
| |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
X |
|
| X |
|
|
|
| X |
|
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
X |
X |
| X |
|
|
|
| X |
|
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
X |
|
Each
class has different expenses. Because of these different expenses, the
investment performance of the classes will vary. For more information, including
your eligibility to purchase certain classes of shares, call Principal Funds at
1-800-222-5852.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC (“PGI” or the “Manager”) may recommend to the Board of
Directors (the “Board”), and the Board may elect, to close certain Funds to new
investors or close certain Funds to new and existing investors. PGI may make
such a recommendation when a Fund approaches a size where additional investments
in the Fund have the potential to adversely impact Fund performance and make it
increasingly difficult to keep the Fund fully invested in a manner consistent
with its investment objective. PGI may also recommend to the Board, and the
Board may elect, to close certain share classes to new or new and existing
investors.
MULTIPLE
CLASS STRUCTURE
The
Board has adopted a multiple class plan (the “Multiple Class Plan”) pursuant to
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 18f-3. The share classes
each Fund offers are identified in the chart included under the heading “History
of the Funds.” The share classes offered under the Multiple Class Plan include:
Classes A, C, J, Institutional, R-1, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6, and S.
Class
A shares are generally sold with a sales charge that is a variable percentage
based on the amount of the purchase, as described in the Prospectus. Certain
redemptions of Class A shares within 12 months of purchase may be subject to a
contingent deferred sales charge (“CDSC”), as described in the
Prospectus.
Class
C shares are not subject to a sales charge at the time of purchase but are
subject to a 1% CDSC on shares redeemed within 12 months of purchase, as
described in the Prospectus.
Class
J shares are sold without any front-end sales charge. A CDSC of 1% is imposed if
Class J shares are redeemed within 18 months of purchase, as described in the
Prospectus.
Sales
charge waivers and reductions may be available depending on whether shares are
purchased directly from the Fund or through a financial intermediary, as
described in the Prospectus and Appendix B to the Prospectus, titled
“Intermediary-Specific Sales Charge Waivers and Reductions.”
For
Classes A, C, and J shares purchased from the Fund or through an intermediary
not identified on Appendix B to the Prospectus, the CDSC is waived on
shares:
•redeemed
within 90 days after an account is re-registered due to a shareholder's
death;
•redeemed
to pay surrender fees;
•redeemed
to pay retirement plan fees;
•redeemed
involuntarily from accounts with small balances;
•redeemed
due to the shareholder's disability (as defined by the Internal Revenue Code)
provided the shares were purchased prior to the disability;
•redeemed
from retirement plans to satisfy minimum distribution rules under the Internal
Revenue Code;
•redeemed
from a retirement plan to assure the plan complies with the Internal Revenue
Code;
•redeemed
from retirement plans qualified under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue
Code due to the plan participant's death, disability, retirement, or separation
from service after attaining age 55;
•redeemed
from retirement plans to satisfy excess contribution rules under the Internal
Revenue Code; or
•redeemed
using a systematic withdrawal plan (up to 1% per month (measured cumulatively
with respect to non-monthly plans) of the value of the fund account at the time,
and beginning on the date, the systematic withdrawal plan begins). (The free
withdrawal privilege not used in a calendar year is not added to the free
withdrawal privileges for any following year.)
For
Class J shares purchased from the Fund or through an intermediary not identified
on Appendix B to the Prospectus, the CDSC also is waived on shares:
•redeemed
that were purchased pursuant to the Small Amount Force Out program (SAFO);
or
•of
the Money Market Fund redeemed within 30 days of the initial purchase if the
redemption proceeds are transferred to another Principal IRA, defined as either
a fixed or variable annuity issued by Principal Life Insurance Company to fund
an IRA, a Principal Bank IRA product, or a WRAP account IRA sponsored by
Principal Securities, Inc. (PSI).
Institutional
Class and Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, R-5, and R-6 shares are available without any
front-end sales charge or CDSC. Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5 shares are
available through employer-sponsored retirement plans. Such plans may impose
fees in addition to those charged by the Funds. Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5
shares are subject to asset-based charges (described below). Class R-6 shares
are generally available through the defined contribution investment only
channel.
PGI
receives a fee for providing investment advisory and certain corporate
administrative services under the terms of the Management Agreement between the
Registrant and PGI. In addition to the management fee, the Funds’ Classes R-1,
R-3, R-4, and R-5 shares pay PGI a service fee and an administrative services
fee under the terms of a Service Agreement between the Registrant and PGI and an
Administrative Services Agreement between the Registrant and PGI,
respectively.
Service
Agreement (Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5 Shares)
The
Service Agreement provides for PGI to provide certain personal services to
shareholders (plan sponsors) and beneficial owners (plan members) of those
classes. These personal services include:
• responding
to plan sponsor and plan member inquiries;
• providing
information regarding plan sponsor and plan member investments; and
• providing
other similar personal services or services related to the maintenance of
shareholder accounts as contemplated by National Association of Securities
Dealers (NASD) Rule 2830 (or any successor thereto).
As
compensation for these services, Principal Funds will pay PGI service fees equal
to 0.25% of the average daily net assets attributable to each of the R-1, R-3,
R-4, and R-5 Classes. The service fees are calculated and accrued daily and paid
monthly to PGI (or at such other intervals as Principal Funds and PGI may
agree).
Administrative
Services Agreement (Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5 Shares)
The
Administrative Services Agreement provides for PGI to provide services to
beneficial owners of Fund shares. Such services include:
• receiving,
aggregating, and processing purchase, exchange, and redemption requests from
plan shareholders;
• providing
plan shareholders with a service that invests the assets of their accounts in
shares pursuant to pre-authorized instructions submitted by plan
members;
• processing
dividend payments from the Funds on behalf of plan shareholders and changing
shareholder account designations;
• acting
as shareholder of record and nominee for plans;
• maintaining
account records for shareholders and/or other beneficial owners;
• providing
notification to plan shareholders of transactions affecting their
accounts;
• forwarding
prospectuses, financial reports, tax information, and other communications from
the Fund to beneficial owners;
• distributing,
receiving, tabulating, and transmitting proxy ballots of plan shareholders;
and
• other
similar administrative services.
As
compensation for these services, Principal Funds will pay PGI service fees equal
to 0.28% of the average daily net assets attributable to the R-1 Class, 0.07% of
the average daily net assets of the R-3 Class, 0.03% of the average daily net
assets of the R-4 Class, and 0.01% of the average daily net assets of the R-5
Class. The service fees are calculated and accrued daily and paid monthly to PGI
(or at such other intervals as Principal Funds and PGI may agree).
PGI
will generally, at its discretion, appoint (and may at any time remove) other
parties, including companies affiliated with PGI, as its agent to carry out the
provisions of the Service Agreement and/or the Administrative Services
Agreement. However, the appointment of an agent shall not relieve PGI of any of
its responsibilities or liabilities under those agreements. Any fees paid to
agents under these agreements shall be the sole responsibility of
PGI.
Class
S: Class S shares are available without any front-end sales charge or CDSC.
Eligibility to invest in the Capital Securities Fund is limited to certain
wrap-fee program accounts. Only wrap-fee program accounts as to which Spectrum
and/or PGI have an agreement with the wrap-fee program’s sponsor (“Sponsor”) or
the wrap account owner to provide investment advisory or sub-advisory services
(either directly or by providing a model investment portfolio created and
maintained by Spectrum and/or PGI to the Sponsor or one or more
Sponsor-designated investment managers) (“Eligible Wrap Accounts”) are eligible
to purchase shares of the Fund. References to Wrap Fee Advisor shall mean
Spectrum and/or PGI in their role providing such services to Eligible Wrap
Accounts.
A
client agreement with the Sponsor to open an account in the Sponsor’s wrap-fee
program typically may be obtained by contacting the Sponsor or your financial
advisor. Purchase and sale decisions regarding Fund shares for your wrap account
ordinarily will be made by the Wrap Fee Advisor, the Sponsor, or a
Sponsor-designated investment manager, depending on the particular wrap-fee
program in which your wrap account participates. If your wrap-fee account’s use
of the Wrap Fee Advisor’s investment style is terminated by you, the Sponsor, or
the Wrap Fee Advisor, your wrap account will cease to be an Eligible Wrap
Account and you will be required to redeem all your shares of the Capital
Securities Fund. Each Eligible Wrap Account, by purchasing shares, agrees to any
such redemption.
Rule
12b-1 Fees / Distribution Plans and Agreements
The
distributor for the Funds is Principal Funds Distributor, Inc. (“PFD” or the
“Distributor”). PFD's address is 711 High Street, Des Moines, IA
50392.
In
addition to the management and service fees, certain of the Funds’ share classes
are subject to a Rule 12b-1 Distribution Plan and Agreement (each, a “Plan” and,
together, the “Plans”). The Board and initial shareholders of Classes A, C, J,
R-1, R-3, and R-4 shares have approved and entered into a Plan. In adopting the
Plans, the Board (including a majority of board members who are not interested
persons of the Funds, as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as
amended) determined that there was a reasonable likelihood that the Plans would
benefit the Funds and the shareholders of the affected classes. Among the
possible benefits of the Plans include the potential for building and retaining
Fund assets, as well as the ability to offer an incentive for registered
representatives to provide ongoing servicing to shareholders.
The
Plans provide that each Fund makes payments to the Fund’s Distributor from
assets of each share class that has a Plan to compensate the Distributor and
other selling dealers, various banks, broker-dealers, and other financial
intermediaries, for providing certain services to the Fund. Such services may
include, but are not limited to:
• formulation
and implementation of marketing and promotional activities;
• preparation,
printing, and distribution of sales literature;
• preparation,
printing, and distribution of prospectuses and the Fund reports to
other-than-existing shareholders;
• obtaining
such information with respect to marketing and promotional activities as the
Distributor deems advisable;
• making
payments to dealers and others engaged in the sale of shares or who engage in
shareholder support services; and
• providing
training, marketing, and support with respect to the sale of
shares.
Each
Fund pays the Distributor a fee after the end of each month at an annual rate as
a percentage of the daily net asset value of the assets attributable to each
share class as follows:
|
|
|
|
| |
Share
Class |
Maximum
Annualized
12b-1
Fee |
| |
A
(1)
|
0.25% |
C
(1)
|
1.00% |
J
(1)
|
0.15% |
R-1 |
0.35% |
R-3 |
0.25% |
R-4 |
0.10% |
(1)The
Distributor also receives the proceeds of any CDSC imposed.
Effective
January 1, 2021, the Distributor has voluntarily agreed to limit the
distribution fees attributable to Class J, reducing the Funds’ distribution fees
for Class J shares by 0.020%.* This voluntary waiver may be revised or
terminated at any time without notice to shareholders.
* For
the period from December 31, 2016 to December 31, 2020, the voluntary waiver was
0.030%.
The
Distributor may remit on a continuous basis all of these sums to its investment
representatives and other financial intermediaries as a trail fee in recognition
of their services and assistance.
Currently,
the Distributor makes payments to dealers on accounts for which such dealer is
designated dealer of record. Payments are based on the average net asset value
of the accounts invested in Classes A, C, J, R-1, R-3, or R-4
shares.
Under
the Plans, the Funds have no legal obligation to pay any amount that exceeds the
compensation limit. The Funds do not pay, directly or indirectly, interest,
carrying charges, or other financing costs in association with these Plans. All
fees paid under a Fund’s Plan are paid to the Distributor, which is entitled to
retain such fees paid by the Fund without regard to the expenses that it
incurs.
For
the fiscal year ended August 31, 2023, each Fund made the following 12b-1
payments to PFD, and PFD, from these 12b-1 payments, made the following payments
to financial intermediaries that distribute and/or service the Fund’s shares.
The “Retained by PFD” column reflects the difference between the amount paid by
the Fund to PFD and the amount of that 12b-1 fee paid by PFD to financial
intermediaries. That difference/remainder is then used by PFD to pay for other
12b-1-eligible expenses. For the fiscal year ended August 31, 2023, the
12b-1-eligible expenses for each Fund were greater than the amount of the Fund’s
12b-1 payments to PFD.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Paid
by Fund to PFD (amounts in thousands) |
Paid
by PFD to
Financial
Intermediaries
(amounts
in thousands) |
Retained
by PFD
(amounts
in thousands) |
Blue
Chip |
$5,098 |
$4,924 |
$174 |
Bond
Market Index |
73 |
66 |
7 |
Capital
Securities |
— |
— |
— |
Diversified
Real Asset |
262 |
262 |
— |
Edge
MidCap |
42 |
41 |
1 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
95 |
94 |
1 |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
— |
— |
— |
International
Equity Index |
39 |
34 |
5 |
International
Small Company |
— |
— |
— |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
108 |
108 |
— |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
13 |
13 |
— |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
738 |
733 |
5 |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
3,497 |
3,349 |
148 |
Principal
Underwriter
PFD
acts as the principal underwriter in the continuous public offering of the
Funds’ shares. The table below shows the aggregate dollar amount of underwriting
commissions and the amount retained by PFD for the last three fiscal years ended
August 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Underwriting
Fees for Periods Ended August 31
(amounts
in thousands) |
| 2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
Fund |
Total
Underwriting Commissions |
Amount
Retained by PFD |
Total
Underwriting Commissions |
Amount
Retained by PFD |
Total
Underwriting Commissions |
Amount
Retained by PFD |
Blue
Chip |
$1,495 |
$305 |
$2,423 |
$467 |
$3,115 |
$563 |
Bond
Market Index |
1 |
1 |
1 |
1 |
6 |
6 |
Capital
Securities |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
Diversified
Real Asset |
54 |
17 |
147 |
30 |
30 |
6 |
Edge
MidCap |
46 |
10 |
55 |
8 |
73 |
11 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
13 |
3 |
8 |
2 |
5 |
1 |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
International
Equity Index |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
International
Small Company |
— |
— |
— |
— |
7 |
1 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
9 |
2 |
26 |
4 |
14 |
6 |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
7 |
1 |
17 |
3 |
42 |
7 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
74 |
13 |
81 |
17 |
113 |
21 |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
408 |
147 |
455 |
222 |
727 |
245 |
PFD
does not charge fees on redemptions or repurchases of Fund shares. The amounts
in the table above for Total Underwriting Commissions include any applicable
contingent deferred sales charges and front-end sales charges.
Transfer
Agency Agreement (Classes A, C, J, Institutional, R-1, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6, and
S)
The
Transfer Agency Agreement provides for Principal Shareholder Services, Inc.
(“PSS”) (711 High Street, Des Moines, IA 50392), an affiliate of PGI, to act as
transfer and shareholder servicing agent for the Classes A, C, J, Institutional,
R-1, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6, and S.
•For
Classes A, C, and R-6, and Institutional Class shares, the Registrant pays PSS a
fee for the services provided pursuant to the Transfer Agency Agreement in an
amount equal to the costs incurred by PSS for providing such
services.
•For
Class J shares, the Registrant pays PSS a fee for the services provided pursuant
to the Transfer Agency Agreement in an amount that includes profit.
The
Registrant pays PSS for the following services for Classes A, C, J, and R-6, and
Institutional Class shares:
•issuance,
transfer, conversion, cancellation, and registry of ownership of Fund shares,
and maintenance of open account system;
•preparation
and distribution of dividend and capital gain payments to
shareholders;
•delivery,
redemption, and repurchase of shares, and remittances to
shareholders;
•the
tabulation of proxy ballots and the preparation and distribution to shareholders
of notices, proxy statements and proxies, reports, confirmation of transactions,
prospectuses, and tax information;
•communication
with shareholders concerning the above items; and
•use
of its best efforts to qualify the capital stock of the Funds for sale in states
and jurisdictions as directed by the Funds.
The
Registrant does not pay for these services for Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5
shares.
PSS will pay operating expenses attributable to Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5
shares related to (a) the cost of meetings of shareholders and (b) the costs of
initial and ongoing qualification of the capital stock of the Funds for sale in
states and jurisdictions.
DESCRIPTION
OF THE FUNDS’ INVESTMENTS AND RISKS
The
Registrant is a registered, open-end management investment company, commonly
called a mutual fund. The Registrant consists of multiple investment portfolios,
which are referred to as “Funds.” Each Fund has its own investment objective,
strategies, and portfolio management team. As described below, each Fund has
adopted a fundamental policy regarding diversification, as that term is used in
the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), and as
interpreted, modified, or otherwise permitted by regulatory authority having
jurisdiction, from time to time.
Fund
Policies
The
investment objective, principal investment strategies, and principal risks of
each Fund are described in the Prospectus. This SAI contains supplemental
information about those strategies and risks and the types of securities that
those managing the investments of each Fund can select. Additional information
is also provided about other strategies that each Fund may use to try to achieve
its objective.
The
composition of each Fund and the techniques and strategies that those managing a
Fund’s investments may use in selecting securities will vary over time. A Fund
is not required to use all of the investment techniques and strategies available
to it in seeking its goals.
Unless
otherwise indicated, with the exception of the percentage limitations on
borrowing, the restrictions apply at the time transactions are entered into.
Accordingly, any later increase or decrease beyond the specified limitation,
resulting from market fluctuations or in a rating by a rating service, does not
require elimination of any security from a Fund’s portfolio.
The
investment objective of each Fund and, except as described below as “fundamental
restrictions,” the investment strategies described in this SAI and the
Prospectus are not fundamental and may be changed by the Board without
shareholder approval.
With
the exception of the diversification test required by the Internal Revenue Code,
the Funds will not consider collateral held in connection with securities
lending activities when applying any of the following fundamental restrictions
or any other investment restriction set forth in the Prospectus or
SAI.
Fundamental
Restrictions
Except
as specifically noted, each Fund has adopted the following fundamental
restrictions. Each fundamental restriction is a matter of fundamental policy and
may not be changed without a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting
securities of the affected Fund, except as permitted by the 1940 Act or other
governing statute and the rules thereunder, the SEC, or other regulatory agency
with authority over the Funds. The 1940 Act provides that “a vote of a majority
of the outstanding voting securities” of a Fund means the affirmative vote of
the lesser of (1) more than 50% of the outstanding Fund shares or (2) 67% or
more of the Fund shares present at a meeting if more than 50% of the outstanding
Fund shares are represented at the meeting in person or by proxy. Each share has
one vote, with fractional shares voting proportionately. Shares of all classes
of a Fund will vote together as a single class, except when otherwise required
by law or as determined by the Board.
Each
Fund:
1)may
not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act, as amended,
and as interpreted, modified, or otherwise permitted by regulatory authority
having jurisdiction, from time to time.
2)has
adopted a commodities policy, as follows:
(a)The
Opportunistic Municipal Fund may not purchase or sell commodities, except as
permitted under the 1940 Act, as amended, and as interpreted, modified, or
otherwise permitted by regulatory authority having jurisdiction, from time to
time.
(b)The
remaining Funds may not purchase or sell commodities, except as permitted by
applicable law, regulation, or regulatory authority having
jurisdiction.
3)may
not purchase or sell real estate, which term does not include securities of
companies that deal in real estate or mortgages or investments secured by real
estate or interests therein, except that each Fund reserves freedom of action to
hold and to sell real estate acquired as a result of the Fund’s ownership of
securities.
4)may
not borrow money, except as permitted under the 1940 Act, as amended, and as
interpreted, modified, or otherwise permitted by regulatory authority having
jurisdiction, from time to time.
5)may
not make loans, except as permitted under the 1940 Act, as amended, and as
interpreted, modified, or otherwise permitted by regulatory authority having
jurisdiction, from time to time.
6)has
adopted a policy regarding diversification, as follows:
(a)The
Global Sustainable Listed Infrastructure Fund has elected to be
non-diversified.
(b)All
other Funds have elected to be treated as a "diversified" investment company, as
that term is used in the 1940 Act, as amended, and as interpreted, modified, or
otherwise permitted by regulatory authority having jurisdiction, from time to
time.
7)has
adopted a concentration policy, as follows:
(a)The
Capital Securities, Diversified Real Asset, Global Sustainable Listed
Infrastructure, and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income Funds will
concentrate their investments in a particular industry or group of industries as
described in the Prospectus.
(b)The
Bond Market Index and International Equity Index Funds will not concentrate
their investments in a particular industry, except to the extent that their
related Index is also so concentrated.
(c)The
Opportunistic Municipal Fund may not concentrate, as that term is used in the
1940 Act, its investments in a particular industry, except as permitted under
the 1940 Act, as amended, and as interpreted, modified, or otherwise permitted
by regulatory authority having jurisdiction, from time to time.
(d)The
remaining Funds may not concentrate, as that term is used in the 1940 Act, as
amended, and as interpreted, modified, or otherwise permitted by regulatory
authority having jurisdiction, from time to time, its investments in a
particular industry or group of industries.
8) may
not act as an underwriter of securities, except to the extent that the Fund may
be deemed to be an underwriter in connection with the sale of securities held in
its portfolio.
Non-Fundamental
Restrictions
Except
as specifically noted, each Fund has also adopted the following non-fundamental
restrictions. Non-fundamental restrictions are not fundamental policies and may
be changed without shareholder approval. It is contrary to each Fund’s present
policy to:
1)Invest
more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid securities and in repurchase
agreements maturing in more than seven days, except to the extent permitted by
applicable law or regulatory authority having jurisdiction, from time to
time.
2)Pledge,
mortgage, or hypothecate its assets, except to secure permitted borrowings. The
deposit of underlying securities and other assets in escrow and other collateral
arrangements in connection with transactions that involve any future payment
obligation, as permitted under the 1940 Act, as amended, and as interpreted,
modified, or otherwise permitted by any regulatory authority having
jurisdiction, from time to time, are not deemed to be pledges, mortgages,
hypothecations, or other encumbrances.
3)Invest
in companies for the purpose of exercising control or management.
4)Invest
more than 25% of its assets in foreign securities; however:
(a)the
Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income Fund may not invest more than
60% of its assets in foreign securities;
(b)the
Capital Securities, Diversified Real Asset, Global Multi-Strategy, Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure, International Equity Index, International
Small Company, and Origin Emerging Markets Funds each may invest up to 100% of
its assets in foreign securities;
(c)the
Bond Market Index Fund may invest in foreign securities to the extent that the
relevant index is so invested; and
(d)the
Opportunistic Municipal Fund may not invest in foreign securities.
5)Invest
more than 5% of its total assets in real estate limited partnership
interests.
The
Diversified Real Asset and Global Multi-Strategy Funds have not adopted this
non-fundamental restriction.
6)Acquire
securities of other investment companies in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(F) or
(G) of the 1940 Act, invest more than 10% of its total assets in securities of
other investment companies, invest more than 5% of its total assets in the
securities of any one investment company, or acquire more than 3% of the
outstanding voting securities of any one investment company, except in
connection with a merger, consolidation, or plan of reorganization and except as
permitted by the 1940 Act, SEC Rules adopted under the 1940 Act, or exemptions
granted by the SEC. The Fund may purchase securities of closed-end investment
companies in the open market where no underwriter or dealer’s commission or
profit, other than a customary broker’s commission, is involved.
Non-Fundamental
Policy - Rule 35d-1 under the 1940 Act - Investment Company Names
Except
as specifically noted, each Fund has also adopted a non-fundamental policy,
pursuant to SEC Rule 35d-1, which requires it, under normal circumstances, to
invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus any borrowings for investment
purposes, in the type of investments, industry, or geographic region (as
described in the Prospectus) as suggested by the name of the Fund.
This
policy applies at the time of purchase. A Fund will provide 60 days’ notice to
shareholders prior to implementing a change in this policy for the Fund. For
purposes of this non-fundamental policy, each Fund tests market capitalization
ranges monthly.
For
purposes of testing this requirement with respect to:
•Forward
foreign currency contracts and other investments that have economic
characteristics similar to foreign currency:
the value of such contracts and investments may include the Fund’s investments
in cash and/or cash equivalents to the extent such cash and/or cash equivalents
are maintained with respect to the Fund’s exposure under its forward foreign
currency contracts and similar investments.
•Derivatives
instruments:
each Fund will typically count the mark-to-market value of such derivatives.
However, a Fund may use a derivative contract’s notional value when it
determines that notional value is an appropriate measure of the Fund’s exposure
to investments. For example, with respect to single-name equity swaps that are
“fully paid” (equity swaps in which cash and/or cash equivalents are posted as
collateral for the purpose of covering the full notional value of the swap),
each Fund will count the value of such cash and/or cash
equivalents.
•Investments
in underlying funds (including ETFs):
each Fund will count all investments in an underlying fund toward the
requirement as long as 80% of the value of such underlying fund’s holdings focus
on the particular type of investment suggested by the Fund name.
The
Global Multi-Strategy Fund has not adopted this non-fundamental
policy.
The
Opportunistic Municipal Fund has adopted a fundamental policy that requires it,
under normal circumstances, to invest at least 80% of its net assets, plus the
amount of any borrowings for investment purposes, in investments, the income
from which is exempt from federal income tax or so that at least 80% of the
income the Fund distributes will be exempt from federal income tax.
Investment
Strategies and Risks Related to Borrowing and Senior Securities,
Commodity-Related Investments, Industry Concentration, and Loans
Borrowing
and Senior Securities
Under
the 1940 Act, a fund that borrows money is required to maintain continuous asset
coverage (that is, total assets including borrowings, less liabilities exclusive
of borrowings) of 300% of the amount borrowed, with an exception for borrowings
not in excess of 5% of the fund’s total assets made for temporary or emergency
purposes. If a fund invests the proceeds of borrowing, borrowing will tend to
exaggerate the effect on net asset value of any increase or decrease in the
market value of a fund’s portfolio. If a fund invests the proceeds of borrowing,
money borrowed will be subject to interest costs that may or may not be
recovered by earnings on the securities purchased. A fund also may be required
to maintain minimum average balances in connection with a borrowing or to pay a
commitment or other fee to maintain a line of credit; either of these
requirements would increase the cost of borrowing over the stated interest
rate.
Commodity-Related
Investments
All
Funds Except the Diversified Real Asset Fund and the Global Multi-Strategy
Fund
Under
the 1940 Act, a fund’s registration statement must recite the fund’s policy with
regard to investing in commodities. Each Fund may invest in commodities to the
extent permitted by applicable law and under its fundamental and non-fundamental
policies and restrictions. Pursuant to a claim for exclusion filed with the
Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) on behalf of each of the Funds
under Rule 4.5, PGI is not deemed to be a “commodity pool operator” under the
Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) as it specifically relates to PGI’s operations
with respect to the Funds, and the Funds, therefore, are not considered
regulated commodity pools and are not subject to registration or regulation
under the CEA. The CFTC amended Rule 4.5 exclusions for certain otherwise
regulated persons from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator.”
Rule 4.5 provides that an investment company does not meet the definition of
“commodity pool operator” if its use of futures contracts, options on futures
contracts, and swaps is sufficiently limited that the fund can fall within one
of two exclusions set out in Rule 4.5. Each Fund intends to limit its use of
futures contracts, options on futures contracts, and swaps to the degree
necessary to fall within one of the two exclusions. If a Fund is unable to do
so, it may incur expenses that are necessary to comply with the CEA and rules
the CFTC has adopted under it.
Diversified
Real Asset Fund and Global Multi-Strategy Fund
The
Diversified Real Asset Fund and the Global Multi-Strategy Fund are each deemed
to be a “commodity pool” under the CEA, and PGI is considered a “commodity pool
operator” with respect to each such Fund. PGI is, therefore, subject to dual
regulation by the SEC and the CFTC. The CFTC or the SEC could alter the
regulatory requirements governing the use of commodity futures (which include
futures on broad-based securities indexes, interest rate futures, and currency
futures) or options on commodity futures or swaps transactions by investment
companies, including these Funds.
To
gain exposure to the commodity markets within the limitations of the federal tax
law requirements applicable to regulated investment companies under the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), the Diversified Real Asset Fund
and the Global Multi-Strategy Fund may each invest up to 25% of its total assets
in its respective wholly-owned subsidiary organized under the laws of the Cayman
Islands (a “Cayman Subsidiary”). The Diversified Real Asset Fund and the Global
Multi-Strategy Fund may test for compliance with certain investment restrictions
on a consolidated basis with its Cayman Subsidiary. With respect to investments
that involve leverage, each Cayman Subsidiary’s assets will be aggregated with
the assets of the respective parent fund for compliance with the SEC’s
derivatives rule.
Industry
Concentration
“Concentration”
means a fund invests more than 25% of its net assets in a particular industry or
group of industries. To monitor compliance with the policy regarding industry
concentration, the Funds may use the industry classifications provided by
Bloomberg, L.P., the Morgan Stanley Capital International (MSCI)/Standard &
Poor’s Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS), the Directory of
Companies Filing Annual Reports with the SEC, or any other reasonable industry
classification system. With respect to monitoring industry concentration, a Fund
concentrating in the “financial services industry” concentrates its investments
in one or more industries classified within the broader financial services
sector.
•Each
Fund interprets its policy with respect to concentration in a particular
industry to apply only to direct investments in the securities of issuers in a
particular industry.
•For
purposes of this restriction, government securities (such as treasury securities
or mortgage-backed securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S.
government, its agencies, or instrumentalities) are not subject to the Funds’
industry concentration restrictions.
•Each
Fund views its investments in tax-exempt municipal securities as not
representing interests in any particular industry or group of industries. For
information about municipal securities, see the Municipal Obligations
section.
Loans
A
Fund may not make loans to other persons, except (i) as permitted by the 1940
Act and the Rules and Regulations thereunder, or other successor law governing
the regulation of registered investment companies, or interpretations or
modifications thereof by the SEC, SEC Staff, or other authority of competent
jurisdiction, or (ii) pursuant to exemptive or other relief or permission from
the SEC, SEC Staff, or other authority of competent jurisdiction. Generally,
this means the Funds are typically permitted to make loans but must take into
account potential issues such as liquidity, valuation, and avoidance of
impermissible transactions. Examples of permissible loans include (a) the
lending of its portfolio securities, (b) the purchase of debt securities, loan
participations, and/or engaging in direct corporate loans in accordance with the
Fund’s investment objective and policies, (c) the entry into a repurchase
agreement (to the extent such entry is deemed to be a loan), and (d) loans to
affiliated investment companies to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act or any
exemptions therefrom that may be granted by the SEC.
Other
Investment Strategies and Risks
Commodity
Index-Linked Notes
A
commodity index-linked note is a type of structured note that is a derivative
instrument. Over the long term, the returns on a fund’s investments in commodity
index-linked notes are expected to exhibit low or negative correlation with
stocks and bonds, which means the prices of commodity-linked notes may move in a
different direction than investments in traditional equity and debt securities.
As an example, during periods of rising inflation, debt securities have
historically tended to decrease in value and the prices of certain commodities,
such as oil and metals, have historically tended to increase. The reverse may be
true during “bull markets,” when the value of traditional securities such as
stocks and bonds is increasing. Under such economic conditions, a fund’s
investments in commodity index-linked notes may be expected not to perform as
well as investments in traditional securities. There can be no assurance,
however, that derivative instruments will perform in that manner in the future
and, at certain times in the past, the price movements of commodity-linked
investments have been parallel to debt and equity securities. If commodities
prices move in tandem with the prices of financial assets, they may not provide
overall portfolio diversification benefits.
Convertible
Securities
A
convertible security is a bond, debenture, note, preferred stock, or other
security that entitles the holder to acquire common stock or other equity
securities of the same or a different issuer. A convertible security generally
entitles the holder to receive interest paid or accrued until the convertible
security matures or is redeemed, converted or exchanged. Before conversion,
convertible securities have characteristics similar to non-convertible debt or
preferred securities, as applicable. Convertible securities rank senior to
common stock in a corporation’s capital structure and, therefore, generally
entail less risk than the corporation’s common stock, although the extent to
which such risk is reduced depends in large measure upon the degree to which the
convertible security sells above its value as a fixed income security.
Convertible securities are subordinate in rank to any senior debt obligations of
the issuer, and, therefore, an issuer’s convertible securities entail more risk
than its debt obligations. Convertible securities generally offer lower interest
or dividend yields than non-convertible debt securities of similar credit
quality because of the potential for capital appreciation. In addition,
convertible securities are often lower-rated securities.
Because
of the conversion feature, the price of the convertible security will normally
fluctuate in some proportion to changes in the price of the underlying asset,
and as such is subject to risks relating to the activities of the issuer and/or
general market and economic conditions. The income component of a convertible
security may tend to cushion the security against declines in the price of the
underlying asset. However, the income component of convertible securities causes
fluctuations based upon changes in interest rates and the credit quality of the
issuer.
If
the conversion value of a convertible security increases to a point that
approximates or exceeds its investment value, the value of the security will be
principally influenced by its conversion value. A convertible security will sell
at a premium over its conversion value to the extent investors place value on
the right to acquire the underlying common stock while holding an
income-producing security.
A
convertible security may be subject to redemption at the option of the issuer at
a predetermined price. If a convertible security held by a fund is called for
redemption, the fund would be required to permit the issuer to redeem the
security and convert it to underlying common stock, or would sell the
convertible security to a third party, which may have an adverse effect on the
fund’s ability to achieve its investment objective.
Synthetic
Convertibles
A
“synthetic” convertible security may be created by combining separate securities
that possess the two principal characteristics of a traditional convertible
security, i.e., an income-producing security (“income-producing component”) and
the right to acquire an equity security (“convertible component”). The
income-producing component is achieved by investing in non-convertible,
income-producing securities such as bonds, preferred stocks and money market
instruments, which may be represented by derivative instruments. The convertible
component is achieved by investing in securities or instruments such as warrants
or options to buy common stock at a certain exercise price, or options on a
stock index. Unlike a traditional convertible security, which is a single
security having a single market value, a synthetic convertible comprises two or
more separate securities, each with its own market value. Therefore, the “market
value” of a synthetic convertible security is the sum of the values of its
income-producing component and its convertible component. For this reason, the
values of a synthetic convertible security and a traditional convertible
security may respond differently to market fluctuations.
More
flexibility is possible in the assembly of a synthetic convertible security than
in the purchase of a convertible security. Although synthetic convertible
securities may be selected where the two components are issued by a single
issuer, thus making the synthetic convertible security similar to the
traditional convertible security, the character of a synthetic convertible
security allows the combination of components representing distinct issuers,
when such a combination may better achieve a fund’s investment objective. A
synthetic convertible security also is a more flexible investment in that its
two components may be purchased separately. For example, a fund may purchase a
warrant for inclusion in a synthetic convertible security but temporarily hold
short-term investments while postponing the purchase of a corresponding bond
pending development of more favorable market conditions.
A
holder of a synthetic convertible security faces the risk of a decline in the
price of the security or the level of the index involved in the convertible
component, causing a decline in the value of the security or instrument, such as
a call option or warrant, purchased to create the synthetic convertible
security. Should the price of the stock fall below the exercise price and remain
there throughout the exercise period, the entire amount paid for the call option
or warrant would be lost. Because a synthetic convertible security includes the
income-producing component as well, the holder of a synthetic convertible
security also faces the risk that interest rates will rise, causing a decline in
the value of the income-producing instrument.
A
fund also may purchase synthetic convertible securities created by other
parties, including convertible structured notes. Convertible structured notes
are income-producing debentures linked to equity and are typically issued by
investment banks. Convertible structured notes have the attributes of a
convertible security; however, the investment bank that issues the convertible
note, rather than the issuer of the underlying common stock into which the note
is convertible, assumes credit risk associated with the underlying investment,
and the fund in turn assumes credit risk associated with the convertible
note.
Corporate
Reorganizations
Funds
may invest in securities for which a tender or exchange offer has been made or
announced and in securities of companies for which a merger, consolidation,
liquidation, or reorganization proposal has been announced if, in the judgment
of those managing the fund’s investments, there is a reasonable prospect of
capital appreciation significantly greater than the brokerage and other
transaction expenses involved. The primary risk of such investments is that if
the contemplated transaction is abandoned, revised, delayed, or becomes subject
to unanticipated uncertainties, including, for example, new or revised laws or
regulations, the market price of the securities may decline below the purchase
price paid by a fund.
In
general, securities that are the subject of such an offer or proposal sell at a
premium to their historic market price immediately prior to the announcement of
the offer or proposal. However, the increased market price of such securities
may discount what the stated or appraised value of the security would be if the
contemplated transaction were approved or consummated. Such investments may be
advantageous when the discount: significantly overstates the risk of the
contingencies involved; significantly undervalues the securities, assets, or
cash to be received by shareholders of the prospective company as a result of
the contemplated transaction; or fails adequately to recognize the possibility
that the offer or proposal may be replaced or superseded by an offer or proposal
of greater value. The evaluation of such contingencies requires unusually broad
knowledge and experience on the part of those managing the fund’s investments,
which must appraise not only the value of the issuer and its component
businesses, but also the financial resources and business motivation of the
offer or proposal as well as the dynamics of the business climate when the offer
or proposal is in process.
Cyber
Security Issues
Each
Fund and its service providers may be subject to cyber security risks. Those
risks include, among others, theft, misuse or corruption of data maintained
online or digitally; denial of service attacks on websites; the loss or
unauthorized release of confidential and proprietary information; operational
disruption; or various other forms of cyber security breaches. Cyber-attacks
against or security breakdowns of a Fund or its service providers may harm the
Fund and its shareholders, potentially resulting in, among other things,
financial losses, the inability of Fund shareholders to transact business,
inability to calculate a fund’s NAV, violations of applicable privacy and other
laws, regulatory fines, penalties, reputational damage, reimbursement or other
compensation costs, and/or additional compliance and remediation costs. Cyber
security risks may also affect issuers of securities in which a fund invests,
potentially causing the fund’s investment in such issuers to lose value. Despite
risk management processes, there can be no guarantee that a fund will avoid
losses relating to cyber security risks or other information security
breaches.
Derivatives
Options
on Securities and Securities Indices
Funds
may write (sell) and purchase call and put options on securities and on
securities indices. Funds may engage in these transactions to hedge against a
decline in the value of securities owned or an increase in the price of
securities that the Fund plans to purchase, or to generate additional
revenue.
•Exchange-Traded
Options. An exchange-traded option may be closed out only on an exchange that
generally provides a liquid secondary market for an option of the same series.
If a liquid secondary market for an exchange-traded option does not exist, it
might not be possible to effect a closing transaction with respect to a
particular option, with the result that a Fund would have to exercise the option
in order to consummate the transaction.
•Over
the Counter (“OTC”) Options. OTC options differ from exchange-traded options in
that they are two-party contracts, with price and other terms negotiated between
buyer and seller, and generally do not have as much market liquidity as
exchange-traded options. An OTC option (an option not traded on an established
exchange) may be closed out only by agreement with the other party to the
original option transaction. With OTC options, a Fund is at risk that the other
party to the transaction will default on its obligations or will not permit the
Fund to terminate the transaction before its scheduled maturity. While a Fund
will seek to enter into OTC options only with dealers who agree to or are
expected to be capable of entering into closing transactions with a Fund, there
can be no assurance that a Fund will be able to liquidate an OTC option at a
favorable price at any time prior to its expiration. OTC options are not subject
to the protections afforded purchasers of listed options by the Options Clearing
Corporation or other clearing organizations.
•FLexible
EXchange Options (“FLEX Options”). FLEX Options are customized options contracts
available through national securities exchanges that are guaranteed for
settlement by the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”), a market clearinghouse.
FLEX Options provide investors with the ability to customize terms of an option,
including exercise prices, exercise styles (European-style options, which are
exercisable only at the expiration date, versus American-style options, which
are exercisable any time prior to the expiration date), and expiration dates,
while achieving price discovery in competitive, transparent auction markets and
avoiding the counterparty exposure of the OTC option positions.
There
is no assurance that a liquid secondary market on an options exchange will exist
for any particular option, or at any particular time, and for some options no
secondary market on an exchange or elsewhere may exist. If a Fund is unable to
close out a call option on securities that it has written before the option is
exercised, the Fund may be required to purchase the optioned securities in order
to satisfy its obligation under the option to deliver such securities. If the
Fund is unable to effect a closing sale transaction with respect to options on
securities that it has purchased, it would have to exercise the option in order
to realize any profit and would incur transaction costs upon the purchase and
sale of the underlying securities. The writing and purchasing of options is a
highly specialized activity that involves investment techniques and risks
different from those associated with ordinary portfolio securities transactions.
Imperfect correlation between the options and securities markets may detract
from the effectiveness of attempted hedging. Options transactions may result in
significantly higher transaction costs and portfolio turnover for a
Fund.
Writing
Call and Put Options. When
a Fund writes a call option, it gives the purchaser of the option the right to
buy a specific security at a specified price at any time before the option
expires. When a Fund writes a put option, it gives the purchaser of the option
the right to sell to the Fund a specific security at a specified price at any
time before the option expires. In both situations, the Fund receives a premium
from the purchaser of the option.
The
premium received by a Fund reflects, among other factors, the current market
price of the underlying security, the relationship of the exercise price to the
market price, the time period until the expiration of the option and interest
rates. The premium generates additional income for the Fund if the option
expires unexercised or is closed out at a profit. By writing a call, a Fund
limits its opportunity to profit from any increase in the market value of the
underlying security above the exercise price of the option, but it retains the
risk of loss if the price of the security should decline. By writing a put, a
Fund assumes the risk that it may have to purchase the underlying security at a
price that may be higher than its market value at time of exercise.
A
Fund usually owns the underlying security covered by any outstanding call
option. With respect to an outstanding put option, a Fund deposits and maintains
with its custodian or segregates on the Fund’s records, cash, or other liquid
assets with a value at least equal to the market value of the option that was
written.
Once
a Fund has written an option, it may terminate its obligation before the option
is exercised. The Fund executes a closing transaction by purchasing an option of
the same series as the option previously written. The Fund has a gain or loss
depending on whether the premium received when the option was written exceeds
the closing purchase price plus related transaction costs.
Purchasing
Call and Put Options. When
a Fund purchases a call option, it receives, in return for the premium it pays,
the right to buy from the writer of the option the underlying security at a
specified price at any time before the option expires. A Fund purchases call
options in anticipation of an increase in the market value of securities that it
intends ultimately to buy. During the life of the call option, the Fund is able
to buy the underlying security at the exercise price regardless of any increase
in the market price of the underlying security. For a call option to result in a
gain, the market price of the underlying security must exceed the sum of the
exercise price, the premium paid, and transaction costs.
When
a Fund purchases a put option, it receives, in return for the premium it pays,
the right to sell to the writer of the option the underlying security at a
specified price at any time before the option expires. A Fund purchases put
options in anticipation of a decline in the market value of the underlying
security. During the life of the put option, the Fund is able to sell the
underlying security at the exercise price regardless of any decline in the
market price of the underlying security. In order for a put option to result in
a gain, the market price of the underlying security must decline, during the
option period, below the exercise price enough to cover the premium and
transaction costs.
Once
a Fund purchases an option, it may close out its position by selling an option
of the same series as the option previously purchased. The Fund has a gain or
loss depending on whether the closing sale price exceeds the initial purchase
price plus related transaction costs.
Options
on Securities Indices. Each
Fund may purchase and sell put and call options on any securities index based on
securities in which the Fund may invest. Securities index options are designed
to reflect price fluctuations in a group of securities or segment of the
securities market rather than price fluctuations in a single security. Options
on securities indices are similar to options on securities, except that the
exercise of securities index options requires cash payments and does not involve
the actual purchase or sale of securities. Each Fund engages in transactions in
put and call options on securities indices for the same purposes as they engage
in transactions in options on securities. When a Fund writes call options on
securities indices, it holds in its portfolio underlying securities which, in
the judgment of those managing the fund’s investments, correlate closely with
the securities index and which have a value at least equal to the aggregate
amount of the securities index options.
Index
Warrants. A
Fund may purchase put warrants and call warrants whose values vary depending on
the change in the value of one or more specified securities indices (“index
warrants”). Index warrants are generally issued by banks or other financial
institutions and give the holder the right, at any time during the term of the
warrant, to receive upon exercise of the warrant a cash payment from the issuer
based on the value of the underlying index at the time of exercise. In general,
if the value of the underlying index rises above the exercise price of the index
warrant, the holder of a call warrant will be entitled to receive a cash payment
from the issuer upon exercise based on the difference between the value of the
index and the exercise price of the warrant; if the value of the underlying
index falls, the holder of a put warrant will be entitled to receive a cash
payment from the issuer upon exercise based on the difference between the
exercise price of the warrant and the value of the index. The holder of a
warrant would not be entitled to any payments from the issuer at a time when, in
the case of a call warrant, the exercise price is more than the value of the
underlying index, or in the case of a put warrant, the exercise price is less
than the value of the underlying index. If a Fund were not to exercise an index
warrant prior to its expiration, then a Fund would lose the amount of the
purchase price paid by it for the warrant. A Fund will normally use index
warrants in a manner similar to its use of options on securities
indices.
Risks
Associated with Option Transactions. An
option position may be closed out only on an exchange that provides a secondary
market for an option of the same series. A Fund generally purchases or writes
only those options for which there appears to be an active secondary market.
However, there is no assurance that a liquid secondary market on an exchange
exists for any particular option, or at any particular time. If a Fund is unable
to effect closing sale transactions in options it has purchased, it has to
exercise its options in order to realize any profit and may incur transaction
costs upon the purchase or sale of underlying securities. If the Fund is unable
to effect a closing purchase transaction for a covered option that it has
written, it is not able to sell the underlying securities until the option
expires or is exercised. A Fund’s ability to terminate option positions
established in the over-the-counter market may be more limited than for
exchange-traded options and may also involve the risk that broker-dealers
participating in such transactions might fail to meet their
obligations.
Futures
Contracts and Options on Futures Contracts
Funds
may purchase and sell futures contracts of many types, including for example,
futures contracts covering indexes, financial instruments, and foreign
currencies. Funds may purchase and sell financial futures contracts and options
on those contracts. Financial futures contracts are commodities contracts based
on financial instruments such as U.S. Treasury bonds or bills or on securities
indices such as the S&P 500 Index. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission
regulates futures contracts, options on futures contracts, and the commodity
exchanges on which they are traded. Through the purchase and sale of futures
contracts and related options, a Fund may seek to hedge against a decline in the
value of securities owned by the Fund or an increase in the price of securities
that the Fund plans to purchase. Funds may also purchase and sell futures
contracts and related options to maintain cash reserves while simulating full
investment in securities and to keep substantially all of its assets exposed to
the market. Funds may enter into futures contracts and related options
transactions both for hedging and non-hedging purposes.
Futures
Contracts. Funds
may purchase or sell a futures contract to gain exposure to a particular market
asset without directly purchasing that asset. When a Fund sells a futures
contract based on a financial instrument, the Fund is obligated to deliver that
kind of instrument at a specified future time for a specified price. When a Fund
purchases that kind of contract, it is obligated to take delivery of the
instrument at a specified time and to pay the specified price. In most
instances, these contracts are closed out by entering into an offsetting
transaction before the settlement date. The Fund realizes a gain or loss
depending on whether the price of an offsetting purchase plus transaction costs
are less or more than the price of the initial sale or on whether the price of
an offsetting sale is more or less than the price of the initial purchase plus
transaction costs. Although the Fund usually liquidates futures contracts on
financial instruments, by entering into an offsetting transaction before the
settlement date, they may make or take delivery of the underlying securities
when it appears economically advantageous to do so.
A
futures contract based on a securities index provides for the purchase or sale
of a group of securities at a specified future time for a specified price. These
contracts do not require actual delivery of securities but result in a cash
settlement. The amount of the settlement is based on the difference in value of
the index between the time the contract was entered into and the time it is
liquidated (at its expiration or earlier if it is closed out by entering into an
offsetting transaction).
When
a Fund purchases or sells a futures contract, it pays a commission to the
futures commission merchant through which the Fund executes the transaction.
When entering into a futures transaction, the Fund does not pay the execution
price, as it does when it purchases a security, or a premium, as it does when it
purchases an option. Instead, the Fund deposits an amount of cash or other
liquid assets (generally about 5% of the futures contract amount) with its
futures commission merchant. This amount is known as “initial margin.” In
contrast to the use of margin account to purchase securities, the Fund’s deposit
of initial margin does not constitute the borrowing of money to finance the
transaction in the futures contract. The initial margin represents a good faith
deposit that helps assure the Fund’s performance of the transaction. The futures
commission merchant returns the initial margin to the Fund upon termination of
the futures contract if the Fund has satisfied all its contractual
obligations.
Subsequent
payments to and from the futures commission merchant, known as “variation
margin,” are required to be made on a daily basis as the price of the futures
contract fluctuates, a process known as “marking to market.” The fluctuations
make the long or short positions in the futures contract more or less valuable.
If the position is closed out by taking an opposite position prior to the
settlement date of the futures contract, a final determination of variation
margin is made. Any additional cash is required to be paid to or released by the
broker and the Fund realizes a loss or gain.
In
using futures contracts, a Fund may seek to establish with more certainty than
would otherwise be possible the effective price of or rate of return on
portfolio securities or securities that the Fund proposes to acquire. A Fund,
for example, sells futures contracts in anticipation of a rise in interest rates
that would cause a decline in the value of its debt investments. When this kind
of hedging is successful, the futures contract increases in value when the
Fund’s debt securities decline in value and thereby keeps the Fund’s net asset
value from declining as much as it otherwise would. A Fund may also sell futures
contracts on securities indices in anticipation of or during a stock market
decline in an endeavor to offset a decrease in the market value of its equity
investments. When a Fund is not fully invested and anticipates an increase in
the cost of securities it intends to purchase, it may purchase financial futures
contracts.
When
increases in the prices of equities are expected, a Fund may purchase futures
contracts on securities indices in order to gain rapid market exposure that may
partially or entirely offset increases in the cost of the equity securities it
intends to purchase.
Options
on Futures Contracts. Funds
may also purchase and write call and put options on futures contracts. A call
option on a futures contract gives the purchaser the right, in return for the
premium paid, to purchase a futures contract (assume a long position) at a
specified exercise price at any time before the option expires. A put option
gives the purchaser the right, in return for the premium paid, to sell a futures
contract (assume a short position), for a specified exercise price, at any time
before the option expires.
Upon
the exercise of a call, the writer of the option is obligated to sell the
futures contract (to deliver a long position to the option holder) at the option
exercise price, which will presumably be lower than the current market price of
the contract in the futures market. Upon exercise of a put, the writer of the
option is obligated to purchase the futures contract (deliver a short position
to the option holder) at the option exercise price, which will presumably be
higher than the current market price of the contract in the futures market.
However, as with the trading of futures, most options are closed out prior to
their expiration by the purchase or sale of an offsetting option at a market
price that reflects an increase or a decrease from the premium originally paid.
Options on futures can be used to hedge substantially the same risks addressed
by the direct purchase or sale of the underlying futures contracts. For example,
if a Fund anticipates a rise in interest rates and a decline in the market value
of the debt securities in its portfolio, it might purchase put options or write
call options on futures contracts instead of selling futures
contracts.
If
a Fund purchases an option on a futures contract, it may obtain benefits similar
to those that would result if it held the futures position itself. But in
contrast to a futures transaction, the purchase of an option involves the
payment of a premium in addition to transaction costs. In the event of an
adverse market movement, however, the Fund is not subject to a risk of loss on
the option transaction beyond the price of the premium it paid plus its
transaction costs.
When
a Fund writes an option on a futures contract, the premium paid by the purchaser
is deposited with the Fund’s custodian. The Fund must maintain with its futures
commission merchant all or a portion of the initial margin requirement on the
underlying futures contract. It assumes a risk of adverse movement in the price
of the underlying futures contract comparable to that involved in holding a
futures position. Subsequent payments to and from the futures commission
merchant, similar to variation margin payments, are made as the premium and the
initial margin requirements are marked to market daily. The premium may
partially offset an unfavorable change in the value of portfolio securities, if
the option is not exercised, or it may reduce the amount of any loss incurred by
the Fund if the option is exercised.
Risks
Associated with Futures Transactions. There
are many risks associated with transactions in futures contracts and related
options. The value of the assets that are the subject of the futures contract
may not move in the anticipated direction. A Fund’s successful use of futures
contracts is subject to the ability of those managing the fund’s investments to
predict correctly the factors affecting the market values of the Fund’s
portfolio securities. For example, if a Fund is hedged against the possibility
of an increase in interest rates which would adversely affect debt securities
held by the Fund and the prices of those debt securities instead increases, the
Fund loses part or all of the benefit of the increased value of its securities
it hedged because it has offsetting losses in its futures positions. Other risks
include imperfect correlation between price movements in the financial
instrument or securities index underlying the futures contract, on the one hand,
and the price movements of either the futures contract itself or the securities
held by the Fund, on the other hand. If the prices do not move in the same
direction or to the same extent, the transaction may result in trading
losses.
Prior
to exercise or expiration, a position in futures may be terminated only by
entering into a closing purchase or sale transaction. This requires a secondary
market on the relevant contract market. A Fund enters into a futures contract or
related option only if there appears to be a liquid secondary market. There can
be no assurance, however, that such a liquid secondary market exists for any
particular futures contract or related option at any specific time. Thus, it may
not be possible to close out a futures position once it has been established.
Under such circumstances, the Fund continues to be required to make daily cash
payments of variation margin in the event of adverse price movements. In such
situations, if the Fund has insufficient cash, it may be required to sell
portfolio securities to meet daily variation margin requirements at a time when
it may be disadvantageous to do so. In addition, the Fund may be required to
perform under the terms of the futures contracts it holds. The inability to
close out futures positions also could have an adverse impact on the Fund’s
ability effectively to hedge its portfolio.
Most
United States futures exchanges limit the amount of fluctuation permitted in
futures contract prices during a single trading day. This daily limit
establishes the maximum amount that the price of a futures contract may vary
either up or down from the previous day’s settlement price at the end of a
trading session. Once the daily limit has been reached in a particular type of
contract, no more trades may be made on that day at a price beyond that limit.
The daily limit governs only price movements during a particular trading day and
therefore does not limit potential losses because the limit may prevent the
liquidation of unfavorable positions. Futures contract prices have occasionally
moved to the daily limit for several consecutive trading days with little or no
trading, thereby preventing prompt liquidation of futures positions and
subjecting some futures traders to substantial losses.
Debt-Linked
and Equity-Linked Securities
Each
Fund may invest in debt-linked and equity-linked securities. The investment
results of such instruments are intended to correspond generally to the
performance of one or more specified equity or debt securities, or of a specific
index or analogous “basket” of equity or debt securities. Therefore, investing
in these instruments involves risks similar to the risks of investing in the
underlying stocks or bonds directly. In addition, a Fund bears the risk that the
issuer of an equity- or debt-linked security may default on its obligations
under the instrument. Equity- and debt-linked securities are often used for many
of the same purposes as, and share many of the same risks with, other derivative
instruments as well as structured notes. Like many derivatives and structured
notes, equity- and debt-linked securities may be considered illiquid,
potentially limiting a Fund’s ability to dispose of them.
Hybrid
Instruments
A
hybrid instrument is a type of derivative that combines a traditional stock or
bond with an option or forward contract. Generally, the principal amount, amount
payable upon maturity or redemption, or interest rate of a hybrid is tied
(positively or negatively) to the price of some currency or securities index or
another interest rate or some other economic factor (each a “benchmark”). The
interest rate or (unlike most fixed income securities) the principal amount
payable at maturity of a hybrid security may be increased or decreased,
depending on changes in the value of the benchmark. An example of a hybrid could
be a bond issued by an oil company that pays a small base level of interest with
additional interest that accrues in correlation to the extent to which oil
prices exceed a certain predetermined level. Such a hybrid instrument would be
economically similar to a combination of a bond and a call option on
oil.
Hybrids
can be used as an efficient means of pursuing a variety of investment goals,
including currency hedging, duration management and increased total return.
Hybrids may not bear interest or pay dividends. The value of a hybrid or its
interest rate may be a multiple of a benchmark and, as a result, may be
leveraged and move (up or down) more steeply and rapidly than the benchmark.
These benchmarks may be sensitive to economic and political events, such as
currency devaluations, which cannot be readily foreseen by the purchaser of a
hybrid. Under certain conditions, the redemption value of a hybrid could be
zero. Thus, an investment in a hybrid may entail significant market risks that
are not associated with a similar investment in a traditional, U.S.
dollar-denominated bond that has a fixed principal amount and pays a fixed rate
or floating rate of interest. The purchase of hybrids also exposes the Fund to
the credit risk of the issuer of the hybrids. These risks may cause significant
fluctuations in the NAV of a Fund.
Certain
hybrid instruments may provide exposure to the commodities markets. These are
derivative securities with one or more commodity-linked components that have
payment features similar to commodity futures contracts, commodity options or
similar instruments. Commodity-linked hybrid instruments may be either equity or
debt securities, leveraged or unleveraged, and are considered hybrid instruments
because they have both security and commodity-like characteristics. A portion of
the value of these instruments may be derived from the value of a commodity,
futures contract, index or other economic variable and therefore are subject to
many of the same risks as investments in those underlying securities,
instruments or commodities.
Certain
issuers of structured products such as hybrid instruments may be deemed to be
investment companies as defined in the 1940 Act. As a result, a Fund’s
investments in these products may be subject to limits applicable to investments
in investment companies and may be subject to restrictions contained in the 1940
Act.
Spread
Transactions
Funds
may engage in spread trades, which typically represent a simultaneous purchase
and sale of two different contracts designed to capture the change in the
relationship in price between the two contracts. Spread transactions are
typically accompanied by lower margin requirements and lower volatility than an
outright purchase. Funds may purchase spread options. The purchase of a covered
spread option gives the Fund the right to put, or sell, a security that it owns
at a fixed dollar spread or fixed yield spread in relationship to another
security that the Fund does not own, but which is used as a benchmark. The risk
to the Fund in purchasing covered spread options is the cost of the premium paid
for the spread option and any transaction costs. In addition, there is no
assurance that closing transactions will be available. The security covering the
spread option is maintained in segregated accounts either with the Fund’s
custodian or on the Fund’s records. The Funds do not consider a security covered
by a spread option to be “pledged” as that term is used in the Fund’s policy
limiting the pledging or mortgaging of assets. The purchase of spread options
can be used to protect Funds against adverse changes in prevailing credit
quality spreads, i.e., the yield spread between high quality and lower quality
securities.
Swap
Agreements and Options on Swap Agreements
Funds
may engage in swap transactions, including, but not limited to, swap agreements
on interest rates, security or commodity indexes, specific securities and
commodities, and credit and event-linked swaps, to the extent permitted by its
investment restrictions. To the extent a Fund may invest in foreign
currency-denominated securities, it may also invest in currency swap agreements
and currency exchange rate swap agreements. Funds may also enter into options on
swap agreements (“swap options”).
Funds
may enter into swap transactions for any legal purpose consistent with its
investment objectives and policies, such as for the purpose of attempting to
obtain or preserve a particular return or spread at a lower cost than obtaining
a return or spread through purchases and/or sales of instruments in other
markets; to protect against currency fluctuations; as a duration management
technique; to protect against any increase in the price of securities a Fund
anticipates purchasing at a later date; to gain exposure to one or more
securities, currencies, or interest rates; to take advantage of perceived
mispricing in the securities markets; or to gain exposure to certain markets in
the most economical way possible.
Swap
agreements are two party contracts entered into primarily by institutional
investors for periods ranging from a few weeks to more than one year. In a
standard “swap” transaction, two parties agree to exchange the returns (or
differentials in rates of return) earned or realized on particular predetermined
investments or instruments, which may be adjusted for an interest factor. The
gross returns to be exchanged or “swapped” between the parties are generally
calculated with respect to a “notional amount,” i.e., the return on or increase
in value of a particular dollar amount invested at a particular interest rate,
in a particular foreign currency, or in a “basket” of securities or commodities
representing a particular index.
•Interest
Rate Swaps. Interest rate swaps involve the exchange by a Fund with another
party of their respective commitments to pay or receive interest (for example,
an exchange of floating rate payments for fixed rate payments with respect to a
notional amount of principal). Forms of swap agreements also include interest
rate caps, under which, in return for a premium, one party agrees to make
payments to the other to the extent that interest rates exceed a specified rate,
or “cap”; interest rate floors, under which, in return for a premium, one party
agrees to make payments to the other to the extent that interest rates fall
below a specified rate, or “floor”; and interest rate collars, under which a
party sells a cap and purchases a floor or vice versa in an attempt to protect
itself against interest rate movements exceeding given minimum or maximum
levels.
•Currency
Swaps. A currency swap is an agreement to exchange cash flows on a notional
amount based on changes in the relative values of the specified
currencies.
•Index
Swaps. An index swap is an agreement to make or receive payments based on the
different returns that would be achieved if a notional amount were invested in a
specified basket of securities (such as the S&P 500 Index) or in some other
investment (such as U.S. Treasury Securities).
•Total
Return Swaps. A total return swap is an agreement to make payments of the total
return from a specified asset or instrument (or a basket of such instruments)
during the specified period, in return for payments equal to a fixed or floating
rate of interest or the total return from another specified asset or instrument.
Alternatively, a total return swap can be structured so that one party will make
payments to the other party if the value of the relevant asset or instrument
increases, but receive payments from the other party if the value of that asset
or instrument decreases.
•Commodity
Swap Agreements. Consistent with a Fund’s investment objectives and general
investment policies, certain of the Funds may invest in commodity swap
agreements. For example, an investment in a commodity swap agreement may involve
the exchange of floating-rate interest payments for the total return on a
commodity index. In a total return commodity swap, a Fund will receive the price
appreciation of a commodity index, a portion of the index, or a single commodity
in exchange for paying an agreed-upon fee. If the commodity swap is for one
period, a Fund may pay a fixed fee, established at the outset of the swap.
However, if the term of the commodity swap is for more than one period, with
interim swap payments, a Fund may pay an adjustable or floating fee. With a
“floating” rate, the fee may be pegged to a base rate, such as the London
InterBank Offered Rate (LIBOR), the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR), or
a similar reference rate, and is adjusted each period. Therefore, if interest
rates increase over the term of the swap contract, a Fund may be required to pay
a higher fee at each swap reset date.
•Credit
Default Swap Agreements. The “buyer” in a credit default contract is obligated
to pay the “seller” a periodic stream of payments over the term of the contract
provided that no event of default on an underlying reference obligation has
occurred. If an event of default occurs, the seller must pay the buyer the full
notional value, or “par value,” of the reference obligation in exchange for the
reference obligation. A Fund may be either the buyer or seller in a credit
default swap transaction. If a Fund is a buyer and no event of default occurs,
the Fund will lose its investment and recover nothing. However, if an event of
default occurs, the Fund (if the buyer) will receive the full notional value of
the reference obligation that may have little or no value. As a seller, a Fund
receives a fixed rate of income throughout the term of the contract, which
typically is between six months and five years, provided that there is no
default event. If an event of default occurs, the seller must pay the buyer the
full notional value of the reference obligation. In addition, collateral posting
requirements are individually negotiated and there is no regulatory requirement
that a counterparty post collateral to secure its obligations or a specified
amount of cash, depending upon the terms of the swap, under a credit default
swap. Furthermore, there is no requirement that a party be informed in advance
when a credit default swap agreement is sold. Accordingly, a Fund may have
difficulty identifying the party responsible for payment of its claims. The
notional value of credit default swaps with respect to a particular investment
is often larger than the total par value of such investment outstanding and, in
event of a default, there may be difficulties in making the required deliveries
of the reference investments, possibly delaying payments.
Funds
may invest in derivative instruments that provide exposure to one or more credit
default swaps. For example, a Fund may invest in a derivative instrument known
as the Loan-Only Credit Default Swap Index (“LCDX”), a tradable index with 100
equally-weighted underlying single-name loan-only credit default swaps (“LCDS”).
Each underlying LCDS references an issuer whose loans trade in the secondary
leveraged loan market. A Fund can either buy the index (take on credit exposure)
or sell the index (pass credit exposure to a counterparty). While investing in
these types of derivatives will increase the universe of debt securities to
which a Fund is exposed, such investments entail additional risks that are not
typically associated with investments in other debt securities. Credit default
swaps and other derivative instruments related to loans are subject to the risks
associated with loans generally, as well as the risks of derivative
transactions.
•Investment
Pools. Funds may invest in publicly or privately issued interests in investment
pools whose underlying assets are credit default, credit-linked, interest rate,
currency exchange, equity-linked or other types of swap contracts and related
underlying securities or securities loan agreements. The pools’ investment
results may be designed to correspond generally to the performance of a
specified securities index or “basket” of securities, or sometimes a single
security. These types of pools are often used to gain exposure to multiple
securities with a smaller investment than would be required to invest directly
in the individual securities. They also may be used to gain exposure to foreign
securities markets without investing in the foreign securities themselves and/or
the relevant foreign market. To the extent that a Fund invests in pools of swaps
and related underlying securities or securities loan agreements whose return
corresponds to the performance of a foreign securities index or one or more
foreign securities, investing in such pools will involve risks similar to the
risks of investing in foreign securities. In addition to the risks associated
with investing in swaps generally, a Fund bears the risks and costs generally
associated with investing in pooled investment vehicles, such as paying the fees
and expenses of the pool and the risk that the pool or the operator of the pool
may default on its obligations to the holder of interests in the pool, such as a
Fund. Interests in privately offered investment pools of swaps may be considered
illiquid.
•Contracts
for Differences. “Contracts for differences” are swap arrangements in which a
Fund may agree with a counterparty that its return (or loss) will be based on
the relative performance of two different groups or “baskets” of securities. For
example, as to one of the baskets, a Fund’s return is based on theoretical long
futures positions in the securities comprising that basket, and as to the other
basket, a Fund’s return is based on theoretical short futures positions in the
securities comprising that other basket. The notional sizes of the baskets will
not necessarily be the same, which can give rise to investment leverage. Funds
may also use actual long and short futures positions to achieve the market
exposure(s) as contracts for differences. Funds may enter into swaps and
contracts for differences for investment return, hedging, risk management and
for investment leverage.
•Swaptions.
A swap option (also known as “swaptions”) is a contract that gives a
counterparty the right (but not the obligation) in return for payment of a
premium, to enter into a new swap agreement or to shorten, extend, cancel, or
otherwise modify an existing swap agreement, at some designated future time on
specified terms. The buyer and seller of the swap option agree on the strike
price, length of the option period, the term of the swap, notional amount,
amortization and frequency of settlement. Funds may engage in swap options for
hedging purposes or in an attempt to manage and mitigate credit and interest
rate risk. Funds may write (sell) and purchase put and call swap options. The
use of swap options involves risks, including, among others, imperfect
correlation between movements of the price of the swap options and the price of
the securities, indices or other assets serving as reference instruments for the
swap option, reducing the effectiveness of the instrument for hedging
or
investment
purposes.
Obligations
under Swap Agreements. The
swap agreements a Fund enters into settle in cash and, therefore, provide for
calculation of the obligations of the parties to the agreement on a “net basis.”
Consequently, a Fund's current obligations (or rights) under such a swap
agreement will generally be equal only to the net amount to be paid or received
under the agreement based on the relative values of the positions held by each
party to the agreement (the “net amount”). A Fund's current obligations under
such a swap agreement will be accrued daily (offset against any amounts owed to
the Fund).
Risks
Associated with Swap Agreements. Swaps
can be highly volatile and may have a considerable impact on a Fund’s
performance, as the potential gain or loss on any swap transaction is not
subject to any fixed limit. Whether a Fund’s use of swap agreements or swap
options will be successful in furthering its investment objective of total
return will depend on the ability of those managing the fund’s investments to
predict correctly whether certain types of investments are likely to produce
greater returns than other investments. Because they are two party contracts and
because they may have terms of greater than seven days, swap agreements may be
considered to be illiquid. Moreover, a Fund bears the risk of loss of the amount
expected to be received under a swap agreement in the event of the default or
bankruptcy of a swap agreement counterparty. The Funds will enter into swap
agreements only with counterparties that present minimal credit risks, as
determined by those managing the fund’s investments. Certain restrictions
imposed on each Fund by the Internal Revenue Code may limit a Fund’s ability to
use swap agreements.
Depending
on the terms of the particular option agreement, a Fund will generally incur a
greater degree of risk when it writes a swap option than it will incur when it
purchases a swap option. When a Fund purchases a swap option, it risks losing
only the amount of the premium it has paid should it decide to let the option
expire unexercised. However, when a Fund writes a swap option, upon exercise of
the option the Fund will become obligated according to the terms of the
underlying agreement.
Liquidity
of Swap Agreements. Some
swap markets have grown substantially in recent years with a large number of
banks and investment banking firms acting both as principals and as agents
utilizing standardized swap documentation. As a result, these swap markets have
become relatively liquid. The liquidity of swap agreements will be determined by
those managing the fund’s investments based on various factors,
including:
•the
frequency of trades and quotations,
•the
number of dealers and prospective purchasers in the marketplace,
•dealer
undertakings to make a market,
•the
nature of the security (including any demand or tender features),
and
•the
nature of the marketplace for trades (including the ability to assign or offset
a portfolio's rights and obligations relating to the investment).
Such
determination will govern whether a swap will be deemed to be within each Fund’s
restriction on investments in illiquid securities.
Valuing
Swap Agreements. For
purposes of applying a fund’s investment policies and restrictions (as stated in
the Prospectuses and this SAI) swap agreements are generally valued by the funds
at market value. In the case of a credit default swap, however, in applying
certain of the funds’ investment policies and restrictions the fund will value
the credit default swap at its notional value or its full exposure value (i.e.,
the sum of the notional amount for the contract plus the market value), but may
value the credit default swap at market value for purposes of applying certain
of the funds’ other investment policies and restrictions. For example, a fund
may value credit default swaps at full exposure value for purposes of the fund’s
credit quality guidelines because such value reflects the fund’s actual economic
exposure during the term of the credit default swap agreement. In this context,
both the notional amount and the market value may be positive or negative
depending on whether the fund is selling or buying protection through the credit
default swap. The manner in which certain securities or other instruments are
valued by a fund for purposes of applying investment policies and restrictions
may differ from the manner in which those investments are valued by other types
of investors.
Permissible
Uses of Futures and Options on Futures Contracts
Each
Fund may enter into futures contracts and related options transactions, for
hedging purposes and for other appropriate risk management purposes, and to
modify the Fund’s exposure to various currency, commodity, equity, or
fixed-income markets. Each Fund may engage in futures trading in an effort to
generate returns. When using futures contracts and options on futures contracts
for hedging or risk management purposes, each Fund determines that the price
fluctuations in the contracts and options are substantially related to price
fluctuations in securities held by the Fund or which it expects to purchase. In
pursuing traditional hedging activities, each Fund may sell futures contracts or
acquire puts to protect against a decline in the price of securities that the
Fund owns. Each Fund may purchase futures contracts or calls on futures
contracts to protect the Fund against an increase in the price of securities the
Fund intends to purchase before it is in a position to do so.
Limitations
on the Use of Futures, Options on Futures Contracts, and Swaps
All
Funds except the Diversified Real Asset Fund and the Global Multi-Strategy
Fund.
CFTC Rule 4.5 provides that an investment company does not meet the definition
of “commodity pool operator” under the CEA if its use of futures contracts,
options on futures contracts, and swaps is sufficiently limited that the fund
can fall within one of two exclusions set out in Rule 4.5. Each Fund intends to
limit its use of futures contracts, options on futures contracts, and swaps to
the degree necessary to fall within one of the two exclusions. If a Fund is
unable to do so, it may incur expenses that are necessary to comply with the CEA
and the rules the CFTC has adopted under it.
Diversified
Real Asset Fund and Global Multi-Strategy Fund.
The Diversified Real Asset Fund and the Global Multi-Strategy Fund are each
deemed to be regulated “commodity pools” under the CEA and, as a result, may
invest in futures contracts, options on futures contracts, and swaps in excess
of the limitations imposed by the CFTC under Rule 4.5.
Risk
of Potential Government Regulation of Derivatives
It
is possible that additional government regulation of various types of derivative
instruments, including futures, options and swap agreements, may limit or
prevent a fund from using such instruments as a part of its investment strategy,
and could ultimately prevent a fund from being able to achieve its investment
objective. It is difficult to predict the effects future legislation and
regulation in this area, but the effects could be substantial and adverse. It is
possible that legislative and regulatory activity could limit or restrict the
ability of a fund to use certain instruments as a part of its investment
strategy.
Limits
or restrictions applicable to the counterparties with which the funds engage in
derivative transactions could also prevent the funds from using certain
instruments.
Environmental,
Social, and Governance Factors in the Selection of Portfolio
Securities
(Applicable
to all Funds or portions of the Funds, other than Bond Market Index Fund, Global
Multi-Strategy Fund, International Equity Index Fund, and Opportunistic
Municipal Fund. The below is not applicable to the Global Sustainable Listed
Infrastructure Fund as ESG Investing Risk is principal to the Fund and included
in the Fund's Prospectus.)
The
portfolio managers of the Funds consider one or more environmental, social,
and/or governance (“ESG”) factors along with other, non-ESG factors in making
investment decisions. The consideration of ESG factors is intended to further
the stated objective of the particular Funds. These ESG factors are generally no
more significant than other factors in the investment selection process, such
that ESG factors may not be determinative in deciding to include or exclude any
particular investment in the portfolio. By way of example, environmental factors
can include one or more of the following: climate change, natural resources,
pollution and waste, and environmental opportunities. Social factors can include
one or more of the following: human capital, product liability, stakeholder
opposition, and social opportunities. Governance factors can include corporate
governance and/or corporate behavior. Integration of ESG factors is qualitative
and subjective by nature. There is no guarantee that the criteria used, or
judgment exercised, will reflect the beliefs or values of any particular
investor. Further, there is no assurance that any strategy or integration of ESG
factors will be successful or profitable.
Further,
the portion of Diversified Real Asset Fund managed by Impax Asset Management
Limited and related to investments in natural resources considers climate as a
particular factor in its stock selection process. This consideration may impact
the investable universe, and may, under certain circumstances, detract from
investment performance.
Environmental,
Social, and Governance Factors in the Selection of Investment Advisors and Asset
Classes
The
Diversified Real Asset Fund is structured as an asset allocation fund, in which
PGI is responsible for selecting sub-advisors and investment teams within PGI
that, in turn, are responsible for selecting underlying investments. In
selecting sub-advisors, investment teams, and asset classes, the PGI asset
allocation team considers ESG factors. ESG factors are generally no more
significant than other factors in the selection process, such that ESG factors
may not be determinative in deciding to include or exclude any particular
sub-advisor, investment team, or asset class in the portfolio. Integration of
ESG factors is qualitative and subjective by nature. There is no guarantee that
the criteria used, or judgment exercised, will reflect the beliefs or values of
any particular investor. Further, there is no assurance that any strategy or
integration of ESG factors will be successful or profitable.
Fixed-Income
Securities
ETNs
Certain
funds may invest in, or sell short, exchange-traded notes (“ETNs”). ETNs are
typically senior, unsecured, unsubordinated debt securities whose returns are
linked to the performance of a particular market index less applicable fees and
expenses. ETNs are listed on an exchange and traded in the secondary market. The
fund may hold the ETN until maturity, at which time the issuer is obligated to
pay a return linked to the performance of the relevant market index. ETNs do not
make periodic interest payments and principal is not protected.
ETNs
are subject to credit risk and the value of the ETN may drop due to a downgrade
in the issuer’s credit rating, despite the underlying market benchmark or
strategy remaining unchanged. The value of an ETN may also be influenced by time
to maturity, level of supply and demand for the ETN, volatility and lack of
liquidity in underlying assets, changes in the applicable interest rates,
changes in the issuer’s credit rating, and economic, legal, political, or
geographic events that affect the referenced underlying asset. When a Fund
invests in ETNs, it will bear their proportionate share of any fees and expenses
borne by the ETN. The Fund’s decision to sell its ETN holdings may be limited by
the availability of a secondary market. ETNs are also subject to tax risk. The
Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and Congress are considering proposals that
would change the timing and character of income and gains from ETNs. There may
also be times when an ETN share trades at a premium or discount to its market
benchmark or strategy.
Funding
Agreements
Some
Funds may invest in Guaranteed Investment Contracts (“GICs”) and similar funding
agreements. In connection with these investments, a Fund makes cash
contributions to a deposit fund of an insurance company’s general account. The
insurance company then credits to a Fund on a monthly basis guaranteed interest,
which is based on an index (such as LIBOR, SOFR, or a similar reference rate).
The funding agreements provide that this guaranteed interest will not be less
than a certain minimum rate. The purchase price paid for a funding agreement
becomes part of the general assets of the insurance company. GICs are considered
illiquid securities and will be subject to any limitations on such investments,
unless there is an active and substantial secondary market for the particular
instrument and market quotations are readily available.
Generally,
funding agreements are not assignable or transferable without the permission of
the issuing company, and an active secondary market in some funding agreements
does not currently exist. Investments in GICs are subject to the risks
associated with fixed-income instruments generally, and are specifically subject
to the credit risk associated with an investment in the issuing insurance
company.
Inflation-Indexed
Bonds
Some
Funds may invest in inflation-indexed bonds or inflation protected debt
securities, which are fixed income securities whose value is periodically
adjusted according to the rate of inflation. Two structures are common. The U.S.
Treasury and some other issuers utilize a structure that accrues inflation into
the principal value of the bond. Most other issuers pay out the Consumer Price
Index accruals as part of a semi-annual coupon. Inflation-indexed securities
issued by the U.S. Treasury (Treasury Inflation Protected Securities or TIPS)
have maturities of approximately five, ten or thirty years, although it is
possible that securities with other maturities will be issued in the future. The
U.S. Treasury securities pay interest on a semi-annual basis equal to a fixed
percentage of the inflation-adjusted principal amount. If the periodic
adjustment rate measuring inflation falls, the principal value of
inflation-indexed bonds will be adjusted downward, and consequently the interest
payable on these securities (calculated with respect to a smaller principal
amount) will be reduced. The value of inflation-indexed bonds is expected to
change in response to changes in real interest rates. Real interest rates in
turn are tied to the relationship between nominal interest rates and the rate of
inflation. Therefore, if the rate of inflation rises at a faster rate than
nominal interest rates, real interest rates might decline, leading to an
increase in value of inflation-indexed bonds. In contrast, if nominal interest
rates increase at a faster rate than inflation, real interest rates might rise,
leading to a decrease in value of inflation-indexed bonds. While these
securities are expected to be protected from long-term inflationary trends,
short-term increases in inflation may lead to a decline in value. If interest
rates rise due to reasons other than inflation (for example, due to changes in
currency exchange rates), investors in these securities may not be protected to
the extent that the increase is not reflected in the bond’s inflation
measure.
The
periodic adjustment of U.S. inflation-indexed bonds is tied to the Consumer
Price Index for Urban Consumers (CPI-U), which is calculated monthly by the U.S.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPI-U is a measurement of changes in the cost of
living, made up of components such as housing, food, transportation and energy.
Inflation-indexed bonds issued by a foreign government are generally adjusted to
reflect a comparable inflation index calculated by that government. Any increase
in the principal amount of an inflation-indexed bond will be considered taxable
ordinary income, even though investors do not receive their principal until
maturity.
Step-Coupon
Securities
Each
Fund may invest in step-coupon securities. Step-coupon securities trade at a
discount from their face value and pay coupon interest. The coupon rate is low
for an initial period and then increases to a higher coupon rate thereafter.
Market values of these types of securities generally fluctuate in response to
changes in interest rates to a greater degree than conventional interest-paying
securities of comparable term and quality. Under many market conditions,
investments in such securities may be illiquid, making it difficult for a Fund
to dispose of them or determine their current value.
“Stripped”
Securities
Each
Fund may invest in stripped securities, which are usually structured with two or
more classes that receive different proportions of the interest and principal
distribution on a pool of U.S. government or foreign government securities or
mortgage assets. In some cases, one class will receive all of the interest (the
interest-only or “IO” class), while the other class will receive all of the
principal (the principal-only or “PO” class). Stripped securities commonly have
greater market volatility than other types of fixed-income securities. In the
case of stripped mortgage securities, if the underlying mortgage assets
experience greater than anticipated payments of principal, a Fund may fail to
recoup fully its investments in IOs. Stripped securities may be illiquid.
Stripped securities may be considered derivative securities.
Structured
Notes
Some
Funds may invest in a broad category of instruments known as “structured notes.”
These instruments are debt obligations issued by industrial corporations,
financial institutions or governmental or international agencies. Traditional
debt obligations typically obligate the issuer to repay the principal plus a
specified rate of interest. Structured notes, by contrast, obligate the issuer
to pay amounts of principal or interest that are determined by reference to
changes in some external factor or factors, or the principal and interest rate
may vary from the stated rate because of changes in these factors. For example,
the issuer’s obligations could be determined by reference to changes in the
value of a foreign currency, an index of securities (such as the S&P 500
Index) or an interest rate (such as the U.S. Treasury bill rate). In some cases,
the issuer’s obligations are determined by reference to changes over time in the
difference (or “spread”) between two or more external factors (such as the U.S.
prime lending rate and the total return of the stock market in a particular
country, as measured by a stock index). In some cases, the issuer’s obligations
may fluctuate inversely with changes in an external factor or factors (for
example, if the U.S. prime lending rate goes up, the issuer’s interest payment
obligations are reduced). In some cases, the issuer’s obligations may be
determined by some multiple of the change in an external factor or factors (for
example, three times the change in the U.S. Treasury bill rate). In some cases,
the issuer’s obligations remain fixed (as with a traditional debt instrument) so
long as an external factor or factors do not change by more than the specified
amount (for example, if the value of a stock index does not exceed some
specified maximum), but if the external factor or factors change by more than
the specified amount, the issuer’s obligations may be sharply
reduced.
Structured
notes can serve many different purposes in the management of a fund. For
example, they can be used to increase a fund’s exposure to changes in the value
of assets that a fund would not ordinarily purchase directly (such as stocks
traded in a market that is not open to U.S. investors). They also can be used to
hedge the risks associated with other investments a fund holds. For example, if
a structured note has an interest rate that fluctuates inversely with general
changes in a country’s stock market index, the value of the structured note
would generally move in the opposite direction to the value of holdings of
stocks in that market, thus moderating the effect of stock market movements on
the value of a fund’s portfolio as a whole. The cash flow on the underlying
instruments may be apportioned among the newly issued structured notes to create
securities with different investment characteristics such as varying maturities,
payment priorities or interest rate provisions; the extent of the payments made
with respect to structured notes is dependent on the extent of the cash flow on
the underlying instruments.
Structured
notes involve special risks. As with any debt obligation, structured notes
involve the risk that the issuer will become insolvent or otherwise default on
its payment obligations. This risk is in addition to the risk that the issuer’s
obligations (and thus the value of a fund’s investment) will be reduced because
of adverse changes in the external factor or factors to which the obligations
are linked. The value of structured notes will in many cases be more volatile
(that is, will change more rapidly or severely) than the value of traditional
debt instruments. Volatility will be especially high if the issuer’s obligations
are determined by reference to some multiple of the change in the external
factor or factors. Structured notes also may be more difficult to accurately
price than less complex securities and instruments or more traditional debt
securities. Many structured notes have limited or no liquidity, so that a fund
would be unable to dispose of the investment prior to maturity. As with all
investments, successful use of structured notes depends in significant part on
the accuracy of the analysis of those managing the fund’s investments of the
issuer’s creditworthiness and financial prospects, and of their forecast as to
changes in relevant economic and financial market conditions and factors. In
instances where the issuer of a structured note is a foreign entity, the usual
risks associated with investments in foreign securities apply. Structured notes
may be considered derivative securities.
Zero-Coupon
Securities
Each
Fund may invest in zero-coupon securities. Zero-coupon securities have no stated
interest rate and pay only the principal portion at a stated date in the future.
They usually trade at a substantial discount from their face (par) value.
Zero-coupon securities are subject to greater market value fluctuations in
response to changing interest rates than debt obligations of comparable
maturities that make distributions of interest in cash.
Foreign
Currency Transactions
Options
on Foreign Currencies
A
Fund may buy and write options on foreign currencies in a manner similar to that
in which futures or forward contracts on foreign currencies will be utilized.
Each Fund may use options on foreign currencies to hedge against adverse changes
in foreign currency conversion rates. For example, a decline in the U.S. dollar
value of a foreign currency in which portfolio securities are denominated will
reduce the U.S. dollar value of such securities, even if their value in the
foreign currency remains constant. In order to protect against such diminutions
in the value of the portfolio securities, a Fund may buy put options on the
foreign currency. If the value of the currency declines, a Fund will have the
right to sell such currency for a fixed amount in U.S. dollars, thereby
offsetting, in whole or in part, the adverse effect on its portfolio.
Conversely, when a rise in the U.S. dollar value of a currency in which
securities to be acquired are denominated is projected, thereby increasing the
cost of such securities, a Fund may buy call options on the foreign currency.
The purchase of such options could offset, at least partially, the effects of
the adverse movements in exchange rates. As in the case of other types of
options, however, the benefit to a Fund from purchases of foreign currency
options will be reduced by the amount of the premium and related transaction
costs. In addition, if currency exchange rates do not move in the direction or
to the extent desired, a Fund could sustain losses or lesser gains on
transactions in foreign currency options that would require a Fund to forgo a
portion or all of the benefits of advantageous changes in those
rates.
Each
Fund also may write options on foreign currencies. For example, to hedge against
a potential decline in the U.S. dollar due to adverse fluctuations in exchange
rates, a Fund could, instead of purchasing a put option, write a call option on
the relevant currency. If the decline expected by a Fund occurs, the option will
most likely not be exercised and the diminution in value of portfolio securities
will be offset at least in part by the amount of the premium received.
Similarly, instead of purchasing a call option to hedge against a potential
increase in the U.S. dollar cost of securities to be acquired, a Fund could
write a put option on the relevant currency which, if rates move in the manner
projected by a Fund, will expire unexercised and allow a Fund to hedge the
increased cost up to the amount of the premium. If exchange rates do not move in
the expected direction, the option may be exercised and a Fund would be required
to buy or sell the underlying currency at a loss, which may not be fully offset
by the amount of the premium. Through the writing of options on foreign
currencies, a Fund also may lose all or a portion of the benefits that might
otherwise have been obtained from favorable movements in exchange
rates.
Futures
on Currency
A
foreign currency future provides for the future sale by one party and purchase
by another party of a specified quantity of foreign currency at a specified
price and time. A public market exists in futures contracts covering a number of
foreign currencies. Currency futures contracts are exchange-traded and change in
value to reflect movements of a currency or a basket of currencies. Settlement
must be made in a designated currency.
Forward
Foreign Currency Exchange Contracts
Each
Fund may, but is not obligated to, enter into forward foreign currency exchange
contracts. Currency transactions include forward currency contracts and exchange
listed or over-the-counter options on currencies. A forward currency contract
involves a privately negotiated obligation to purchase or sell a specific
currency at a specified future date at a price set at the time of the
contract.
The
typical use of a forward contract is to “lock in” the price of a security in
U.S. dollars or some other foreign currency which a Fund is holding in its
portfolio. By entering into a forward contract for the purchase or sale, for a
fixed amount of dollars or other currency, of the amount of foreign currency
involved in the underlying security transactions, a Fund may be able to protect
itself against a possible loss resulting from an adverse change in the
relationship between the U.S. dollar or other currency which is being used for
the security purchase and the foreign currency in which the security is
denominated in or exposed to during the period between the date on which the
security is purchased or sold and the date on which payment is made or
received.
Those
managing the fund’s investments also may from time to time utilize forward
contracts for other purposes. For example, they may be used to hedge a foreign
security held in the portfolio or a security which pays out principal tied to an
exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and a foreign currency, against a decline
in value of the applicable foreign currency. They also may be used to lock in
the current exchange rate of the currency in which those securities anticipated
to be purchased are denominated in or exposed to. At times, each Fund may enter
into “cross-currency” hedging transactions involving currencies other than those
in which securities are held or proposed to be purchased are
denominated.
It
should be noted that the use of forward foreign currency exchange contracts does
not eliminate fluctuations in the underlying prices of the securities. It simply
establishes a rate of exchange between the currencies that can be achieved at
some future point in time. Additionally, although such contracts tend to
minimize the risk of loss due to a decline in the value of the hedged currency,
they also tend to limit any potential gain that might result if the value of the
currency increases.
Foreign
Securities
Investing
in foreign securities carries political and economic risks distinct from those
associated with investing in the United States. Investments in foreign
securities also involve the risk of possible adverse changes in investment or
exchange control regulations, expropriation or confiscatory taxation, limitation
on or delays in the removal of funds or other assets of a fund, political or
financial instability, or diplomatic and other developments that could affect
such investments. Foreign investments may be affected by actions of foreign
governments adverse to the interests of U.S. investors, including the
possibility of expropriation or nationalization of assets, confiscatory
taxation, restrictions on U.S. investment, or on the ability to repatriate
assets or to convert currency into U.S. dollars. There may be a greater
possibility of default by foreign governments or foreign-government sponsored
enterprises. Investments in foreign countries also involve a risk of local
political, economic, or social instability; military action or unrest; or
adverse diplomatic developments.
Asia-Pacific
Countries
In
addition to the risks of foreign investing and the risks of investing in
emerging markets, the developing market Asia-Pacific countries in which a Fund
may invest are subject to certain additional or specific risks. In the
Asia-Pacific markets, there is a high concentration of market capitalization and
trading volume in a small number of issuers representing a limited number of
industries, as well as a high concentration of investors and financial
intermediaries. Many of these markets also may be affected by developments with
respect to more established markets in the region, such as Japan and Hong Kong.
Brokers in developing market Asia-Pacific countries typically are fewer in
number and less well capitalized than brokers in the United States.
Many
of the developing market Asia-Pacific countries may be subject to a greater
degree of economic, political and social instability than is the case in the
United States and Western European countries. Such instability may result from,
among other things: (i) authoritarian governments or military involvement in
political and economic decision- making, including changes in government through
extra-constitutional means; (ii) popular unrest associated with demands for
improved political, economic and social conditions; (iii) internal insurgencies;
(iv) hostile relations with neighboring countries; and/or (v) ethnic, religious
and racial disaffection. In addition, the governments of many of such countries,
such as Indonesia, have a heavy role in regulating and supervising the
economy.
An
additional risk common to most such countries is that the economy is heavily
export-oriented and, accordingly, is dependent upon international trade. The
existence of overburdened infrastructure and obsolete financial systems also
present risks in certain countries, as do environmental problems. Certain
economies also depend to a significant degree upon exports of primary
commodities and, therefore, are vulnerable to changes in commodity prices that,
in turn, may be affected by a variety of factors. The legal systems in certain
developing market Asia-Pacific countries also may have an adverse impact on a
Fund. The rights of investors in developing market Asia-Pacific companies may be
more limited than those of shareholders of U.S. corporations. It may be
difficult or impossible to obtain and/or enforce a judgment in a developing
market Asia-Pacific country.
China
Investing
in China involves special considerations, including: the risk of nationalization
or expropriation of assets or confiscatory taxation; greater governmental
involvement in and control over the economy, interest rates and currency
exchange rates; controls on foreign investment and limitations on repatriation
of invested capital; greater social, economic and political uncertainty;
dependency on exports and the corresponding importance of international trade;
and currency exchange rate fluctuations. The government of China maintains
strict currency controls in support of economic, trade and political objectives
and regularly intervenes in the currency market. The government’s actions in
this respect may not be transparent or predictable. Furthermore, it is difficult
for foreign investors to directly access money market securities in China
because of investment and trading restrictions. These and other factors may
decrease the value and liquidity of a fund’s investments.
A
fund may obtain exposure to companies based or operated in China by investing
through legal structures known as variable interest entities (“VIEs”). VIEs are
not formally recognized under Chinese law and are subject to risks, such as the
risk that China could cease to allow VIEs, could impose new restrictions on
VIEs, or could deem the contractual arrangements of VIEs unenforceable. These
risks could limit or eliminate the remedies and rights available to VIEs and
their investors, such as a fund. If these risks materialize, the value of a
fund’s investments in VIEs could be adversely affected, and a fund could incur
significant losses with no available recourse.
Investments
in Stock Connect and Bond Connect
Funds
may invest in China A shares, which are shares of certain Chinese companies
listed and traded through the Shanghai-Hong Kong Stock Connect and Shenzhen-Hong
Kong Stock Connect programs (“Stock Connect”). Stock Connect is a securities
trading and clearing program established by Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing
Limited, the Shanghai Stock Exchange (“SSE”), the Shenzhen Stock Exchange
(“SZSE”) and China Securities Depository and Clearing Corporation Limited, which
seeks to provide mutual stock market access between Mainland China and Hong
Kong. Trading through Stock Connect is subject to numerous restrictions and
risks that could impair the Fund’s ability to invest in or sell China A shares
and adversely affect the Fund’s performance, such as the following:
•China
A shares generally may not be sold, purchased or otherwise transferred other
than through Stock Connect in accordance with applicable rules, regulations, and
restrictions. Such securities may lose their eligibility, in which case they
presumably could be sold but could no longer be purchased through Stock Connect.
Market volatility and settlement difficulties in the China A share markets may
result in significant fluctuations in the prices and liquidity of the securities
traded on such markets. Further regulations or restrictions, such as limitations
on redemptions or suspension of trading, may adversely impact the
Fund.
•Stock
Connect is generally only available on business days when both the China and
Hong Kong markets are open and when banking services are available in both
markets on the corresponding settlement days. As a result, a Fund may not be
able trade when it would be otherwise attractive to do so, and the Fund may not
be able to dispose of its China A shares in a timely manner.
•Investing
in China A shares is subject to Stock Connect’s clearance and settlement
procedures, which could pose risks to the Fund. Certain requirements must be
completed before the market opening, or a Fund cannot sell the shares on that
trading day. Stock Connect also imposes quotas that limit aggregate net
purchases on an exchange on a particular day, and an investor cannot purchase
and sell the same security through Stock Connect on the same trading day. Once
the daily quota is reached, orders to purchase additional China A shares through
Stock Connect will be rejected. Such restrictions could limit a Fund’s ability
to sell its China A shares in a timely manner, or to sell them at
all.
•If
a Fund holds 5% or more of a China A share issuer’s total shares through Stock
Connect investments, the Fund must return any profits obtained from the purchase
and sale of those shares if both transactions occur within a six-month period.
All accounts managed by the Funds’ Advisor and/or its affiliates will be
aggregated for purposes of this 5% limitation, which makes it more likely that a
Fund’s profits may be subject to these limitations.
•Stock
Connect uses an omnibus clearing structure, and the Fund’s shares will be
registered in its custodian’s name on the Central Clearing and Settlement
System. This may limit the ability of the Fund’s advisor to effectively manage a
Fund, and may expose the Fund to the credit risk of its custodian or to greater
risk of expropriation. Investment in China A shares through Stock Connect may be
available only through a single broker that is an affiliate of the Fund’s
custodian, which may affect the quality of execution provided by such
broker.
•China
A shares purchased through Stock Connect will be held via a book entry omnibus
account in the name of Hong Kong Securities Clearing Company Limited (“HKSCC”),
Hong Kong’s clearing entity, and not the Fund’s name as the beneficial owner.
Therefore, a Fund’s ability to exercise its rights as a shareholder and to
pursue claims against the issuer of China A shares may be limited. While Chinese
regulations and the Hong Kong Stock Exchange have issued clarifications and
guidance supporting the concept of beneficial ownership through Stock Connect,
the interpretation of beneficial ownership in China by regulators and courts may
continue to evolve.
•The
Fund’s investments in China A shares through Stock Connect are generally subject
to Chinese securities regulations and listing rules, among other restrictions.
The Fund will not benefit from access to Hong Kong investor compensation funds,
which are set up to protect against defaults of trades, when investing through
Stock Connect. Investments in China A shares may not be covered by the
securities investor protection programs of the exchanges and, without the
protection of such programs, will be subject to the risk of default by the
broker. If the depository of the SSE and the SZSE defaulted, a Fund may not be
able to recover fully its losses from the depository or may be delayed in
receiving proceeds as part of any recovery process.
•Fees,
costs and taxes imposed on foreign investors (such as the Fund) may be higher
than comparable fees, costs and taxes imposed on owners of other securities that
provide similar investment exposure. Trades using Stock Connect may also be
subject to various fees, taxes and market charges imposed by Chinese market
participants and regulatory authorities. Uncertainties in China’s tax rules
related to the taxation of income and gains from investments in China A shares
could result in unexpected tax liabilities for the Fund, and the withholding tax
treatment of dividends and capital gains payable to overseas investors currently
is unsettled.
•Because
trades of eligible China A shares on Stock Connect must be settled in Renminbi
(RMB), the Chinese currency, Funds investing through Stock Connect will be
exposed to RMB currency risks. The ability to hedge RMB currency risks may be
limited. The RMB is subject to exchange control restrictions, and the Fund could
be adversely affected by delays in converting currencies into RMB and vice
versa.
•Because
Stock Connect is in its early stages, the effect on the market for trading China
A shares with the introduction of numerous foreign investors is currently
unknown. Stock Connect is relatively new and may be subject to further
interpretation and guidance. There can be no assurance as to Stock Connect’s
continued existence or whether future developments regarding the program may
restrict or adversely affect the Fund’s investments or returns.
Funds
may also invest in China Interbank bonds traded on the China Interbank Bond
Market (“CIBM”) through the China - Hong Kong Bond Connect program (“Bond
Connect”). In China, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority Central Money Markets Unit
holds Bond Connect securities on behalf of investors (such as the Fund) in
accounts maintained with maintained with a China-based custodian (either the
China Central Depository & Clearing Co. or the Shanghai Clearing House).
Investments using Bond Connect are subject to risks similar to those described
above with respect to Stock Connect.
Europe
The
economies and markets of European countries are often closely connected and
interdependent, and events in one European country can have an adverse impact on
other European countries. Certain funds may invest in securities of issuers that
are domiciled in, or have significant operations in, member countries of the
Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union (the “EU”), which requires
member countries to comply with restrictions on inflation rates, deficits,
interest rates, debt levels and fiscal and monetary controls. Decreasing imports
or exports, changes in governmental or EU regulations on trade, changes in the
exchange rate of the euro (the common currency of certain EU countries), the
default or threat of default by an EU member country on its sovereign debt,
and/or an economic recession in an EU member country may have a significant
adverse effect on the economies of EU member countries and their trading
partners, including some or all of the emerging markets countries. Although
certain European countries do not use the euro, many of these countries are
obliged to meet the criteria for joining the euro zone. Consequently, these
countries must comply with many of the restrictions noted above. The European
financial markets have experienced volatility and adverse trends in recent years
due to concerns about economic downturns, rising government debt levels and the
possible default of government debt in several European countries. Further
defaults or restructurings by governments and other entities of their debt could
have additional adverse effects on economies, financial markets and asset
valuations around the world. In addition, one or more countries may abandon the
euro and/or withdraw from the EU. The United Kingdom (the "UK") departed the EU
on January 31, 2020 (commonly referred to as "Brexit"). As a result of Brexit,
the UK may be less stable than it had been in prior years, and investments in
the UK may be more volatile due to economic uncertainty and currency exchange
rate fluctuations. The impact of these actions by European countries, especially
if they occur in a disorderly fashion, is not clear but could be significant and
far-reaching and could adversely impact the value of investments in the
region.
Japan
Japanese
investments may be significantly affected by events influencing Japan’s economy
and the exchange rate between the Japanese yen and the U.S. dollar. Japan’s
economy fell into a long recession in the 1990s. After a few years of mild
recovery in the mid-2000s, Japan’s economy fell into another recession as a
result of the recent global economic crisis. Japan is heavily dependent on
exports and foreign oil. Japan is located in a seismically active area, and in
2011 experienced an earthquake of a sizable magnitude and a tsunami that
significantly affected important elements of its infrastructure and resulted in
a nuclear crisis. Since these events, Japan’s financial markets have fluctuated
dramatically. The full extent of the impact of these events on Japan’s economy
and on foreign investment in Japan is difficult to estimate. Japan’s economic
prospects may be affected by the political and military situations of its near
neighbors, notably North and South Korea, China, and Russia.
Latin
America
Most
Latin American countries have experienced, at one time or another, severe and
persistent levels of inflation, including, in some cases, hyperinflation. This
has, in turn, led to high interest rates, extreme measures by governments to
keep inflation in check, and a generally debilitating effect on economic growth.
Although inflation in many countries has lessened, there is no guarantee it will
remain at lower levels. In addition, the political history of certain Latin
American countries has been characterized by political uncertainty, intervention
by the military in civilian and economic spheres, and political corruption. Such
developments, if they were to reoccur, could reverse favorable trends toward
market and economic reform, privatization, and removal of trade barriers, and
result in significant disruption in securities markets. Certain Latin American
countries may also have managed currencies, which are maintained at artificial
levels to the U.S. dollar rather than at levels determined by the market. This
type of system can lead to sudden and large adjustments in the currency which,
in turn, can have a disruptive and negative effect on foreign investors. There
is no significant foreign exchange market for many currencies and it would, as a
result, be difficult for the Fund to engage in foreign currency transactions
designed to protect the value of the Fund’s interests in securities denominated
in such currencies. Finally, a number of Latin American countries are among the
largest debtors of developing markets. There have been moratoria on, and
reschedulings of, repayment with respect to these debts. Such events can
restrict the flexibility of these debtor nations in the international markets
and result in the imposition of onerous conditions on their
economies.
High
Yield Securities
Each
Fund may invest a portion of its assets in bonds that are rated below investment
grade (sometimes called “high yield bonds” or “junk bonds”), which are rated at
the time of purchase Ba1 or lower by Moody’s and BB+ or lower by S&P Global
Ratings. If the bond has been rated by only one of the rating agencies, that
rating will determine the bond's rating; if the bond is rated differently by the
rating agencies, the highest rating will be used; and if the bond has not been
rated by either of the rating agencies, those selecting such investments will
determine the bond's quality. Lower-rated bonds involve a higher degree of
credit risk, which is the risk that the issuer will not make interest or
principal payments when due. In the event of an unanticipated default, a fund
would experience a reduction in its income and could expect a decline in the
market value of the bonds so affected. Issuers of high yield securities may be
involved in restructurings or bankruptcy proceedings that may not be successful.
If an issuer defaults, it may not be able to pay all or a portion of interest
and principal owed to the fund, it may exchange the high yield securities owned
by the fund for other securities, including equities, and/or the fund may incur
additional expenses while seeking recovery of its investment. Some funds may
also invest in unrated bonds of foreign and domestic issuers. Unrated bonds,
while not necessarily of lower quality than rated bonds, may not have as broad a
market. Because of the size and perceived demand of the issue, among other
factors, certain municipalities may not incur the expense of obtaining a rating.
Those managing the fund’s investments will analyze the creditworthiness of the
issuer, as well as any financial institution or other party responsible for
payments on the bond, in determining whether to purchase unrated bonds. Unrated
bonds will be included in the limitation each fund has with regard to high yield
bonds unless those managing the fund’s investments deem such securities to be
the equivalent of investment-grade bonds. Some of the high yield securities
consist of Rule 144A securities. High yield securities may contain any type of
interest rate payment or reset terms, including fixed rate, adjustable rate,
zero coupon, contingent, deferred, payment-in-kind, and those with auction rate
features.
Initial
Public Offerings (“IPOs”)
An
IPO is a company’s first offering of stock to the public. IPO risk is that the
market value of IPO shares will fluctuate considerably due to factors such as
the absence of a prior public market, unseasoned trading, the small number of
shares available for trading, and limited information about the issuer. The
purchase of IPO shares may involve high transaction costs. IPO shares are
subject to market risk and liquidity risk. In addition, the market for IPO
shares can be speculative and/or inactive for extended periods. The limited
number of shares available for trading in some IPOs may make it more difficult
for a fund to buy or sell significant amounts of shares without an unfavorable
impact on prevailing prices. Investors in IPO shares can be affected by
substantial dilution in the value of their shares by sales of additional shares
and by concentration of control in existing management and principal
shareholders.
When
a fund’s asset base is small, a significant portion of the fund’s performance
could be attributable to investments in IPOs because such investments would have
a magnified impact on the fund. As the fund’s assets grow, the effect of the
fund’s investments in IPOs on the fund’s performance probably will decline,
which could reduce the fund’s performance. Because of the price volatility of
IPO shares, a fund may choose to hold IPO shares for a very short period. This
may increase the turnover of the fund’s portfolio and lead to increased expenses
to the fund, such as commissions and transaction costs. By selling IPO shares,
the fund may realize taxable gains it will subsequently distribute to
shareholders.
Interfund
Lending and Borrowing
The
SEC has granted an exemption permitting Principal Funds to borrow money from and
lend money to each other for temporary or emergency purposes. The loans are
subject to a number of conditions designed to ensure fair and equitable
treatment of all participating funds, including the following: (1) no fund may
borrow money through the program unless it receives a more favorable interest
rate than a rate approximating the lowest interest rate at which bank loans
would be available to any of the participating funds under a loan agreement; and
(2) no fund may lend money through the program unless it receives a more
favorable return than that available from an investment in overnight repurchase
agreements. In addition, a fund may participate in the program only if and to
the extent that such participation is consistent with a fund’s investment
objectives and policies. Interfund loans and borrowings have a maximum duration
of seven days. Loans may be called on one day’s notice. A fund may have to
borrow from a bank at a higher interest rate if an interfund loan is called or
not renewed. Any delay in repayment to a lending fund could result in a lost
investment opportunity or additional costs. The Board is responsible for
overseeing and periodically reviewing the interfund lending
program.
Inverse
Floating Rate and Other Variable and Floating Rate Instruments
Each
Fund may purchase variable and floating rate instruments. These instruments may
include variable amount master demand notes that permit the indebtedness
thereunder to vary in addition to providing for periodic adjustments in the
interest rate. These instruments may also include leveraged inverse floating
rate debt instruments, or “inverse floaters”. The interest rate of an inverse
floater resets in the opposite direction from the market rate of interest on a
security or interest to which it is related. An inverse floater may be
considered to be leveraged to the extent that its interest rate varies by a
magnitude that exceeds the magnitude of the change in the index rate of interest
and is subject to many of the same risks as derivatives. The higher degree of
leverage inherent in inverse floaters is associated with greater volatility in
their market values. Certain of these investments may be illiquid. The absence
of an active secondary market with respect to these investments could make it
difficult for a Fund to dispose of a variable or floating rate note if the
issuer defaulted on its payment obligation or during periods that a Fund is not
entitled to exercise its demand rights, and a Fund could, for these or other
reasons, suffer a loss with respect to such instruments.
Investment
Company Securities
Securities
of other investment companies, including shares of closed-end investment
companies (including interval funds), unit investment trusts, various
exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), and other open-end investment companies,
represent interests in professionally managed portfolios that may invest in a
variety of instruments. Certain types of investment companies, such as certain
closed-end investment companies, do not continuously offer their shares for sale
(like open-end investment companies) but instead issue a fixed number of shares
that trade on a stock exchange or over-the-counter at a premium or a discount to
their net asset value. An interval fund is a type of closed-end investment
company that is continuously offered at net asset value, is not listed on an
exchange, and only periodically offers to repurchase a limited amount of
outstanding shares from its shareholders. Investing in interval funds involves
liquidity risk, and the liquidity risk is even greater in interval funds that
invest in securities of companies with smaller market capitalizations,
derivatives, securities with substantial market and/or credit risk, or
securities that are themselves illiquid. Other types of investment companies,
such as ETFs, are continuously offered at net asset value but may also be traded
in the secondary market. ETFs are often structured to perform in a similar
fashion to a broad-based securities index. Investing in ETFs involves generally
the same risks as investing directly in the underlying instruments. Investing in
ETFs involves the risk that they will not perform in exactly the same fashion,
or in response to the same factors, as the index or underlying instruments.
Shares of ETFs may trade at prices other than NAV.
A
fund that invests in another investment company is subject to the risks
associated with direct ownership of the securities in which such investment
company invests. Fund shareholders indirectly bear their proportionate share of
the expenses of each such investment company, including its advisory and
administrative fees. The fund would also continue to pay its own advisory fees
and other expenses. Consequently, the fund and its shareholders would, in
effect, absorb two levels of fees with respect to investments in other
investment companies.
A
fund may invest in affiliated underlying funds, and those who manage such fund's
investments and their affiliates may earn different fees from different
underlying funds and may have an incentive to allocate more fund assets to
underlying funds from which they receive higher fees.
Master
Limited Partnerships (“MLPs”)
An
MLP is an entity that is generally taxed as a partnership for federal income tax
purposes and that derives each year at least 90% of its gross income from
“Qualifying Income”. Qualifying Income includes interest, dividends, real estate
rents, gain from the sale or disposition of real property, income and gain from
commodities or commodity futures, and income and gain from mineral or natural
resources activities that generate Qualifying Income. MLP interests (known as
units) are traded on securities exchanges or over-the-counter. An MLP’s
organization as a partnership and compliance with the Qualifying Income rules
generally eliminates federal tax at the entity level.
An
MLP has one or more general partners (who may be individuals, corporations, or
other partnerships) which manage the partnership, and limited partners, which
provide capital to the partnership but have no role in its management.
Typically, the general partner is owned by company management or another
publicly traded sponsoring corporation. When an investor buys units in an MLP,
the investor becomes a limited partner. Holders of MLP units have limited
control and voting rights on matters affecting the partnership and are exposed
to a remote possibility of liability for all of the obligations of that MLP in
the event that a court determines that the rights of the holders of MLP units to
vote to remove or replace the general partner of that MLP, to approve amendments
to that MLP’s partnership agreement, or to take other action under the
partnership agreement of that MLP would constitute “control” of the business of
that MLP, or a court or governmental agency determines that the MLP is
conducting business in a state without complying with the partnership statute of
that state. Holders of MLP units are also exposed to the risk that they will be
required to repay amounts to the MLP that are wrongfully distributed to
them.
The
business of certain MLPs is affected by supply and demand for energy commodities
because such MLPs derive revenue and income based upon the volume of the
underlying commodity produced, transported, processed, distributed, and/ or
marketed. Pipeline MLPs have indirect commodity exposure to oil and gas price
volatility because, although they do not own the underlying energy commodity,
the general level of commodity prices may affect the volume of the commodity the
MLP delivers to its customers and the cost of providing services such as
distributing natural gas liquids. The costs of natural gas pipeline MLPs to
perform services may exceed the negotiated rates under “negotiated rate”
contracts. Processing MLPs may be directly affected by energy commodity prices.
Propane MLPs own the underlying energy commodity, and therefore have direct
exposure to energy commodity prices. The MLP industry in general could be hurt
by market perception that MLP’s performance and valuation are directly tied to
commodity prices.
Pipeline
MLPs are common carrier transporters of natural gas, natural gas liquids
(primarily propane, ethane, butane and natural gasoline), crude oil or refined
petroleum products (gasoline, diesel fuel and jet fuel). Pipeline MLPs also may
operate ancillary businesses such as storage and marketing of such products.
Pipeline MLPs derive revenue from capacity and transportation fees.
Historically, pipeline output has been less exposed to cyclical economic forces
due to its low-cost structure and government-regulated nature. In addition, most
pipeline MLPs have limited direct commodity price exposure because they do not
own the product being shipped.
Processing
MLPs are gatherers and processors of natural gas as well as providers of
transportation, fractionation and storage of natural gas liquids (“NGLs”).
Processing MLPs derive revenue from providing services to natural gas producers,
which require treatment or processing before their natural gas commodity can be
marketed to utilities and other end user markets. Revenue for the processor is
fee based, although it is not uncommon to have some participation in the prices
of the natural gas and NGL commodities for a portion of revenue.
Propane
MLPs are distributors of propane to homeowners for space and water heating.
Propane MLPs derive revenue from the resale of the commodity on a margin over
wholesale cost. The ability to maintain margin is a key to profitability.
Propane serves approximately 3% of the household energy needs in the United
States, largely for homes beyond the geographic reach of natural gas
distribution pipelines. Approximately 70% of annual cash flow is earned during
the winter heating season (October through March). Accordingly, volumes are
weather dependent, but have utility type functions similar to electricity and
natural gas.
MLPs
operating interstate pipelines and storage facilities are subject to substantial
regulation by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”), which regulates
interstate transportation rates, services and other matters regarding natural
gas pipelines including: the establishment of rates for service; regulation of
pipeline storage and liquified natural gas facility construction; issuing
certificates of need for companies intending to provide energy services or
constructing and operating interstate pipeline and storage facilities; and
certain other matters. FERC also regulates the interstate transportation of
crude oil, including: regulation of rates and practices of oil pipeline
companies; establishing equal service conditions to provide shippers with equal
access to pipeline transportation; and establishment of reasonable rates for
transporting petroleum and petroleum products by pipeline. Certain MLPs
regulated by the FERC have the right, but are not obligated, to redeem common
units held by an investor who is not subject to U.S. federal income taxation.
The financial condition and results of operations of an MLP that redeems its
common units could be adversely impacted.
MLPs
are subject to various federal, state and local environmental laws and health
and safety laws as well as laws and regulations specific to their particular
activities. These laws and regulations address: health and safety standards for
the operation of facilities, transportation systems and the handling of
materials; air and water pollution requirements and standards; solid waste
disposal requirements; land reclamation requirements; and requirements relating
to the handling and disposition of hazardous materials. MLPs are subject to the
costs of compliance with such laws applicable to them, and changes in such laws
and regulations may adversely affect their results of operations.
MLPs
may be subject to liability relating to the release of substances into the
environment, including liability under federal “Superfund” and similar state
laws for investigation and remediation of releases and threatened releases of
hazardous materials, as well as liability for injury and property damage for
accidental events, such as explosions or discharges of materials causing
personal injury and damage to property. Such potential liabilities could have a
material adverse effect upon the financial condition and results of operations
of MLPs.
MLPs
are subject to numerous business related risks, including: deterioration of
business fundamentals reducing profitability due to development of alternative
energy sources, consumer sentiment with respect to global warming, changing
demographics in the markets served, unexpectedly prolonged and precipitous
changes in commodity prices and increased competition that reduces the MLP’s
market share; the lack of growth of markets requiring growth through
acquisitions; disruptions in transportation systems; the dependence of certain
MLPs upon the energy exploration and development activities of unrelated third
parties; availability of capital for expansion and construction of needed
facilities; a significant decrease in natural gas production due to depressed
commodity prices or otherwise; the inability of MLPs to successfully integrate
recent or future acquisitions; and the general level of the
economy.
Municipal
Obligations and AMT-Subject Bonds
Municipal
Obligations are obligations issued by or on behalf of states, territories, and
possessions of the United States and the District of Columbia and their
political subdivisions, agencies and instrumentalities, including municipal
utilities, or multi-state agencies or authorities. The interest on Municipal
Obligations is exempt from federal income tax in the opinion of bond counsel to
the issuer. Three major classifications of Municipal Obligations are: Municipal
Bonds, that generally have a maturity at the time of issue of one year or more;
Municipal Notes, that generally have a maturity at the time of issue of six
months to three years; and Municipal Commercial Paper, that generally has a
maturity at the time of issue of 30 to 270 days.
The
term “Municipal Obligations” includes debt obligations issued to obtain funds
for various public purposes, including the construction of a wide range of
public facilities such as airports, bridges, highways, housing, hospitals, mass
transportation, schools, streets, water and sewer works, and electric utilities.
Other public purposes for which Municipal Obligations are issued include
refunding outstanding obligations, obtaining funds for general operating
expenses, and lending such funds to other public institutions and facilities. To
the extent that a fund invests a significant portion of its assets in municipal
obligations issued in connection with a single project, the fund likely will be
affected by the economic, business or political environment of the
project.
AMT-Subject
Bonds are industrial development bonds issued by or on behalf of public
authorities to obtain funds to provide for the construction, equipment, repair
or improvement of privately operated housing facilities, sports facilities,
convention or trade show facilities, airport, mass transit, industrial, port or
parking facilities, air or water pollution control facilities, and certain local
facilities for water supply, gas, electricity, or sewage or solid waste
disposal. They are considered to be Municipal Obligations if the interest paid
thereon qualifies as exempt from federal income tax in the opinion of bond
counsel to the issuer, even though the interest may be subject to the federal
individual alternative minimum tax.
Municipal
Bonds
Municipal
Bonds may be either “general obligation” or “revenue” issues. General obligation
bonds are secured by the issuer’s pledge of its faith, credit, and taxing power
for the payment of principal and interest. Revenue bonds are payable from the
revenues derived from a particular facility or class of facilities or, in some
cases, from the proceeds of a special excise tax or other specific revenue
source (e.g., the user of the facilities being financed), but not from the
general taxing power. Industrial development bonds and pollution control bonds
in most cases are revenue bonds and generally do not carry the pledge of the
credit of the issuing municipality. The payment of the principal and interest on
industrial revenue bonds depends solely on the ability of the user of the
facilities financed by the bonds to meet its financial obligations and the
pledge, if any, of real and personal property so financed as security for such
payment. Funds may also invest in “moral obligation” bonds that are normally
issued by special purpose public authorities. If an issuer of moral obligation
bonds is unable to meet its obligations, the repayment of the bonds becomes a
moral commitment but not a legal obligation of the state or municipality in
question.
Municipal
Commercial Paper
Municipal
Commercial Paper refers to short-term obligations of municipalities that may be
issued at a discount and may be referred to as Short-Term Discount Notes.
Municipal Commercial Paper is likely to be used to meet seasonal working capital
needs of a municipality or interim construction financing. Generally they are
repaid from general revenues of the municipality or refinanced with long-term
debt. In most cases Municipal Commercial Paper is backed by letters of credit,
lending agreements, note repurchase agreements or other credit facility
agreements offered by banks or other institutions.
Municipal
Notes
Municipal
Notes usually are general obligations of the issuer and are sold in anticipation
of a bond sale, collection of taxes, or receipt of other revenues. Payment of
these notes is primarily dependent upon the issuer’s receipt of the anticipated
revenues. Other notes include “Construction Loan Notes” issued to provide
construction financing for specific projects, and “Bank Notes” issued by local
governmental bodies and agencies to commercial banks as evidence of borrowings.
Some notes (“Project Notes”) are issued by local agencies under a program
administered by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Project
Notes are secured by the full faith and credit of the United
States.
•Bank
Notes are notes issued by local governmental bodies and agencies such as those
described above to commercial banks as evidence of borrowings. The purposes for
which the notes are issued are varied but they are frequently issued to meet
short-term working-capital or capital-project needs. These notes may have risks
similar to the risks associated with TANs and RANs.
•Bond
Anticipation Notes (“BANs”) are usually general obligations of state and local
governmental issuers which are sold to obtain interim financing for projects
that will eventually be funded through the sale of long-term debt obligations or
bonds. The ability of an issuer to meet its obligations on its BANs is primarily
dependent on the issuer’s access to the long-term municipal bond market and the
likelihood that the proceeds of such bond sales will be used to pay the
principal and interest on the BANs.
• Construction
Loan Notes are issued to provide construction financing for specific projects.
Permanent financing, the proceeds of which are applied to the payment of
construction loan notes, is sometimes provided by a commitment by the Government
National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) to purchase the loan, accompanied by a
commitment by the Federal Housing Administration to insure mortgage advances
thereunder. In other instances, permanent financing is provided by commitments
of banks to purchase the loan. The Opportunistic Municipal Fund will only
purchase construction loan notes that are subject to GNMA or bank purchase
commitments.
•Revenue
Anticipation Notes (“RANs”) are issued by governments or governmental bodies
with the expectation that future revenues from a designated source will be used
to repay the notes. In general they also constitute general obligations of the
issuer. A decline in the receipt of projected revenues, such as anticipated
revenues from another level of government, could adversely affect an issuer’s
ability to meet its obligations on outstanding RANs. In addition, the
possibility that the revenues would, when received, be used to meet other
obligations could affect the ability of the issuer to pay the principal and
interest on RANs.
•Tax
Anticipation Notes (“TANs”) are issued by state and local governments to finance
the current operations of such governments. Repayment is generally to be derived
from specific future tax revenues. TANs are usually general obligations of the
issuer. A weakness in an issuer’s capacity to raise taxes due to, among other
things, a decline in its tax base or a rise in delinquencies, could adversely
affect the issuer’s ability to meet its obligations on outstanding
TANs.
Other
Municipal Obligations
Other
kinds of Municipal Obligations are occasionally available in the marketplace,
and the fund may invest in such other kinds of obligations to the extent
consistent with its investment objective and limitations. Such obligations may
be issued for different purposes and with different security than those
mentioned.
Stand-By
Commitments
Funds
may acquire stand-by commitments with respect to municipal obligations held in
their respective portfolios. Under a stand-by commitment, a broker-dealer,
dealer, or bank would agree to purchase, at the relevant funds’ option, a
specified municipal security at a specified price. Thus, a stand-by commitment
may be viewed as the equivalent of a put option acquired by a fund with respect
to a particular municipal security held in the fund’s portfolio.
The
amount payable to a fund upon its exercise of a stand-by commitment normally
would be 1) the acquisition cost of the municipal security (excluding any
accrued interest that the fund paid on the acquisition), less any amortized
market premium or plus any amortized market or original issue discount during
the period the fund owned the security, plus, 2) all interest accrued on the
security since the last interest payment date during the period the security was
owned by the fund. Absent unusual circumstances, the fund would value the
underlying municipal security at amortized cost. As a result, the amount payable
by the broker-dealer, dealer or bank during the time a stand-by commitment is
exercisable would be substantially the same as the value of the underlying
municipal obligation.
A
fund’s right to exercise a stand-by commitment would be unconditional and
unqualified. Although a fund could not transfer a stand-by commitment, it could
sell the underlying municipal security to a third party at any time. It is
expected that stand-by commitments generally will be available to the funds
without the payment of any direct or indirect consideration. The funds may,
however, pay for stand-by commitments if such action is deemed necessary. In any
event, the total amount paid for outstanding stand-by commitments held in a
fund’s portfolio would not exceed 0.50% of the value of a fund’s total assets
calculated immediately after each stand-by commitment is acquired.
The
funds intend to enter into stand-by commitments only with broker-dealers,
dealers, or banks that those managing the fund’s investments believe present
minimum credit risks. A fund’s ability to exercise a stand-by commitment will
depend upon the ability of the issuing institution to pay for the underlying
securities at the time the stand-by commitment is exercised. The credit of each
institution issuing a stand-by commitment to a fund will be evaluated on an
ongoing basis by those managing the fund’s investments.
A
fund intends to acquire stand-by commitments solely to facilitate portfolio
liquidity and does not intend to exercise its right thereunder for trading
purposes. The acquisition of a stand-by commitment would not affect the
valuation of the underlying municipal security. Each stand-by commitment will be
valued at zero in determining net asset value. Should a fund pay directly or
indirectly for a stand-by commitment, its costs will be reflected in realized
gain or loss when the commitment is exercised or expires. The maturity of a
municipal security purchased by a fund will not be considered shortened by any
stand-by commitment to which the obligation is subject. Thus, stand-by
commitments will not affect the dollar-weighted average maturity of a fund’s
portfolio.
Variable
and Floating Rate Obligations
Certain
Municipal Obligations, obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government
or its agencies or instrumentalities, and debt instruments issued by domestic
banks or corporations may carry variable or floating rates of interest. Such
instruments bear interest at rates which are not fixed, but which vary with
changes in specified market rates or indices, such as a bank prime rate or
tax-exempt money market index. Variable rate notes are adjusted to current
interest rate levels at certain specified times, such as every 30 days. A
floating rate note adjusts automatically whenever there is a change in its base
interest rate adjustor, e.g., a change in the prime lending rate or specified
interest rate indices. Typically such instruments carry demand features
permitting the fund to redeem at par.
The
fund’s right to obtain payment at par on a demand instrument upon demand could
be affected by events occurring between the date the fund elects to redeem the
instrument and the date redemption proceeds are due which affects the ability of
the issuer to pay the instrument at par value. Those managing the fund’s
investments monitor on an ongoing basis the pricing, quality, and liquidity of
such instruments and similarly monitor the ability of an issuer of a demand
instrument, including those supported by bank letters of credit or guarantees,
to pay principal and interest on demand. Although the ultimate maturity of such
variable rate obligations may exceed one year, the fund treats the maturity of
each variable rate demand obligation as the longer of a) the notice period
required before the fund is entitled to payment of the principal amount through
demand or b) the period remaining until the next interest rate adjustment.
Floating rate instruments with demand features are deemed to have a maturity
equal to the period remaining until the principal amount can be recovered
through demand.
Funds
may purchase participation interests in variable rate Municipal Obligations
(such as industrial development bonds). A participation interest gives the
purchaser an undivided interest in the Municipal Obligation in the proportion
that its participation interest bears to the total principal amount of the
Municipal Obligation. A fund has the right to demand payment on seven days’
notice, for all or any part of the fund’s participation interest in the
Municipal Obligation, plus accrued interest. Each participation interest is
backed by an irrevocable letter of credit or guarantee of a bank. Banks will
retain a service and letter of credit fee and a fee for issuing repurchase
commitments in an amount equal to the excess of the interest paid on the
Municipal Obligations over the negotiated yield at which the instruments were
purchased by the fund.
Risks
of Municipal Obligations
The
yields on Municipal Obligations are dependent on a variety of factors, including
general economic and monetary conditions, money market factors, conditions in
the Municipal Obligations market, size of a particular offering, maturity of the
obligation, and rating of the issue. The fund’s ability to achieve its
investment objective also depends on the continuing ability of the issuers of
the Municipal Obligations in which it invests to meet their obligation for the
payment of interest and principal when due.
Municipal
Obligations are subject to the provisions of bankruptcy, insolvency, and other
laws affecting the rights and remedies of creditors, such as the Federal
Bankruptcy Act. They are also subject to federal or state laws, if any, which
extend the time for payment of principal or interest, or both, or impose other
constraints upon enforcement of such obligations or upon municipalities to levy
taxes. The power or ability of issuers to pay, when due, principal of and
interest on Municipal Obligations may also be materially affected by the results
of litigation or other conditions.
From
time to time, proposals have been introduced before Congress for the purpose of
restricting or eliminating the federal income tax exemption for interest on
Municipal Obligations. It may be expected that similar proposals will be
introduced in the future. If such a proposal was enacted, the ability of the
fund to pay “exempt interest” dividends may be adversely affected. The fund
would reevaluate its investment objective and policies and consider changes in
its structure.
Special
Considerations Relating to California Municipal Obligations
The
Opportunistic Municipal Fund invests in California municipal obligations and,
therefore, may be significantly impacted by political, economic, or regulatory
developments that affect issuers in California and their ability to pay
principal and interest on their obligations. The ability of issuers to pay
interest on, and repay principal of, California municipal obligations may be
affected by 1) amendments to the California Constitution and related statutes
that limit the taxing and spending authority of California government entities,
2) voter initiatives, 3) a wide variety of California laws and regulations,
including laws related to the operation of health care institutions and laws
related to secured interests in real property, and 4) the general financial
condition of the State of California and the California economy.
Taxable
Investments of the Municipal Funds
The
Opportunistic Municipal Fund may invest a portion of its assets, as described in
the Prospectus, in taxable short-term investments consisting of: obligations
issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or its agencies or
instrumentalities, domestic bank certificates of deposit and bankers’
acceptances, short-term corporate debt securities such as commercial paper, and
repurchase agreements (“Taxable Investments”). These investments must have a
stated maturity of one year or less at the time of purchase and must meet the
following standards: banks must have assets of at least $1 billion; commercial
paper must be rated at least “A” by S&P Global or “Prime” by Moody’s or, if
not rated, must be issued by companies having an outstanding debt issue rated at
least “A” by S&P Global or Moody’s; corporate bonds and debentures must be
rated at least “A” by S&P Global or Moody’s. Interest earned from Taxable
Investments is taxable to investors. When, in the opinion of the Fund’s Manager,
it is advisable to maintain a temporary “defensive” posture, the Opportunistic
Municipal Fund may invest without limitation in Taxable Investments. At other
times, the following investments will not exceed 20% of the Fund’s total assets:
Taxable Investments; Municipal Obligations that do not meet quality standards
required for the 80% portion of the portfolio; and Municipal Obligations, the
interest on which is treated as a tax preference item for purposes of the
federal individual alternative minimum tax.
Insurance
The
insured municipal obligations in which the Opportunistic Municipal Fund may
invest are insured under insurance policies that relate to the specific
municipal obligation in question. This insurance is generally non-cancelable and
will continue in force so long as the municipal obligations are outstanding, and
the insurer remains in business. The insured municipal obligations are generally
insured as to the scheduled payment of all installments of principal and
interest as they fall due.
The
insurance covers only credit risk and therefore does not guarantee the market
value of the obligations in a Fund’s investment portfolio or a Fund’s NAV. The
Fund’s NAV will continue to fluctuate in response to fluctuations in interest
rates. A Fund’s investment policy requiring investment in insured municipal
obligations will not affect the Fund’s ability to hold its assets in cash or to
invest in escrow-secured and defeased bonds or in certain short-term tax-exempt
obligations, or affect its ability to invest in uninsured taxable obligations
for temporary or liquidity purposes or on a defensive basis.
Pay-in-Kind
Securities
Each
Fund may invest in pay-in-kind securities. Pay-in-kind securities pay dividends
or interest in the form of additional securities of the issuer, rather than in
cash. These securities are usually issued and traded at a discount from their
face amounts. The amount of the discount varies depending on various factors,
such as the time remaining until maturity of the securities, prevailing interest
rates, the liquidity of the security, and the perceived credit quality of the
issuer. The market prices of pay-in-kind securities generally are more volatile
than the market prices of securities that pay interest periodically and are
likely to respond to changes in interest rates to a greater degree than are
other types of securities having similar maturities and credit
quality.
Portfolio
Turnover (Active Trading)
Portfolio
turnover is a measure of how frequently a portfolio’s securities are bought and
sold. The portfolio turnover rate is generally calculated as the dollar value of
the lesser of a portfolio’s purchases or sales of shares of securities during a
given year, divided by the monthly average value of the portfolio securities
during that year (excluding securities whose maturity or expiration at the time
of acquisition were less than one year). For example, a portfolio reporting a
100% portfolio turnover rate would have purchased and sold securities worth as
much as the monthly average value of its portfolio securities during the
year.
It
is not possible to predict future turnover rates with accuracy. Many variable
factors are outside the control of a portfolio manager. The investment outlook
for the securities in which a portfolio may invest may change as a result of
unexpected developments in securities markets, economic or monetary policies, or
political relationships. High market volatility may result in a portfolio
manager using a more active trading strategy than might otherwise be employed.
Each portfolio manager considers the economic effects of portfolio turnover but
generally does not treat the portfolio turnover rate as a limiting factor in
making investment decisions.
Sale
of shares by investors may require the liquidation of portfolio securities to
meet cash flow needs. In addition, changes in a particular portfolio’s holdings
may be made whenever the portfolio manager considers that a security is no
longer appropriate for the portfolio or that another security represents a
relatively greater opportunity. Such changes may be made without regard to the
length of time that a security has been held.
Higher
portfolio turnover rates generally increase transaction costs that are expenses
of the Fund. Active trading may generate short-term gains (losses) for taxable
shareholders.
The
following Fund(s) had significant variation in portfolio turnover rates over the
two most recently completed fiscal years:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
2023 Turnover |
2022 Turnover |
Comments |
Blue
Chip |
10.0% |
24.0% |
Turnover
was lower in 2023 relative to 2022 due to company-level decisions, with
the Advisor generally continuing to view portfolio holdings more favorably
than other companies in the opportunity
set. |
Preferred
Securities
Preferred
securities can include: traditional preferred securities, hybrid-preferred
securities, $25 par hybrid preferred securities, baby bonds, U.S. dividend
received deduction (“DRD”) preferred stock, fixed rate and floating rate
adjustable preferred securities, step-up preferred securities, public and 144A
$1000 par capital securities including U.S. agency subordinated debt issues,
trust originated preferred securities, monthly income preferred securities,
quarterly income bond securities, quarterly income debt securities, quarterly
income preferred securities, corporate trust securities, public income notes,
and other trust preferred securities.
•Traditional
Preferred Securities. Traditional preferred securities may be issued by an
entity taxable as a corporation and pay fixed or floating rate dividends.
However, these claims are subordinated to more senior creditors, including
senior debt holders. “Preference” means that a company must pay dividends on its
preferred securities before paying any dividends on its common stock, and the
claims of preferred securities holders are ahead of common stockholders’ claims
on assets in a corporate liquidation. Holders of preferred securities usually
have no right to vote for corporate directors or on other matters. Preferred
securities share many investment characteristics with both common stock and
bonds.
•Hybrid
or Trust Preferred Securities. Hybrid-preferred securities are debt instruments
that have characteristics similar to those of traditional preferred securities
(characteristics of both subordinated debt and preferred stock). Hybrid
preferred securities may be issued by corporations, generally in the form of
interest-bearing instruments with preferred securities characteristics, or by an
affiliated trust or partnership of the corporation, generally in the form of
preferred interests in subordinated business trusts or similarly structured
securities. The hybrid-preferred securities market consists of both fixed and
adjustable coupon rate securities that are either perpetual in nature or have
stated maturity dates. Hybrid preferred holders generally have claims to assets
in a corporate liquidation that are senior to those of traditional preferred
securities but subordinate to those of senior debt holders. Certain subordinated
debt and senior debt issues that have preferred characteristics are also
considered to be part of the broader preferred securities market.
Preferred
securities may be issued by trusts (likely one that is wholly-owned by a
financial institution or other corporate entity, typically a bank holding
company) or other special purpose entities established by operating companies,
and are therefore not direct obligations of operating companies. The financial
institution creates the trust and owns the trust’s common securities. The trust
uses the sale proceeds of its preferred securities to purchase, for example,
subordinated debt issued by the financial institution. The financial institution
uses the proceeds from the subordinated debt sale to increase its capital while
the trust receives periodic interest payments from the financial institution for
holding the subordinated debt. The trust uses the funds received to make
dividend payments to the holders of the trust preferred securities. The primary
advantage of this structure may be that the trust preferred securities are
treated by the financial institution as debt securities for tax purposes and as
equity for the calculation of capital requirements.
Trust
preferred securities typically bear a market rate coupon comparable to interest
rates available on debt of a similarly rated issuer. Typical characteristics
include long-term maturities, early redemption by the issuer, periodic fixed or
variable interest payments, and maturities at face value. Holders of trust
preferred securities have limited voting rights to control the activities of the
trust and no voting rights with respect to the financial institution. The market
value of trust preferred securities may be more volatile than those of
conventional debt securities. Trust preferred securities may be issued in
reliance on Rule 144A under the 1933 Act and subject to restrictions on resale.
There can be no assurance as to the liquidity of trust preferred securities and
the ability of holders, such as a fund, to sell their holdings. The condition of
the financial institution can be looked to identify the risks of trust preferred
securities as the trust typically has no business operations other than to issue
the trust preferred securities. If the financial institution defaults on
interest payments to the trust, the trust will not be able to make dividend
payments to holders of its securities, such as a fund.
•Floating
Rate Preferred Securities. Floating rate preferred securities provide for a
periodic adjustment in the interest rate paid on the securities. The terms of
such securities provide that interest rates are adjusted periodically based upon
an interest rate adjustment index. The adjustment intervals may be regular, and
range from daily up to annually, or may be event-based, such as a change in the
short-term interest rate. Because of the interest rate reset feature, floating
rate securities provide the Fund with a certain degree of protection against
rising interest rates, although the interest rates of floating rate securities
will participate in any declines in interest rates as well.
If
a portion of a fund’s income consists of dividends paid by U.S. corporations, a
portion of the dividends paid by the fund may be eligible for the corporate
dividends-received deduction for corporate shareholders. In addition,
distributions reported by a fund as derived from qualified dividend income
(“QDI”) will be taxed in the hands of individuals at the reduced rates
applicable to net capital gains, provided certain holding period and other
requirements are met by both the shareholder and the fund. Dividend income that
a fund receives from REITs, if any, will generally not be treated as QDI and
will not qualify for the corporate dividends-received deduction. It is unclear
the extent to which distributions a fund receives from investments in certain
preferred securities will be eligible for treatment as QDI or for the corporate
dividends-received deduction. A fund cannot predict at this time what portion,
if any, of its dividends will qualify for the corporate dividends-received
deduction or be eligible for the reduced rates of taxation applicable to
QDI.
Real
Estate Investment Trusts (“REITs”)
REITs
are pooled investment vehicles that invest in income producing real estate, real
estate related loans, or other types of real estate interests. U.S. REITs are
allowed to eliminate corporate level federal tax so long as they meet certain
requirements of the Internal Revenue Code. Foreign REITs (“REIT-like”) entities
may have similar tax treatment in their respective countries. Equity real estate
investment trusts own real estate properties, while mortgage real estate
investment trusts make and/or invests in construction, development, and
long-term mortgage loans. Their value may be affected by changes in the
underlying property of the trusts, the creditworthiness of the issuer, property
taxes, interest rates, and tax and regulatory requirements, such as those
relating to the environment. Both types of trusts are not diversified, are
dependent upon management skill, are subject to heavy cash flow dependency,
defaults by borrowers, self-liquidation, and the possibility of failing to
qualify for tax-free status of income under the Internal Revenue Code and
failing to maintain exemption from the 1940 Act. In addition, foreign REIT-like
entities will be subject to foreign securities risks. (See “Foreign
Securities”).
Repurchase
and Reverse Repurchase Agreements, Mortgage Dollar Rolls, and
Sale-Buybacks
Each
Fund may invest in repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements. Repurchase
agreements typically involve the purchase of debt securities from a financial
institution such as a bank, savings and loan association, or broker-dealer. A
repurchase agreement provides that the fund sells back to the seller and that
the seller repurchases the underlying securities at a specified price on a
specific date. Repurchase agreements may be viewed as loans by a fund
collateralized by the underlying securities. This arrangement results in a fixed
rate of return that is not subject to market fluctuation while the fund holds
the security. In the event of a default or bankruptcy by a selling financial
institution, the affected fund bears a risk of loss. To minimize such risks, the
fund enters into repurchase agreements only with parties those managing the
fund’s investments deem creditworthy (those that are large, well-capitalized,
and well-established financial institutions). In addition, the value of the
securities collateralizing the repurchase agreement is, and during the entire
term of the repurchase agreement remains, at least equal to the acquisition
price the Funds pay to the seller of the securities.
In
a repurchase agreement, a Fund purchases a security and simultaneously commits
to resell that security to the seller at an agreed upon price on an agreed upon
date within a number of days (usually not more than seven) from the date of
purchase. The resale price consists of the purchase price plus an amount that is
unrelated to the coupon rate or maturity of the purchased security. A repurchase
agreement involves the obligation of the seller to pay the agreed upon price,
which obligation is in effect secured by the value (at least equal to the amount
of the agreed upon resale price and marked-to-market daily) of the underlying
security or “collateral.” A risk associated with repurchase agreements is the
failure of the seller to repurchase the securities as agreed, which may cause a
Fund to suffer a loss if the market value of such securities declines before
they can be liquidated on the open market. In the event of bankruptcy or
insolvency of the seller, a Fund may encounter delays and incur costs in
liquidating the underlying security. Repurchase agreements that mature in more
than seven days are subject to each Fund’s limit on illiquid investments. While
it is not possible to eliminate all risks from these transactions, it is the
policy of the Fund to limit repurchase agreements to those parties whose
creditworthiness has been reviewed and found satisfactory by those managing the
fund’s investments.
Each
Fund may use reverse repurchase agreements, mortgage dollar rolls, and
economically similar transactions to obtain cash to satisfy unusually heavy
redemption requests or for other temporary or emergency purposes without the
necessity of selling portfolio securities, or to earn additional income on
portfolio securities, such as Treasury bills or notes. In a reverse repurchase
agreement, a Fund sells a portfolio security to another party, such as a bank or
broker-dealer, in return for cash and agrees to repurchase the instrument at a
particular price and time. A Fund will enter into reverse repurchase agreements
only with parties that those managing the fund's investments deem creditworthy.
Using reverse repurchase agreements to earn additional income involves the risk
that the interest earned on the invested proceeds is less than the expense of
the reverse repurchase agreement transaction. This technique may also have a
leveraging effect on the Fund.
A
“mortgage dollar roll” is similar to a reverse repurchase agreement in certain
respects. In a “dollar roll” transaction a Fund sells a mortgage-related
security, such as a security issued by the Government National Mortgage
Association, to a dealer and simultaneously agrees to repurchase a similar
security (but not the same security) in the future at a pre-determined price. A
dollar roll can be viewed, like a reverse repurchase agreement, as a
collateralized borrowing in which a Fund pledges a mortgage-related security to
a dealer to obtain cash. Unlike in the case of reverse repurchase agreements,
the dealer with which a Fund enters into a dollar roll transaction is not
obligated to return the same securities as those originally sold by the Fund,
but only securities which are “substantially identical.” To be considered
“substantially identical,” the securities returned to a Fund generally must: 1)
be collateralized by the same types of underlying mortgages; 2) be issued by the
same agency and be part of the same program; 3) have a similar original stated
maturity; 4) have identical net coupon rates; 5) have similar market yields (and
therefore price); and 6) satisfy “good delivery” requirements, meaning that the
aggregate principal amounts of the securities delivered and received back must
be within 0.01% of the initial amount delivered.
Each
Fund also may effect simultaneous purchase and sale transactions that are known
as “sale-buybacks.” A sale-buyback is similar to a reverse repurchase agreement,
except that in a sale-buyback, the counterparty who purchases the security is
entitled to receive any principal or interest payments made on the underlying
security pending settlement of the Fund’s repurchase of the underlying security.
Restricted
and Illiquid Securities
A
Fund may experience difficulty in valuing and selling illiquid securities and,
in some cases, may be unable to value or sell certain illiquid securities for an
indefinite period of time. Illiquid securities may include a wide variety of
investments, such as (1) repurchase agreements maturing in more than seven days
(unless the agreements have demand/redemption features), (2) OTC options
contracts and certain other derivatives (including certain swap agreements), (3)
fixed time deposits that are not subject to prepayment or do not provide for
withdrawal penalties upon prepayment (other than overnight deposits), (4) loan
interests and other direct debt instruments, (5) certain municipal lease
obligations, (6) commercial paper issued pursuant to Section 4(a)(2) of the 1933
Act, (7) thinly-traded securities, and (8) securities whose resale is restricted
under the federal securities laws or contractual provisions (including
restricted, privately placed securities that, under the federal securities laws,
generally may be resold only to qualified institutional buyers). Generally,
restricted securities may be sold only in a public offering for which a
registration statement has been filed and declared effective or in a transaction
that is exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933.
When registration is required, a Fund that owns restricted securities may be
obligated to pay all or part of the registration expenses and a considerable
period may elapse between the time of the decision to sell and the time the Fund
may be permitted to sell a restricted security. If adverse market conditions
were to develop during such a period, the Fund might obtain a less favorable
price than existed when it decided to sell.
Illiquid
and restricted securities are priced at fair value as determined in good faith
by PGI as the Funds’ valuation designee, subject to the Board’s oversight. As
described above, some of the Funds have adopted investment restrictions that
limit investments in illiquid securities.
Royalty
Trusts
A
royalty trust generally acquires an interest in natural resource or chemical
companies and distributes the income it receives to its investors. A sustained
decline in demand for natural resource and related products could adversely
affect royalty trust revenues and cash flows. Such a decline could result from a
recession or other adverse economic conditions, an increase in the market price
of the underlying commodity, higher taxes or other regulatory actions that
increase costs, or a shift in consumer demand. Rising interest rates could harm
the performance and limit the capital appreciation of royalty trusts because of
the increased availability of alternative investments at more competitive
yields. Fund shareholders will indirectly bear their proportionate share of the
royalty trusts’ expenses.
Securitized
Products — Mortgage- and Asset-Backed Securities
The
yield characteristics of the mortgage- and asset-backed securities in which a
Fund may invest differ from those of traditional debt securities. Among the
major differences are that the interest and principal payments are made more
frequently on mortgage- and asset-backed securities (usually monthly) and that
principal may be prepaid at any time because the underlying mortgage loans or
other assets generally may be prepaid at any time. As a result, if a Fund
purchases those securities at a premium, a prepayment rate that is faster than
expected will reduce their yield, while a prepayment rate that is slower than
expected will have the opposite effect of increasing yield. If the Fund
purchases these securities at a discount, faster than expected prepayments will
increase their yield, while slower than expected prepayments will reduce their
yield. Amounts available for reinvestment by a Fund are likely to be greater
during a period of declining interest rates and, as a result, are likely to be
reinvested at lower interest rates than during a period of rising interest
rates.
In
general, the prepayment rate for mortgage-backed securities decreases as
interest rates rise and increases as interest rates fall. However, rising
interest rates will tend to decrease the value of these securities. In addition,
an increase in interest rates may affect the volatility of these securities by
effectively changing a security that was considered a short-term security at the
time of purchase into a long-term security. Long-term securities generally
fluctuate more widely in response to changes in interest rates than short- or
medium-term securities.
The
market for privately issued mortgage- and asset-backed securities is smaller and
less liquid than the market for U.S. government mortgage-backed securities. A
collateralized mortgage obligation (“CMO”) may be structured in a manner that
provides a wide variety of investment characteristics (yield, effective
maturity, and interest rate sensitivity). As market conditions change, and
especially during periods of rapid market interest rate changes, the ability of
a CMO to provide the anticipated investment characteristics may be greatly
diminished. Increased market volatility and/or reduced liquidity may
result.
Each
Fund may invest in each of collateralized bond obligations (“CBOs”),
collateralized loan obligations (“CLOs”), other collateralized debt obligations
(“CDOs”), and other similarly structured securities. CBOs, CLOs, and other CDOs
are types of asset-backed securities. A CBO is a trust that is often backed by a
diversified pool of high risk, below-investment-grade fixed-income securities.
The collateral can be from many different types of fixed-income securities, such
as high yield debt, residential privately issued mortgage-related securities,
commercial privately issued mortgage-related securities, trust preferred
securities, and emerging market debt. A CLO is a trust typically collateralized
by a pool of loans, which may include, among others, domestic and foreign senior
secured loans, senior unsecured loans, and subordinate corporate loans,
including loans that may be rated below investment grade or equivalent unrated
loans. Other CDOs are trusts backed by other types of assets representing
obligations of various parties. CBOs, CLOs, and other CDOs may charge management
fees and administrative expenses.
Short
Sales
A
short sale involves the sale by a fund of a security that it does not own with
the expectation of covering settlement by purchasing the same security at a
later date at a lower price. A fund may also enter into a short position by
using a derivative instrument, such as a future, forward, or swap agreement. If
the price of the security or derivative increases prior to the time the fund is
required to replace the borrowed security, then the fund will incur a loss equal
to the increase in price from the time that the short sale was entered into plus
any premiums and interest paid to the broker. Therefore, short sales involve the
risk that losses may be exaggerated, potentially losing more money than the
value of the investment.
A
“short sale against the box” is a technique that involves selling either a
security owned by a fund, or a security equivalent in kind and amount to the
security sold short that the fund has the right to obtain, at no additional
cost, for delivery at a specified date in the future. Each fund may enter into a
short sale against the box to hedge against anticipated declines in the market
price of portfolio securities. If the value of the securities sold short against
the box increases prior to the scheduled delivery date, a fund will lose
money.
Special
Purpose Acquisition Companies (“SPACs”)
Each
Fund may invest in securities of special purpose acquisition companies (“SPACs”)
or similar special purpose entities that pool funds to seek potential
acquisition opportunities. Unless and until an acquisition is completed, a SPAC
or similar entity generally maintains assets (less a portion retained to cover
expenses) in a trust account comprised of U.S. government securities, money
market securities, and cash, and similar investments whose returns or yields may
be significantly lower than those of the Fund’s other investments. Because SPACs
and similar entities are in essence blank-check companies without an operating
history or ongoing business other than seeking acquisitions, the value of their
securities is particularly dependent on the ability of the entity’s management
to identify and complete a profitable acquisition, which may not occur. For
example, even if an acquisition or merger target is identified, the Fund may
elect not to participate in, or vote to approve, the proposed transaction.
Moreover, an acquisition or merger once effected may prove unsuccessful and an
investment in the SPAC may lose value.
SPACs
are also subject to the following additional risks:
•The
risk that, in the case of SPACs used as an opportunity for startups to go public
without going through the traditional IPO process, such startups may become
publicly traded with potentially less due diligence than what is typical in a
traditional IPO through an underwriter and may not be experienced in facing the
challenges, expenses and risks of being a public company, including the
increased regulatory and financial scrutiny and the need to comply with
applicable governance and accounting requirements.
•SPAC
sponsors may have a potential conflict of interest to complete a deal that may
be unfavorable for other investors in the SPAC. For example, SPAC sponsors often
own warrants to acquire additional shares of the company at a fixed price, and
the exercise by the SPAC sponsor of its warrants may dilute the value of the
equity interests of other investors in the SPAC.
•Some
SPACs may pursue acquisitions only within certain industries or regions, which
may increase the volatility of their prices.
•Only
a thinly traded market for shares of or interests in a SPAC may develop, or
there may be no market at all, leaving the Fund unable to sell its interest in a
SPAC or to sell its interest only at a lower price. Investments in SPACs may
include private placements, including PIPEs, and, accordingly, may be considered
illiquid and/or be subject to restrictions on resale.
•Values
of investments in SPACs may be highly volatile and may depreciate significantly
over time.
Supranational
Entities
Each
Fund may invest in obligations of supranational entities. A supranational entity
is an entity designated or supported by national governments to promote economic
reconstruction, development or trade amongst nations. Examples of supranational
entities include the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (also
known as the World Bank) and the European Investment Bank. Obligations of
supranational entities are subject to the risk that the governments on whose
support the entity depends for its financial backing or repayment may be unable
or unwilling to provide that support. Obligations of a supranational entity that
are denominated in foreign currencies will also be subject to the risks
associated with investments in foreign currencies.
Synthetic
Securities
Incidental
to other transactions in fixed income securities and/or for investment purposes,
a Fund also may combine options on securities with cash, cash equivalent
investments or other fixed income securities in order to create “synthetic”
securities which approximate desired risk and return profiles. This may be done
where a “non-synthetic” security having the desired risk/return profile either
is unavailable (e.g., short-term securities of certain non-U.S. governments) or
possesses undesirable characteristics (e.g., interest payments on the security
would be subject to non-U.S. withholding taxes). A Fund also may purchase
forward non-U.S. exchange contracts in conjunction with U.S. dollar-denominated
securities in order to create a synthetic non-U.S. currency denominated security
which approximates desired risk and return characteristics where the
non-synthetic securities either are not available in non-U.S. markets or possess
undesirable characteristics. The use of synthetic bonds and other synthetic
securities may involve risks different from, or potentially greater than, risks
associated with direct investments in securities and other assets. Synthetic
securities may increase other Fund risks, including market risk, liquidity risk,
and credit risk, and their value may or may not correlate with the value of the
relevant underlying asset.
Temporary
Defensive Measures/Money Market Instruments
Each
Fund may make money market investments (cash equivalents), without limit,
pending other investment or settlement, for liquidity, or in adverse market
conditions. Following are descriptions of the types of money market instruments
that each Fund may purchase:
•U.S.
Government Securities - Securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government,
including treasury bills, notes, and bonds.
•U.S.
Government Agency Securities - Obligations issued or guaranteed by agencies or
instrumentalities of the U.S. government.
•U.S.
agency obligations include, but are not limited to, the Bank for Cooperatives,
Federal Home Loan Banks, and Federal Intermediate Credit Banks.
•U.S.
instrumentality obligations include, but are not limited to, the Export-Import
Bank, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, and Federal National Mortgage
Association.
Some
obligations issued or guaranteed by U.S. government agencies and
instrumentalities are supported by the full faith and credit of the U.S.
Treasury. Others, such as those issued by the Federal National Mortgage
Association, are supported by discretionary authority of the U.S. government to
purchase certain obligations of the agency or instrumentality. Still others,
such as those issued by the Student Loan Marketing Association, are supported
only by the credit of the agency or instrumentality.
•Bank
Obligations - Certificates of deposit, time deposits and bankers’ acceptances of
U.S. commercial banks having total assets of at least one billion dollars and
overseas branches of U.S. commercial banks and foreign banks, which in the
opinion of those managing the fund’s investments, are of comparable quality. A
Fund may acquire obligations of U.S. banks that are not members of the Federal
Reserve System or of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Certificates
of deposit are negotiable certificates issued against funds deposited in a
commercial bank for a definite period of time and earning a specified return.
Bankers’ acceptances are negotiable drafts or bills of exchange, normally drawn
by an importer or exporter to pay for specific merchandise, which are “accepted”
by a bank, meaning, in effect, that the bank unconditionally agrees to pay the
face value of the instrument on maturity. Fixed time deposits are bank
obligations payable at a stated maturity date and bearing interest at a fixed
rate. Fixed time deposits may be withdrawn on demand by the investor, but may be
subject to early withdrawal penalties which vary depending upon market
conditions and the remaining maturity of the obligation. There are no
contractual restrictions on the right to transfer a beneficial interest in a
fixed time deposit to a third party, although there is no market for such
deposits.
Obligations
of foreign banks and obligations of overseas branches of U.S. banks are subject
to somewhat different regulations and risks than those of U.S. domestic banks.
For example, an issuing bank may be able to maintain that the liability for an
investment is solely that of the overseas branch which could expose a Fund to a
greater risk of loss. In addition, obligations of foreign banks or of overseas
branches of U.S. banks may be affected by governmental action in the country of
domicile of the branch or parent bank. Examples of adverse foreign governmental
actions include the imposition of currency controls, the imposition of
withholding taxes on interest income payable on such obligations, interest
limitations, seizure or nationalization of assets, or the declaration of a
moratorium. Deposits in foreign banks or foreign branches of U.S. banks are not
covered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and that the selection of
those obligations may be more difficult because there may be less publicly
available information concerning foreign banks or the accounting, auditing and
financial reporting standards, practices and requirements applicable to foreign
banks may differ from those applicable to United States banks. Foreign banks are
not generally subject to examination by any United States Government agency or
instrumentality. A Fund only buys short-term instruments where the risks of
adverse governmental action are believed by those managing the fund’s
investments to be minimal. A Fund considers these factors, along with other
appropriate factors, in making an investment decision to acquire such
obligations. It only acquires those which, in the opinion of management, are of
an investment quality comparable to other debt securities bought by the
Fund.
A
certificate of deposit is issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings
and loan association for a definite period of time, at a specified rate of
return. Normally they are negotiable. However, a Fund occasionally may invest in
certificates of deposit which are not negotiable. Such certificates may provide
for interest penalties in the event of withdrawal prior to their maturity. A
bankers’ acceptance is a short-term credit instrument issued by corporations to
finance the import, export, transfer, or storage of goods. They are termed
“accepted” when a bank guarantees their payment at maturity and reflect the
obligation of both the bank and drawer to pay the face amount of the instrument
at maturity.
•Commercial
Paper - Short-term promissory notes issued by U.S. or foreign
corporations.
•Short-term
Corporate Debt - Corporate notes, bonds, and debentures that at the time of
purchase have 397 days or less remaining to maturity, with certain exceptions
permitted by applicable regulations.
•Repurchase
Agreements - Instruments under which securities are purchased from a bank or
securities dealer with an agreement by the seller to repurchase the securities
at the same price plus interest at a specified rate.
•Taxable
Municipal Obligations - Short-term obligations issued or guaranteed by state and
municipal issuers which generate taxable income.
U.S.
Government and U.S. Government-Sponsored Securities
U.S.
government securities refers to a variety of debt securities issued by or
guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury, such as Treasury bills, notes, and bonds and
mortgage-backed securities guaranteed by the Government National Mortgage
Association (Ginnie Mae), and are supported by the full faith and credit of the
United States meaning that the U.S. government is required to repay the
principal in the event of default. Others are supported by the right of the
issuer to borrow from the U.S. Treasury; others are supported by the
discretionary authority of the U.S. government to purchase the agency’s
obligations; and still others are supported only by the credit of the issuing
agency, instrumentality, or enterprise. The U.S. government does not guarantee
the market price of any U.S. government security.
Although
U.S. government-sponsored enterprises such as the Federal Home Loan Mortgage
Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal National Mortgage Association
(Fannie Mae) may be chartered or sponsored by Congress, they are not funded by
Congressional appropriations, and their securities are not issued by the U.S.
Treasury nor supported by the full faith and credit of the U.S.
government.
U.S.
government securities and U.S. government-sponsored securities may be adversely
impacted by changes in interest rates or a default by or decline in the credit
rating of the applicable government-sponsored entity. There is no assurance that
the U.S. government would provide financial support to its agencies and
instrumentalities if not required to do so. In addition, certain
governmental entities have been subject to regulatory scrutiny regarding their
accounting policies and practices and other concerns that may result in
legislation, changes in regulatory oversight, and/or other consequences that
could adversely affect the credit quality, availability, or investment character
of securities issued by these entities. The value and liquidity of U.S.
government securities may be affected adversely by changes in the ratings of
those securities.
Warrants
and Rights
The
Funds may invest in warrants and rights. A warrant is an instrument that gives
the holder a right to purchase a given number of shares of a particular security
at a specified price until a stated expiration date. Buying a warrant generally
can provide a greater potential for profit or loss than an investment of
equivalent amounts in the underlying common stock. The market value of a warrant
does not necessarily move with the value of the underlying securities. If a
holder does not sell the warrant, it risks the loss of its entire investment if
the market price of the underlying security does not, before the expiration
date, exceed the exercise price of the warrant. Investment in warrants is a
speculative activity. Warrants pay no dividends and confer no rights (other than
the right to purchase the underlying securities) with respect to the assets of
the issuer. A right is a privilege granted to existing shareholders of a
corporation to subscribe for shares of a new issue of common stock before it is
issued. Rights normally have a short life, usually two to four weeks, are freely
transferable and entitle the holder to buy the new common stock at a lower price
than the public offering price.
When-Issued,
Delayed Delivery, and Forward Commitment Transactions
Each
of the Funds may purchase or sell securities on a when-issued, delayed delivery,
or forward commitment basis. Typically, no income accrues on securities a Fund
has committed to purchase prior to the time delivery of the securities is
made.
When
purchasing a security on a when-issued, delayed delivery, or forward commitment
basis, the Fund assumes the rights and risks of ownership of the security,
including the risk of price and yield fluctuations, and takes such fluctuations
into account when determining its net asset value. Because the Fund is not
required to pay for the security until the delivery date, these risks are in
addition to the risks associated with the Fund’s other investments. If the Fund
remains substantially fully invested at a time when when-issued, delayed
delivery, or forward commitment purchases are outstanding, the purchases may
result in a form of leverage.
When
the Fund has sold a security on a when-issued, delayed delivery, or forward
commitment basis, the Fund does not participate in future gains or losses with
respect to the security. If the other party to a transaction fails to deliver or
pay for the securities, the Fund could miss a favorable price or yield
opportunity or could suffer a loss. A Fund may dispose of or renegotiate a
transaction after it is entered into, and may sell when-issued, delayed
delivery, or forward commitment securities before they are delivered, which may
result in a capital gain or loss. There is no percentage limitation on the
extent to which the Funds may purchase or sell securities on a when-issued,
delayed delivery, or forward commitment basis.
LEADERSHIP
STRUCTURE AND BOARD
PFI's
Board has overall responsibility for overseeing PFI's operations in accordance
with the 1940 Act, other applicable laws, and PFI's charter. Each Board Member
serves on the Boards of the following investment companies: Principal Funds,
Inc. (“PFI”), Principal Variable Contracts Funds, Inc. (“PVC”), Principal
Exchange-Traded Funds (“PETF”), and Principal Real Asset Fund (“PRA”), which are
collectively referred to in this SAI as the “Fund Complex.” Board Members who
are affiliated persons of any investment advisor, the principal distributor, or
the principal underwriter of the Fund Complex are considered “interested
persons” of the Funds (as defined in the 1940 Act) and are referred to in this
SAI as “Interested Board Members.” Board Members who are not Interested Board
Members are referred to as “Independent Board Members.”
Each
Board Member generally serves until the next annual meeting of shareholders or
until such Board Member’s earlier death, resignation, or removal. Independent
Board Members have a 72-year age limit and, for Independent Board Members
elected on or after September 14, 2021, a 72-year age limit or a 15-year term
limit, whichever occurs first. The Board may waive the age or term limits in the
Board’s discretion. The Board elects officers to supervise the day-to-day
operations of the Fund Complex. Officers serve at the pleasure of the Board, and
each officer has the same position with each investment company in the Fund
Complex.
The
Board meets in regularly scheduled meetings eight times throughout the year.
Board meetings may occur in-person, by telephone, or virtually. In addition, the
Board holds special meetings or informal conference calls to discuss specific
matters that may arise or require action between regular meetings. Independent
Board Members also meet annually to consider renewal of advisory
contracts.
The
Chairman of the Board is an interested person of the Fund Complex. The
Independent Board Members have appointed a Lead Independent Board Member whose
role is to review and approve, with the Chairman, each Board meeting’s agenda
and to facilitate communication between and among the Independent Board Members,
management, and the full Board. The Board’s leadership structure is appropriate
for the Fund Complex given its characteristics and circumstances, including the
number of portfolios, variety of asset classes, net assets, and distribution
arrangements. The appropriateness of this structure is enhanced by the
establishment and allocation of responsibilities among the following Committees,
which report their activities to the Board on a regular basis.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Committee
and Independent Board Members |
Primary
Purpose and Responsibilities |
Meetings
Held During the Last Fiscal Year |
15(c)
Committee Karen
McMillan, Chair
Katharin
S. Dyer Fritz S. Hirsch Padelford L. Lattimer |
The
Committee’s primary purpose is to assist the Board in performing the
annual review of the Funds’ advisory and sub-advisory agreements pursuant
to Section 15(c) of the 1940 Act. The Committee is responsible for
requesting and reviewing related materials. |
6 |
Audit
Committee Victor
L. Hymes, Chair
Craig
Damos Frances P. Grieb Elizabeth A. Nickels
|
The
Committee’s primary purpose is to assist the Board by serving as an
independent and objective party to monitor the Fund Complex’s accounting
policies, financial reporting, and internal control system, as well as the
work of the independent registered public accountants. The Audit Committee
assists Board oversight of 1) the integrity of the Fund Complex’s
financial statements; 2) the Fund Complex’s compliance with certain legal
and regulatory requirements; 3) the independent registered public
accountants’ qualifications and independence; and 4) the performance of
the Fund Complex’s independent registered public accountants. The Audit
Committee also facilitates communication among the independent registered
public accountants, PGI’s internal auditors, Fund Complex management, and
the Board. |
10 |
Executive
Committee Kamal
Bhatia, Chair Craig Damos Patrick G. Halter
|
The
Committee’s primary purpose is to exercise certain powers of the Board
when the Board is not in session. When the Board is not in session, the
Committee may exercise all powers of the Board in the management of the
Fund Complex’s business except the power to 1) issue stock, except as
permitted by law; 2) recommend to the shareholders any action that
requires shareholder approval; 3) amend the bylaws; or 4) approve any
merger or share exchange that does not require shareholder
approval. |
None |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Committee
and Independent Board Members |
Primary
Purpose and Responsibilities |
Meetings
Held During the Last Fiscal Year |
Nominating
and
Governance
Committee Elizabeth
A. Nickels, Chair Craig Damos Fritz S. Hirsch Victor L.
Hymes
Karen
McMillan
|
The
Committee’s primary purpose is to oversee the structure and efficiency of
the Board and the committees. The Committee is responsible for evaluating
Board membership and functions, committee membership and functions,
insurance coverage, and legal matters. The Committee’s nominating
functions include selecting and nominating Independent Board Member
candidates for election to the Board. Generally, the Committee requests
nominee suggestions from Board Members and management. In addition, the
Committee considers candidates recommended by shareholders of the Fund
Complex. Recommendations should be submitted in writing to the Principal
Funds Complex Secretary, in care of the Principal Funds Complex, 711 High
Street, Des Moines, IA 50392. Such recommendations must include all
information specified in the Committee’s charter and must conform with the
procedures set forth in Appendix A thereto, which can be found at
https://secure02.principal.com/publicvsupply/GetFile?fm=MM13013&ty=VOP&EXT=.VOP.
Examples of such information include the nominee’s biographical
information; relevant educational and professional background of the
nominee; the number of shares of each Fund owned of record and
beneficially by the nominee and by the recommending shareholder; any other
information regarding the nominee that would be required to be disclosed
in a proxy statement or other filing required to be made in connection
with the solicitation of proxies for the election of board members;
whether the nominee is an “interested person” of the Funds as defined in
the 1940 Act; and the written consent of the nominee to be named as a
nominee and serve as a board member if elected.
When
evaluating a potential nominee for Independent Board Member, the Committee
may consider, among other factors: educational background; relevant
business and industry experience; whether the person is an “interested
person” of the Funds as defined in the 1940 Act; and whether the person is
willing to serve, and willing and able to commit the time necessary to
attend meetings and perform the duties of an Independent Board Member. In
addition, the Committee may consider whether a candidate’s background,
experience, skills and views would complement the background, experience,
skills and views of other Board Members and would contribute to the
diversity of the Board. The final decision is based on a combination of
factors, including the strengths and the experience an individual may
bring to the Board. The Board does not regularly use the services of
professional search firms to identify or evaluate potential candidates or
nominees. |
5 |
Operations
Committee Padelford
L. Lattimer, Chair Katharin S. Dyer Karen McMillan |
The
Committee’s primary purpose is to review and oversee the provision of
administrative and distribution services to the Fund Complex,
communications with the Fund Complex’s shareholders, and the Fund
Complex’s operations. |
6 |
Risk
oversight forms part of the Board’s general oversight of the Fund Complex. The
Board has appointed a Chief Compliance Officer who oversees the implementation
and testing of the Funds' compliance program and reports to the Board regarding
compliance matters for the Funds and principal service providers. As part of its
regular oversight functions, the Board, directly or through a committee,
interacts with and reviews reports from, among others: Fund Complex management,
sub-advisors, the Chief Compliance Officer, the independent registered public
accounting firm, and internal auditors for PGI or its affiliates, as
appropriate. The Board, with the assistance of management and PGI, reviews
investment policies and risks in connection with its review of Fund Complex
performance. In addition, as part of the Board’s periodic review of advisory,
sub-advisory, and other service provider agreements, the Board may consider risk
management aspects of their operations and the functions for which they are
responsible. With respect to valuation, the Board has designated PGI as the
Funds’ valuation designee, as permitted by SEC Rule 2a-5, where PGI is
responsible for the day-to-day valuation and oversight responsibilities of the
Funds, subject to the Board’s oversight. PGI has established a Valuation
Committee to fulfill its oversight responsibilities as the Funds’ valuation
designee.
Each
Board Member has significant prior senior management and/or board experience.
Board Members are selected and retained based upon their skills, experience,
judgment, analytical ability, diligence, and ability to work effectively with
other Board Members, a commitment to the interests of shareholders, and, for
each Independent Board Member, a demonstrated willingness to take an independent
and questioning view of management. In addition to these general qualifications,
the Board seeks members who build upon the Board’s diversity. Below is a brief
discussion of the specific education, experience, qualifications, or skills that
led to the conclusion that each person identified below should serve as a Board
Member. As required by rules adopted under the 1940 Act, the Independent Board
Members select and nominate all candidates for Independent Board Member
positions.
Independent
Board Members
Craig
Damos. Mr.
Damos has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2008.
Since 2011, Mr. Damos has served as the President of C.P. Damos Consulting, LLC
(doing business as Craig Damos Consulting). He has also served as a director of
the employees’ stock ownership plan of the Baker Group since 2020. Mr. Damos
served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Weitz Company from 2006 to
2010; Vertical Growth Officer of Weitz Company from 2004 to 2006; and Chief
Financial Officer of Weitz Company from 2000 to 2004. From 2005 to 2008, Mr.
Damos served as a director of West Bank. Through his education, employment
experience, and experience as a board member, Mr. Damos is experienced with
financial, accounting, regulatory, and investment matters.
Katharin
S. Dyer. Ms.
Dyer has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2023.
She is the founder and Chief Executive Officer of PivotWise, a firm providing
strategic advice focused on digital transformation. Ms. Dyer currently serves as
a director of Liquidity Services and the Grameen Foundation. She previously
served as a director of Providence Health from 2019 to 2021, Noora Health from
2018 to 2021, YWCA of Nashville and Middle Tennessee from 2016 to 2022, and CARE
from 2001 to 2013. She was formerly employed by IBM Global Services as a Global
Partner and a member of the senior leadership team from 2016 to 2018. Ms. Dyer
was a member of the Global Management Team at American Express Company from 2013
to 2015. Through her education, employment experience, and experience as a board
member, Ms. Dyer is experienced with financial, information and digital
technology, investment, and regulatory matters.
Frances
P. Grieb. Ms.
Grieb has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2023.
Ms. Grieb currently serves as a director of First Interstate BancSystem, Inc.
and the National Advisory Board of the College of Business at the University of
Nebraska at Omaha. She is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants and the National Association of Corporate Directors. From 2014 to
2022, she served as a director of Great Western Bancorp, Inc. Ms. Grieb is a
retired partner having served in various leadership roles at Deloitte LLP from
1982 to 2010. Ms. Grieb is a retired Certified Public Accountant. Through her
education, employment experience, and experience as a board member, Ms. Grieb is
experienced with financial, accounting, investment, and regulatory
matters.
Fritz
S. Hirsch. Mr.
Hirsch has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2005.
From 2011 to 2015, Mr. Hirsch served as CEO of MAM USA. He served as President
and Chief Executive Officer of Sassy, Inc. from 1986 to 2009, and Chief
Financial Officer of Sassy, Inc. from 1983 to 1985. Through his education,
employment experience, and experience as a board member, Mr. Hirsch is
experienced with financial, accounting, regulatory, and investment
matters.
Victor
L. Hymes. Mr.
Hymes has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2020.
He currently serves as Founder, Chief Executive Officer, and Chief Investment
Officer of Legato Capital Management, LLC. Over the past thirty years, Mr. Hymes
has served in the roles of CEO, COO, CIO, portfolio manager, and other senior
management positions with investment management firms, including Zurich Scudder
Investments, Inc., Goldman, Sachs & Co., and Kidder, Peabody & Co. Mr.
Hymes has served on numerous boards and has chaired four investment committees
over the past two decades. Through his education, employment experience, and
experience as a board member, Mr. Hymes is experienced with financial,
accounting, regulatory, and investment matters.
Padelford
L. Lattimer. Mr.
Lattimer has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since
2020. He currently serves as Managing Partner for TBA Management Consulting LLC.
For more than twenty years, Mr. Lattimer served in various capacities at
financial services companies, including as a senior managing director for TIAA
Cref Asset Management (2004-2010), First Vice President at Mellon Financial
Corporation (2002-2004), and in product management roles at Citibank
(2000-2002). Through his education, employment experience, and experience as a
board member, Mr. Lattimer is experienced with financial, regulatory, and
investment matters.
Karen
McMillan. Ms.
McMillan has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since
2014. Ms. McMillan is the founder and owner of Tyche Consulting LLC. She served
as a Managing Director of Patomak Global Partners, LLC from 2014 to 2021. From
2007 to 2014, Ms. McMillan served as general counsel to the Investment Company
Institute. Prior to that (from 1999-2007), she worked as an attorney in private
practice, specializing in the mutual fund industry. From 1991 to 1999, she
served in various roles as counsel at the SEC, Division of Investment
Management, including as Assistant Chief Counsel. Through her professional
education, experience as an attorney, and experience as a board member, Ms.
McMillan is experienced in financial, investment, and regulatory
matters.
Elizabeth
A. Nickels. Ms.
Nickels has served as an Independent Board Member of the Fund Complex since
2015. From 2000 to 2022, Ms. Nickels served as a director of SpartanNash. From
2008 to 2017, she served as a director of the not-for-profit Spectrum Health
System; from 2014 to 2016, she served as a director of Charlotte Russe; from
2014 to 2015, she served as a director of Follet Corporation; and from 2013 to
2015, she served as a director of PetSmart. Ms. Nickels was formerly employed by
Herman Miller, Inc. in several capacities: from 2012 to 2014, as the Executive
Director of the Herman Miller Foundation; from 2007 to 2012, as President of
Herman Miller Healthcare; and from 2000 to 2007, as Chief Financial Officer.
Through her education, employment experience, and experience as a board member,
Ms. Nickels is experienced with financial, accounting, and regulatory
matters.
Interested
Board Members
Kamal
Bhatia. Mr.
Bhatia has served as Chair of the Fund Complex since 2023. He has also served as
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Fund Complex since 2019. Mr. Bhatia
serves as Senior Executive Managing Director - Global Head of Investments for
Principal®
Asset Management. From 2019 to 2023, he served as a Senior Executive Director
and Chief Operating Officer of Principal®
Asset Management. Mr. Bhatia joined Principal®
in 2019 and serves as a director of numerous Principal®
affiliates.
From 2011 to 2019, he was a Senior Vice President for Oppenheimer Funds. Mr.
Bhatia is a CFA®
charter holder. Through his education and experience, Mr. Bhatia is experienced
with financial, marketing, regulatory, and investment matters.
Patrick
G. Halter. Mr.
Halter has served as a Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2017. Mr. Halter
also serves as President and Chief Executive Officer for Principal®
Asset Management. He also serves as a director of numerous Principal®
affiliates. Mr. Halter joined Principal®
in 1984 and has held various other positions since joining Principal®.
Through his education and employment experience, Mr. Halter is experienced with
financial, accounting, regulatory, and investment matters.
Kenneth
A. McCullum. Mr.
McCullum has served as a Board Member of the Fund Complex since 2023. Mr.
McCullum has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Risk Officer for
Principal®
since 2023. Prior to that, he served as Senior Vice President and Chief Risk
Officer for Principal®
from 2020 to 2023 and Vice President and Chief Actuary for Principal®
from 2015 to 2020. From 2013 to 2015, Mr. McCullum was an Executive Vice
President responsible for business development at Delaware Life Insurance
Company. He served as a Senior Vice President for the life annuity business at
Sun Life from 2010 to 2013. Mr. McCullum is a Fellow of the Society of Actuaries
and is a Member of the American Academy of Actuaries. Through his education and
experience, Mr. McCullum is experienced with financial, accounting, regulatory,
and investment matters.
Additional
Information Regarding Board Members and Officers
The
following tables present additional information regarding the Board Members and
Fund Complex officers, including their principal occupations, which, unless
specific dates are shown, are of more than five years duration. For each Board
Member, the tables also include information concerning other directorships held
in reporting companies under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 or registered
investment companies under the 1940 Act.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
INDEPENDENT
BOARD MEMBERS |
Name,
Address, and Year of Birth |
Board
Positions Held with Fund Complex |
Principal
Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years |
Number
of Portfolios Overseen in Fund Complex |
Other Directorships Held
During Past 5 Years |
Craig
Damos 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1954 |
Lead
Independent Board Member (since 2020) Director, PFI and
PVC (since 2008) Trustee, PETF (since 2014) Trustee, PRA (since
2019) |
President,
C.P. Damos Consulting, LLC (consulting services)
|
126 |
None |
Katharin
S. Dyer 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1957 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2023) Trustee, PETF and PRA (since
2023) |
Founder
and Chief Executive Officer, PivotWise (consulting
services); Global Partner, IBM (technology company)
from 2016-2018 |
126 |
Liquidity
Services, Inc. (2020-present) |
Frances
P. Grieb 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1960 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2023) Trustee, PETF and PRA (since
2023) |
Retired |
126 |
First
Interstate BancSystem, Inc. (2022-present); Great
Western Bancorp, Inc. and Great Western Bank
(2014-2022) |
Fritz
S. Hirsch 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1951 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2005) Trustee, PETF (since 2014) Trustee, PRA
(since 2019) |
Interim
CEO, MAM USA (manufacturer of infant and juvenile products) from February
2020-October 2020 |
126 |
MAM
USA (2011-present)
|
Victor
L. Hymes 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1957 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2020) Trustee, PETF and PRA (since
2020) |
Founder,
CEO, CIO, Legato Capital Management, LLC (investment management
company) |
126 |
None |
Padelford
L. Lattimer 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1961 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2020) Trustee, PETF and PRA (since
2020) |
Managing
Partner, TBA Management Consulting LLC (management consulting and staffing
company) |
126 |
None |
Karen
McMillan 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1961 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2014) Trustee, PETF (since 2014) Trustee, PRA
(since 2019) |
Founder/Owner,
Tyche Consulting LLC (consulting services); Managing
Director, Patomak Global Partners, LLC (financial
services consulting) from 2014-2021 |
126 |
None |
Elizabeth
A. Nickels 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1962 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2015) Trustee, PETF (since 2015) Trustee, PRA
(since 2019) |
Retired |
126 |
SpartanNash
(2000-2022) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
INTERESTED
BOARD MEMBERS |
Name,
Address, and Year of Birth |
Positions
Held with Fund Complex |
Principal
Occupation(s) During Past 5 Years |
Number
of Portfolios Overseen in Fund Complex |
Other Directorships Held
During Past 5 Years |
Kamal
Bhatia 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1972 |
Director
and Chair, PFI and PVC (since 2023) Trustee and Chair,
PETF and PRA (since 2023) Chief Executive Officer and
President (since 2019)
|
Principal
Financial Group*
Senior
Executive Managing Director - Global Head of Investments – Principal Asset
Management (since 2023)
Senior
Executive Director and Chief
Operating
Officer – Principal Asset
Management
(2019-2023)
President
– Principal Funds (2019-2020)
OppenheimerFunds,
Inc.
Senior
Vice President (2011-2019) |
126 |
None |
Patrick
G. Halter 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1959 |
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2017) Trustee, PETF (since 2017) Trustee, PRA
(since 2019) |
Principal
Financial Group*
President
and Chief Executive Officer – Principal Asset Management (since
2022)
President
– Principal Global Asset Management (2020-2022)
Chief
Executive Officer and President – Principal Global Investors, LLC
(2018-2020) |
126 |
None |
Kenneth
A. McCullum 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1964
|
Director,
PFI and PVC (since 2023) Trustee, PETF and PRA (since
2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Executive
Vice President and Chief Risk
Officer
(since 2023)
Senior
Vice President and Chief Risk Officer (2020-2023)
Vice
President and Chief Actuary (2015-2020) |
126 |
None |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
FUND
COMPLEX OFFICERS |
Name,
Address, and Year of Birth |
Position(s)
Held with Fund Complex |
Principal
Occupation(s)
During
Past 5 Years |
George
Djurasovic
711
High Street Des Moines, IA 50392
1971 |
Vice
President and General Counsel (since 2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Vice
President and General Counsel – Principal Asset Management (since
2022)
Artisan
Partners Limited Partnership
Global
Chief Compliance Officer (2013-2022) |
Calvin
Eib 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1963 |
Assistant
Tax Counsel (since 2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Counsel
(2021)
Transamerica
Tax
Counsel (2016-2021) |
Beth
Graff 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1968 |
Vice
President and Assistant Controller
(since
2021) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Director
– Fund Accounting (since 2016)
|
Gina
L. Graham 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1965 |
Treasurer
(since 2016) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Vice
President and Treasurer (since 2016)
|
Megan
Hoffmann 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1979 |
Vice
President and Controller (since 2021) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Director
– Accounting (since 2020)
Assistant
Director – Accounting (2017-2020)
|
Laura
B. Latham 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1986 |
Counsel
and Assistant Secretary (since 2023)
Assistant
Counsel and Assistant Secretary
(2018-2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Counsel
(since 2018)
|
Diane
K. Nelson 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1965 |
AML
Officer (since 2016) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Chief
Compliance Officer/AML Officer (since 2015)
|
Tara
Parks 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1983 |
Vice
President and Assistant Controller
(since
2021) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Director
– Accounting (since 2019)
ALPS
Fund Services
Tax
Manager (2011-2019) |
Deanna
Y. Pellack 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1987 |
Counsel
and Assistant Secretary (since 2023)
Assistant
Counsel and Assistant Secretary
(2022-2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Counsel
(since 2022)
The
Northern Trust Company
Vice
President (2019-2022)
Second
Vice President (2014-2019) |
Sara
L. Reece 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1975 |
Vice
President and Chief Operating Officer
(since
2021)
Vice
President and Controller (2016-2021) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Managing
Director – Global Fund Ops (since 2021)
Director
– Accounting (2015-2021)
|
Teri
R. Root 711 High Street Des Moines, IA 50392 1979 |
Chief
Compliance Officer (since 2018)
|
Principal
Financial Group*
Chief
Compliance Officer – Funds (since 2018)
Vice
President (since 2015)
|
Michael
Scholten 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1979 |
Chief
Financial Officer (since 2021) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Assistant
Vice President and Actuary (since 2021)
Chief
Financial Officer – Funds/Platforms (2015-2021)
|
Adam
U. Shaikh
711
High Street
Des
Moines, IA 50392
1972 |
Vice
President and Assistant General Counsel
(since
2023)
Assistant
Secretary (since 2022)
Assistant
Counsel (2006-2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Assistant
General Counsel (since 2018) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
FUND
COMPLEX OFFICERS |
Name,
Address, and Year of Birth |
Position(s)
Held with Fund Complex |
Principal
Occupation(s)
During
Past 5 Years |
John
L. Sullivan 711 High Street
Des
Moines, IA 50392 1970 |
Counsel
and Assistant Secretary (since 2023)
Assistant
Counsel and Assistant Secretary
(2019-2023) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Assistant
General Counsel (since 2023)
Counsel
(2019-2023)
Prior
thereto, Attorney in Private Practice |
Dan
L. Westholm 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1966 |
Assistant
Treasurer (since 2006) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Assistant
Vice President – Treasury (since 2013)
|
Beth
C. Wilson 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1956 |
Vice
President and Secretary (since 2007) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Director
and Secretary – Funds (since 2007)
|
Jared
A. Yepsen 711 High Street Des Moines, IA
50392 1981 |
Assistant
Tax Counsel (since 2017) |
Principal
Financial Group*
Assistant
General Counsel (since 2023)
Counsel
(2015-2023)
|
|
| |
*The
reference to Principal Financial Group includes positions held by the
Interested Board Member / Fund Complex Officer, including as an officer,
employee, and/or director, with affiliates or subsidiaries of Principal
Financial Group. The titles set forth in this SAI are each Interested
Board Member's / Fund Complex Officer’s title with Principal Workforce,
LLC. |
Board
Member Ownership of Securities
The
following tables set forth the dollar range of the equity securities of Funds
included in this SAI, and aggregate dollar range of the equity securities of the
funds in the Fund Complex, that were beneficially owned by the Board Members as
of December 31, 2022. As of that date, Board Members did not own shares of the
Funds included in this SAI that are not listed.
For
the purpose of these tables, beneficial ownership means a direct or indirect
pecuniary interest. Only Interested Board Members are eligible to participate in
an employee benefit program that invests in the Fund Complex. Board Members who
beneficially owned shares of the series of PVC did so through variable life
insurance and variable annuity contracts. Please note that exact dollar amounts
of securities held are not listed. Rather, ownership is listed based on the
following dollar ranges:
|
|
|
|
| |
A |
$0 |
B |
$1
up to and including $10,000 |
C |
$10,001
up to and including $50,000 |
D |
$50,001
up to and including $100,000 |
E |
$100,001
or more |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
Fund |
Damos |
Dyer(1) |
Grieb(1) |
Hirsch |
Hymes |
Lattimer |
McMillan |
Nickels |
Blue
Chip |
E |
A |
A |
C |
A |
B |
E |
E |
Diversified
Real Asset |
E |
A |
A |
C |
A |
B |
A |
A |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
B |
A |
A |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
E |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
A |
Total
Fund Complex |
E |
A |
A |
E |
E |
C |
E |
E |
(1)Appointment
effective January 26, 2023
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Interested
Board Members |
Fund |
Bhatia(1) |
Halter |
McCullum(1) |
Diversified
Real Asset(2) |
E |
A |
A |
Origin
Emerging Markets(2) |
D |
A |
A |
Total
Fund Complex |
E |
E |
E |
(1)Appointment
effective January 26, 2023
(2)Ownership
through participation in an Employee Benefit Plan
Board
Member and Officer Compensation
The
Fund Complex does not pay any remuneration to its officers or to any Board
Members listed above as Interested Board Members. The Board annually considers a
proposal to reimburse PGI for certain expenses, including a portion of the Chief
Compliance Officer’s compensation. If the proposal is adopted, these amounts are
allocated across all Funds based on relative net assets of each
portfolio.
Each
Independent Board Member received compensation for service as a member of the
Boards of all investment companies in the Fund Complex based on a schedule that
takes into account an annual retainer amount, the number of meetings attended,
and expenses incurred. Board Member compensation and related expenses are
allocated to each of the Funds based on the net assets of each relative to
combined net assets of the Fund Complex.
The
following table provides information regarding the compensation received by the
Independent Board Members from
the Funds included in this SAI and from the Fund Complex during the fiscal year
ended August 31, 2023. On that date, there were 4 investment companies in the
Fund Complex. The Fund Complex does not provide retirement benefits or pensions
to any of the Board Members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Board
Member |
Funds
in this SAI |
Fund
Complex |
Craig
Damos |
$56,776 |
$392,250 |
Katharin
S. Dyer(1) |
$33,782 |
$233,250 |
Frances
P. Grieb(1) |
$33,998 |
$234,750 |
Fritz
S. Hirsch |
$48,635 |
$336,000 |
Victor
L. Hymes |
$50,620 |
$349,750 |
Padelford
L. Lattimer |
$49,712 |
$343,500 |
Karen
McMillan |
$50,260 |
$347,250 |
Elizabeth
A. Nickels |
$50,803 |
$351,000 |
(1)Appointment
effective January 26, 2023.
INVESTMENT
ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES
Investment
Advisors
Principal
Global Investors, LLC (doing business as Principal®
Asset Management) (“PGI”), an indirect subsidiary of Principal Financial Group,
Inc. (“Principal®”),
serves as the manager for the Funds. Principal Management Corporation,
previously an affiliate of PGI, served as manager to the Funds prior to its
merger with and into PGI on May 1, 2017.
PGI
directly makes decisions to purchase or sell securities for each Fund, except
for those Funds or portions of Funds for which PGI has retained a sub-advisor to
provide such services, as described below.
PGI
has executed agreements with various sub-advisors. Under those sub-advisory
agreements, the sub-advisor agrees to assume the obligations of PGI to provide
investment advisory services for a specific Fund. For these services, PGI pays
each sub-advisor a fee (except on the Capital Securities Fund).
Sub-Advisor: BlackRock
Financial Management, Inc. (“BlackRock”)
is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc.
Sub-Sub-Advisor:
BlackRock International Limited is
an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of BlackRock, Inc.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: ClearBridge
Investments (North America) Pty Limited (“ClearBridge”)
is an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Franklin Resources, Inc.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: CoreCommodity
Management, LLC (“CoreCommodity”)
is a wholly-owned subsidiary of CoreCommodity Capital, LLC. CoreCommodity is
controlled by its senior management, which owns 100% of the voting interest and
50% of the economic interest through various subsidiaries. The other 50%
economic interest in CoreCommodity is held by a subsidiary of Jeffries Financial
Group Inc. (NYSE: JEF).
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset (commodities sleeve and,
indirectly through a Cayman subsidiary, commodity derivatives)
Sub-Advisor: Delaware
Investments Fund Advisers (“DIFA”) is
an indirect wholly-owned subsidiary of Macquarie Group Limited and operates as
part of Macquarie Asset Management, the asset management division of Macquarie
Group Limited.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: Gotham
Asset Management, LLC ("Gotham") is
wholly-owned by Gotham Asset Management Holdings, LP (“GAMH”). Joel Greenblatt
and Robert Goldstein control Gotham through their control of GAMH and as
Managing Principals of Gotham.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Global Multi-Strategy
Sub-Advisor: Graham
Capital Management, L.P. ("Graham") is
majority-owned by KGT Investment Partners, L.P., which is principally owned by
Graham’s founder, Kenneth Tropin, and members of Mr. Tropin’s
family.
Fund(s):
a
portion of the assets of Global Multi-Strategy
Sub-Advisor: Impax
Asset Management Limited (“Impax”)
is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Impax Asset Management Group plc, which is
publicly traded on the Alternative Investment Market of the London Stock
Exchange as “IPX.”
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P. (“Loomis Sayles”)
is a subsidiary of Natixis Investment Managers, LLC, which is part of Natixis
Investment Managers, an international asset management group based in Paris,
France.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Global Multi-Strategy
Sub-Advisor: Los
Angeles Capital Management LLC ("Los Angeles Capital")
is a California limited liability company. It is owned by key employees through
its parent holding companies, LACM Holdings, Inc. and LACM Equity LLC
(collectively, the “Parent Company”). Thomas D. Stevens, Chairman, holds a
controlling equity interest in the Parent Company.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Global Multi-Strategy
Sub-Advisor: Newton
Investment Management North America LLC
(“NIMNA,
LLC”)
is an indirect subsidiary of The Bank of New York Mellon Corporation ("BNY
Mellon"), a banking and financial services company. NIMNA LLC is part of ‘The
Newton Investment Management Group, which is used to collectively describe a
group of affiliated companies that provide investment advisory services under
the brand name ‘Newton’ or ‘Newton Investment Management.’ Investment advisory
services are provided in United States by NIMNA LLC and in the United Kingdom by
Newton Investment Management Limited (NIM). Both firms are indirect subsidiaries
of BNY Mellon.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC (“Nuveen Asset Management”)
is
an investment advisor registered with the SEC, whose sole managing member is
Nuveen Funds Advisors, LLC. Nuveen Asset Management is an indirect subsidiary of
Teachers Insurance and Annuity Association of America, which constitutes the
ultimate principal owner of Nuveen Asset Management.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: Origin
Asset Management LLP (doing
business as Principal Origin)
(“Origin”) is
an indirect majority-owned subsidiary of Principal Financial Services, Inc., an
affiliate of PGI, and a member of Principal®.
Fund(s): Origin
Emerging Markets
Sub-Advisor: Pictet
Asset Management SA
(“Pictet”)
is
the asset management arm of the Pictet Group, which is owned by eight managing
partners.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: Principal
Real Estate Investors, LLC (doing
business as Principal Real Estate)
("Principal-REI") is
an
indirect subsidiary of Principal Financial Group, Inc.
Fund(s): Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure and a portion of the assets of Diversified
Real Asset
Sub-Advisor: Sound
Point Capital Management, LP ("Sound Point"),
Stephen
Ketchum, five principals of Stone Point Capital LLC, Dyal Capital Partners II
(A), LP, a third-party permanent capital fund managed by the Dyal Capital
division of Blue Owl Capital Inc., and Assured Guaranty Ltd., through one or
more subsidiaries, together own 100% of the equity of the General Partner and
the Sub-Advisor with Dyal, the Stone Point principals, and Assured Guaranty
owning minority stakes.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Global Multi-Strategy
Sub-Advisor: Spectrum
Asset Management, Inc. ("Spectrum")
is an indirect subsidiary of Principal Financial Group, Inc.
Fund(s): Capital
Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Sub-Advisor: Wellington
Management Company LLP (“Wellington”)
is owned by the partners of Wellington Management Group LLP, a Massachusetts
limited liability partnership.
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Diversified Real Asset and a portion of the assets of
Global Multi-Strategy
Sub-Advisor: Westchester
Capital Management, LLC ("Westchester")
is 100% owned by its sole member, Virtus Partners, Inc. (“VPI”). VPI is 100%
owned by Virtus Investment Partners, Inc. (NASDAQ: VRTS)
(“VIP”).
Fund(s): a
portion of the assets of Global Multi-Strategy
Affiliated
Persons of the Registrant Who are Affiliated Persons of the Advisor
For
information about affiliated persons of the Registrant who are also affiliated
persons of PGI or affiliated advisors, see the Interested Board Members and Fund
Complex Officers tables in the “Leadership Structure and Board”
section.
Codes
of Ethics
The
Registrant, PGI, PFD, and each of the sub-advisors have adopted Codes of Ethics
(“Codes”) under Rule 17j-1 of the 1940 Act. PGI and the sub-advisors have each
also adopted such a Code under Rule 204A-1 of the Investment Advisers Act of
1940. These Codes are designed to prevent, among other things, persons with
access to information regarding the portfolio trading activity of the Funds from
using that information for their personal benefit. Except in limited
circumstances, the Code for PGI and the Registrant prohibits portfolio managers
from personally trading securities that are held or traded in the actively
managed portfolios for which they are responsible. Certain sub-advisors have
adopted Codes that do not permit personnel subject to such Code to invest in
securities that may be purchased or held by a Fund. However, other sub-advisors’
Codes do permit, subject to conditions, personnel subject to the Code to invest
in securities that may be purchased or held by a Fund. The Registrant’s Board
reviews reports at least annually regarding the operation of the Code of Ethics
of the Registrant, PGI, PFD, and each sub-advisor. A copy of the Registrant’s
Code will be provided upon request, which may be made by contacting the
Registrant.
Management
Agreement
Under
the terms of the Management Agreement with the Registrant, PGI, the investment
advisor, is entitled to receive a fee computed and accrued daily and payable
monthly, at the following annual rates, for providing investment advisory
services and specified other services. The management fee schedule for each Fund
is as follows (expressed as a percentage of average net assets).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
All
Assets |
|
Bond
Market Index |
0.14 |
% |
|
Capital
Securities |
0.00 |
% |
(1) |
International
Equity Index |
0.25 |
| |
(1)The
table reflects that PGI is absorbing all expenses of the Fund. You should be
aware, however, that the Fund is an integral part of “wrap-fee” programs,
including those sponsored by registered investment advisors and broker-dealers
unaffiliated with the Fund. Participants in these programs pay a “wrap” fee to
the wrap-free program’s sponsor (“Sponsor”). You should carefully read the
wrap-fee brochure provided to you by your Sponsor or your registered investment
advisor. The brochure is required to include information about the fees charged
to you by the Sponsor and the fees the Sponsor paid to your registered
investment advisor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
First
$500
Million |
Next
$500
Million |
Next
$500
Million |
Over $1.5
Billion |
Edge
MidCap |
0.65% |
0.63% |
0.61% |
0.60% |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
0.75 |
0.73 |
0.71 |
0.70 |
International
Small Company |
1.00 |
0.98 |
0.96 |
0.95 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
0.44 |
0.42 |
0.40 |
0.39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
First $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next
$1 Billion |
Over
$3 Billion |
Diversified
Real Asset |
0.80% |
0.78% |
0.76% |
0.75% |
0.74% |
0.73% |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
0.99 |
0.97 |
0.95 |
0.94 |
0.93 |
0.92 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
0.79 |
0.77 |
0.75 |
0.74 |
0.73 |
0.72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
First $2
Billion |
Next $2
Billion |
Over $4
Billion |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
1.36% |
1.30% |
1.25% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
First $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next
$1 Billion |
Next
$7 Billion |
Over
$10 Billion |
Blue
Chip |
0.65% |
0.63% |
0.61% |
0.60% |
0.59% |
0.58% |
0.57% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
First $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next $500
Million |
Next
$1 Billion |
Next
$2 Billion |
Next
$2 Billion |
Next
$3 Billion |
Over
$10 Billion |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
0.75% |
0.73% |
0.71% |
0.70% |
0.69% |
0.68% |
0.67% |
0.66% |
0.65% |
Fund
Operating Expenses
Each
Fund pays all of its operating expenses. Under the terms of the Management
Agreement, PGI is responsible for paying the expenses associated with the
organization of each Fund, including the expenses incurred in the initial
registration of each Fund with the SEC; compensation of personnel, officers, and
Board Members who are affiliated with PGI; and expenses and compensation
associated with furnishing office space and all necessary office facilities and
equipment and personnel necessary to perform the general corporate functions of
the Funds. Accounting services customarily required by investment companies are
provided to each Fund by PGI, under the terms of the Management Agreement.
Principal Shareholder Services, Inc., an affiliate of PGI, provides transfer
agent services for Classes A, C, J, Institutional, R-1, R-3, R-4, R-5, R-6, and
S shares, including qualifying shares of the Funds for sale in states and other
jurisdictions. PGI is also responsible for providing certain shareholder and
administrative services to Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5 shares pursuant to a
Service Agreement and an Administrative Services Agreement.
Contractual
Limits on Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses
PGI
has contractually agreed to limit Fund expenses (excluding interest expense,
expenses related to fund investments, acquired fund fees and expenses, and tax
reclaim recovery expenses and other extraordinary expenses) on certain share
classes of certain of the Funds. The reductions and reimbursements are in
amounts that maintain total operating expenses at or below certain limits. The
limits are expressed as a percentage of average daily net assets attributable to
each respective class on an annualized basis. Subject to applicable expense
limits, the Funds may reimburse PGI for expenses incurred during the current
fiscal year.
The
operating expense limits and the agreement terms are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Contractual
Limits on Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses |
Fund |
A |
C |
Inst. |
Expiration |
Blue
Chip |
N/A |
N/A |
0.66% |
12/30/2024 |
Diversified
Real Asset |
1.20% |
N/A |
0.83% |
12/30/2024 |
Edge
MidCap |
1.10% |
N/A |
0.77% |
12/30/2024 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
N/A |
N/A |
1.43% |
12/30/2024 |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
N/A |
N/A |
0.88% |
12/30/2024 |
International
Equity Index |
N/A |
N/A |
0.31% |
12/30/2024 |
International
Small Company |
N/A |
N/A |
1.08% |
12/30/2024 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
0.84% |
N/A |
0.56% |
12/30/2024 |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
1.45% |
N/A |
1.05% |
12/30/2024 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
1.12% |
1.87% |
0.85% |
12/30/2024 |
For
Capital Securities Fund, PGI has agreed contractually to limit the Fund’s
expenses attributable to Class S shares by paying expenses normally payable by
the Fund (excluding interest expense, expenses related to fund investments,
acquired fund fees and expenses, and tax reclaim recovery expenses and other
extraordinary expenses) to maintain a total level of operating expenses
(expressed as a percent of average net assets on an annualized basis) not to
exceed 0.00%. It
is expected that the expense limit will continue permanently (and in any event,
at least through December 30, 2024); however, PFI and PGI, the parties to the
agreement, may mutually agree to terminate the expense limit.
Contractual
Limits on Other Expenses
PGI
has contractually agreed to limit the expenses identified as “Other Expenses”
related to certain share classes of certain of the Funds by paying, if
necessary, expenses normally payable by the Fund (excluding interest expense,
expenses related to fund investments, acquired fund fees and expenses, and tax
reclaim recovery expenses and other extraordinary expenses) to maintain “Other
Expenses” (expressed as a percent of average net assets on an annualized basis)
at or below certain limits.
The
other expenses limits and the agreement terms are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Contractual
Limits on Other Expenses |
Fund |
R-6 |
Expiration |
Diversified
Real Asset |
0.02% |
12/30/2024 |
Edge
MidCap |
0.02% |
12/30/2024 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
0.02% |
12/30/2024 |
International
Equity Index |
0.04% |
12/30/2024 |
International
Small Company |
0.04% |
12/30/2024 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
0.02% |
12/30/2024 |
Contractual
Management Fee Waivers
PGI
has contractually agreed to waive a portion of certain Fund’s management fees.
The fee waiver will reduce the Fund’s management fees by the amounts listed
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Contractual
Management Fee Waivers |
Fund |
Waiver |
Expiration |
Blue
Chip |
0.030% |
12/30/2024 |
Bond
Market Index |
0.015% |
12/30/2024 |
Limits
on Distribution Fees and/or Service (12b-1) Fees
Effective
January 1, 2021, Principal Funds Distributor, Inc. has voluntarily agreed to
limit the distribution fees attributable to Class J, reducing the Funds’
distribution fees for Class J shares by 0.020%.* This voluntary waiver may be
revised or terminated at any time without notice to shareholders.
*
For the period from December 31, 2016 to December 31, 2020, the voluntary waiver
was 0.030%.
Management
Fees Paid
Management
fees paid for investment management services (before any waivers/reimbursements
from PGI) during the periods indicated were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Management
Fees Paid for Periods Ended August 31 (amounts in thousands) |
Fund |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
Blue
Chip |
$51,176 |
$57,901 |
$53,203 |
Bond
Market Index |
3,393 |
1,323 |
1,489 |
Capital
Securities |
— |
— |
— |
Diversified
Real Asset |
29,831(1)(2) |
36,917(1)(2) |
29,866(1) |
Edge
MidCap |
600 |
3,481 |
5,639 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
6,635(1) |
8,180(1) |
10,276(1) |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
98(3) |
N/A |
N/A |
International
Equity Index |
2,685 |
2,816 |
2,941 |
International
Small Company |
6,905 |
9,944 |
11,220 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
579 |
839 |
735 |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
24,130 |
31,158 |
31,024 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
8,984 |
8,826 |
10,676 |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
40,611 |
51,413 |
55,300 |
(1)Consolidated
financial statement; see "Basis for Consolidation" in Notes to Financial
Statements.
(2)Class
R-5 shares discontinued operations and converted to Class R-6 shares on January
13, 2023.
(3)Period
from September 22, 2022, date operations commenced, through August 31,
2023.
Management
Fees Waived
For
the following Funds, PGI waived a portion of the management fee during the
periods indicated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Management
Fees Waived for Periods Ended August 31 (amounts in
thousands) |
Fund |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
Blue
Chip |
$2,598 |
$3,315 |
$3,864 |
Bond
Market Index |
364 |
142 |
160 |
Diversified
Real Asset |
685 |
2,306 |
1,854 |
Edge
MidCap |
17 |
249 |
407 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
62 |
205 |
258 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
25 |
100 |
88 |
Expenses
Reimbursed
For
the following Funds, PGI reimbursed certain expenses during the periods
indicated as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Expenses
Reimbursed for Periods Ended August 31 (amounts in thousands) |
Fund |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
Blue
Chip |
$478 |
$— |
$— |
Capital
Securities |
481 |
555 |
524 |
Diversified
Real Asset |
1,041 |
798 |
901 |
Edge
MidCap |
85 |
32 |
40 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
672 |
471 |
642 |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
65(1) |
— |
— |
International
Equity Index |
335 |
259 |
288 |
International
Small Company |
95 |
14 |
13 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
62 |
55 |
38 |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
249 |
50 |
21 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
401 |
311 |
708 |
(1)Period
from September 22, 2022, date operations commenced, through August 31,
2023.
Sub-Advisory
Agreements for the Funds
PGI
(and not the Funds) pays the sub-advisors fees determined pursuant to a
sub-advisory agreement with each sub-advisor, including those sub-advisors that
are at least 95% owned, directly or indirectly, by PGI or its affiliates
(“Wholly-Owned Sub-Advisors”) and the sub-advisors for the Funds listed in the
tables below. Fees paid to sub-advisors are individually negotiated between PGI
and each sub-advisor and may vary.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Aggregate
Fees Paid to Sub-Advisors (other than Wholly-Owned Sub-Advisors and
Origin) for Fiscal Years Ended August 31 (dollar amounts in
thousands) |
Fund |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
| Dollar
Amount |
Percent of
Average Daily Net Assets |
Dollar
Amount |
Percent of
Average Daily Net Assets |
Dollar
Amount |
Percent of
Average Daily Net Assets |
Diversified
Real Asset |
$8,409 |
0.25% |
$9,952 |
0.27% |
$7,587 |
0.27% |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
2,854 |
0.76 |
3,406 |
0.79 |
4,211 |
0.78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fees
Paid to Origin for Fiscal Years Ended August 31 (dollar amounts in
thousands) |
Fund |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
| Dollar
Amount |
Percent of
Average Daily Net Assets |
Dollar
Amount |
Percent of
Average Daily Net Assets |
Dollar
Amount |
Percent of
Average Daily Net Assets |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
$8,967 |
0.36% |
$11,902 |
0.39% |
$11,288 |
0.37% |
Custodian
The
custodian of the portfolio securities and cash assets of the Funds and the
Cayman Subsidiaries is The Bank of New York Mellon, One Wall Street, New York,
NY 10286. The custodian performs no managerial or policy-making functions for
the Funds.
Securities
Lending Agent
The
Bank of New York Mellon serves as the securities lending agent for the Funds.
Information regarding securities lending during the Funds’ fiscal year ended
August 31, 2023 is as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Gross
income (including from cash collateral reinvestment) |
Fees
paid to securities lending agent from a revenue split |
Fees
paid for any cash collateral management service that are not included in
revenue split |
Administrative
fees not included in revenue split |
Indemnification
fees not included in revenue split |
Net
rebate paid to borrower |
Other
fees not included in revenue split |
Aggregate
fees/ compensation |
Net
income from securities lending |
Blue
Chip |
$ |
24,044 |
| $ |
330 |
| $— |
$— |
$— |
$ |
20,748 |
| $— |
$ |
21,078 |
| $ |
2,966 |
|
Bond
Market Index |
490,843 |
| 13,458 |
| — |
— |
— |
356,199 |
| — |
369,657 |
| 121,186 |
|
Capital
Securities |
621,804 |
| 21,373 |
| — |
— |
— |
408,046 |
| — |
429,418 |
| 192,386 |
|
Diversified
Real Asset |
1,101,361 |
| 21,960 |
| — |
— |
— |
881,743 |
| — |
903,703 |
| 197,658 |
|
Edge
MidCap |
3,741 |
| 38 |
| — |
— |
— |
3,359 |
| — |
3,398 |
| 344 |
|
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
1,117 |
| 37 |
| — |
— |
— |
747 |
| — |
784 |
| 333 |
|
International
Equity Index |
639,806 |
| 12,312 |
| — |
— |
— |
516,645 |
| — |
528,958 |
| 110,848 |
|
International
Small Company |
446,115 |
| 8,030 |
| — |
— |
— |
365,802 |
| — |
373,831 |
| 72,284 |
|
Origin
Emerging Markets |
130,852 |
| 13,701 |
| — |
— |
— |
(6,162) |
| — |
7,539 |
| 123,312 |
|
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
33,782 |
| 363 |
| — |
— |
— |
30,146 |
| — |
30,509 |
| 3,273 |
|
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
3,772,985 |
| 105,437 |
| — |
— |
— |
2,718,460 |
| — |
2,823,897 |
| 949,087 |
|
The
services provided by The Bank of New York Mellon, as securities lending agent
for the Funds, include: coordinating, with the Funds, the selection of
securities to be loaned; negotiating loan terms; monitoring the value of
securities loaned and corresponding collateral, marking to market daily;
coordinating collateral movements; monitoring dividends; and transferring,
recalling, and arranging the return of loaned securities to the Funds upon loan
termination.
INTERMEDIARY
COMPENSATION
Additional
Payments to Intermediaries.
Shares
of the Funds are sold primarily through intermediaries, such as brokers,
dealers, investment advisors, banks, trust companies, pension plan consultants,
retirement plan administrators, and insurance companies.
In
addition to payments pursuant to 12b-1 plans, PGI or its affiliates enter into
agreements with some intermediaries pursuant to which the intermediaries receive
payments for providing services relating to Fund shares. Examples of such
services are administrative, networking, recordkeeping, sub-transfer agency,
and/or shareholder services. In some situations, the Funds will reimburse PGI or
its affiliates for making such payments; in others, the Funds make such payments
directly to intermediaries.
For
Classes R-1, R-3, R-4, and R-5 shares, such compensation is generally paid out
of the Service Fees and Administrative Services Fees that are disclosed in the
Prospectus as Other Expenses. Such compensation is generally based on the
average asset value of Fund shares for the relevant share class held by clients
of the intermediary.
In
addition, PGI or its affiliates pay, without reimbursement from the Funds,
compensation from their own resources, to certain intermediaries that support
the distribution of shares of the Funds or provide services to Fund
shareholders. In addition, PGI or its affiliates pay, without reimbursement from
the Funds, compensation from their own resources to certain large plan sponsors
to help cover the cost of providing educational materials to plan
participants.
The
amounts paid to intermediaries vary by share class and by Fund.
Principal
Life Insurance Company is one such intermediary that provides services relating
to Fund shares held in employee benefit plans, and it is typically paid all of
the Service Fees and Administrative Services Fees pertaining to such
plans.
Plan
recordkeepers, who may have affiliated financial intermediaries that sell shares
of the Funds, may be paid additional amounts. In addition, some financial
intermediaries or their affiliates receive compensation from PGI or its
affiliates for maintaining retirement plan platforms that facilitate trading by
affiliated and non-affiliated financial intermediaries and recordkeeping for
retirement plans.
A
number of factors may be considered in determining the amount of these
additional payments, including each financial intermediary’s Fund sales and
assets, as well as the willingness and ability of the financial intermediary to
give the Distributor access to its Financial Professionals for educational and
marketing purposes. In some cases, intermediaries will include the Funds on a
preferred list. The Distributor’s goals include making the Financial
Professionals who interact with current and prospective investors and
shareholders more knowledgeable about the Funds so that they can provide
suitable information and advice about the Funds and related investor services.
The amounts paid to intermediaries vary by Fund and by share class.
Additionally,
in some cases, the Distributor and its affiliates will provide payments or
reimbursements in connection with the costs of conferences, educational
seminars, training, and marketing efforts related to the Funds. Such activities
may be sponsored by intermediaries or the Distributor. The costs associated with
such activities may include travel, lodging, entertainment, and meals. In some
cases, the Distributor will also provide payment or reimbursement for expenses
associated with transactions (“ticket”) charges and general marketing expenses.
Other compensation may be paid to the extent not prohibited by applicable laws,
regulations, or the rules of any self-regulatory agency, such as
FINRA.
The
payments described in this SAI may create a conflict of interest by influencing
your Financial Professional or your intermediary to recommend a Fund over
another investment, or to recommend one share class of a Fund over another share
class. Ask your Financial Professional or visit your intermediary’s website for
more information about the total amounts paid to them by PGI and its affiliates,
and by sponsors of other investment companies your Financial Professional may
recommend to you.
Your
intermediary may charge you additional fees other than those disclosed in the
Prospectus. Ask your Financial Professional about any fees and commissions they
charge.
Although
a Fund may use brokers who sell shares of the Funds to effect portfolio
transactions, the sale of shares is not considered as a factor by the Fund’s
sub-advisors when selecting brokers to effect portfolio
transactions.
As
of December 1, 2023, the Distributor anticipates that the firms that will
receive additional payments as described in the Additional Payments to
Intermediaries section above (other than sales charges, Rule 12b-1 fees, and
expense reimbursement) include, but are not necessarily limited to, the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Acclaim
Benefits, Inc. |
G.A.
Repple & Company |
Private
Client Services LLC |
ADP
Broker Dealer Inc |
GBM
International Inc |
Procyon
Advisors, LLC |
AIG
SunAmerica |
Global
Retirement Partners LLC |
Prudential
Retirement Services |
Alight
Financial Solutions LLC |
Goldman
Sachs & Co. |
Purshe
Kaplan Sterling Investments, Inc. |
American
Century Investments |
ICMA-Retirement
Corp. |
Putnam
Investors Services |
American
United Life Insurance Co. |
Insight
Wealth Partners LLC |
Raymond
James & Associates, Inc. |
Ameriprise
Financial Services |
J.P.
Morgan Securities, Inc. |
Raymond
James Financial Services, Inc. |
Ameritas
Investments Corp |
Janney
Montgomery Scott |
RBC
Capital Markets Corp. |
Ascensus |
John
Hancock Life Insurance Company of New York |
Reliance
Trust Company |
AXOS
Clearing LLC |
John
Hancock Life Insurance Company USA |
Retirement
Clearinghouse |
Baird |
John
Hancock Trust Co. |
Robert
W. Baird & Co. |
Benefit
Plan Administrators |
July
Business Services LLC |
Rockefeller
Financial LLC |
Benefit
Solutions |
Kestra
Investment Services, LLC |
Sammons
Institutional Group |
Benefit
Trust Company |
Lincoln
Retirement Services Co. |
Sanctuary
Securities, Inc |
Bolton
Global Capital |
LPL
Financial Corporation |
Standard
Insurance Company |
BNY
Mellon NA |
Massachusetts
Mutual Life Insurance Company |
Stifel
Nicolaus & Company, Inc. |
Broadridge
Business Process Outsourcing, LLC |
Mercer
HR Services, LLC |
T.
Rowe Price Retirement Plan Services |
California
Capital Management |
Merrill
Lynch |
TD
Ameritrade Inc |
Cambridge
Investment Research Inc. |
Merrill
Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. |
TD
Ameritrade Trust Company |
Canterbury
Consulting Inc |
Merrill
Lynch, Retirement Group |
Ten
Capital Wealth Advisors, LLC |
Cetera
Advisor Networks LLC |
MidAtlantic
Capital Corporation |
Thrivent
Financial for Lutherans |
Charles
Schwab & Co., Inc. |
Midland
National Life Insurance Company |
TIAA-CREF |
Charles
Schwab Trust Bank |
Minnesota
Life Insurance Company |
Total
Administrative Services Corporation |
Citigroup
Global Markets Inc. |
Morgan
Stanley Smith Barney LLC |
Triad
Advisors, Inc. |
Columbia
Management Investment |
National
Financial Services |
UBS
Financial Services, Inc. |
Advisers,
LLC |
Nationwide
Financial Services, Inc. |
US
Bancorp Investments |
Commonwealth
Financial Network |
Nationwide
Investment Services Corp |
VALIC
Retirement Services Company |
Concentrum
Wealth Management |
Newport
Group, The |
Vanguard
Brokerage Services |
CPI
Qualified Consultants |
NFP
Retirement Inc |
Vanguard
Group, The |
Edward
Jones |
Northwestern
Mutual Investment Services |
Voya
Institutional Plan Services, LLC |
Empower
Annuity Insurance Company |
OneDigital
Investment Advisors |
Voya
Institutional Trust Co. |
of
America |
Oppenheimer
& Co. |
Wealth
Enhancement Advisory Svcs LLC |
Empower
Financial Services Inc |
Osaic,
Inc. |
Wells
Fargo Advisors, LLC |
ePlan
Services, Inc. |
Pensionmark
Financial Group LLC |
Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A. |
Equitable
Financial Life Insurance Co |
Pershing
LLC |
Wells
Fargo Clearing Services LLC |
Fidelity
Investment Institutional Operations Co. |
Plan
Administrators, Inc. |
Wells
Fargo Community Bank Advisors |
Fortem
Financial Group LLC |
Principal
Bank |
Western
International Securities Inc |
Four
Peaks Planning And Investments |
Principal
Life Insurance Company |
Woodbury
Financial Services |
FSC
Securities Corporation |
Principal
Securities, Inc. |
|
The
preceding list is subject to change at any time without notice. Any additions,
modifications, or deletions to the financial intermediaries identified in this
list that have occurred since the date noted above are not reflected. To obtain
a current list, call 1-800-222-5852.
BROKERAGE
ALLOCATION AND OTHER PRACTICES
Brokerage
on Purchases and Sales of Securities
All
orders for the purchase or sale of portfolio securities are placed on behalf of
a Fund by PGI or by the Fund’s sub-advisor pursuant to the terms of the
applicable sub-advisory agreement. In distributing brokerage business arising
out of the placement of orders for the purchase and sale of securities for any
Fund, the objective of PGI and of each Fund’s sub-advisor is to obtain the best
overall terms. In pursuing this objective, PGI or the sub-advisor considers all
matters it deems relevant, including the breadth of the market in the security,
the price of the security, the financial condition and executing capability of
the broker or dealer, confidentiality, including trade anonymity, and the
reasonableness of the commission, if any (for the specific transaction and on a
continuing basis). This may mean in some instances that PGI or a sub-advisor
will pay a broker commissions that are in excess of the amount of commissions
another broker might have charged for executing the same transaction when PGI or
the sub-advisor believes that such commissions are reasonable in light of a) the
size and difficulty of the transaction, b) the quality of the execution
provided, and c) the level of commissions paid relative to commissions paid by
other institutional investors. Such factors are viewed both in terms of that
particular transaction and in terms of all transactions that broker executes for
accounts over which PGI or the sub-advisor exercises investment discretion. The
Board has also adopted a policy and procedure designed to prevent each of the
Funds from compensating a broker/dealer for promoting or selling Fund shares by
directing brokerage transactions to that broker/dealer for the purpose of
compensating the broker/dealer for promoting or selling Fund shares. Therefore,
PGI or a sub-advisor may not compensate a broker/dealer for promoting or selling
Fund shares by directing brokerage transactions to that broker/dealer for the
purpose of compensating the broker/dealer for promoting or selling Fund shares.
PGI or a sub-advisor may purchase securities in the over-the-counter market,
utilizing the services of principal market makers unless better terms can be
obtained by purchases through brokers or dealers, and may purchase securities
listed on the NYSE from non-Exchange members in transactions off the
Exchange.
PGI
or a sub-advisor may give consideration in the allocation of business to
services performed by a broker (e.g., the furnishing of statistical data and
research generally consisting of, but not limited to, information of the
following types: analyses and reports concerning issuers, industries, economic
factors, and trends; portfolio strategy; performance of client accounts; and
access to research analysts, corporate management personnel, and industry
experts). If any such allocation is made, the primary criteria used will be to
obtain the best overall terms for such transactions or terms that are reasonable
in relation to the research or brokerage services provided by the broker or
dealer when viewed in terms of either a particular transaction or a
sub-advisor’s overall responsibilities to the accounts under its management. PGI
or a sub-advisor generally pays additional commission amounts for such research
services. Statistical data and research information received from brokers or
dealers as described above may be useful in varying degrees and PGI or a
sub-advisor may use it in servicing some or all of the accounts it
manages.
PGI
and the sub-advisors allocated portfolio transactions for the Funds indicated in
the following table to certain brokers for the year ended August 31, 2023 due to
research services provided by such brokers. The table also indicates the
commissions paid to such brokers as a result of these portfolio
transactions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Amount
of Transactions because of Research Services Provided |
Related
Commissions Paid |
Blue
Chip |
$1,722,939,618 |
$380,580 |
Diversified
Real Asset |
1,181,166,705 |
808,259 |
Edge
MidCap |
33,619,013 |
11,308 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
232,798,885 |
95,314 |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
15,016,052 |
8,615 |
International
Equity Index |
434,635,642 |
214,412 |
International
Small Company |
488,874,601 |
322,031 |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
2,960,406,161 |
586,448 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
583,838,569 |
277,795 |
Subject
to the rules promulgated by the SEC, as well as other regulatory requirements,
the Board has approved procedures whereby a Fund may purchase securities that
are offered in underwritings in which an affiliate of a sub‑advisor, or PGI,
participates. These procedures prohibit a Fund from directly or indirectly
benefiting a sub‑advisor affiliate or PGI affiliate in connection with such
underwritings. In addition, for underwritings where a sub-advisor affiliate or
PGI participates as a principal underwriter, certain restrictions may apply that
could, among other things, limit the amount of securities that a Fund could
purchase in the underwritings. The sub-advisor shall determine the amounts and
proportions of orders allocated to the sub-advisor or affiliate. The Board will
receive quarterly reports on these transactions.
The
Board has approved procedures that permit a Fund to effect a purchase or sale
transaction between the Fund and any other affiliated investment company or
between a Fund and affiliated persons of the Fund under limited circumstances
prescribed by SEC Rules. Any such transaction must be effected without any
payment other than a cash payment for the securities, for which a market
quotation is readily available, at the current market price; must be consistent
with the investment objective, investment strategy, and risk profile of the
Fund; and no brokerage commission or fee (except for customary transfer fees),
or other remuneration may be paid in connection with the transaction. The Board
will receive quarterly reports on these transactions.
The
Board has also approved procedures that permit a Fund’s sub-advisor(s) to place
portfolio trades with an affiliated broker under circumstances prescribed by SEC
Rules 17e-1 and 17a-10. The procedures require that total commissions, fees, or
other remuneration received or to be received by an affiliated broker must be
reasonable and fair compared to the commissions, fees, or other remuneration
received by other brokers in connection with comparable transactions involving
similar securities being purchased or sold on a securities exchange during a
comparable time period. The Board will receive quarterly reports on these
transactions.
Purchases
and sales of debt securities and money market instruments usually are principal
transactions; portfolio securities are normally purchased directly from the
issuer or from an underwriter or marketmakers for the securities. Such
transactions are usually conducted on a net basis with a Fund paying no
brokerage commissions. Purchases from underwriters include a commission or
concession paid by the issuer to the underwriter, and the purchases from dealers
serving as marketmakers include the spread between the bid and asked
prices.
The
following table shows the brokerage commissions paid during the periods
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Total
Brokerage Commissions Paid for Periods Ended August 31 |
Fund |
2023 |
2022 |
2021 |
Blue
Chip |
$676,534 |
$1,124,327 |
$753,316 |
Bond
Market Index |
6,550 |
3,100 |
1,113 |
Capital
Securities |
— |
— |
— |
Diversified
Real Asset |
1,949,929 |
2,790,121 |
2,070,760 |
Edge
MidCap |
22,898 |
143,600 |
233,178 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
229,490 |
214,062 |
265,244 |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
19,207 |
N/A |
N/A |
International
Equity Index |
411,944 |
145,622 |
168,042 |
International
Small Company |
836,811 |
1,136,409 |
1,015,533 |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
— |
529 |
860 |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
1,425,797 |
1,255,281 |
1,875,966 |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
450,627 |
321,101 |
1,035,762 |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
184,867 |
208,830 |
175,793 |
Primary
reasons for changes in several Funds’ brokerage commissions for the three years
were changes in commission rates; changes in Fund size; changes in market
conditions; changes in money managers of certain Funds; and implementation of
investment strategies. In some cases, such events required substantial portfolio
restructurings, resulting in increased securities transactions and brokerage
commissions.
In
particular, primary reasons for changes in brokerage commissions for those Funds
with relatively greater variations for the three years were, in part: for the
International Equity Index Fund, increased trading volumes and increased
portfolio turnover for 2023 when compared to 2022.
Brokerage
commissions from the portfolio transactions effected for the Funds were paid to
brokers affiliated with PGI or such Fund's sub-advisors for the fiscal years
ended August 31 as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Sub-Advisor
Employed by the Fund Complex |
Affiliated
Broker |
2023 Fund's
Total Commissions Paid |
%
of Fund's Total Commissions |
%
of Dollar Amount of Fund's Commissionable Transactions |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
| Spectrum
Asset Management |
SAMI
Brokerage LLC |
$176,543 |
95.50% |
98.96% |
Total |
$176,543 |
95.50% |
98.96% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Sub-Advisor
Employed by the Fund Complex |
Affiliated
Broker |
2022 Fund's
Total Commissions Paid |
%
of Fund's Total Commissions |
%
of Dollar Amount of Fund's Commissionable Transactions |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
| Spectrum
Asset Management |
SAMI
Brokerage LLC |
$82,547 |
39.53% |
95.82% |
Total |
$82,547 |
39.53% |
95.82% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Sub-Advisor
Employed by the Fund Complex |
Affiliated
Broker |
2021 Fund's
Total Commissions Paid |
%
of Fund's Total Commissions |
%
of Dollar Amount of Fund's Commissionable Transactions |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
| Spectrum
Asset Management |
SAMI
Brokerage LLC |
$74,814 |
42.56% |
89.50% |
Total |
$74,814 |
42.56% |
89.50% |
Material
differences, if any, between the percentage of a Fund’s brokerage commissions
paid to a broker and the percentage of transactions effected through that broker
reflect the commission rates the sub-advisor has negotiated with the broker.
Commission rates a sub-advisor pays to brokers may vary and reflect such factors
as the trading volume placed with a broker, the type of security, the market in
which a security is traded and the trading volume of that security, the types of
services provided by the broker (i.e., execution services only or additional
research services), and the quality of a broker’s execution.
The
following table indicates the value of each Fund’s aggregate holdings, in
thousands, of the securities of its regular brokers or dealers for the fiscal
year ended August 31, 2023.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Holdings
of Securities of Principal Funds, Inc. Regular Brokers and
Dealers |
Fund |
Broker
or Dealer |
Holdings
(in
thousands) |
Bond
Market Index |
Bank
of Montreal |
$1,374 |
| Bank
of New York Mellon Corp/The |
2,573 |
| Barclays
PLC |
4,400 |
| Citigroup
Inc |
9,926 |
| Credit
Suisse AG |
813 |
| Goldman
Sachs Group Inc/The |
9,970 |
| Jefferies
Group LLC |
156 |
| JPMorgan
Chase & Co |
13,495 |
| Morgan
Stanley |
13,321 |
| Royal
Bank of Canada |
3,873 |
| UBS
Group AG |
483 |
| Wells
Fargo & Co |
10,482 |
Capital
Securities |
Bank
of New York Mellon Corp/The |
$44,681 |
| Barclays
PLC |
24,528 |
| Citigroup
Inc |
26,439 |
| Goldman
Sachs Group Inc/The |
9,343 |
| JPMorgan
Chase & Co |
19,434 |
| UBS
Group AG |
33,282 |
| Wells
Fargo & Co |
14,321 |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
Bank
of New York Mellon Corp/The |
$190 |
| Barclays
PLC |
551 |
| Goldman
Sachs Group Inc/The |
972 |
| JPMorgan
Chase & Co |
427 |
| Morgan
Stanley |
400 |
| UBS
Group AG |
692 |
| Wells
Fargo & Co |
383 |
International
Equity Index |
Barclays
PLC |
$2,243 |
|
UBS
Group AG |
6,745 |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
Bank
of New York Mellon Corp/The |
$59,626 |
| Barclays
PLC |
151,982 |
| Citigroup
Inc |
225,281 |
| Goldman
Sachs Group Inc/The |
78,444 |
| JPMorgan
Chase & Co |
224,150 |
| Morgan
Stanley |
28,860 |
| UBS
Group AG |
99,472 |
| Wells
Fargo & Co |
199,646 |
Allocation
of Trades
By
the Manager (PGI).
PGI has its own trading platform and personnel that perform trade-related
functions. Where applicable, PGI trades on behalf of its own clients. Such
transactions are executed in accordance with PGI’s trading policies and
procedures, including, but not limited to, trade allocations and order
aggregation, purchase of new issues, and directed brokerage. PGI acts as
discretionary investment advisor for a variety of individual accounts, ERISA
accounts, registered investment companies, insurance company separate accounts,
and public employee retirement plans and places orders to trade portfolio
securities for each of these accounts. Managing multiple accounts may give rise
to potential conflicts of interest including, for example, conflicts among
investment strategies and conflicts in the allocation of investment
opportunities. PGI has adopted and implemented policies and procedures that it
believes address the potential conflicts associated with managing accounts for
multiple clients and are designed to ensure that all clients are treated fairly
and equitably. These procedures include allocation policies and procedures and
internal review processes.
If,
in carrying out the investment objectives of its respective clients, occasions
arise in which PGI deems it advisable to purchase or sell the same equity
securities for two or more client accounts at the same or approximately the same
time, PGI may submit the orders to purchase or sell to a broker/dealer for
execution on an aggregate or “bunched” basis. PGI will not aggregate orders
unless it believes that aggregation is consistent with (1) its duty to seek best
execution and (2) the terms of its investment advisory agreements. In
distributing the securities purchased or the proceeds of sale to the client
accounts participating in a bunched trade, no advisory account will be favored
over any other account and each account that participates in an aggregated order
will participate at the average share price for all transactions of PGI relating
to that aggregated order on a given business day, with all transaction costs
relating to that aggregated order shared on a pro rata basis.
Because
of PGI’s role as investment advisor to each of the Funds and discretionary
advisor to funds of funds and some underlying funds, conflicts may arise in
connection with the services PGI provides to funds of funds with respect to
asset class and target weights for each asset class and investments made in
underlying funds. PGI also provides advisory services to funds that have
multiple investment advisors (“Multi-Managed Funds”). These services include
determining the portion of a Multi-Managed Fund’s portfolio to be allocated to
an advisor. Conflicts may arise in connection with the services PGI provides to
the funds of funds that it manages, in connection with the services PGI provides
to other funds of funds and Multi-Managed Funds, for the following
reasons:
•PGI
serves as the investment advisor to the underlying funds in which the funds of
funds invest, sometimes as the discretionary advisor, and an affiliated
investment advisor may serve as sub-advisor to the funds in which a fund of
funds may invest. This raises a potential conflict because PGI’s or an
affiliated company’s profit margin may vary depending upon the underlying fund
in which the funds of funds invest.
•PGI
or an affiliated person may serve as investment advisor to a portion of a
Multi-Managed Fund. In addition, PGI might recommend that an affiliated person
serve as sub-advisor to a portion of a Multi-Managed Fund. This raises a
potential conflict because PGI’s or an affiliated investment advisor’s profit
margin may vary depending on the extent to which a Multi-Managed Fund’s assets
are managed by PGI or allocated to an affiliated advisor.
•A
sub-advisor may determine that the asset class PFI has hired it to manage (for
example, small capitalization growth stocks) can be managed effectively only by
limiting the amount of money devoted to the purchase of securities in the asset
class. In such a case, a sub-advisor may impose a limit on the amount of money
PFI may place with the sub-advisor for management. When a sub-advisor for two or
more PFI Funds imposes such a limit, PGI and/or the sub-advisor may need to
determine which Fund will be required to limit its investment in the asset class
and the degree to which the Fund will be so limited. PGI and the sub-advisor may
face a conflict of interest in making its determination.
PGI
implements the following in an effort to limit the appearance of conflicts of
interest and the opportunity for events that could trigger an actual conflict of
interest:
•PGI
implements a process for selecting underlying funds that emphasizes the
selection of funds within the Principal Funds Complex that are determined to be
consistent with the fund of fund’s objective and principal investment
strategies. However, PGI will select an unaffiliated underlying fund managed by
an unaffiliated sub-advisor when deemed necessary or appropriate based upon a
consideration of the Fund’s objective and investment strategies and available
expertise and resources within the Principal organization.
•PGI
uses a process to select investment advisors that emphasizes the selection of
PGI or Principal-affiliated sub-advisors that are determined to be qualified
under PGI’s due diligence process. However, PGI will select an unaffiliated
sub-advisor to manage all or a portion of a Fund’s portfolio when deemed
necessary or appropriate based upon a consideration of the Fund’s objective and
investment strategies and available expertise and resources within the Principal
organization.
•PGI
provides ongoing oversight of the Funds’ investments to monitor adherence to
their investment program.
By
the Sub-Advisors. The
portfolio managers of each sub-advisor manage a number of accounts other than
the Funds’ portfolios, including in some instances proprietary or personal
accounts. Managing multiple accounts may give rise to potential conflicts of
interest, including, for example, conflicts among investment strategies,
allocating time and attention to account management, allocation of investment
opportunities, knowledge of and timing of fund trades, selection of brokers and
dealers, and compensation for the account. Each has adopted and implemented
policies and procedures that it believes address the potential conflicts
associated with managing accounts for multiple clients and personal accounts and
are designed to ensure that all clients and client accounts are treated fairly
and equitably. These procedures include allocation policies and procedures,
personal trading policies and procedures, internal review processes, and, in
some cases, review by independent third parties.
Investments
the sub-advisor deems appropriate for a Fund’s portfolio may also be deemed
appropriate by it for other accounts. Therefore, the same security may be
purchased or sold at or about the same time for both the Fund’s portfolio and
other accounts. In such circumstances, the sub-advisor may determine that orders
for the purchase or sale of the same security for the Fund’s portfolio and one
or more other accounts should be combined. In this event, the transactions will
be priced and allocated in a manner deemed by the sub-advisor to be equitable
and in the best interests of the Fund’s portfolio and such other accounts. While
in some instances combined orders could adversely affect the price or volume of
a security, the Fund believes that its participation in such transactions on
balance will produce better overall results for the Fund.
PURCHASE
AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES
Purchase
of Shares
Participating
insurance companies and certain other designated organizations are authorized to
receive purchase orders on the Funds’ behalf, and those organizations are
authorized to designate their agents and affiliates as intermediaries to receive
purchase orders. Purchase orders are deemed received by a Fund when authorized
organizations, their agents, or affiliates receive the order. The Funds are not
responsible for the failure of any designated organization or its agents or
affiliates to carry out its obligations to its customers. Class A shares of the
Funds are purchased at their public offering price, and other share classes of
the Funds are purchased at the net asset value (“NAV”) per share, as determined
at the close of the regular trading session of the NYSE next occurring after a
purchase order is received and accepted by an authorized agent of a Fund. In
order to receive a day’s price, an order must be received in good order by the
close of the regular trading session of the NYSE as described below in “Pricing
of Fund Shares.”
All
income dividend and capital gains distributions, if any, on a Fund's Class S
shares are paid out in cash. All income dividends and capital gains
distributions, if any, on a Fund’s Institutional Class and Classes R-1, R-3,
R-4, R-5, and R-6 shares are reinvested automatically in additional shares of
the same class of the same Fund. Dividends and capital gains distributions, if
any, on a Fund’s Classes A, C, and J shares are reinvested automatically in
additional shares of the same Class of shares of the same Fund unless the
shareholder elects to take dividends in cash. The reinvestment will be made at
the NAV determined on the first business day following the record
date.
The
Fund, at its discretion, may permit the purchase of shares using securities as
consideration (a purchase in-kind).
For
information related to Class S shares, see the section in this SAI entitled
“Multiple Class Structure.”
Class
R-1 Shares
Effective
January 31, 2017, the Registrant no longer offers Class R-1 shares for purchase
from new retirement plans, except in limited circumstances. However, if a
retirement plan currently offers Class R-1 shares, such plan will be allowed to
continue to invest in this share class through Funds it currently offers in its
plans or Funds it adds to its plans.
Abandoned
or Orphaned Accounts
In
order to invest in shares of Principal Funds, a shareholder’s account must have
a registered broker-dealer on file with us when the account is established. If
an active account does not have a registered broker-dealer on file, we consider
the account to be an “abandoned or orphaned account”. If we determine in our
discretion that an account is abandoned or orphaned, we will take the following
actions:
•Notify
the shareholder in writing as to the account’s status and request that the
account(s) be moved to another registered broker-dealer;
•Remove
the broker/dealer from the account. If the shareholder does not request
another registered broker/dealer to be added to the account, Principal
Shareholder Services, Inc. (“PSS”), the Funds’ Transfer Agent, will hold the
accounts until another registered broker/dealer is added to the account.
PSS is not a broker-dealer and does not offer investment advice;
and
•No
initial sales charge will apply to purchases of Fund shares while PSS is holding
the account.
Sales
of Shares
Payment
for shares tendered for redemption is ordinarily made in cash. The Fund may
determine, however, that it would be detrimental to the remaining shareholders
to make payment of a redemption order wholly or partly in cash. The Fund may,
therefore, pay the redemption proceeds in whole or in part by a distribution “in
kind” of securities from the Fund’s portfolio in lieu of cash. If the Fund pays
the redemption proceeds in kind, the redeeming shareholder might incur brokerage
or other costs in selling the securities for cash. The Fund will value
securities used to pay redemptions in kind using the same method the Fund uses
to value its portfolio securities as described below in “Pricing of Fund
Shares.”
The
right to require the Funds to redeem their shares may be suspended, or the date
of payment may be postponed, whenever: 1) trading on the NYSE is restricted, as
determined by the SEC, or the NYSE is closed except for holidays and weekends;
2) the SEC permits such suspension and so orders; or 3) an emergency exists as
determined by the SEC so that disposal of securities or determination of NAV is
not reasonably practicable.
Certain
designated organizations are authorized to receive sell orders on the Fund’s
behalf and those organizations are authorized to designate their agents and
affiliates as intermediaries to receive redemption orders. Redemption orders are
deemed received by the Fund when authorized organizations, their agents, or
affiliates receive the order. The Fund is not responsible for the failure of any
designated organization or its agents or affiliates to carry out its obligations
to its customers.
For
information related to Class S shares, see the section in this SAI entitled
“Multiple Class Structure.”
Exchanges
Between Classes of Shares
Class
S shares of the Capital Securities Fund are not subject to
exchange.
Through
your financial intermediary, in certain limited circumstances, you may become
eligible to exchange shares of a Fund you own for shares of a different class of
the same Fund, if you become eligible to purchase shares of such different class
of the same Fund through your account with your financial intermediary. The
following shows the permitted exchanges, subject to the conditions described
herein:
|
|
|
|
| |
Exchange
From Class |
Exchange
To Class |
A |
Institutional |
C |
A,
Institutional |
Institutional |
A,
C, R-6 |
R-6 |
Institutional |
Such
same-Fund exchanges between share classes are permitted, subject to conditions
including, but not limited to, the following:
•You
or your retirement plan sponsor must be eligible to purchase shares of the class
into which the exchange is to occur;
•Your
financial intermediary or the retirement plan sponsor's financial intermediary
must have an agreement with the underwriter or transfer agent of Principal Funds
allowing the purchase of such share class for you;
•The
Fund must offer shares of such class of such Fund in your state or the state of
the retirement plan sponsor;
•In
order to exchange into Class A shares, you must be eligible to: (i) purchase
Class A shares with no initial sales charge; or (ii) exchange into Class A
shares through your financial intermediary with no initial sales
charge;
•Depending
on the circumstances, for exchanges from Classes A and C shares there may be a
contingent deferred sales charge in connection with the exchange;
and
•Any
such exchange must be requested by your financial intermediary or retirement
plan sponsor (with approval by the Distributor) and, except as otherwise
approved by the Distributor, must result from either (i) the financial
intermediary seeking to have shares of the Funds on their platform held in a
particular share class, (ii) the share class becoming available to your
financial intermediary or Financial Professional through a new relationship, or
(iii) your retirement plan sponsor electing to have shares of the Funds offered
as part of the plan investment options held in a particular share
class.
If,
after purchasing Institutional Class shares, you become ineligible to invest in
Institutional Class shares, you may be permitted to exchange from Institutional
Class shares into other share classes issued by the same Fund if your financial
intermediary determines you qualify for such an exchange.
You
should check with your financial intermediary to see if the exchange you wish to
complete will satisfy the conditions. Your ability to exchange between share
classes of the same Fund may be limited by the operational limitations of your
financial intermediary. Please consult your Financial Professional for more
information.
While
such an exchange may not be considered a taxable event for income tax purposes,
you should consult with your tax advisor regarding possible federal, state,
local, and foreign tax consequences.
PRICING
OF FUND SHARES
Each
Fund’s shares are bought and sold at the current net asset value (“NAV”) per
share. Each Fund’s NAV for each class is calculated each day the New York Stock
Exchange (“NYSE”) is open, as of the close of business of the NYSE (normally
3:00 p.m. Central Time). The NAV of Fund shares is not determined on days the
NYSE is closed (generally, New Year’s Day; Martin Luther King, Jr. Day;
Washington’s Birthday/Presidents’ Day; Good Friday; Memorial Day; Juneteenth,
Independence Day; Labor Day; Thanksgiving Day; and Christmas). When an order to
buy or sell shares is received, the share price used to fill the order is the
next price calculated after the order is received in proper form.
The
Funds will not treat an intraday unscheduled disruption in NYSE trading as a
closure of the NYSE and will price shares as of 3:00 p.m. Central Time, if the
particular disruption directly affects only the NYSE.
For
all Funds the share price is calculated by:
•taking
the current market value of the total assets of the Fund,
•subtracting
liabilities of the Fund,
•dividing
the remainder proportionately into the classes of the Fund,
•subtracting
the liability of each class, and
•dividing
the remainder by the total number of shares owned in that class.
In
determining NAV, securities listed on an Exchange, the Nasdaq National Market,
and any foreign markets within the Western Hemisphere are valued at the closing
prices on such markets, or if such price is lacking for the trading period
immediately preceding the time of determination, such securities are valued at
their current bid price.
Municipal
securities held by the Funds are traded primarily in the over-the-counter
market. Valuations of such securities are furnished by one or more pricing
services employed by the Funds and are based upon appraisals obtained by a
pricing service, in reliance upon information concerning market transactions and
quotations from recognized municipal securities dealers.
Other
securities that are traded on the over-the-counter market are valued at their
closing bid prices. Each Fund will determine the market value of individual
securities held by it, by using prices provided by one or more professional
pricing services that may provide market prices to other funds, or, as needed,
by obtaining market quotations from independent broker-dealers. Debt securities
with remaining maturities of sixty days or less for which market quotations and
information furnished by a third-party pricing service are not readily available
will be valued at amortized cost, which approximates current value. Securities
for which quotations are not readily available, and other assets, are valued at
fair value determined in good faith under procedures established by and under
the supervision of the Board.
A
Fund’s securities may be traded on foreign securities markets that close each
day prior to the time the NYSE closes. In addition, foreign securities trading
generally or in a particular country or countries may not take place on all
business days in New York. The Fund has adopted policies and procedures to “fair
value” some or all securities held by a Fund. These fair valuation procedures
are intended to discourage shareholders from investing in the Fund for the
purpose of engaging in market timing or arbitrage transactions. The values of
foreign securities used in computing share price are determined at the time the
foreign market closes. Foreign securities and currencies are converted to U.S.
dollars using the exchange rate in effect at the close of the NYSE.
Occasionally, events affecting the value of foreign securities occur when the
foreign market is closed and the NYSE is open. The NAV of a Fund investing in
foreign securities may change on days when shareholders are unable to purchase
or redeem shares. If the Manager believes that the market value is materially
affected, the share price will be calculated using the policy adopted by the
Fund.
Certain
securities issued by companies in emerging markets may have more than one quoted
valuation at any point in time, sometimes referred to as a “local” price and a
“premium” price. The premium price is often a negotiated price that may not
consistently represent a price at which a specific transaction can be effected.
It is the policy of the Funds to value such securities at prices at which it is
expected those shares may be sold, and PGI is authorized to make such
determinations subject to the oversight of the Board as may from time to time be
necessary.
Appendix
B provides a specimen price-make-up sheet showing how the Fund calculates the
total offering price per share.
TAX
CONSIDERATIONS
Qualification
as a Regulated Investment Company
Each
Fund intends to qualify annually to be treated as a regulated investment company
(“RIC”) under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “IRC”), by
satisfying certain requirements prescribed by Subchapter M of the IRC. To
qualify as a RIC, a Fund must invest in assets that produce types of income
specified in the IRC (“Qualifying Income”). Whether the income from derivatives,
swaps, commodity-linked derivatives, and other commodity/natural
resource-related securities is Qualifying Income is unclear under current law.
Accordingly, a Fund’s ability to invest in certain derivatives, swaps,
commodity-linked derivatives, and other commodity/natural resource-related
securities may be restricted. Further, if a Fund does invest in these types of
securities and the income is not determined to be Qualifying Income, it may
cause the Fund to fail to qualify as a RIC under the IRC for a given year. In
addition, a Fund must satisfy certain diversification tests under the IRC to
qualify as a RIC. If a Fund fails to qualify as a RIC for a particular year, it
will be liable for taxes, significantly reducing its distributions to
shareholders and eliminating shareholders’ ability to treat distributions (as
long- or short-term capital gains or qualifying dividends) of the Fund in the
manner they were received by the Fund.
Futures
Contracts and Options
As
previously discussed, some of the Funds invest in futures contracts or options
thereon, index options, or options traded on qualified exchanges. For federal
income tax purposes, capital gains and losses on futures contracts or options
thereon, index options, or options traded on qualified exchanges are generally
treated as 60% long-term and 40% short-term. In addition, the Funds must
recognize any unrealized gains and losses on such positions held at the end of
the fiscal year. A Fund may elect out of such tax treatment, however, for a
futures or options position that is part of an “identified mixed straddle” such
as a put option purchased with respect to a portfolio security. Gains and losses
on futures and options included in an identified mixed straddle are considered
100% short-term, and unrealized gains or losses on such positions are not
realized at year-end. The straddle provisions of the IRC may require the
deferral of realized losses to the extent that a Fund has unrealized gains in
certain offsetting positions at the end of the fiscal year. The IRC may also
require recharacterization of all or a part of losses on certain offsetting
positions from short-term to long-term, as well as adjustment of the holding
periods of straddle positions.
International
Funds
Some
foreign securities purchased by the Funds may be subject to foreign withholding
taxes that could reduce the yield on such securities. The amount of such foreign
taxes is expected to be insignificant. Shareholders of the Funds that invest in
foreign securities may be entitled to claim a credit or deduction with respect
to foreign taxes. The Funds may from year to year make an election to pass
through such taxes to shareholders. If such election is not made, any foreign
taxes paid or accrued will represent an expense to each affected Fund that will
reduce its investment company taxable income. Certain Funds may purchase
securities of certain foreign corporations considered to be passive foreign
investment companies by the IRS. In order to avoid taxes and interest that must
be paid by the Funds if these instruments appreciate in value, the Funds may
make various elections permitted by the tax laws. However, these elections could
require that the Funds recognize additional taxable income, which in turn must
be distributed. In addition, the Fund’s investments in foreign securities or
foreign currencies may increase or accelerate the Fund’s recognition of ordinary
income and may affect the timing or amount of the Fund’s
distributions.
Under
the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (“FATCA”), a Fund may be required to
withhold a 30% tax on (a) dividends paid by the Fund, and (b) certain capital
gain distributions and/or the proceeds arising from the sale of Fund shares paid
by the Fund after December 31, 2018, to certain foreign entities, referred to as
foreign financial institutions or non-financial foreign entities, that fail to
comply (or be deemed compliant) with extensive new reporting and withholding
requirements designed to inform the U.S. Department of the Treasury of
U.S.-owned foreign investment accounts. The IRS recently issued proposed
regulations indicating its intent to eliminate the 30% withholding tax on gross
proceeds. A Fund may disclose the information that it receives from its
shareholders to the IRS, non-U.S. taxing authorities or other parties as
necessary to comply with FATCA. Withholding also may be required if a foreign
entity that is a shareholder of a Fund fails to provide the Fund with
appropriate certifications or other documentation concerning its status under
FATCA.
Special
Tax Considerations for the Opportunistic Municipal Fund (the “Municipal
Fund”)
The
Municipal Fund also intends to qualify to pay “exempt-interest dividends” to its
shareholders. An exempt-interest dividend is that part of dividend distributions
made by the Fund that consist of interest received by that Fund on tax-exempt
municipal obligations. Shareholders incur no federal income taxes on
exempt-interest dividends. However, these exempt-interest dividends may be
taxable under state or local law. Exempt-interest dividends that derive from
certain private activity bonds must be included by individuals as a preference
item in determining whether they are subject to the alternative minimum tax. The
Fund may also pay ordinary income dividends and distribute capital gains from
time to time. Ordinary income dividends and distributions of capital gains, if
any, are taxable for federal purposes.
If
a shareholder receives an exempt-interest dividend with respect to shares of the
Fund held for six months or less, then any loss on the sale or exchange of such
shares, to the extent of the amount of such dividend, is disallowed. If a
shareholder receives a capital gain dividend with respect to shares held for six
months or less, then any loss on the sale or exchange of such shares is treated
as a long-term capital loss to the extent the loss exceeds any exempt-interest
dividend received with respect to such shares, and is disallowed to the extent
of such exempt-interest dividend.
Interest
on indebtedness incurred or continued by a shareholder to purchase or carry
shares of this Fund is not deductible. Furthermore, entities or persons who are
“substantial users” (or related persons) under Section 147(a) of the IRC of
facilities financed by private activity bonds should consult their tax advisors
before purchasing shares of the Fund.
From
time to time, proposals have been introduced before Congress for the purpose of
restricting or eliminating the federal income tax exemption for interest on
municipal obligations. If legislation is enacted that eliminates or
significantly reduces the availability of municipal obligations, it could
adversely affect the ability of the Fund to continue to pursue its investment
objective and policies. In such event, the Fund would reevaluate its investment
objective and policies.
PORTFOLIO
HOLDINGS DISCLOSURE
The
Funds may publish month-end portfolio holdings information for each Fund’s
portfolio on the www.PrincipalAM.com website on the thirteenth business day of
the following month. The Funds may also occasionally publish information on the
websites relating to specific events, such as the impact of a natural disaster,
corporate debt default, or similar events on portfolio holdings.
The Funds may also occasionally publish information on the websites concerning
the removal, addition, or change in weightings of underlying funds in which the
funds of funds invest. It is the Funds’ policy to disclose only public
information regarding portfolio holdings (i.e., information published on the
websites or filed with the SEC), except as described below.
Non-Specific
Information. Under
the Portfolio Holdings Disclosure Policy, the Funds may distribute non-specific
information about the Funds and/or summary information about the Funds as
requested. Such information will not identify any specific portfolio holding,
but may reflect, among other things, the quality, character, or sector
distribution of a Fund’s holdings. This information may be made available at any
time (or without delay).
Policy.
The
Funds and PGI have adopted a policy of disclosing non-public portfolio holdings
information to third parties only to the extent required by federal law, and to
the following third parties, so long as such third party has agreed, or is
legally obligated, to maintain the confidentiality of the information and to
refrain from using such information to engage in securities
transactions:
1)Daily
to the Funds’ portfolio pricing services, Bloomberg LP, ICE Data Services, J.P.
Morgan PricingDirect, Inc., and IHS Markit Partners, to obtain prices for
portfolio securities;
2)Upon
proper request to government regulatory agencies or to self-regulatory
organizations;
3)As
needed to Ernst & Young LLP, the independent registered public accounting
firm, in connection with the performance of the services provided by Ernst &
Young LLP to the Funds;
4)To
the sub-advisors’ proxy service providers (Broadridge Financial Solutions, LLC,
Glass Lewis & Co., and Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS)) to
facilitate voting of proxies;
5)To
the Funds’ custodian, The Bank of New York Mellon, in connection with the
custodial services it provides to the Funds; and
6)Kessler,
Topaz,
Meltzer
&
Check,
LLP,
in
connection
with
legal
services
it
provides
to
the
Funds.
The
Funds are also permitted to enter into arrangements to disclose portfolio
holdings to other third parties in connection with the performance of a
legitimate business purpose if such third party agrees in writing to maintain
the confidentiality of the information prior to the information being disclosed.
Any such written agreement must be approved by an officer of the Funds, PGI, or
the Fund’s sub-advisor. Approval must be based on a reasonable belief that
disclosure to such other third party is in the best interests of the Fund’s
shareholders. If a conflict of interest is identified in connection with
disclosure to any such third party, the Fund’s or PGI’s Chief Compliance Officer
(“CCO”) must approve such disclosure, in writing, before it occurs. The Funds
currently have disclosure agreements with the following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Abacus
Group LLC |
Clearpar
(Markit) |
LiquidNet |
Abel
Noser |
Confluence
Technologies |
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, LP |
ACA
Compliance Alpha |
Deutsche
Bank |
Markit
WSO Services |
ACA
Market Abuse Surveillance Module |
DTCC
OASYS |
Microsoft
Azure |
Accenture |
Dynamo
Software |
Morgan
Stanley |
Advent
Axys |
Eagle |
Morningstar,
Inc. |
Advent
APX |
Eagle
Investment Systems Corp. |
MSCI |
Advent
Geneva |
Electra |
MSCI
ESG Risk Metrics |
Allvue
Systems |
Electra
Information Systems |
MSCI
- Risk Metrics |
Ashland
Partners |
Essentia
Analytics |
Natixis
Investment Managers |
Askia,
LLC |
Everest
(Allvue Systems) |
Northern
Trust |
Assette |
FactSet |
Northern
Trust Integrated Trading Solutions |
Bank
of America |
FactSet
Research Systems Inc. |
Omgeo
LLC |
Barra |
Financial
Recovery Technologies (FRT) |
PORTIA
(SS&C Technologies) |
BlackRock
Aladdin |
Financial
Tracking Technologies LLC |
Qontigo
(Axioma Risk System) |
BlackRock
Institutional Trust Company, N.A. |
FIS
Global Asset Management |
Russell
Investments Implementation |
Bloomberg
AIM |
FIS
PTA |
Services,
LLC |
Bloomberg
LP |
Global
Trading Analytics |
S3 |
Bloomberg
Port |
Goldman
Sachs |
SEI
Global Services, Inc. |
Bloomberg
Professional Services |
Gresham
Technologies |
SEI
Investments Co |
BNY
Mellon |
ICE
Data Pricing & Reference Data |
SS&C
Advent |
Broadridge
Business Process Outsourcing |
ICE
Liquidity |
SS&C
(Evare) |
Solutions,
LLC |
IHS
Markit LTD |
SS&C
Eze |
Broadridge
Financial Solutions Inc. / |
INDATA |
SS&C
Vision FI |
Proxy
Edge |
Indus
Valley Partners (IVP) |
State
Street Bank & Trust |
Brown
Brothers Harriman |
InvestCloud
Inc |
SWIFT |
Charles
River |
Investment
Company Institute (ICI) |
TSI
(Virtus) |
Charles
River Development |
JP
Morgan |
Virtu
Americas LLC |
Charles
River Trading System |
LexisNexis |
Virtus
Shared Services |
Any
agreement by which any Fund or any party acting on behalf of the Fund agrees to
provide Fund portfolio information to a third party, other than a third party
identified in the policy described above, must be approved prior to information
being provided to the third party, unless the third party is a regulator or has
a duty to maintain the confidentiality of such information and to refrain from
using such information to engage in securities transactions. A written record of
approval will be made by the person granting approval.
The
Funds’ non-public portfolio holdings information policy applies without
variation to individual investors, institutional investors, intermediaries that
distribute the Funds’ shares, third-party service providers, rating and ranking
organizations, and affiliated persons of the Funds. Neither the Funds nor PGI
nor any other party receives compensation in connection with the disclosure of
Fund portfolio information. The Funds’ CCO will periodically, but no less
frequently than annually, review the Funds’ portfolio holdings disclosure policy
and recommend changes the CCO believes are appropriate, if any, to the Board. In
addition, the Board must approve any change in the Funds’ portfolio holdings
disclosure policy that would expand the distribution of such
information.
PROXY
VOTING POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
The
Board has delegated responsibility for decisions regarding proxy voting for
securities held by each Fund to PGI or to the Fund’s sub-advisor, as
appropriate. PGI and each sub-advisor will vote such proxies in accordance with
its proxy policies and procedures, which have been reviewed by the Board, and
which are found in Appendix C. Any material changes to the proxy policies and
procedures will be submitted to the Board for approval.
In
addition, the sub-advisor, with respect to the Global Sustainable Listed
Infrastructure Fund, intends to vote proxies in accordance with the Fund’s
sustainable investing strategy as disclosed in its Prospectus.
For
Funds that participate in a securities lending program, the voting rights for
securities that are loaned are transferred to the borrower. Therefore, the
lender (i.e., a Fund) is not entitled to vote the loaned securities, unless it
recalls those securities. Those managing the Fund’s investments may recall
securities for voting purposes when they reasonably believe the ability to vote
such securities outweighs the additional revenue received if such securities
were not recalled.
Information
regarding how the Funds voted proxies relating to portfolio securities during
the most recent 12-month period ended June 30, 2023, is available, without
charge, upon request, by calling 1-800-222-5852 or by accessing the Funds’ most
recently filed Form N-PX on the SEC website at www.sec.gov.
FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS
The
financial statements of the Funds at August 31, 2023, are incorporated herein by
reference to the Funds' most recent Annual
Report to Shareholders
filed with the SEC on Form N-CSR.
INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Ernst
& Young LLP (700 Nicollet Mall, Suite 500, Minneapolis, MN 55402) is the
independent registered public accounting firm for the Fund Complex.
CONTROL
PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES
The
following list identifies shareholders who own more than 25% of the voting
securities of a Fund as of November 30, 2023. It
is presumed that a person who owns more than 25% of the voting securities of a
Fund controls the Fund. A control person could control the outcome of proposals
presented to shareholders for approval. The information is listed in
alphabetical order by Fund.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Percent
of
Ownership |
Shareholder
Name and Address |
Jurisdiction
Under
Which
Control
Person
is
Organized
(when
control
person
is a
company) |
Parent
of Control
Person
(when control
person
is a company) |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES |
30.90% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
DELAWARE |
MORGAN
STANLEY |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
| |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
| |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES |
30.46% |
MLPF&S |
NEW
YORK |
BANK
OF AMERICA |
|
| FOR
THE SOLE BENEFIT OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
| CORPORATION |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
| |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
| |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP |
28.64% |
AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE INVESTMENT SVC |
MN |
AMERIPRISE
FINANCIAL, INC. |
|
| FBO
#41999970 |
| |
|
| 707
2ND AVE S |
| |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55402-2405 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
GLOBAL |
62.48% |
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES INC |
IOWA
|
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL |
SUSTAINABLE
LISTED |
| PUBLIC
SEED ACCOUNT |
| GROUP,
INC. |
INFRASTRUCTURE |
| ATTN
GAM INVACCT ACA TEAM G-016-S40 |
| |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
| |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-9992 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
GLOBAL |
29.59% |
CHURCH
OF GOD BENEFITS BOARD INC |
TEXAS |
NOT
APPLICABLE |
SUSTAINABLE
LISTED |
| PO
BOX 4608 |
| |
INFRASTRUCTURE |
| CLEVELAND
TN 37320-4608 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
Percent
of
Ownership |
Shareholder
Name and Address |
Jurisdiction
Under
Which
Control
Person
is
Organized
(when
control
person
is a
company) |
Parent
of Control
Person
(when control
person
is a company) |
INTERNATIONAL |
31.74% |
PRINCIPAL
LIFE INS COMPANY CUST |
IOWA |
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL |
EQUITY
INDEX |
| FBO
PFG OMNIBUS WRAPPED AND CUSTOM |
|
SERVICES,
INC.(1) |
|
| ATTN
PLIC PROXY COORDINATOR |
| |
|
| FUNDS |
| |
|
| 711
HIGH STREET |
| |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL |
26.29% |
DIVERSIFIED
GROWTH ACCOUNT |
MARYLAND |
PRINCIPAL
FUNDS, INC. |
EQUITY
INDEX |
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
| |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
| |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
|
29.89% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
DELAWARE |
FIDELITY
GLOBAL |
MUNICIPAL
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
| BROKERAGE
GROUP, INC. |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
| a
wholly owned subsidiary |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
| of
FMR, LLC |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
| |
|
|
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING |
41.35% |
PRINCIPAL
GLOBAL INVESTORS TRUST CO |
DELAWARE |
PRINCIPAL
HOLDING |
MARKETS |
| PRINCIPAL
LIFETIME HYBRID |
|
COMPANY,
LLC(1) |
|
| COLLECTIVE
INVESTMENT FUNDS |
| |
|
| 1300
SW 5TH AVE STE 3300 |
| |
|
| PORTLAND
OR 97201-5640 |
| |
(1)Principal
Financial Group, Inc. is the parent of Principal Financial Services, Inc.;
Principal Financial Services, Inc. is the parent both of Principal Life
Insurance Company and of Principal Global Holding Company (US), LLC; Principal
Life Insurance Company is the parent of Principal Holding Company, LLC.;
Principal Global Holding Company (US), LLC is the parent of Principal Global
Investors, LLC.
The
Board Members and officers of the Funds, member companies of the Principal
Financial Group, and certain other persons may purchase shares of the Funds
without the payment of any sales charge. The sales charge is waived on these
transactions because there are either no distribution costs or only minimal
distribution costs associated with the transactions. For a description of the
persons entitled to a waiver of sales charge in connection with their purchase
of shares of the Funds, see the discussion of the waiver of sales charges under
the caption “Choosing a Share Class and the Costs of Investing” in the
Prospectus.
Funds
that operate as funds of funds and Principal Life Insurance Company will vote in
the same proportion as shares of the Funds owned by other shareholders.
Therefore, neither the funds of funds nor Principal Life Insurance Company
exercise voting discretion.
A
quorum must be present at a meeting of shareholders for business to be
transacted. PFI's Bylaws state that a quorum is the presence in person or by
proxy of the holders of one-third of the shares of capital stock of PFI or, when
the meeting relates to a certain Fund, that Fund, issued and outstanding and
entitled to vote on the record date.
Certain
proposals presented to shareholders for approval require the vote of a “majority
of the outstanding voting securities,” which is a term defined in the 1940 Act
to mean, with respect to a Fund, the affirmative vote of the lesser of 1) 67% or
more of the voting securities of the Fund present at the meeting of that Fund,
if the holders of more than 50% of the outstanding voting securities of the Fund
are present in person or by proxy, or 2) more than 50% of the outstanding voting
securities of the Fund).
Principal
Holders of Securities
The
Registrant is unaware of any persons who own beneficially (but are not
shareholders of record) 5% or more of any class of the Funds’ outstanding
shares. The
following list identifies the shareholders of record who own 5% or more of any
class of the Funds’ outstanding shares as of November 30, 2023.
The list is presented in alphabetical order by Fund.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
BLUE
CHIP (A) |
53.30% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (C) |
18.37% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (C) |
15.54% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR THE |
|
| EXCLUSIVE
BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (C) |
11.45% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
|
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (C) |
8.63% |
STIFEL
NICOLAUS & CO INC |
|
| EXCLUSIVE
BENEFIT OF CUSTOMERS |
|
| 501
N BROADWAY |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63102-2188 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (C) |
8.58% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN STREET |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (C) |
8.40% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
28.10% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
11.58% |
AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE INVESTMENT SVC |
|
| FBO
#41999970 |
|
| 707
2ND AVE S |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55402-2405 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
10.51% |
LPL
FINANCIAL |
|
| OMNIBUS
CUSTOMER ACCOUNT |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND TRADING |
|
| 4707
EXECUTIVE DR |
|
| SAN
DIEGO CA 92121-3091 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
9.29% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
7.28% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN STREET |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
6.84% |
PERSHING
LLC |
|
| 1
PERSHING PLZ |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07399-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
6.19% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
|
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (I) |
6.10% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R3) |
35.60% |
SAMMONS
INSTITUTIONAL GROUP |
|
| 8300
MILLS CIVIC PKWY |
|
| WDM
IA 50266-3833 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R3) |
31.49% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R3) |
9.72% |
STATE
STREET BANK CUST |
|
| FBO
ADP ACCESS PRODUCT 401(K) PLAN |
|
| 1
LINCOLN ST |
|
| BOSTON
MA 02111-2900 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R3) |
5.39% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
SSP AMERICAN DEF COMP PLAN |
|
| ATTN
SUSAN SAGGIONE |
|
| 1013
CENTRE RD |
|
| WILMINGTON
DE 19805-1265 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
BLUE
CHIP (R4) |
42.36% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R4) |
16.45% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
FIRST COUNTY BANK |
|
| NQ
DEF COMP AND SERP |
|
| ATTN
PLAN TRUSTEE |
|
| 1013
CENTRE RD |
|
| WILMINGTON
DE 19805-1265 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R4) |
15.55% |
STATE
STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY |
|
| TRUSTEE
AND/OR CUSTODIAN |
|
| FBO
ADP ACCESS PRODUCT |
|
| 1
LINCOLN ST |
|
| BOSTON
MA 02111-2901 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R4) |
6.72% |
BRIDGES
INC |
|
| FBO
EXEC 457F OF BRIDGES INC |
|
| ATTN
CHRISTY KNUTSON |
|
| 3600
POWER INN RD STE C |
|
| SACRAMENTO
CA 95826-3826 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R5) |
53.92% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R5) |
36.24% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
26.17% |
PRINCIPAL
LIFE INS COMPANY CUST |
|
| FBO
PFG OMNIBUS WRAPPED AND CUSTOM |
|
| ATTN
PLIC PROXY COORDINATOR - FUNDS |
|
| 711
HIGH STREET |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
7.27% |
SAM
BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING -H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
6.96% |
LIFETIME
2040 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
6.64% |
SAM
CONS GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
6.44% |
LIFETIME
2030 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING- H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
5.62% |
LIFETIME
2050 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BLUE
CHIP (R6) |
5.41% |
SAM
STRATEGIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
19.18% |
SAM
FLEXIBLE INCOME PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
11.47% |
LIFETIME
HYBRID 2030 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
10.48% |
SAM
BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING -H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
9.85% |
SAM
CONS BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
9.82% |
LIFETIME
HYBRID 2025 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
7.26% |
LIFETIME
HYBRID 2020 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (I) |
6.55% |
LIFETIME
HYBRID 2035 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R1) |
77.22% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R1) |
15.17% |
STATE
STREET BANK CUST |
|
| FBO
ADP ACCESS LARGE MARKET |
|
| 401(K)
PLAN |
|
| 1
LINCOLN ST |
|
| BOSTON
MA 02111-2901 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R3) |
61.21% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R3) |
8.25% |
EQUIPMENT
DEVELOPMENT CO INC |
|
| ATTN
PLAN TRUSTEE |
|
| FBO
EDCO NQ DEF COMP PLAN |
|
| 100
THOMAS JOHNSON DR |
|
| FREDERICK
MD 21702-4600 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R3) |
5.58% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
EXEC NQ EXCESS OF |
|
| MAGNECOMP
CORP |
|
| ATTN
SUSAN SAGGIONE |
|
| 1013
CENTRE RD |
|
| WILMINGTON
DE 19805-1265 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R4) |
59.01% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R4) |
21.01% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
ISS FACILITY SERVICES HLDNG INC |
|
| EX
DC PLN |
|
| ATTN
PLAN TRUSTEE |
|
| 1013
CENTRE RD |
|
| WILMINGTON
DE 19805-1265 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R5) |
41.87% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R5) |
23.12% |
FEDERAL
REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST |
|
| FBO
FEDERAL REALTY INVESTMENT TRUST |
|
| ATTN
VICKIE RALLS |
|
| 1626
E JEFFERSON ST |
|
| ROCKVILLE
MD 20852-4041 |
|
| |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R5) |
5.68% |
BANKERS
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
IPSOS AMERICA INC. NQ EXCESS |
|
| ATTN
DEBBIE WILLIAMS |
|
| 453
7TH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50309-4110 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
BOND
MARKET INDEX (R5) |
5.39% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| ATTN
SUSAN SAGGIONE |
|
| FBO
LT INCENTIVE PERFORMANCE OF MTSI |
|
| 1013
CENTRE RD |
|
| WILMINGTON
DE 19805-1265 |
|
| |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES (S) |
30.91% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES (S) |
30.47% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES (S) |
15.46% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR THE |
|
| EXCLUSIVE
BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES (S) |
5.13% |
RBC
CAPITAL MARKETS LLC |
|
| MUTUAL
FUND OMNIBUS PROCESSING |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND OPS MANAGER |
|
| 250
NICOLLET MALL SUITE 1400 |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55401-7554 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (A) |
22.18% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (A) |
19.22% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 101
MONTGOMERY ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94104-4151 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (A) |
5.53% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (A) |
5.10% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR THE |
|
| EXCLUSIVE
BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (I) |
23.34% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (I) |
22.29% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C |
|
| FOR
THE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 101
MONTGOMERY ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94104-4151 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (I) |
8.07% |
CAPINCO
C/O US BANK NA |
|
| 1555
N RIVERCENTER DR STE 302 |
|
| MILWAUKEE
WI 53212-3958 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (I) |
7.11% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (R3) |
96.98% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
BLUE ROCK REFINISHING SOLUTIONS LLC |
|
| CASH
BALANCE PLAN |
|
| 2974
CLEVELAND AVE N |
|
| SAINT
PAUL MN 55113-1101 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (R6) |
15.63% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (R6) |
8.64% |
SAM
BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING -H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (R6) |
6.61% |
SAM
CONS GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (R6) |
6.49% |
CAPINCO
C/O US BANK NA |
|
| 1555
N RIVERCENTER DR STE 302 |
|
| MILWAUKEE
WI 53212-3958 |
|
| |
DIVERSIFIED
REAL ASSET (R6) |
6.13% |
PRINCIPAL
LIFE INS COMPANY CUST |
|
| FBO
PFG OMNIBUS WRAPPED AND CUSTOM |
|
| ATTN
PLIC PROXY COORDINATOR - FUNDS |
|
| 711
HIGH STREET |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (A) |
23.24% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (A) |
19.76% |
AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE INVESTMENT SVC |
|
| FBO
#41999970 |
|
| 707
2ND AVE S |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55402-2405 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
EDGE
MIDCAP (A) |
11.02% |
MINNESOTA
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY |
|
| 400
ROBERT ST N STE A |
|
| SAINT
PAUL MN 55101-2099 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (A) |
5.08% |
MATRIX
TRUST COMPANY CUST FBO |
|
| GEBHARDT
& SMITH LLP |
|
| 717
17TH STREET SUITE 1300 |
|
| DENVER
CO 80202-3304 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (I) |
57.02% |
AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE INVESTMENT SVC |
|
| FBO
#41999970 |
|
| 707
2ND AVE S |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55402-2405 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (I) |
8.27% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (I) |
7.36% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN STREET |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (I) |
6.32% |
ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ADMINISTRATOR |
|
| C/O
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL ID 636 |
|
| SEI
PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY |
|
| ONE
FREEDOM VALLEY DRIVE |
|
| OAKS
PA 19456-9989 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (I) |
5.93% |
PRINCIPAL
GLOBAL INVESTORS LLC |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (R6) |
39.37% |
TIAA
TRUST, N.A. AS CUST/TTEE |
|
| OF
RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| RECORD
KEPT BY TIAA |
|
| ATTN:
FUND OPERATIONS |
|
| 8500
ANDREW CARNEGIE BLVD |
|
| CHARLOTTE
NC 28262-8500 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (R6) |
27.16% |
JASCO
& CO |
|
| 800
PHILADELPHIA ST |
|
| INDIANA
PA 15701-3908 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (R6) |
10.72% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (R6) |
7.90% |
ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ADMINISTRATOR |
|
| C/O
TRUIST ID 866 |
|
| SEI
PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY |
|
| ONE
FREEDOM VALLEY DRIVE |
|
| OAKS
PA 19456-9989 |
|
| |
EDGE
MIDCAP (R6) |
5.97% |
C/O
REGIONS |
|
| 1
FREEDOM VALLEY DR |
|
| OAKS
PA 19456-9989 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (A) |
29.46% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (A) |
13.96% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (A) |
13.08% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (A) |
6.26% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (I) |
22.73% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (I) |
21.70% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (I) |
15.00% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (I) |
5.48% |
UBS
WM USA |
|
| 0O0
11011 6100 |
|
| OMNI
ACCOUNT M/F |
|
| SPEC
CDY A/C EBOC UBSFSI |
|
| 1000
HARBOR BLVD |
|
| WEEHAWKEN
NJ 07086-6761 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (I) |
5.32% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (I) |
5.11% |
AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE INVESTMENT SVC |
|
| FBO
#41999970 |
|
| 707
2ND AVE S |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55402-2405 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (R6) |
39.85% |
WELLS
FARGO BANK NA |
|
| PO
BOX 1533 |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55480-1533 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (R6) |
18.98% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 2 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (R6) |
11.03% |
PRINCIPAL
LIFE INS COMPANY CUST |
|
| FBO
PFG OMNIBUS WRAPPED AND CUSTOM |
|
| ATTN
PLIC PROXY COORDINATOR - FUNDS |
|
| 711
HIGH STREET |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (R6) |
10.36% |
MORI
& CO |
|
| 922
WALNUT ST |
|
| MAILSTOP
TBTS 2 |
|
| KANSAS
CITY MO 64106-1802 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
MULTI-STRATEGY (R6) |
8.88% |
ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ADMINISTRATOR |
|
| C/O
PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL ID 636 |
|
| SEI
PRIVATE TRUST COMPANY |
|
| ONE
FREEDOM VALLEY DRIVE |
|
| OAKS
PA 19456-9989 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
SUSTAINABLE LISTED |
62.48% |
PRINCIPAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES INC |
INFRASTRUCTURE
(I) |
| PUBLIC
SEED ACCOUNT |
|
| ATTN
GAM INVACCT ACA TEAM G-016-S40 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-9992 |
|
| |
GLOBAL
SUSTAINABLE LISTED |
29.59% |
CHURCH
OF GOD BENEFITS BOARD INC |
INFRASTRUCTURE
(I) |
| PO
BOX 4608 |
|
| CLEVELAND
TN 37320-4608 |
GLOBAL
SUSTAINABLE LISTED |
5.02% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
INFRASTRUCTURE
(I) |
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (I) |
41.91% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| FBO
SPECIAL CUSTODY ACCOUNTS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (I) |
19.91% |
LPL
FINANCIAL |
|
| OMNIBUS
CUSTOMER ACCOUNT |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND TRADING |
|
| 4707
EXECUTIVE DR |
|
| SAN
DIEGO CA 92121-3091 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (I) |
14.65% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (I) |
12.26% |
PIMS/PRUDENTIAL
RETIREMENT |
|
| AS
NOMINEE FOR THE TTEE/CUST PL 008 |
|
| EMPIRE
TODAY, LLC 401(K) |
|
| 333
NORTHWEST AVE |
|
| NORTHLAKE
IL 60164-1604 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R1) |
45.07% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R1) |
27.02% |
FIIOC
FBO |
|
| CENTRAL
PARK INSURANCE AGENCY INC |
|
| EMPLOYEES
PROFIT SHARING PLAN |
|
| 100
MAGELLAN WAY |
|
| COVINGTON
KY 41015-1987 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R1) |
20.17% |
FIIOC |
|
| FBO
KEITH PORTER INSULATION |
|
| &
FIREPLACE 401K PLAN |
|
| 100
MAGELLAN WAY (KW1C) |
|
| COVINGTON
KY 41015-1987 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R1) |
7.26% |
FIIOC |
|
| FBO
HOSPICE OF SOUTH TEXAS |
|
| PROFIT
SHARING & 401K PLAN |
|
| 100
MAGELLAN WAY (KW1C) |
|
| COVINGTON
KY 41015-1987 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R3) |
60.74% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R4) |
41.14% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R4) |
24.74% |
STATE
STREET BANK AND TRUST COMPANY |
|
| TRUSTEE
AND/OR CUSTODIAN |
|
| FBO
ADP ACCESS PRODUCT |
|
| 1
LINCOLN ST |
|
| BOSTON
MA 02111-2901 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R4) |
5.75% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
|
| FBO
LESLIE GABER ASSOC INC |
|
| CASH
BALANCE PLAN |
|
| 24
HILLCREST DR |
|
| COLTS
NECK NJ 07722-2227 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R4) |
5.02% |
ND
PAPER INC |
|
| ATTN
PLAN TRUSTEE |
|
| FBO
ND PAPER DEFERRED COMP PLAN |
|
| 1901
S MEYERS ROAD |
|
| OAKBROOK
TERRACE IL 60181-5243 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R5) |
53.54% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
|
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R5) |
21.45% |
WACHOVIA
BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION |
|
| FBO
DEF COMP PLAN OF CED INC (PS |
|
| ATTN
SHELLEY ANDERSON |
|
| DEF |
|
| ONE
WEST FOURTH STREET |
|
| WINSTON-SALEM
NC 27101-3818 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R5) |
9.31% |
FIIOC |
|
| FBO
PATTERSON & DEWAR ENGINEERS INC |
|
| 100
MAGELLAN WAY |
|
| COVINGTON
KY 41015-1987 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R6) |
35.04% |
PRINCIPAL
LIFE INS COMPANY CUST |
|
| FBO
PFG OMNIBUS WRAPPED AND CUSTOM |
|
| ATTN
PLIC PROXY COORDINATOR - FUNDS |
|
| 711
HIGH STREET |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R6) |
29.02% |
DIVERSIFIED
GROWTH ACCOUNT |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY INDEX (R6) |
13.26% |
DIVERSIFIED
GROWTH VOLATILITY |
|
| CONTROL
ACCOUNT |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (I) |
62.15% |
PERSHING
LLC |
|
| 1
PERSHING PLZ |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07399-0001 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (I) |
12.02% |
THE
GRABLE FOUNDATION |
|
| 701
MARKET ST STE 1100 |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63101-1867 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (I) |
9.81% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (I) |
7.93% |
PRINCIPAL
GLOBAL INVESTORS LLC |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (R6) |
12.99% |
LIFETIME
2040 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (R6) |
12.01% |
LIFETIME
2030 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING- H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (R6) |
10.52% |
LIFETIME
2050 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (R6) |
7.32% |
SAM
STRATEGIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (R6) |
6.87% |
SAM
BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING -H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
INTERNATIONAL
SMALL COMPANY (R6) |
6.39% |
SAM
CONS GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (A) |
29.08% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (A) |
17.79% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (A) |
8.53% |
RBC
CAPITAL MARKETS LLC |
|
| MUTUAL
FUND OMNIBUS PROCESSING |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND OPS MANAGER |
|
| 250
NICOLLET MALL SUITE 1400 |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55401-7554 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (A) |
6.62% |
AMERICAN
ENTERPRISE INVESTMENT SVC |
|
| FBO
#41999970 |
|
| 707
2ND AVE S |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55402-2405 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (I) |
30.15% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (I) |
19.35% |
UBS
WM USA |
|
| 0O0
11011 6100 |
|
| OMNI
ACCOUNT M/F |
|
| SPEC
CDY A/C EBOC UBSFSI |
|
| 1000
HARBOR BLVD |
|
| WEEHAWKEN
NJ 07086-6761 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (I) |
17.85% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (I) |
7.80% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
|
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
OPPORTUNISTIC
MUNICIPAL (I) |
5.94% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (A) |
37.25% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (I) |
52.56% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (I) |
35.52% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (I) |
10.39% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FBO CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN STREET |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (R6) |
42.68% |
PRINCIPAL
GLOBAL INVESTORS TRUST CO |
|
| PRINCIPAL
LIFETIME HYBRID |
|
| COLLECTIVE
INVESTMENT FUNDS |
|
| 1300
SW 5TH AVE STE 3300 |
|
| PORTLAND
OR 97201-5640 |
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (R6) |
11.66% |
PRINCIPAL
LIFE INS COMPANY CUST |
|
| FBO
PFG OMNIBUS WRAPPED AND CUSTOM |
|
| ATTN
PLIC PROXY COORDINATOR - FUNDS |
|
| 711
HIGH STREET |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
ORIGIN
EMERGING MARKETS (R6) |
5.34% |
LIFETIME
2040 FUND |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (A) |
16.77% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (A) |
13.49% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (A) |
7.86% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (A) |
7.54% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (A) |
6.84% |
UBS
WM USA |
|
| 0O0
11011 6100 |
|
| OMNI
ACCOUNT M/F |
|
| SPEC
CDY A/C EBOC UBSFSI |
|
| 1000
HARBOR BLVD |
|
| WEEHAWKEN
NJ 07086-6761 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (A) |
5.86% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
|
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (C) |
23.72% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (C) |
18.82% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
|
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (C) |
16.78% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (C) |
5.22% |
UBS
WM USA |
|
| 0O0
11011 6100 |
|
| OMNI
ACCOUNT M/F |
|
| SPEC
CDY A/C EBOC UBSFSI |
|
| 1000
HARBOR BLVD |
|
| WEEHAWKEN
NJ 07086-6761 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (I) |
22.24% |
UBS
WM USA |
|
| 0O0
11011 6100 |
|
| OMNI
ACCOUNT M/F |
|
| SPEC
CDY A/C EBOC UBSFSI |
|
| 1000
HARBOR BLVD |
|
| WEEHAWKEN
NJ 07086-6761 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (I) |
21.30% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
|
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (I) |
11.82% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (I) |
11.52% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
|
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (I) |
5.61% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 2 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (I) |
5.54% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
|
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (R6) |
21.16% |
SAM
BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING -H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (R6) |
19.10% |
SAM
STRATEGIC GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (R6) |
18.39% |
SAM
FLEXIBLE INCOME PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (R6) |
16.54% |
SAM
CONS GROWTH PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (R6) |
5.79% |
KENTUCKY
PUBLIC EMPLOYEES DEFERRED |
|
| COMPENSATION
AUTHORITY |
|
| C/O
NATIONWIDE |
|
| PO
BOX 182029 |
|
| COLUMBUS
OH 43218-2029 |
|
| |
SMALL-MIDCAP
DIVIDEND INCOME (R6) |
5.41% |
SAM
CONS BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
19.41% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (A) |
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR EAST 3RD FL |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
14.16% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (A) |
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
13.59% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (A) |
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
9.26% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (A) |
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
5.09% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (A) |
| FBO
SPECIAL CUSTODY ACCOUNTS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 211
MAIN ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94105-1901 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
22.14% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (C) |
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
17.50% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (C) |
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
12.42% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (C) |
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
12.20% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (C) |
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR EAST 3RD FL |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
5.98% |
PERSHING
LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (C) |
| 1
PERSHING PLZ |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07399-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
12.87% |
LPL
FINANCIAL |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| OMNIBUS
CUSTOMER ACCOUNT |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND TRADING |
|
| 4707
EXECUTIVE DR |
|
| SAN
DIEGO CA 92121-3091 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
11.51% |
RAYMOND
JAMES |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| OMNIBUS
FOR MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| HOUSE
ACCT FIRM 92500015 |
|
| ATTN:
COURTNEY WALLER |
|
| 880
CARILLON PKWY |
|
| ST
PETERSBURG FL 33716-1102 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
10.95% |
WELLS
FARGO CLEARING SERVICES LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY ACCT FOR |
|
| THE
EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF CUSTOMER |
|
| 2801
MARKET ST |
|
| SAINT
LOUIS MO 63103-2523 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
10.58% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
10.19% |
MORGAN
STANLEY SMITH BARNEY LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| FOR
THE EXCLUSIVE BENE OF ITS CUST |
|
| 1
NEW YORK PLZ FL 12 |
|
| NEW
YORK NY 10004-1965 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
10.11% |
NATIONAL
FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| FOR
THE EXCL BENE OF OUR CUSTOMERS |
|
| 499
WASHINGTON BLVD |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS DEPT 4TH FL |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07310-1995 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
7.34% |
PERSHING
LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| 1
PERSHING PLZ |
|
| JERSEY
CITY NJ 07399-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
5.96% |
CHARLES
SCHWAB & CO INC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (I) |
| SPECIAL
CUSTODY A/C FOR THE |
|
| BENEFIT
OF CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUNDS |
|
| 101
MONTGOMERY ST |
|
| SAN
FRANCISCO CA 94104-4151 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
54.81% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R1) |
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
40.99% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R1) |
| FBO
CONCORP CONCRETE INC DEFINED |
|
| BENEFIT
PENSION PLAN |
|
| 2485
ASHCROFT AVE |
|
| CLOVIS
CA 93611-6001 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
19.66% |
SAMMONS
INSTITUTIONAL GROUP |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| 8300
MILLS CIVIC PKWY |
|
| WDM
IA 50266-3833 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
18.70% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
11.81% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| FBO
BLUE ROCK REFINISHING SOLUTIONS LLC |
|
| CASH
BALANCE PLAN |
|
| 2974
CLEVELAND AVE N |
|
| SAINT
PAUL MN 55113-1101 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
8.90% |
PIMS/PRUDENTIAL
RETIREMENT |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| AS
NOMINEE FOR THE TTEE/CUST PL 765 |
|
| ACME
MONACO CORPORATION 401(K) |
|
| 75
WINCHELL RD |
|
| NEW
BRITAIN CT 06052-1017 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
7.76% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| FBO
RVVS CASH BALANCE PLAN |
|
| 15900
JORDAN AVE SE |
|
| PRIOR
LAKE MN 55372-2051 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
6.80% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 2 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
6.58% |
FIDELITY
INVESTMENTS INST OPER CO |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| INC
FBO HAY DISTRIBUTING |
|
| 100
MAGELLAN WAY (KW1C) |
|
| COVINGTON
KY 41015-1999 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
5.82% |
UBS
WM USA |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| 0O0
11011 6100 |
|
| OMNI
ACCOUNT M/F |
|
| SPEC
CDY A/C EBOC UBSFSI |
|
| 1000
HARBOR BLVD |
|
| WEEHAWKEN
NJ 07086-6761 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
5.66% |
FIIOC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R3) |
| FBO
FLETCHER TILTON PC |
|
| PROFIT
SHARING PLAN AND TRUST |
|
| 100
MAGELLAN WAY |
|
| COVINGTON
KY 41015-1987 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
98.04% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R4) |
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund/Class |
Percentage
of Ownership |
Name
and Address of Owner |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
36.55% |
DCGT
AS TTEE AND/OR CUST |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R5) |
| FBO
PLIC VARIOUS RETIREMENT PLANS |
|
| OMNIBUS |
|
| ATTN
NPIO TRADE DESK |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
32.27% |
VANGUARD
FIDUCIARY TRUST CO |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R5) |
| FBO
401K CLIENTS |
|
| ATTN
INVESTMENT SERVICES |
|
| PO
BOX 2600 |
|
| VALLEY
FORGE PA 19482-2600 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
15.09% |
JOHN
HANCOCK TRUST COMPANY LLC |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R5) |
| 200
BERKELEY ST STE 7 |
|
| BOSTON
MA 02116-5038 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
10.56% |
PRINCIPAL
TRUST COMPANY |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R5) |
| FBO
NQ DB OF AAA ARIZONA |
|
| ATTN
SUSAN SAGGIONE |
|
| 1013
CENTRE RD |
|
| WILMINGTON
DE 19805-1265 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
20.83% |
WELLS
FARGO BANK NA FBO |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R6) |
| OMNIBUS
CASH - XXXX0 |
|
| PO
BOX 1533 |
|
| MINNEAPOLIS
MN 55480-1533 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
15.75% |
MLPF&S
FOR THE SOLE |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R6) |
| BENEFIT
OF ITS CUSTOMERS |
|
| ATTN
FUND ADMINISTRATION |
|
| 4800
DEER LAKE DR E FL 3 |
|
| JACKSONVILLE
FL 32246-6484 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
14.10% |
SAM
BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R6) |
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING -H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
10.56% |
SAM
FLEXIBLE INCOME PORTFOLIO PIF |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R6) |
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
|
| |
SPECTRUM
PREFERRED AND |
7.51% |
SAM
CONS BALANCED PORTFOLIO PIF |
CAPITAL
SECURITIES INCOME (R6) |
| ATTN
MUTUAL FUND ACCOUNTING-H221 |
|
| 711
HIGH ST |
|
| DES
MOINES IA 50392-0001 |
Management
Ownership
As
of November 30, 2023, the Board Members and officers of the Funds, as a group,
owned less than 1% of the outstanding shares of any class of any of the
Funds.
PORTFOLIO
MANAGER DISCLOSURE
(as
provided by the Investment Advisors)
This
section contains information about portfolio managers and the other accounts
they manage, their compensation, and their ownership of securities. The
“Ownership of Securities” tables reflect the portfolio managers’ beneficial
ownership, which means a direct or indirect pecuniary interest. For some
portfolio managers, this includes beneficial ownership of Fund shares through
participation in an employee benefit program that invests in Principal Funds,
Inc. For information about potential material conflicts of interest, see
Brokerage Allocation and Other Practices - Allocation of Trades.
This
section lists information about PGI’s portfolio managers first. Next, the
section includes information about the sub-advisors’ portfolio managers
alphabetically by sub-advisor.
Information
in this section is as of August 31, 2023, unless otherwise noted.
Advisor:
Principal Global Investors, LLC (Principal Asset Allocation Portfolio
Managers)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Jessica
S. Bush:
Diversified Real Asset and Global Multi-Strategy Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$8.9 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Benjamin
E. Rotenberg:
Diversified Real Asset and Global Multi-Strategy Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$8.9 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
May
Tong:
Diversified Real Asset and Global Multi-Strategy Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$8.9 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Compensation
PGI
offers the Funds’ investment team a competitive compensation structure that is
evaluated annually relative to other global asset management firms to ensure its
continued competitiveness and alignment with industry best practices. The
objective of the structure is to offer market competitive compensation that
aligns individual and team contributions with firm and client performance
objectives in a manner that is consistent with industry standards and business
results.
Compensation
for each Fund’s investment team is comprised of base salary and variable
incentive components. As team members advance in their careers, the variable
component increases in its proportion commensurate with responsibility levels.
The variable component is designed to reinforce investment performance, firm
performance, team collaboration, regulatory compliance, operational excellence,
client retention, and client satisfaction. Investment performance is measured on
a pre-tax basis against relative client benchmarks and peer groups over
one-year, three-year, and five-year periods, calculated quarterly, reinforcing a
longer-term orientation.
Payments
under the variable incentive plan may be in the form of cash or a combination of
cash and deferred compensation. The amount of variable compensation delivered in
the form of deferred compensation depends on the size of an individual’s
incentive award as it relates to a tiered deferral scale. Deferred compensation
is required to be invested into Principal Financial Group (“PFG”) restricted
stock units and funds managed by the team via a co-investment program. Both
payment vehicles are subject to a three-year vesting schedule. The overall
measurement framework and the deferred component are well aligned with our
desired focus on clients’ objectives (e.g., co-investment), alignment with PFG
stakeholders, and talent retention.
In
addition to deferred compensation obtained through their compensation
programming, team members have investments acquired through their participation
in the PFG employee stock purchase plan, retirement plans, and direct personal
investments. It should be noted that PFG’s retirement plans and deferred
compensation plans generally utilize its non-registered group separate accounts
or commingled vehicles rather than the traditional mutual funds. However, in
each instance these vehicles are managed in lockstep alignment with the mutual
funds (i.e., “clones”).
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Jessica
S. Bush |
Diversified
Real Asset |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Jessica
S. Bush |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
$10,001
- $50,000 |
Benjamin
E. Rotenberg |
Diversified
Real Asset |
$10,001
- $50,000 |
Benjamin
E. Rotenberg |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
May
Tong |
Diversified
Real Asset |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
May
Tong |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
$1
- $10,000 |
Advisor:
Principal Global Investors, LLC (Principal Edge Portfolio Managers)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Lauren
Choi:
Edge MidCap and Small-MidCap Dividend Income Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
9 |
$210.7 million |
0 |
$0 |
Daniel
R. Coleman:
Edge MidCap and Small-MidCap Dividend Income Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
5 |
$13.2 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
2 |
$315.5 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
45 |
$3.4 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Theodore
Jayne:
Edge MidCap Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
2 |
$3.8 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
9 |
$210.7 million |
0 |
$0 |
Sarah
E. Radecki:
Small-MidCap Dividend Income Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
3 |
$9.4 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
2 |
$315.5 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
35 |
$3.2 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Compensation
PGI
offers the Funds’ investment team a competitive compensation structure that is
evaluated annually relative to other global asset management firms to ensure its
continued competitiveness and alignment with industry best practices. The
objective of the structure is to offer market competitive compensation that
aligns individual and team contributions with firm and client performance
objectives in a manner that is consistent with industry standards and business
results.
Compensation
for each Fund’s investment team is comprised of base salary and variable
incentive components. As team members advance in their careers, the variable
component increases in its proportion commensurate with responsibility levels.
The variable component is designed to reinforce delivery of investment
performance, firm performance, team collaboration, regulatory compliance,
operational excellence, client retention, and client satisfaction. Investment
performance is measured on a pre-tax basis against relative client benchmarks
and peer groups over one-year, three-year, and five-year periods, calculated
quarterly, reinforcing a longer-term orientation.
Payments
under the variable incentive plan may be in the form of cash or a combination of
cash and deferred compensation. The amount of variable compensation delivered in
the form of deferred compensation depends on the size of an individual’s
incentive award as it relates to a tiered deferral scale. Deferred compensation
is required to be invested into Principal Financial Group (“PFG”) restricted
stock units and funds managed by the team via a co-investment program. Both
payment vehicles are subject to a three-year vesting schedule. The overall
measurement framework and the deferred component are well aligned with our
desired focus on clients’ objectives (e.g., co-investment), alignment with PFG
stakeholders, and talent retention.
In
addition to deferred compensation obtained through their compensation
programming, team members have investments acquired through their participation
in the PFG employee stock purchase plan, retirement plans, and direct personal
investments. It should be noted that PFG’s retirement plans and deferred
compensation plans generally utilize its non-registered group separate accounts
or commingled vehicles rather than the traditional mutual funds. However, in
each instance these vehicles are managed in lockstep alignment with the mutual
funds (i.e., “clones”).
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Lauren
Choi |
Edge
MidCap |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Lauren
Choi(1) |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Daniel
R. Coleman |
Edge
MidCap |
Over
$1,000,000 |
Daniel
R. Coleman |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
Over
$1,000,000 |
Theodore
Jayne |
Edge
MidCap |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Sarah
E. Radecki |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
Over
$1,000,000 |
(1)Information
as of November 30, 2023
Advisor:
Principal Global Investors, LLC (Principal Equities Portfolio
Managers)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Tiffany
N. Lavastida:
International Small Company Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
5 |
$80.5 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
2 |
$1.6 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
14 |
$1.6 billion |
0 |
$0 |
K.
William Nolin:
Blue Chip Fund |
Registered
Investment Companies |
7 |
$31.4 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$2.8 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
67 |
$13.4 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Tyler
O'Donnell:
International Equity Index Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
20 |
$15.9 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$43.6 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
2 |
$2.1 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Brian
W. Pattinson: International
Small Company Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$1.5 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$2.3 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
41 |
$4.6 billion |
2 |
$502.1 million |
Tom
Rozycki:
Blue Chip Fund |
Registered
Investment Companies |
7 |
$31.4 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$2.8 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
67 |
$13.4 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Aaron
J. Siebel:
International Equity Index Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
30 |
$18.7 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$43.6 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
2 |
$2.1 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Compensation
PGI
offers the Funds’ investment team a competitive compensation structure that is
evaluated annually relative to other global asset management firms to ensure its
continued competitiveness and alignment with industry best practices. The
objective of the structure is to offer market competitive compensation that
aligns individual and team contributions with firm and client performance
objectives in a manner that is consistent with industry standards and business
results.
Compensation
for each Fund’s investment team is comprised of base salary and variable
incentive components. As team members advance in their careers, the variable
component increases in its proportion commensurate with responsibility levels.
The variable component is designed to reinforce delivery of investment
performance, firm performance, team collaboration, regulatory compliance,
operational excellence, client retention, and client satisfaction. Investment
performance is measured on a pre-tax basis against relative client benchmarks
and peer groups over one-year, three-year, and five-year periods, calculated
quarterly, reinforcing a longer-term orientation.
Payments
under the variable incentive plan may be in the form of cash or a combination of
cash and deferred compensation. The amount of variable compensation delivered in
the form of deferred compensation depends on the size of an individual’s
incentive award as it relates to a tiered deferral scale. Deferred compensation
is required to be invested into Principal Financial Group (“PFG”) restricted
stock units and funds managed by the team via a co-investment program. Both
payment vehicles are subject to a three-year vesting schedule. The overall
measurement framework and the deferred component are well aligned with our
desired focus on clients’ objectives (e.g., co-investment), alignment with PFG
stakeholders, and talent retention.
In
addition to deferred compensation obtained through their compensation
programming, team members have investments acquired through their participation
in the PFG employee stock purchase plan, retirement plans, and direct personal
investments. It should be noted that PFG’s retirement plans and deferred
compensation plans generally utilize its non-registered group separate accounts
or commingled vehicles rather than the traditional mutual funds. However, in
each instance these vehicles are managed in lockstep alignment with the mutual
funds (i.e., “clones”).
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Tiffany
N. Lavastida |
International
Small Company |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
K.
William Nolin |
Blue
Chip |
Over
$1,000,000 |
Tyler
O'Donnell |
International
Equity Index |
None |
Brian
W. Pattinson |
International
Small Company |
Over
$1,000,000 |
Tom
Rozycki |
Blue
Chip |
Over
$1,000,000 |
Aaron
J. Siebel |
International
Equity Index |
None |
Advisor:
Principal Global Investors, LLC (Principal Fixed Income Portfolio
Managers)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Jeff
Callahan: Bond
Market Index Fund |
Registered
Investment Companies |
2 |
$2.7 billion
|
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
3 |
$11.2 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
1 |
$3.4
billion |
0 |
$0 |
James
Noble:
Opportunistic Municipal Fund |
Registered
Investment Companies |
3 |
$1.2 billion
|
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
4 |
$67.9 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
13 |
$719.1 million |
0 |
$0 |
Darryl
Trunnel:
Bond Market Index Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
13 |
$3.8 billion |
1 |
$544.0 million |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
20 |
$14.7 billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
33 |
$10.6 million |
4 |
$780.1 million |
James
Welch:
Opportunistic Municipal Fund |
Registered
Investment Companies |
3 |
$1.2 billion
|
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
4 |
$67.9 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
13 |
$719.1 million |
0 |
$0 |
Compensation
PGI
offers the Funds’ investment team a competitive compensation structure that is
evaluated annually relative to other global asset management firms to ensure its
continued competitiveness and alignment with industry best practices. The
objective of the structure is to offer market competitive compensation that
aligns individual and team contributions with firm and client performance
objectives in a manner that is consistent with industry standards and business
results.
Compensation
for each Fund’s investment team is comprised of base salary and variable
incentive components. As team members advance in their careers, the variable
component increases in its proportion commensurate with responsibility levels.
The variable component is designed to reinforce delivery of investment
performance, firm performance, team collaboration, regulatory compliance,
operational excellence, client retention, and client satisfaction. Investment
performance is measured on a pre-tax basis against relative client benchmarks
and peer groups over one-year, three-year, and five-year periods, calculated
quarterly, reinforcing a longer-term orientation.
Payments
under the variable incentive plan may be in the form of cash or a combination of
cash and deferred compensation. The amount of variable compensation delivered in
the form of deferred compensation depends on the size of an individual’s
incentive award as it relates to a tiered deferral scale. Deferred compensation
is required to be invested into Principal Financial Group (“PFG”) restricted
stock units and funds managed by the team via a co-investment program. Both
payment vehicles are subject to a three-year vesting schedule. The overall
measurement framework and the deferred component are well aligned with our
desired focus on clients’ objectives (e.g., co-investment), alignment with PFG
stakeholders, and talent retention.
In
addition to deferred compensation obtained through their compensation
programming, team members have investments acquired through their participation
in the PFG employee stock purchase plan, retirement plans, and direct personal
investments. It should be noted that PFG’s retirement plans and deferred
compensation plans generally utilize its non-registered group separate accounts
or commingled vehicles rather than the traditional mutual funds. However, in
each instance these vehicles are managed in lockstep alignment with the mutual
funds (i.e., “clones”).
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Jeff
Callahan |
Bond
Market Index |
$1
- $10,000 |
James
Noble |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Darryl
Trunnel |
Bond
Market Index |
$1
- $10,000 |
James
Welch |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Sub-Advisor:
Origin Asset Management LLP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Chris
Carter:
Origin Emerging Markets Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
1 |
$303.0 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
2 |
$90.0 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
10 |
$1.6 billion |
1 |
$112.0 million |
Tarlock
Randhawa:
Origin Emerging Markets Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
1 |
$303.0 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
2 |
$90.0 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
10 |
$1.6 billion |
1 |
$112.0 million |
Nerys
Weir: Origin
Emerging Markets Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
1 |
$303.0 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
2 |
$90.0 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
10 |
$1.6 billion |
1 |
$112.0 million |
Compensation
Origin
Asset Management LLP offers investment professionals a competitive compensation
structure that is evaluated relative to other asset management firms to ensure
its continued competitiveness and alignment with industry best practices. The
objective of the structure is to align team contributions in a manner that is
consistent with industry standards and business results. Compensation of
Origin’s portfolio managers is formed of a competitive fixed salary and a share
of a bonus pool, which is a function of the annual profitability of the firm.
Select members of the investment team further share in the firm’s profits based
on their overall partner ownership.
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Chris
Carter |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
None |
Tarlock
Randhawa |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
None |
Nerys
Weir |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
None |
Sub-Advisor:
Principal Real Estate Investors, LLC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Emily
Foshag:
Global Sustainable Listed Infrastructure Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
1 |
$10.3 million |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
0 |
$0 |
0 |
$0 |
Compensation
Principal
Real Estate Investors, LLC offers the Funds’ investment team a competitive
compensation structure that is evaluated annually relative to other global asset
management firms to ensure its continued competitiveness and alignment with
industry best practices. The objective of the structure is to offer market
competitive compensation that aligns individual and team contributions with firm
and client performance objectives in a manner that is consistent with industry
standards and business results.
Compensation
for each Fund’s investment team is comprised of base salary and variable
incentive components. As team members advance in their careers, the variable
component increases in its proportion commensurate with responsibility levels.
The variable component is designed to reinforce delivery of investment
performance, firm performance, team collaboration, regulatory compliance,
operational excellence, client retention, and client satisfaction. Investment
performance is measured on a pre-tax basis against relative client benchmarks
and peer groups over one-year, three-year, and five-year periods, calculated
quarterly, reinforcing a longer-term orientation.
Payments
under the variable incentive plan may be in the form of cash or a combination of
cash and deferred compensation. The amount of variable compensation delivered in
the form of deferred compensation depends on the size of an individual’s
incentive award as it relates to a tiered deferral scale. Deferred compensation
is required to be partially invested in Principal Financial Group (“PFG”)
restricted stock units. The remaining portion will be awarded in deferred cash.
Both payment vehicles are subject to a three-year vesting schedule. The overall
measurement framework and the deferred component are well aligned with our
desired focus on clients’ objectives, alignment with PFG stakeholders, and
talent retention.
In
addition to deferred compensation obtained through their compensation
programming, team members have investments acquired through their participation
in PFG’s employee stock purchase plan, retirement plans, and direct personal
investments. It should be noted that PFG’s retirement plans and deferred
compensation plans generally utilize its non-registered group separate accounts
or commingled vehicles rather than the traditional mutual funds. However, in
each instance these vehicles are managed in lockstep alignment with the mutual
funds (i.e., “clones”).
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Emily
Foshag |
Global
Sustainable Listed Infrastructure |
$100,001
- $500,000 |
Sub-Advisor:
Spectrum Asset Management, Inc.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| Other
Accounts Managed |
| Total
Number of Accounts |
Total
Assets in the Accounts |
Number
of Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on Performance |
Total
Assets of the Accounts that base the Advisory Fee on
Performance |
Fernando
(“Fred”) Diaz:
Capital Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Roberto
Giangregorio:
Capital Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
L.
Phillip Jacoby, IV:
Capital Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Manu
Krishnan:
Capital Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Mark
A. Lieb:
Capital Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Kevin
Nugent:
Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income Fund |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Satomi
Yarnell:
Capital Securities and Spectrum Preferred and Capital Securities Income
Funds |
Registered
investment companies |
7 |
$3.5
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
pooled investment vehicles |
7 |
$4.2
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Other
accounts |
70 |
$7.6
billion |
0 |
$0 |
Compensation
Spectrum
Asset Management offers investment professionals a competitive compensation
structure that is evaluated relative to other asset management firms to ensure
its continued competitiveness and alignment with industry best practices. The
objective of the structure is to align individual and team contributions with
client performance objectives in a manner that is consistent with industry
standards and business results.
Compensation
for investment professionals at all levels is comprised of base salary and
variable incentive components. As team members advance in their careers, the
variable component increases in its proportion commensurate with responsibility
levels. The incentive component is aligned with performance and goals of the
firm. Salaries are established based on a benchmark of salary levels of relevant
asset management firms, taking into account each portfolio manager’s position
and responsibilities, experience, contribution to client servicing, compliance
with firm and/or regulatory policies and procedures, work ethic, seniority and
length of service, and contribution to the overall functioning of the
organization. Spectrum attempts to award all compensation in a manner that
promotes sound risk management principles. Base salaries are fixed, but are
subject to periodic adjustments, usually on an annual basis.
The
variable incentive is in the form of a discretionary bonus and may represent a
significant proportion of an individual’s total annual compensation.
Discretionary bonuses are determined quarterly and are based on a methodology
used by senior management that takes into consideration several factors,
including, but not necessarily limited to, those listed below:
•Changes
in overall firm assets under management (“AUM”), including those assets in the
Fund. (Portfolio managers are not directly incentivized to increase AUM,
although they are indirectly compensated as a result of an increase in
AUM.)
•Portfolio
performance (on a pre-tax basis) relative to benchmarks measured
annually.
•Contribution
to client servicing.
•Compliance
with firm and/or regulatory policies and procedures.
•Work
ethic.
•Seniority
and length of service.
•Contribution
to overall functioning of organization.
Ownership
of Securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager |
PFI
Funds Managed by Portfolio Manager |
Dollar
Range of Securities Owned by the Portfolio Manager |
Fernando
(“Fred”) Diaz |
Capital
Securities |
None |
Fernando
(“Fred”) Diaz |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
None |
Roberto
Giangregorio |
Capital
Securities |
None |
Roberto
Giangregorio |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
$50,001
- $100,000 |
L.
Phillip Jacoby, IV |
Capital
Securities |
None |
L.
Phillip Jacoby, IV |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
$500,001
- $1,000,000 |
Manu
Krishnan |
Capital
Securities |
None |
Manu
Krishnan |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
$500,001
- $1,000,000 |
Mark
A. Lieb |
Capital
Securities |
None |
Mark
A. Lieb |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
Over
$1,000,000 |
Kevin
Nugent |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
None |
Satomi
Yarnell |
Capital
Securities |
None |
Satomi
Yarnell |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
None |
Moody’s
Investors Service, Inc. Rating Definitions:
Long-Term
Obligation Ratings
Ratings
assigned on Moody’s global long-term obligation rating scales are
forward-looking opinions of the relative credit risk of financial obligations
issued by non-financial corporates, financial institutions, structured finance
vehicles, project finance vehicles, and public sector entities. Long-term
ratings are assigned to issuers or obligations with an original maturity of one
year or more and reflect both on the likelihood of a default or impairment on
contractual financial obligations and the expected financial loss suffered in
the event of default or impairment.1
1
For
certain structured finance, preferred stock and hybrid securities in which
payment default events are either not defined or do not match investor’s
expectations for timely payment, the ratings reflect the likelihood of
impairment and the expected financial loss in the event of
impairment.
|
|
|
|
| |
Aaa: |
Obligations
rated Aaa are judged to be of the highest quality, subject to the lowest
level of credit risk. |
Aa: |
Obligations
rated Aa are judged to be of high quality and are subject to very low
credit risk. |
A: |
Obligations
rated A are considered upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit
risk. |
Baa: |
Obligations
rated Baa are subject to moderate credit risk. They are considered
medium-grade and as such may possess certain speculative
characteristics. |
Ba: |
Obligations
rated Ba are judged to be speculative and are subject to substantial
credit risk. |
B: |
Obligations
rated B are considered speculative and are subject to high credit
risk. |
Caa: |
Obligations
rated Caa are judged to be speculative of poor standing and are subject to
very high credit risk. |
Ca: |
Obligations
rated Ca are highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default,
with some prospect of recovery of principal and
interest. |
C: |
Obligations
rated C are the lowest rated class of bonds and are typically in default,
with little prospect for recovery of principal or
interest. |
|
|
|
|
| |
NOTE: |
Moody’s
appends numerical modifiers, 1, 2, and 3 to each generic rating
classification from Aa through Caa. The modifier 1 indicates that the
obligation ranks in the higher end of its generic rating category, the
modifier 2 indicates a mid-range ranking, and the modifier 3 indicates a
ranking in the lower end of that generic rating category. Additionally, a
“(hyb)” indicator is appended to all ratings of hybrid securities issued
by banks, issuers, financial companies, and securities
firms.* |
*By
their terms, hybrid securities allow for the omission of scheduled dividends,
interest, or principal payments, which can potentially result in impairment if
such an omission occurs. Hybrid securities may also be subject to contractually
allowable write-downs of principal that could result in impairment. Together the
hybrid indicator, the long-term obligation rating assigned to a hybrid security
is an expression of the relative credit risk associated with that
security.
SHORT-TERM
NOTES: Short-term ratings are assigned to obligations with an original maturity
of thirteen months or less and reflect both on the likelihood of a default or
impairment on contractual financial obligations and the expected financial loss
suffered in the event of default. Moody’s employs the following three
designations, all judged to be investment grade, to indicate the relative
repayment ability of rated issuers:
Issuers
rated Prime-1 (or related supporting institutions) have a superior ability to
repay short-term debt obligations.
Issuers
rated Prime-2 (or related supporting institutions) have a strong ability to
repay short-term debt obligations.
Issuers
rated Prime-3 (or related supporting institutions) have an acceptable ability to
repay short-term obligations.
Issuers
rated Not Prime do not fall within any of the Prime rating
categories.
US
MUNICIPAL SHORT-TERM DEBT: The Municipal Investment Grade (MIG) scale is used to
rate US municipal bonds of up to three years maturity. MIG ratings are divided
into three levels - MIG 1 through MIG 3 - while speculative grade short-term
obligations are designated SG.
MIG
1 denotes superior credit quality, afforded excellent protection from
established cash flows, highly reliable liquidity support, or demonstrated
broad-based access to the market for refinancing.
MIG
2 denotes strong credit quality with ample margins of protection, although not
as large as in the preceding group.
MIG
3 notes are of acceptable credit quality. Liquidity and cash-flow protection may
be narrow and market access for refinancing is likely to be less
well-established.
SG
denotes speculative-grade credit quality and may lack sufficient margins of
protection.
Description
of S&P Global Ratings’ Credit Rating Definitions:
S&P
Global’s credit rating, both long-term and short-term, is a forward-looking
opinion of the creditworthiness of an obligor with respect to a specific
obligation. This assessment takes into consideration the creditworthiness of
guarantors, insurers, or other forms of credit enhancement on the
obligation.
The
credit rating is not a recommendation to purchase, sell or hold a security,
inasmuch as it does not comment as to market price or suitability for a
particular investor.
The
ratings are statements of opinion as of the date they are expressed furnished by
the issuer or obtained by S&P Global Ratings from other sources S&P
Global Ratings considers reliable. S&P Global Ratings does not perform an
audit in connection with any rating and may, on occasion, rely on unaudited
financial information. The ratings may be changed, suspended, or withdrawn as a
result of changes in, or unavailability of, such information, or for other
circumstances.
The
ratings are based, in varying degrees, on the following
considerations:
•Likelihood
of payment - capacity and willingness of the obligor to meet its financial
commitment on an obligation in accordance with the terms of the
obligation;
•Nature
of and provisions of the financial obligation;
•Protection
afforded by, and relative position of, the financial obligation in the event of
bankruptcy, reorganization, or other arrangement under the laws of bankruptcy
and other laws affecting creditor’s rights.
LONG-TERM
CREDIT RATINGS:
|
|
|
|
| |
AAA: |
Obligations
rated ‘AAA’ have the highest rating assigned by S&P Global Ratings.
The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation
is extremely strong. |
AA: |
Obligations
rated ‘AA’ differ from the highest-rated issues only in small degree. The
obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is
very strong. |
A:
|
Obligations
rated ‘A’ have a strong capacity to meet financial commitment on the
obligation although they are somewhat more susceptible to the adverse
effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than
obligations in higher-rated categories. |
BBB: |
Obligations
rated ‘BBB’ exhibit adequate protection parameters; however, adverse
economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a
weakened capacity to meet financial commitment on the
obligation. |
BB,
B, CCC,
CC
and C:
|
Obligations
rated ‘BB’, ‘B’, ‘CCC’, ‘CC’, and ‘C’ are regarded, on balance, as having
significant speculative characteristics. ‘BB’ indicates the lowest degree
of speculation and ‘C’ the highest degree of speculation. While such
obligations will likely have some quality and protective characteristics,
these may be outweighed by large uncertainties or major risk exposures to
adverse conditions. |
BB: |
Obligations
rated ‘BB’ are less vulnerable to nonpayment than other speculative
issues. However it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to
adverse business, financial, or economic conditions which could lead to
the obligor’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitment on the
obligation. |
B: |
Obligations
rated ‘B’ are more vulnerable to nonpayment than ‘BB’ but the obligor
currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the
obligation. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will
likely impair this capacity. |
CCC: |
Obligations
rated ‘CCC’ are currently vulnerable to nonpayment and is dependent upon
favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to
meet its financial commitment on the obligation. If adverse business,
financial, or economic conditions occur, the obligor is not likely to have
the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the
obligation. |
CC: |
Obligations
rated ‘CC’ are currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment. The ‘CC’ rating
is used when a default has not yet occurred but S&P Global Ratings
expects default to be a virtual certainty, regardless of anticipated time
to default. |
C:
|
The
rating ‘C’ is highly vulnerable to nonpayment, the obligation is expected
to have lower relative seniority or lower ultimate recovery compared to
higher rated obligations. |
D:
|
Obligations
rated ‘D’ are in default, or in breach of an imputed promise. For
non-hybrid capital instruments, the ‘D’ rating category is used when
payments on an obligation are not made on the date due, unless S&P
Global Ratings believes that such payments will be made within five
business days in the absence of a stated grace period or within the
earlier of the stated grace period or 30 calendar days. The rating will
also be used upon filing for bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar
action and where default is a virtual certainty. If an obligation is
subject to a distressed exchange offer the rating is lowered to
‘D’. |
Plus
(+) or Minus (-): The ratings from ‘AA’ to ‘CCC’ may be modified by the addition
of a plus or minus sign to show relative standing within the major rating
categories.
|
|
|
|
| |
NR: |
Indicates
that no rating has been requested, that there is insufficient information
on which to base a rating or that S&P Global Ratings does not rate a
particular type of obligation as a matter of
policy. |
SHORT-TERM
CREDIT RATINGS: Ratings are graded into four categories, ranging from ‘A-1’ for
the highest quality obligations to ‘D’ for the lowest.
|
|
|
|
| |
A-1:
|
This
is the highest category. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial
commitment on the obligation is strong. Within this category, certain
obligations are designated with a plus sign (+). This indicates that the
obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on these obligations
is extremely strong. |
A-2:
|
Issues
carrying this designation are somewhat more susceptible to the adverse
effects of the changes in circumstances and economic conditions than
obligations in higher rating categories. However, the obligor’s capacity
to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is
satisfactory. |
A-3:
|
Issues
carrying this designation exhibit adequate capacity to meet their
financial obligations. However, adverse economic conditions or changing
circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the
obligor to meet it financial commitment on the obligation. |
B:
|
Issues
rated ‘B’ are regarded as vulnerable and have significant speculative
characteristics. The obligor has capacity to meet financial commitments;
however, it faces major ongoing uncertainties which could lead to
obligor’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial
obligations. |
C:
|
This
rating is assigned to short-term debt obligations that are currently
vulnerable to nonpayment and is dependent upon favorable business,
financial, and economic conditions to meet its financial commitment on the
obligation. |
D:
|
This
rating indicates that the issue is either in default or in breach of an
imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the ‘D’ rating
category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date
due, unless S&P Global Ratings believes that such payments will be
made within any stated grace period. However, any stated grace period
longer than five business days will be treated as five business days. The
rating will also be used upon filing for bankruptcy petition or the taking
of similar action and where default is a virtual certainty. If an
obligation is subject to a distressed debt restructuring the rating is
lowered to ‘D’. |
MUNICIPAL
SHORT-TERM NOTE RATINGS: S&P Global Ratings rates U.S. municipal notes with
a maturity of less than three years as follows:
|
|
|
|
| |
SP-1:
|
A
strong capacity to pay principal and interest. Issues that possess a very
strong capacity to pay debt service is given a “+”
designation. |
SP-2:
|
A
satisfactory capacity to pay principal and interest, with some
vulnerability to adverse financial and economic changes over the terms of
the notes. |
SP-3:
|
A
speculative capacity to pay principal and interest. |
D: |
Assigned
upon failure to pay the note when due, completion of a distressed debt
restructuring, or the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of
similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Class
A |
|
|
|
| |
Maximum
Offering Price Calculation |
|
|
|
| |
| NAV |
= |
Maximum
Offering Price |
| (1-Sales
Charge Percentage) |
|
|
|
|
| |
Fund |
|
|
|
| |
Blue
Chip |
$34.44 |
= |
$36.44 |
| |
| (1-.0550) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Diversified
Real Asset |
$10.88 |
= |
$11.30 |
| |
| (1-.0375) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Edge
MidCap |
$11.65 |
= |
$12.33 |
| |
| (1-.0550) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Global
Multi-Strategy |
$10.36 |
= |
$10.76 |
| |
| (1-.0375) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Opportunistic
Municipal |
$9.43 |
= |
$9.80 |
| |
| (1-.0375) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Origin
Emerging Markets |
$9.61 |
= |
$10.17 |
| |
| (1-.0550) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Small-MidCap
Dividend Income |
$16.45 |
= |
$17.41 |
| |
| (1-.0550) |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
Spectrum
Preferred and Capital Securities Income |
$8.68 |
= |
$9.02 |
| |
| (1-.0375) |
| |
The
proxy voting policies applicable to each Fund appear in the following
order:
The
proxy voting policy for the Fund Complex is first, followed by PGI’s proxy
voting policy, and followed by the proxy voting policies for the sub-advisors,
alphabetically.
Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures For
Principal
Funds, Inc.
Principal
Variable Contracts Funds, Inc.
Principal
Exchange-Traded Funds
Principal
Diversified Select Real Asset Fund (and other Principal interval
funds)
(each
a “Fund” and together “the Funds”)
(March
9, 2015)
Revised
June 11, 2019
It
is each Fund's policy to delegate authority to its advisor or sub-advisor, as
appropriate, to vote proxy ballots relating to the Fund's portfolio securities
in accordance with the adviser's or sub-adviser's voting policies and
procedures.
The
adviser or sub-adviser must provide, on a quarterly basis:
1.Written
affirmation that all proxies voted during the preceding calendar quarter, other
than those specifically identified by the adviser or sub-adviser, were voted in
a manner consistent with the adviser's or sub-adviser's voting policies and
procedures. In order to monitor the potential effect of conflicts of interest of
an adviser or sub-adviser, the adviser or sub-adviser will identify any proxies
the adviser or sub-adviser voted in a manner inconsistent with its policies and
procedures. The adviser or sub-adviser shall list each vote, explain why the
adviser or sub-adviser voted in a manner contrary to its policies and
procedures, state whether the adviser or sub-adviser’s vote was consistent with
the recommendation to the adviser or sub-adviser of a third-party and, if so,
identify the third-party; and
2.Written
notification of any material changes to the adviser's or sub-adviser's proxy
voting policies and procedures made during the preceding calendar
quarter.
The
adviser or sub-adviser must provide, no later than July 31 of each year, the
following information regarding each proxy vote cast during the 12-month period
ended June 30 for each Fund portfolio or portion of Fund portfolio for which it
serves as investment adviser, in a format acceptable to Fund
management:
1.Identification
of the issuer of the security;
2.Exchange
ticker symbol of the security;
3.CUSIP
number of the security;
4.The
date of the shareholder meeting;
5.A
brief description of the subject of the vote;
6.Whether
the proposal was put forward by the issuer or a shareholder;
7.Whether
and how the vote was cast; and
8.Whether
the vote was cast for or against management of the issuer.
PRINCIPAL
GLOBAL INVESTORS, LLC
Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures
Introduction
Principal
Global Investors1
(“PGI”) is an investment adviser registered with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission (“SEC”) pursuant to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the
“Advisers Act”). As a registered investment adviser, PGI has a fiduciary duty to
act in the best interests of its clients. PGI recognizes that this duty requires
it to vote client securities, for which it has voting power on the applicable
record date, in a timely manner and make voting decisions that are in the best
interests of its clients. This document, Principal Global Investors’ Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures (the “Policy”) is intended to comply with the
requirements of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, the Investment Company Act
of 1940 and the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 applicable to
the voting of the proxies of both US and non-US issuers on behalf of PGI’s
clients who have delegated such authority and discretion.
Effective
January 1, 2021 Finisterre Investment Teams adopted the policies and procedures
in the Adviser’s compliance manual except for the following proxy policies and
procedures. Finisterre Investment Teams will continue to follow the previously
adopted proxy policies and procedures until amended. Please see the Appendix to
the compliance manual for Finisterre specific proxy policies and
procedures.
Relationship
between Investment Strategy, ESG and Proxy Voting
PGI
has a fiduciary duty to make investment decisions that are in its clients’ best
interests by maximizing the value of their shares. Proxy voting is an important
part of this process through which PGI can support strong corporate governance
structures, shareholder rights and transparency. PGI also believes a company’s
positive environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) practices may influence
the value of the company, leading to long-term shareholder value. PGI may take
these factors into considerations when voting proxies in its effort to seek the
best outcome for its clients. PGI believes that the integration of consideration
of ESG practices in PGI’s investment process helps identify sources of risk that
could erode the long-term investment results it seeks on behalf of its clients.
From time to time, PGI may work with various ESG-related organizations to engage
issuers or advocate for greater levels of disclosure.
Roles
and Responsibilities
Role
of the Proxy Voting Committee
PGI’s
Proxy Voting Committee (the “Proxy Voting Committee”) shall (i) oversee the
voting of proxies and the Proxy Advisory Firm, (ii) where necessary, make
determinations as to how to instruct the vote on certain specific proxies, (iii)
verify ongoing compliance with the Policy, (iv) review the business practices of
the Proxy Advisory Firm and (v) evaluate, maintain, and review the Policy on an
annual basis.
The
Proxy Voting Committee is comprised of representatives of each investment team
and a representative from PGI Risk, Legal, Operations, and Compliance will be
available to advise the Proxy Voting Committee but are non-voting members. The
Proxy Voting Committee may designate one or more of its members to oversee
specific, ongoing compliance with respect to the Policy and may designate
personnel to instruct the vote on proxies on behalf the PGI’s clients
(collectively, “Authorized Persons”).
The
Proxy Voting Committee shall meet at least four times per year, and as necessary
to address special situations.
1
These policies and procedures apply to Principal Global Investors, LLC,
Principal Real Estate Investors, LLC, Principal Global Investors (Hong Kong)
Limited and any affiliates which have entered into participating affiliate
agreements with the aforementioned managers.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
Role
of Portfolio Management
While
the Proxy Voting Committee establishes the Guidelines and Procedures, the Proxy
Voting Committee does not direct votes for any client except in certain cases
where a conflict of interest exists. Each investment team is responsible for
determining how to vote proxies for those securities held in the portfolios
their team manages. While investment teams generally vote consistently with the
Guidelines, there may be instances where their vote deviates from the
Guidelines. In those circumstances, the investment team will work within the
Exception Process. In some instances, the same security may be held by more than
one investment team. In these cases, PGI may vote differently on the same matter
for different accounts as determined by each investment team.
Proxy
Voting Guidelines
The
Proxy Voting Committee, on an annual basis, or more frequently as needed, will
direct each investment team to review draft proxy voting guidelines recommended
by the Committee (“Draft Guidelines”). The Proxy Voting Committee will collect
the reviews of the Draft Guidelines to determine whether any investment teams
have positions on issues that deviate from the Draft Guidelines. Based on this
review, PGI will adopt proxy voting guidelines. Where an investment team has a
position which deviates from the Draft Guidelines, an alternative set of
guidelines for that investment team may be created. Collectively, these
guidelines will constitute PGI’s current Proxy Voting Guidelines and may change
from time to time (the “Guidelines”). The Proxy Voting Committee has the
obligation to determine that, in general, voting proxies pursuant to the
Guidelines is in the best interests of clients. Exhibit A (Base) and Exhibit B
(Sustainable) to the Policy sets forth the current Guidelines.
There
may be instances where proxy votes will not be in accordance with the
Guidelines. Clients may instruct PGI to utilize a different set of guidelines,
request specific deviations, or directly assume responsibility for the voting of
proxies. In addition, PGI may deviate from the Guidelines on an exception basis
if the investment team or PGI has determined that it is the best interest of
clients in a particular strategy to do so, or where the Guidelines do not direct
a particular response and instead list relevant factors. Any such a deviation
will comply with the Exception Process which shall include a written record
setting out the rationale for the deviation.
The
subject of the proxy vote may not be covered in the Guidelines. In situations
where the Guidelines do not provide a position, PGI will consider the relevant
facts and circumstances of a particular vote and then vote in a manner PGI
believes to be in the clients’ bests interests. In such circumstance, the
analysis will be documented in writing and periodically presented to the Proxy
Voting Committee. To the extent that the Guidelines do not cover potential
voting issues, PGI may consider the spirit of the Guidelines and instruct the
vote on such issues in a manner that PGI believes would be in the best interests
of the client.
Use
of Proxy Advisory Firms
PGI
has retained one or more third-party proxy service provider(s) (the “Proxy
Advisory Firm”) to provide recommendations for proxy voting guidelines,
information on shareholder meeting dates and proxy materials, translate proxy
materials printed in a foreign language, provide research on proxy proposals,
operationally process votes in accordance with the Guidelines on behalf of the
clients for whom PGI has proxy voting responsibility, and provide reports
concerning the proxies voted (“Proxy Voting Services”). Although PGI has
retained the Proxy Advisory Firm for Proxy Voting Services, PGI remains
responsible for proxy voting decisions. PGI has designed the Policy to oversee
and evaluate the Proxy Advisory Firm, including with respect to the matters
described below, to support the PGI’s voting in accordance with this Policy.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
Oversight
of Proxy Advisory Firms
Prior
to the selection of any new Proxy Advisory Firm and annually thereafter or more
frequently if deemed necessary by PGI, the Proxy Voting Committee will consider
whether the Proxy Advisory Firm: (a) has the capacity and competency to
adequately analyze proxy issues and provide the Proxy Voting Services the Proxy
Advisory Firm has been engaged to provide and (b) can make its recommendations
in an impartial manner, in consideration of the best interests of PGI’s clients,
and consistent with the PGI’s voting policies. Such considerations may include,
depending on the Proxy Voting Services provided, the following: (i) periodic
sampling of votes pre-populated by the Proxy Advisory Firm’s systems as well as
votes cast by the Proxy Advisory Firm to review that the Guidelines adopted by
PGI are being followed; (ii) onsite visits to the Proxy Advisory Firm office
and/or discussions with the Proxy Advisory Firm to determine whether the Proxy
Advisory Firm continues to have the capacity and competency to carry out its
proxy obligations to PGI; (iii) a review of those aspects of the Proxy Advisory
Firm’s policies, procedures, and methodologies for formulating voting
recommendations that PGI consider material to Proxy Voting Services provided to
PGI, including factors considered, with a particular focus on those relating to
identifying, addressing and disclosing potential conflicts of interest
(including potential conflicts related to the provision of Proxy Voting
Services, activities other than Proxy Voting Services, and those presented by
affiliation such as a controlling shareholder of the Proxy Advisory Firm) and
monitoring that materially current, accurate, and complete information is used
in creating recommendations and research; (iv) requiring the Proxy Advisory Firm
to notify PGI if there is a substantive change in the Proxy Advisory Firm’s
policies and procedures or otherwise to business practices, including with
respect to conflicts, information gathering and creating voting recommendations
and research, and reviewing any such change(s); (v) a review of how and when the
Proxy Advisory Firm engages with, and receives and incorporates input from,
issuers, the Proxy Advisory Firm’s clients and other third-party information
sources; (vi) assessing how the Proxy Advisory Firm considers factors unique to
a specific issuer or proposal when evaluating a matter subject to a shareholder
vote; (vii) in case of an error made by the Proxy Advisory Firm, discussing the
error with the Proxy Advisory Firm and determining whether appropriate
corrective and preventive action is being taken; and (viii) assessing whether
the Proxy Advisory Firm appropriately updates its methodologies, guidelines, and
voting recommendations on an ongoing basis and incorporates input from issuers
and Proxy Advisory Firm clients in the update process. In evaluating the Proxy
Advisory Firm, PGI may also consider the adequacy and quality of the Proxy
Advisory Firm’s staffing, personnel, and/or technology.
Procedures
for Voting Proxies
To
increase the efficiency of the voting process, PGI utilizes the Proxy Advisory
Firm to act as its voting agent for its clients’ holdings. Issuers initially
send proxy information to the clients’ custodians. PGI instructs these
custodians to direct proxy related materials to the Proxy Advisory Firm. The
Proxy Advisory Firm provides PGI with research related to each resolution.
PGI
analyzes relevant proxy materials on behalf of their clients and seek to
instruct the vote (or refrain from voting) proxies in accordance with the
Guidelines. A client may direct PGI to vote for such client’s account
differently than what would occur in applying the Policy and the Guidelines. PGI
may also agree to follow a client’s individualized proxy voting guidelines or
otherwise agree with a client on particular voting considerations.
PGI
seeks to vote (or refrain from voting) proxies for its clients in a manner that
PGI determines is in the best interests of its clients, which may include both
considering both the effect on the value of the client’s investments and ESG
factors. In some cases, PGI may determine that it is in the best interests of
clients to refrain from exercising the clients’ proxy voting rights. PGI may
determine that voting is not in the best interests of a client and refrain from
voting if the costs, including the opportunity costs, of voting would, in the
view of PGI, exceed the expected benefits of voting to the client.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
Procedures
for Proxy Issues within the Guidelines
Where
the Guidelines address the proxy matter being voted on, the Proxy Advisor Firm
will generally process all proxy votes in accordance with the Guidelines. The
applicable investment team may provide instructions to vote contrary to the
Guidelines in their discretion and with sufficient rationale documented in
writing to seek to maximize the value of the client’s investments or is
otherwise in the client’s best interest. This rationale will be submitted to PGI
Compliance to approve and once approved administered by PGI Operations. This
process will follow the Exception Process. The Proxy Voting Committee will
receive and review a quarterly report summarizing all proxy votes for securities
for which PGI exercises voting authority. In certain cases, a client may have
elected to have PGI administer a custom policy which is unique to the Client. If
PGI is also responsible for the administration of such a policy, in general,
except for the specific policy differences, the procedures documented here will
also be applicable, excluding reporting and disclosure procedures.
Procedures
for Proxy Issues Outside the Guidelines
To
the extent that the Guidelines do not cover potential voting issues, the Proxy
Advisory Firm will seek direction from PGI. PGI may consider the spirit of the
Guidelines and instruct the vote on such issues in a manner that PGI believes
would be in the best interests of the client. Although this not an exception to
the Guidelines, this process will also follow the Exception Process. The Proxy
Voting Committee will receive and review a quarterly report summarizing all
proxy votes for securities for which PGI exercises voting discretion, which
shall include instances where issues fall outside the Guidelines.
Securities
Lending
Some
clients may have entered into securities lending arrangements with agent lenders
to generate additional revenue. If a client participates in such lending, the
client will need to inform PGI as part of their contract with PGI if they
require PGI to take actions in regard to voting securities that have been lent.
If not commemorated in such agreement, PGI will not recall securities and as
such, they will not have an obligation to direct the proxy voting of lent
securities.
In
the case of lending, PGI maintains one share for each company security out on
loan by the client. PGI will vote the remaining share in these circumstances.
In
cases where PGI does not receive a solicitation or enough information within a
sufficient time (as reasonably determined by PGI) prior to the proxy-voting
deadline, PGI or the Proxy Advisory Firm may be unable to vote.
Regional
Variances in Proxy Voting
PGI
utilizes the Policy and Guidelines for both US and non-US clients, and there are
some significant differences between voting U.S. company proxies and voting
non-U.S. company proxies. For U.S. companies, it is usually relatively easy to
vote proxies, as the proxies are typically received automatically and may be
voted by mail or electronically. In most cases, the officers of a U.S. company
soliciting a proxy act as proxies for the company’s shareholders.
With
respect to non-U.S. companies, we make reasonable efforts to vote most proxies
and follow a similar process to those in the U.S. However, in some cases it may
be both difficult and costly to vote proxies due to local regulations, customs
or other requirements or restrictions, and such circumstances and expected costs
may outweigh any anticipated economic benefit of voting. The major difficulties
and costs may include: (i) appointing a proxy; (ii) obtaining reliable
information about the time and location of a meeting; (iii) obtaining relevant
information about voting procedures for foreign shareholders; (iv) restrictions
on trading securities that are subject to proxy votes (share-blocking periods);
(v) arranging for a proxy to vote locally in person; (vi) fees charged by
custody banks for providing certain services with regard to voting proxies; and
(vii) foregone income from securities lending programs. In certain instances, it
may be determined by PGI that the anticipated economic benefit outweighs the
expected cost of voting. PGI intends to make their determination on whether to
vote proxies of non-U.S. companies on a case-by-case basis. In doing so, PGI
shall evaluate market requirements and impediments, including the difficulties
set forth above, for voting proxies of companies in each country. PGI
periodically reviews voting logistics, including costs and other voting
difficulties, on a client by client and country by country basis, in order to
determine if there have been any material changes that would affect PGI’s
determinations and procedures.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
Conflicts
of Interest
PGI
recognizes that, from time to time, potential conflicts of interest may exist.
In order to avoid any perceived or actual conflict of interest, the procedures
set forth below have been established for use when PGI encounters a potential
conflict to ensure that PGI’s voting decisions are based on maximizing
shareholder value and are not the product of a conflict.
Addressing
Conflicts of Interest – Exception Process
Prior
to voting contrary to the Guidelines, the relevant investment team must complete
and submit a report to PGI Compliance setting out the name of the security, the
issue up for vote, a summary of the Guidelines’ recommendation, the vote changes
requested and the rational for voting against the Guidelines’ recommendation.
The member of the investment team requesting the exception must attest to
compliance with Principal’s Code of Conduct and the has an affirmative
obligation to disclose any known personal or business relationship that could
affect the voting of the applicable proxy. PGI Compliance will approve or deny
the exception in consultation, if deemed necessary, with the Legal.
If
PGI Compliance determines that there is no potential material conflict exists,
the Guidelines may be overridden. If PGI Compliance determines that there exists
or may exist a material conflict, it will refer the issue to the Proxy Voting
Committee. The Proxy Voting Committee will consider the facts and circumstances
of the pending proxy vote and the potential or actual material conflict and
decide by a majority vote as to how to vote the proxy – i.e., whether to permit
or deny the exception.
In
considering the proxy vote and potential material conflict of interest, the
Proxy Voting Committee may review the following factors:
•The
percentage of outstanding securities of the issuer held on behalf of clients by
PGI;
•The
nature of the relationship of the issuer with the PGI, its affiliates or its
executive officers;
•Whether
there has been any attempt to directly or indirectly influence the investment
team’s decision;
•Whether
the direction of the proposed vote would appear to benefit PGI or a related
party; and/or
•Whether
an objective decision to vote in a certain way will still create a strong
appearance of a conflict.
In
the event that the Proxy Advisor Firm itself has a conflict and thus is unable
to provide a recommendation, the investment team may vote in accordance with the
recommendation of another independent service provider, if available. If a
recommendation from an independent service provider other than the Proxy Advisor
Firm is not available, the investment team will follow the Exception Process.
PGI Compliance will review the form and if it determines that there is no
potential material conflict mandating a voting recommendation from the Proxy
Voting Committee, the investment team may instruct the Proxy Advisory Firm to
vote the proxy issue as it determines is in the best interest of clients. If PGI
Compliance determines that there exists or may exist a material conflict, it
will refer the issue to the Proxy Voting Committee for consideration as outlined
above.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
Availability
of Proxy Voting Information and Recordkeeping
Disclosure
On
a quarterly basis, PGI publicly discloses on our website https://www.principalglobal.com/eu/about-us/responsible-investing
a
voting report setting forth the manner in which votes were cast, including
details related to (i) votes against management, and (ii)
abstentions.
Form
more information, Clients may contact PGI for more information related to how
PGI has voted with respect to securities held in the Client’s
account.
On
request, PGI will provide clients with a summary of PGI’s proxy voting
guidelines, process and policies and will inform the clients how they can obtain
a copy of the complete Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures upon request. PGI
will also include such information described in the preceding two sentences in
Part 2A of its Form ADV.
Recordkeeping
PGI
will keep records of the following items: (i) the Guidelines, (ii) the Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures; (iii) proxy statements received regarding client
securities (unless such statements are available on the SEC’s Electronic Data
Gathering, Analysis, and Retrieval (EDGAR) system); (iv) records of votes they
cast on behalf of clients, which may be maintained by a Proxy Advisory Firm if
it undertakes to provide copies of those records promptly upon request; (v)
records of written client requests for proxy voting information and PGI’s
responses (whether a client’s request was oral or in writing); (vi) any
documents prepared by PGI that were material to making a decision how to vote,
or that memorialized the basis for the decision; (vii) a record of any testing
conducted on any Proxy Advisory Firm’s votes; (viii) materials collected and
reviewed by PGI as part of its due diligence of the Proxy Advisory Firm; (ix) a
copy of each version of the Proxy Advisory Firm’s policies and procedures
provided to PGI; and (x) the minutes of the Proxy Voting Committee meetings. All
of the records referenced above will be kept in an easily accessible place for
at least the length of time required by local regulation and custom, and, if
such local regulation requires that records are kept for less than six years
from the end of the fiscal year during which the last entry was made on such
record, we will follow the US rule of six years. If the local regulation
requires that records are kept for more than six years, we will comply with the
local regulation. We maintain the vast majority of these records electronically.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
Appendix
- Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures
I.STATEMENT
OF POLICY
Proxy
voting is an important right of investors and reasonable care and diligence must
be undertaken to ensure that such rights are properly and timely exercised. The
Firm generally retains proxy-voting authority with respect to securities
purchased for its clients. Under such circumstances, the Firm votes proxies in
the best interest of its clients and in accordance with these policies and
procedures.
II.USE
OF THIRD-PARTY PROXY VOTING SERVICE
The
Firm has entered into an agreement with Broadridge Investor Communication
Solutions, Inc. (referred to as “Broadridge” and the “Proxy Voting Service”)
acting with Glass Lewis & Co, to enable it to fulfill its proxy voting
obligations.
Broadridge
executes, monitors and records the proxies according to the instructions of the
Firm. The Firm relies on the recommendations of Glass Lewis & Co, LLC to
provide recommendations as to how any proxy should be voted in the best
interests of the Clients. These recommendations are integrated into the voting
platform set up by the Proxy Voting Service, and the Firm has instructed the
Proxy Voting Service to execute all proxies in accordance with such
recommendation unless instructed otherwise by the Firm.
The
SEC has expressed its view that although the voting of proxies remains the duty
of a registered adviser, an adviser may contract with service providers to
perform certain functions with respect to proxy voting so long as the adviser is
comfortable that the proxy voting service is independent from the issuer
companies on which it completes its proxy research. In assessing whether a proxy
voting service is independent (as defined by the SEC), the SEC counsels
investment advisers that they should not follow the recommendations of an
independent proxy voting service without first determining, among other things,
that the proxy voting service (a) has the capacity and competence to analyze
proxy issues and (b) is in fact independent and can make recommendations in an
impartial manner in the best interests of the adviser's clients.
At
a minimum annually, or more frequently as deemed necessary, Compliance will
ensure that a review of the independence and impartiality of the Proxy Voting
Service is carried out, including obtaining certification or other information
from the Proxy Voting Service to enable the Firm to make such an assessment.
Compliance will also monitor any new SEC interpretations regarding the voting of
proxies and the uses of third-party proxy voting services and revise the Firm’s
policies and procedures as necessary.
Proxies
relating to securities held in client accounts will be sent directly to the
Proxy Voting Service. If a proxy is received by anyone in the Firm, they must
immediately inform the Compliance and work with Compliance to ensure that it is
promptly forwarded to the Proxy Voting Service. In the event that the Proxy
Voting Service is unable to complete/provide its research regarding a security
on a timely basis or the Firm has made a determination that it is in the best
interests of the Firm’s clients for the Firm to vote the proxy, the Firm’s
general proxy-voting procedures are required to be followed, as follows.
Compliance
will require that:
1.the
recipient of the proxy will forward a copy to Compliance, who will keep a copy
of each proxy received;
2.if
the recipient is not the Portfolio Manager responsible for voting the proxy on
behalf of the Firm, s/he will forward a copy to such Portfolio
manager;
3.the
Portfolio Manager will determine how to vote the proxy promptly in order to
allow enough time for the completed proxy to be returned to the issuer prior to
the vote taking place; and provide evidence of such to Compliance;
4.Absent
material conflicts (see Section V), the Portfolio Manager will determine whether
the Firm will follow the Proxy Voting Service’s recommendation or vote the proxy
directly. The Portfolio Manager will send his/her decision on how the Firm
should vote a proxy to the Proxy Voting Service, in a timely and appropriate
manner. It is desirable to have the Proxy Voting Service complete the actual
voting so there exists one central source for the documentation of the Firm’s
proxy voting records.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
III.VOTING
GUIDELINES
To
the extent that the Firm is voting a proxy itself and not utilizing the Proxy
Voting Service, the Firm will consider the proxy on a case by case basis and
require that the relevant investment professional vote the proxy in a manner
consistent with the Firm’s duty. Investment professionals of the Firm each have
the duty to vote proxies in a way that, in their best judgment, is in the best
interest of the Firm’s clients.
IV.DISCLOSURE
A.The
Firm will disclose in its Form ADV Part 2 that clients may contact the Chief
Compliance Officer via e-mail or telephone in order to obtain information on how
the Firm voted such client’s proxies, and to request a copy of these policies
and procedures. If a client requests this information, the Chief Compliance
Officer will prepare a written response to the client that lists, with respect
to each voted proxy that the client has inquired about, (1) the name of the
issuer; (2) the proposal voted upon and (3) how the Firm voted the client’s
proxy.
B.A
concise summary of these Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures will be included
in the Firm’s Form ADV Part 2 and will be updated whenever these policies and
procedures are updated. Compliance will arrange for a copy of this summary to be
sent to all existing clients.
V.POTENTIAL
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
A.In
the event that the Firm is directly voting a proxy, Compliance will examine
conflicts that exist between the interests of the Firm and its clients. This
examination will include a review of the relationship of the Firm, its personnel
and its affiliates with the issuer of each security and any of the issuer’s
affiliates to determine if the issuer is a client of the Firm or an affiliate of
the Firm or has some other relationship with the Firm, its personnel or a client
of the Firm.
B.If,
as a result of Compliance’s examination, a determination is made that a material
conflict of interest exists, the Firm will determine whether voting in
accordance with the voting guidelines and factors described above is in the best
interests of the client. If the proxy involves a matter covered by the voting
guidelines and factors described above, the Firm will generally vote the proxy
as specified above. Alternatively, the Firm may vote the proxy in accordance
with the recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service.
The
Firm may disclose the conflict to the affected clients and, except in the case
of clients that are subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of
1974, as amended (“ERISA”), give the clients the opportunity to vote their
proxies themselves In the case of ERISA clients, if the Investment Management
Agreement reserves to the ERISA client the authority to vote proxies when the
Firm determines it has a material conflict that affects its best judgment as an
ERISA fiduciary, the Firm will give the ERISA client the opportunity to vote the
proxies themselves.
Absent
the client reserving voting rights, the Firm will either vote the proxies in
accordance with the policies outlined in Section III “Voting Guidelines” above
or vote the proxies in accordance with the recommendation of the Proxy Voting
Service.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
VI.PROXY
RECORDKEEPING
Compliance
will maintain files relating to the Firm’s proxy voting procedures in an easily
accessible place. (Under the services contract between the Firm and its Proxy
Voting Service, the Proxy Voting Service will maintain the Firm’s proxy-voting
records). Records will be maintained and preserved for five years from the end
of the fiscal year during which the last entry was made on a record, with
records for the most recent two years kept in the offices of the Firm. Records
of the following will be included in the files:
1.Copies
of these proxy voting policies and procedures, and any amendments
thereto;
2.A
copy of each proxy statement that the Firm receives regarding client securities
(the Firm may rely on third parties or EDGAR);
3.A
record of each vote that the Firm casts;
4.A
copy of any document the Firm created that was material to making a decision how
to vote proxies, or that memorializes that decision. (For votes that are
inconsistent with the Firm’s general proxy voting polices, the reason/rationale
for such an inconsistent vote is required to be briefly documented and
maintained); and
5.A
copy of each written client request for information on how the Firm voted such
client’s proxies, and a copy of any written response to any (written or oral)
client request for information on how the Firm voted its proxies.
Principal
Global Investors, LLC
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship
Global
Principles
Effective
as of January 2023
|
|
|
|
| |
Contents |
|
|
|
Introduction
to BlackRock |
3 |
|
Philosophy
on investment stewardship |
3 |
|
Key
themes |
5 |
|
Boards
and directors |
6 |
|
Auditors
and audit-realted issues |
9 |
|
Capital
structure, mergers, asset sales and other special transactions |
10 |
|
Compensation
and benefits |
11 |
|
Material
sustainability-related risks and opportunities |
12 |
|
Other
corporate governance matters and shareholder protections |
14 |
|
Shareholder
proposals |
15 |
|
BlackRock’s
oversight of our investment stewardship activities |
15 |
|
Vote
execution |
16 |
|
Conflicts
management policies and procedures |
17 |
|
Securities
Lending |
19 |
|
Voting
guidelines |
19 |
|
Reporting
and vote transparency |
19 |
|
The
purpose of this document is to provide an overarching explanation of BlackRock’s
approach globally to our responsibilities as a shareholder on behalf of our
clients, our expectations of companies, and our commitments to clients in terms
of our own governance and transparency.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Introduction
to BlackRock
BlackRock’s
purpose is to help more and more people experience financial well-being. We
manage assets on behalf of institutional and individual clients, across a full
spectrum of investment strategies, asset classes, and regions. Our client base
includes pension plans, endowments, foundations, charities, official
institutions, insurers, and other financial institutions, as well as individuals
around the world. As part of our fiduciary duty to our clients, we consider it
one of our responsibilities to promote sound corporate governance, as an
informed, engaged shareholder on their behalf. At BlackRock, this is the
responsibility of the Investment Stewardship team.
Philosophy
on investment stewardship
Companies
are responsible for ensuring they have appropriate governance structures to
serve the interests of shareholders and other key stakeholders. We believe that
there are certain fundamental rights attached to shareholding. Companies and
their boards should be accountable to shareholders and structured with
appropriate checks and balances to ensure that they operate in shareholders’
best interests to create sustainable value. Shareholders should have the right
to vote to elect, remove, and nominate directors, approve the appointment of the
auditor, and amend the corporate charter or by-laws. Shareholders should be able
to vote on key board decisions that are material to the protection of their
investment, including but not limited to, changes to the purpose of the
business, dilution levels and pre- emptive rights, and the distribution of
income and capital structure. In order to make informed decisions, shareholders
need sufficient and timely information. In addition, shareholder voting rights
should be proportionate to their economic ownership—the principle of “one share,
one vote” helps achieve this balance.
Consistent
with these shareholder rights, BlackRock has a responsibility to monitor and
provide feedback to companies in our role as stewards of our clients’
investments. Investment stewardship is how we use our voice as an investor to
promote sound corporate governance and business practices to help maximize
long-term shareholder value for our clients, the vast majority of whom are
investing for long-term goals such as retirement. BlackRock Investment
Stewardship (BIS) does this through engagement with management teams and/or
board members on material business issues and, for those clients who have given
us authority, through voting proxies in their best long-term financial
interests.1
We also contribute to consultations on public policy and private sector
initiatives on industry standards, consistent with our clients’ interests as
long-term shareholders.
BlackRock
looks to companies to provide timely, accurate, and comprehensive disclosure on
all material governance and business matters. This transparency allows
shareholders to appropriately understand and assess how relevant risks and
opportunities are being effectively identified and managed. Where company
reporting and disclosure is inadequate or where the governance approach taken
may be inconsistent with durable, long-term value creation for shareholders, we
will engage with a company and/or vote in a manner that advances long-term
shareholders’ interests.
BlackRock
views engagement as an important activity; engagement provides us with the
opportunity to improve our understanding of the business and of the risks and
opportunities that are material to the companies in which our clients invest.
Engagement may also inform our voting decisions. As long-term investors on
behalf of clients, we seek to have regular and continuing dialogue with
executives and board directors to advance sound governance and durable business
practices aligned with long-term value creation, as well as to understand the
effectiveness of the company’s management and oversight of material issues.
Engagement is an important mechanism for providing feedback on company practices
and disclosures, particularly where we believe they could be enhanced to support
a company’s ability to deliver financial performance. Similarly, it provides us
with an opportunity to hear directly from company boards and management on how
they believe their actions are aligned with durable, long-term value
creation.
1
Through BlackRock
Voting Choice
we have, since January 2022, made proxy voting easier and more accessible for
investors in separate accounts and certain pooled vehicles. As a result, the
shares attributed to BlackRock in company share registers may be voted
differently depending on whether our clients have authorized BIS to vote on
their behalf, have authorized BIS to vote in accordance with a third party
policy, or have elected to vote shares in accordance with their own policy. We
are not able to disclose which clients have opted to exercise greater control
over their voting, nor are we able to disclose which proxy voting policies they
have selected.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
We
generally vote in support of management and boards that exhibit an approach to
decision-making that is consistent with creating durable, long-term value for
shareholders. If we have concerns about a company’s approach, we may choose to
explain our expectations to the company’s board and management. Following that
engagement, we may signal through our voting that we have outstanding concerns,
generally by voting against the re-election of directors we view as having
responsibility for an issue. We apply our regional proxy voting guidelines to
achieve the outcome that is most aligned with our clients’ long-term financial
interests.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Key
themes
We
recognize that accepted standards and norms of corporate governance can differ
between markets. However, in our experience, there are certain fundamental
elements of governance practice that are intrinsic globally to a company’s
ability to create long-term value for shareholders. These global themes are set
out in this overarching set of principles (the Principles), which are anchored
in transparency and accountability. At a minimum, it is our view that companies
should observe the accepted corporate governance standards in their domestic
market and ask that, if they do not, they explain how their approach better
supports durable, long-term value creation.
These
Principles cover seven key themes:
•Boards
and directors
•Auditors
and audit-related issues
•Capital
structure, mergers, asset sales and other special transactions
•Compensation
and benefits
•Material
sustainability-related risks and opportunities
•Other
corporate governance matters and shareholder protections
•Shareholder
proposals
Our
regional and market-specific voting guidelines explain how these Principles
inform our voting decisions in relation to specific ballot items for shareholder
meetings.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Boards
and directors
Our
primary focus is on the performance of the board of directors to promote sound
corporate governance. The performance of the board is critical to the economic
success of the company and the protection of shareholders’ interests. As part of
their responsibilities, board members owe fiduciary duties to shareholders in
overseeing the strategic direction and operation of the company. For this
reason, BIS sees engaging with and the election of directors as one of our most
important and impactful responsibilities.
We
support boards whose approach is consistent with creating durable, long-term
value. This includes the effective corporate governance and management of
material sustainability-related risks and opportunities,2
as well as the consideration of the company’s key constituents including their
employees, clients, suppliers, and the communities within which they operate.
The board should establish and maintain a framework of robust and effective
governance mechanisms to support its oversight of the company’s strategic aims.
We look to the board to articulate the effectiveness of these mechanisms in
overseeing the management of business risks and opportunities and the
fulfillment of the company’s purpose. Disclosure of all material issues that
affect the company’s long-term strategy and ability to create value is essential
for shareholders to be able to appropriately understand and assess how risks are
effectively identified, managed and mitigated.
Where
a company has not adequately disclosed and demonstrated that they have fulfilled
these responsibilities, we will consider voting against the re-election of
directors whom we consider to have particular responsibility for the issue. We
assess director performance on a case-by-case basis and in light of each
company’s circumstances, taking into consideration our assessment of their
governance, business practices that support durable, long-term value creation,
and performance. In serving the interests of shareholders, the responsibility of
the board of directors includes, but is not limited to, the
following:
•Establishing
an appropriate corporate governance structure
•Supporting
and overseeing management in setting long-term strategic goals, and applicable
measures of value-creation and milestones that will demonstrate progress, and
taking steps to address anticipated or actual obstacles to success
•Providing
oversight on the identification and management of material governance and
sustainability-related risks
•Overseeing
the financial resilience of the company, the integrity of financial statements,
and the robustness of a company's Enterprise Risk Management3
framework
•Making
decisions on matters that require independent evaluation which may include
mergers, acquisitions and dispositions, activist situations or other similar
cases
•Establishing
appropriate executive compensation structures
•Monitoring
business issues including material sustainability-related risks and
opportunities, that have the potential to significantly impact the company's
long-term value
There
should be clear descriptions of the role of the board and the committees of the
board and how they engage with and oversee management. Set out below are ways in
which boards and directors can demonstrate a commitment to acting in the best
long-term economic interests of all shareholders.
2
By material sustainability-related risks and opportunities, we mean the drivers
of risk and value creation in a company’s business model that have an
environmental or social dependency or impact. Examples of environmental issues
include, but are not limited to, water use, land use, waste management and
climate risk. Examples of social issues include, but are not limited to, human
capital management, impacts on the communities in which a company operates,
customer loyalty and relationships with regulators. It is our view that
well-managed companies will effectively evaluate and manage material
sustainability-related risks and opportunities relevant to their businesses.
Governance is the core means by which boards can oversee the creation of
durable, long-term value. Appropriate risk oversight of business-relevant and
material sustainability-related considerations is a component of a sound
governance framework.
3
Enterprise risk management is a process, effected by the entity’s board of
directors, management, and other personnel, applied in strategy setting and
across the enterprise, designed to identify potential events that may affect the
entity, and manage risk to be within the risk appetite, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the achievement of objectives.(Committee of Sponsoring
Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), Enterprise Risk Management —
Integrated Framework, September 2004, New York, NY).
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
We
will seek to engage with the appropriate directors where we have concerns about
the performance of the company, board, or individual directors and may signal
outstanding concerns in our voting. While we consider these principles to be
globally relevant, when assessing a board’s composition and governance
processes, we consider local market norms and regulations.
Regular
accountability
It
is our view that directors should stand for re-election on a regular basis,
ideally annually. In our experience, annual re-elections allow shareholders to
reaffirm their support for board members or hold them accountable for their
decisions in a timely manner. When board members are not re-elected annually, in
our experience, it is good practice for boards to have a rotation policy to
ensure that, through a board cycle, all directors have had their appointment
re-confirmed, with a proportion of directors being put forward for re-election
at each annual general meeting.
Effective
board composition
Regular
director elections also give boards the opportunity to adjust their composition
in an orderly way to reflect the evolution of the company’s strategy and the
market environment. In our view, it is beneficial for new directors to be
brought onto the board periodically to refresh the group’s thinking and in a
manner that supports both continuity and appropriate succession planning. We
consider the average overall tenure of the board, where we are seeking a balance
between the knowledge and experience of longer-serving members and the fresh
perspectives of newer members. We encourage companies to keep under regular
review the effectiveness of their board (including its size), and assess
directors nominated for election or re-election in the context of the
composition of the board as a whole. This assessment should consider a number of
factors, including the potential need to address gaps in skills, experience,
independence, and diversity.
In
our view, there should be a sufficient number of independent directors, free
from conflicts of interest or undue influence from connected parties, to ensure
objectivity in the decision-making of the board and its ability to oversee
management. Common impediments to independence may include but are not limited
to:
•Current
or recent employment at the company or a subsidiary
•Being,
or representing, a shareholder with a substantial shareholding in the
company
•Interlocking
directorships
•Having
any other interest, business or other relationship which could, or could
reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with a director’s ability to
act in the best interests of the company and their shareholders
In
our experience, boards are most effective at overseeing and advising management
when there is a senior independent board leader. This director may chair the
board, or, where the chair is also the CEO (or is otherwise not independent), be
designated as a lead independent director. The role of this director is to
enhance the effectiveness of the independent members of the board through
shaping the agenda, ensuring adequate information is provided to the board, and
encouraging independent director participation in board deliberations. The lead
independent director or another appropriate director should be available to
shareholders in those situations where an independent director is best placed to
explain and contextualize a company’s approach.
When
nominating new directors to the board, we look to companies to provide
sufficient information on the individual candidates so that shareholders can
assess the suitability of each individual nominee and the overall board
composition. These disclosures should give an understanding of how the
collective experience and expertise of the board aligns with the company’s
long-term strategy and business model. Highly qualified, engaged directors with
professional characteristics relevant to a company’s business enhance the
ability of the board to add value and be the voice of shareholders in board
discussions. In our view, a strong board provides a competitive advantage to a
company, providing valuable oversight and contributing to the most important
management decisions that support long-term financial performance.
It
is in this context that we are interested in diversity in the board room. We see
it as a means to promoting diversity of thought and avoiding “group think” in
the board’s exercise of its responsibilities to advise and oversee management.
It allows boards to have deeper discussions and make more resilient decisions.
We ask boards to disclose how diversity is considered in board composition,
including professional characteristics, such as a director’s industry
experience, specialist areas of expertise and geographic location; as well as
demographic characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity and age.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
We
look to understand a board’s diversity in the context of a company’s domicile,
market capitalization, business model and strategy. Increasingly, we see leading
boards adding members whose experience deepens the board’s understanding of the
company’s customers, employees and communities. Self- identified board
demographic diversity can usefully be disclosed in aggregate, consistent with
local law. We believe boards should aspire to meaningful diversity of
membership, at least consistent with local regulatory requirements and best
practices, while recognizing that building a strong, diverse board can take
time.
This
position is based on our view that diversity of perspective and thought – in the
board room, in the management team and throughout the company – leads to better
long term economic outcomes for companies. Academic research already reveals
correlations between specific dimensions of diversity and effects on
decision-making processes and outcomes.4
In our experience, greater diversity in the board room contributes to more
robust discussions and more innovative and resilient decisions. Over time,
greater diversity in the board room can also promote greater diversity and
resilience in the leadership team, and the workforce more broadly. That
diversity can enable companies to develop businesses that more closely reflect
and resonate with the customers and communities they serve.
There
are matters for which the board has responsibility that may involve a conflict
of interest for executives or for affiliated directors. It is our view that
objective oversight of such matters is best achieved when the board forms
committees comprised entirely of independent directors. In many markets, these
committees of the board specialize in audit, director nominations, and
compensation matters. An ad hoc committee might also be formed to decide on a
special transaction, particularly one involving a related party, or to
investigate a significant adverse event.
Sufficient
capacity
As
the role and expectations of a director are increasingly demanding, directors
must be able to commit an appropriate amount of time to board and committee
matters. It is important that directors have the capacity to meet all of their
responsibilities - including when there are unforeseen events – and therefore,
they should not take on an excessive number of roles that would impair their
ability to fulfill their duties.
Auditors
and audit-related issues
BlackRock
recognizes the critical importance of financial statements, which should provide
a true and fair picture of a company’s financial condition. Accordingly, the
assumptions made by management and reviewed by the auditor in preparing the
financial statements should be reasonable and justified.
The
accuracy of financial statements, inclusive of financial and non-financial
information as required or permitted under market-specific accounting rules, is
of paramount importance to BlackRock. Investors increasingly recognize that a
broader range of risks and opportunities have the potential to materially impact
financial performance. Over time, we anticipate investors and other users of
company reporting will increasingly seek to understand and scrutinize the
assumptions underlying financial statements, particularly those that pertain to
the impact of the transition to a low carbon economy on a company’s business
model and asset mix. We recognize that this is an area of evolving practice and
we look to international standards setters, the International Accounting
Standards Board (IASB) and the International Auditing and Assurance Standards
Board (IAASB) to provide additional guidance to companies.
In
this context, audit committees, or equivalent, play a vital role in a company’s
financial reporting system by providing independent oversight of the accounts,
material financial and, where appropriate to the jurisdiction, non-financial
information, internal control frameworks, and in the absence of a dedicated risk
committee, Enterprise Risk Management systems. In our view, effective audit
committee oversight strengthens the quality and reliability of a company’s
financial statements and provides an important level of reassurance to
shareholders.
4
For a discussion on the different impacts of diversity see: McKinsey, “Diversity
Wins: How Inclusion Matters”, May 2022; Harvard Business Review, Diverse Teams
Feel Less Comfortable – and That’s Why They Perform Better, September 2016; “Do
Diverse Directors Influence DEI Outcomes”, September 2022 McKinsey, “Diversity
Wins: How Inclusion Matters”, May 2022; Harvard Business Review, Diverse Teams
Feel Less Comfortable – and That’s Why They Perform Better, September 2016; “Do
Diverse Directors Influence DEI Outcomes”, September 2022
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
We
hold members of the audit committee or equivalent responsible for overseeing the
management of the audit function. Audit committees or equivalent should have
clearly articulated charters that set out their responsibilities and have a
rotation plan in place that allows for a periodic refreshment of the committee
membership to introduce fresh perspectives to audit oversight. We recognize that
audit committees will rely on management, internal audit and the independent
auditor in fulfilling their responsibilities but look to committee members to
demonstrate they have relevant expertise to monitor and oversee those
functions.
We
take particular note of unexplained changes in reporting methodology, cases
involving significant financial restatements, or ad hoc notifications of
material financial weakness. In this respect, audit committees should provide
timely disclosure on the remediation of Key and Critical Audit Matters
identified either by the external auditor or internal audit
function.
The
integrity of financial statements depends on the auditor being free of any
impediments to being an effective check on management. To that end, it is
important that auditors are, and are seen to be, independent. Where an audit
firm provides services to the company in addition to the audit, the fees earned
should be disclosed and explained. Audit committees should have in place a
procedure for assessing annually the independence of the auditor and the quality
of the external audit process.
Comprehensive
disclosure provides investors with a sense of the company’s long-term
operational risk management practices and, more broadly, the quality of the
board’s oversight. The audit committee or equivalent, or a dedicated risk
committee, should periodically review the company’s risk assessment and risk
management policies and the significant risks and exposures identified by
management, the internal auditors or the independent accountants, and
management’s steps to address them. In the absence of robust disclosures, we may
reasonably conclude that companies are not adequately managing
risk.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Capital
structure, mergers, asset sales, and other special transactions
The
capital structure of a company is critical to shareholders as it impacts the
value of their investment and the priority of their interest in the company
relative to that of other equity or debt investors. Pre- emptive rights are a
key protection for shareholders against the dilution of their
interests.
Effective
voting rights are basic rights of share ownership. It is our view that one vote
for one share as a guiding principle supports effective corporate governance.
Shareholders, as the residual claimants, have the strongest interest in
protecting company value, and voting rights should match economic
exposure.
In
principle, we disagree with the creation of a share class with equivalent
economic exposure and preferential, differentiated voting rights. In our view,
this structure violates the fundamental corporate governance principle of
proportionality and results in a concentration of power in the hands of a few
shareholders, thus disenfranchising other shareholders and amplifying any
potential conflicts of interest. However, we recognize that in certain markets,
at least for a period of time, companies may have a valid argument for listing
dual classes of shares with differentiated voting rights. In our view, such
companies should review these share class structures on a regular basis or as
company circumstances change.
Additionally,
they should seek shareholder approval of their capital structure on a periodic
basis via a management proposal at the company’s shareholder meeting. The
proposal should give unaffiliated shareholders the opportunity to affirm the
current structure or establish mechanisms to end or phase out controlling
structures at the appropriate time, while minimizing costs to
shareholders.
In
assessing mergers, asset sales, or other special transactions, BlackRock’s
primary consideration is the long-term economic interests of our clients as
shareholders. Boards proposing a transaction need to clearly explain the
economic and strategic rationale behind it. We will review a proposed
transaction to determine the degree to which it can enhance long-term
shareholder value. We would prefer that proposed transactions have the unanimous
support of the board and have been negotiated at arm’s length. We may seek
reassurance from the board that executives’ and/or board members’ financial
interests in a given transaction have not adversely affected their ability to
place shareholders’ interests before their own. Where the transaction involves
related parties, the recommendation to support should come from the independent
directors, a best practice in most markets, and ideally, the terms should have
been assessed through an independent appraisal process. In addition, it is good
practice that it be approved by a separate vote of the non-conflicted
parties.
As
a matter of sound governance practice, shareholders should have a right to
dispose of company shares in the open market without unnecessary restriction. In
our view, corporate mechanisms designed to limit shareholders’ ability to sell
their shares are contrary to basic property rights. Such mechanisms can serve to
protect and entrench interests other than those of the shareholders. In our
experience, shareholders are broadly capable of making decisions in their own
best interests. We encourage any so-called “shareholder rights plans” proposed
by a board to be subject to shareholder approval upon introduction and
periodically thereafter.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Compensation
and benefits
In
most markets, one of the most important roles for a company’s board of directors
is to put in place a compensation structure that incentivizes and rewards
executives appropriately. There should be a clear link between variable pay and
operational and financial performance. Performance metrics should be stretching
and aligned with a company’s strategy and business model. BIS does not have a
position on the use of sustainability-related criteria, but in our view, where
companies choose to include them, they should be as rigorous as other financial
or operational targets. Long-term incentive plans should vest over timeframes
aligned with the delivery of long-term shareholder value. Compensation
committees should guard against contractual arrangements that would entitle
executives to material compensation for early termination of their employment.
Finally, pension contributions and other deferred compensation arrangements
should be reasonable in light of market practice.
We
are not supportive of one-off or special bonuses unrelated to company or
individual performance. Where discretion has been used by the compensation
committee or its equivalent, we expect disclosure relating to how and why the
discretion was used, and how the adjusted outcome is aligned with the interests
of shareholders. We acknowledge that the use of peer group evaluation by
compensation committees can help ensure competitive pay; however, we are
concerned when the rationale for increases in total compensation at a company is
solely based on peer benchmarking rather than a rigorous measure of
outperformance. We encourage companies to clearly explain how compensation
outcomes have rewarded outperformance against peer firms.
We
believe consideration should be given to building claw back provisions into
incentive plans such that executives would be required to forgo rewards when
they are not justified by actual performance and/or when compensation was based
on faulty financial reporting or deceptive business practices. We also favor
recoupment from any senior executive whose behavior caused material financial
harm to shareholders, material reputational risk to the company, or resulted in
a criminal investigation, even if such actions did not ultimately result in a
material restatement of past results.
Non-executive
directors should be compensated in a manner that is commensurate with the time
and effort expended in fulfilling their professional responsibilities.
Additionally, these compensation arrangements should not risk compromising
directors’ independence or aligning their interests too closely with those of
the management, whom they are charged with overseeing.
We
use third party research, in addition to our own analysis, to evaluate existing
and proposed compensation structures. We may vote against members of the
compensation committee or equivalent board members for poor compensation
practices or structures.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Material
sustainability-related risks and opportunities
It
is our view that well-managed companies will effectively evaluate and manage
material sustainability- related risks and opportunities relevant to their
businesses. Appropriate oversight of sustainability considerations is a core
component of having an effective governance framework, which supports durable,
long-term value creation.
Robust
disclosure is essential for investors to effectively evaluate companies’
strategy and business practices related to material sustainability-related risks
and opportunities. Given the increased understanding of material
sustainability-related risks and opportunities and the need for better
information to assess them, BlackRock advocates for continued improvement in
companies’ reporting, where necessary, and will express any concerns through our
voting where a company’s actions or disclosures are inadequate.
BlackRock
encourages companies to use the framework developed by the Task Force on
Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD) to disclose their approach to
ensuring they have a sustainable business model and to supplement that
disclosure with industry-specific metrics such as those identified by the
Sustainability Accounting Standards Board (SASB), now part of the International
Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) under the International Financial
Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation.5
While the TCFD framework was developed to support climate-related risk
disclosure, the four pillars of the TCFD governance, strategy, risk management,
and metrics and targets are a useful way for companies to disclose how they
identify, assess, manage, and oversee a variety of sustainability-related risks
and opportunities. SASB’s industry-specific guidance (as identified in its
materiality map) is beneficial in helping companies identify key performance
indicators (KPIs) across various dimensions of sustainability that are
considered to be financially material and decision-useful within their industry.
In particular, we encourage companies to consider reporting on nature-related
factors, given the growing materiality of these issues for many
businesses.6
We recognize that some companies may report using different standards, which may
be required by regulation, or one of a number of voluntary standards. In such
cases, we ask that companies highlight the metrics that are industry- or
company-specific.
Climate
and other sustainability-related disclosures often require companies to collect
and aggregate data from various internal and external sources. We recognize that
the practical realities of data- collection and reporting may not line up with
financial reporting cycles and companies may require additional time after their
fiscal year-end to accurately collect, analyze and report this data to
investors. To give investors time to assess the data, we encourage companies to
produce climate and other sustainability-related disclosures sufficiently in
advance of their annual meeting.
Companies
may also adopt or refer to guidance on sustainable and responsible business
conduct issued by supranational organizations such as the United Nations or the
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. Further, industry
initiatives on managing specific operational risks may provide useful guidance
to companies on best practices and disclosures. Companies should disclose any
relevant global climate and other sustainability-related standards adopted, the
industry initiatives in which they participate, any peer group benchmarking
undertaken, and any assurance processes to help investors understand their
approach to sustainable and responsible business practices.
5
The International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation announced in
November 2021 the formation of an International Sustainability Standards Board
(ISSB) to develop a comprehensive global baseline of high-quality sustainability
disclosure standards to meet investors’ information needs. SASB standards will
over time be adapted to ISSB standards but are the reference reporting tool in
the meantime.
6
While guidance is still under development for a unified disclosure framework
related to natural capital, the emerging recommendations of the Taskforce on
Nature-related Financial Disclosures (TNFD), may prove useful to some
companies.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Climate
risk
It
is our view that climate change has become a key factor in many companies’
long-term prospects. As such, as long-term investors we are interested in
understanding how companies may be impacted by material climate-related risks
and opportunities - just as we seek to understand other business-relevant risks
and opportunities - and how these factors are considered within strategy in a
manner consistent with the company’s business model and sector. Specifically, we
look for companies to disclose strategies they have in place that mitigate and
are resilient to any material risks to their long-term business model associated
with a range of climate-related scenarios, including a scenario in which global
warming is limited to well below 2°C, considering global ambitions to achieve a
limit of 1.5°C.7
It is, of course, up to each company to define their own strategy: that is not
the role of BlackRock or other investors.
BIS
recognizes that climate change can be challenging for many companies, as they
seek to drive long- term value by mitigating risks and capturing opportunities.
A growing number of companies, financial institutions, as well as governments,
have committed to advancing decarbonization in line with the Paris Agreement.
There is growing consensus that companies can benefit from the more favorable
macro- economic environment under an orderly, timely and equitable global energy
transition.8
Yet the path ahead is deeply uncertain and uneven, with different parts of the
economy moving at different speeds.9
Many companies are asking what their role should be in contributing to an
orderly and equitable transition – in ensuring a reliable energy supply and
energy security, and in protecting the most vulnerable from energy price shocks
and economic dislocation. In this context, we encourage companies to include in
their disclosure a business plan for how they intend to deliver long-term
financial performance through a transition to global net zero carbon emissions,
consistent with their business model and sector.
We
look to companies to disclose short-, medium- and long-term targets, ideally
science-based targets where these are available for their sector, for Scope 1
and 2 greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) reductions and to demonstrate how their
targets are consistent with the long-term economic interests of their
shareholders. Many companies have an opportunity to use and contribute to the
development of low carbon energy sources and technologies that will be essential
to decarbonizing the global economy over time. We also recognize that continued
investment in traditional energy sources, including oil and gas, is required to
maintain an orderly and equitable transition — and that divestiture of
carbon-intensive assets is unlikely to contribute to global emissions
reductions. We encourage companies to disclose how their capital allocation to
various energy sources is consistent with their strategy.
At
this stage, we view Scope 3 emissions differently from Scopes 1 and 2, given
methodological complexity, regulatory uncertainty, concerns about
double-counting, and lack of direct control by companies. While we welcome any
disclosures and commitments companies choose to make regarding Scope 3
emissions, we recognize these are provided on a good-faith basis as methodology
develops. Our publicly available commentary provides more information on our
approach to climate risk.
Key
stakeholder interests
In
order to advance long-term shareholders’ interests, companies should consider
the interests of the various parties on whom they depend for their success over
time. It is for each company to determine their key stakeholders based on what
is material to their business and long-term financial performance. Most
commonly, key stakeholders include employees, business partners (such as
suppliers and distributors), clients and consumers, regulators, and the
communities in which they operate.
7
The global aspiration to achieve a net-zero global economy by 2050 is reflective
of aggregated efforts; governments representing over 90% of GDP have committed
to move to net-zero over the coming decades. In determining how to vote on
behalf of clients who have authorized us to do so, we look to companies only to
address issues within their control and do not anticipate that they will address
matters that are the domain of public policy.
8
For example, BlackRock’s Capital Markets Assumptions anticipate 25 points of
cumulative economic gains over a 20-year period in an orderly transition as
compared to the alternative. This better macro environment will support better
economic growth, financial stability, job growth, productivity, as well as
ecosystem stability and health outcomes.
9
BlackRock, “Managing the net-zero transition”, February 2022.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Considering
the interests of key stakeholders recognizes the collective nature of long-term
value creation and the extent to which each company’s prospects for growth are
tied to its ability to foster strong sustainable relationships with and support
from those stakeholders. Companies should articulate how they address adverse
impacts that could arise from their business practices and affect critical
business relationships with their stakeholders. We encourage companies to
implement, to the extent appropriate, monitoring processes (often referred to as
due diligence) to identify and mitigate potential adverse impacts and grievance
mechanisms to remediate any actual adverse material impacts. In our view,
maintaining trust within these relationships can contribute to a company’s
long-term success.
As
a long-term shareholder on behalf of our clients, we find it helpful when
companies disclose how they have identified their key stakeholders and
considered their interests in business decision-making. We are also interested
to understand the role of the board, which is well positioned to ensure that the
approach taken is informed by and aligns with the company’s strategy and
purpose.
Other
corporate governance matters and shareholder protections
It
is our view that shareholders have a right to material and timely information on
the financial performance and viability of the companies in which they invest.
In addition, companies should publish information on the governance structures
in place and the rights of shareholders to influence these structures. The
reporting and disclosure provided by companies help shareholders assess whether
their economic interests have been protected and the quality of the board’s
oversight of management. We believe shareholders should have the right to vote
on key corporate governance matters, including changes to governance mechanisms,
to submit proposals to the shareholders’ meeting, and to call special meetings
of shareholders.
Corporate
Form
In
our view, it is the responsibility of the board to determine the corporate form
that is most appropriate given the company's purpose and business
model.10
Companies proposing to change their corporate form to a public benefit
corporation or similar entity should put it to a shareholder vote if not already
required to do so under applicable law. Supporting documentation from companies
or shareholder proponents proposing to alter the corporate form should clearly
articulate how the interests of shareholders and different stakeholders would be
impacted as well as the accountability and voting mechanisms that would be
available to shareholders. As a fiduciary on behalf of clients, we generally
support management proposals if our analysis indicates that shareholders’
interests are adequately protected. Relevant shareholder proposals are evaluated
on a case-by-case basis.
10
Corporate form refers to the legal structure by which a business is
organized.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Shareholder
proposals
In
most markets in which BlackRock invests on behalf of clients, shareholders have
the right to submit proposals to be voted on by shareholders at a company’s
annual or extraordinary meeting, as long as eligibility and procedural
requirements are met. The matters that we see put forward by shareholders
address a wide range of topics, including governance reforms, capital
management, and improvements in the management or disclosure of
sustainability-related risks.
BlackRock
is subject to certain requirements under antitrust law in the United States that
place restrictions and limitations on how BlackRock can interact with the
companies in which we invest on behalf of our clients, including our ability to
submit shareholder proposals. As noted above, we can vote, on behalf of clients
who authorize us to do so, on proposals put forth by others.
When
assessing shareholder proposals, we evaluate each proposal on its merit, with a
singular focus on its implications for long-term value creation. We consider the
business and economic relevance of the issue raised, as well as its materiality
and the urgency with which we believe it should be addressed. We take into
consideration the legal effect of the proposal, as shareholder proposals may be
advisory or legally binding depending on the jurisdiction. We would not support
proposals that we believe would result in over-reaching into the basic business
decisions of the company.
Where
a proposal is focused on a material governance or sustainability-related risk
that we agree needs to be addressed and the intended outcome is consistent with
long-term value creation, we will look to the board and management to
demonstrate that the company has met the intent of the request made in the
shareholder proposal. Where our analysis and/or engagement indicate an
opportunity for improvement in the company’s approach to the issue, we may
support shareholder proposals that are reasonable and not unduly prescriptive or
constraining on management. Alternatively, or in addition, we may vote against
the re-election of one or more directors if, in our assessment, the board has
not responded sufficiently or with an appropriate sense of urgency. While we may
not agree with all aspects of a shareholder proponent’s views or all facets of
the proponent’s supporting statement, we may still support proposals that
address material governance or sustainability-related risks where we believe it
would be helpful for shareholders to have more detailed information on how those
risks are identified, monitored, and managed to support a company’s ability to
deliver long-term financial returns. We may also support a proposal if
management is on track, but we believe that voting in favor might accelerate
progress.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
BlackRock’s
oversight of its investment stewardship activities
Oversight
BlackRock
maintains three regional advisory committees (Stewardship Advisory Committees)
for a) the Americas; b) Europe, the Middle East and Africa (EMEA); and c)
Asia-Pacific, generally consisting of senior BlackRock investment professionals
and/or senior employees with practical boardroom experience. The regional
Stewardship Advisory Committees review and advise on amendments to BIS proxy
voting guidelines covering markets within each respective region (Guidelines).
The advisory committees do not determine voting decisions, which are the
responsibility of BIS.
In
addition to the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees, the Investment
Stewardship Global Oversight Committee (Global Committee) is a risk-focused
committee, comprised of senior representatives from various BlackRock investment
teams, a senior legal representative, the Global Head of Investment Stewardship
(Global Head), and other senior executives with relevant experience and team
oversight. The Global Oversight Committee does not determine voting decisions,
which are the responsibility of BIS.
The
Global Head has primary oversight of the activities of BIS, including voting in
accordance with the Guidelines, which require the application of professional
judgment and consideration of each company’s unique circumstances. The Global
Committee reviews and approves amendments to these Principles. The Global
Committee also reviews and approves amendments to the regional Guidelines, as
proposed by the regional Stewardship Advisory Committees.
In
addition, the Global Committee receives and reviews periodic reports regarding
the votes cast by BIS, as well as updates on material process issues, procedural
changes, and other risk oversight considerations. The Global Committee reviews
these reports in an oversight capacity as informed by the BIS corporate
governance engagement program and the Guidelines.
BIS
carries out engagement with companies, monitors and executes proxy votes, and
conducts vote operations (including maintaining records of votes cast) in a
manner consistent with the relevant Guidelines. BIS also conducts research on
corporate governance issues and participates in industry discussions to
contribute to and keep abreast of important developments in the corporate
governance field. BIS may utilize third parties for certain of the foregoing
activities and performs oversight of those third parties. BIS may raise
complicated or particularly controversial matters for internal discussion with
the relevant investment teams and governance specialists for discussion and
guidance prior to making a voting decision.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Vote
execution
BlackRock
votes on proxy issues when our clients authorize us to do so. We offer certain
clients who prefer their holdings to be voted consistent with specific values or
views Voting Choice.11
When BlackRock votes on behalf of our clients, we carefully consider proxies
submitted to funds and other fiduciary account(s) (Fund or Funds) for which we
have voting authority. BlackRock votes (or refrains from voting) proxies for
each Fund for which we have voting authority based on our evaluation of the best
long-term economic interests of our clients as shareholders, in the exercise of
our independent business judgment, and without regard to the relationship of the
issuer of the proxy (or any shareholder proponent or dissident shareholder) to
the Fund, the Fund’s affiliates (if any), BlackRock or BlackRock’s affiliates,
or BlackRock employees (see “Conflicts management policies and procedures”,
below).
When
exercising voting rights, BlackRock will normally vote on specific proxy issues
in accordance with the Guidelines for the relevant market. The Guidelines are
reviewed annually and are amended consistent with changes in the local market
practice, as developments in corporate governance occur, or as otherwise deemed
advisable by the applicable Stewardship Advisory Committees. BIS analysts may,
in the exercise of their professional judgment, conclude that the Guidelines do
not cover the specific matter upon which a proxy vote is required or that an
exception to the Guidelines would be in the best long-term economic interests of
BlackRock’s clients.
In
the uncommon circumstance of there being a vote with respect to fixed income
securities or the securities of privately held issuers, the decision generally
will be made by a Fund's portfolio managers and/or BIS based on their assessment
of the particular transactions or other matters at issue.
In
certain markets, proxy voting involves logistical issues which can affect
BlackRock’s ability to vote such proxies, as well as the desirability of voting
such proxies. These issues include, but are not limited to: i) untimely notice
of shareholder meetings; ii) restrictions on a foreigner’s ability to exercise
votes; iii) requirements to vote proxies in person; iv) “share-blocking”
(requirements that investors who exercise their voting rights surrender the
right to dispose of their holdings for some specified period in proximity to the
shareholder meeting); v) potential difficulties in translating the proxy; vi)
regulatory constraints; and vii) requirements to provide local agents with
unrestricted powers of attorney to facilitate voting instructions. We are not
supportive of impediments to the exercise of voting rights such as
share-blocking or overly burdensome administrative requirements.
As
a consequence, BlackRock votes proxies in these situations on a “best-efforts”
basis. In addition, BIS may determine that it is generally in the best interests
of BlackRock’s clients not to vote proxies (or not to vote our full allocation)
if the costs (including but not limited to opportunity costs associated with
share- blocking constraints) associated with exercising a vote are expected to
outweigh the benefit the client would derive by voting on the
proposal.
Portfolio
managers have full discretion to vote the shares in the Funds they manage based
on their analysis of the economic impact of a particular ballot item on their
investors. Portfolio managers may, from time to time, reach differing views on
how best to maximize economic value with respect to a particular investment.
Therefore, portfolio managers may, and sometimes do, vote shares in the Funds
under their management differently from BIS or from one another. However,
because BlackRock’s clients are mostly long-term investors with long-term
economic goals, ballots are frequently cast in a uniform manner.
11
To learn more visit https://www.blackrock.com/corporate/about-us/investment-stewardship/blackrock-voting-choice
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Conflicts
management policies and procedures
BIS
maintains policies and procedures that seek to prevent undue influence on
BlackRock’s proxy voting activity. Such influence might stem from any
relationship between the investee company (or any shareholder proponent or
dissident shareholder) and BlackRock, BlackRock’s affiliates, a Fund or a Fund’s
affiliates, or BlackRock employees. The following are examples of sources of
perceived or potential conflicts of interest:
•BlackRock
clients who may be issuers of securities or proponents of shareholder
resolutions
•BlackRock
business partners or third parties who may be issuers of securities or
proponents of shareholder resolutions
•BlackRock
employees who may sit on the boards of public companies held in Funds managed by
BlackRock
•Significant
BlackRock, Inc. investors who may be issuers of securities held in Funds managed
by BlackRock
•Securities
of BlackRock, Inc. or BlackRock investment funds held in Funds managed by
BlackRock
•BlackRock,
Inc. board members who serve as senior executives or directors of public
companies held in Funds managed by BlackRock
BlackRock
has taken certain steps to mitigate perceived or potential conflicts including,
but not limited to, the following:
•Adopted
the Guidelines which are designed to advance our clients’ interests in the
companies in which BlackRock invests on their behalf
•Established
a reporting structure that separates BIS from employees with sales, vendor
management, or business partnership roles. In addition, BlackRock seeks to
ensure that all engagements with corporate issuers, dissident shareholders or
shareholder proponents are managed consistently and without regard to
BlackRock’s relationship with such parties. Clients or business partners are not
given special treatment or differentiated access to BIS. BIS prioritizes
engagements based on factors including, but not limited to, our need for
additional information to make a voting decision or our view on the likelihood
that an engagement could lead to positive outcome(s) over time for the economic
value of the company. Within the normal course of business, BIS may engage
directly with BlackRock clients, business partners and/or third parties, and/or
with employees with sales, vendor management, or business partnership roles, in
discussions regarding our approach to stewardship, general corporate governance
matters, client reporting needs, and/or to otherwise ensure that proxy-related
client service levels are met
•Determined
to engage, in certain instances, an independent third party voting service
provider to make proxy voting recommendations as a further safeguard to avoid
potential conflicts of interest, to satisfy regulatory compliance requirements,
or as may be otherwise required by applicable law. In such circumstances, the
voting service provider provides BlackRock with recommendations, in accordance
with the Guidelines, as to how to vote such proxies. BlackRock uses an
independent voting service provider to make proxy voting recommendations for
shares of BlackRock, Inc. and companies affiliated with BlackRock, Inc.
BlackRock may also use an independent voting service provider to make proxy
voting recommendations for:
◦public
companies that include BlackRock employees on their boards of
directors
◦public
companies of which a BlackRock, Inc. board member serves as a senior executive
or a member of the board of directors
◦public
companies that are the subject of certain transactions involving BlackRock
Funds
◦public
companies that are joint venture partners with BlackRock, and
◦public
companies when legal or regulatory requirements compel BlackRock to use an
independent voting service provider
In
selecting a voting service provider, we assess several characteristics,
including but not limited to: independence, an ability to analyze proxy issues
and make recommendations in the best economic interest of our clients in
accordance with the Guidelines, reputation for reliability and integrity, and
operational capacity to accurately deliver the assigned recommendations in a
timely manner. We may engage more than one voting service provider, in part to
mitigate potential or perceived conflicts of interest at a single voting service
provider. The Global Committee appoints and reviews the performance of the
voting service providers, generally on an annual basis.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Securities
lending
When
so authorized, BlackRock acts as a securities lending agent on behalf of Funds.
Securities lending is a well-regulated practice that contributes to capital
market efficiency. It also enables funds to generate additional returns for a
fund, while allowing fund providers to keep fund expenses lower.
With
regard to the relationship between securities lending and proxy voting,
BlackRock’s approach is informed by our fiduciary responsibility to act in our
clients’ best interests. In most cases, BlackRock anticipates that the potential
long-term value to the Fund of voting shares would be less than the potential
revenue the loan may provide the Fund. However, in certain instances, BlackRock
may determine, in its independent business judgment as a fiduciary, that the
value of voting outweighs the securities lending revenue loss to clients and
would therefore recall shares to be voted in those instances.
The
decision to recall securities on loan as part of BlackRock’s securities lending
program in order to vote is based on an evaluation of various factors that
include, but are not limited to, assessing potential securities lending revenue
alongside the potential long-term value to clients of voting those securities
(based on the information available at the time of recall
consideration).12
BIS works with colleagues in the Securities Lending and Risk and Quantitative
Analysis teams to evaluate the costs and benefits to clients of recalling shares
on loan.
Periodically,
BlackRock reviews our process for determining whether to recall securities on
loan in order to vote and may modify it as necessary.
Voting
guidelines
The
issue-specific Guidelines published for each region/country in which we vote are
intended to summarize BlackRock’s general philosophy and approach to issues that
may commonly arise in the proxy voting context in each market where we invest.
The Guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive. BIS applies the Guidelines on
a case-by-case basis, in the context of the individual circumstances of each
company and the specific issue under review. As such, the Guidelines do not
indicate how BIS will vote in every instance. Rather, they reflect our view
about corporate governance issues generally, and provide insight into how we
typically approach issues that commonly arise on corporate ballots.
Reporting
and vote transparency
We
are committed to transparency in the stewardship work we do on behalf of
clients. We inform clients about our engagement and voting policies and
activities through direct communication and through disclosure on our website.
Each year we publish an annual report that provides a global overview of our
investment stewardship engagement and voting activities and a voting spotlight
that summarizes our voting over a proxy year.13
Additionally, we make public our market-specific voting guidelines for the
benefit of clients and companies with whom we engage. We also publish
commentaries to share our perspective on market developments and emerging key
themes.
At
a more granular level, we publish quarterly our vote record for each company
that held a shareholder meeting during the period, showing how we voted on each
proposal and explaining any votes against management proposals or on shareholder
proposals. For shareholder meetings where a vote might be high profile or of
significant interest to clients, we may publish a vote bulletin after the
meeting, disclosing and explaining our vote on key proposals. We also publish a
quarterly list of all companies with which we engaged and the key topics
addressed in the engagement meeting.
In
this way, we help inform our clients about the work we do on their behalf in
promoting the governance and business models that support durable, long-term
value creation.
12
Recalling securities on loan can be impacted by the timing of record dates. In
the United States, for example, the record date of a shareholder meeting
typically falls before the proxy statements are released. Accordingly, it is not
practicable to evaluate a proxy statement, determine that a vote has a material
impact on a fund and recall any shares on loan in advance of the record date for
the annual meeting. As a result, managers must weigh independent business
judgement as a fiduciary, the benefit to a fund’s shareholders of recalling
loaned shares in advance of an estimated record date without knowing whether
there will be a vote on matters which have a material impact on the fund
(thereby forgoing potential securities lending revenue for the fund’s
shareholders) or leaving shares on loan to potentially earn revenue for the fund
(thereby forgoing the opportunity to vote).
13
The proxy year runs from July 1 to June 30 of the proceeding calendar
year.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
Want
to know more?
This
document is provided for information and educational purposes only. Investing
involves risk, including the loss of principal.
Prepared
by BlackRock, Inc.
©2023
BlackRock, Inc. All rights reserved. BLACKROCK
is a trademark of BlackRock, Inc., or its subsidiaries in the United States and
elsewhere. All other trademarks are those of their respective
owners.
BlackRock
Investment Stewardship - Global Principals
CLEARBRIDGE
INVESTMENTS
Proxy
Voting Policy
February
2023
ClearBridge
Investments Limited (CIL)
ClearBridge
RARE Infrastructure International Pty Limited (CBI RIIPL)
ClearBridge
Investments (North America) Pty Limited (CINA)
(the
above entities are referred to as “ClearBridge” for the purposes of this policy.
ClearBridge
and ClearBridge Investments, LLC. are collectively referred to as
“ClearBridge
Investments”.)
Document
Owner: Head of Legal, Risk & Compliance
This
document is confidential and is only intended for the purposes of the above
entities. This document may only be provided to third parties with the express
prior written approval of the Head of Legal, Risk & Compliance. No recipient
is authorised to pass this document or its contents on to any other person
whatsoever or reproduce it by any means. All intellectual property contained in
this document remains the property of the above entities and any rights in
relation to this intellectual property are not intended to be diluted by the
distribution of this document.
CLEARBRIDGE
INVESTMENTS
Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures
I.Types
of Accounts for Which ClearBridge Votes Proxies
II.General
Guidelines
III.How
ClearBridge Votes
IV.Conflicts
of Interest
A.Procedures
for Identifying Conflicts of Interest
B.Procedures
for Assessing Materiality of Conflicts of Interest and for Addressing Material
Conflicts of Interest
C.Third
Party Proxy Voting Firm – Conflicts of Interest
V.Voting
Policy
A.Election
of Directors
B.Proxy
Contests
C.Auditors
D.Proxy
Contest Defenses
E.Tender
Offer Defenses
F.Miscellaneous
Governance Provisions
G.Capital
Structure
H.Executive
and Director Compensation
I.State/Country
of Incorporation
J.Mergers
and Corporate Restructuring
K.Social
and Environmental Issues
L.Miscellaneous
VI.Other
Considerations
A.Share
Blocking
B.Securities
on Loan
VII.Disclosure
of Proxy Voting
VIII.Recordkeeping
and Oversight
Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures
I.TYPES
OF ACCOUNTS FOR WHICH CLEARBRIDGE VOTES PROXIES
ClearBridge
votes proxies for each client for which it has investment discretion unless the
investment management agreement provides that the client or other authorized
party (e.g., a trustee or named fiduciary of a plan) is responsible for voting
proxies.
II.GENERAL
GUIDELINES
In
voting proxies, we are guided by general fiduciary principles. Our goal is to
act prudently, solely in the best interest of the beneficial owners of the
accounts we manage. We attempt to provide for the consideration of all factors
that could affect the value of the investment and will vote proxies in the
manner that we believe will be consistent with efforts to maximize shareholder
values.
III.HOW
CLEARBRIDGE VOTES
Section
V of these policies and procedures sets forth certain stated positions. In the
case of a proxy issue for which there is a stated position, we generally vote in
accordance with the stated position. In the case of a proxy issue for which
there is a list of factors set forth in Section V that we consider in voting on
such issue, we consider those factors and vote on a case-by-case basis in
accordance with the general principles set forth above. In the case of a proxy
issue for which there is no stated position or list of factors that we consider
in voting on such issue, we vote on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the
general principles set forth above. We may utilize an external service provider
to provide us with information and/or a recommendation with regard to proxy
votes but we are not required to follow any such recommendations. The use of an
external service provider does not relieve us of our responsibility for the
proxy vote.
For
routine matters, we usually vote according to our policy or the external service
provider’s recommendation, although we are not obligated to do so and each
individual portfolio management team may vote contrary to our policy or the
recommendation of the external service provider. If a matter is non-routine,
e.g., management’s recommendation is different than that of the external service
provider and ClearBridge is a significant holder or it is a significant holding
for ClearBridge, the issues will be highlighted to the appropriate Investment
teams. Different Investment teams may vote differently on the same issue,
depending upon their assessment of clients’ best interests.
ClearBridge’s
policies are reviewed annually and its proxy voting process is overseen and
coordinated by its Proxy Committee.
IV.CONFLICTS
OF INTEREST
In
furtherance of ClearBridge’s goal to vote proxies in the best interests of
clients, ClearBridge follows procedures designed to identify and address
material conflicts that may arise between ClearBridge’s interests and those of
its clients before voting proxies on behalf of such clients.
A.Procedures
for Identifying Conflicts of Interest
ClearBridge
relies on the following to seek to identify conflicts of interest with respect
to proxy voting:
1.ClearBridge’s
employees are periodically reminded of their obligation (i) to be aware of the
potential for conflicts of interest on the part of ClearBridge with respect to
voting proxies on behalf of client accounts both as a result of their personal
relationships or personal or business relationships relating to another Franklin
Resources, Inc. ("Franklin") business unit, and (ii) to bring conflicts of
interest of which they become aware to the attention of ClearBridge’s Chief
Compliance Officer.
2.ClearBridge’s
finance area maintains and provides to ClearBridge Compliance and proxy voting
personnel an up- to-date list of all client relationships that have historically
accounted for or are projected to account for greater than 1% of ClearBridge’s
net revenues.
3.As
a general matter, ClearBridge takes the position that relationships between a
non- ClearBridge Franklin unit and an issuer (e.g.,
investment management relationship between an issuer and a non- ClearBridge
Franklin affiliate) do not present a conflict of interest for ClearBridge in
voting proxies with respect to such issuer because ClearBridge operates as an
independent business unit from other Franklin business units and because of the
existence of informational barriers between ClearBridge and certain other
Franklin business units. As noted above, ClearBridge employees are under an
obligation to bring such conflicts of interest, including conflicts of interest
which may arise because of an attempt by another Franklin business unit or non-
ClearBridge Franklin officer or employee to influence proxy voting by
ClearBridge to the attention of ClearBridge Compliance.
4.A
list of issuers with respect to which ClearBridge has a potential conflict of
interest in voting proxies on behalf of client accounts will be maintained by
ClearBridge proxy voting personnel. ClearBridge will not vote proxies relating
to such issuers until it has been determined that the conflict of interest is
not material or a method for resolving the conflict of interest has been agreed
upon and implemented, as described in Section IV below.
B.Procedures
for Assessing Materiality of Conflicts of Interest and for Addressing Material
Conflicts of Interest
1.ClearBridge
maintains a Proxy Committee which, among other things, reviews and addresses
conflicts of interest brought to its attention. The Proxy Committee is comprised
of such ClearBridge personnel (and others, at ClearBridge’s request), as are
designated from time to time. The current members of the Proxy Committee are set
forth in the Proxy Committee’s Terms of Reference.
2.All
conflicts of interest identified pursuant to the procedures outlined in Section
IV.A. must be brought to the attention of the Proxy Committee for resolution. A
proxy issue that will be voted in accordance with a stated ClearBridge position
on such issue or in accordance with the recommendation of an independent third
party generally is not brought to the attention of the Proxy Committee for a
conflict of interest review because ClearBridge’s position is that any conflict
of interest issues are resolved by voting in accordance with a pre-determined
policy or in accordance with the recommendation of an independent third
party.
3.The
Proxy Committee will determine whether a conflict of interest is material. A
conflict of interest will be considered material to the extent that it is
determined that such conflict is likely to influence, or appear to influence,
ClearBridge’s decision-making in voting the proxy. All materiality
determinations will be based on an assessment of the particular facts and
circumstances. A written record of all materiality determinations made by the
Proxy Committee will be maintained.
4.If
it is determined by the Proxy Committee that a conflict of interest is not
material, ClearBridge may vote proxies notwithstanding the existence of the
conflict.
5.If
it is determined by the Proxy Committee that a conflict of interest is material,
the Proxy Committee will determine an appropriate method to resolve such
conflict of interest before the proxy affected by the conflict of interest is
voted. Such determination shall be based on the particular facts and
circumstances, including the importance of the proxy issue, the nature of the
conflict of interest, etc. Such methods may include:
*disclosing
the conflict to clients and obtaining their consent before voting;
*suggesting
to clients that they engage another party to vote the proxy on their
behalf;
*in
the case of a conflict of interest resulting from a particular employee’s
personal relationships, removing such employee from the decision-making process
with respect to such proxy vote; or
*such
other method as is deemed appropriate given the particular facts and
circumstances, including the importance of the proxy issue, the nature of the
conflict of interest, etc. *
A
written record of the method used to resolve a material conflict of interest
shall be maintained.
______________________
*
Especially
in the case of an apparent, as opposed to actual, conflict of interest, the
Proxy Committee may resolve such conflict of interest by satisfying itself that
ClearBridge’s proposed vote on a proxy issue is in the best interest of client
accounts and is not being influenced by the conflict of interest.
C.Third
Party Proxy Voting Firm - Conflicts of Interest
With
respect to a third-party proxy voting firm described herein, the Proxy Committee
will periodically review and assess such firm’s policies, procedures and
practices with respect to the disclosure and handling of conflicts of
interest.
V.VOTING
POLICY
These
are policy guidelines that can always be superseded, subject to the duty to act
solely in the best interest of the beneficial owners of accounts, by the
investment management professionals responsible for the account holding the
shares being voted. There may be occasions when different Investment teams vote
differently on the same issue. In addition, in the case of Taft-Hartley clients,
ClearBridge will comply with a client direction to vote proxies in accordance
with Institutional Shareholder Services’ (ISS) PVS Proxy Voting Guidelines,
which ISS represents to be fully consistent with AFL-CIO
guidelines.
A.Election
of Directors
1.Voting
on Director Nominees in Uncontested Elections
a.We
withhold our vote from a director nominee who:
*attended
less than 75 percent of the company’s board and committee meetings without a
valid excuse (illness, service to the nation/local government, work on behalf of
the company)
*received
more than 50 percent withheld votes of the shares cast at the previous board
election, and the company has failed to address the issue as to why
*is
a member of the company’s audit committee, when excessive non-audit fees were
paid to the auditor, or there are chronic control issues and an absence of
established effective control mechanisms
*is
a member of the company’s compensation committee if the compensation committee
ignore a say on pay proposal that a majority of shareholders
opposed
*is
a member of the company’s nominating committee and there is no gender diversity
on the board (or those currently proposed for election to the board do not meet
that criterion).
*is
a member of the company’s nominating committee and there is no racial/ethnic
diversity on the board (or those currently proposed for election to the board do
not meet that criterion).1
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis in the following circumstances:
*Significant
Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Emitters -
we will generally vote against the Chair of the board and the Chair of the
responsible committee for companies that are significant GHG emitters in cases
where the company is not taking the minimum steps needed to understand, assess,
and mitigate risks related to climate change to the company and the larger
economy. Minimum steps include detailed disclosure of climate-related risks,
such as the Task Force on Climate-related Financial Disclosures (TCFD); and, at
this time, “appropriate” GHG emissions reductions targets (i.e., short- term and
medium-term GHG reduction targets or net zero by 2050 GHG reduction
targets).
*Lack
of Progress Towards Addressing Emissions
- we may decide to vote against the Chair of the board and relevant Directors in
connection with our net zero commitment if we determine that insufficient
progress has been made towards addressing emissions. Such a vote against the
Chair and Directors would be one of the final steps in our net zero escalation
policy. A vote against the Chair and Directors would only be considered after
extensive direct engagement with the company and where there is insufficient
progress being made via engagement after several years. This
vote would be placed on an ad hoc basis and only upon our specific
request.
c.We
vote for all other director nominees.
1
This position only applies to Anglo markets which is defined as US, Canada, UK,
Ireland, Australia and New Zealand.
2.Chairman
and CEO is the Same Person.
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on shareholder proposals that would require the
positions of the Chairman and CEO to be held by different persons. We would
generally vote FOR such a proposal unless there are compelling reasons to vote
against the proposal, including:
*designation
of a lead director
*majority
of independent directors (supermajority)
*all
independent key committees
*size
of the company (based on market capitalization
*established
governance guidelines
*company
performance
3.Majority
of Independent Directors
a.We
vote for shareholder proposals that request that the board be comprised of a
majority of independent directors. Generally, that would require that the
director have no connection to the company other than the board seat. In
determining whether an independent director is truly independent (e.g. when
voting on a slate of director candidates), we consider certain factors
including, but not necessarily limited to, the following: whether the director
or his/her company provided professional services to the company or its
affiliates either currently or in the past year; whether the director has any
transactional relationship with the company; whether the director is a
significant customer or supplier of the company; whether the director is
employed by a foundation or university that received significant grants or
endowments from the company or its affiliates; and whether there are
interlocking directorships.
b.We
vote for shareholder proposals that request that the board audit, compensation
and/or nominating committees include independent directors
exclusively.
4.Stock
Ownership Requirements
We
vote against shareholder proposals requiring directors to own a minimum amount
of company stock in order to qualify as a director, or to remain on the
board.
5.Term
of Office
We
vote against shareholder proposals to limit the tenure of independent
directors.
6.Director
and Officer Indemnification and Liability Protection
a.Subject
to subparagraphs 2, 3, and 4 below, we vote for proposals concerning director
and officer indemnification and liability protection.
b.We
vote for proposals to limit and against proposals to eliminate entirely director
and officer liability for monetary damages for violating the duty of
care.
c.We
vote against indemnification proposals that would expand coverage beyond just
legal expenses to acts, such as negligence, that are more serious violations of
fiduciary obligations than mere carelessness.
d.We
vote for only those proposals that provide such expanded coverage noted in
subparagraph 3 above in cases when a director's or officer's legal defense was
unsuccessful if: (1) the director was found to have acted in good faith and in a
manner that he reasonably believed was in the best interests of the company,
and
(2)
if only the director's legal expenses would be covered.
7.Director
Qualifications
a.We
vote case-by-case on proposals that establish or amend director qualifications.
Considerations include how reasonable the criteria are and to what degree they
may preclude dissident nominees from joining the board.
b.We
vote against shareholder proposals requiring two candidates per board
seat.
B.Proxy
Contests
1.Voting
for Director Nominees in Contested Elections
We
vote on a case-by-case basis in contested elections of directors. Considerations
include: chronology of events leading up to the proxy contest; qualifications of
director nominees (incumbents and dissidents); for incumbents, whether the board
is comprised of a majority of outside directors; whether key committees (i.e.:
nominating, audit, compensation) comprise solely of independent outsiders;
discussion with the respective Portfolio Manager(s).
2.Reimburse
Proxy Solicitation Expenses
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals to provide full reimbursement for
dissidents waging a proxy contest. Considerations include: identity of persons
who will pay solicitation expenses; cost of solicitation; percentage that will
be paid to proxy solicitation firms.
C.Auditors
1.Ratifying
Auditors
We
vote for proposals to ratify auditors, unless an auditor has a financial
interest in or association with the company, and is therefore not independent;
or there is reason to believe that the independent auditor has rendered an
opinion that is neither accurate nor indicative of the company's financial
position or there is reason to believe the independent auditor has not followed
the highest level of ethical conduct. Specifically, we will vote to ratify
auditors if the auditors only provide the company audit services and such other
audit-related and non-audit services the provision of which will not cause such
auditors to lose their independence under applicable laws, rules and
regulations.
2.Financial
Statements and Director and Auditor Reports
We
generally vote for management proposals seeking approval of financial accounts
and reports and the discharge of management and supervisory board members,
unless there is concern about the past actions of the company’s auditors or
directors.
3.Remuneration
of Auditors
We
vote for proposals to authorize the board or an audit committee of the board to
determine the remuneration of auditors, unless there is evidence of excessive
compensation relative to the size and nature of the company.
4.Indemnification
of Auditors
We
vote against proposals to indemnify auditors.
D.Proxy
Contest Defenses
1.Board
Structure: Staggered vs. Annual Elections
a.We
vote against proposals to classify the board.
b.We
vote for proposals to repeal classified boards and to elect all directors
annually.
2.Shareholder
Ability to Remove Directors
a.We
vote against proposals that provide that directors may be removed only for
cause.
b.We
vote for proposals to restore shareholder ability to remove directors with or
without cause.
c.We
vote against proposals that provide that only continuing directors may elect
replacements to fill board vacancies.
d.We
vote for proposals that permit shareholders to elect directors to fill board
vacancies.
3.Cumulative
Voting
a.If
plurality voting is in place for uncontested director elections, we vote for
proposals to permit or restore cumulative voting.
b.If
majority voting is in place for uncontested director elections, we vote against
cumulative voting.
c.If
plurality voting is in place for uncontested director elections, and proposals
to adopt both cumulative voting and majority voting are on the same slate, we
vote for majority voting and against cumulative voting.
4.Majority
Voting
We
vote for non-binding and/or binding resolutions requesting that the board amend
a company’s by-laws to stipulate that directors need to be elected with an
affirmative majority of the votes cast, provided that it does not conflict with
the state law where the company is incorporated. In addition, all resolutions
need to provide for a carve-out for a plurality vote standard when there are
more nominees than board seats (i.e. contested election). In addition,
ClearBridge strongly encourages companies to adopt a post-election director
resignation policy setting guidelines for the company to follow to promptly
address situations involving holdover directors.
5.Shareholder
Ability to Call Special Meetings
a.We
vote against proposals to restrict or prohibit shareholder ability to call
special meetings.
b.We
vote for proposals that provide shareholders with the ability to call special
meetings, taking into account a minimum ownership threshold of 10 percent (and
investor ownership structure, depending on bylaws).
6.Shareholder
Ability to Act by Written Consent
a.We
vote against proposals to restrict or prohibit shareholder ability to take
action by written consent.
b.We
vote for proposals to allow or make easier shareholder action by written
consent.
7.Shareholder
Ability to Alter the Size of the Board
a.We
vote for proposals that seek to fix the size of the board.
b.We
vote against proposals that give management the ability to alter the size of the
board without shareholder approval.
8.Advance
Notice Proposals
We
vote on advance notice proposals on a case-by-case basis, giving support to
those proposals which allow shareholders to submit proposals as close to the
meeting date as reasonably possible and within the broadest window
possible.
9.Amendment
of By-Laws
a.We
vote against proposals giving the board exclusive authority to amend the
by-laws.
b.We
vote for proposals giving the board the ability to amend the by-laws in addition
to shareholders.
10.Article
Amendments (not otherwise covered by ClearBridge Proxy Voting Policies and
Procedures)
We
review on a case-by-case basis all proposals seeking amendments to the articles
of association.
We
vote for article amendments if:
*shareholder
rights are protected;
*there
is negligible or positive impact on shareholder value;
*management
provides adequate reasons for the amendments; and
*the
company is required to do so by law (if applicable).
E.Tender
Offer Defenses
1.Poison
Pills
a.We
vote for shareholder proposals that ask a company to submit its poison pill for
shareholder ratification.
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on shareholder proposals to redeem a company's
poison pill. Considerations include: when the plan was originally adopted;
financial condition of the company; terms of the poison pill.
c.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on management proposals to ratify a poison pill.
Considerations include: sunset provision - poison pill is submitted to
shareholders for ratification or rejection every 2 to 3 years; shareholder
redemption feature -10% of the shares may call a special meeting or seek a
written consent to vote on rescinding the rights plan.
2.Fair
Price Provisions
a.We
vote for fair price proposals, as long as the shareholder vote requirement
embedded in the provision is no more than a majority of disinterested
shares.
b.We
vote for shareholder proposals to lower the shareholder vote requirement in
existing fair price provisions.
3.Greenmail
a.We
vote for proposals to adopt anti-greenmail charter or bylaw amendments or
otherwise restrict a company's ability to make greenmail payments.
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on anti-greenmail proposals when they are bundled
with other charter or bylaw amendments.
4.Unequal
Voting Rights
a.We
vote against dual class exchange offers.
b.We
vote against dual class re-capitalization.
5.Supermajority
Shareholder Vote Requirement to Amend the Charter or Bylaws
a.We
vote against management proposals to require a supermajority shareholder vote to
approve charter and bylaw amendments.
b.We
vote for shareholder proposals to lower supermajority shareholder vote
requirements for charter and bylaw amendments.
6.Supermajority
Shareholder Vote Requirement to Approve Mergers
a.We
vote against management proposals to require a supermajority shareholder vote to
approve mergers and other significant business combinations.
b.We
vote for shareholder proposals to lower supermajority shareholder vote
requirements for mergers and other significant business
combinations.
7.White
Knight/Squire Placements
We
vote for shareholder proposals to require approval of blank check preferred
stock issues.
F.Miscellaneous
Governance Provisions
1.Confidential
Voting
a.We
vote for shareholder proposals that request corporations to adopt confidential
voting, use independent tabulators and use independent inspectors of election as
long as the proposals include clauses for proxy contests as follows: in the case
of a contested election, management is permitted to request that the dissident
group honor its confidential voting policy. If the dissidents agree, the policy
remains in place. If the dissidents do not agree, the confidential voting policy
is waived.
b.We
vote for management proposals to adopt confidential voting subject to the
proviso for contested elections set forth in sub-paragraph A.1.
above.
2.Equal
Access
We
vote for shareholder proposals that would allow significant company shareholders
equal access to management's proxy material in order to evaluate and propose
voting recommendations on proxy proposals and director nominees, and in order to
nominate their own candidates to the board.
3.Bundled
Proposals
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on bundled or "conditioned" proxy proposals. In the
case of items that are conditioned upon each other, we examine the benefits and
costs of the packaged items. In instances when the joint effect of the
conditioned items is not in shareholders' best interests and therefore not in
the best interests of the beneficial owners of accounts, we vote against the
proposals. If the combined effect is positive, we support such
proposals.
4.Shareholder
Advisory Committees
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals to establish a shareholder advisory
committee. Considerations include: rationale and cost to the firm to form such a
committee. We generally vote against such proposals if the board and key
nominating committees are comprised solely of independent/outside
directors.
5.Other
Business
We
vote for proposals that seek to bring forth other business matters.
6.Adjourn
Meeting
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals that seek to adjourn a shareholder
meeting in order to solicit additional votes.
7.Lack
of Information
We
vote against proposals if a company fails to provide shareholders with adequate
information upon which to base their voting decision.
G.Capital
Structure
1.Common
Stock Authorization
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals to increase the number of shares of
common stock authorized for issue, except as described in paragraph 2
below.
b.Subject
to paragraph 3, below we vote for the approval requesting increases in
authorized shares if the company meets certain criteria:
*company
has already issued a certain percentage (i.e. greater than 50%) of the company's
allotment
*the
proposed increase is reasonable (i.e. less than 150% of current inventory) based
on an analysis of the company's historical stock management or future growth
outlook of the company.
c.We
vote on a case-by-case basis, based on the input of affected Portfolio Managers,
if holding is greater than 1% of an account.
2.Stock
Distributions: Splits and Dividends
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on management proposals to increase common share
authorization for a stock split, provided that the split does not result in an
increase of authorized but unissued shares of more than 100% after giving effect
to the shares needed for the split.
3.Reverse
Stock Splits
We
vote for management proposals to implement a reverse stock split, provided that
the reverse split does not result in an increase of authorized but unissued
shares of more than 100% after giving effect to the shares needed for the
reverse split.
4.Blank
Check Preferred Stock
a.We
vote against proposals to create, authorize or increase the number of shares
with regard to blank check preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion,
dividend distribution and other rights.
b.We
vote for proposals to create “declawed” blank check preferred stock (stock that
cannot be used as a takeover defense).
c.We
vote for proposals to authorize preferred stock in cases where the company
specifies the voting, dividend, conversion, and other rights of such stock and
the terms of the preferred stock appear reasonable.
d.We
vote for proposals requiring a shareholder vote for blank check preferred stock
issues.
5.Adjust
Par Value of Common Stock
We
vote for management proposals to reduce the par value of common
stock.
6.Preemptive
Rights
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis for shareholder proposals seeking to establish them
and consider the following factors:
*size
of the Company
*characteristics
of the size of the holding (holder owning more than 1% of the outstanding
shares)
*percentage
of the rights offering (rule of thumb less than 5%).
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis for shareholder proposals seeking the elimination
of pre-emptive rights.
7.Debt
Restructuring
We
vote on a case-by-case basis for proposals to increase common and/or preferred
shares and to issue shares as part of a debt-restructuring plan. Generally, we
approve proposals that facilitate debt restructuring.
8.Share
Repurchase Programs
We
vote for management proposals to institute open-market share repurchase plans in
which all shareholders may participate on equal terms.
9.Dual-Class
Stock
We
vote for proposals to eliminate dual-class structures, unless a company has a
stated policy that stipulates that the dual class structure will be eliminated
in a period not to exceed 5 years from its initial public offering.
10.Issue
Stock for Use with Rights Plan
We
vote against proposals that increase authorized common stock for the explicit
purpose of implementing a shareholder rights plan (poison pill).
11.Debt
Issuance Requests
When
evaluating a debt issuance request, the issuing company’s present financial
situation is examined. The main factor for analysis is the company’s current
debt-to-equity ratio, or gearing level. A high gearing level may incline markets
and financial analysts to downgrade the company’s bond rating, increasing its
investment risk factor in the process. A gearing level up to 100 percent is
considered acceptable.
We
vote for debt issuances for companies when the gearing level is between zero and
100 percent.
We
view on a case-by-case basis proposals where the issuance of debt will result in
the gearing level being greater than 100 percent. Any proposed debt issuance is
compared to industry and market standards.
12.Financing
Plans
We
generally vote for the adopting of financing plans if we believe they are in the
best economic interests of shareholders.
H.Executive
and Director Compensation
In
general, we vote for executive and director compensation plans, with the view
that viable compensation programs reward the creation of stockholder wealth by
having high payout sensitivity to increases in shareholder value. Certain
factors, however, such as repricing underwater stock options without shareholder
approval, would cause us to vote against a plan. Additionally, in some cases we
would vote against a plan deemed unnecessary.
1.OBRA-Related
Compensation Proposals
a.Amendments
that Place a Cap on Annual Grant or Amend Administrative Features
We
vote for plans that simply amend shareholder-approved plans to include
administrative features or place a cap on the annual grants any one participant
may receive to comply with the provisions of Section 162(m) of the Internal
Revenue Code.
b.Amendments
to Added Performance-Based Goals
We
vote for amendments to add performance goals to existing compensation plans to
comply with the provisions of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue
Code.
c.Amendments
to Increase Shares and Retain Tax Deductions Under OBRA
We
vote for amendments to existing plans to increase shares reserved and to qualify
the plan for favorable tax treatment under the provisions of Section 162(m) the
Internal Revenue Code.
d.Approval
of Cash or Cash-and-Stock Bonus Plans
We
vote for cash or cash-and-stock bonus plans to exempt the compensation from
taxes under the provisions of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue
Code.
2.Expensing
of Options
We
vote for proposals to expense stock options on financial
statements.
3.Shareholder
Proposals to Limit Executive and Director Pay
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on all shareholder proposals that seek additional
disclosure of executive and director pay information. Considerations include:
cost and form of disclosure. We vote for such proposals if additional disclosure
is relevant to shareholder’s needs and would not put the company at a
competitive disadvantage relative to its industry.
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on all other shareholder proposals that seek to
limit executive and director pay.
4.Reports
to Assess the Feasibility of Including Sustainability as a Performance
Metric
We
vote in favor of non-binding proposals for reports on the feasibility of
including sustainability as a performance metric for senior executive
compensation.
We
have a policy of voting to reasonably limit the level of options and other
equity- based compensation arrangements available to management to reasonably
limit shareholder dilution and management compensation. For options and
equity-based compensation arrangements, we vote FOR proposals or amendments that
would result in the available awards being less than 10% of fully diluted
outstanding shares (i.e. if the combined total of shares, common share
equivalents and options available to be awarded under all current and proposed
compensation plans is less than 10% of fully diluted shares). In the event the
available awards exceed the 10% threshold, we would also consider the % relative
to the common practice of its specific industry (e.g. technology firms). Other
considerations would include, without limitation, the following:
*compensation
committee comprised of independent outside directors
*maximum
award limits
*repricing
without shareholder approval prohibited
*3-year
average burn rate for company
*plan
administrator has authority to accelerate the vesting of awards
*shares
under the plan subject to performance criteria
5.Golden
Parachutes
a.We
vote for shareholder proposals to have golden parachutes submitted for
shareholder ratification.
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on all proposals to ratify or cancel golden
parachutes. Considerations include: the amount should not exceed 3 times average
base salary plus guaranteed benefits; golden parachute should be less attractive
than an ongoing employment opportunity with the firm.
6.Golden
Coffins
a.We
vote for shareholder proposals that request a company not to make any death
benefit payments to senior executives’ estates or beneficiaries or pay premiums
in respect to any life insurance policy covering a senior executive’s life
(“golden coffin”). We carve out benefits provided under a plan, policy or
arrangement applicable to a broader group of employees, such as offering group
universal life insurance.
b.We
vote for shareholder proposals that request shareholder approval of survivor
benefits for future agreements that, following the death of a senior executive,
would obligate the company to make payments or awards not earned.
7.Anti-Tax
Gross-up Policy
a.We
vote for proposals that ask a company to adopt a policy whereby it will not
make, or promise to make, any tax gross-up payment to its senior executives,
except for tax gross-ups provided pursuant to a plan, policy, or arrangement
applicable to management employees of the company generally, such as relocation
or expatriate tax equalization policy; we also vote for proposals that ask
management to put gross-up payments to a shareholder vote.
b.We
vote against proposals where a company will make, or promise to make, any tax
gross-up payment to its senior executives without a shareholder vote, except for
tax gross-ups provided pursuant to a plan, policy, or arrangement applicable to
management employees of the company generally, such as relocation or expatriate
tax equalization policy.
8.Employee
Stock Ownership Plans (ESOPs)
We
vote for proposals that request shareholder approval in order to implement an
ESOP or to increase authorized shares for existing ESOPs, except in cases when
the number of shares allocated to the ESOP is "excessive" (i.e., generally
greater than five percent of outstanding shares).
9.Employee
Stock Purchase Plans
a.We
vote for qualified plans where all of the following apply:
*the
purchase price is at least 85 percent of fair market value
*the
offering period is 27 months or less
*the
number of shares allocated to the plan is five percent or less of outstanding
shares
If
the above do not apply, we vote on a case-by-case basis.
b.We
vote for non-qualified plans where all of the following apply:
*all
employees of the company are eligible to participate (excluding 5 percent or
more beneficial owners)
*there
are limits on employee contribution (ex: fixed dollar amount)
*there
is a company matching contribution with a maximum of 25 percent of an employee’s
contribution
*there
is no discount on the stock price on purchase date (since there is a company
match).
If
the above do not apply, we vote against the non-qualified employee stock
purchase plan.
10.401(k)
Employee Benefit Plans
We
vote for proposals to implement a 401(k) savings plan for
employees.
11.Stock
Compensation Plans
a.We
vote for stock compensation plans which provide a dollar-for-dollar cash for
stock exchange.
b.We
vote on a case-by-case basis for stock compensation plans which do not provide a
dollar-for-dollar cash for stock exchange using a quantitative
model.
12.Directors
Retirement Plans
a.We
vote against retirement plans for non-employee directors.
b.We
vote for shareholder proposals to eliminate retirement plans for non-employee
directors.
13.Management
Proposals to Reprice Options
We
vote against management proposals seeking approval to reprice options.
14.Shareholder
Proposals Regarding Executive and Director Pay
a.We
vote against shareholder proposals seeking to set absolute levels on
compensation or otherwise dictate the amount or form of
compensation.
b.We
vote against shareholder proposals requiring director fees be paid in stock
only.
c.We
vote against shareholder proposals to eliminate vesting of options and
restricted stock on change of control.
d.We
vote for shareholder proposals to put option repricing to a shareholder
vote.
e.We
vote for shareholder proposals that call for a non-binding advisory vote on
executive pay (“say-on-pay”). Company boards would adopt a policy giving
shareholders the opportunity at each annual meeting to vote on an advisory
resolution to ratify the compensation of the named executive officers set forth
in the proxy statement’s summary compensation table.
f.We
vote “annual” for the frequency of say-on-pay proposals rather than once every
two or three years.
g.We
vote on a case-by-case basis for all other shareholder proposals regarding
executive and director pay, taking into account company performance, pay level
versus peers, pay level versus industry, and long term corporate
outlook.
15.Management
Proposals on Executive Compensation
For
non-binding advisory votes on executive officer compensation, when management
and the external service provider agree, we vote for the proposal. When
management and the external service provider disagree, the proposal becomes a
refer item. In the case of a Refer item, the factors under consideration will
include the following:
*company
performance over the last 1, 3, and 5-year periods on a total shareholder return
basis
*performance
metrics for short- and long-term incentive programs
*CEO
pay relative to company performance (is there a misalignment)
*tax
gross ups to senior executives
*change-in-control
arrangements
*presence
of a clawback provision, ownership guidelines, or stock holding requirements for
senior executives
16.Stock
Retention / Holding Period of Equity Awards
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on shareholder proposals asking companies to adopt
policies requiring senior executives to retain all or a significant (>50
percent) portion of their shares acquired through equity compensation plans,
either:
*while
employed and/or for one to two years following the termination of their
employment; or
*for
a substantial period following the lapse of all other vesting requirements for
the award, with ratable release of a portion of the shares annually during the
lock-up period
The
following factors will be taken into consideration:
*Whether
the company has any holding period, retention ratio, or named executive officer
ownership requirements currently in place
*Actual
stock ownership of the company’s named executive officers
*Policies
aimed at mitigating risk taking by senior executives
*Pay
practices at the company that we deem problematic
I.State/Country
of Incorporation
1.Voting
on State Takeover Statutes
a.We
vote for proposals to opt out of state freeze-out provisions.
b.We
vote for proposals to opt out of state disgorgement provisions.
2.Voting
on Re-incorporation Proposals
We
vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals to change a company's state or country
of incorporation. Considerations include: reasons for re-incorporation (i.e.
financial, restructuring, etc); advantages/benefits for change (i.e. lower
taxes); compare the differences in state/country laws governing the
corporation.
3.Control
Share Acquisition Provisions
a.We
vote against proposals to amend the charter to include control share acquisition
provisions.
b.We
vote for proposals to opt out of control share acquisition statutes unless doing
so would enable the completion of a takeover that would be detrimental to
shareholders.
c.We
vote for proposals to restore voting rights to the control shares.
d.We
vote for proposals to opt out of control share cashout statutes.
J.Mergers
and Corporate Restructuring
1.Mergers
and Acquisitions
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on mergers and acquisitions. Considerations
include: benefits/advantages of the combined companies (i.e. economies of scale,
operating synergies, increase in market power/share, etc.); offer price (premium
or discount); change in the capital structure; impact on shareholder
rights.
2.Corporate
Restructuring
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on corporate restructuring proposals involving
minority squeeze outs and leveraged buyouts. Considerations include: offer
price, other alternatives/offers considered and review of fairness
opinions.
3.Spin-offs
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on spin-offs. Considerations include the tax and
regulatory advantages, planned use of sale proceeds, market focus, and
managerial incentives.
4.Asset
Sales
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on asset sales. Considerations include the impact
on the balance sheet/working capital, value received for the asset, and
potential elimination of diseconomies.
5.Liquidations
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on liquidations after reviewing management's
efforts to pursue other alternatives, appraisal value of assets, and the
compensation plan for executives managing the liquidation.
6.Appraisal
Rights
a.We
vote for proposals to restore, or provide shareholders with, rights of
appraisal.
7.Changing
Corporate Name
a.We
vote for proposals to change the “corporate name”, unless the proposed name
change bears a negative connotation.
8.Conversion
of Securities
a.We
vote on a case-by-case basis on proposals regarding conversion of securities.
Considerations include the dilution to existing shareholders, the conversion
price relative to market value, financial issues, control issues, termination
penalties, and conflicts of interest.
9.Stakeholder
Provisions
a.We
vote against proposals that ask the board to consider non-shareholder
constituencies or other non-financial effects when evaluating a merger or
business combination.
K.Social
and Environmental Issues
When
considering environmental and social (E&S) proposals, we have an obligation
to vote proxies in the best interest of our clients, considering both
shareholder value as well as societal impact.
1.Sustainability
Reporting
a.We
vote for proposals seeking greater disclosure on the company’s environmental,
social & governance policies and practices;
b.We
vote for proposals that would require companies whose annual revenues are at
least $5 billion to prepare a sustainability report. All others will be decided
on a case-by-case basis.
2.Diversity
& Equality
a.We
vote for proposals supporting nomination of most qualified candidates, inclusive
of a diverse pool of women and people of color, to the Board of Directors and
senior management levels;
b.We
vote for proposals requesting comprehensive disclosure on board
diversity;
c.We
vote for proposals requesting comprehensive disclosure on employee
diversity;
d.We
vote for proposals requesting comprehensive reports on gender and racial pay
disparity;
e.We
vote for proposals seeking to amend a company’s EEO statement or diversity
policies to prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation and/or gender
identity.
3.Climate
Risk Disclosure
a.We
vote for climate proposals that are not overly prescriptive seeking more
disclosure on financial, physical or regulatory risks related to climate change
and/or how the company measures and manages such risks;
b.We
vote for climate proposals that are not overly prescriptive requesting a
report/disclosure of goals on GHG emissions reduction targets from company
operations and/or products;
4.Case-by-case
E&S proposals (examples)
a.Animal
welfare policies
b.Human
rights and related company policies
c.Reproductive
rights; as a general matter, we vote for company policies that are designed to
allow for provision of resources
and
other
support
to
company
employees
in
an
effort
to
enable
them
to
exercise
their
individual
choices
d.Operations
in high-risk or sensitive areas
e.Product
integrity and marketing
f.Proposals
asking a company to conduct an independent racial equity and/or civil rights
audit, which we generally support but vote on a case-by-case basis given the
variability in the language.
L.Miscellaneous
1.Charitable
Contributions
We
vote against proposals to eliminate, direct or otherwise restrict charitable
contributions.
2.Political
Contributions
We
will vote in favor of non-binding proposals for reports on corporate lobbying
and political contributions.
In
general, we vote on a case-by-case basis on other shareholder proposals
pertaining to political contributions. In determining our vote on political
contribution proposals we consider, among other things, the
following:
*does
the company have a political contributions policy publicly
available
*how
extensive is the disclosure on these documents
*what
oversight mechanisms the company has in place for approving/reviewing political
contributions and expenditures
*does
the company provide information on its trade association
expenditures
*total
amount of political expenditure by the company in recent history
3.Operational
Items
a.We
vote against proposals to provide management with the authority to adjourn an
annual or special meeting absent compelling reasons to support the
proposal.
b.We
vote against proposals to reduce quorum requirements for shareholder meetings
below a majority of the shares outstanding unless there are compelling reasons
to support the proposal.
c.We
vote for by-law or charter changes that are of a housekeeping nature (updates or
corrections).
d.We
vote for management proposals to change the date/time/location of the annual
meeting unless the proposed change is unreasonable.
e.We
vote against shareholder proposals to change the date/time/location of the
annual meeting unless the current scheduling or location is
unreasonable.
f.We
vote against proposals to approve other business when it appears as voting
item.
4.Routine
Agenda Items
In
some markets, shareholders are routinely asked to approve:
*the
opening of the shareholder meeting
*that
the meeting has been convened under local regulatory requirements
*the
presence of a quorum
*the
agenda for the shareholder meeting
*the
election of the chair of the meeting
*regulatory
filings
*the
allowance of questions
*the
publication of minutes
*the
closing of the shareholder meeting.
We
generally vote for these and similar routine management proposals.
5.Allocation
of Income and Dividends
We
generally vote for management proposals concerning allocation of income and the
distribution of dividends, unless the amount of the distribution is consistently
and unusually small or large.
6.Stock
(Scrip) Dividend Alternatives
a.We
vote for most stock (scrip) dividend proposals.
b.We
vote against proposals that do not allow for a cash option unless management
demonstrates that the cash option is harmful to shareholder value.
ClearBridge
has determined that registered investment companies, particularly closed end
investment companies, raise special policy issues making specific voting
guidelines frequently inapplicable. To the extent that ClearBridge has proxy
voting authority with respect to shares of registered investment companies,
ClearBridge shall vote such shares in the best interest of client accounts and
subject to the general fiduciary principles set forth herein without regard to
the specific voting guidelines set forth in Section V. A. through
L.
The
voting policy guidelines set forth herein will be reviewed annually and may be
changed by ClearBridge in its sole discretion.
VI.OTHER
CONSIDERATIONS
In
certain situations, ClearBridge may determine not to vote proxies on behalf of a
client because ClearBridge believes that the expected benefit to the client of
voting shares is outweighed by countervailing considerations. Examples of
situations in which ClearBridge may determine not to vote proxies on behalf of a
client include:
A.Share
Blocking
Proxy
voting in certain countries requires “share blocking.” This means that
shareholders wishing to vote their proxies must deposit their shares shortly
before the date of the meeting (e.g., one week) with a designated depositary.
During the blocking period, shares that will be voted at the meeting cannot be
sold until the meeting has taken place and the shares have been returned to
client accounts by the designated depositary. In deciding whether to vote shares
subject to share blocking, ClearBridge will consider and weigh, based on the
particular facts and circumstances, the expected benefit to clients of voting in
relation to the detriment to clients of not being able to sell such shares
during the applicable period.
B.Securities
on Loan
Certain
clients of ClearBridge, such as an institutional client or a mutual fund for
which ClearBridge acts as a sub-adviser, may engage in securities lending with
respect to the securities in their accounts. ClearBridge typically does not
direct or oversee such securities lending activities. To the extent feasible and
practical under the circumstances, ClearBridge will request that the client
recall shares that are on loan so that such shares can be voted if ClearBridge
believes that the expected benefit to the client of voting such shares outweighs
the detriment to the client of recalling such shares (e.g., foregone income).
The ability to timely recall shares for proxy voting purposes typically is not
entirely within the control of ClearBridge and requires the cooperation of the
client and its other service providers. Under certain circumstances, the recall
of shares in time for such shares to be voted may not be possible due to
applicable proxy voting record dates and administrative
considerations.
VII.DISCLOSURE
OF PROXY VOTING
ClearBridge
employees may not disclose to others outside of ClearBridge (including employees
of other Franklin business units) how ClearBridge intends to vote a proxy absent
prior approval from ClearBridge’s Chief Compliance Officer, except that a
ClearBridge investment professional may disclose to a third party (other than an
employee of another Franklin business unit) how s/he intends to vote without
obtaining prior approval from ClearBridge’s Chief Compliance Officer if (1) the
disclosure is intended to facilitate a discussion of publicly available
information by ClearBridge personnel with a representative of a company whose
securities are the subject of the proxy, (2) the company’s market capitalization
exceeds $1 billion and (3) ClearBridge has voting power with respect to less
than 5% of the outstanding common stock of the company.
If
a ClearBridge employee receives a request to disclose ClearBridge’s proxy voting
intentions to, or is otherwise contacted by, another person outside of
ClearBridge (including an employee of another Franklin business unit) in
connection with an upcoming proxy voting matter, he/she should immediately
notify ClearBridge’s Chief Compliance Officer.
If
a Portfolio Manager wants to take a public stance with regards to a proxy, s/he
must consult with ClearBridge’s Chief Compliance Officer before making or
issuing a public statement.
VIII.RECORDKEEPING
AND OVERSIGHT
ClearBridge
shall maintain the following records relating to proxy voting:
*a
copy of these policies and procedures;
*a
copy of each proxy form (as voted);
*a
copy of each proxy solicitation (including proxy statements) and related
materials with regard to each vote;
*documentation
relating to the identification and resolution of conflicts of
interest;
*any
documents created by ClearBridge that were material to a proxy voting decision
or that memorialized the basis for that decision; and
*a
copy of each written client request for information on how ClearBridge voted
proxies on behalf of the client, and a copy of any written response by
ClearBridge to any (written or oral) client request for information on how
ClearBridge voted proxies on behalf of the requesting client.
Such
records shall be maintained and preserved in an easily accessible place for a
period of not less than six years from the end of the fiscal year during which
the last entry was made on such record, the first two years in an appropriate
office of the ClearBridge adviser.
To
the extent that ClearBridge is authorized to vote proxies for a United States
Registered Investment Company, ClearBridge shall maintain such records as are
necessary to allow such fund to comply with its recordkeeping, reporting and
disclosure obligations under applicable laws, rules and
regulations.
In
lieu of keeping copies of proxy statements, ClearBridge may rely on proxy
statements filed on the EDGAR system as well as on third party records of proxy
statements and votes cast if the third party provides an undertaking to provide
the documents promptly upon request.
CoreCommodity
Management, LLC
Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures
October
2022
Issued
July 2011
Revised
May 2013
November
2014
October
2015
October
2016
October
2017
April
2018
October
2019
October
2020
October
2021
Supersedes
all previous Compliance Policies regarding this subject matter
CoreCommodity
Management, LLC (“CoreCommodity”) may be responsible for voting on shareholder
proxies and may do so only in accordance with the following Proxy Voting
Procedures, in the best interest of a client and as agreed to by the advisory
client.
GENERAL
GUIDELINES
CoreCommodity
relies on Institutional Shareholder Services (“ISS”), a privately-held company,
which is owned by ISS HoldCo. Inc. (”HoldCo”), to research, vote and record all
proxy ballots for Accounts over which CoreCommodity has proxy voting authority.
On February 25, 2021 Deutsche Borse acquired an approximate 80% stake in HoldCo
with the remainder owned by a combination of limited partnerships controlled by
Genstar Capital LLC, a private equity firm based in San Francisco, CA and ISS
management., CoreCommodity has adopted the ISS U Sustainability U.S. Proxy
Voting Guidelines. In voting proxies, CoreCommodity is guided by general
fiduciary principles. CoreCommodity 's goal is to act prudently, solely in the
best interest of the beneficial owners of the accounts it manages. CoreCommodity
does not necessarily have an obligation to vote every proxy; for example
CoreCommodity may forego voting proxies if the Account no longer holds the
position at the time of the vote, or the cost of voting (such as in the case of
a vote regarding a foreign issuer that requires being physically present to
vote) outweighs the anticipated benefit to the Account. Similarly, in
jurisdictions which permit “share blocking” or require additional documentation
to vote proxies (such as a power of attorney), or require additional disclosure
of ownership, CoreCommodity may choose to refrain from voting. CoreCommodity
only votes the proxies delivered to it from custodians and generally does not
vote proxies for shares that are out on loan to third parties, and generally
will not seek to recall such shares in order to vote them.
How
CoreCommodity Votes
CoreCommodity
votes proxies in accordance with the ISS recommendations, and has informed ISS
to vote in accordance with these recommendations unless otherwise specified by
CoreCommodity. A portfolio manager may request that shares under his management
be voted differently from the ISS recommendations, if he believes that such a
vote would be in the best interest of the client(s). Such vote requests will be
subject to the conflict of interest review described below.
Conflicts
Of Interest
In
furtherance of CoreCommodity’s goal to vote proxies in the best interests of
clients, CoreCommodity follows procedures designed to identify and address
material conflicts that may arise between CoreCommodity’s interests and those of
its clients before voting proxies on behalf of such clients. Only
votes which are not in accordance with the ISS recommendations are subject to
these conflicts of interest procedures.
Procedures
for Identifying Conflicts of Interest
CoreCommodity
relies on the following to seek to identify conflicts of interest:
•CoreCommodity
Associated Persons are under an obligation (i) to be aware of the potential for
conflicts of interest on the part of CoreCommodity with respect to voting
proxies on behalf of client accounts both as a result of a CoreCommodity
Associated Person’s personal relationships and due to special circumstances that
may arise during the conduct of CoreCommodity’s business, and (ii) to bring
conflicts of interest of which they become aware to the attention of
CoreCommodity’s Compliance Officer.
•CoreCommodity
is deemed to have a material conflict of interest in voting proxies relating to
issuers that are clients of CoreCommodity and that have historically accounted
for or are projected to account for a material percentage of CoreCommodity’s
annual revenues.
•CoreCommodity
shall not vote proxies relating to issuers on such list on behalf of client
accounts until it has been determined that the conflict of interest is not
material or a method for resolving such conflict of interest has been agreed
upon and implemented, as described below.
Procedures
for Assessing Conflicts of Interest and for Addressing Material Conflicts of
Interest
All
conflicts of interest identified pursuant to the procedures outlined above must
be brought to the attention of the Compliance Officer for resolution. The
Compliance Officer will work with appropriate CoreCommodity personnel to
determine whether a conflict of interest is material. A conflict of interest
will be considered material to the extent that it is determined that such
conflict has the potential to influence CoreCommodity’s decision-making in
voting the proxy. A conflict of interest shall be deemed material in the event
that the issuer that is the subject of the proxy has a client relationship with
CoreCommodity of the type described above. All other materiality determinations
will be based on an assessment of the particular facts and circumstances. The
Compliance Officer shall maintain a written record of all materiality
determinations.
If
it is determined that a conflict of interest is not material, CoreCommodity may
vote proxies notwithstanding the existence of the conflict.
If
it is determined that a conflict of interest is material, the Compliance Officer
will work with appropriate CoreCommodity personnel to agree upon a method to
resolve such conflict of interest before voting proxies affected by the conflict
of interest. Such methods may include:
•disclosing
the conflict to clients and obtaining their consent before voting;
•suggesting
to clients that they engage another party to vote the proxy on their behalf;
or
•such
other method as is deemed appropriate under the circumstances given the nature
of the conflict.
Record
Keeping And Oversight
CoreCommodity
shall maintain the following records relating to proxy voting:
•a
copy of these policies and procedures;
•a
copy of each proxy form (as voted);
•a
copy of each proxy solicitation (including proxy statements) and related
materials with regard to each vote;
•documentation
relating to the identification and resolution of conflicts of
interest;
•any
documents created by CoreCommodity that were material to a proxy voting decision
or that memorialized the basis for that decision; and
•a
copy of each written client request for information on how CoreCommodity voted
proxies on behalf of the client, and a copy of any written response by
CoreCommodity to any (written or oral) client request for information on how
CoreCommodity voted proxies on behalf of the requesting client.
Such
records shall be maintained and preserved in an easily accessible place for a
period of not less than five years from the end of the fiscal year during which
the last entry was made on such record, the first two years in CoreCommodity’s
office.
In
lieu of keeping copies of proxy statements, CoreCommodity may rely on proxy
statements filed on the EDGAR system as well as on third party records of proxy
statements and votes cast if the third party provides an undertaking to provide
the documents promptly upon request.
MONITORING
These
Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures will be reviewed on a periodic basis. As
part of the review, CoreCommodity will (i) review the capacity and competency of
ISS, including the ability of ISS to make recommendations based upon materially
accurate information, and (ii) consider any changes at ISS that may create new
conflicts of interest, in each case as deemed necessary by CoreCommodity to
ensure that CoreCommodity, acting through ISS, continues to vote proxies in the
best interests of clients. Part of such review may include the periodic sampling
of proxy votes made by ISS on behalf of CoreCommodity, generally or with respect
to particular types of proposals, as deemed necessary by CoreCommodity.
CoreCommodity may arrange with ISS that ISS will update CoreCommodity of
business changes that CoreCommodity considers relevant (i.e., with respect to
ISS’ capacity and competency to provide proxy voting advice) and conflicts
policies and procedures.
MACQUARIE
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Public
Investments
Global
Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures
January
2023
Introduction
Macquarie
Asset Management Public Investments (“MPI”) is a global active manager within
the asset management division of Macquarie Group Limited. These Proxy Voting
Policies and Procedures (the “Procedures”) are utilized by the following
companies1
within MPI:
–Macquarie
Investment Management Business Trust (“MIMBT”): MIMBT is a registered investment
adviser with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) pursuant to the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940, as amended, (the “Advisers Act”). MIMBT is
headquartered in Philadelphia, PA, USA and consists of the following series of
entities: Delaware Management Company, Macquarie Investment Management Advisers,
Delaware Capital Management, Macquarie Asset Advisers, Macquarie Alternative
Strategies, and Delaware Investments Fund Advisers.
–Macquarie
Investment Management Global Limited (“MIMGL”): MIMGL holds an Australian
financial services licence and is also a registered investment adviser with the
SEC pursuant to the Advisers Act. MIMGL is headquartered in Sydney, Australia.
–Macquarie
Investment Management Europe S.A. (“MIME S.A.”): MIME S.A. is authorized and
regulated by the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (“CSSF”) in the
Grand Duchy of Luxembourg. MIME S.A. has an application pending to become a
registered investment adviser with the SEC pursuant to the Advisers Act. MIME
S.A. is headquartered in Luxembourg.
–Macquarie
Funds Management Hong Kong Limited (“MFMHK”): MFMHK is licensed by the
Securities and Futures Commission of Hong Kong and is also a registered
investment adviser with the SEC pursuant to the Advisers Act. MFMHK is
headquartered in Hong Kong.
–Macquarie
Investment Management Austria Kapitalanlage AG (“MIMAK”): MIMAK is authorized
and regulated by the Financial Markets Authority (“FMA”) in Austria and is also
a registered investment adviser with the SEC pursuant to the Advisers Act. MIMAK
is headquartered in Vienna, Austria.
–Macquarie
Investment Management Europe Limited (“MIMEL”): MIMEL is authorized and
regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (“FCA”) in the United Kingdom.
MIMEL is also a registered investment adviser with the SEC pursuant to the
Advisers Act. MIMEL is headquartered in London, England.
–MIMBT
and its series, MIMGL, MIME S.A., MFMHK, MIMAK, and MIMEL are referred to herein
as MPI.
1
The list of companies noted within these Procedures does not include every asset
management entity within the MPI organization. For inquiries regarding the proxy
voting policies of MPI companies not included above, please contact such MPI
entity or your MPI representative for more details.
MPI
provides investment advisory and portfolio management services to various types
of clients such as registered and unregistered commingled funds, defined benefit
plans, defined contribution plans, private and public pension funds,
foundations, endowment funds and other types of institutional investors.
Pursuant to the terms of an investment management agreement between MPI and its
client or as a result of some other type of specific delegation by the client,
MPI is often given the authority and discretion to exercise the securityholder’s
right to vote on company and shareholder resolutions (referred to herein as
“proxy” or “proxies”) relating to the underlying securities held in such client
portfolios managed by MPI. Also, clients sometimes ask MPI to give voting advice
on certain proxies without delegating full responsibility to MPI to vote proxies
on behalf of the client. Clients also have the option to retain the
responsibility to vote proxies for their portfolio securities and occasionally
clients will ask MPI to vote proxies pursuant to a client’s proxy voting policy.
In cases where MPI has been delegated the responsibility to vote or provide
advice on proxies, MPI has developed the following Procedures in order to ensure
that MPI votes proxies or gives proxy voting advice that MPI believe is in the
best interests of its clients. Typically, the investment management agreement
between MPI and a client will fully and fairly disclose the terms of MPI’s role
in proxy voting and such agreement will demonstrate the client’s informed
consent on such proxy voting authority.
Procedures
for Voting Proxies
MPI
has established a Proxy Voting Committee (the “Committee”) that is responsible
for overseeing MPI’s proxy voting process. The Committee consists of the
following persons in MPI: (i) at least five portfolio management
representatives; (ii) one representative from Fund Administration; (iii) one
representative from Data Operations; (iv) one representative from Compliance;
and (v) one representative from the Legal Department. The person(s) representing
each department on the Committee may change from time to time, but at least one
member of the Committee will also be a member of MPI’s Global ESG Oversight
Committee. The Committee will meet as necessary to help MPI fulfill its duties
to vote proxies for clients, but in any event, will meet at least quarterly to
discuss various proxy voting issues. The Committee may meet in person, by video
conference, and/or telephonically and may also conduct business via email or by
other electronic communication.
One
of the main responsibilities of the Committee is to review and approve the
Procedures on a yearly basis or as otherwise necessary. When reviewing the
Procedures, the Committee looks to see if the Procedures are designed to allow
MPI to vote proxies in a manner consistent with the goals of voting in the best
interests of clients and maximizing the value of the underlying shares being
voted on by MPI. The Committee will also review the Procedures to make sure that
they comply with any new rules promulgated by the SEC, the Australian Securities
& Investments Commission (“ASIC”), the CSSF, the FMA, the FCA, the European
Securities and Markets Authority (“ESMA”), or other relevant regulatory bodies.
After the Procedures are approved by the Committee, MPI will vote proxies or
give advice on voting proxies generally in accordance with such Procedures and
MPI’s Proxy Voting Guidelines (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines are also
reviewed and approved on a yearly basis or as otherwise necessary.
In
order to facilitate the actual process of voting proxies, MPI retains the
following proxy advisory firms (as of the date of these Procedures) for various
services: Institutional Shareholder Services (“ISS”); Glass Lewis & Co.,
including its Australian subsidiary CGI Glass Lewis (together, “Glass Lewis”);
and Ownership Matters (“OM”). ISS, Glass Lewis, OM, and any other proxy advisory
firms utilized by MPI are collectively referred to as “Proxy Advisor” within
these Procedures. Also, certain clients may request that MPI utilize the
client’s preferred proxy advisory firm from time to time and as agreed to by the
parties.
The
Proxy Advisor and/or the client’s custodian monitor corporate events in
connection with MPI’s client accounts. After receiving the proxy statements,
Proxy Advisor will review the proxy issues and recommend a vote in accordance
with MPI’s Guidelines. When the Guidelines state that a proxy issue will be
decided on a case-by-case basis, Proxy Advisor’s custom research team will look
at the relevant facts and circumstances and research the issue to provide MPI
with a recommendation as to how the proxy should be voted in accordance with the
parameters described in the Guidelines. If the Guidelines do not address a
particular proxy issue, Proxy Advisor will similarly look at the relevant facts
and circumstances and research the issue to provide a recommendation as to how
the proxy should be voted. In limited cases where Proxy Advisor is unable to
provide research and a proxy vote recommendation for a portfolio company, MPI
will be solely responsible for researching the proxy and voting the
proxy.
Macquarie
Asset Management
Proxy
Advisor’s proxy voting research recommendations are made available to the
applicable portfolio management teams within MPI to review and evaluate prior to
the corresponding shareholder meeting. As described further below in the “Proxy
Voting Guidelines” section, there will be times when a MPI portfolio management
team believes that the best interests of the client will be better served if MPI
votes a proxy counter to Proxy Advisor’s research recommendation under the
Guidelines. In these cases, the portfolio management team will document the
rationale for their votes and provide such rationale to the Committee or the
Committee’s delegates for its records. The Committee and its delegates are
responsible for reviewing the rationale for these votes to assure that it
provides a reasonable basis for any vote.
After
a proxy has been voted, Proxy Advisor will create a record of the vote in order
to help MPI comply with its duties listed under “Availability of Proxy Voting
Information and Recordkeeping” below. If a client provides MPI with its own
instruction on a given proxy vote for their portfolio, MPI will forward the
client’s instruction to Proxy Advisor who will vote the client’s proxy pursuant
to the client’s instruction.
MPI
will attempt to vote every proxy which they or their agents receive when a
client has given MPI the authority and direction to vote such proxies. However,
there are situations in which MPI may not be able to process a proxy or the cost
of processing such proxies would be high and/or exceed the expected benefits to
the client. Examples of such situations include, but are not limited to: MPI may
not have sufficient time to process a vote because MPI or its agents received a
proxy statement in an untimely manner; MPI generally retains voting rights in
respect of securities lent or pledged as collateral but may in certain
situations be unable to vote a proxy, for example in relation to a security that
is on loan pursuant to a securities lending program; or casting a vote on a
security could involve additional costs such as hiring a translator or hiring an
agent or traveling to the site of the shareholder meeting to vote the proxy in
person. Use of a Proxy Advisor and relationships with multiple custodians can
help to mitigate a situation where MPI is unable to vote a proxy.
Company
Management Recommendations
When
determining whether to invest in a particular company, one of the factors MPI
may consider is the quality and depth of the company’s management. As a result,
MPI believes that recommendations of management on any issue (particularly
routine issues) should be given a fair amount of weight in determining how proxy
issues should be voted. Thus, on many issues, MPI’s votes are cast in accordance
with the recommendations of the company’s management. However, MPI may vote
against management’s position when it runs counter to the Guidelines, and MPI
will also vote against management’s recommendation when MPI believes such
position is not in the best interests of MPI’s clients.
MPI
portfolio management teams retain the ability to discuss upcoming proxy votes
with company management. In those instances where MPI votes against management’s
recommendation and the proxy result is contrary to MPI’s vote, the portfolio
management team that manages the security may escalate the matter. Each
portfolio management team is responsible for determining whether there is a need
to escalate based on the facts and circumstances of the proxy vote. Options
available to the portfolio management team include: directly contacting the
company’s senior management; utilizing MPI’s Sustainability Team to engage with
the company on the team’s behalf; and/or reducing the team’s holdings in the
company or divesting from the position in its entirety.
Conflicts
of Interest
As
a matter of policy, the Committee and any other officers, directors, employees
and affiliated persons of MPI may not be influenced by outside sources who have
interests which conflict with the interests of MPI’s clients when voting proxies
for such clients. However, in order to ensure that MPI votes proxies in the best
interests of the client, MPI has established various systems described below to
properly deal with a material conflict of interest.
Most
of the proxies which MPI receives on behalf of its clients are voted in
accordance with the Guidelines. As stated above, these Procedures (including the
Guidelines) are reviewed and approved by the Committee annually and at other
necessary times. The custom Guidelines are then utilized by Proxy Advisor going
forward to provide recommendations on how to vote client proxies. The Committee
approves the Guidelines only after it has determined that the Guidelines are
designed to help MPI vote proxies in a manner consistent with the goal of voting
in the best interests of its clients. Since the Guidelines are pre-determined by
the Committee, application of the Guidelines by MPI’s portfolio management teams
when voting proxies after reviewing the proxy and research provided by Proxy
Advisor should in most instances adequately address any potential conflicts of
interest.
Macquarie
Asset Management
If
MPI becomes aware of a conflict of interest in an upcoming proxy vote, the proxy
vote will generally be referred to the Committee or the Committee’s delegates
for review. If the portfolio management team for such proxy intends to vote in
accordance with Proxy Advisor’s recommendation pursuant to our Guidelines, then
no further action is needed to be taken by the Committee. If the MPI portfolio
management team is considering voting a proxy contrary to Proxy Advisor’s
research recommendation under the Guidelines, the Committee or its delegates
will assess the proposed vote to determine if it is reasonable. The Committee or
its delegates will also assess whether any business or other material
relationships between MPI and a portfolio company (unrelated to the ownership of
the portfolio company’s securities) could have influenced an inconsistent vote
on that company’s proxy. If the Committee or its delegates determines that the
proposed proxy vote is unreasonable or unduly influenced by a conflict, the
portfolio management team will be required to vote the proxy in accordance with
Proxy Advisor’s research recommendation or abstain from voting. Except as
permitted by law, MPI will not vote in relation to related party securities on
proposals in which MPI has an interest other than as an investor. Generally, MPI
will abstain from voting on proposals related to Macquarie Group Limited (“MGL”)
or on entities controlled by MGL.
In
connection with its advisory business, MPI may also act as an investment adviser
to a “fund of funds” in which a fund (“MPI Fund”) may invest in underlying funds
affiliated with MPI (“Underlying Affiliated Fund”) as part of its investment
strategy. If an Underlying Affiliated Fund has a shareholder meeting, MPI will
typically seek to vote the MPI Fund’s interests in the Underlying Affiliated
Fund in the same proportion as the proxy votes cast by all of the other
shareholders of the Underlying Affiliated Fund. This is known as “echo voting”
and is designed to avoid potential conflicts of interest.
Oversight
of Proxy Advisory Firm
The
Committee and appropriate MPI personnel are responsible for overseeing Proxy
Advisor’s proxy voting activities for MPI’s clients. MPI will conduct periodic
due diligence of Proxy Advisor that will include: (i) Proxy Advisor’s conflict
of interest procedures and any other pertinent procedures or representations
from Proxy Advisor in an attempt to ensure that Proxy Advisor will make research
recommendations for voting proxies in an impartial manner and in the best
interests of MPI’s clients; (ii) the adequacy and quality of Proxy Advisor’s
staffing, personnel, and technology; (iii) the methodologies, guidelines,
sources and factors underlying Proxy Advisor’s voting recommendations; (iv)
whether Proxy Advisor has an effective engagement process for seeking timely
input from issuers, its clients and other third parties and how that input is
incorporated into Proxy Advisor’s methodologies, guidelines and proxy voting
recommendations; (v) how Proxy Advisor ensures that it has complete, accurate
and up-to-date information about each proxy voting matter and updates its
research accordingly; (vi) reviewing whether Proxy Advisor has undergone any
recent, material organizational or business changes; and (vii) a review of Proxy
Advisor’s general compliance with the terms of its agreement with
MPI.
Availability
of Proxy Voting Information and Recordkeeping
Clients
of MPI will be directed to their client service representative to obtain
information from MPI on how their securities were voted. At the beginning of a
new relationship with a client, MPI will typically provide clients with a
concise summary of MPI’s proxy voting process and will inform clients that they
can obtain a copy of the complete Procedures upon request. Existing clients will
also be provided with the above information as agreed with the
client.
Where
required by applicable law, MPI will also retain records regarding proxy voting
on behalf of clients. MPI will typically keep records of the following items:
(i) the Procedures; (ii) proxy statements received regarding client securities
(via hard copies held by Proxy Advisor or electronic filings from the company’s
respective regulatory filing system); (iii) records of votes cast on behalf of
MPI’s clients (via Proxy Advisor); (iv) records of a client’s written request
for information on how MPI voted proxies for the client, and any MPI written
response to an oral or written client request for information on how MPI voted
proxies for the client; and (v) any documents prepared by MPI that were material
to making a decision as to how to vote or that memorialized the basis for that
decision.
Proxy
Voting Guidelines
The
Proxy Voting Guidelines summarize MPI’s positions on various issues and give a
general indication as to how MPI will vote proxies on each issue. The Proxy
Voting Committee has reviewed the Guidelines and determined that voting proxies
pursuant to the Guidelines should be in the best interests of the client and
should align with the goal of maximizing the value of the client’s investments.
Macquarie
Asset Management
For
certain clients, MPI may also need to take into account additional factors
outside of the Guidelines that will influence how MPI analyzes and votes
proxies. For example, proxy votes made by MPI for a client with specialized
investment objectives and strategies may take into account additional research
and factors that may lead a portfolio management team to vote a proxy in a
different manner. In these situations, MPI may also develop one-off proxy voting
guidelines for such client. In addition, the location of a portfolio company may
also necessitate MPI having to review additional research and factors in order
to account for local laws and standards when voting proxies.
Moreover,
the list of Guidelines may not include all potential voting issues. To the
extent that the Guidelines do not cover potential voting issues, MPI will vote
on such issues in a manner that is consistent with the spirit of the Guidelines
and that MPI believes promotes the best interests of the client.
Although
MPI will usually vote proxies in accordance with these Guidelines, each MPI
portfolio management team reserves the right to vote certain issues counter to
the Guidelines if, after a thorough review of the matter, the team believes that
a client’s best interests would be served by such a vote. In all cases, the MPI
portfolio management team responsible for voting proxies on behalf of a client
will have the final decision on how to vote proxies, subject to these
Procedures.
To
the extent that management of a portfolio company or another company shareholder
would like to engage with MPI on a particular proxy statement, the company or
shareholder should reach out to the MPI portfolio management team who holds the
applicable company security on behalf of its clients. MPI will consider any
additional information provided by the company or shareholder regarding an
upcoming proxy and analyze such information along with prior research provided
by Proxy Advisor before coming to a decision on how to vote an applicable proxy.
Macquarie
Asset Management
GOTHAM
ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC
10.
Proxy Voting and Class Actions
As
of January 2023
A.Purpose
In
order to comply with Rule 206(4)-6 of the Investment Advisers Act, Gotham has
adopted written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure
that Gotham’s voting determinations with respect to Client securities are made
in the best interest of the Client (considering its investment strategy) and do
not place Gotham’s own interests ahead of the interests of its Client. The
Investment Advisers Act also requires disclosure to Clients with respect to
obtaining information on how their securities were voted and Gotham's guidelines
for voting Client securities.
B.Proxy
Policies and Procedures
Gotham
employs a value-based investment program for its Clients that is generally
passive and agnostic on corporate control and other management issues that are
presented to shareholders for approval ("proxies"). Nevertheless, at present,
Gotham generally votes proxies for its Clients in accordance with the procedures
below. These procedures may be modified with respect to certain Clients,
provided that such Client agrees to such arrangement. For example, certain SMA
Clients vote their own proxies pursuant to their investment management
agreement. Gotham votes Client securities using Proxy Exchange, an electronic
voting platform provided by ISS. Proxy Exchange retains a record of proxy votes
for each Client.
When
Gotham votes proxies, it seeks to do so in the best interests of its Clients
considering their investment strategy and must not place its own interests ahead
of the interests of its Clients. Accordingly, Gotham generally votes Client
securities in conformity with the recommendations of Institutional Shareholder
Services Inc. ("ISS").
ISS is a neutral third party that issues recommendations based on its own
internal guidelines and research. ISS retains a record of all of its
recommendations. Gotham believes that the retention of ISS to provide advice
with respect to proxy voting is an efficient and effective means to assist
Gotham in complying with its fiduciary duties to its Clients, and also provides
a means to avoid any impact on voting decisions that might arise from any
conflicts of interests between Gotham and its Clients.
When
it votes proxies, Gotham may, however, vote Client securities in a manner that
is inconsistent with ISS' recommendations when Gotham believes it is in the best
interest of its Clients and such a vote does not create an impermissible
conflict of interest between Gotham and its Clients. In such a case, Gotham will
keep a record of why ISS' recommendation was not in the Client's best interest
and information supporting Gotham's decision.
Gotham
also may determine not to vote a particular proxy if it determines that
abstaining or not voting is in the best interests of its Client. In making such
a determination, Gotham will consider various factors including, but not limited
to, whether:
(i)the
resolution of the proxy is not relevant to the Client's investment;
(ii)Gotham
believes the cost of voting the proxy outweighs the potential benefit to the
Client derived from voting;
(iii)a
proxy is received with respect to securities that are no longer held in a Client
account;
(iv)the
terms of a securities lending agreement prevent Gotham from voting a loaned
security;
(v)Gotham
(or Proxy Exchange) receives proxy materials without sufficient time to reach an
informed voting decision and vote the proxies;
(vi)ISS
does not have a recommendation; or
(vii)the
terms of the security or any related agreement or applicable law preclude Gotham
from voting.
The
Firm will generally vote in the same manner for all Clients holding a particular
security, subject to the investment objectives and best interests of each
Client.
Gotham
Asset Management, LLC
In
accordance with SEC guidance issued in August 2019, and in order to verify that
proxy votes are cast in accordance with Clients' best interests and our proxy
voting procedures, Legal & Compliance will periodically (but no less often
than annually) sample proxy votes to review whether they complied with the
Firm's proxy voting policy and procedures.
The
Firm will also periodically review ISS' capacity and competency to adequately
analyze proxy issues. In this regard, Gotham may consider relevant factors,
including whether ISS, among other things:
•Has
sufficient resources, such as ISS’ staffing, personnel and/or technology;
•Has
an effective process for seeking input from issuers;
•Has
adequate disclosures as to it methodologies;
•Has
adequate policies and procedures to address conflicts of interest;
and
•Has
adequate processes to identify potential factual errors, incompleteness or
methodological weakness.
Finally,
the Firm will review the adequacy of Gotham’s policies and procedures to ensure
they have been formulated reasonably and implemented effectively, including
whether they continue to be reasonably designed to ensure that Gotham casts
votes on behalf of its Clients in the best interest of such
Clients.
C.Conflicts
of Interest
Supervised
Persons must inform Legal & Compliance if they become aware of any material
conflict of interest between the Firm and a Client or between Clients with
respect to a proxy vote. Conflicts may also exist due to positions held by
Supervised Persons in their personal trading accounts. Since the Firm generally
votes in accordance with ISS' recommendations, Gotham believes that generally no
conflicts of interest will impact Gotham's vote. When voting Client securities
in a manner that is inconsistent with ISS' recommendations, Gotham will review
any conflicts of interest that are identified.
Legal
& Compliance will attempt to resolve the conflict of interest before the
Firm votes. In the event that the material conflict of interest cannot be
reasonably resolved prior to voting, the Firm will take steps designed to ensure
that a decision to vote the proxy was based on the Firm's determination of the
Client's best interest and was not the product of the conflict. The Firm will
disclose and obtain consent of the Client to the extent required under
applicable law.
D.Reporting
and Disclosure Procedures
Gotham
generally does not disclose proxy votes on behalf of a Client to any other
Client. To the extent that Gotham serves as a sub-adviser to another adviser,
Gotham may provide proxy voting records to such adviser, if requested. Proxy
votes on behalf of Mutual Funds and the ETF are disclosed annually on their
respective Form N-PX.
The
Firm will include in its Brochure a summary of this proxy voting policy. Each
Client may request a copy of this proxy voting policy, ISS' proxy voting
guidelines, and records of how such Client's securities were voted by making a
written request to:
Gotham
Asset Management, LLC
825
Third Avenue, Suite 1750
New
York, NY 10022
Attention:
Legal & Compliance
E.Recordkeeping
The
Firm maintains records of: (a) this proxy voting policy; (b) all proxy
statements and materials the Firm receives on behalf of Clients unless such
materials are readily available from the SEC via EDGAR; (c) all proxy votes that
are made on behalf of the Clients; (d) all written requests from Clients
regarding voting history; and (e) all responses (written and oral) to Clients'
requests. Such records are available to the impacted Client upon request. To
fulfill some of these recordkeeping requirements, the Firm may rely on
information stored on Proxy Exchange (or the predecessor system used by the
Firm), Firm e-mail or other third party service providers.
Gotham
Asset Management, LLC
Graham
Capital Management, L.P.
GRAHAM
CAPITAL LLP
Proxy
Voting Policy
October
2022
PROXY
VOTING AND CLASS ACTIONS
A.General
Graham
has adopted policies and procedures (the “Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures”)
which have been designed to ensure that Graham complies with the requirements of
Rule 206(4)-6 and Rule 204-2(c)(2) under the Advisers Act, and reflect Graham’s
commitment to vote all Client securities for which it exercises voting authority
in a manner consistent with the best interest of the Client. Employees who have
the authority to vote Client securities must familiarize themselves with and
strictly adhere to Graham’s Proxy Voting Policies and Procedures.
Although
the Advisers Act does not obligate advisers to adopt policies and procedures in
respect of participating in class actions, in its capacity as a fiduciary to its
Clients Graham has nonetheless adopted such policies and procedures.
B.Proxy
Voting Policies and Procedures
Graham
has selected and retained ISS Governance Services to assist in the proxy voting
process. The CCO manages Graham’s relationship with ISS. The CCO ensures that
ISS votes all proxies according to Graham’s general guidance, and retains all
required documentation associated with proxy voting.
Graham
has approved a list of proxy voting guidelines that ISS generally follows when
recommending how to vote on particular proxies. The following guidelines reflect
ISS’ general approach on certain key proxy proposals; however, these guidelines
represent only a small number of proposals and the guidelines are much broader
in scope and more detailed.
•Auditor
Ratification.
ISS generally recommends to vote FOR proposals to ratify auditors except where
(i) the auditor has a financial interest or association with the company, (ii)
there is reason to believe the auditor has rendered an opinion that is neither
accurate nor indicative of the company’s financial position, (iii) poor
accounting practices have been identified that rise to a serious level of
concern or (iv) fees for non-audit services are excessive;
•Board
of Directors.
ISS generally recommends to vote FOR director nominees except where (i) the
board lacks accountability coupled with sustained poor performance relative to
peers, (ii) the board demonstrates a lack of responsiveness (e.g., in responding
to shareholder proposals, takeover offers, issues that resulted in one or more
directors receiving more than 50% withhold/against votes, etc.), (iii) there are
defects in the composition of the board (e.g., unacceptable attendance at board
and committee meetings, directors serve on excessive number of boards of other
companies, etc.), and (iv) the board lacks sufficient controls or features to
ensure its independence;
•Capital
Structure Changes.
ISS generally recommends to vote (i) FOR proposals to increase the number of
shares where the primary purpose is to issue shares in connection with a
transaction on the same ballot, (ii) AGAINST proposals to increase the number of
shares of a class with superior voting rights, (iii) AGAINST proposals to
increase the number of shares if a vote for a reverse stock split is on the same
ballot, and (iv) AGAINST proposals to create a new class of common stock, except
under certain conditions;
•Executive
Compensation.
ISS Generally recommends to vote (i) AGAINST advisory votes on executive
compensation if there is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company
performance, the company maintains problematic pay practices or the board
exhibits a significant level of poor communications and responsiveness to
shareholders, (ii) AGAINST/WITHHOLD from the members of the compensation
committee or full board as applicable where there is no management-say-on pay
item on the ballot, and in other instances, and (iii) AGAINST an equity plan if
there is a performance misalignment and the CEO’s pay is skewed towards
non-performance based equity awards.
Portfolio
Managers that wish to deviate from ISS’s proxy recommendations must provide the
CCO with a written explanation of the reason for the deviation, as well as a
representation that the employee and Graham are not conflicted in making the
chosen voting decision.
Graham
Capital Management, L.P.
Because
Graham generally will vote proxies based upon the recommendations of ISS, there
is little to no risk of a conflict of interest arising. However, in instances
that might involve a conflict of interest between Graham and its Clients, such
as where a portfolio manager wishes to deviate from ISS’s recommendation or such
other instances as Graham may determine, the CCO, in conjunction with the
compliance committee as appropriate, will review the relevant facts and
determine whether or not a material conflict of interest may arise due to
business, personal or family relationships of Graham, its owners, its employees
or its affiliates, with persons having an interest in the outcome of the vote.
If a material conflict exists, Graham will take steps to ensure that its voting
decision is based on the best interests of the Client and is not a product of
the conflict. Graham shall keep appropriate records demonstrating how such
conflicts were resolved.
ISS
will retain, on Graham’s behalf, the following information in connection with
each proxy vote:
•The
Issuer’s name;
•The
security ticker symbol or CUSIP, as applicable;
•The
shareholder meeting date;
•The
number of shares that Graham voted;
•A
brief identification of the matter voted on;
•Whether
the matter was proposed by the Issuer or a security holder;
•Whether
Graham cast a vote;
•How
Graham cast its vote (for the proposal, against the proposal, or abstain); and
•Whether
Graham cast its vote with or against management.
With
respect to each registered investment company for which Graham provides
discretionary sub-advisory services, Graham will provide each fund with a copy
of Graham’s proxy voting policy. In addition, when requested, Graham will
provide such funds with information concerning Graham’s proxy voting policy and
voting results as required to enable such funds to file periodic proxy voting
reports.
C.Class
Actions
As
a fiduciary, Graham always seeks to act in the best interest of its Clients,
with good faith, loyalty, and due care. Accordingly, with respect to class
actions involving any Graham Funds, Graham will determine whether the fund will
(a) participate in a recovery achieved through a class action, (b) opt out of
the class action and separately pursue its own remedy, or (c) opt out of the
class action and not pursue its own remedy. Graham’s legal department oversees
the completion of Proof of Claim forms and any associated documentation the
submission of such documents to the claim administrator, and the receipt of any
recovered monies. Graham will maintain documentation associated with
participation in class actions by any Graham Funds. Consistent with its
procedures for selecting and monitoring service providers and its fiduciary
obligation to Clients, Graham may utilize third-party service providers to
facilitate the processing and administration of class action claims.
Graham,
for itself or on behalf of its funds, generally does not serve as the lead
plaintiff in class actions because the costs of such participation typically
exceed any extra benefits that accrue to lead plaintiffs.
D.Disclosures
to Investors
Graham
includes a description of its policies and procedures regarding proxy voting and
class actions in Part 2 of the Form ADV, along with a statement that investors
can contact Graham to obtain a copy of these policies and procedures and
information about how Graham voted proxies.
Any
request for information about proxy voting or class actions should be promptly
forwarded to the CCO, who will respond to any such requests.
As
a matter of policy, Graham does not disclose how it expects to vote on upcoming
proxies. Additionally, Graham does not disclose the way it voted proxies to
unaffiliated third parties without a legitimate need to know such information.
Graham
Capital Management, L.P.
IMPAX
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Proxy
Voting Policy
April
2023
This
Proxy Voting Policy (the “Policy”) is applicable to all investment management
entities of the Impax Group, namely:
•Impax
Asset Management Limited (“Ltd”),
•Impax
Asset Management (AIFM) Ltd (“AIFM”),
•Impax
Asset Management Ireland Ltd, and
•Impax
Asset Management LLC;
all
collectively defined as “Impax” or the “Firm”
1.Principles:
Proxy
voting is the exercise of voting rights obtained by the firm in the course of
its day-to-day investment activities in listed equities. It is a key component
in the ongoing dialogue with the companies in which the Firm invests. As such,
proxy voting forms an important aspect of Impax’s overall investment
process.
The
Firm is committed to ensuring the consistent exercise of voting rights
associated with shares held in investment mandates, where proxy voting has been
delegated to Impax. Through the implementation of this Policy and the Impax
Proxy Voting Guidelines, Impax aims to enhance the long-term value of its
shareholdings, foster clear corporate governance best practices and promote
greater accountability and transparency in the companies Impax has invested in.
The Firm also aims to exercise voting rights on all shares held by Impax, where
it is in the best interest of its clients and where excessive costs, or
administrative burdens are not present.
Impax
invests in companies in a variety of countries and markets around the globe each
year. Each market has unique rules, regulatory requirements, reporting
requirements, and ESG practices and standards. The Firm aims to stay abreast of
new and emerging issues in these markets, and how they relate to global best
practices for ESG issues.
The
Firm supports the UK Stewardship Code and complies with its guidelines regarding
proxy voting. The Firm also complies with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission’s proxy voting disclosure requirements for mutual funds. In addition,
as part of Impax’s on-going proprietary company and issuer-level ESG analysis,
the Firm identifies company-specific matters and risks. As part of monitoring
and managing risks, Impax exercises active ownership and actively votes on and
engages with companies and issuers regarding these matters.
MAIN
CORPORATE GOVERNANCE PRINCIPLES THAT WE EXPECT FROM OUR INVESTEE COMPANIES:
▪Creating
sustainable, long-term value for stakeholders
▪Protecting
shareholder rights
▪Maintaining
high integrity in corporate behaviour at all times
▪Ensuring
an independent and efficient board structure
▪Aligning
corporate incentive structures and remuneration with long-term interests of
shareholders
▪Disclosing
accurate, timely and transparent financial and corporate governance
information
▪Ensuring
strong environmental and social performance and disclosures.
2.Environmental,
Social and Governance considerations
Impax
believes that well-governed companies are attentive to the environmental, social
and governance (ESG) concerns that affect shareholders and stakeholders. These
companies actively engage with their stakeholders and consider the long-term
implications of their actions with a focus on creating durable, sustainable
value.
Our
ESG criteria helps us identify well-managed companies; while stewardship helps
us improve the environmental, social and corporate governance performance of the
companies we invest in. Proxy voting is one of the ways of engagement with
investee companies. Impax seeks to vote proxies consistently with our ESG
criteria, which we apply to all companies.
3.Processes:
Impax’s
proxy voting is predominantly related to governance issues such as the election
of directors, board structures and management remuneration, but we also express
our views on diversity, climate and sustainability management and reporting,
through the vote of management and shareholder resolutions. The Firm also
maintains dialogue with investee companies throughout the year and frequently
engages on proposed governance structures ahead of voting at an AGM or soon
after.
▪Impax
uses a third-party voting platform to facilitate the Firm’s vote execution,
reporting and record keeping. Impax also uses third-party service providers,
including proxy advisor service and research providers, to help inform analysis
of relevant proxy issues and proxy votes.
▪Impax’s
proxy voting principles and guidelines are informed by global governance best
practices, and by advisory governance and internal ESG research, implemented as
described in the Impax Proxy Voting Guidelines1.
▪The
Firm applies its voting principles and guidelines with full consideration to a
company’s circumstances, following internal analysis.
▪Votes
are cast on shares, where the Firm does not consider legal, financial or
technical constraints to be excessive or burdensome.
▪Where
Impax’s proxy voting principles and guidelines or general corporate governance
best practice principles are not met, the Firm votes against a resolution and,
when practical, attempt to engage with the investee firm before or after the
meeting.
▪Impax
carefully assesses shareholder resolutions and tends to vote for resolutions
that are reasonable and would strengthen governance structures, shareholder
rights or sustainability objectives, processes, and disclosures.
4.Proxy
Voting Conflicts of Interest
The
Firm reviews each proxy vote to assess the extent, if any, to which there may be
a material conflict between the interests of our clients and the Firm’s own
interests (including those of our affiliates, managers, officers, employees and
other connected persons, referred to hereafter as a “Potential Proxy Conflict of
Interest”). Impax performs this assessment on a resolution basis.
1
Proxy
Voting Guidelines Impax Asset Management:
https://impaxam.com/assets/pdfs/proxy-voting/proxy_voting_guidelines.pdf?pwm=157
The
Firm conducts proxy voting in accordance with its own Proxy Voting Guidelines.
If it is determined that a Potential Proxy Conflict of Interest exists, the
potential conflict will be promptly reported to the Firm’s Chief Compliance
Officer (the “CCO”). The CCO will then determine whether a Potential Proxy
Conflict of Interest exists and is authorized to resolve any such conflict in a
manner that is in the collective best interests of all affected clients. The CCO
may decide to resolve a Potential Proxy Conflict of Interest in any of the
following manners:
▪Impax
may disclose any potential conflict to affected clients and obtain the consent
of the majority of those clients, before voting in the manner approved by the
majority of those clients;
▪Impax
may elect to engage an independent third-party to help determine how the proxy
should be voted on; or
▪Impax
may elect to establish an internal information barrier between the relevant
person(s) that are involved in the potential conflict and the person(s) involved
in making the proxy voting decision, in order to insulate the potential conflict
from the proxy vote decision maker.
5.Disclosures:
▪Proxy
voting records:
•On
a quarterly basis Impax publicly discloses on its website a summary of the
company’s proxy voting activity.
•On
an annual basis Impax publicly discloses on its website all “significant
votes”2
cast.
•Voting
decisions for both past and upcoming meetings for each of the relevant U.S.
registered mutual funds are disclosed on the company’s website.
•Impax
files a Form N-PX (annual report of proxy voting record) with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission annually.
•Impax
Proxy Voting Guidelines; periodically updated.
•UK
Stewardship Code Statement: This statement can be found on the Impax
website.
•Client
Communications: The Firm regularly discusses and reports its stewardship
policies and/or activities with its clients.
All
the publicly disclosed policies and documents can be found here:
https://impaxam.com/investment-philosophy/environmental-social-and-governance-risk-management/
2
Impax defines “significant votes” as those votes that are not just purely
procedural, but that are material in describing a company’s financial position,
corporate governance profile or other corporate structures or processes (whether
votes are cast FOR or AGAINST management). This disclosure applies to funds
managed by Impax Asset Management Limited, Impax Asset Management Ireland Ltd,
Impax Asset Management (AIFM) Ltd.
LOOMIS,
SAYLES & COMPANY
Proxy
Voting Policy and Procedures
March
24, 2022
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
1.GENERAL
A.Introduction.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P. (“Loomis Sayles”) will vote proxies of the securities
held in its clients’ portfolios on behalf of each client that has delegated
proxy voting authority to Loomis Sayles as investment adviser. Loomis Sayles has
adopted and implemented these policies and procedures (“Proxy Voting
Procedures”) to ensure that, where it has voting authority, proxy matters are
handled in the best interests of clients, in accordance with Loomis Sayles’
fiduciary duty, and all applicable law and regulations. The Proxy Voting
Procedures, as implemented by the Loomis Sayles Proxy Committee (as described
below), are intended to support good corporate governance, including those
corporate practices that address environmental and social issues (“ESG
Matters”), in all cases with the objective of protecting shareholder interests
and maximizing shareholder value.
Loomis
Sayles uses the services of third parties (each a “Proxy Voting Service” and
collectively the “Proxy Voting Services”), to provide research, analysis and
voting recommendations and to administer the process of voting proxies for those
clients for which Loomis Sayles has voting authority. Any reference in these
Proxy Voting Procedures to a “Proxy Voting Service” is a reference either to the
Proxy Voting Service that provides research, analysis and voting recommendations
to Loomis Sayles or to the Proxy Voting Service that administers the process of
voting proxies for Loomis Sayles or to both, as the context may require. Loomis
Sayles will generally follow its express policy with input from the Proxy Voting
Service that provides research, analysis and voting recommendations to Loomis
Sayles unless the Proxy Committee determines that the client’s best interests
are served by voting otherwise.
B.General
Guidelines.
The
following guidelines will apply when voting proxies on behalf of accounts for
which Loomis Sayles has voting authority.
1.Client’s
Best Interests.
The Proxy Voting Procedures are designed and implemented in a way that is
reasonably expected to ensure that proxy matters are conducted in the best
interests of clients. When considering the best interests of clients, Loomis
Sayles has determined that this means the best investment interest of its
clients as shareholders of the issuer. To protect its clients’ best interests,
Loomis Sayles has integrated the consideration of ESG Matters into its
investment process. The Proxy Voting Procedures are intended to reflect the
impact of these factors in cases where they are material to the growth and
sustainability of an issuer. Loomis Sayles has established its Proxy Voting
Procedures to assist it in making its proxy voting decisions with a view toward
enhancing the value of its clients’ interests in an issuer over the period
during which it expects its clients to hold their investments. Loomis Sayles
will vote against proposals that it believes could adversely impact the current
or future market value of the issuer’s securities during the expected holding
period. Loomis Sayles also believes that protecting the best interests of
clients requires the consideration of potential material impacts of proxy
proposals associated with ESG Matters.
For
the avoidance of doubt, and notwithstanding any other provisions of these Proxy
Voting Procedures, in all instances in which Loomis Sayles votes proxies on
behalf of clients that are employee benefit plans subject to the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), Loomis Sayles (a)
will act solely in accordance with the economic interest of the plan and its
participants and beneficiaries, and (b) will not subordinate the interests of
the participants and beneficiaries in their retirement income or financial
benefits under the plan to any other objective, or promote benefits or goals
unrelated to those financial interests of the plan’s participants and
beneficiaries.
2.Client
Proxy Voting Policies. Rather
than delegating proxy voting authority to Loomis Sayles, a client may (a) retain
the authority to vote proxies on securities in its account; (b) delegate voting
authority to another party; or (c) instruct Loomis Sayles to vote proxies
according to a policy that differs from the Proxy Voting Procedures. Loomis
Sayles will honor any of these instructions if the instruction is agreed to in
writing by Loomis Sayles in its investment management agreement with the client.
If Loomis Sayles incurs additional costs or expenses in following any such
instruction, it may request payment for such additional costs or expenses from
the client.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
3.Stated
Policies.
In the interest of consistency in voting proxies on behalf of its clients where
appropriate, Loomis Sayles has adopted policies that identify issues where
Loomis Sayles will (a) generally vote in favor of a proposal; (b) generally vote
against a proposal; (c) generally vote as recommended by the Proxy Voting
Service; and (d) specifically consider its vote for or against a proposal.
However, these policies are guidelines and each vote may be cast differently
than the stated policy, taking into consideration all relevant facts and
circumstances at the time of the vote. In certain cases where the recommendation
of the Proxy Voting Service and the recommendation of the issuer’s management
are the same, the vote will generally be cast as recommended and will not be
reviewed on a case-by-case basis by the Proxy Committee. In cases where the
portfolio manager of an account that holds voting securities of an issuer or the
analyst covering the issuer or its securities recommends a vote, the proposal(s)
will be voted according to these recommendations after a review for any
potential conflicts of interest is conducted and will not be reviewed on a
case-by-case basis by the Proxy Committee. There may be situations where Loomis
Sayles casts split votes despite the stated policies. For example, Loomis Sayles
may cast a split vote when different clients may be invested in strategies with
different investment objectives, or when different clients may have different
economic interests in the outcome of a particular proposal. Loomis Sayles also
may cast a split vote on a particular proposal when its investment teams have
differing views regarding the impact of the proposal on their clients’
investment interests.
4.Abstentions
and Other Exceptions.
Loomis Sayles’ general policy is to vote rather than abstain from voting on
issues presented, unless the Proxy Committee determines, pursuant to its best
judgment, that the client’s best interests require abstention. However, in the
following circumstances Loomis Sayles may not vote a client’s
proxy:
•The
Proxy Committee has concluded that voting would have no meaningful, identifiable
economic benefit to the client as a shareholder, such as when the security is no
longer held in the client’s portfolio or when the value of the portfolio holding
is insignificant.
•The
Proxy Committee has concluded that the costs of or disadvantages resulting from
voting outweigh the economic benefits of voting. For example, in some non-US
jurisdictions, the sale of securities voted may be legally or practically
prohibited or subject to some restrictions for some period of time, usually
between the record and meeting dates (“share blocking”). Loomis Sayles believes
that the loss of investment flexibility resulting from share blocking generally
outweighs the benefit to be gained by voting. Information about share blocking
is often incomplete or contradictory. Loomis Sayles relies on the client’s
custodian and on its Proxy Voting Service to identify share blocking
jurisdictions. To the extent such information is wrong, Loomis Sayles could fail
to vote shares that could have been voted without loss of investment
flexibility, or could vote shares and then be prevented from engaging in a
potentially beneficial portfolio transaction.
•Administrative
requirements for voting proxies in certain foreign jurisdictions (which may be
imposed a single time or may be periodic), such as providing a power of attorney
to the client’s local sub-custodian, cannot be fulfilled due to timing of the
requirement, or the costs required to fulfill the administrative requirements
appear to outweigh the benefits to the client of voting the proxy.
•The
client, as of the record date, has loaned the securities to which the proxy
relates and Loomis Sayles has concluded that it is not in the best interest of
the client to recall the loan or is unable to recall the loan in order to vote
the securities1.
•The
client so directs Loomis Sayles.
The
Proxy Committee will generally vote against, rather than abstain from voting on,
ballot issues where the issuer does not provide sufficient information to make
an informed decision. In addition, there may be instances where Loomis Sayles is
not able to vote proxies on a client's behalf, such as when ballot delivery
instructions have not been processed by a client's custodian, when the Proxy
Voting Service has not received a ballot for a client's account (e.g., in cases
where the client’s shares have been loaned to a third party), when proxy
materials are not available in English, and under other circumstances beyond
Loomis Sayles’ control.
5.Oversight.
All
issues presented for shareholder vote are subject to the oversight of the Proxy
Committee, either directly or by application of this policy. All non-routine
issues will generally be considered directly by the
1
Loomis Sayles does not engage in securities lending. However, some clients do
opt to lend securities, availing themselves of their custodians’ services.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
Proxy
Committee and, when necessary, the investment professionals responsible for an
account holding the security, and will be voted in the best investment interests
of the client. All routine “for” and “against” issues will be voted according to
this policy unless special factors require that they be considered by the Proxy
Committee and, when necessary, the investment professionals responsible for an
account holding the security.
6.Availability
of Procedures.
Loomis Sayles publishes these Proxy Voting Procedures, as updated from time to
time, on its public website, www.loomissayles.com, and includes a description of
its Proxy Voting Procedures in Part 2A of its Form ADV. Upon request, Loomis
Sayles also provides clients with a copy of its Proxy Voting
Procedures.
7.Disclosure
of Vote.
Loomis Sayles makes certain disclosures regarding its voting of proxies in the
aggregate (not specific as to clients) on its website, www.loomissayles.com. For
mutual funds that it manages, Loomis Sayles is required by law to make certain
disclosures regarding its voting of proxies annually. This information is also
available on the Loomis Sayles website. Additionally, Loomis Sayles will, upon
request by a client, provide information about how each proxy was voted with
respect to the securities in that client’s account. Loomis Sayles’ policy is not
to disclose a client’s proxy voting records to third parties except as required
by applicable law and regulations.
C.Proxy
Committee.
1.Proxy
Committee.
Loomis Sayles has established a Proxy Committee. The Proxy Committee is composed
of senior representatives from firm investment teams and members of the Legal
and Compliance Department, and other employees of Loomis Sayles as needed. In
the event that any member is unable to participate in a meeting of the Proxy
Committee, he or she may designate another individual to act on his or her
behalf. A vacancy in the Proxy Committee is filled by the prior member’s
successor in position at Loomis Sayles or a person of equivalent experience.
Each portfolio manager of an account that holds voting securities of an issuer
or the analyst covering the issuer or its securities may be an ad hoc member of
the Proxy Committee in connection with voting proxies of that issuer. Voting
determinations made by the Proxy Committee generally will be memorialized
electronically (e.g., by email).
2.Duties.
The Proxy Committee’s specific responsibilities include the
following:
a.developing,
authorizing, implementing and updating the Proxy Voting Procedures,
including:
(i)annually
reviewing the Proxy Voting Procedures to ensure consistency with internal
policies and regulatory agency policies, including determining the continuing
adequacy of the Proxy Voting Procedures to confirm that they have been
formulated reasonably and implemented effectively, including whether they
continue to be reasonably designed to ensure that proxy votes are cast in
clients’ best interest,
(ii)annually
reviewing existing voting guidelines and developing of additional voting
guidelines to assist in the review of proxy proposals, and
(iii)annually
reviewing the proxy voting process and addressing any general issues that relate
to proxy voting;
b.overseeing
the proxy voting process, including:
(i)overseeing
the vote on proposals according to the predetermined policies in the voting
guidelines,
(ii)directing
the vote on proposals where there is reason not to vote according to the
predetermined policies in the voting guidelines or where proposals require
special consideration,
(iii)consulting
with the portfolio managers and analysts for the accounts holding the security
when necessary or appropriate, and
(iv)periodically
sampling or engaging an outside party to sample proxy votes to ensure they
comply with the Proxy Voting Procedures and are cast in accordance with the
clients’ best interests;
c.engaging
and overseeing third-party vendors that materially assist Loomis Sayles with
respect to proxy voting, such as the Proxy Voting Services,
including:
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
(i)determining
and periodically reassessing whether, as relevant, the Proxy Voting Service has
the capacity and competency to adequately analyze proxy issues by
considering:
(a)the
adequacy and quality of the Proxy Voting Service’s staffing, personnel and
technology,
(b)whether
the Proxy Voting Service has adequately disclosed its methodologies in
formulating voting recommendations, such that Loomis Sayles can understand the
factors underlying the Proxy Voting Service’s voting recommendations,
(c)the
robustness of the Proxy Voting Service’s policies and procedures regarding its
ability to ensure that its recommendations are based on current, materially
complete and accurate information, and
(d)the
Proxy Voting Service’s policies and procedures regarding how it identifies and
addresses conflicts of interest, including whether the Proxy Voting Service’s
policies and procedures provide for adequate disclosure of its actual and
potential conflicts of interest with respect to the services it provides to
Loomis Sayles.
(ii)providing
ongoing oversight of the Proxy Voting Services to ensure that proxies continue
to be voted in the best interests of clients and in accordance with these Proxy
Voting Procedures and the determinations and directions of the Proxy
Committee,
(iii)receiving
and reviewing updates from the Proxy Voting Services regarding relevant business
changes or changes to the Proxy Voting Services’ conflict policies and
procedures, and
(iv)in
the event that the Proxy Committee becomes aware that a recommendation of the
Proxy Voting Service was based on a material factual error (including materially
inaccurate or incomplete information): investigating the error, considering the
nature of the error and the related recommendation, and determining whether the
Proxy Voting Service has taken reasonable steps to reduce the likelihood of
similar errors in the future; and
d. further
developing and/or modifying these Proxy Voting Procedures as otherwise
appropriate or necessary.
3.Standards.
a.When
determining the vote of any proposal for which it has responsibility, the Proxy
Committee shall vote in the client’s best interests as described in section
1(B)(1) above. In the event a client believes that its other interests require a
different vote, Loomis Sayles shall vote as the client instructs if the
instructions are provided as required in section 1(B)(2) above.
b.When
determining the vote on any proposal, the Proxy Committee shall not consider any
benefit to Loomis Sayles, any of its affiliates, any of its or their clients or
service providers, other than benefits to the owner of the securities to be
voted.
c.If
Loomis Sayles becomes aware of additional information relevant to the voting of
a shareholder meeting after a vote has been entered but before the applicable
voting deadline has passed, it will consider whether or not such information
impacts the vote determination entered, and if necessary, use reasonable efforts
to change the vote instruction.
D.Conflicts
of Interest.
Loomis
Sayles has established policies and procedures to ensure that proxy votes are
voted in its clients’ best interests and are not affected by any possible
conflicts of interest. First, except in certain limited instances, Loomis Sayles
votes in accordance with its pre-determined policies set forth in these Proxy
Voting Procedures. Second, where these Proxy Voting Procedures allow for
discretion, Loomis Sayles will generally consider the recommendations of the
Proxy Voting Service in making its voting decisions. However, if the Proxy
Committee determines that the Proxy Voting Service’s recommendation is not in
the best interests of the firm’s clients, then the Proxy Committee may use its
discretion to vote against the Proxy Voting Service’s recommendation, but only
after taking the following steps: (1) conducting a review for any material
conflict of interest Loomis Sayles may have, and (2) if any material conflict is
found to exist, excluding anyone at Loomis Sayles who is subject to that
conflict of interest from participating in the voting decision in any way.
However, if deemed necessary or appropriate by the Proxy Committee after full
disclosure of any conflict, that person may provide information, opinions or
recommendations on any proposal to the Proxy Committee. In such event, prior to
directing any vote, the Proxy
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
Committee
will make reasonable efforts to obtain and consider information, opinions and
recommendations from or about the opposing position.
E.Recordkeeping.
Loomis
Sayles or the Proxy Voting Service will maintain records of proxies voted
pursuant to Rule 204-2 under the Advisers Act. The records include: (1) a copy
of its Proxy Voting Procedures; (2) proxy statements received regarding client
securities; (3) a record of each vote cast; (4) a copy of any document created
by Loomis Sayles that is material to making a decision how to vote proxies on
behalf of a client or that memorializes the basis for that decision; and (5)
each written client request for proxy voting records and Loomis Sayles’ written
response to any (written or oral) client request for such records.
Proxy
voting books and records are maintained in an easily accessible place for a
period of five years, the first two in an appropriate office of Loomis
Sayles.
2.PROXY
VOTING
A.Introduction
Loomis
Sayles has established certain specific guidelines intended to achieve the
objective of the Proxy Voting Procedures: to support good corporate governance,
including ESG Matters, in all cases with the objective of protecting shareholder
interests and maximizing shareholder value.
B.Board
of Directors
Loomis
Sayles believes that an issuer’s independent, qualified board of directors is
the foundation of good corporate governance. Loomis Sayles supports proxy
proposals that reflect the prudent exercise of the board’s obligation to provide
leadership and guidance to management in fulfilling its obligations to its
shareholders. As an example, it may be prudent not to disqualify a director from
serving on a board if they participated in affiliated transactions if all
measures of independence and good corporate governance were met.
Annual
Election of Directors:
Vote for proposals to repeal classified boards and to elect all directors
annually.
Chairman
and CEO are Separate Positions:
Vote for proposals that require the positions of chairman and CEO to be held by
different persons.
Director
and Officer Indemnification and Liability Protection:
A.Vote
against proposals concerning director and officer indemnification and liability
protection that limit or eliminate entirely director and officer liability for
monetary damages for violating the duty of care, or that would expand coverage
beyond legal expenses to acts such as gross negligence that are more serious
violations of fiduciary obligations than mere carelessness.
B.Vote
for only those proposals that provide such expanded coverage in cases when a
director's or officer's legal defense was unsuccessful if (i) the director or
officer was found to have acted in good faith and in a manner that the director
or officer reasonably believed was in the best interests of the company, and
(ii) if the director's or officer’s legal expenses only would be
covered.
Director
Nominees in Contested Elections:
Votes in a contested election of directors or a “vote no” campaign must be
evaluated on a case-by-case basis, considering the following factors: (1)
long-term financial performance of the issuer relative to its industry;
management's track record; (2) background to the proxy contest; qualifications
of director nominees (both slates); (3) evaluation of what each side is offering
shareholders as well as the likelihood that the proposed objectives and goals
can be met; and (4) stock ownership positions.
Director
Nominees in Uncontested Elections:
A.Vote
for proposals involving routine matters such as election of directors, provided
that at least two-thirds of the directors would be independent, as determined by
the Proxy Voting Service, and affiliated or inside nominees do not serve on any
key board committee, defined as the Audit, Compensation, Nominating and/or
Governance Committees.
B.Vote
against nominees that are CFOs of the subject company. Generally, vote against
nominees that the Proxy Voting Service has identified as not acting in the best
interests of shareholders (e.g., due to over-
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
boarding,
risk management failures, a lack of diversity, etc.). Vote against nominees that
have attended less than 75% of board and committee meetings, unless a reasonable
cause (e.g., health or family emergency) for the absence is noted and accepted
by the Proxy Voting Service and the board. Vote against affiliated or inside
nominees who serve on a key board committee (as defined above). Vote against
affiliated and inside nominees if less than two-thirds of the board would be
independent. Vote against Governance or Nominating Committee members if both the
following are true: a) there is no independent lead or presiding director; and
b) the position of CEO and chairman are not held by separate individuals.
Generally, vote against Audit Committee members if auditor ratification is not
proposed, except in cases involving: (i) investment company board members, who
are not required to submit auditor ratification for shareholder approval
pursuant to Investment Company Act of 1940 rules; or (ii) any other issuer that
is not required by law or regulation to submit a proposal ratifying the auditor
selection. Vote against Compensation Committee members when Loomis Sayles or the
Proxy Voting Service recommends a vote against the issuer's "say on pay"
advisory vote.
C.Generally,
vote against all members of a board committee and not just the chairman or a
representative thereof in situations where the Proxy Voting Service finds that
the board committee has not acted in the best interests of
shareholders.
D.Vote
as recommended by the Proxy Voting Service when directors are being elected as a
slate and not individually.
E.When
electing directors for any foreign-domiciled issuer to which the Proxy Voting
Service believes it is reasonable to apply U.S. governance standards, we
generally will vote in accordance with our policies set forth in (A) through (D)
above. When electing directors for any other foreign-domiciled issuers, a
recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will generally be followed in lieu of
the above stipulations.
Independent
Audit, Compensation and Nominating and/or Governance Committees:
Vote for proposals requesting that the board Audit, Compensation and/or
Nominating and/or Governance Committees include independent directors
exclusively.
Independent
Board Chairman:
A.Vote
for shareholder proposals that generally request the board to adopt a policy
requiring its chairman to be "independent" (based on some reasonable definition
of that term) with respect to any issuer whose enterprise value is, according to
the Proxy Voting Service, greater than or equal to $10 billion.
B.Vote
such proposals on a case-by-case basis when, according to the Proxy Voting
Service, the issuer's enterprise value is less than $10 billion.
Multiple
Directorships:
Generally vote against a director nominee who serves as an executive officer of
any public company while serving on more than two total public company boards
and any other director nominee who serves on more than five total public company
boards, unless a convincing argument to vote for that nominee is made by the
Proxy Voting Service, in which case, the recommendation of the Proxy Voting
Service will generally be followed.
Staggered
Director Elections:
Vote against proposals to classify or stagger the board.
Stock
Ownership Requirements:
Generally vote against shareholder proposals requiring directors to own a
minimum amount of company stock in order to qualify as a director, or to remain
on the board.
Term
of Office:
Vote against shareholder proposals to limit the tenure of outside
directors.
C.Ratification
of Auditor
Loomis
Sayles generally supports proposals for the selection or ratification of
independent auditors, subject
to consideration of various factors such as independence and reasonableness of
fees.
A.Generally
vote for proposals to ratify auditors.
B.Vote
against ratification of auditors where an auditor has a financial interest in or
association with the company, and is therefore not independent; or there is
reason to believe that the independent auditor has rendered an opinion which is
neither accurate nor indicative of the company's financial position.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
C.In
general, if non-audit fees amount to 35% or more of total fees paid to a
company's auditor we will vote against ratification and against the members of
the Audit Committee unless the Proxy Voting Service states that the fees were
disclosed and determined to be reasonable. In such instances, the recommendation
of the Proxy Voting service will generally be followed.
D.Vote
against ratification of auditors and vote against members of the Audit Committee
where it is known that an auditor has negotiated an alternative dispute
resolution procedure.
E.Vote
against ratification of auditors if the Proxy Voting Service indicates that a
vote for the ratification of auditors it is not in the best long term interest
of shareholders.
D. Remuneration
and Benefits
Loomis
Sayles believes that an issuer’s compensation and benefit plans must be designed
to ensure the alignment of executives’ and employees’ interests with those of
its shareholders.
401(k)
Employee Benefit Plans:
Vote for proposals to implement a 401(k) savings plan for
employees.
Compensation
Plans:
Proposals with respect to compensation plans generally will be voted as
recommended by the Proxy Voting Service.
Compensation
in the Event of a Change in Control:
Votes on proposals regarding executive compensation in the event of a change in
control of the issuer will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Director
Related Compensation:
Vote proposals relating to director compensation, that are required by and
comply with applicable laws (domestic or foreign) or listing requirements
governing the issuer, as recommended by the Proxy Voting Service.
Employee
Stock Ownership Plans (“ESOPs”):
Vote for proposals that request shareholder approval in order to implement an
ESOP or to increase authorized shares for existing ESOPs, except in cases when
the number of shares allocated to the ESOP is "excessive" (i.e., generally
greater than five percent of outstanding shares), in which case the
recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will generally be
followed.
Golden
Coffins:
Review on a case-by-case basis all proposals relating to the obligation of an
issuer to provide remuneration or awards to survivors of executives payable upon
such executive's death.
Golden
and Tin Parachutes:
A.Vote
for shareholder proposals to have golden (top management) and tin (all
employees) parachutes submitted for shareholder ratification.
B.Review
on a case-by-case basis all proposals to ratify or cancel golden or tin
parachutes.
OBRA
(Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act)-Related Compensation Proposals:
A.Vote
for proposals to amend shareholder-approved plans to include administrative
features or place a cap on the annual grants any one participant may receive to
comply with the provisions of Section 162(m) of OBRA.
B.Vote
for amendments to add performance goals to existing compensation plans to comply
with the provisions of Section 162(m) of OBRA.
C.Vote
for cash or cash-and-stock bonus plans to exempt the compensation from taxes
under the provisions of Section 162(m) of OBRA.
D.Votes
on amendments to existing plans to increase shares reserved and to qualify the
plan for favorable tax treatment under the provisions of Section 162(m) should
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Shareholder
Proposals to Limit Executive and Director Pay Including Executive Compensation
Advisory Resolutions (“Say on Pay”):
A.Generally,
vote for shareholder proposals that seek additional disclosure of executive and
director pay information.
B.Review
on a case-by-case basis (1) all shareholder proposals that seek to limit
executive and director pay and (2) all advisory resolutions on executive pay
other than shareholder resolutions to permit such advisory resolutions.
C.Vote
against proposals to link all executive or director variable compensation to
performance goals.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
D.Vote
for an annual review of executive compensation.
E.Non-binding
advisory votes on executive compensation will be voted as recommended by the
Proxy Voting Service.
F.For
foreign domiciled issuers where a non-binding advisory vote on executive
compensation is proposed concurrently with a binding vote on executive
compensation, and the recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service is the same for
each proposal, a vote will be entered as recommended by the Proxy Voting
Service.
Share
Retention by Executives:
Generally vote against shareholder proposals requiring executives to retain
shares of the issuer for fixed periods unless the board and the Proxy Voting
Service recommend voting in favor of the proposal.
Stock
Option Plans:
A recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will generally be followed using
the following as a guide:
A.Vote
against stock option plans which expressly permit repricing of underwater
options.
B.Vote
against proposals to make all stock options performance based.
C.Vote
against stock option plans that could result in an earnings dilution above the
company specific cap considered by the Proxy Voting Service.
D.Vote
for proposals that request expensing of stock options.
E.Capital
Structure Management Issues
Adjustments
to Par Value of Common Stock:
Vote for management proposals to reduce the par value of common
stock.
Authority
to Issue Shares:
Vote for proposals by boards to authorize the issuance of shares (with or
without preemptive rights) to the extent the size of the proposed issuance in
proportion to the issuer’s issued ordinary share capital is consistent with
industry standards and the recommendations of the issuer’s board and the Proxy
Voting Service are in agreement. Proposals that do not meet the above criteria
will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
Blank
Check Preferred Authorization:
A.Vote
for proposals to create blank check preferred stock in cases when the company
expressly states that the stock will not be used as a takeover defense or carry
superior voting rights, and expressly states conversion, dividend, distribution
and other rights.
B.Vote
for shareholder proposals to have blank check preferred stock placements, other
than those shares issued for the purpose of raising capital or making
acquisitions in the normal course of business, submitted for shareholder
ratification.
C.Review
proposals to increase the number of authorized blank check preferred shares on a
case-by-case basis.
Common
Stock Authorization:
Vote against proposed common stock authorizations that increase the existing
authorization by more than 100% unless a clear need for the excess shares is
presented by the company. A recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will
generally be followed.
Greenshoe
Options (French issuers only):
Vote for proposals by boards of French issuers in favor of greenshoe options
that grant the issuer the flexibility to increase an over-subscribed securities
issuance by up to 15% so long as such increase takes place on the same terms and
within thirty days of the initial issuance, provided that the recommendation of
the issuer’s board and the Proxy Voting Service are in agreement. Proposals that
do not meet the above criteria will be reviewed on a case-by-case
basis.
Reverse
Stock Splits:
Vote for management proposals to reduce the number of outstanding shares
available through a reverse stock split.
Share
Cancellation Programs:
Vote for management proposals to reduce share capital by means of cancelling
outstanding shares held in the issuer's treasury.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
Share
Repurchase Programs:
Vote for management proposals to institute open-market share repurchase plans in
which all shareholders may participate on equal terms.
Stock
Distributions, Splits and Dividends:
Generally vote for management proposals to increase common share authorization,
provided that the increase in authorized shares following the split or dividend
is not greater than 100 percent of existing authorized shares.
F. Mergers,
Asset Sales and Other Special Transactions
Proposals
for transactions that have the potential to affect the ownership interests
and/or voting rights of the issuer’s shareholders, such as mergers, asset sales
and corporate or debt restructuring, will be considered on a case-by-case basis,
based on (1) whether the best economic result is being created for shareholders,
(2) what changes in corporate governance will occur, (3) what impact they will
have on shareholder rights, (4) whether the proposed transaction has strategic
merit for the issuer, and (5) other factors as noted in each section below, if
any.
Asset
Sales:
Votes on asset sales will be determined on a case-by-case basis after
considering the impact on the balance sheet/working capital, value received for
the asset, and potential elimination of inefficiencies.
Conversion
of Debt Instruments: Votes on the conversion of debt instruments will be
considered on a case-by-case basis after the recommendation of the relevant
Loomis Sayles equity or fixed income analyst is obtained.
Corporate
Restructuring:
Votes on corporate restructuring proposals, including minority squeeze-outs,
leveraged buyouts, spin-offs, liquidations, and asset sales will be considered
on a case-by-case basis.
Debt
Restructurings:
Review on a case-by-case basis proposals to increase common and/or preferred
shares and to issue shares as part of a debt-restructuring plan. Consider the
following issues:
A.Dilution
- How much will ownership interest of existing shareholders be reduced, and how
extreme will dilution to any future earnings be?
B.Change
in Control - Will the transaction result in a change in control of the
company?
C.Bankruptcy
– Loomis Sayles’ Corporate Actions Department is responsible for consents
related to bankruptcies and debt holder consents related to
restructurings.
D.Potential
Conflicts of Interest – For example, clients may own securities at different
levels of the capital structure; in such cases, Loomis Sayles will exercise
voting or consent rights for each such client based on that client’s best
interests, which may differ from the interests of other clients.
Delisting
a Security:
Proposals to delist a security from an exchange will be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis.
Fair
Price Provisions:
A.Vote
for fair price proposals, as long as the shareholder vote requirement embedded
in the provision is no more than a majority of disinterested shares.
B.Vote
for shareholder proposals to lower the shareholder vote requirement in existing
fair price provisions.
Greenmail:
A.Vote
for proposals to adopt anti-greenmail charter or bylaw amendments or otherwise
restrict a company’s ability to make greenmail payments.
B.Review
anti-greenmail proposals on a case-by-case basis when they are bundled with
other charter or bylaw amendments.
C.Vote
for proposals to eliminate an anti-greenmail bylaw if the recommendations of
management and the Proxy Voting Service are in agreement. If they are not in
agreement, review and vote such proposals on a case-by-case basis.
Liquidations:
Proposals on liquidations will be voted on a case-by-case basis after reviewing
relevant factors including but not necessarily limited to management's efforts
to pursue other alternatives, the appraisal value of assets, and the
compensation plan for executives managing the liquidation.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
Mergers
and Acquisitions:
Votes on mergers and acquisitions should be considered on a case-by-case basis,
generally taking into account relevant factors including but not necessarily
limited to: anticipated financial and operating benefits; offer price (cost vs.
premium); prospects of the combined companies; how the deal was negotiated;
golden parachutes; financial benefits to current management; and changes in
corporate governance and their impact on shareholder rights.
Poison
Pills:
A.Vote
for shareholder proposals that ask a company to submit its poison pill for
shareholder ratification.
B.Review
on a case-by-case basis shareholder proposals to redeem a company's poison
pill.
C.Review
on a case-by-case basis management proposals to ratify a poison
pill.
Reincorporation
Provisions:
Proposals to change a company's domicile will be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis.
Right
to Adjourn: Vote for the right to adjourn in conjunction with a vote for a
merger or acquisition or other proposal, and vote against the right to adjourn
in conjunction with a vote against a merger or acquisition or other
proposal.
Spin-offs:
Votes on spin-offs will be considered on a case-by-case basis depending on
relevant factors including but not necessarily limited to the tax and regulatory
advantages, planned use of sale proceeds, market focus, and managerial
incentives.
Tender
Offer Defenses:
Proposals concerning tender offer defenses will be evaluated on a case-by-case
basis.
G. Shareholder
Rights
Loomis
Sayles believes that issuers have a fundamental obligation to protect the rights
of their shareholders. Pursuant to its fiduciary duty to vote shares in the best
interests of its clients, Loomis Sayles considers proposals relating to
shareholder rights based on whether and how they affect and protect those
rights.
Appraisal
Rights:
Vote for proposals to restore, or provide shareholders with, rights of
appraisal.
Bundled
Proposals:
Review on a case-by-case basis bundled or "conditioned" proxy proposals. In the
case of items that are conditioned upon each other, examine the benefits and
costs of the packaged items. In instances when the joint effect of the
conditioned items is not in shareholders' best interests, vote against the
proposals. If the combined effect is positive, support such
proposals.
Confidential
Voting:
Vote for shareholder proposals that request corporations to adopt confidential
voting, use independent tabulators and use independent inspectors of election as
long as the proposals include clauses for proxy contests as follows: in the case
of a contested election, management should be permitted to request that the
dissident group honor its confidential voting policy. If the dissidents agree,
the policy remains in place. If the dissidents do not agree, the confidential
voting policy is waived. Vote for management proposals to adopt confidential
voting.
Counting
Abstentions:
Votes on proposals regarding counting abstentions when calculating vote proposal
outcomes will be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Cumulative
Voting:
Vote for proposals to permit cumulative voting, except where the issuer already
has in place a policy of majority voting.
Equal
Access:
Vote for shareholder proposals that would allow significant company shareholders
equal access to management's proxy material in order to evaluate and propose
voting recommendations on proxy proposals and director nominees, and in order to
nominate their own candidates to the board.
Exclusive
Forum Provisions:
Vote against proposals mandating an exclusive forum for any shareholder
lawsuits. Vote against the members of the issuer’s Governance Committee in the
event of a proposal mandating an exclusive forum without shareholder approval.
Independent
Proxy:
Vote for proposals to elect an independent proxy to serve as a voting proxy at
shareholder meetings.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
Majority
Voting:
Vote for proposals to permit majority rather than plurality or cumulative voting
for the election of directors/trustees.
Preemptive
Rights:
Votes with respect to preemptive rights generally will be voted as recommended
by the Proxy Voting Service subject to the Common Stock Authorization
requirements above.
Proxy
Access:
A recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will generally be followed with
regard to proposals intended to grant shareholders the right to place nominees
for director on the issuer’s proxy ballot (“Proxy Access”). Vote for such
proposals when they require the nominating shareholder(s) to hold, in aggregate,
at least 3% of the voting shares of the issuer for at least three years, and be
allowed to nominate up to 25% of the nominees. All other proposals relating to
Proxy Access will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis.
Shareholder
Ability to Alter the Size of the Board:
A.Vote
for proposals that seek to fix the size of the board.
B.Vote
against proposals that give management the ability to alter the size of the
board without shareholder approval.
Shareholder
Ability to Remove Directors:
A.Vote
against proposals that provide that directors may be removed only for
cause.
B.Vote
against proposals that provide that only continuing directors may elect
replacements to fill board vacancies.
C.Vote
for proposals to restore shareholder ability to remove directors with or without
cause and proposals that permit shareholders to elect directors to fill board
vacancies.
Shareholder
Advisory Committees:
Proposals to establish a shareholder advisory committee will be reviewed on a
case-by-case basis.
Shareholder
Rights Regarding Special Meetings:
A.Vote
for proposals that set a threshold of 10% of the outstanding voting stock as a
minimum percentage allowable to call a special meeting of shareholders. Vote
against proposals that increase or decrease the threshold from 10%.
B.Vote
against proposals to restrict or prohibit shareholder ability to call special
meetings.
Supermajority
Shareholder Voting Requirements:
Vote for all proposals to replace supermajority shareholder voting requirements
with simple majority shareholder voting requirements, subject to applicable laws
and regulations. Vote against management proposals to require a supermajority
shareholder vote to approve charter and bylaw amendments.
Unequal
Voting Rights:
A.Vote
against dual class exchange offers and dual class
recapitalizations.
B.Vote
on a case-by-case basis on proposals to eliminate an existing dual class voting
structure.
Written
Consent: Vote for proposals regarding the right to act by written consent when
the Proxy Voting Service recommends a vote for the proposal. Proposals regarding
the right to act by written consent where the Proxy Voting Service recommends a
vote against will be sent to the Proxy Committee for determination. Generally
vote against proposals to restrict or prohibit shareholder ability to take
action by written consent.
H. Environmental
and Social Matters
Loomis
Sayles has a fiduciary duty to act in the best interests of its clients.
Loomis
Sayles believes good corporate governance, including those practices that
address ESG Matters, is essential to the effective management of a company’s
financial, litigation and reputation risk, the maximization of its long-term
economic performance and sustainability, and the protection of its shareholders’
best interests, including the maximization of shareholder value.
Proposals
on environmental and social matters cover a wide range of issues, including
environmental and energy practices and their impacts, labor matters, diversity
and human rights. These proposals may be voted as recommended by the Proxy
Voting Service or may, in the determination of the Proxy Committee, be reviewed
on a
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
case-by-case
basis if the Proxy Committee believes that a particular proposal (i) could have
a material impact on an industry or the growth and sustainability of an issuer;
(ii) is appropriate for the issuer and the cost to implement would not be
excessive; (iii) is appropriate for the issuer in light of various factors such
as reputational damage or litigation risk; or (iv) is otherwise appropriate for
the issuer.
Loomis
Sayles will consider whether such proposals are likely to enhance the value of
the client’s investments after taking into account the costs involved, pursuant
to its fiduciary duty to its clients.
Climate
Reporting: Generally vote for proposals requesting the issuer produce a report,
at reasonable expense, on the issuer’s climate policies. A recommendation
against such proposals by the Proxy Voting Service will be considered by the
Proxy Committee.
Workplace
Diversity Reporting: Generally vote for proposals requesting the issuer produce
a report, at reasonable expense, on the issuer’s workforce diversity or equity
policies and/or performance. A recommendation against such proposals by the
Proxy Voting Service will be considered by the Proxy Committee.
I. General
Corporate Governance
Loomis
Sayles has a fiduciary duty to its clients with regard to proxy voting matters,
including routine proposals that do not present controversial issues. The impact
of proxy proposals on its clients’ rights as shareholders must be evaluated
along with their potential economic benefits.
Changing
Corporate Name:
Vote for management proposals to change the corporate name.
Charitable
and Political Contributions and Lobbying Expenditures:
Votes on proposals regarding charitable contributions, political contributions,
and lobbying expenditures, should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
Proposals of UK issuers concerning political contributions will be voted for if
the issuer states that (a) it does not intend to make any political donations or
incur any expenditures in respect to any political party in the EU; and (b) the
proposal is submitted to ensure that the issuer does not inadvertently breach
the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 and sections 366 and
367 of the Companies Act 2006.
Delivery
of Electronic Proxy Materials:
Vote for proposals to allow electronic delivery of proxy materials to
shareholders.
Disclosure
of Prior Government Service:
Review on a case-by-case basis all proposals to disclose a list of employees
previously employed in a governmental capacity.
Financial
Statements:
Generally, proposals to accept and/or approve the delivery of audited financial
statements shall be voted as recommended by the Proxy Voting Service. In certain
non-US jurisdictions where local regulations and/or market practices do not
require the release of audited financial statements in advance of custodian vote
deadlines (e.g., Korea), and the Proxy Voting Service has not identified any
issues with the company’s past financial statements or the audit procedures
used, then Loomis Sayles shall vote for such proposals.
Non-Material
Miscellaneous Bookkeeping Proposals:
A recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will generally be followed
regarding miscellaneous bookkeeping proposals of a non-material nature.
Ratification
of Board and/or Management Acts: Generally, proposals concerning the
ratification or approval of the acts of the board of directors and/or management
of the issuer for the past fiscal year shall be voted as recommended by the
Proxy Voting Service.
Reimbursement
of Proxy Contest Defenses:
Generally, proposals concerning all proxy contest defense cost reimbursements
should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Reimbursement
of Proxy Solicitation Expenses:
Proposals to provide reimbursement for dissidents waging a proxy contest should
be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
State
Takeover Statutes:
Review on a case-by-case basis proposals to opt in or out of state takeover
statutes (including control share acquisition statutes, control share cash-out
statutes, freeze out provisions, fair price provisions, stakeholder laws, poison
pill endorsements, severance pay and labor contract provisions, anti-greenmail
provisions, and disgorgement provisions).
Technical
Amendments to By-Laws:
A recommendation of the Proxy Voting Service will generally be followed
regarding technical or housekeeping amendments to by-laws or articles designed
to bring the by-laws or articles into line with current regulations and/or
laws.
Transaction
of Other Business:
Vote against proposals asking for authority to transact open-ended other
business without any information provided by the issuer at the time of
voting.
Transition
Manager Ballots:
Any ballot received by Loomis Sayles for a security that was held for a client
by a Transition Manager prior to Loomis Sayles’ management of the client’s
holdings will be considered on a case-by case basis by the Proxy Committee
(without the input of any Loomis Sayles analyst or portfolio manager) if such
security is no longer held in the client’s account with Loomis
Sayles.
J. Investment
Company Matters
Election
of Investment Company Trustees:
Vote for nominees who oversee fewer than 60 investment company portfolios. Vote
against nominees who oversee 60 or more investment company portfolios that
invest in substantially different asset classes (e.g., if the applicable
portfolios include both fixed income funds and equity funds). Vote on a
case-by-case basis for or against nominees who oversee 60 or more investment
company portfolios that invest in substantially similar asset classes (e.g., if
the applicable portfolios include only fixed income funds or only equity funds).
These policies will be followed with respect to funds advised by Loomis Sayles
and its affiliates, as well as funds for which Loomis Sayles acts as subadviser
and other third parties.
Mutual
Fund Distribution Agreements:
Votes on mutual fund distribution agreements should be evaluated on a
case-by-case basis.
Investment
Company Fundamental Investment Restrictions:
Votes on amendments to an investment company’s fundamental investment
restrictions should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
Investment
Company Investment Advisory Agreements:
Votes on investment company investment advisory agreements should be evaluated
on a case-by-case basis
.
Loomis,
Sayles & Company, L.P.
Los
Angeles Capital Management LLC
LOS
ANGELES CAPITAL
Proxy
Policy
Rev.
August 23, 2022
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Table
of Contents |
|
|
| |
I. |
| Introduction |
3 |
II. |
| Proxy
Policy Statement |
3 |
| A. |
Proxy
Voting Guidelines |
3 |
| B. |
Limitations |
4 |
| C. |
Special
Considerations |
4 |
III. |
| Responsibility
and Oversight |
5 |
IV. |
| Proxy
Voting Procedures |
5 |
|
A. |
Materiality |
5 |
| B. |
Conflicts
of Interest |
5 |
| C. |
Disclosure |
6 |
| D. |
Recordkeeping |
6 |
I.Introduction
Los
Angeles Capital Management LLC (“Los Angeles Capital” or the “Firm”) has adopted
and implemented policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure
that proxies are voted in the best interest of clients, in accordance with U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) Rule 206(4) ‐ 6 under the Investment
Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) and its obligations under the Employee
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). Los Angeles Capital provides
investment advisory or sub-advisory services to various types of institutional
clients. When clients give Los Angeles Capital the authority to vote proxies
held in their client accounts such authority is specified in the advisory
contract or other governing agreement.
II.Proxy
Policy Statement
Los
Angeles Capital has retained Glass Lewis & Co., LLC (“Glass Lewis”) an
unaffiliated third‐party, to act as an independent proxy voting agent. Glass
Lewis provides proxy analysis, voting recommendations, recordkeeping, and
manages other operational matters of the proxy voting process. If at any time a
material conflict arises, it would be resolved in the best interest of the
client.
When
Los Angeles Capital is given proxy voting authority together with a client’s
voting policy, the Firm oversees compliance with such policy. When the client
elects to use the Firm’s standard proxy guidelines, the Firm will vote in
accordance with the guidelines approved by the Firm’s Proxy Committee
(“Committee”). The Committee has approved the use of Glass Lewis’ U.S. and
Global guidelines, as may be modified from time to time (the “Firm’s
Guidelines”).
A.Proxy
Voting Guidelines
On
an annual basis, the Committee reviews the Firm’s Guidelines. The Committee also
selectively reviews a sampling of the voting recommendations and the related
proxy materials in determining whether to continue or modify the approved Firm
Guidelines.
The
Firm ultimately retains the right to cast each vote on a case‐by‐case basis,
taking into consideration the applicable proxy guidelines including any
contractual obligations or custom voting policy of the particular portfolio as
well as all relevant facts and circumstances including information that might be
gathered from sources beyond Glass Lewis. In the event there is a disagreement
with the Glass Lewis analysis as to a particular vote, the Committee will
determine whether it is appropriate to vote contrary to the Glass Lewis analysis
provided that such decision is consistent with the approved guideline. In the
rare circumstance that the Committee believes it is in the best interest of a
client to vote contrary to an approved guideline, the Committee will seek client
consent prior to placing a vote that is contrary to an approved guideline.
Los
Angeles Capital recognizes that a client may issue specific directives regarding
how particular proxy issues are to be voted for the client’s portfolio holdings.
The Firm requires that the advisory or sub‐advisory contract specify such
instructions, including instructions as to how those votes will be managed,
particularly where they differ from the Firm’s Guidelines.
It
is unlikely that serious conflicts of interest will arise in the context of the
Firm’s proxy voting because the Firm does not engage in other financial
businesses such as brokerage, managing or advising public companies,
underwriting, or investment banking. Nevertheless, should a conflict of interest
arise in connection with proxy voting or Glass Lewis, such conflict will be
handled as described below under Section IV B, “Conflicts of Interest.” As a
matter of policy, the Firm and its employees are required to put the interests
of clients ahead of their own.
B.Limitations
In
limited circumstances, the Firm may elect to abstain from voting or may be
unable to vote a client’s proxy. These circumstances include:
•Where
the Firm concludes that the effect on shareholder’s economic interests or the
value of the portfolio holding is indeterminable or insignificant.
•Where
the securities related to the vote participate in a securities
lending program and
are out on loan. In many cases, where a client directs the securities lending,
Los Angeles Capital may not be aware when the security is out on loan and thus
may not be able to recall the security before the record date. Where Los Angeles
Capital deems a holding materially significant or is directing the securities
lending, the Firm may recall securities, if operationally feasible, so that they
can be voted where the Firm determines it has a fiduciary obligation to do
so.
•Where
the related securities are issued in a country that participates in share
blocking
because it is disruptive to the management of the portfolio.
•Where
multiple global custodian accounts roll up into one omnibus
sub-custodian account.
In the specific markets where this may occur, the account managed by Los Angeles
Capital is not registered individually. Therefore, if ballots are voted
differently for the underlying accounts, the omnibus vote is considered split
and is rejected.
•Where
in the Firm’s judgement the unjustifiable
costs1
or disadvantages of voting the proxy would exceed the anticipated benefit of
voting (e.g., certain non‐U.S. securities).
•Where
a required Power
of Attorney is
not on file.
C.Special
Considerations
Certain
accounts may warrant specialized treatment in voting proxies. Contractual
stipulations and individual client direction will dictate how voting will be
done in these cases.
Mutual
Funds
Where
the Firm votes proxies for a mutual fund that it sub-advises, the proxies will
be voted in accordance with the Fund’s stated guidelines and requirements of
securities laws. Proxies of portfolio companies voted may be subject to
investment restrictions of the fund and voted in accordance with any resolutions
or other instructions approved by authorized persons of the fund.
ERISA
Accounts
Responsibilities
for voting ERISA accounts include: the duty of loyalty, prudence, compliance
with the plan, as well as a duty to avoid prohibited transactions.
Issuer
Supplemental Information
Management
of issuers, as well as other interested parties, will sometimes release
supplemental information (after the proxy statement) that relates to a pending
proxy vote. Glass Lewis and the Firm will not always be able to consider that
additional information depending on when it is released.
1
The DOL has indicated that such costs include, but are not limited to,
expenditures related to developing proxy resolutions, proxy voting services and
the analysis of the likely net effect of a particular issue on the economic
value of the plan’s investment. Fiduciaries must take into consideration whether
the exercise of its rights to vote a proxy is expected to have an effect on the
economic value of the plan’s investment that will outweigh the costs of
exercising such rights. With respect to proxies for shares of foreign
corporations, a fiduciary, in deciding whether to purchase shares of a foreign
corporation, should consider whether any additional difficulty and expense in
voting such shares is reflected in their market price.
III.Responsibility
and Oversight
The
Committee was established to provide oversight to the proxy voting process and
is responsible for developing, implementing, and updating the Firm’s proxy
policy, reviewing approving, and/or formulating the Firm’s Guidelines, selecting
and overseeing the third‐party proxy vendor, identifying any conflicts of
interest, determining the votes for issues it elects to vote independently from,
or that cannot be voted by, Glass Lewis, monitoring legislative and corporate
governance developments surrounding proxy issues, and meeting to discuss any
material issues regarding the proxy voting process. The Committee meets annually
and as necessary to fulfill its obligations.
As
part of the Committee’s ongoing oversight of its third-party proxy vendor, the
Committee considers (i) the adequacy and quality of the proxy vendor’s staffing
and personnel; (ii) the presence of conflicts and processes to address those
conflicts; (iii) the robustness of the proxy vendor’s policies and procedures
for ensuring that its recommendations are based on current and accurate
information; and (iv) any other appropriate considerations as to the nature and
quality of the proxy vendor’s services. In addition, Compliance conducts
periodic reviews of ballots voted by the proxy vendor to ensure they are in line
with proxy voting procedures.
In
cases where the Committee votes a proxy ballot it may conduct research
internally and/or use the resources of an independent research consultant or use
information from any of the following sources: legislative materials, studies of
corporate governance and other proxy voting issues, reports by issuers’
management on pending proxy votes, and/or published analyses of shareholder and
management proposals. In all voting circumstances, two votes from voting members
of the Committee or one voting member of the Committee and an internal legal
counsel are required.
Los
Angeles Capital’s Operations Department handles the day-to-day administration of
the proxy voting process.
IV.Proxy
Voting Procedures
Glass
Lewis provides for the timely execution of specified proxy votes on the Firm’s
behalf, which includes complete account set‐up, vote execution, reporting,
recordkeeping, and compliance with ERISA.
Los
Angeles Capital’s responsibility for voting proxies is generally determined by
the obligations set forth under each client’s Investment Management Agreement,
Limited Partnership Agreement, Prospectus, or other legal documentation
governing the account. Voting ERISA client proxies is a fiduciary act of plan
asset management that must be performed by the adviser unless the voting right
is retained by a named fiduciary of the plan. If an advisory or sub‐advisory
contract or similar document states that Los Angeles Capital does not have the
authority to vote client proxies, then voting is the responsibility of some
other named fiduciary.
While
Los Angeles Capital will accept direction from clients on specific proxy issues
for their account, the Firm reserves the right to maintain its standard position
on all other client accounts for which the Firm has proxy
authority.
A.Materiality
The
Committee has designated certain materiality thresholds for situations in which
the Committee may vote independently from Glass Lewis or may take separate
actions in regard to securities lending limitations. Materiality thresholds are
monitored daily and are escalated to the Committee for review.
B.Conflicts
of Interest
Los
Angeles Capital attempts to minimize the risks of conflicts and reviews the
Conflict of Interest Statement prepared by Glass Lewis on an annual
basis.
If
Glass Lewis identifies a potential conflict of interest between it and a
publicly held company, it will disclose the relationship on the relevant
research report. If an unforeseen conflict requires specialized treatment,
alternate measures may be taken, up to and including having Glass Lewis refrain
from writing a Proxy Paper report on the company. In this scenario Glass Lewis
would procure a substitute research report from an alternative qualified
provider and the Committee may be required to research and vote the
proxy.
If,
during this process, the Committee identifies a potential material conflict of
interest between Los Angeles Capital or an affiliated person of the Firm and the
issuer whose ballot is being voted, the client will be notified. If no directive
is issued by the client, the Committee will vote in such a way that, in the
Committee’s opinion, fairly addresses the conflict in the best interest of the
client.
C.Disclosure
Los
Angeles Capital will provide all clients with a copy of the Firm’s current proxy
policies and procedures upon request. In addition, clients may request, at any
time, a copy of the Firm’s voting records for their respective account(s) by
making a formal request to Los Angeles Capital. Los Angeles Capital will make
this information available to a client upon its request within a reasonable
time. For further information, please contact a member of Operations at Los
Angeles Capital at 310‐479‐9998 or [email protected].
Los
Angeles Capital generally will not disclose how it intends to vote on behalf of
a client account except as required by applicable law but may disclose such
information to a client regarding their portfolio who itself may decide or may
be required to make public such information. Los Angeles Capital will not
disclose past votes or share amounts voted except (i) for a valid business
purpose as determined in the discretion of the Chief Compliance Officer or Chief
Legal Officer, (ii) to the respective client, or (iii) as required by
law.
D.Recordkeeping
All
proxy records pursuant to Section 204‐2 of the Advisers Act are retained by
either Glass Lewis or Los Angeles Capital. Glass Lewis retains (1) records of
proxy statements received regarding client securities and (2) records of each
vote cast. Los Angeles Capital retains (1) copies of its proxy policies,
procedures, and Firm Guidelines; (2) copies of any document created by Los
Angeles Capital that was material to making a decision how to vote proxies on
behalf of a client or that memorializes the basis for that decision; (3) each
written client request for information on how the adviser voted proxies on
behalf of the client; and (4) a copy of any written response by Los Angeles
Capital to any (written or oral) client request for information on how the
adviser voted proxies on behalf of the requesting client.
ERISA
Accounts
Los
Angeles Capital’s maintains access to proxy voting records (both procedures and
actions taken in individual situations) to enable the named fiduciary to
determine whether Los Angeles Capital is fulfilling its obligations. Such
records may be maintained via Glass Lewis’ electronic system. Retention may
include: (1) issuer name and meeting; (2) issues voted on and record of the
vote; (3) number of shares eligible to be voted on the record date; (4) number
of shares voted; and (5) where appropriate, cost‐benefit analyses.
Duration
Proxy
voting books and records will be maintained in an easily accessible place for at
least five years from the end of the fiscal year during which the last entry was
made on such records. For the first two years, the records are fully accessible
in Los Angeles Capital’s office and electronically.
NEWTON
INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT
Proxy
Voting Policy
November
15, 2022
|
|
|
|
| |
Related
Regulations |
Rule
206(4)-6 and 204-2 under The Investment Advisers Act of 1940
ERISA
Rule 404a-1 |
|
|
|
|
| |
Related
Corporate Policies |
BNY
Mellon Proxy Voting Policy |
Background
This
policy is set forth by applicable business unit and both Newton Investment
Management North America, LLC, (“NIMNA”) and its affiliate, Newton Investment
Management Limited (“NIM”) (collectively referred to as “Newton”) have
implemented a global approach to their proxy voting process and oversight. In
addition, both NIMNA and NIM are wholly owned subsidiaries of The Bank of New
York Mellon (“BNY Mellon”) and as such, Newton may rely on services provided by
BNY Mellon related to the proxy voting process.
Policy
Statement
As
a fiduciary and to meet its obligations as an SEC registered investment adviser,
Newton owes its clients a duty of care and a duty of loyalty with respect to all
services undertaken on the client’s behalf including (where applicable) the
exercise of voting rights. Newton provides discretionary and non-discretionary
investment advisory services to institutional investors in the form of, for
example, separate accounts, model portfolios pooled investment vehicles that are
offered or maintained by The Bank of New York Mellon and its affiliates, and to
other investment advisers through sub-advisory agreements. In addition, we may
also provide voting advice to accounts where Newton acts in an advisory
capacity.
This
Proxy Voting Policy (the “Policy”) describes Newton’s approach to exercising
voting rights, where discretion over the voting decisions has been delegated to
Newton by its clients and where Newton provides guidance on exercising voting
rights in securities that Newton has recommended to clients on a
non-discretionary basis, e.g. model accounts.
Where
applicable, Newton will use its best efforts to exercise voting rights as part
of its authority to manage, acquire and dispose of account assets. With respect
of funds, i.e. registered investment companies, UCITS or AIFs, which Newton
manages and/ or sub-advises, Newton will exercise voting rights under this
Policy pursuant to an authority granted under the applicable client
agreements.
Newton
will exercise voting rights in a prudent and diligent manner and in the best
interests of clients.
Policy
Summary
Newton
has adopted and implemented this Policy, which it believes is reasonably
designed to:
•Ensure
that voting rights are exercised;
•Ensure
voting decisions are taken in the best interests of clients;
•Address
potential material conflicts of interest that may arise; and
•Meet
disclosure requirements and expectations in connection with voting
responsibilities and activities undertaken.
Voting
Guidelines
Newton
has established overarching stewardship principles which guide our ultimate
voting decision, based on guidance established by internationally recognized
governance principles including the OECD Corporate Governance Principles, the
ICGN Global Governance Principles, the UK Investment Association’s Principles of
Remuneration and the UK Corporate Governance Code, in addition to other local
governance codes. All voting decisions are taken on a case-by-case basis,
reflecting our investment rationale, engagement activity and the company’s
approach to relevant codes, market practices and regulations. These are applied
to the company’s unique situation, while also taking into account any
explanations offered for why the company has adopted a certain position or
policy. It is only in the event that we recognise a material conflict of
interest that we apply the vote recommendations of our third-party voting
administrator. These are described in Newton’s publicly available Responsible
Investment Policies and Principles.
Newton
seeks to make proxy voting decisions that are in the best long-term financial
interests of its clients and which seek to support investor value by promoting
sound economic, environmental, social and governance policies, procedures and
practices through the support of proposals that are consistent with following
four key objectives:
•To
support the alignment of the interests of a company's management and board of
directors with those of the company's investors;
•To
promote the accountability of a company's management to its board of directors,
as well as the accountability of the board of directors to the company's
investors;
•To
uphold the rights of a company's investors to effect change by voting on those
matters submitted for approval; and
•To
promote adequate disclosure about a company's business operations and financial
performance in a timely manner.
In
general, voting decisions are taken consistently across all Newton’s clients
that are invested in the same underlying company. This is in line with Newton’s
investment process that focuses on the long-term success of the investee
company. Further, it is Newton’s intention to exercise voting rights in all
circumstances where it retains voting authority. This may be hindered by various
practical considerations. For instance, in certain markets, shares are "blocked"
before the exercise of voting rights. Blocking consists of placing the stock on
a register for a number of days spanning the meeting. During the share-blocked
period, the shares cannot be traded freely. In markets where share blocking is
practiced, Newton will vote only when the resolution is not in shareholders'
best interests and where restricting the ability to trade is not expected to
risk adversely affecting the value of clients' holdings.
For
further detail regarding; i) Newton’s overarching views when voting of proxies
as a fiduciary for clients; ii) voting procedures; and iii) voting practices
please see Newton’s Responsible Investment Policies and Principles.
Voting
Procedures
All
voting opportunities are communicated to Newton by way of an electronic voting
platform.
The
Responsible Investment team reviews all resolutions for matters of concern. Any
such contentious issues identified may be referred to the appropriate global
fundamental equity analyst or portfolio manager for comment. Where an issue
remains contentious, Newton may also decide to confer or engage with the company
or other relevant stakeholders.
An
electronic voting service is employed to submit voting decisions. Each voting
decision is submitted via the electronic voting service by a member of the
Responsible Investment team but can only be executed by way of an alternate
member of the team approving the vote within the same system.
Members
of certain BNY Mellon operations teams are responsible for administrative
elements surrounding the exercise of voting rights by ensuring the right to
exercise clients’ votes is available and that these votes are
exercised.
Newton
Investment Management
Acting
collectively
Subject
to applicable law and reporting regulations, Newton will work collectively with
other investors as well as trade associations, government bodies and
non-governmental organizations to develop best practice, raise awareness of a
concern or enhance the effectiveness of engagement activities. When considering
action and also when acting collectively on a specific issue of concern with a
company, we exercise caution in order to avoid situations of being
unintentionally in receipt of material non-public information, breaching
relevant anti-trust or anti-competitive rules and regulations, or being
considered acting in concert with one or more other investors.
Voting
service providers
Newton
utilizes an independent voting service provider for the purposes of managing
upcoming meetings and instructing voting decisions via its electronic platform,
and for providing research. Its voting recommendations of are not routinely
followed; it is only in the event that we recognize a potential material
conflict of interest (as described below) that the recommendation of our
external voting service provider will be applied.
Newton’s
external voting provider is subject to the requirements set by Newton’s Vendor
Management Oversight Group. As such, regular due diligence meetings are held and
minutes maintained with this provider, which includes reviewing its operational
performance, service quality, robustness of research and its internal controls,
including management of its potential material conflicts of interest. In
addition, and along with its other clients, Newton participates in consultations
that seek specific feedback on proxy voting matters. This helps ensure alignment
of interest between Newton’s expectations and the voting recommendations
provided by the external provider.
Conflicts
of Interest
Where
Newton acts as a proxy for its clients, a conflict could arise between Newton
(including BNY Mellon funds or affiliate funds), the investee company and/or a
client when exercising voting rights. Newton has in place procedures for
ensuring potential material conflicts of interests are mitigated, while its
clients’ voting rights are exercised in their best interests. Newton seeks to
avoid potential material conflicts of interest through:
1.the
establishment of these proxy voting guidelines;
2.the
Responsible Investment team;
3.internal
oversight groups; and
4.the
application of the proxy voting guidelines in an objective and consistent manner
across client accounts, based on, as applicable, internal and external research
and recommendations provided by third party proxy advisory services and without
consideration of any Newton or BNY Mellon client relationship
factors.
Where
a potential material conflict of interest exists between Newton, BNY Mellon, the
underlying company and/or a client, the voting recommendations of an independent
third party proxy service provider will be instructed.
A
potential material conflict of interest could exist in the following situations,
among others:
1.Where
a shareholder meeting is convened by Newton’s parent company, BNY
Mellon;
2.Where
a shareholder meeting is convened by a company for which the CEO of BNY Mellon
serves as a Board member;
3.Where
a shareholder meeting is convened by a company that is a current client of BNY
Mellon and contributed more than 5% of BNY Mellon’s revenue as of the end of the
last fiscal quarter;
4.Where
a shareholder meeting involves an issue that is being publicly challenged or
promoted (e.g., a proxy contest) by (i) a BNY Mellon Board member or (ii) a
company for which a BNY Mellon Board member serves as Chairman of the Board of
Directors, CEO, President, CFO or COO (or functional equivalent);
5.Where
a shareholder meeting is convened by a pooled vehicle with agenda items relating
to services provided by (or fees paid to) a BNY Mellon affiliate (e.g.,
Investment Management Agreement, Custody Agreement, etc);
Newton
Investment Management
6.Where
an employee, officer or director of BNY Mellon or one of its affiliated
companies has a personal interest in the outcome of a particular proxy
proposal); and
7.The
proxy relates to a security where Newton has invested in two or more companies
that are subject to the same merger or acquisition. All instances where a
potential material conflict of interest has been recognised and Newton engages
its proxy voting service provider are reported separately in Newton’s publicly
available Responsible Investment Quarterly Reports.
Newton
employees are required to identify any potential or actual conflicts of interest
and take appropriate action to avoid or manage these and report them to Newton’s
Conflicts of Interest Committee for review, further information can be found in
Newton’s Conflicts of Interest Policy.
Disclosures
and reporting
Newton
publishes publicly on its website its Responsible Investment Policies and
Principles, which describes Newton’s approach to Responsible Investment
including the exercise of voting rights. The Responsible Investment quarterly
reports are also published publicly, which include the details of ESG engagement
undertaken during the period in addition to a list all voting decisions taken
and the voting rationale for decisions not aligned with the recommendations of
the underlying company’s management and for decisions on all
shareholder-proposed resolutions.
Newton’s
Proxy Voting Policy and procedures is also summarized in its Form ADV, which is
filed with the SEC and furnished to clients. Upon request, Newton will provide
clients with a copy of the policies noted above as well as information on how
their proxies were voted by Newton.
Securities
lending
Newton
does not engage in securities lending on behalf of its clients; this activity is
at the discretion of individual clients. For certain funds that are managed by
BNY Mellon, and where Newton is appointed as investment manager or sub-advisor,
the fund boards have entered into securities-lending programs.
Controls,
record keeping and auditing
Newton
has established a Sustainability Committee that oversees all aspects relating to
sustainability at Newton, including Newton’s investments, direct impacts and
engagement with communities and engagement with financial markets (advocacy)
regarding sustainability issues. All internal procedure documents related to
voting matters, including this policy document, are overseen by the
Sustainability Committee at least annually.
Records
are kept of all voting decisions, including evidence of the submission and
approval process, which are subject to external audit. In addition, the
Corporate Actions team reports monthly on critical risk indicators in relation
to voting matters. Further, Compliance Monitoring carry out reviews of Newton’s
proxy voting policies and procedures on a risk-based approach to confirm
Newton’s compliance with this policy.
Roles
and responsibilities
Members
of certain BNY Mellon Operations teams are responsible for administrative
processes and actions that ensures Newton has the ability to and does exercise
its individual clients’ voting rights.
Responsible
Investment team
members are also responsible for ensuring voting rights are exercised and that
voting decisions are in line with Newton’s voting guidelines.
Fundamental
equity analysts and portfolio managers
provide specific company-level investment insight for consideration when
arriving at voting decisions.
The
Sustainability
Committee
oversees Newton’s Responsible Investment Policies and Principles, which includes
this Policy.
Newton
Investment Management
NUVEEN
ASSET MANAGEMENT, LLC
Proxy
Voting Policy
Proxy
Voting Conflicts of Interest Policy and Procedures
October
1, 2022
Nuveen
Proxy Voting Policy
Policy
Purpose and Statement
Proxy
voting is the primary means by which shareholders may influence a publicly
traded company's governance and operations and thus create the potential for
value and positive long-term investment performance. When an SEC registered
investment adviser has proxy voting authority, the adviser has a fiduciary duty
to vote proxies in the best interests of its clients and must not subrogate its
clients’ interests to its own. In their capacity as fiduciaries and investment
advisers, Nuveen Asset Management, LLC (“NAM”), Teachers Advisors, LLC (“TAL”)
and TIAA-CREF Investment Management, LLC (“TCIM”), (each an “Adviser” and
collectively, the “Advisers”), vote proxies for the Portfolio Companies held by
their respective clients, including investment companies and other pooled
investment vehicles, institutional and retail separate accounts, and other
clients as applicable. The Advisers have adopted this Policy, the Nuveen Proxy
Voting Guidelines, and the Nuveen Proxy Voting Conflicts of Interest Policy for
voting the proxies of the Portfolio Companies they manage. The Advisers leverage
the expertise and services of an internal group referred to as the Responsible
Investing Team (RI Team) to administer the Advisers’ proxy voting. The RI Team
adheres to the Advisers’ Proxy Voting Guidelines which are reasonably designed
to ensure that the Advisers vote client securities in the best interests of the
Advisers’ clients.
Policy
Statement
Proxy
voting is a key component of a Portfolio Company’s corporate governance program
and is the primary method for exercising shareholder rights and influencing the
Portfolio Company’s behavior. Nuveen makes informed voting decisions in
compliance with Rule 206(4)-6 (the “Rule”) of the Investment Advisers Act of
1940, as amended (the “Advisers Act”) and applicable laws and regulations,
(e.g., the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974,
“ERISA”).
Applicability
This
Policy applies to Nuveen employees acting on behalf of Nuveen Asset Management,
LLC, Teachers Advisors, LLC, and TIAA-CREF Investment Management,
LLC
Enforcement
As
provided in the TIAA Code of Business Conduct, all employees are expected to
comply with applicable laws and regulations, as well as the relevant policies,
procedures and compliance manuals that apply to Nuveen’s business activities.
Violation of this Policy may result in disciplinary action up to and including
termination of employment.
Terms
and Definitions
Advisory
Personnel
includes the Adviser’s portfolio managers and/or research analysts.
Proxy
Voting Guidelines (the ‘’Guidelines’’)
are a set of pre-determined principles setting forth the manner in which the
Advisers intend to vote on specific voting categories, and serve to assist
clients, Portfolio Companies, and other interested parties in understanding how
the Advisers intend to vote on proxy-related matters. The Guidelines are not
exhaustive and do not necessarily dictate how the Advisers will ultimately vote
with respect to any proposal or resolution.
Portfolio
Company
includes any publicly traded company held in an account that is managed by an
Adviser.
Policy
Requirements
Investment
advisers, in accordance with the Rule, are required to (i) adopt and implement
written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that
proxies are voted in the best interest of clients, and address resolution of
material conflicts that may arise, (ii) describe their proxy voting procedures
to their clients and provide copies on request, and (iii) disclose to clients
how they may obtain information on how the Advisers voted their
proxies.
The
Nuveen Proxy Voting Committee (the “Committee”), the Advisers, the RI Team and
Nuveen Compliance are subject to the respective requirements outlined below
under Roles and Responsibilities.
Although
it is the general policy to vote all applicable proxies received in a timely
fashion with respect to securities selected by an Adviser for current clients,
the Adviser may refrain from voting in certain circumstances where such voting
would be disadvantageous, materially burdensome or impractical, or otherwise
inconsistent with the overall best interest of clients.
Roles
and Responsibilities
Nuveen
Proxy Voting Committee
The
purpose of the Committee is to establish a governance framework to oversee the
proxy voting activities of the Advisers in accordance with the Policy. The
Committee has delegated responsibility for the implementation and ongoing
administration of the Policy to the RI Team, subject to the Committee’s ultimate
oversight and responsibility as outlined in the Committee’s Proxy Voting
Charter.
Advisers
1.Advisory
Personnel maintain the ultimate decision-making authority with respect to how
proxies will be voted, unless otherwise instructed by a client, and may
determine to vote contrary to the Guidelines and/or a vote recommendation of the
RI Team if such Advisory Personnel determines it is in the best interest of the
Adviser’s clients to do so. The rationale for all such contrary vote
determinations will be documented and maintained.
2.When
voting proxies for different groups of client accounts, Advisory Personnel may
vote proxies held by the respective client accounts differently depending on the
facts and circumstances specific to such client accounts. The rationale for all
such vote determinations will be documented and maintained.
3.Advisory
Personnel must comply with the Nuveen Proxy Voting Conflicts of Interest Policy
with respect to potential material conflicts of interest.
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
Responsible
Investing Team
1.Performs
day-to-day administration of the Advisers’ proxy voting processes.
2.Seeks
to vote proxies in adherence to the Guidelines, which have been constructed in a
manner intended to align with the best interests of clients. In applying the
Guidelines, the RI Team, on behalf of the Advisers, takes into account several
factors, including, but not limited to:
•Input
from Advisory Personnel
•Third-party
research
•Specific
Portfolio Company context, including environmental, social and governance
practices, and financial performance.
3.Delivers
copies of the Advisers’ Policy to clients and prospective clients upon request
in a timely manner, as appropriate.
4.Assists
with the disclosure of proxy votes as applicable on corporate website and
elsewhere as required by applicable regulations.
5.Prepares
reports of proxies voted on behalf of the Advisers’ investment company clients
to their Boards or committees thereof, as applicable.
6.Performs
an annual vote reconciliation for review by the Committee.
7.Arranges
the annual service provider due diligence, including a review of the service
provider’s potential conflicts of interests, and presents the results to the
Committee.
8.Facilitates
quarterly Committee meetings, including agenda and meeting minute
preparation.
9.Complies
with the Nuveen Proxy Voting Conflicts of Interest Policy with respect to
potential material conflicts of interest.
10.Creates
and retains certain records in accordance with Nuveen’s Record Management
program.
11.Oversees
the proxy voting service provider in making and retaining certain records as
required under applicable regulation.
12.Assesses,
in cooperation with Advisory Personnel, whether securities on loan should be
recalled in order to vote their proxies.
Nuveen
Compliance
1.Ensures
proper disclosure of Advisers’ Policy to clients as required by regulation or
otherwise.
2.Ensures
proper disclosure to clients of how they may obtain information on how the
Advisers voted their proxies.
3.Assists
the RI Team with arranging the annual service provider due diligence and
presenting the results to the Committee.
4.Monitors
for compliance with this Policy and retains records relating to its monitoring
activities pursuant to Nuveen’s Records Management program.
Governance
Review
and Approval
This
Policy will be reviewed at least annually and will be updated sooner if
substantive changes are necessary. The Policy Leader, the Committee and the NEFI
Compliance Committee are responsible for the review and approval of this
Policy.
Implementation
Nuveen
has established the Committee to provide centralized management and oversight of
the proxy voting process administered by the RI Team for the Advisers in
accordance with its Proxy Voting Committee Charter and this Policy.
Exceptions
Any
request for a proposed exception or variation to this Policy will be submitted
to the Committee for approval and reported to the appropriate governance
committee(s), where appropriate.
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
Nuveen
Proxy Voting Conflicts of Interest Policy and Procedures
Policy
Purpose and Statement
Proxy
voting by investment advisers is subject to U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission (“SEC”) rules and regulations, and for accounts subject to ERISA,
U.S. Department of Labor (“DOL”) requirements. These rules and regulations
require policies and procedures reasonably designed to ensure proxies are voted
in the best interest of clients and that such procedures set forth how the
adviser addresses material conflicts that may arise between the Adviser’s
interests and those of its clients. The purpose of this Proxy Voting Conflicts
of Interest Policy and Procedures (“Policy”) is to describe how the Advisers
monitor and address the risks associated with Material Conflicts of Interest
arising out of business and personal relationships that could affect proxy
voting decisions.
Nuveen’s
Responsible Investing Team (“RI Team”) is responsible for providing vote
recommendations, based on the Nuveen Proxy Voting Guidelines (the “Guidelines”),
to the Advisers and for administering the voting of proxies on behalf of the
Advisers. When determining how to vote proxies, the RI Team adheres to the
Guidelines which are reasonably designed to ensure that the Advisers vote
proxies in the best interests of the Advisers’ clients.
Advisers
may face certain potential Material Conflicts of Interest when voting proxies.
The procedures set forth below have been reasonably designed to identify,
monitor, and address potential Material Conflicts of Interest to ensure that the
Advisers’ voting decisions are based on the best interest of their clients and
are not the product of a conflict.
Policy
Statement
The
Advisers have a fiduciary duty to vote proxies in the best interests of their
clients and must not subrogate the interests of their clients to their
own.
Applicability
This
Policy applies to employees of Nuveen (“Nuveen”) acting on behalf of Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC (“NAM”), Teachers Advisors, LLC (“TAL”) and TIAA-CREF
Investment Management, LLC (“TCIM”), (each an “Adviser” and collectively
referred to as the “Advisers”)
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
Enforcement
As
provided in the TIAA Code of Business Conduct, all employees are expected to
comply with applicable laws and regulations, as well as the relevant policies,
procedures and compliance manuals that apply to Nuveen’s business activities.
Violation of this Policy may result in disciplinary action up to and including
termination of employment.
Terms
and Definitions
Advisory
Personnel includes
the Advisers’ portfolio managers and research analysts.
Conflicts
Watch List
(“Watch
List”)
refers to a list maintained by the RI Team based on the following:
1.The
positions and relationships of the following categories of individuals are
evaluated to assist in identifying a potential Material Conflict with a
Portfolio Company:
i.The
TIAA CEO
ii.Nuveen
Executive Leadership Team
iii.RI
Team members who provide proxy voting recommendations on behalf of the
Advisers,
iv.Advisory
Personnel, and
v.Household
Members of the parties listed above in Nos. 1(i) – 1(iv)
The
following criteria constitute a potential Material Conflict:
•Any
individual identified above in 1(i) – 1(v) who serves on a Portfolio Company’s
board of directors; and/or
•Any
individual identified above in 1(v) who serves as a senior executive of a
Portfolio Company.
2.In
addition, the following circumstances have been determined to constitute a
potential Material Conflict:
i.Voting
proxies for Funds sponsored by a Nuveen Affiliated Entity (i.e., registered
investment funds and other funds that require proxy voting) held in client
accounts,
ii.Voting
proxies for Portfolio Companies that are direct advisory clients of the Advisers
and/or the Nuveen Affiliated Entities,
iii.Voting
proxies for Portfolio Companies that have a material distribution
relationship1
with regard to the products or strategies of the Advisers and/or the Nuveen
Affiliated Entities,
iv.Voting
proxies for Portfolio Companies that are institutional investment consultants
with which the Advisers and/or the Nuveen Affiliated Entities have engaged for
any material business opportunity1 and
v.Any
other circumstance where the RI Team, the Nuveen Proxy Voting Committee (the
“Committee”), the Advisers, Nuveen Legal or Nuveen Compliance are aware of in
which the Adviser’s duty to serve its clients’ interests could be materially
compromised.
In
addition, certain conflicts may arise when a Proxy Service Provider or their
affiliate(s), have determined and/or disclosed that a relationship exists with
i) a Portfolio Company ii) an entity acting as a primary shareholder proponent
with respect to a Portfolio Company or iii) another party. Such relationships
include, but are not limited to, the products and services provided to, and the
revenue obtained from, such Portfolio Company or its affiliates. The Proxy
Service Provider is required to disclose such relationships to the Advisers, and
the RI Team reviews and evaluates the Proxy Service Provider’s disclosed
conflicts of interest and associated controls annually and reports its
assessment to the Committee.
1
Such criteria is defined in a separate standard operating
procedure.
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
Household
Member
includes any of the following who reside or are expected to reside in your
household for at least 90 days a year: i) spouse or Domestic Partner, ii)
sibling, iii) child, stepchild, grandchild, parents, grandparent, stepparent,
and in-laws (mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister).
Domestic
Partner is
defined as an individual who is neither a relative of, or legally married to, a
Nuveen employee but shares a residence and is in a mutual commitment similar to
marriage with such Nuveen employee.
Material
Conflicts of Interest (“Material Conflict”) A
conflict of interest that reasonably could have the potential to influence a
recommendation based on the criteria described in this Policy.
Nuveen
Affiliated Entities refers
to TIAA and entities that are under common control with the Advisers and that
provide investment advisory services to third party clients2.
TIAA and the Advisers will undertake reasonable efforts to identify and manage
any potential TIAA-related conflicts of interest.
Portfolio
Company
refers to any publicly traded company held in an account that is managed by an
Adviser or a Nuveen Affiliated Entity.
Proxy
Service Provider(s) refers
to any independent third-party vendor(s) who provides proxy voting
administrative, research and/or recordkeeping services to Nuveen.
Proxy
Voting Guidelines (the “Guidelines’’) are
a set of pre-determined principles setting forth the manner in which the
Advisers generally intend to vote on specific voting categories and serve to
assist clients, Portfolio Companies, and other interested parties in
understanding how the Advisers generally intend to vote proxy-related matters.
The Guidelines are not exhaustive and do not necessarily dictate how the
Advisers will ultimately vote with respect to any proposal or
resolution.
Proxy
Voting Conflicts of Interest Escalation Form (“Escalation Form”) Used
in limited circumstances as described below to formally document certain
requests to deviate from the Guidelines, the rationale supporting the request,
and the ultimate resolution.
Policy
Requirements
The
Advisers have a fiduciary duty to vote proxies in the best interests of their
clients and must not subrogate the interests of their clients to their
own.
The
RI Team and Advisory Personnel are prohibited from being influenced in their
proxy voting decisions by any individual outside the established proxy voting
process. The RI Team and Advisory Personnel are required to report to Nuveen
Compliance any individuals or parties seeking to influence proxy votes outside
the established proxy voting process.
The
RI Team generally seeks to vote proxies in adherence to the Guidelines. In the
event that a potential Material Conflict has been identified, the Committee, the
RI Team, Advisory Personnel and Nuveen Compliance are required to comply with
the following:
Proxies
are generally voted in accordance with the Guidelines. In instances where a
proxy is issued by a Portfolio Company on the Watch List, and the RI Team’s vote
direction is in support of company management and either contrary to the
Guidelines or the Guidelines require a case by case review, then the RI Team
vote recommendation is evaluated using established criteria3
to determine whether a potential conflict exists. In instances where it is
determined a potential conflict exists, the vote direction shall default to the
recommendation of an independent third-party Proxy Service Provider based on
such provider’s benchmark policy. To the extent the RI Team believes there is a
justification to vote contrary to the Proxy Service Provider’s benchmark
recommendation in such an instance, then such requests are evaluated and
mitigated pursuant to an Escalation Form review process as described in the
Roles and Responsibilities section below. In all cases votes are intended to be
in line with the Guidelines and in the best interests of clients.
The
Advisers are required to adhere to the baseline standards and guiding principles
governing client and personnel conflicts as outlined in the TIAA Conflicts of
Interest Policy to assist in identifying, escalating and addressing proxy voting
conflicts in a timely manner.
2
Such list is maintained in a separate standard operating procedure.
3
Such criteria is defined in a separate standard operating
procedure.
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
Roles
and Responsibilities
Nuveen
Proxy Voting Committee
1.Annually,
review and approve the criteria constituting a Material Conflict involving the
individuals and entities named on the Watch List.
2.Review
and approve the Policy annually, or more frequently as required.
3.Review
Escalation Forms as described above to determine whether the rationale of the
recommendation is clearly articulated and reasonable relative to the potential
Material Conflict.
4.Review
RI Team Material Conflicts reporting.
5.Review
and consider any other matters involving the Advisers’ proxy voting activities
that are brought to the Committee.
Responsible
Investing Team
1.Promptly
disclose RI Team members’ Material Conflicts to Nuveen Compliance.
2.RI
Team members must recuse themselves from all decisions related to proxy voting
for the Portfolio Company seeking the proxy for which they personally have
disclosed, or are required to disclose, a Material Conflict.
3.Compile,
administer and update the Watch List promptly based on the Watch List criteria
described herein as necessary.
4.Evaluate
vote recommendations for Portfolio Companies on the Watch List, based on
established criteria to determine whether a vote shall default to the
third-party Proxy Service Provider, or whether an Escalation Form is
required.
5.In
instances where an Escalation Form is required as described above, the RI Team
member responsible for the recommendation completes and submits the form to an
RI Team manager and the Committee. The RI Team will specify a response due date
from the Committee typically no earlier than two business days from when the
request was delivered. While the RI Team will make reasonable efforts to provide
a two business day notification period, in certain instances the required
response date may be shortened. The Committee reviews the Escalation Form to
determine whether a Material Conflict exists and whether the rationale of the
recommendation is clearly articulated and reasonable relative to the existing
conflict. The Committee will then provide its response in writing to the RI Team
member who submitted the Escalation Form.
6.Provide
Nuveen Compliance with established reporting.
7.Prepare
Material Conflicts reporting to the Committee and other parties, as
applicable.
8.Retain
Escalation Forms and responses thereto and all other relevant documentation in
conformance with Nuveen’s Record Management program.
Advisory
Personnel
1.Promptly
disclose Material Conflicts to Nuveen Compliance.
2.Provide
input and/or vote recommendations to the RI Team upon request. Advisory
Personnel are prohibited from providing the RI Team with input and/or
recommendations for any Portfolio Company for which they have disclosed, or are
required to disclose, a Material Conflict.
3.From
time to time as part of the Adviser’s normal course of business, Advisory
Personnel may initiate an action to override the Guidelines for a particular
proposal. For a proxy vote issued by a Portfolio Company on the Watch List, if
Advisory Personnel request a vote against the Guidelines and in favor of
Portfolio Company management, then the request will be evaluated by the RI Team
in accordance with their established criteria and processes described above. To
the extent an Escalation Form is required, the Committee reviews the Escalation
Form to determine whether the rationale of the recommendation is clearly
articulated and reasonable relative to the potential Material
Conflict.
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
Nuveen
Compliance
1.Determine
criteria constituting a Material Conflict involving the individuals and entities
named on the Watch List.
2.Determine
parties responsible for collection of, and providing identified Material
Conflicts to, the RI Team for inclusion on the Watch List.
3.Perform
periodic reviews of votes where Material Conflicts have been identified to
determine whether the votes were cast in accordance with this
Policy.
4.Develop
and maintain, in consultation with the RI Team, standard operating procedures to
support the Policy.
5.Perform
periodic monitoring to determine adherence to the Policy.
6.Administer
training to the Advisers and the RI Team, as applicable, to ensure applicable
personnel understand Material Conflicts and disclosure
responsibilities.
7.Assist
the Committee with the annual review of this Policy.
Nuveen
Legal
1.Provide
legal guidance as requested.
Governance
Review
and Approval
This
Policy will be reviewed at least annually and will be updated sooner if changes
are necessary. The Policy Leader, the Committee and the NEFI Compliance
Committee are responsible for the review and approval of this
Policy.
Implementation
Nuveen
has established the Committee to provide centralized management and oversight of
the proxy voting process administered by the RI Team for the Advisers in
accordance with its Proxy Voting Committee Charter and this Policy.
Exceptions
Any
request for a proposed exception or variation to this Policy will be submitted
to the Committee for approval and reported to the appropriate governance
committee(s), where appropriate.
Nuveen
Asset Management, LLC
ORIGIN
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Procedures
and Control Processes
Proxy
voting
December
2022
This
document draws on the Advisers Act of 1940, a United States federal law, and
subsequent Securities and Exchange Commission guidance IA-5325; IC-33605, 17 CFR
Parts 271 and 276 (effective date 10th September 2019) and provides an outline
of the policies in place to ensure Origin LLP (‘the Firm’) meets its obligation
to vote on proxies in the best interest of its clients.
Origin
reviews and documents the adequacy of its proxy voting policies at least
annually.
The
Firm has engaged a third-party international corporate governance research and
proxy voting service provider (‘third party proxy voting service provider’) to
provide voting recommendations and research relating to upcoming proxy votes.
Origin sets its voting policy annually, and once set, uses the Broadridge proxy
voting platform service to execute that policy. The Firm has chosen to actively
vote proxies for all clients according to its voting policy, unless a client
does not wish or require us to do so. Any proxy voting arrangements shall be
approved by the Stewardship Committee. Origin has elected to follow the Glass
Lewis standard Proxy Voting Guidelines (the ‘Guidelines’), which embody the
positions and factors that the Firm’s investment team generally consider
important in casting proxy votes.
The
Firm must:
(a)Adopt
and implement written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to
ensure that the Firm votes client securities in the best interest of
clients.
(b)Disclose
to clients how they may obtain information from the Firm about votes with
respect to securities; and
(c)Describe
to clients the proxy voting policies and procedures and, upon request, provide
the clients with a copy of these policies and procedures.
(d)Take
steps to demonstrate that it is making voting determinations in a client’s best
interests.
(e)Consider
factors such as the third-party proxy voting service provider’s capacity and
competency when deciding whether to use a proxy advisory firm.
(f)Take
steps to ensure that its voting determinations are not based on materially
inaccurate or incomplete information. This can take the form of scrutinising the
third- party proxy service provider firm’s procedures.
The
duty of care requires the Firm to monitor corporate actions and vote client
proxies. This does not necessarily mean that a failure to vote every proxy would
necessarily violate fiduciary obligations. Due to the nature of some of the
holdings, how they are registered, and our strategies, there will be many times
when refraining from voting a proxy will be in the client's best interest. This
will mainly be when it is determined that the cost of voting a proxy exceeds the
expected benefit to a client. It is not mandatory to vote proxies on behalf of a
client where this has been covered by a prior agreement with the
client.
Origin’s
use of Third-Party Proxy Voting Advisory Providers
Origin
engages with their clients to assess particular themes of interest around
governance and corporate behaviour. The Origin Proxy Voting Policy will be set
to reflect both the clients’ wishes and industry best practice. The Origin team
will work together with the team at Glass Lewis to ensure that the GL voting
recommendations are tailored to meet the objectives of the Origin Proxy Voting
Policy as far as is possible.
The
Firm believes that the third-party proxy voting provider has the necessary
resources, in- depth knowledge and expertise to provide recommendations that are
in the best interests of our clients. As mentioned above, Origin sets a voting
policy annually, and once set, uses the Broadridge proxy voting service to
execute that policy. At present, Origin has elected to follow the Glass Lewis
standard Proxy Voting Guidelines (the ‘Guidelines’). The Firm may deviate from
these guidelines on the basis of a client request or where it believes it do be
in the client’s best interest to do so. A Stewardship committee has been
established to evaluate and review the services provided by the third-party
proxy voting provider and voting platform. This committee shall also develop and
maintain the Firm’s Proxy Voting Policy and consider any requests to override
the chosen voting guidelines.
Voting
Procedure Summary
The
Firm shall obtain from the third-party proxy voting service provider a
notification of all pending proxy vote opportunities. The Custodian will provide
a list of all proxy voting requests relevant to the Firm’s holdings to the
third-party proxy voting service provider. The third- party proxy voting service
provider shall then issue the recommendations corresponding to this list. These
are then returned to the Custodian for instruction and votes are cast via a
voting platform in accordance with the voting policy. Prior to the votes being
returned to the Custodian to be cast, the Firm’s operations team access the
voting platform and confirm the voting decisions. This will usually be in line
with the recommendations provided by the third- party proxy voting service
provider, but the Firm does have the option to override these recommendations at
this stage, should the client request this or should the Firm deem it to be in
the client’s best interest.
The
rationale for disagreeing with a guideline proxy voting recommendation as per
the Origin Proxy Voting Policy must be discussed, recorded and agreed with
Compliance before the override is enacted. A record of all voting decisions is
maintained by the Firm and the Custodian.
Conflicts
of Interests in respect of voting Proxies
When
the Firm has, or may have, a conflict of interest between it and its clients, or
between one client and another, it must pay due regard to the interests of each
customer and manage the conflict of interest fairly.
Where
a conflict arises, or may arise, the Firm must not knowingly advise or deal in
the exercise of discretion, in relation to that transaction unless it takes
reasonable steps to ensure fair treatment for the client. The Firm’s client
agreements make a formal disclosure that such conflicts could arise (i.e.
non-exclusivity), and by doing so puts the customer on notice of the
possibility. This keeps the Firm within the strict letter of the rules and
principles, but it is an overriding policy of the Firm that all such conflicts
should be brought to the attention of the Compliance Officer in order that they
may be sure that the Firm’s procedures are adequate.
If
an investment decision is made for any client that departs from previous advice
or recorded strategy for that client or which may result in an increased risk
profile for the client's portfolio, the Firm must record the reasons behind the
decision. If the reasons are the same for a number of clients or transactions,
only one record needs to be made. These records must be made in writing and be
kept in the relevant client files.
The
Firm will notify clients of how they may obtain a copy of how the Firm voted
free of charge and will provide a contact for that purpose.
Compliance
Monitoring and Policy Review
An
investment adviser that retains a third party proxy advisory service provider to
provide voting recommendations or voting execution services also should consider
additional steps to evaluate whether the investment adviser’s voting
determinations are consistent with its voting policies and procedures and in the
client’s best interest before the votes are cast. The operations and investment
teams view all “pre-populated” vote recommendation by the third-party proxy
advisory firm before they are cast via the electronic voting
platform.
The
Firm’s ongoing compliance monitoring program will include;
1)An
annual review of the Firm’s internal compliance monitoring procedures and
policies with respect to proxy voting.
2)An
annual review of the adequacy of service provided by the third-party proxy
voting service provider and its compliance with the SEC guidelines and federal
law with respect to proxy voting.
3)A
quarterly review of the ongoing communication of voting intentions to the
investment team to ensure that these are visible to the investment
team.
4)A
quarterly sample test of pre-populated voting intentions focused on votes that
are likely to impact the client, such as those for corporate events or contested
elections of directors, to ensure the voting rationales and relevant background
information supplied by the third party proxy voting service provider is
available and of adequate quality.
5)Ad-hoc
reviews of company-specific voting intentions where the Firm considers this
appropriate based on the above sample testing.
The
Firm is in compliance with the Financial Reporting Council’s UK Stewardship Code
and Shareholders Rights Directive II regarding corporate governance and
engagement. The latest disclosure response to the UK Stewardship Code and
Shareholders Rights Directive II is available on the Origin website
(https://www.originam.com/)
ORIGIN
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Procedures
and Control Processes Proxy voting
December
2022
Control
objective 8: Responsibility for generating proxy voting instructions is clearly
established.
Proxy
voting instructions are generated and recorded and carried out accurately and in
a timely manner.
Whilst
Origin has full oversight responsibilities, the generation of proxy voting
instructions and ensuring that they are recorded and carried out accurately and
in a timely manner has been outsourced to the international governance research
and voting specialist Glass Lewis and the Broadridge ProxyEdge voting platform
with monitoring and oversight undertaken by Origin.
Glass
Lewis is an independent global voting and governance specialist and is currently
used by institutional investors representing over $15 trillion in assets. Its
team of approximately 200 full time researchers provides contextual, objective
governance analysis and proxy voting recommendations on shareholder votes on
over 23,000 companies in 100 markets worldwide.
For
clients that require us to vote proxies the firm’s default policy is to set up
standing instructions for all global markets where Origin is invested with
Broadridge via their web based online system ProxyEdge to vote in line with the
Glass Lewis proxy guidelines. These are available at www.glasslewis.com.
The
proxy guidelines specifically address key governance issues such as board
composition, remuneration, the appointment of auditors, dividend distributions
and Long Term Incentive Plans.
Access
to our online ProxyEdge log in is restricted to the members of the operations
team. Having set up standing instructions for all client accounts that require
us to vote proxies as detailed above, the operations team also receive regular
email notifications from ProxyEdge whenever a shareholder meeting has been
announced providing brief details of the company, meeting date and vote
instruction deadline.
The
operations team on at least a monthly basis log in to ProxyEdge to check and
review that all meetings have been voted in accordance with the Glass Lewis
recommendations mentioned above.
On
a bi-monthly basis, the Operations Team will download a report and circulate
this to the Investment Team (cc: Compliance) of all impending votes for the next
two months together with recommendations from Glass Lewis. This gives the
Investment Team visibility and the option to amend on any
proposals.
The
Operations Team also has access to the Glass Lewis recommendations and rationale
via a link within ProxyEdge. This link opens the Glass Lewis website (a specific
log-in and password are required) and directs the user to the reports for the
specific company vote which can be downloaded if required. There is also a
search function to check recommendations for historic meetings.
A
summary of meetings held and shares voted is produced on a quarterly basis as
part of our client reporting to both segregated and pooled fund clients by
generating and downloading Vote Audit and Vote Summary reports from ProxyEdge
for the period.
The
downloaded reports in both Excel and PDF formats are saved to the shared drive
K:\ Operations \ Proxy Voting \ Reports and then reformatted and edited
accordingly in Excel prior to being cut and pasted into the client reports. The
edited reports produced by a member of the operations team are subsequently
checked and reviewed by a senior member of the operations team.
The
collation and production of all monthly and quarterly client reporting is
covered in detail under Procedure 4 – Client Reporting.
The
firm is in compliance with the Financial Reporting Council’s UK Stewardship Code
and Shareholders Rights Directive II regarding corporate governance and
engagement.
A
copy of Origin’s latest disclosure response to the UK Stewardship Code and
Shareholders Rights Directive II is stored in the shared drive K:\ Policies
& Procedures
Compliance
Monitoring and Policy Review
An
investment adviser that retains a third party proxy advisory service provider to
provide voting recommendations or voting execution services also should consider
additional steps to evaluate whether the investment adviser’s voting
determinations are consistent with its voting policies and procedures and in the
client’s best interest before the votes are cast. The operations and investment
teams view all “pre-populated” vote recommendation by the third party proxy
advisory firm before they are cast via the electronic voting
platform.
Compliance
will conduct the following reviews:
1)An
annual review of the Firm’s internal compliance monitoring procedures and
policies with respect to proxy voting.
2)An
annual review of the adequacy of service provided by the third party proxy
voting service provider and its compliance with the SEC guidelines and federal
law with respect to proxy voting. Compliance will review the Glass Lewis
documentation under the Compliance section of their website (https://www.glasslewis.com/due_diligence_resources/).
The object is to ensure that Glass Lewis processes and procedures are in line
with relevant SEC guidance as well as the SRDII.
3)A
quarterly review of the ongoing communication of voting intentions to the
investment team to ensure that these are visible to the investment team. As part
of the monthly compliance monitoring plan, compliance currently check that the
operations team have shared the voting recommendations from Glass Lewis for
upcoming votes with the compliance and investment teams. There is an automatic
Proxy Edge email alert containing corporate events alerts and one from Operation
with a summary of all upcoming proxy votes.
The
emails look like this:
4)A
quarterly sample test of pre-populated voting intentions focused on votes that
are likely to impact the client, such as those for corporate events or contested
elections of directors, to ensure the voting rationales and relevant background
information supplied by the third party proxy voting service provider is
available and of adequate quality.
5)Ad-hoc
reviews of company-specific voting intentions where the Firm considers this
appropriate based on the above sample testing.
PICTET
ASSET MANAGEMENT
Proxy
Voting Policy
PROXY
VOTING
Scope
The
following principles are used to define the securities eligible for proxy
voting1:
a.For
actively managed funds, we aim to vote on 100% of equity holdings.
b.For
passively managed funds, we aim to vote on companies representing 80% of
underlying benchmarks by weight2.
This target may be revised upwards or downwards for specific strategies
depending on factors such as portfolio size, geography or market
capitalization.
c.For
segregated accounts, including mandates and third-party (i.e. sub-advisory)
mutual funds managed by Pictet Asset Management, clients who delegate the
exercise of voting rights to us have the choice between Pictet Asset
Management’s voting guidelines or their own voting guidelines.
Purpose
The
overarching purpose of our voting is to protect and promote the rights and
long-term interests of our clients as shareholders. We consider it our
responsibility to engage with and challenge companies’ management to ensure that
the issuers we invest in on our clients’ behalf are well-run, adhere to their
strategy and deliver shareholder value. We aim to support a strong culture of
corporate governance, effective management of environmental and social issues
and comprehensive reporting according to credible standards.
Voting
Guidelines
In
line with Good Corporate Governance Practices3,
our proxy voting upholds best practice in corporate governance including board
and management, executive remuneration, risk management and shareholder rights.
Given that the long-term interests of shareholders are the paramount objective,
we do not always support the management of companies and may vote against
management from time to time. We also reserve the right to deviate from our
voting guidelines to take into account company-specific
circumstances.
The
complete version of these guidelines can be found under the following
links:
https://www.issgovernance.com/file/policy/active/specialty/Sustainability-International-Voting-Guide-lines.pdf
https://www.issgovernance.com/file/policy/active/specialty/Sustainability-US-Voting-Guidelines.pdf
Pictet
Asset Management’s voting guidelines are reviewed every year and adapted as
appropriate to reflect the specificities of certain regions and/or ownership
structures.
Research
& Decision Making
To
assist us in performing our proxy voting responsibilities, Pictet Asset
Management uses the services of third-party specialists to provide research and
to facilitate the execution of voting decisions at all relevant company meetings
worldwide.
Third
party specialists are tasked with collecting meeting notices for all holdings
and researching the implications of every resolution according to voting
guidelines defined by Pictet Asset Management. All recommendations are
communicated to relevant investment teams and the Environmental Social
Governance (ESG) team.
Pictet
Asset Management retains full discretion over all voting decisions and always
reserves the right to deviate from third party voting recommendations, on a
case-by-case basis, in order to act in the best interests of our clients. Such
divergences may be initiated by investment teams or by the ESG team and must be
supported by written rationale.
In
instances when consensus cannot be reached between the investments teams and ESG
team, the decision is escalated to relevant Chief Investment Officers (CIOs)
and, if necessary, the Head of Investments.
1
This activity does not include indirect investments through third-party funds
that we invest in on behalf of our clients, where we expect those managers to
exercise their votes according to their own policy and report accordingly to
relevant Pictet Asset Management entities.
2
We do not exercise voting rights in share blocking markets across passive
strategies.
3
See Appendix D for further details on Good Corporate Governance
Practices.
Security
Lending
Security
lending can impair our ability to execute our voting rights. As a result,
investment teams wishing to exercise full voting rights have two
options:
· Recalling
shares on loan on a case-by-case basis
· Removing
a portfolio from the securities lending pool
Shareholder
Resolutions
Shareholder
resolutions at Annual General Meetings (AGMs)/Extraordinary General Meetings
(EGMs) are evaluated in accordance with Pictet Asset Management’s voting
guidelines. Evaluations are based on their own merits and are supported when
they would improve the company’s corporate governance or business profile at a
reasonable cost.
Pictet
Asset Management does not usually assume the role of an activist investor and
does not initiate shareholder resolutions or shareholder groups. However, Pictet
Asset Management may consider supporting the submission of shareholder
resolutions initiated by third-parties, or joining shareholder groups, based on
the following criteria:
· How
would the proposal enhance or protect shareholder value in the short-term and
long-term?
· Liquidity
and other technical issues that may impact specific portfolios, such as a share
blocking period between the submission and the general assembly.
· Legal
and compliance issues (such as concert party action or transparency requirements
relating to ownership size).
Supporting
the submission of a shareholder resolution, including the number of shares and
corresponding accounts earmarked to support the submission, is subject to
agreement by relevant investment teams and the ESG team. In cases where no
consensus is reached, the decision is escalated to the relevant Chief Investment
Officer and, if necessary, the Head of Investments.
CONFLICTS
OF INTEREST
Pictet
Asset Management is an independent asset manager and consequently is free of
many of the conflicts of interest that are faced by larger or more dependent
financial institutions.
However,
we recognise that conflicts of interest may arise within the context of
exercising our Responsible Investment activities. For example, we may face
firmwide conflicts of interest when voting against management of a company who
is a client, or whose pension scheme or senior management are clients of Pictet
Asset Management. Likewise, personal conflicts of interest may
arise
Pictet
Asset Management’s Executive Committee is responsible for establishing a
framework, implementing systems, controls and procedures to identify, escalate
and manage conflicts of interest, including those arising from issuer engagement
or proxy voting. Every employee is responsible for identifying and escalating
potential conflicts of interest so that they may be appropriately managed and
resolved. All of our staff are required to undertake regular training to ensure
they are aware of their obligations and adhere to this policy. Our policy can be
viewed at:
https://am.pictet/-/media/pam/pam-common-gallery/article-content/2016/graphs/pictet-asset-management/compliance/conflicts-of-interest-policy.pdf.
Any
material conflict of interest arising in the performance of our Responsible
Investment activities are referred to the relevant CIO and Pictet Asset
Management’s ESG team to ensure that we always act in the best interests of our
clients. If necessary, issues may be raised to Pictet Asset Management’s Head of
Investments and/or CEO for determination.
SOUND
POINT CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LP
Policy
Regarding Proxy Voting
2020
Purpose
and Scope
The
purpose of this policy and its related procedures regarding voting proxies for
securities held in Client accounts and for which Sound Point has been delegated
proxy voting authority (“Client Proxies”) is to establish guidelines regarding
Client Proxies that are reasonably designed to conform with the requirements of
applicable law (this “Policy”).
General
Policy
Rule
206(4)-6 of the Advisers Act requires a registered investment adviser that
exercises proxy voting authority over client securities to: (i) adopt and
implement written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure
that the investment adviser votes proxies related to client securities in the
best interest of its Clients; (ii) ensure that the written policies and
procedures address material conflicts that may arise between the interests of
the investment adviser and those of its Clients; (iii) describe its proxy voting
procedures to clients, and provide copies of such procedures upon request by
such clients; and (iv) disclose to clients how they may obtain information from
the investment adviser about how the adviser voted with respect to their
securities. Sound Point is committed to implementing policies and procedures
that conform to the requirements of the Advisers Act. To that end, it has
implemented this Policy to facilitate Sound Point’s compliance with Rule
206(4)-6 and to ensure that proxies related to Client Securities are voted (or
not voted) in a manner consistent with the best interest of its
Clients.
Proxy
Voting Policy
Rule
206(4)-6 of the Advisers Act requires a registered investment adviser that
exercises its authority to vote Client Proxies to: (i) adopt and implement
written policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to ensure that the
investment adviser votes Client Proxies in the best interest of its Clients;
(ii) ensure that the written policies and procedures address material conflicts
that may arise between the interests of the investment adviser and those of its
Clients; (iii) describe its proxy voting procedures to clients, and provide
copies of such procedures upon request by such clients; and (iv) disclose to
clients how they may obtain information from the investment adviser about how
the adviser voted their proxies.
Sound
Point generally has proxy voting authority over securities held in Client
accounts for which it has discretionary investment management responsibility.
Proxy voting, however, is not an integral component of Sound Point’s investment
strategy, which focuses primarily on investments and trading in fixed income,
credit and credit-linked securities (collectively referred to herein as “credit
positions”). These types of securities do not typically convey voting rights to
the holder. To the extent Clients holds equity securities, it will generally be
for the purpose of hedging credit positions or for short-term trading
strategies. In the absence of a specific duty, if Sound Point does not believe
the exercise of a proxy vote right will have a material economic impact on the
client account, Sound Point may not exercise its voting authority with respect
to a proxy. In addition, Sound Point may elect to not vote a proxy if the cost
of voting, or time commitment required to vote a proxy outweighs the expected
benefits of voting the proxy.
These
policies and procedures do not mandate that Sound Point vote every Client Proxy
that it receives. There may be circumstances when refraining from voting a proxy
is in a Client’s best interest, such as when and if Sound Point determines that
the cost of voting the proxy exceeds the expected benefit to the Client.
Further, Sound Point will not vote proxies for which a Client has not delegated
voting authority to Sound Point. Sound Point shall vote all proxies related to
Client Accounts where such account has mandated such practice (e.g. 40 Act
Clients, Client accounts that specifically instructed Sound Point to vote
proxies). With respect to ERISA clients, Sound Point will act prudently and
solely in the interest of the participants and beneficiaries of such ERISA
client.
Proxy
Voting Procedures
Procedures
The
CCO or his or her designee is responsible for determining whether a particular
proxy vote may have a material economic impact on an underlying Client position
or trading strategy and, if so, instructing the custodian to act in the manner
which the CCO believes will increase the value of the underlying credit position
or short-term trading strategy. In make any such determination, the CCO shall
consider any potential conflicts of interest which may exist and shall at all
times act in the manner in which he believes will further the economic interests
of the clients. The CCO shall document the rationale for any decision to vote or
not to vote a proxy.
Sound
Point has retained BroadRidge/ProxyEdge to assist it in coordinating and voting
Client Proxies. The CCO or his or her designee will monitor the third-party to
assure that all proxies are being properly voted and appropriate records are
being retained.
Any
employee, officer or director of Sound Point receiving an inquiry directly from
a company holding a proxy contest must promptly notify the CCO.
Conflicts
of Interest
Sound
Point will not put its own interests ahead of a Client’s interest at any time,
and will resolve any potential conflicts between its interests and those of its
Clients in favor of its Clients. The CCO will be primarily responsible for
determining whether a conflict of interest exists in connection with any Client
Proxy vote. The CCO will presume a conflict of interest to exist whenever Sound
Point or any partner, member, affiliate, subsidiary or employee of Sound Point
has a personal or business interest in the outcome of a particular matter before
shareholders. The following conflicts of interest are monitored and the results
are presented to the Conflicts Committee as they arise or on a quarterly basis
if there are no conflicts identified; director candidates related to Sound
Point, shareholder proposals from Sound Point, its affiliates or clients; votes
by portfolio managers where securities are also held in their personal accounts;
and votes in securities where Sound Point has a material position.
Limitations
on Proxy Voting
Sound
Point will not be obliged to vote a Client Proxy if Sound Point reasonably
determines that the cost of voting such Securities would exceed the expected
benefit to the Client.
Disclosure
to Clients
Form
ADV Disclosure
Sound
Point will disclose in Part 2A of its Form ADV that Clients may contact the CCO
during regular business hours, via email or telephone, to obtain information on
how Sound Point voted such Client’s proxies for the past 5 years. The summary of
this Policy included in Sound Point’s Part 2A of its Form ADV will be updated
whenever this Policy is revised. Clients may also receive a copy of this Policy
upon their request.
Note
that updating the Form ADV with a change to the proxy voting policy outside of
the annual update is voluntary. However, Sound Point will need to communicate to
the Client any changes to this Policy affecting its fiduciary duty.
Client
Requests for Information
Clients
and Private Fund Investors may request a copy of this Policy and/or information
about how Sound Point has voted securities in their behalf (or, with respect to
a Private Fund) account by contacting Sound Point. Sound Point will not disclose
proxy votes made on behalf of a Client to other Clients or third parties unless
specifically requested, in writing, by the Client. However, to the extent that
Sound Point may serve as sub-adviser to another adviser to a client, Sound Point
will be deemed to be authorized to provide proxy voting records on such Accounts
to such other adviser.
Sound
Point Capital Management, LP
Recordkeeping
In
accordance with the recordkeeping requirements of Rule 204-2 of the Advisers
Act, Sound Point will, for a period of at least 5 years from the end of the
fiscal year during which the record was finalized, maintain or have ready access
to the following documents, the first 2 years in an appropriate office of Sound
Point:
(i)a
copy of this Policy;
(ii)a
copy of each proxy statement received by Sound Point regarding Securities held
on behalf of its Clients;
(iii)a
record of each vote cast by Sound Point on behalf of its Clients;
(iv)a
copy of any documents prepared by Sound Point that were material to making a
decision how to vote, or that memorialized the basis for such decision;
and
(v)a
copy of each written request received from a Client as to how Sound Point voted
proxies on its behalf, and a copy of any written response from Sound Point to
any (written or oral) Client request for information on how Sound Point voted
proxies on its behalf.
To
fulfill some of these recordkeeping requirements, Sound Point may rely on proxy
statements filed on EDGAR and proxy statements and records of proxy votes cast
that are maintained with a proxy voting service or other third-party, provided
that Sound Point has obtained an undertaking from such third-party to provide a
copy of the documents promptly upon request.
Additionally,
Sound Point shall collect proxy information necessary for the preparation and
filing of any required forms, such as Form N-PX.
Sound
Point will retain each of the records listed above in accordance with Sound
Point’s
Policy
Regarding Recordkeeping.
Sound
Point Capital Management, LP
SPECTRUM
ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.
Policy
on Proxy Voting
For
Investment Advisory Clients
2023
GENERAL
POLICY
Spectrum,
an investment adviser registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
acts as investment advisor for various types of client accounts (e.g. employee
benefit plans, governmental plans, mutual funds, insurance company separate
accounts, corporate pension plans, endowments and foundations). While
Spectrum receives few proxies for the preferred shares it manages, Spectrum
nonetheless will, when delegated the authority by a client, vote these shares
per the following policy voting standards and processes:
STANDARDS:
Spectrum’s
standards aim to ensure the following in keeping with the best interests of its
clients:
•That
Spectrum act solely in the interest of its clients in providing for ultimate
long-term stockholder value.
•That
Spectrum act without undue influence from individuals or groups who may have an
economic interest in the outcome of a proxy vote.
•That
the custodian bank is aware of our fiduciary duty to vote proxies on behalf of
others – Spectrum relies on the best efforts of the custodian bank to deliver
all proxies we are entitled to vote.
•That
Spectrum will exercise its right to vote all proxies on behalf of its clients
(or permit clients to vote their interest, as the case(s) may be).
•That
Spectrum will implement a reasonable and sound basis to vote
proxies.
PROCESSES:
A.Following
ISS’ Recommendations
Spectrum
has selected Institutional Shareholder Services (ISS) to assist it with its
proxy voting responsibilities. Spectrum follows ISS Standard Proxy
Voting guidelines (the “Guidelines”). The Guidelines embody the
positions and factors Spectrum generally considers important in casting proxy
votes. They address a wide variety of individual topics, including, among other
matters, shareholder voting rights, anti-takeover defenses, board structures,
the election of directors, executive and director compensation, reorganizations,
mergers, and various shareholder proposals. Recognizing the complexity and
fact-specific nature of many corporate governance issues, the Guidelines often
do not direct a particular voting outcome, but instead identify factors ISS
considers in determining how the vote should be cast.
In
connection with each proxy vote, ISS prepares a written analysis and
recommendation (an "ISS Recommendation") that reflects ISS's application of
Guidelines to the particular proxy issues. Where the Guidelines do not direct a
particular response and instead list relevant factors, the ISS Recommendation
will reflect ISS's own evaluation of the factors. Spectrum may on any particular
proxy vote decide to diverge from the Guidelines or an ISS Recommendation. In
such cases, our procedures require: (i) the requesting Portfolio Manager to set
forth the reasons for their decision; (ii) the approval of the Chief Investment
Officer; (iii) notification to the Compliance Department and other appropriate
Principal Global Investors personnel; (iv) a determination that the decision is
not influenced by any conflict of interest; and (v) the creation of a written
record reflecting the process.
Spectrum
generally votes proxies in accordance with ISS’ recommendations. When
Spectrum follows ISS’ recommendations, it need not follow the conflict of
interest procedures in Section B, below.
From
time to time ISS may have a business relationship or affiliation with one or
more issuers held in Spectrum client accounts, while also providing voting
recommendations on these issuers’ securities. Because this practice
may present a conflict of interest for ISS, Spectrum’s Chief Compliance Officer
will require from ISS at least annually additional information, or a
certification that ISS has adopted policies and procedures to detect and
mitigate such conflicts of interest in issuing voting
recommendations. Spectrum may obtain voting recommendations from two
proxy voting services as an additional check on the independence of the ISS’
voting recommendations.
B.Disregarding
ISS’ Recommendations
Should
Spectrum determine not to follow ISS’ recommendation for a particular proxy,
Spectrum will use the following procedures for identifying and resolving a
material conflict of interest and will use the Proxy Voting Guidelines (below)
in determining how to vote. The Report for Proxy Vote(s) against ISS
Recommendation(s), Exhibit A hereto, shall be completed in each such
instance.
Spectrum
will classify proxy vote issues into three broad categories: Routine
Administrative Items, Special Interest Issues, and Issues Having the Potential
for Significant Economic Impact. Once the Senior Portfolio Manager
has analyzed and identified each issue as belonging in a particular category and
disclosed the conflict of interests to affected clients and obtained their
consents prior to voting, Spectrum will cast the client’s vote(s) in accordance
with the philosophy and decision guidelines developed for that
category. New and unfamiliar issues are constantly appearing in the
proxy voting process. As new issues arise, we will make every effort
to classify them among the three categories below. If we believe it
would be informative to do so, we may revise this document to reflect how we
evaluate such issues.
Due
to timing delays, logistical hurdles and high costs associated with procuring
and voting international proxies, Spectrum has elected to approach international
proxy voting on the basis of achieving “best efforts at a reasonable
cost.”
As
a fiduciary, Spectrum owes its clients an undivided duty of
loyalty. We strive to avoid even the appearance of a conflict that
may compromise the trust our clients have placed in it. This is true
with respect to proxy voting and thus Spectrum has adopted the following
procedures for addressing potential or actual conflicts of
interest.
Identifying
a Conflict of Interest. There
may be a material conflict of interest when Spectrum votes a proxy solicited by
an issuer whose retirement plan or fund we manage or with whom Spectrum, an
affiliate, or an officer or director of Spectrum or of an affiliate has any
other material business or personal relationship that may affect how we vote the
issuer’s proxy. To avoid any perceived material conflict of interest,
the following procedures have been established for use when Spectrum encounters
a potential material conflict to ensure that voting decisions are based on a
clients’ best interest and are not the product of a material
conflict.
Monitoring
for Conflicts of Interest. All
employees of Spectrum are responsible for monitoring for conflicts of interest
and referring any that may be material to the CCO for resolution. At
least annually, the CCO will take reasonable steps to evaluate the nature of
Spectrum’s material business relationships (and those of its affiliates) with
any company whose preferred securities are held in client accounts (a “portfolio
company”) to assess which, if any, could give rise to a conflict of
interest. CCO’s review will focus on the following three
categories:
•Business
Relationships – The CCO will consider whether Spectrum (or an affiliate) has a
substantial business relationship with a portfolio company or a proponent of a
proxy proposal relating to the portfolio company (e.g., an employee group), such
that failure to vote in favor of management (or the proponent) could harm the
adviser’s relationship with the company (or proponent). For example,
if Spectrum manages money for the portfolio company or an employee group,
manages pension assets, leases office space from the company, or provides other
material services to the portfolio company, the CCO will review whether such
relationships may give rise to a conflict of interest.
•Personal
Relationships – The CCO will consider whether any senior executives or portfolio
managers (or similar persons at Spectrum’s affiliates) have a personal
relationship with other proponents of proxy proposals, participants in proxy
contests, corporate directors, or candidates for directorships that might give
rise to a conflict of interest.
•Familial
Relationships – The CCO will consider whether any senior executives or portfolio
managers (or similar persons at Spectrum’s affiliates) have a familial
relationship relating to a portfolio company (e.g., a spouse or other relative
who serves as a director of a portfolio company, is a candidate for such a
position, or is employed by a portfolio company in a senior
position).
Spectrum
Asset Management, Inc.
In
monitoring for conflicts of interest, the CCO will consider all information
reasonably available to it about any material business, personal, or familial
relationship involving Spectrum (and its affiliates) and a portfolio company,
including the following:
•A
list of clients that are also public companies, which is prepared and updated by
the Operations Department and retained in the Compliance
Department.
•Publicly
available information.
•Information
generally known within Spectrum.
•Information
actually known by senior executives or portfolio managers. When considering a
proxy proposal, investment professionals involved in the decision-making process
must disclose any potential material conflict that they are aware of to the CCO
prior to any substantive discussion of a proxy matter.
•Information
obtained periodically from those persons whom the CCO reasonably believes could
be affected by a conflict arising from a personal or familial relationship
(e.g., portfolio managers, senior management).
The
CCO may, at his discretion, assign day-to-day responsibility for monitoring for
conflicts to a designated person. With respect to monitoring of
affiliates, the CCO in conjunction with PGI’s CCO may rely on information
barriers between Spectrum and its affiliates in determining the scope of its
monitoring of conflicts involving affiliates.
Determining
Whether a Conflict of Interest is “Material”
– On a regular basis, CCO will monitor conflicts of interest to determine
whether any may be “material” and therefore should be referred to PGI for
resolution. The SEC has not provided any specific guidance as to what
types of conflicts may be “material” for purposes of proxy voting, so therefore
it would be appropriate to look to the traditional materiality analysis under
the federal securities laws, i.e., that a “material” matter is one that is
reasonably likely to be viewed as important by the average
shareholder.
Whether
a conflict may be material in any case will, of course, depend on the facts and
circumstances. However, in considering the materiality of a conflict, Spectrum
will use the following two-step approach:
1.Financial
Materiality – The most likely indicator of materiality in most cases will be the
dollar amount involved with the relationship in question. For
purposes of proxy voting, it will be presumed that a conflict is not material
unless it involves at least 5% of Spectrum’s annual revenues or a minimum dollar
amount of $1,000,000. Different percentages or dollar amounts may be
used depending on the nature and degree of the conflict (e.g., a higher number
if the conflict arises through an affiliate rather than directly with
Spectrum).
2.Non-Financial
Materiality – A non-financial conflict of interest might be material (e.g.,
conflicts involving personal or familial relationships) and should be evaluated
based on the facts and circumstances of each case.
If
the CCO has any question as to whether a particular conflict is material, it
should presume the conflict to be material and refer it to the PGI’s CCO for
resolution. As in the case of monitoring conflicts, the CCO may
appoint a designated person or subgroup of Spectrum’s investment team to
determine whether potential conflicts of interest may be material.
Resolving
a Material Conflict of Interest
– When an employee of Spectrum refers a potential material conflict of interest
to the CCO, the CCO will determine whether a material conflict of interest
exists based on the facts and circumstances of each particular
situation. If the CCO determines that no material conflict of
interest exists, no further action is necessary and the CCO will notify
management accordingly. If the CCO determines that a material
conflict exists, CCO must disclose the conflict to affected clients and obtain
consent from each as to the manner in which Spectrum proposes to
vote.
Clients
may obtain information about how we voted proxies on their behalf by contacting
Spectrum’s Compliance Department.
Spectrum
Asset Management, Inc.
PROXY
VOTING GUIDELINES
CATEGORY
I: Routine
Administrative Items
Philosophy: Spectrum
is willing to defer to management on matters of a routine administrative nature.
We feel management is best suited to make those decisions which are essential to
the ongoing operation of the company and which do not have a major economic
impact on the corporation and its shareholders. Examples of issues on which
we will normally defer to management’s recommendation
include:
1.selection
of auditors
2.increasing
the authorized number of common shares
3.election
of unopposed directors
CATEGORY
II: Special
Interest Issues
Philosophy: While
there are many social, political, environmental and other special interest
issues that are worthy of public attention, we do not believe the corporate
proxy process is the appropriate arena in which to achieve gains in these
areas. Our primary responsibility in voting proxies is to provide for
the greatest long-term value for Spectrum’s clients. We are opposed
to proposals which involve an economic cost to the corporation, or which
restrict the freedom of management to operate in the best interest of the
corporation and its shareholders. However, in general we will abstain
from voting on shareholder social, political and environmental proposals because
their long-term impact on share value cannot be calculated with any reasonable
degree of confidence.
CATEGORY
III: Issues
Having the Potential for Significant Economic Impact
Philosophy: Spectrum
is not willing to defer to management on proposals which have the potential for
major economic impact on the corporation and the value of its
shares. We believe such issues should be carefully analyzed and
decided by the owners of the corporation. Presented below are
examples of issues which we believe have the potential for significant economic
impact on shareholder value.
1.Classification
of Board of Directors.
Rather than electing all directors annually, these provisions
stagger a board, generally into three annual classes, and call for only
one-third to be elected each year. Staggered boards may help to
ensure leadership continuity, but they also serve as defensive
mechanisms. Classifying the board makes it more difficult to change
control of a company through a proxy contest involving election of
directors. In general, we vote on a case by case basis on proposals
for staggered boards, but generally favor annual elections of all
directors.
2.Cumulative
Voting of Directors. Most
corporations provide that shareholders are entitled to cast one vote for each
director for each share owned - the one share, one vote standard. The
process of cumulative voting, on the other hand, permits shareholders to
distribute the total number of votes they have in any manner they wish when
electing directors. Shareholders may possibly elect a minority
representative to a corporate board by this process, ensuring representation for
all sizes of shareholders. Outside shareholder involvement can
encourage management to maximize share value. We generally support
cumulative voting of directors.
3.Prevention
of Greenmail. These
proposals seek to prevent the practice of “greenmail”, or targeted share
repurchases by management of company stock from individuals or groups seeking
control of the company. Since only the hostile party receives
payment, usually at a substantial premium over the market value of its shares,
the practice discriminates against all other shareholders. By making
greenmail payments, management transfers significant sums of corporate cash to
one entity, most often for the primary purpose of saving their
jobs. Shareholders are left with an asset-depleted and often less
competitive company. We think that if a corporation offers to buy
back its stock, the offer should be made to all shareholders, not just to a
select group or individual. We are opposed to greenmail and will
support greenmail prevention proposals.
Spectrum
Asset Management, Inc.
4.Supermajority
Provisions. These
corporate charter amendments generally require that a very high percentage of
share votes (70-81%) be cast affirmatively to approve a merger, unless the board
of directors has approved it in advance. These provisions have the
potential to give management veto power over merging with another company, even
though a majority of shareholders favor the merger. In most cases we
believe requiring supermajority approval of mergers places too much veto power
in the hands of management and other minority shareholders, at the expense of
the majority shareholders, and we oppose such provisions.
5.Defensive
Strategies. These
proposals will be analyzed on a case by case basis to determine the effect on
shareholder value. Our decision will be based on whether the proposal
enhances long-term economic value.
6.Business
Combinations or Restructuring. These
proposals will be analyzed on a case by case basis to determine the effect on
shareholder value. Our decision will be based on whether the proposal
enhances long-term economic value.
7.Executive
and Director Compensation. These
proposals will be analyzed on a case by case basis to determine the effect on
shareholder value. Our decision will be based on whether the proposal
enhances long-term economic value.
Spectrum
Asset Management, Inc.
|
| |
Exhibit
A to Proxy Policy |
|
Report
for Proxy Vote(s) Against ISS Recommendation(s) |
|
This
form should be completed in instances in which Spectrum Portfolio
Manager(s) decide to vote against ISS recommendations. |
|
1.
Security Name / Symbol: |
|
|
| |
3.
Summary of ISS recommendation (see attached full ISS
recommendation: |
|
|
|
| |
4.
Reasons for voting against ISS recommendation (supporting documentation
may be attached): |
|
|
|
| |
5.
Determination of potential conflicts (if any): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
6.
Contacted Compliance Department: Yes / No |
Name
of individual contacted: |
| |
Date: |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
7.
Contacted other Spectrum portfolio managers who have position in same
security: Yes / No |
Name
of individual contacted: |
| |
Date: |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
8.
Portfolio Manager Signature: |
|
Date: |
| |
Portfolio
Manager Name: |
| |
|
| |
Portfolio
Manager Signature*: |
| |
Date: |
| |
Portfolio
Manager Name: |
| |
*Note:
All Portfolio Managers who manage portfolios that hold relevant security must
sign.
Spectrum
Asset Management, Inc.
WELLINGTON
MANAGEMENT
Global
Proxy Policy and Procedures
September
15, 2023
INTRODUCTION
Wellington
Management has adopted and implemented policies and procedures it believes are
reasonably designed to ensure that proxies are voted in the best interests of
clients for which it exercises proxy-voting discretion.
The
purpose of this document is to outline Wellington Management’s approach to
executing proxy voting. Wellington Management’s Proxy Voting Guidelines (the
“Guidelines”), which are contained in a separate document, set forth broad
guidelines and positions on common issues that Wellington Management uses for
voting proxies. The
Guidelines
set out our general expectations on how we vote rather than rigid rules that we
apply without consideration of the particular facts and
circumstances.
STATEMENT
OF POLICY
Wellington
Management:
1)Votes
client proxies for clients that have affirmatively delegated proxy voting
authority, in writing, unless we have arranged in advance with a particular
client to limit the circumstances in which the client would exercise voting
authority, or we determine that it is in the best interest of one or more
clients to refrain from voting a given proxy.
2)Seeks
to vote proxies in the best financial interests of the clients for which we are
voting.
3)Identifies
and resolves all material proxy-related conflicts of interest between the firm
and our clients in the best interests of the client.
RESPONSIBILITY
AND OVERSIGHT
The
Proxy Voting Team monitors regulatory requirements with respect to proxy voting
and works with the firm’s Legal and Compliance Group and the Investment
Stewardship Committee to develop practices that implement those requirements.
The Proxy Voting Team also acts as a resource for portfolio managers and
investment research analysts on proxy matters as needed. Day-to-day
administration of the proxy voting process is the responsibility of the Proxy
Voting Team. The Investment Stewardship Committee a senior, cross-functional
group of experienced professionals, is responsible for oversight of the
implementation of the Global Proxy Policy and Procedures, review and approval of
the Guidelines, and identification and resolution of conflicts of interest. The
Investment Stewardship Committee reviews the Guidelines as well as the Global
Proxy Policy and Procedures annually.
PROCEDURES
Use
of Third-Party Voting Agent
Wellington
Management uses the services of a third-party voting agent for research and to
manage the administrative aspects of proxy voting. We view third-party research
as an input to our process. Wellington Management complements the research
provided by its primary voting agent with research from other
firms.
Our
primary voting agent processes proxies for client accounts and maintains records
of proxies voted. For certain routine issues, as detailed below, votes may be
instructed according to standing instructions given to our primary voting agent,
which are based on the Guidelines.
We
manually review instances where our primary voting agent discloses a material
conflict of interest of its own, potentially impacting its research outputs. We
perform oversight of our primary voting agent, which involves regular service
calls and an annual due diligence exercise, as well as regular touchpoints in
the normal course of business.
Receipt
of Proxy
If
a client requests that Wellington Management vote proxies on its behalf, the
client must instruct its custodian bank to deliver all relevant voting materials
to Wellington Management or its designated voting agent in a timely
manner.
Reconciliation
Proxies
for public equity securities received by electronic means are matched to the
securities eligible to be voted, and a reminder is sent to custodians/trustees
that have not forwarded the proxies due. This reconciliation is performed at the
ballot level. Although proxies received for private equity securities, as well
as those received in non-electronic format for any securities, are voted as
received, Wellington Management is not able to reconcile these ballots and does
not notify custodians of non-receipt; Wellington Management is only able to
reconcile ballots where clients have consented to providing holdings information
with its provider for this purpose.
Proxy
Voting Process
Our
approach to voting is investment-led and serves as an influential component of
our engagement and escalation strategy. The Investment Stewardship Committee, a
cross-functional group of experienced professionals, oversees Wellington
Management’s activities with regards to proxy voting practices.
Routine
issues that can be addressed by the proxy voting guidance below are voted by
means of standing instructions communicated to our primary voting agent. Some
votes warrant analysis of specific facts and circumstances and therefore are
reviewed individually. We examine such vote sources including internal research
notes, third-party voting research and company engagement. While manual votes
are often resolved by investment research teams, each portfolio manager is
empowered to make a final decision for their relevant client portfolio(s),
absent a material conflict of interest. Proactive portfolio manager input is
sought under certain circumstances, which may include consideration of position
size and proposal subject matter and nature. Where portfolio manager input is
proactively sought, deliberation across the firm may occur. This collaboration
does not prioritize consensus across the firm above all other interests but
rather seeks to inform portfolio managers’ decisions by allowing them to
consider multiple perspectives. Portfolio managers may occasionally arrive at
different voting conclusions for their clients, resulting in different decisions
for the same vote. Voting procedures and the deliberation that occurs before a
vote decision are aligned with our role as active owners and fiduciaries for our
clients.
Material
Conflict of Interest Identification and Resolution Processes
Further
detail on our management of conflicts of interest can be found in our
Stewardship Conflicts of Interest Policy, available on our website.
OTHER
CONSIDERATIONS
In
certain instances, Wellington Management may be unable to vote or may determine
not to vote a proxy on behalf of one or more clients. While not exhaustive, the
following are potential instances in which a proxy vote might not be
entered.
Securities
Lending
Clients
may elect to participate in securities lending Such lending may impact their
ability to have their shares voted. Under certain circumstances, and where
practical considerations allow, Wellington Management may determine that the
anticipated value of voting could outweigh the benefit to the client resulting
from use of securities for lending and recommend that a client attempt to have
its custodian recall the security to permit voting of related proxies. We do not
borrow shares for the sole purpose of exercising voting rights.
Share
Blocking and Re-Registration
Certain
countries impose trading restrictions or requirements regarding re-registration
of securities held in omnibus accounts in order for shareholders to vote a
proxy. The potential impact of such requirements is evaluated when determining
whether to vote such proxies.
Lack
of Adequate Information, Untimely Receipt of Proxy Materials, or Excessive
Costs
Wellington
Management may abstain from voting a proxy when the proxy statement or other
available information is inadequate to allow for an informed vote; the proxy
materials are not delivered in a timely fashion; or, in Wellington Management’s
judgment, the costs of voting exceed the expected benefits to clients (included
but not limited to instances such as when powers of attorney or consularization
or the disclosure of client confidential information are required).
ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION
Wellington
Management maintains records related to proxies pursuant to Rule 204-2 of the
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”), the Employee Retirement
Income Security Act of 1974, as amended (“ERISA”), and other applicable laws. In
addition, Wellington Management discloses voting decisions through its website,
including the rationale for votes against management.
Wellington
Management provides clients with a copy of its Global Proxy Policy and
Procedures, as well as the Voting Guidelines, upon written request. In addition,
Wellington Management will provide specific client information relating to proxy
voting to a client upon written request.
WESTCHESTER
CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC
Proxy
and Corporate Action Voting
Policies
and Procedures
As
Adopted October 2021
I.POLICY
& DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY
Westchester
Capital Management, LLC (“Adviser”) acts as subadviser to The Merger Fund, The
Merger Fund VL, Virtus Westchester Event-Driven Fund and Virtus Westchester
Credit Event Fund (collectively, the “Virtus Subadvised Funds”) and may act as
subadviser for one or more additional funds from time-to-time (each a
“Subadvised Fund” and together with the Virtus Subadvised Funds, the “Funds”).
The Adviser has been delegated authority to vote proxies related to the Funds’
portfolio holdings in accordance with these Proxy and Corporate Action Voting
Policies and Procedures (the “Policy”). The Adviser has full authority to vote
proxies and to act with respect to other shareholder or corporate actions on
behalf of each Fund. Corporate actions may include, for example and without
limitation, tender offers or exchanges, bankruptcy proceedings and class
actions.
The
Adviser shall consider each proxy proposal separately from all others. In that
regard, the Adviser will seek to vote all proxies and act on all other actions
in a timely manner as part of its full discretionary authority in accordance
with this Policy. When voting proxies or acting with respect to corporate
actions for the Funds, the Adviser’s utmost concern is that all decisions be
made solely in the best interest of each Fund. The Adviser manages Funds that
pursue event-driven, merger-arbitrage and/or credit event strategies, which are
generally designed to profit upon the completion of a merger, reorganization or
other corporate event. When the Adviser determines that a proposal affects its
investment thesis or a Fund’s investment objectives or strategies, the Adviser
will vote proxies in a manner consistent with its investment thesis and to seek
to maximize the economic value of the investment for the Fund.
II.PURPOSE
The
purpose of this Policy is to memorialize the procedures and policies adopted by
the Adviser to enable it to comply with its fiduciary responsibilities to
clients and the requirements of Rule 206(4)-6 under the Investment Advisers Act
of 1940, as amended (“Advisers Act”).
III.PROCEDURES
The
Adviser’s Chief Compliance Officer or his or her designee is ultimately
responsible for ensuring that all proxies received by the Adviser are voted in
accordance with this Policy and in a manner consistent with the Adviser’s
determination of each Fund’s best interests. Although many proxy proposals can
be voted in accordance with a Fund’s established Guidelines (see Section V.
below, “Guidelines”), the Adviser recognizes that some proposals require special
consideration, which may dictate that the Adviser make an exception to the
Guidelines.
The
Chief Compliance Officer or his or her designee is also responsible for ensuring
that all corporate action notices or requests which require shareholder action
received by the Adviser are addressed in a timely manner and consistent action
is taken for each Fund’s account as appropriate.
A.Conflicts
of Interest1
Where
a proxy proposal raises a material conflict between the Adviser’s interests and
an interest of a Fund, the Adviser will resolve such a conflict in the manner
described below:
1.Vote
in Accordance with the Guidelines.
The Adviser shall vote in accordance with the Guidelines; or
2.Obtain
Consent.
The Adviser will disclose the conflict to the Fund’s investment adviser, and
recommend a proposed vote on the proposal. The disclosure shall include
information regarding the matter to be voted on, the nature of the Adviser’s
conflict such that the recipient of the information would be able to make an
informed decision regarding the vote, and the basis of the Adviser’s
recommendation. If the Fund’s investment adviser does not respond to such a
conflict-disclosure request with a timely instruction, the Adviser may vote in
accordance with the Adviser’s recommendation or, in its discretion, abstain from
voting the securities held by that Fund’s account.
The
Adviser’s Chief Compliance Officer or his or her designee will review proxy
proposals for conflicts of interest as part of the overall vote review process.
B.Resources
The
Adviser may retain third-party services to provide research, summary information
and/or recommendations with respect to proposals on which the Adviser must vote
on behalf of its Fund clients. The Adviser may also retain third-party service
providers to assist with the ministerial act of voting proxies and reporting the
Adviser’s or a Fund’s proxy voting record. The Adviser may reasonably rely on
information or recommendations provided by such third parties.
C.Limitations
In
certain circumstances, in accordance with a Fund’s sub-investment advisory
agreement (or other written directive) or where the Adviser has determined that
it is in the Fund’s best interest, the Adviser will not vote proxies received.
The following are certain circumstances where the Adviser may limit its role in
voting proxies:
1.Fund
Maintains Proxy Voting Authority:
Where a Fund specifies in writing that it will maintain the authority to vote
proxies itself or that it has delegated the right to vote proxies to a third
party, the Adviser will not vote the securities and will direct the relevant
custodian to send the proxy material directly to the Fund. If any proxy material
is received by the Adviser, it will promptly be forwarded to the Fund or
specified third party. This limitation does not apply to any Funds
currently.
2.Terminated
Account:
If the Adviser’s investment advisory relationship with a Fund is terminated, the
Adviser will cease voting proxies on behalf of that Fund as soon as reasonably
practicable.
3.Limited
Value or Effect:
If the Adviser determines that the value of a Fund’s economic interest or the
value of the portfolio holding is indeterminable or insignificant, the Adviser
may abstain from voting a Fund’s proxies. The Adviser also will not generally
vote proxies received for securities which are no longer held by the Fund’s
account.
4.Securities
Lending Programs:
When securities are out on loan, they are transferred into the borrower’s name
and are voted by the borrower, in its discretion. However, if the Adviser has
knowledge that an event will occur having a material effect on the Fund’s
investment in a loaned security, the Adviser will seek to call the loan in time
to vote the securities or the Adviser will seek to enter into an arrangement
which ensures that the proxies for such material events may be voted as the
Adviser believes is in the Fund’s best interests. There can be no assurance the
Adviser will be able to call any loan in a manner that will allow the Adviser to
vote on the related proposal in a timely manner.
1
Due to the nature of the Adviser’s business, its focus on a limited number of
investment strategies, and its absence of affiliated entities engaged in other
lines of business, it is not anticipated that material conflicts of interest
will arise with any frequency.
Westchester
Capital Management, LLC
5.Unjustifiable
Costs:
In certain circumstances, after doing a cost-benefit analysis, the Adviser may
abstain from voting where the cost of voting a Fund’s proxy would exceed any
anticipated benefits to the Fund of the proxy proposal. For example, the Adviser
may determine not to vote proxies regarding a non-material proposal that are
provided only in a foreign language if voting the proxy would require the Fund
to incur significant translation costs.
D.Proxies
Issued by Underlying Investment Companies
To
the extent a Fund invests in other investment companies that are not affiliated
with the Fund in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(E) or (F) of the 1940 Act
(“Underlying Funds”), the Fund is required by the 1940 Act to handle proxies
received from Underlying Funds in a certain manner. It is the policy of the
Adviser to vote all proxies received from Underlying Funds in the same
proportion that all other shares of the Underlying Funds are voted, or in
accordance with instructions received from other shareholders of the Underlying
Fund, pursuant to Section 12(d)(1)(E) or (F) of the 1940 Act.
E.Periodic
Reviews
1.Annual
Compliance Review:
On an annual basis, the Adviser shall complete a review of the proxies voted
during the prior year to determine if proxies were voted in a manner consistent
with this Policy (the “Compliance Review”). The Compliance Review shall be
completed by personnel of the Adviser that have no authority for voting
decisions as part of the Adviser’s process for voting proxies. The Compliance
Review may be conducted using a random sampling of proxies voted by the Adviser
during the period.
2.Annual
Review of Policy:
Each year, the Adviser’s Chief Compliance Officer (or his or her designee) shall
conduct a review of this Policy and make necessary changes to the Policy that
arise out of the review, including any recommended updates to the established
Guidelines (see Section V. below, “Guidelines”). As part of the Annual Review,
the Chief Compliance Officer (or his or her designee) shall consider industry
developments regarding proxy voting through such methods as it determines
appropriate, including, for example, publications from the International
Corporate Governance Network’s Global Corporate Governance Principles and the
Council of Institutional Investors’ Corporate Governance Policies regarding
common shareholder proposals.
IV.RECORD
KEEPING
In
accordance with Rule 204-2 under the Advisers Act, the Adviser will maintain for
the time periods set forth in the Rule (i) these proxy voting procedures and
policies, and all amendments thereto; (ii) all proxy statements received
regarding securities held by the Fund (provided however, that the Adviser may
rely on the proxy statement filed on EDGAR as its records); (iii) a record of
all votes cast on behalf of each Fund; (iv) records of all client requests for
proxy voting information; (v) any documents prepared by the Adviser that were
material to making a decision how to vote or that memorialized the basis for the
decision; and (vi) all records relating to requests made to the Funds regarding
conflicts of interest in voting the proxy.
The
Adviser will describe in its Part II of Form ADV (or other brochure fulfilling
the requirement of Rule 204-3) its proxy voting policies and procedures and will
inform each Fund as to how they may obtain information on how the Adviser voted
proxies with respect to securities held by each Fund. Clients may obtain
information on how their securities were voted or a copy of the Adviser’s
Policies and Procedures by written request addressed to the Adviser. The Adviser
will coordinate with each Fund to assist in the provision of all information
required to be filed on Form N-PX.
V.PROXY
VOTING GUIDELINES
The
following proxy voting guidelines (the “Guidelines”) apply to each proposal on
which the Adviser is authorized to act unless the Adviser determines that a
different voting result is in the best interest of the Fund holding the
securities to which the proposal relates.
These
Guidelines are not intended to address every potential proposal that an Adviser
may need to consider and are not in every instance intended to be construed as
rigid voting rules. In respect of proposals that the Adviser determines are
reasonably likely to have a material economic effect on a Fund’s investment and
that are not addressed below, the Adviser will generally vote in accordance with
management’s recommendations.
Westchester
Capital Management, LLC
The
following Guidelines are grouped according to broad classifications for each
type of proposal.
A.Board
of Directors
1.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of incumbent and board-nominated directors,
unless any such director appears to have demonstrably failed to exercise
reasonable business judgment or care or the Adviser determines that the director
has failed to take action that is in the best interest of the issuer for which
he or she serves as a Director.
2.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of charter or bylaw amendments or other
proposals that seek to expand the indemnification available to directors or
otherwise limit their liability, but the Adviser may oppose such proposals if
they would provide indemnity or limit liability for breaches of the duty of
loyalty or care, intentional misconduct, or interested-director
transactions.
3.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of proposals that call for directors to be
elected by an affirmative majority of votes cast. The Adviser may vote against a
proposal that requires majority voting in contested elections.
4.The
Adviser will generally vote against the imposition of supermajority voting
requirements and will vote for proposals seeking the removal of supermajority
voting requirements.
5.The
Adviser will generally oppose proposals that seek to establish cumulative voting
rights for shareholders.
6.The
Adviser will generally vote against shareholder proposals to impose age or term
limits or to establish a mandatory retirement age for directors on a board or
committee, to change the size of a board or committee, or to limit the pool of
directors that can be chosen for a board or committee.
7.The
Adviser will generally vote for the declassification of an existing “classified
board” (i.e., one on which directors are divided into classes, each of which is
elected on a staggered schedule). Similarly, the Adviser will generally vote
against any proposal to implement a classified board.
8.In
contested director elections, the Adviser will vote proxies on a case-by-case
basis evaluating factors including, but not limited to, qualifications of the
nominees, reasons a dissident shareholder is pursuing a contested election, the
nature of the dissident shareholder’s concerns, and whether a change in the
board would be likely to address the dissident shareholder’s
concerns.
9.The
Adviser will vote proxy access proposals (those that seek to provide
shareholders with greater access to the ability to nominate directors) on a
case-by-case basis with consideration given to, among other things, the economic
and long-term interests of the Funds which holds the securities to which
proposal relates.
B.Auditors
and Audit-Related Issues
1.The
Adviser will typically vote in favor of the approval or ratification of a
company’s auditors, except it may withhold its vote in cases where management is
seeking to replace the current auditors and there has been a dispute over audit
policies or practices or disagreement regarding the company’s recent financial
statements.
C.Proposals
Regarding Changes to a Company’s Capital Structure
1.The
Adviser will typically oppose proposals to issue “blank check” preferred stock
(preferred stock with unspecified voting, conversion and/or other features),
except in cases where the company has publicly stated that the blank check
preferred shares will not be used for anti-takeover purposes or has identifiable
legitimate financing objectives for the issuance of such blank check preferred
shares.
2.The
Adviser will generally vote against proposals that seek to establish a class of
common stock with separate or superior voting rights to existing common
stock.
Westchester
Capital Management, LLC
3.The
Adviser will generally vote against proposals that would allow for the use of a
poison pill and vote for proposals that would eliminate a company’s ability to
use a poison pill or restrict the conditions under which a poison pill may be
used (e.g., by requiring shareholder approval).
4.The
Adviser will evaluate proposals to eliminate dual-class voting structures on a
case-by-case basis and shall consider the costs associated with a restructuring
of the current voting structure and the expected benefits to
shareholders.
5.The
Adviser will oppose proposals requesting increases in authorized common or
preferred stock where management provides no acceptable explanation for the
expected use of or need for these additional shares or in cases where the
Adviser determines that the additional stock is intended to be used to establish
an anti-takeover mechanism for the company.
6.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of stock splits or reverse stock splits if
the proposal would not substantively impact the economic value or voting rights
of the stock that would be impacted by the split.
D.Compensation
of Directors and Employees
1.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of stock incentive plans submitted for
shareholder approval in order to qualify for favorable tax treatment under
Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, unless the Adviser determines that
the performance criteria is inappropriate or poorly defined under the plan or
that the maximum incentive payments are not excessive.
2.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of employee stock purchase plans that
permit an issuer’s employees to purchase stock of the issuer at a discount to
market value.
3.The
Adviser will consider proposals regarding severance agreements that provide for
compensation to management (golden parachutes) on a case-by-case basis taking
into account the following considerations:
a.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of proposals requesting that implementation
of such arrangements be subject to shareholder approval;
b.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of proposals requiring shareholder approval
of plans in which the severance payment would exceed 300% of the executive’s
current salary and bonus (including equity compensation); and
c.For
proposals regarding approval of proposed severance plans, the Adviser will
evaluate such proposals on a case-by-case basis taking into consideration
whether it considers the proposed plan to be in the best interests of
shareholders, whether the compensation payable thereunder is comparable to
similar plans of peer companies, whether such compensation is excessive, whether
compensation is payable irrespective of the recipient’s continued employment
with the employer, and whether such plan may have the effect of rewarding
management that has failed to effectively manage the company.
4.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of claw back proposals (those designed to
seek recoupment of bonuses paid to company executives) regarding fraudulent or
deceptive business practices.
E.Political,
Environmental or Social Issues
1.Proposals
in this category typically request that the issuer disclose or amend certain
business practices. The Adviser generally believes that these are “ordinary
business matters” that are primarily the responsibility of the issuer’s
management and should be evaluated and approved primarily by the issuer’s board
of directors. Often, these proposals may address concerns with which the
Adviser’s personnel philosophically agree, but absent a compelling economic
effect on shareholder value, the Adviser will typically abstain from voting on
these proposals. This reflects the belief that regardless of the Adviser’s (or
its employees’) perspective on an issue, these decisions should be the province
of the issuer’s management unless they have a significant, tangible effect on
the value of an investment in the issuer and management has not been responsive
to the matter.
Westchester
Capital Management, LLC
F.Proposals
Regarding Voting Procedures & Miscellaneous
1.The
Adviser will generally vote for proposals that seek to establish or enhance the
confidentiality of the shareholder voting process.
2.The
Adviser will generally vote in favor of proposals seeking to eliminate
preemptive rights for shareholders. Although the Adviser generally supports
elimination of preemptive rights, it may oppose the elimination of limited
preemptive rights (for example, preemptive rights that are invoked on proposed
secondary issuances in situations where the secondary issuance would result in
more than an acceptable level of dilution of existing shareholder’s
rights).
3.The
Adviser will generally vote for proposals seeking to provide shareholders with
the right to call a special meeting.
4.The
Adviser will generally vote against proposals that seek to establish “fair
price” provisions in the event of a corporate takeover.
5.The
Adviser will generally vote against proposals that seek to permit “greenmail”
(proposals that would allow a company to repurchase shares at a premium from a
large shareholder who is seeking to take over a company through a proxy contest
or other means).
6.The
Adviser will generally vote for proposals that seek to establish the date and
location of a company’s annual meeting.
Westchester
Capital Management, LLC