Table of Contents

AS FILED WITH THE SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION ON JULY 25, 2012

REGISTRATION NOS. 33-21677 AND 811-05547

 

 

 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

FORM N-1A

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933

   Pre-Effective Amendment No.    ¨
   Post-Effective Amendment No. 78    x

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940

   Amendment No. 81    x

 

 

LAUDUS TRUST

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

 

211 Main Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip code)

800.648.5300

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code)

 

 

 

Name and Address of Agent for Service:   Copies to:
David J. Lekich, Esq.   Douglas P. Dick, Esq.
Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.   Dechert LLP
211 Main Street   1775 I Street, N.W.
SF211MN-05-491   Washington, D.C. 20006-2401
San Francisco, CA 94105  

It is proposed that this filing will become effective (check appropriate box):

  ¨ Immediately upon filing pursuant to paragraph (b)
  x On July 29, 2012 pursuant to paragraph (b)
  ¨ 60 days after filing pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)
  ¨ On (date) pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)
  ¨ 75 days after filing pursuant to paragraph (a)(2)
  ¨ On (date) pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of Rule 485

If appropriate, check the following box:

  ¨ This post-effective amendment designates a new effective date for a previously filed post-effective amendment.

 

 

 


Table of Contents

Prospectus

July 29, 2012

   LOGO

 

    

COMMAND PERFORMANCE TM

 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Investor Shares:    LIEQX
Select Shares:    LIEFX
Institutional Shares:    LIEIX

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Investor Shares:    LGEQX
Select Shares:    LGESX
Institutional Shares:    LGEVX

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Investor Shares:    LEMIX
Select Shares:    LEMSX
Institutional Shares:    LEMNX

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

LIFNX   

Investment Adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited

As with all mutual funds, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has not approved these securities or passed on whether the information in this prospectus is adequate and accurate. Anyone who indicates otherwise is committing a federal crime.

Shareholder Services

1.866.452.8387 Institutional Shares

1.866.452.8387 Registered Investment Professionals

1.800.447.3332 Investor and Select Shares

www.laudus.com


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian Funds

 

Fund summaries   

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     1   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     5   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     9   

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     13   
Fund details   

Investment objectives, strategies and risks

     17   

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     17   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     20   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     24   

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     27   

Portfolio holdings

     31   

Financial highlights

     32   

Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts

     39   
Fund management      45   
Investing in the funds      47   

Investing directly with the funds

     47   

Investing through a financial intermediary

     49   

Other investing information

     49   

Further redemption information

     50   

Share price

     50   

Additional policies affecting your investment

     51   

Distribution and taxes

     54   


Table of Contents
 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Ticker Symbols    Investor Shares: LIEQX         Select Shares: LIEFX         Institutional Shares: LIEIX

 

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

Fund fees and expenses

This table describes the fees and expenses you may pay if you buy and hold shares of the fund.

 

Shareholder fees  (fees paid directly from your investment)  
       Institutional     Select     Investor  

Redemption fee (as a % of the amount
sold or exchanged within 30 days of purchase)

     2.00        2.00        2.00   
      
Annual fund operating expenses (expenses that you pay each year
as a % of the value of your investment)
 

Management fees

     0.85        0.85        0.85   

Distribution (12b-1) fees

     None        None        0.25   

Other expenses

     0.38        0.55        0.53   
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses

     1.23        1.40        1.63   

Less expense reduction

     (0.18     (0.28     (0.23
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses
after expense reduction 1

     1.05        1.12        1.40   
  

 

 

 

 

1  

The investment adviser has agreed to limit the total annual fund operating expenses (excluding interest, taxes, and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 1.05%, 1.12%, and 1.40% for the Institutional, Select and Investor classes, respectively, until at least July 30, 2014. During this term, the agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the fund’s Board of Trustees. Any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by the fund to the investment adviser during the next two fiscal years to the extent that the repayment will not cause the fund’s total annual fund operating expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the agreement) during the respective year. The investment adviser may, but is not required to, extend the agreement for additional years.

 

Example

This example is intended to help you compare the cost of investing in the fund with the cost of investing in other mutual funds. The example assumes that you invest $10,000 in the fund for the time periods indicated and then redeem all of your shares at the end of those time periods. The example also assumes that your investment has a 5% return each year and that the fund’s operating expenses remain the same. The one-year figures are based on total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction. The expenses would be the same whether you stayed in the fund or sold your

shares at the end of each period. Your actual costs may be higher or lower.

 

Expenses on a $10,000 investment

 

       1 year      3 years      5 years      10 years  

Institutional

   $ 107       $ 354       $ 640       $ 1,456   

Select

   $ 114       $ 387       $ 711       $ 1,630   

Investor

   $ 143       $ 468       $ 842       $ 1,893   

 

Portfolio turnover

The fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction costs and may result in higher taxes when fund shares are held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in the annual fund operating expenses or in the example, affect the fund’s performance. During the most recent fiscal year, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 35% of the average value of its portfolio.

Principal investment strategies

The fund pursues its investment objective primarily by investing in equity securities of non-U.S. large capitalization issuers, including the securities of emerging market companies, that, in the subadviser’s opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the subadviser. Normally, the fund will invest primarily in common stocks. The fund may purchase securities of non-U.S. issuers directly or indirectly in the form of American, European or Global depositary receipts or other securities representing underlying shares of non-U.S. issuers. The fund may also purchase other investment funds, including, but not limited to, registered funds, including exchange-traded funds (ETFs), unregistered funds and real estate investment trusts (REITs).

For purposes of investments to be made by the fund, large capitalization companies are currently defined by the subadviser to mean issuers that have a market capitalization of more than $6.5 billion at the time of purchase. This level is subject to market movements and is regularly reviewed by the subadviser. Typically, the fund invests in securities of approximately 30-40 companies.

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities.

 

 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund     1   


Table of Contents

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is primarily oriented to individual stock selection and is value driven. In selecting stocks for the fund, the subadviser identifies those stocks that it believes will provide capital appreciation over a market cycle, taking into consideration movements in the price of the individual security and the impact of currency fluctuation on a United States domiciled, dollar-based investor. The subadviser conducts fundamental research on a global basis in order to identify securities that, in the subadviser’s opinion, have the potential for long-term capital appreciation. This research effort generally centers on a value-oriented dividend discount methodology with respect to individual securities and market analysis that isolates value across country boundaries. The approach focuses on future anticipated dividends and discounts the value of those dividends back to what they would be worth if they were being received today. In addition, the analysis typically includes a comparison of the values and current market prices of different possible investments. The subadviser’s general management strategy emphasizes long-term holding of securities, although securities may be sold in the subadviser’s discretion without regard to the length of time they have been held.

The fund may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. The fund may carry out hedging activities and may invest in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with the purchase of individual securities denominated in a particular currency. Under normal circumstances, hedging is undertaken defensively back into the base currency of the fund.

The fund may invest in derivative instruments, principally futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

The fund may also invest in investment- and below investment-grade debt securities issued by government or corporate entities.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and may increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money. The fund’s principal risks include:

Market risk. Stock and bond markets rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. Poor stock selection or a focus on securities in a particular sector may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. In addition, equity markets tend to move in cycles, which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

Large-cap risk. Large-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. During a period when large-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — mid- or small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s large-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Foreign investment risk. The fund’s investments in securities of foreign issuers may involve certain risks that are greater than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions; changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges); differing accounting, auditing, financial reporting and legal standards and practices; differing securities market structures; and higher transaction costs. These risks may be heightened in connection with investments in emerging markets.

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Such countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries.

Currency risk. The fund’s investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies may involve risks that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar.

Derivatives risk. The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments and could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested. In addition, investments in derivatives may involve leverage, which means a small percentage of assets invested in derivatives can have a disproportionately larger impact on the fund.

Fixed income risk. Interest rates rise and fall over time, which will affect the fund’s yield and share price. The credit quality of a portfolio investment could also cause the fund’s share price to fall.

 

 

2   Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund


Table of Contents

The fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio investment or the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Fixed income securities may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower than market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price. Below investment-grade bonds (junk bonds) involve greater credit risk, are more volatile, involve greater risk of price declines and may be more susceptible to economic downturns than investment-grade securities.

Securities lending risk. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent.

REITs risk. The fund’s investments in REITs will be subject to the risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate, including fluctuations in the value of underlying properties, defaults by borrowers or tenants, changes in interest rates and risks related to general or local economic conditions. REITs are also subject to certain additional risks, for example, REITs, are dependent upon specialized management skills and cash flows, and may have their investments in relatively few properties, a small geographic area or a single property type. Failure of a company to qualify as a REIT under federal tax law may have adverse consequences on the fund. In addition, REITs have their own expenses, and the fund will bear a proportionate share of those expenses.

Exchange traded fund (ETF) risk. When the fund invests in an ETF, it will bear a proportionate share of the ETF’s expenses. In addition, lack of liquidity in an ETF can result in its value being more volatile than the underlying portfolio of securities.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities.

Liquidity risk. A particular investment may be difficult to purchase or sell. The fund may be unable to sell illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price.

Your investment in the fund is not a bank deposit and is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency.

For more information on the risks of investing in the fund please see the “Fund details” section in the prospectus.

Performance

The bar chart below shows how the fund’s investment results have varied from year to year, and the following table shows how the fund’s average annual total returns for various periods compared to that of an index. This information provides some indication of the risks of investing in the fund. All figures assume distributions were reinvested. Keep in mind that future performance (both before and after taxes) may differ from past performance. For current performance information, please see www.laudus.com/prospectus .

Annual total returns (%) as of 12/31

Investor Shares

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 18.42% Q2 2009

Worst quarter: (17.85)% Q1 2009

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and before taxes) of the fund’s Investor Shares as of 6/30/2012: 0.15%

 

Average annual total returns (%) as of 12/31/11  
       1 year    

Since

Inception

(6/16/08)

 

Investor Shares

    

Before taxes

     (5.86 )%      (7.91 )% 

After taxes on distributions

     (6.12 )%      (8.07 )% 

After taxes on distributions and sale of shares

     (2.44 )%      (6.38 )% 

Select Shares ®

    

Before taxes

     (5.66 )%      (7.69 )% 

Institutional Shares

    

Before taxes

     (5.60 )%      (7.61 )% 

Comparative Index (reflects no deduction for expenses or taxes)

    

MSCI EAFE Index (Net)

     (12.14 )%      (7.19 )% 

The after-tax figures reflect the highest individual federal income tax rates in effect during the period and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. The after-tax figures are shown for one share class only, and would be different for the other share classes. Your actual after-tax returns depend on your individual tax situation. In addition, after-tax returns are not relevant if you hold your fund shares through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan, IRA or other tax-advantaged account.

Investment adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited

Portfolio managers

Elizabeth Desmond (CFA) , Director and Chief Investment Officer-International Equity Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

Russell Mackie, Senior Portfolio Manager-International Equity Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

 

 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund     3   


Table of Contents

Melissa Platt (CFA), Portfolio Manager-International Equity Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since 2011.

Purchase and sale of fund shares

The fund is open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange is open.

You may invest directly in the fund by placing purchase, exchange and redemption orders through the fund’s transfer agent. Investors must contact the transfer agent by phone or in writing to obtain an account application. Investors may contact the transfer agent:

 

   

by telephone at 1-800-447-3332; or

 

   

by mail in writing at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Funds, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266.

When you place orders to purchase, exchange or redeem fund shares through Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Schwab) or another financial intermediary, you must follow Schwab’s or the other financial intermediary’s transaction procedures.

 

Name of class   

Minimum initial

fund investment

    

Subsequent

investment

 

Institutional

   $ 500,000         None   

Select

   $ 50,000         None   

Investor

   $ 100         None   

These minimums may be waived for certain investors or in the fund’s sole discretion.

Tax information

Dividends and capital gains distributions received from the fund will generally be taxable as ordinary income or capital gains, unless you are investing through an IRA, 401(k) or other tax-advantaged account.

Payments to financial intermediaries

If you purchase shares of the fund through a broker-dealer or other financial intermediary (such as a bank), the fund and its related companies may pay the intermediary for the sale of fund shares and related services. These payments may create a conflict of interest by influencing the broker-dealer or other financial intermediary and your salesperson to recommend the fund over another investment. Ask your salesperson or visit your financial intermediary’s website for more information.

 

 

4   Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund


Table of Contents
 

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Ticker Symbols    Investor Shares: LGEQX        Select Shares: LGESX        Institutional Shares: LGEVX

 

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

Fund fees and expenses

This table describes the fees and expenses you may pay if you buy and hold shares of the fund.

 

Shareholder fees  (fees paid directly from your investment)  
      Institutional     Select     Investor  

Redemption fee (as a % of the amount sold or exchanged within 30 days of purchase)

    2.00        2.00        2.00   
     
Annual fund operating expenses (expenses that you pay each year
as a % of the v
alue of your investment)
 

Management fees

    0.85        0.85        0.85   

Distribution (12b-1) fees

    None        None        0.25   

Other expenses

    3.90        4.05        4.04   
 

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses

    4.75        4.90        5.14   

Less expense reduction

    (3.70     (3.78     (3.74
 

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction 1

    1.05        1.12        1.40   
 

 

 

 

 

1  

The investment adviser has agreed to limit the total annual fund operating expenses (excluding interest, taxes, and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 1.05%, 1.12%, and 1.40% for the Institutional, Select and Investor classes, respectively, until at least July 30, 2014. During this term, the agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the fund’s Board of Trustees. Any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by the fund to the investment adviser during the next two fiscal years to the extent that the repayment will not cause the fund’s total annual fund operating expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the agreement) during the respective year. The investment adviser may, but is not required to, extend the agreement for additional years.

 

Example

This example is intended to help you compare the cost of investing in the fund with the cost of investing in other mutual funds. The example assumes that you invest $10,000 in the fund for the time periods indicated and then redeem all of your shares at the end of

those time periods. The example also assumes that your investment has a 5% return each year and that the fund’s operating expenses remain the same. The one-year figures are based on total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction. The expenses would be the same whether you stayed in the fund or sold your

shares at the end of each period. Your actual costs may be higher or lower.

 

Expenses on a $10,000 investment

 

       1 year      3 years      5 years      10 years  

Institutional

   $ 107       $ 732       $ 1,764       $ 4,366   

Select

   $ 114       $ 762       $ 1,821       $ 4,480   

Investor

   $ 143       $ 841       $ 1,942       $ 4,679   

 

Portfolio turnover

The fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction costs and may result in higher taxes when fund shares are held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in the annual fund operating expenses or in the example, affect the fund’s performance. During the most recent fiscal year, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 31% of the average value of its portfolio.

Principal investment strategies

The fund pursues its investment objective primarily by investing in equity securities of both U.S. and non-U.S. issuers, including the securities of emerging market companies, that, in the subadviser’s opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the subadviser. Normally, the fund will invest primarily in common stocks. The fund may purchase securities of non-U.S. issuers directly or indirectly in the form of American, European or Global depositary receipts or other securities representing underlying shares of non-U.S. issuers. The fund may also purchase other investment funds, including, but not limited to, registered funds, including exchange-traded funds (ETFs), unregistered funds and real estate investment trusts (REITs).

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is primarily oriented to individual stock selection and is value driven. In selecting stocks for the fund, the subadviser identifies those stocks that it believes will provide capital appreciation over a market cycle, taking into consideration movements in the price of the individual security and the impact of currency fluctuation on a

 

 

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund     5   


Table of Contents

United States domiciled, dollar-based investor. The subadviser conducts fundamental research on a global basis in order to identify securities that, in the subadviser’s opinion, have the potential for long-term capital appreciation. This research effort generally centers on a value-oriented dividend discount methodology with respect to individual securities and market analysis that isolates value across country boundaries. The approach focuses on future anticipated dividends and discounts the value of those dividends back to what they would be worth if they were being received today. In addition, the analysis typically includes a comparison of the values and current market prices of different possible investments. The subadviser’s general management strategy emphasizes long-term holding of securities, although securities may be sold in the subadviser’s discretion without regard to the length of time they have been held.

The fund may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. The fund may carry out hedging activities and may invest in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with the purchase of individual securities denominated in a particular currency. Under normal circumstances, hedging is undertaken defensively back into the base currency of the fund.

The fund may invest in derivative instruments, principally futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

The fund may also invest in investment- and below investment-grade debt securities issued by governments or corporate entities.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and may increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money. The fund’s principal risks include:

Market risk. Stock and bond markets rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. Poor stock selection or a focus on securities in a particular sector may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. In addition, equity markets tend to move in cycles, which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

Large-, mid- and small-cap risk. Stocks of different market capitalizations tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. Historically, small- and mid-cap stocks tend to be more volatile than large-cap stocks, and small-cap stocks have been riskier than large- and mid-cap stocks. During a period when stocks of a particular market capitalization fall behind other types of investments — bonds or stocks of another capitalization range, for instance — the fund’s large-, mid- or small-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Foreign investment risk. The fund’s investments in securities of foreign issuers may involve certain risks that are greater than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions; changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges); differing accounting, auditing, financial reporting and legal standards and practices; differing securities market structures; and higher transaction costs. These risks may be heightened in connection with investments in emerging markets.

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Such countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries.

Currency risk. The fund’s investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies may involve risks that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar.

Derivatives risk. The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments and could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested. In addition, investments in derivatives may involve leverage, which means a small percentage of assets invested in derivatives can have a disproportionately larger impact on the fund.

Fixed income risk. Interest rates rise and fall over time, which will affect the fund’s yield and share price. The credit quality of a portfolio investment could also cause the fund’s share price to fall. The fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio

 

 

6   Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund


Table of Contents

investment or the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Fixed income securities may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower than market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price. Below investment-grade bonds (junk bonds) involve greater credit risk, are more volatile, involve greater risk of price declines and may be more susceptible to economic downturns than investment-grade securities.

Securities lending risk. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent.

REITs risk. The fund’s investments in REITs will be subject to the risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate, including fluctuations in the value of underlying properties, defaults by borrowers or tenants, changes in interest rates and risks related to general or local economic conditions. REITs are also subject to certain additional risks, for example, REITs, are dependent upon specialized management skills and cash flows, and may have their investments in relatively few properties, a small geographic area or a single property type. Failure of a company to qualify as a REIT under federal tax law may have adverse consequences on the fund. In addition, REITs have their own expenses, and the fund will bear a proportionate share of those expenses.

Exchange traded fund (ETF) risk. When the fund invests in an ETF, it will bear a proportionate share of the ETF’s expenses. In addition, lack of liquidity in an ETF can result in its value being more volatile than the underlying portfolio of securities.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities.

Liquidity risk. A particular investment may be difficult to purchase or sell. The fund may be unable to sell illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price.

Your investment in the fund is not a bank deposit and is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency.

For more information on the risks of investing in the fund please see the “Fund details” section in the prospectus.

Performance

The bar chart below shows how the fund’s investment results have varied from year to year, and the following table shows how the fund’s average annual total returns for various periods compared to that of an index. This information provides some indication of the risks of investing in the fund. All figures assume distributions were reinvested. Keep in mind that future performance (both before and after taxes) may differ from past performance. For current performance information, please see www.laudus.com/prospectus .

Annual total returns (%) as of 12/31

Investor Shares

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 18.31% Q2 2009

Worst quarter: (15.98)% Q1 2009

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and before taxes) of the fund’s Investor Shares as of 6/30/2012: 4.10%

 

Average annual total returns (%) as of 12/31/11
       1 year     

Since

Inception

(6/16/08)

 

Investor Shares

     

Before taxes

     0.98%         (3.13)%   

After taxes on distributions

     0.82%         (3.46)%   

After taxes on distributions and sale of shares

     1.39%         (2.58)%   

Select Shares ®

     

Before taxes

     1.27%         (2.87)%   

Institutional Shares

     

Before taxes

     1.34%         (2.80)%   

Comparative Index (reflects no deduction for expenses or taxes)

     

MSCI World Index (Net)

     (5.54)%         (3.86)%   

The after-tax figures reflect the highest individual federal income tax rates in effect during the period and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. The after-tax figures are shown for one share class only, and would be different for the other share classes. Your actual after-tax returns depend on your individual tax situation. In addition, after-tax returns are not relevant if you hold your fund shares through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan, IRA or other tax-advantaged account.

Investment adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited

Portfolio managers

Nigel May, Deputy Chief Executive Officer of the subadvisor, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

Brendan Baker, Senior Portfolio Manager-Global Equity Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

Aileen Gan, Senior Portfolio Manager, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since 2012.

 

 

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

    7   


Table of Contents

Purchase and sale of fund shares

The fund is open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange is open.

You may invest directly in the fund by placing purchase, exchange and redemption orders through the fund’s transfer agent. Investors must contact the transfer agent by phone or in writing to obtain an account application. Investors may contact the transfer agent:

 

   

by telephone at 1-800-447-3332; or

 

   

by mail in writing at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Funds, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266.

When you place orders to purchase, exchange or redeem fund shares through Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Schwab) or another financial intermediary, you must follow Schwab’s or the other financial intermediary’s transaction procedures.

 

Name of class   

Minimum initial

fund investment

    

Subsequent

investment

 

Institutional

   $ 500,000         None   

Select

   $ 50,000         None   

Investor

   $ 100         None   

These minimums may be waived for certain investors or in the fund’s sole discretion.

Tax information

Dividends and capital gains distributions received from the fund will generally be taxable as ordinary income or capital gains, unless you are investing through an IRA, 401(k) or other tax-advantaged account.

Payments to financial intermediaries

If you purchase shares of the fund through a broker-dealer or other financial intermediary (such as a bank), the fund and its related companies may pay the intermediary for the sale of fund shares and related services. These payments may create a conflict of interest by influencing the broker-dealer or other financial intermediary and your salesperson to recommend the fund over another investment. Ask your salesperson or visit your financial intermediary’s website for more information.

 

 

8  

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund


Table of Contents
 

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Ticker Symbols     Investor Shares: LEMIX         Select Shares: LEMSX         Institutional Shares: LEMNX

 

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

Fund fees and expenses

This table describes the fees and expenses you may pay if you buy and hold shares of the fund.

 

Shareholder fees (fees paid directly from your investment)  
       Institutional      Select      Investor  

Redemption fee (as a % of the amount sold or exchanged within 30 days of purchase)

     2.00         2.00         2.00   
        
Annual fund operating expenses (expenses that you pay each year
as a % of the value of your investment)
 

Management fees

     1.20         1.20         1.20   

Distribution (12b-1) fees

     None         None         0.25   

Other expenses

     0.30         0.46         0.45   
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses

     1.50         1.66         1.90   

Less expense reduction

     0.05         0.14         0.10   
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction 1

     1.45         1.52         1.80   
  

 

 

 

 

 

1  

The investment adviser has agreed to limit the total annual fund operating expenses (excluding interest, taxes and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 1.45%, 1.52%, and 1.80% for the Institutional, Select and Investor classes, respectively, until at least July 30, 2014. During this term, the agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the fund’s Board of Trustees. Any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by the fund to the investment adviser during the next two fiscal years to the extent that the repayment will not cause the fund’s total annual fund operating expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the agreement) during the respective year. The investment adviser may, but is not required to, extend the agreement for additional years.

 

Example

This example is intended to help you compare the cost of investing in the fund with the cost of investing in other mutual funds. The example assumes that you invest $10,000 in the fund for the time periods indicated and then redeem all of your shares at the end of those time periods. The example also assumes that your investment has a 5% return each year and that the fund’s operating expenses remain the same. The one-year figures are based on total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction. The expenses

would be the same whether you stayed in the fund or sold your shares at the end of each period. Your actual costs may be higher or lower.

 

Expenses on a $10,000 investment
       1 year      3 years      5 years      10 years  

Institutional

   $ 148       $ 464       $ 809       $ 1,782   

Select

   $ 155       $ 495       $ 875       $ 1,941   

Investor

   $ 183       $ 577       $ 1,007       $ 2,205   

 

 

Portfolio turnover

The fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction costs and may result in higher taxes when fund shares are held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in the annual fund operating expenses or in the example, affect the fund’s performance. During the most recent fiscal year, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 43% of the average value of its portfolio.

Principal investment strategies

The fund is an international fund and generally invests in large capitalization equity securities of emerging market companies, as described below, that, in the subadviser’s opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the subadviser. Normally, the fund will invest primarily in common stocks. The fund may also purchase other investment funds, including, but not limited to, registered funds, including exchange-traded funds (ETFs). The fund may purchase securities of non-U.S. issuers directly or indirectly in the form of American, European or Global depositary receipts or other securities representing underlying shares of non-U.S. issuers. The subadviser currently defines companies with large market capitalizations generally, as those with market capitalizations of $3.5 billion or more at the time of purchase. This level is subject to market movements and is regularly reviewed by the subadviser. Typically, the fund invests in securities of approximately 35-45 companies.

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in the securities of emerging markets issuers.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is primarily oriented to individual stock selection and is value driven.

 

 

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund     9   


Table of Contents

In selecting stocks for the fund, the subadviser identifies those stocks that it believes will provide high total return over a market cycle, taking into consideration movements in the price of the individual security and the impact of currency fluctuation on a United States domiciled, dollar-based investor. The subadviser conducts fundamental research on a global basis in order to identify securities that, in the subadviser’s opinion, have the potential for long-term total return. This research effort generally centers on a value-oriented dividend discount methodology with respect to individual securities and market analysis that isolates value across country boundaries. The approach focuses on future anticipated dividends and discounts the value of those dividends back to what they would be worth if they were being received today. In addition, the analysis typically includes a comparison of the values and current market prices of different possible investments. The subadviser’s general management strategy emphasizes long-term holding of securities, although securities may be sold in the subadviser’s discretion without regard to the length of time they have been held.

The fund considers an “emerging country” to be any country except the United States, Canada, and those in the MSCI EAFE Index. Although this is not an exclusive list, the subadviser considers an emerging country security to be one that is issued by a company that exhibits one or more of the following characteristics: (1) its principal securities trading market is in an emerging country, as defined above; (2) while traded in any market, alone or on a consolidated basis, the company derives 50% or more of its annual revenues or annual profits from either goods produced, sales made or services performed in emerging countries; (3) the company has 50% of more of its assets located in an emerging country; or (4) it is organized under the laws of, and has a principal office in, an emerging country.

The fund may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. The fund may actively carry on hedging activities, and may invest in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with the purchase of individual securities denominated in a particular currency. The fund may invest in derivative instruments, principally futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and may increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money. The fund’s principal risks include:

Market risk. Equity markets rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. Poor stock selection or a focus on securities in a particular sector may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. In addition, equity markets tend to move in cycles, which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

Large-cap risk.  Large-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. During a period when large-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — mid- or small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s large-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Foreign investment risk.  The fund’s investments in securities of foreign issuers may involve certain risks that are greater than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions; changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges); differing accounting, auditing, financial reporting and legal standards and practices; differing securities market structures; and higher transaction costs. These risks may be heightened in connection with investments in emerging markets.

Emerging markets risk.  Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Such countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries.

Currency risk. The fund’s investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies may involve risks that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar.

Derivatives risk.  The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional

 

 

10   Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund


Table of Contents

investments and could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested. In addition, investments in derivatives may involve leverage, which means a small percentage of assets invested in derivatives can have a disproportionately larger impact on the fund.

Securities lending risk.  Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent.

Exchange traded fund (ETF) risk.  When the fund invests in an ETF, it will bear a proportionate share of the ETF’s expenses. In addition, lack of liquidity in an ETF can result in its value being more volatile than the underlying portfolio of securities.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities.

Liquidity risk.  A particular investment may be difficult to purchase or sell. The fund may be unable to sell illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price.

Your investment in the fund is not a bank deposit and is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency.

For more information on the risks of investing in the fund please see the “Fund details” section in the prospectus.

Performance

The bar chart below shows how the fund’s investment results have varied from year to year, and the following table shows how the fund’s average annual total returns for various periods compared to that of an index. This information provides some indication of the risks of investing in the fund. All figures assume distributions were reinvested. Keep in mind that future performance (both before and after taxes) may differ from past performance. For current performance information, please see www.laudus.com/prospectus .

 

Annual total returns (%) as of 12/31

Investor Shares

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 30.77% Q2 2009

Worst quarter: (24.80%) Q4 2008

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and pre-tax) of the fund’s Investor Shares as of 6/30/2012: 4.96%

Average annual total returns (%) as of 12/31/11  
       1 year    

Since

Inception

(11/2/07)

 

Investor Shares

    

Before taxes

     (12.66%     (3.12%

After taxes on distributions

     (12.56%     (3.19%

After taxes on distributions and sale of shares

     (7.60%     (2.51%

Select Shares ®

    

Before taxes

     (12.37%     (2.85%

Institutional Shares

    

Before taxes

     (12.29%     (2.80%

Comparative Index (reflects no deduction for expenses or taxes)

    

MSCI Emerging Markets Index (Net)

     (18.42%     (6.11%

 

 

The after-tax figures reflect the highest individual federal income tax rates in effect during the period and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. The after-tax figures are shown for one share class only, and would be different for the other share classes. Your actual after-tax returns depend on your individual tax situation. In addition, after-tax returns are not relevant if you hold your fund shares through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan, IRA or other tax-advantaged account.

Investment adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited

Portfolio managers

Andrew Miller, Senior Portfolio Manager-Global Emerging Markets Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

Ginny Chong, Senior Portfolio Manager-Global Emerging Markets Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

Purchase and sale of fund shares

The fund is open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange is open.

You may invest directly in the fund by placing purchase, exchange and redemption orders through the fund’s transfer agent. Investors must contact the transfer agent by phone or in writing to obtain an account application. Investors may contact the transfer agent:

 

   

by telephone at 1-800-447-3332; or

 

   

by mail in writing at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Funds, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266.

When you place orders to purchase, exchange or redeem fund shares through Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Schwab) or another

 

 

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund     11   


Table of Contents

financial intermediary, you must follow Schwab’s or the other financial intermediary’s transaction procedures.

 

Name of class   

Minimum initial

fund investment

    

Subsequent

investment

 

Institutional

   $ 500,000         None   

Select

   $ 50,000         None   

Investor

   $ 100         None   

 

These minimums may be waived for certain investors or in the fund’s sole discretion.

Tax information

Dividends and capital gains distributions received from the fund will generally be taxable as ordinary income or capital gains, unless you are investing through an IRA, 401(k) or other tax-advantaged account.

Payments to financial intermediaries

If you purchase shares of the fund through a broker-dealer or other financial intermediary (such as a bank), the fund and its related companies may pay the intermediary for the sale of fund shares and related services. These payments may create a conflict of interest by influencing the broker-dealer or other financial intermediary and your salesperson to recommend the fund over another investment. Ask your salesperson or visit your financial intermediary’s website for more information.

 

 

12   Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund


Table of Contents
 

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

Ticker Symbol:    LIFNX

 

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term total return consistent with its value-oriented investment approach.

Fund fees and expenses

This table describes the fees and expenses you may pay if you buy and hold shares of the fund.

 

Shareholder fees (fees paid directly from your investment)  

Redemption fee (as a % of the amount sold or exchanged within 30 days of purchase)

     2.00   
  
Annual fund operating expenses (expenses that you pay each year
as a % of the value of your investment)
 

Management fees

     0.60   

Distribution (12b-1) fees

     None   

Other expenses

     0.11   
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses 1

     0.71   
  

 

 

 

 

1  

The investment adviser has agreed to limit the total annual fund operating expenses (excluding interest, taxes, and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 0.75% until at least July 30, 2014. During this term, the agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the fund’s Board of Trustees. Any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by the fund to the investment adviser during the next two fiscal years to the extent that the repayment will not cause the fund’s total annual fund operating expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the agreement) during the respective year. The investment adviser may, but is not required to, extend the agreement for additional years.

 

Example

This example is intended to help you compare the cost of investing in the fund with the cost of investing in other mutual funds. The example assumes that you invest $10,000 in the fund for the time periods indicated and then redeem all of your shares at the end of those time periods. The example also assumes that your investment has a 5% return each year and that the fund’s operating expenses remain the same. The one-year figure is based on total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction. The expenses would be the same whether you stayed in the fund or sold your shares at the end of each period. Your actual costs may be higher or lower.

Expenses on a $10,000 investment
1 year   3 years   5 years   10 years
$73   $277   $395   $883

 

 

Portfolio turnover

The fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction costs and may result in higher taxes when fund shares are held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in the annual fund operating expenses or in the example, affect the fund’s performance. During the most recent fiscal year, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 68% of the average value of its portfolio.

Principal investment strategies

The fund invests primarily in fixed income securities that may also provide the potential for capital appreciation. The fund is an international fund that invests primarily in issuers that are organized, have a majority of their assets or derive most of their operating income outside of the United States. As such, it may invest primarily in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. Under normal circumstances, the fund intends to invest in securities which are denominated in foreign currencies. Securities of issuers within a given country may be denominated in the currency of such country, in the currency of another country or in multinational currency units, such as the euro. The fund will attempt to achieve its objective by investing in a broad range of fixed income securities, including debt obligations of governments, their agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions and companies. They will generally be rated, at the time of investment, BBB or better by S&P or Moody’s or, if unrated, are deemed to be of comparable quality by the subadviser. The fund may invest up to 5% of its assets (determined at time of purchase) in fixed-income securities rated below investment grade (sometimes called junk bonds), including government securities as discussed below. It is anticipated that no more than 25% of the fund’s assets (determined at time of purchase) will be invested in corporate debt obligations under normal circumstances.

The fund may invest up to 5% of its assets (determined at time of purchase) in emerging markets. The fund is considered “non-diversified”, which means that it may invest in the securities of relatively few issuers.

 

 

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund     13   


Table of Contents

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets in fixed income securities.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is oriented to country selection and is value driven. In selecting fixed income instruments for the fund, the subadviser identifies those countries’ fixed income markets that it believes will provide the United States domiciled investor the highest yield over a market cycle while also offering the opportunity for capital gain and currency appreciation. The subadviser conducts extensive fundamental research on a global basis, and it is through this effort that attractive fixed income markets are selected for investment. The core of the fundamental research effort is a value-oriented prospective real yield approach which looks at today’s yield in each market and subtracts from it forecasted inflation for the next two years to identify value as a forward looking potential real yield. Comparisons of the values of different possible investments are then made. The higher the prospective real yield the higher the relative allocation and conversely the lower the prospective real yield the lower the allocation or even a zero allocation.

The fund may also invest in zero coupon bonds, and in the debt securities of supranational entities denominated in any currency. The fund also may invest in securities issued by the U.S. Government or its agencies and instrumentalities such as Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The fund may actively carry on hedging activities, and may utilize a wide range of derivative instruments, including options, futures contracts and related options, and forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with its portfolio securities. This hedging may be in the form of cross hedging. Hedging and cross hedging may be used to identify value opportunities in the currency markets. The fund may also use derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

It is anticipated that the average weighted maturity of the fund will be in the three- to 10-year range. If the subadviser anticipates a declining interest rate environment, the average weighted maturity may be extended beyond 10 years. Conversely, if the subadviser anticipates a rising rate environment, the average weighted maturity may be shortened to less than three years.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and may increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money. The fund’s principal risks include:

Market risk. Bond markets rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. Poor bond selection or a focus on a particular region may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Non-diversification risk. The fund is non-diversified and, as such, may invest a greater percentage of its assets in the securities of a single issuer than a fund that is diversified. A non-diversified fund is more susceptible to risks associated with a single economic, political or regulatory occurrence than a diversified fund.

Interest rate risk. Interest rates will rise and fall over time. During periods when interest rates are low, the fund’s yield and total return also may be low. The longer the fund’s duration, the more sensitive to interest rate movements its share price is likely to be.

Credit risk. The fund is subject to the risk that a decline in the credit quality of a portfolio investment could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio investment fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Securities rated below investment grade (junk bonds) involve greater risk of price declines than investment grade securities due to actual or perceived changes in the issuer’s creditworthiness.

Prepayment and extension risk. The fund’s investments are subject to the risk that the securities may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower-than-market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price.

Foreign investment risk. The fund’s investments in securities of foreign issuers may involve certain risks that are greater than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions; changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges); differing accounting, auditing, financial reporting and legal standards and practices; differing securities market structures; and higher transaction costs. These risks may be heightened in connection with investments in emerging markets.

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Such countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. In addition, the financial

 

 

14   Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund


Table of Contents

stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries.

Currency risk. The fund’s investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies may involve risks that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar.

Derivatives risk. The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments and could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested. In addition, investments in derivatives may involve leverage, which means a small percentage of assets invested in derivatives can have a disproportionately larger impact on the fund.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities.

Liquidity risk. A particular investment may be difficult to purchase or sell. The fund may be unable to sell illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price.

Securities lending risk. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent.

Your investment in the fund is not a bank deposit and is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency.

For more information on the risks of investing in the fund please see the “Fund details” section in the prospectus.

Performance

The bar chart below shows how the fund’s investment results have varied from year to year, and the following table shows how the fund’s average annual total returns for various periods compared to that of an index. This information provides some indication of the risks of investing in the fund. All figures assume distributions were reinvested. Keep in mind that future performance (both before and after taxes) may differ from past performance. For current performance information, please see www.laudus.com/prospectus . On July 29, 2009, the Investor Share class, Select Share class and Institutional Share class were combined into a single class of shares of the fund, and the fund no longer offers multiple classes of shares. The performance history of the fund is that of the fund’s former Institutional Shares. Accordingly, the past performance information of the fund’s former Institutional Shares is shown below.

Annual total returns (%) as of 12/31

 

LOGO

Best quarter:  11.42 Q1 2008

Worst quarter:  (5.69%) Q2 2008

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and pre-tax) as of 6/30/2012: 1.44%

 

Average annual total returns (%) as of 12/31/11  
       1 year     

Since

Inception

(11/2/07)

 

Before taxes

     3.21%         7.19%   

After taxes on distributions

     1.45%         5.93%   

After taxes on distributions and sale of shares

     2.08%         5.44%   

Comparative Index (reflects no deduction for expenses or taxes)

     

Citigroup non-U.S. Dollar World Government Bond Index

     5.17%         6.31%   

The after-tax figures reflect the highest individual federal income tax rates in effect during the period and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. Your actual after-tax returns depend on your individual tax situation. In addition, after-tax returns are not relevant if you hold your fund shares through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan, IRA or other tax-advantaged account.

Investment adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited

Portfolio managers

Christopher Moth, Director and Chief Investment Officer for Global Fixed Income and Currency of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

David Wakefield, Senior Portfolio Manager-Global Fixed Income Team of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since its inception.

Matt Day, Portfolio Manager of the subadviser, has been a portfolio manager of the fund since 2012.

Purchase and sale of fund shares

The fund may close to investors when net cash flows into the fund total $1 billion. The fund is open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange is open. The minimum initial

 

 

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund     15   


Table of Contents

investment is $100 and there is no subsequent investment minimum. The minimum may be waived for certain investors or in the fund’s sole discretion.

You may invest directly in the fund by placing purchase, exchange and redemption orders through the fund’s transfer agent. Investors must contact the transfer agent by phone or in writing to obtain an account application. Investors may contact the transfer agent:

 

   

by telephone at 1-800-447-3332; or

 

   

by mail in writing at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Funds, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266.

When you place orders to purchase, exchange or redeem fund shares through Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Schwab) or another financial intermediary, you must follow Schwab’s or the other financial intermediary’s transaction procedures.

Tax information

Dividends and capital gains distributions received from the fund will generally be taxable as ordinary income or capital gains, unless you are investing through an IRA, 401(k) or other tax-advantaged account.

Payments to financial intermediaries

If you purchase shares of the fund through a broker-dealer or other financial intermediary (such as a bank), the fund and its related companies may pay the intermediary for the sale of fund shares and related services. These payments may create a conflict of interest by influencing the broker-dealer or other financial intermediary and your salesperson to recommend the fund over another investment. Ask your salesperson or visit your financial intermediary’s website for more information.

 

 

16   Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund


Table of Contents

Fund details

Investment objectives, strategies and risks

The following is a description of the investment objectives, investment strategies and principal risks of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund and Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund. Except as explicitly described otherwise, the investment objective and policies of each of the funds may be changed without shareholder approval.

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

The fund’s investment objective is not fundamental, and therefore, may be changed by the fund’s Board of Trustees without shareholder approval.

Investment strategies

The fund pursues its investment objective primarily by investing in equity securities of non-U.S. large capitalization issuers, including the securities of emerging market companies, that, in the subadviser’s opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the subadviser. Normally, the fund will invest primarily in common stocks. The fund may purchase securities of non-U.S. issuers directly or indirectly in the form of American, European or Global depositary receipts or other securities representing underlying shares of non-U.S. issuers. The fund may also purchase other investment funds, including, but not limited to, registered funds, including exchange-traded funds (ETFs), unregistered funds and real estate investment trusts (REITs).

For purposes of investments to be made by the fund, large capitalization companies are currently defined by the subadviser to mean issuers that have a market capitalization of more than $6.5 billion at the time of purchase. This level is subject to market movements and is regularly reviewed by the subadviser. Typically, the fund invests in securities of approximately 30-40 companies.

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is primarily oriented to individual stock selection and is value driven. In selecting stocks for the fund, the subadviser identifies those stocks that it believes will provide capital appreciation over a market cycle, taking into consideration movements in the price of the individual security and the impact of currency fluctuation on a United States domiciled, dollar-based investor. The subadviser conducts fundamental research on a global basis in order to identify securities that, in the subadviser’s opinion, have the potential for long-term capital appreciation. This research effort generally centers on a value-oriented dividend discount methodology with respect to individual securities and market analysis that isolates value across country boundaries. The approach focuses on future anticipated dividends and discounts the value of those dividends back to what they would be worth if they were being received today. In addition, the analysis typically includes a comparison of the values and current market prices of different possible investments. The subadviser’s general management strategy emphasizes long-term holding of securities, although securities may be sold in the subadviser’s discretion without regard to the length of time they have been held.

Investments will be made mainly in marketable securities of companies located in developed countries including but not limited to Australia, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. The fund may also invest in securities of companies located in emerging countries.

The fund considers an “emerging country” to be any country except the United States, Canada, and those in the MSCI EAFE Index. In considering possible emerging countries in which the fund may invest, the subadviser places particular emphasis on certain factors, such as economic conditions (including growth trends, inflation rates and trade balances), regulatory and currency controls, accounting standards and political and social conditions.

Currency considerations carry a special risk for a portfolio of international securities. The fund may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. Securities of issuers within a given country may be denominated in the currency of another country or in multinational currency units, including the euro. The subadviser primarily uses a purchasing power parity approach to evaluate currency risk. In this regard, the fund may carry out hedging activities and may invest in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with the purchase of individual securities denominated in a particular currency. Under normal circumstances, hedging is undertaken defensively back into the base currency of the fund.

 

Fund details     17   


Table of Contents

The fund may also invest in debt securities issued by governments or by their agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions, or by corporate entities, all of which may be high-yield, high-risk fixed income securities rated below investment-grade (sometimes called junk bonds) or, if unrated, considered to be of equivalent quality by the subadviser. In addition, for temporary defensive purposes, the fund may invest in high-quality debt instruments.

The fund may invest in derivative instruments, such as futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions. The turnover rate may also be affected by cash requirements from redemptions of the fund’s shares.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money.

Market risk. Stock and bond markets and the values of the securities owned by the fund rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. The subadviser applies its own investment techniques and risk analyses in making investment decisions for the fund, but there can be no guarantee that they will produce the desired results. These risks may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. Individual companies may report poor results or be negatively affected by industry and/or economic trends and developments. The prices of securities issued by such companies may suffer a decline in response. In addition, the equity market tends to move in cycles which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

Large-cap risk. Many of the risks of this fund are associated with its investments in the large-cap segments of the stock market. Large-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. During a period when large-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — bonds or small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s performance also will lag those investments.

Foreign investment risk. Investments in securities of foreign issuers involve certain risks that are more significant than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions, or changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges). In certain countries, legal remedies available to investors may be more limited than those available with respect to investments in the United States. The securities of some foreign companies may be less liquid and at times more volatile than securities of comparable U.S. companies. A fund with foreign investments may also experience more rapid or extreme changes in value than a fund that invests solely in securities of U.S. companies because the securities markets of many foreign countries are relatively small, with a limited number of companies representing a small number of industries. There also is the risk that the cost of buying, selling, and holding foreign securities, including brokerage, tax, and custody costs, may be higher than those involved in domestic transactions.

Foreign government securities can involve a high degree of risk. The governmental entity that controls the repayment of sovereign debt may not be able or willing to repay the principal and/or interest when due in accordance with the terms of the debt. A governmental entity’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest due in a timely manner may be affected by, among other factors, its cash flow situation, the extent of its foreign reserves, the availability of sufficient foreign exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the governmental entity’s policy toward the International Monetary Fund, and the political constraints to which a governmental entity may be subject. Governmental entities also may depend on expected disbursements from foreign governments, multilateral agencies and others to reduce principal and interest arrearages on their debt.

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Emerging market countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. It is sometimes difficult to obtain and enforce court judgments in such countries and there is often a greater potential for nationalization and/or expropriation of assets by the government of an emerging market country. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market

 

18   Fund details


Table of Contents

countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries, which may be magnified by currency fluctuations relative to the U.S. dollar.

Currency risk. As a result of its investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies, the fund will be subject to currency risk. This is the risk that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar, or, in the case of hedging positions, that the U.S. Dollar will decline in value relative to the currency hedged. In either event, the dollar value of an investment in the fund would be adversely affected. Currency exchange rates may fluctuate in response to factors extrinsic to that country’s economy, which makes the forecasting of currency market movements extremely difficult. Currency rates in foreign countries may fluctuate significantly over short periods of time for a number of reasons, including changes in interest rates, intervention (or failure to intervene) by U.S. or foreign governments, central banks or supranational entities such as the International Monetary Fund, or by the imposition of currency controls or other political developments in the United States or abroad. These can result in losses to the fund if it is unable to deliver or receive currency or funds in settlement of obligations and could also cause hedges it has entered into to be rendered useless, resulting in full currency exposure as well as incurring transaction costs. Forward contracts on foreign currencies are not traded on exchanges; rather, a bank or dealer will act as agent or as principal in order to make or take future delivery of a specified lot of a particular currency for the fund’s account. The fund is subject to the risk of a principal’s failure, inability or refusal to perform with respect to such contracts.

Derivatives risk. Examples of derivatives are options, futures, options on futures, swaps and warrants. An option is the right to buy or sell an instrument at a specific price before a specific date. A future is an agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specific price on a specific day. A swap is an agreement whereby two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities and a predetermined amount. A credit default swap is an agreement in which the seller agrees to make a payment to the buyer in the event of a specified credit event in exchange for a fixed payment or series of fixed payments. A warrant is a security that gives the holder the right, but not the obligation, to subscribe for newly created equity issues of the issuing company or a related company at a fixed price either on a certain date or during a set period. Changes in the value of a warrant do not necessarily correspond to changes in the value of its underlying security. The price of a warrant may be more volatile than the price of its underlying security, and a warrant may offer greater potential for capital appreciation as well as capital loss. Warrants do not entitle a holder to dividends or voting rights with respect to the underlying security and do not represent any rights in the assets of the issuing company.

The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments. Certain of these risks, such as liquidity risk, credit risk, leverage risk, market risk and management risk, are discussed elsewhere in this section. The fund’s use of derivatives is also subject to lack of availability risk, valuation risk, correlation risk and tax risk. Lack of availability risk is the risk that suitable derivative transactions may not be available in all circumstances for risk management or other purposes. Valuation risk is the risk that a particular derivative may be valued incorrectly. Correlation risk is the risk that changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index. Tax risk is the risk that the use of derivatives may cause the fund to realize higher amounts of short-term capital gain. These risks could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested.

Interest rate risk. The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that interest rates rise and fall over time. As with any investment whose yield reflects current interest rates, the fund’s yield will change over time. During periods when interest rates are low, the fund’s yield (and total return) also may be low. When interest rates rise, bond prices usually fall which could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The longer the fund’s duration, the more sensitive to interest rate movements its share price is likely to be.

Credit risk. The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that a decline in the credit quality of a portfolio investment could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio investment or the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Securities rated below investment-grade (junk bonds) involve greater risks of default or downgrade and are more volatile than investment-grade securities. Below investment-grade securities involve greater risk of price declines than investment-grade securities due to actual or perceived changes in an issuer’s creditworthiness. In addition, issuers of below investment-grade securities may be more susceptible than other issuers to economic downturns. Such securities are subject to the risk that the issuer may not be able to pay interest or dividends and ultimately to repay principal upon maturity. Discontinuation of these payments could substantially adversely affect the market value of the securities.

Prepayment and extension risk. The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that the securities may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower-than-market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price. In addition, rising interest rates tend to extend the duration of certain fixed income securities, making them more sensitive to changes in interest rates. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, the fund may exhibit additional volatility. This is known as extension risk. When interest rates decline, borrowers may pay off their fixed income securities sooner than expected. This can reduce the returns of the fund because the fund will have to reinvest that money at the lower prevailing interest rates. This is known as prepayment risk.

 

Fund details     19   


Table of Contents

Convertible securities risk. A convertible security is a bond, debenture, note, preferred stock or other security that may be converted into or exercised for a prescribed amount of common stock at a specified time and price. Convertible securities provide an opportunity for equity participation, with the potential for a higher dividend or interest yield and lower price volatility compared to common stock. The value of a convertible security is influenced by changes in interest rates, with investment value declining as interest rates increase and increasing as interest rates decline, and the credit standing of the issuer. The price of a convertible security will also normally vary in some proportion to changes in the price of the underlying common stock because of the conversion or exercise feature.

Securities lending risk. The fund may lend its portfolio securities to brokers, dealers and other financial institutions provided a number of conditions are satisfied, including that the loan is fully collateralized. When the fund lends portfolio securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned, and the fund also will receive a fee or interest on the collateral. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent. The fund will also bear the risk of any decline in value of securities acquired with cash collateral. The fund may pay lending fees to a party arranging the loan.

Exchange traded fund (ETF) risk. The fund may purchase shares of ETFs to gain exposure to a particular portion of the market while awaiting an opportunity to purchase securities directly. When the fund invests in an ETF, in addition to directly bearing the expenses associated with its own operations, it will bear a pro rata portion of the ETF’s expenses. Therefore, it may be more costly to own an ETF than to own the underlying securities directly. In addition, while the risks of owning shares of an ETF generally reflect the risks of owning the underlying securities the ETF is designed to track, lack of liquidity in an ETF can result in its value being more volatile than the underlying portfolio securities.

REITs risk. The fund’s investments in REITs will be subject to the risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate. Risks commonly associated with the direct ownership of real estate include fluctuations in the value of underlying properties, defaults by borrowers or tenants, possible lack of availability of mortgage funds or other limits to accessing the credit or capital markets, increases in property taxes and operating expenses, changes in zoning laws, overbuilding, extended vacancies of properties, changes in interest rates and risks related to general or local economic conditions. In addition to the risks associated with investing in securities of real estate companies and real estate related companies, REITs are subject to certain additional risks. Equity REITs may be affected by changes in the value of the underlying properties owned by the trusts, and mortgage REITs may be affected by the quality of any credit extended. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills and may have their investments in relatively few properties, or in a small geographic area or a single property type. REITs are also subject to heavy cash flow dependency, defaults by borrowers and self-liquidation. In addition, REITs could possibly fail to qualify for tax free pass-through of income under the Internal Revenue Code. The failure of a company to qualify as a REIT under federal tax law may have adverse consequences to the fund. In addition, REITs have their own expenses and the fund will bear a proportionate share of those expenses.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

Liquidity risk. Liquidity risk exists when particular investments are difficult to purchase or sell. The market for certain investments may become illiquid due to specific adverse changes in the conditions of a particular issuer or under adverse market or economic conditions independent of the issuer. The fund’s investments in illiquid securities may reduce the returns of the fund because it may be unable to sell the illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price. Further, transactions in illiquid securities may entail transaction costs that are higher than those for transactions in liquid securities.

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

The fund’s investment objective is not fundamental, and therefore, may be changed by the fund’s Board of Trustees without shareholder approval.

Investment strategies

The fund pursues its investment objective primarily by investing in equity securities of both U.S. and non-U.S. issuers, including the securities of emerging market companies, that, in the subadviser’s opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the subadviser. Normally, the fund will invest primarily in common stocks. The fund may purchase securities of non-U.S. issuers directly or indirectly in the form of American, European or Global depositary receipts or other securities representing underlying shares of non-U.S. issuers. The fund may also purchase other investment funds, including, but not limited to, registered funds, including exchange-traded funds (ETFs), unregistered funds and real estate investment trusts (REITs).

 

20   Fund details


Table of Contents

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is primarily oriented to individual stock selection and is value driven. In selecting stocks for the fund, the subadviser identifies those stocks that it believes will provide capital appreciation over a market cycle, taking into consideration movements in the price of the individual security and the impact of currency fluctuation on a United States domiciled, dollar-based investor. The subadviser conducts fundamental research on a global basis in order to identify securities that, in the subadviser’s opinion, have the potential for long-term capital appreciation. This research effort generally centers on a value-oriented dividend discount methodology with respect to individual securities and market analysis that isolates value across country boundaries. The approach focuses on future anticipated dividends and discounts the value of those dividends back to what they would be worth if they were being received today. In addition, the analysis typically includes a comparison of the values and current market prices of different possible investments. The subadviser’s general management strategy emphasizes long-term holding of securities, although securities may be sold in the subadviser’s discretion without regard to the length of time they have been held.

Investments will be made mainly in marketable securities of companies located in developed countries including but not limited to Australia, Belgium, Canada, Finland, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Ireland, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. The fund may also invest in securities of companies located in emerging countries.

The fund considers an “emerging country” to be any country, except the United States, Canada, and those in the MSCI EAFE Index. In considering possible emerging countries in which the fund may invest, the subadviser places particular emphasis on certain factors, such as economic conditions (including growth trends, inflation rates and trade balances), regulatory and currency controls, accounting standards and political and social conditions.

Currency considerations carry a special risk for a portfolio of global securities. The fund may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. Securities of issuers within a given country may be denominated in the currency of another country or in multinational currency units, including the euro. The subadviser primarily uses a purchasing power parity approach to evaluate currency risk. In this regard, the fund may carry out hedging activities, and may invest in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with the purchase of individual securities denominated in a particular currency. Under normal circumstances, hedging is undertaken defensively back into the base currency of the fund.

The fund may also invest in debt securities issued by governments or by their agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions, or by corporate entities, all of which may be high-yield, high-risk fixed income securities rated below investment-grade (sometimes called junk bonds), or, if unrated, considered to be of equivalent quality by the subadviser. In addition, for temporary defensive purposes, the fund may invest in high-quality debt instruments.

The fund may invest in derivative instruments, such as futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions. The turnover rate may also be affected by cash requirements from redemptions of the fund’s shares.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money.

Market risk. Stock and bond markets and the values of the securities owned by the fund rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. The subadviser applies its own investment techniques and risk analyses in making investment decisions for the fund, but there can be no guarantee that they will produce the desired results. These risks may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. Individual companies may report poor results or be negatively affected by industry and/or economic trends and developments. The prices of securities issued by such companies may suffer a decline in response. In addition, the equity market tends to move in cycles which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

 

Fund details     21   


Table of Contents

Large- and mid-cap risk. Both large- and mid-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. However, stocks of mid-cap companies tend to be more volatile than those of large-cap companies because mid-cap companies tend to be more susceptible to adverse business or economic events than larger more established companies. During a period when large- and mid-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s performance could be reduced to the extent its portfolio is holding large-or mid-cap stocks.

Small-cap risk. Historically, small-cap stocks have been riskier than large-and mid-cap stocks. Stock prices of smaller companies may be based in substantial part on future expectations rather than current achievements and may move sharply, especially during market upturns and downturns. Small-cap companies themselves may be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic events than larger, more established companies. In addition, smaller companies may have limited financial resources, product lines and markets, and their securities may trade less frequently and in more limited volumes than the securities of larger companies. Further, smaller companies may have less publicly available information and, when available, it may be inaccurate or incomplete. During a period when small-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — large-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s performance could be reduced to the extent its portfolio is holding small-cap stocks.

Foreign investment risk. Investments in securities of foreign issuers involve certain risks that are more significant than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions, or changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges). In certain countries, legal remedies available to investors may be more limited than those available with respect to investments in the United States. The securities of some foreign companies may be less liquid and at times more volatile than securities of comparable U.S. companies. A fund with foreign investments may also experience more rapid or extreme changes in value than a fund that invests solely in securities of U.S. companies because the securities markets of many foreign countries are relatively small, with a limited number of companies representing a small number of industries. There also is the risk that the cost of buying, selling, and holding foreign securities, including brokerage, tax, and custody costs, may be higher than those involved in domestic transactions.

Foreign government securities can involve a high degree of risk. The governmental entity that controls the repayment of sovereign debt may not be able or willing to repay the principal and/or interest when due in accordance with the terms of the debt. A governmental entity’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest due in a timely manner may be affected by, among other factors, its cash flow situation, the extent of its foreign reserves, the availability of sufficient foreign exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the governmental entity’s policy toward the International Monetary Fund, and the political constraints to which a governmental entity may be subject. Governmental entities also may depend on expected disbursements from foreign governments, multilateral agencies and others to reduce principal and interest arrearages on their debt.

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Emerging market countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. It is sometimes difficult to obtain and enforce court judgments in such countries and there is often a greater potential for nationalization and/or expropriation of assets by the government of an emerging market country. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries, which may be magnified by currency fluctuations relative to the U.S. dollar.

Currency risk. As a result of its investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies, the fund will be subject to currency risk. This is the risk that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar, or, in the case of hedging positions, that the U.S. Dollar will decline in value relative to the currency hedged. In either event, the dollar value of an investment in the fund would be adversely affected. Currency exchange rates may fluctuate in response to factors extrinsic to that country’s economy, which makes the forecasting of currency market movements extremely difficult. Currency rates in foreign countries may fluctuate significantly over short periods of time for a number of reasons, including changes in interest rates, intervention (or failure to intervene) by U.S. or foreign governments, central banks or supranational entities such as the International Monetary Fund, or by the imposition of currency controls or other political developments in the United States or abroad. These can result in losses to the fund if it is unable to deliver or receive currency or funds in settlement of obligations and could also cause hedges it has entered into to be rendered useless, resulting in full currency exposure as well as incurring transaction costs. Forward contracts on foreign currencies are not traded on exchanges; rather, a bank or dealer will act as agent or as principal in order to make or take future delivery of a specified lot of a particular currency for the fund’s account. The fund is subject to the risk of a principal’s failure, inability or refusal to perform with respect to such contracts.

Derivatives risk. The fund may use derivatives to enhance returns or hedge against market declines. Examples of derivatives are options, futures, options on futures, swaps and warrants. An option is the right to buy or sell an instrument at a specific price before a specific date. A future is an agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specific price on a specific day. A swap is an agreement whereby two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities and a predetermined amount. A

 

22   Fund details


Table of Contents

credit default swap is an agreement in which the seller agrees to make a payment to the buyer in the event of a specified credit event in exchange for a fixed payment or series of fixed payments. A warrant is a security that gives the holder the right, but not the obligation, to subscribe for newly created equity issues of the issuing company or a related company at a fixed price either on a certain date or during a set period. Changes in the value of a warrant do not necessarily correspond to changes in the value of its underlying security. The price of a warrant may be more volatile than the price of its underlying security, and a warrant may offer greater potential for capital appreciation as well as capital loss. Warrants do not entitle a holder to dividends or voting rights with respect to the underlying security and do not represent any rights in the assets of the issuing company.

The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments. Certain of these risks, such as liquidity risk, credit risk, leverage risk, market risk and management risk, are discussed elsewhere in this section. The fund’s use of derivatives is also subject to lack of availability risk, valuation risk, correlation risk and tax risk. Lack of availability risk is the risk that suitable derivative transactions may not be available in all circumstances for risk management or other purposes. Valuation risk is the risk that a particular derivative may be valued incorrectly. Correlation risk is the risk that changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index. Tax risk is the risk that the use of derivatives may cause the fund to realize higher amounts of short-term capital gain. These risks could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested.

Interest rate risk. The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that interest rates rise and fall over time. As with any investment whose yield reflects current interest rates, the fund’s yield will change over time. During periods when interest rates are low, the fund’s yield (and total return) also may be low. When interest rates rise, bond prices usually fall which could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The longer the fund’s duration, the more sensitive to interest rate movements its share price is likely to be.

Credit risk. The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that a decline in the credit quality of a portfolio investment could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio investment or the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Securities rated below investment-grade (junk bonds) involve greater risks of default or downgrade and are more volatile than investment-grade securities. Below investment-grade securities involve greater risk of price declines than investment-grade securities due to actual or perceived changes in an issuer’s creditworthiness. In addition, issuers of below investment-grade securities may be more susceptible than other issuers to economic downturns. Such securities are subject to the risk that the issuer may not be able to pay interest or dividends and ultimately to repay principal upon maturity. Discontinuation of these payments could substantially adversely affect the market value of the securities.

Prepayment and extension risk. The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that the securities may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower-than-market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price. In addition, rising interest rates tend to extend the duration of certain fixed income securities, making them more sensitive to changes in interest rates. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, the fund may exhibit additional volatility. This is known as extension risk. When interest rates decline, borrowers may pay off their fixed income securities sooner than expected. This can reduce the returns of the fund because the fund will have to reinvest that money at the lower prevailing interest rates. This is known as prepayment risk.

Convertible securities risk. A convertible security is a bond, debenture, note, preferred stock or other security that may be converted into or exercised for a prescribed amount of common stock at a specified time and price. Convertible securities provide an opportunity for equity participation, with the potential for a higher dividend or interest yield and lower price volatility compared to common stock. The value of a convertible security is influenced by changes in interest rates, with investment value declining as interest rates increase and increasing as interest rates decline, and the credit standing of the issuer. The price of a convertible security will also normally vary in some proportion to changes in the price of the underlying common stock because of the conversion or exercise feature.

Securities lending risk. The fund may lend its portfolio securities to brokers, dealers and other financial institutions provided a number of conditions are satisfied, including that the loan is fully collateralized. When the fund lends portfolio securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned, and the fund also will receive a fee or interest on the collateral. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent. The fund will also bear the risk of any decline in value of securities acquired with cash collateral. The fund may pay lending fees to a party arranging the loan.

Exchange traded fund (ETF) risk. The fund may purchase shares of ETFs to gain exposure to a particular portion of the market while awaiting an opportunity to purchase securities directly. When the fund invests in an ETF, in addition to directly bearing the expenses associated with its own operations, it will bear a pro rata portion of the ETF’s expenses. Therefore, it may be more costly to own an ETF than to own the underlying securities directly. In addition, while the risks of owning shares of an ETF generally reflect the risks of owning the underlying securities the ETF is designed to track, lack of liquidity in an ETF can result in its value being more volatile than the underlying portfolio securities.

 

Fund details     23   


Table of Contents

REITs risk. The fund’s investments in REITs will be subject to the risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate. Risks commonly associated with the direct ownership of real estate include fluctuations in the value of underlying properties, defaults by borrowers or tenants, possible lack of availability of mortgage funds or other limits to accessing the credit or capital markets, increases in property taxes and operating expenses, changes in zoning laws, overbuilding, extended vacancies of properties, changes in interest rates and risks related to general or local economic conditions. In addition to the risks associated with investing in securities of real estate companies and real estate related companies, REITs are subject to certain additional risks. Equity REITs may be affected by changes in the value of the underlying properties owned by the trusts, and mortgage REITs may be affected by the quality of any credit extended. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills and may have their investments in relatively few properties, or in a small geographic area or a single property type. REITs are also subject to heavy cash flow dependency, defaults by borrowers and self-liquidation. In addition, REITs could possibly fail to qualify for tax free pass-through of income under the Internal Revenue Code. The failure of a company to qualify as a REIT under federal tax law may have adverse consequences to the fund. In addition, REITs have their own expenses, and the fund will bear a proportionate share of those expenses.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

Liquidity risk. Liquidity risk exists when particular investments are difficult to purchase or sell. The market for certain investments may become illiquid due to specific adverse changes in the conditions of a particular issuer or under adverse market or economic conditions independent of the issuer. The fund’s investments in illiquid securities may reduce the returns of the fund because it may be unable to sell the illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price. Further, transactions in illiquid securities may entail transaction costs that are higher than those for transactions in liquid securities.

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

The fund’s investment objective is not fundamental, and therefore, may be changed by the fund’s Board of Trustees without shareholder approval.

Investment strategies

The fund is an international fund and generally invests in large capitalization equity securities of emerging market companies, as described below, that, in the subadviser’s opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the subadviser. Normally, the fund will invest primarily in common stocks. The fund may also purchase other investment funds, including, but not limited to, registered funds, including exchange-traded funds (ETFs). The fund may purchase securities of non-U.S. issuers directly or indirectly in the form of American, European or Global depositary receipts or other securities representing underlying shares of non-U.S. issuers. The subadviser currently defines companies with large market capitalizations generally, as those with market capitalizations of $3.5 billion or more at the time of purchase. To the extent that the fund invests in convertible debt securities, those securities will be purchased on the basis of their equity characteristics, and ratings of those securities, if any, will not be an important factor in their selection. Typically, the fund invests in securities of approximately 35-45 companies.

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in the securities of emerging markets issuers. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is primarily oriented to individual stock selection and is value driven. In selecting stocks for the fund, the subadviser identifies those stocks that it believes will provide high total return over a market cycle, taking into consideration movements in the price of the individual security and the impact of currency fluctuation on a United States domiciled, dollar-based investor. The subadviser conducts fundamental research on a global basis in order to identify securities that, in the subadviser’s opinion, have the potential for long-term total return. This research effort generally centers on a value-oriented dividend discount methodology with respect to individual securities and market analysis that isolates value across country boundaries. The approach focuses on future anticipated dividends and discounts the value of those dividends back to what they would be worth if they were being received today. In addition, the analysis typically includes a comparison of the values and current market prices of different possible investments. The subadviser’s general management strategy emphasizes long-term holding of securities, although securities may be sold in the subadviser’s discretion without regard to the length of time they have been held.

The fund considers an “emerging country” to be any country except the United States, Canada, and those in the MSCI EAFE Index.

 

24   Fund details


Table of Contents

In considering possible emerging countries in which the fund may invest, the subadviser will place particular emphasis on factors such as economic conditions (including growth trends, inflation rates, and trade balances), regulatory and currency controls, accounting standards, and political and social conditions.

Although this is not an exclusive list, the subadviser considers an emerging country security to be one that is issued by a company that exhibits one or more of the following characteristics: (1) its principal securities trading market is in an emerging country, as defined above; (2) while traded in any market, alone or on a consolidated basis, the company derives 50% or more of its annual revenues or annual profits from either goods produced, sales made or services performed in emerging countries; (3) the company has 50% of more of its assets located in an emerging country; or (4) it is organized under the laws of, and has a principal office in, an emerging country. The subadviser determines eligibility based on publicly available information and inquiries made of the companies.

Currently, investing in many emerging countries is not feasible, or may, in the subadviser’s opinion, involve unacceptable political or governance risks. The fund focuses its investments in those emerging countries where the subadviser considers the economies to be developing strongly and where the markets are becoming more sophisticated.

The fund may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. Securities of issuers within a given country may be denominated in the currency of another country or in multinational currency units, including the euro. Currency considerations carry a special risk for a portfolio of international securities. The subadviser primarily uses a purchasing power parity approach to evaluate currency risk. In this regard, the fund may actively carry on hedging activities, and may invest in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with the purchase of individual securities denominated in a particular currency.

The fund may invest in derivative instruments, such as futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money.

Market risk. Stock markets and the value of the investments owned by the fund rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. The subadviser applies its own investment techniques and risk analyses in making investment decisions for the fund, but there can be no guarantee that they will produce the desired results. These risks may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. Individual companies may report poor results or be negatively affected by industry and/or economic trends and developments. The prices of securities issued by such companies may suffer a decline in response. In addition, the equity market tends to move in cycles which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

Large-cap risk. Many of the risks of this fund are associated with its investments in the large-cap segments of the stock market. Large-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. During a period when large-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — bonds or small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s performance also will lag those investments.

Foreign investment risk. Investments in securities of foreign issuers involve certain risks that are more significant than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions, or changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges). In certain countries, legal remedies available to investors may be more limited than those available with respect to investments in the United States. The securities of some foreign companies may be less liquid and at times more volatile than securities of comparable U.S. companies. A fund with foreign investments may also experience more rapid or extreme changes in value than a fund that invests solely in securities of U.S. companies because the securities markets of many foreign countries are relatively small, with a limited number of companies representing a small number of industries. There also is the risk that the cost of buying, selling, and holding foreign securities, including brokerage, tax, and custody costs, may be higher than those involved in domestic transactions.

 

Fund details     25   


Table of Contents

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Emerging market countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. It is sometimes difficult to obtain and enforce court judgments in such countries and there is often a greater potential for nationalization and/or expropriation of assets by the government of an emerging market country. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries, which may be magnified by currency fluctuations relative to the U.S. dollar.

Currency risk. As a result of its investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies, the fund will be subject to currency risk. This is the risk that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar, or, in the case of hedging positions, that the U.S. Dollar will decline in value relative to the currency hedged. In either event, the dollar value of an investment in the fund would be adversely affected. Currency exchange rates may fluctuate in response to factors extrinsic to that country’s economy, which makes the forecasting of currency market movements extremely difficult. Currency rates in foreign countries may fluctuate significantly over short periods of time for a number of reasons, including changes in interest rates, intervention (or failure to intervene) by U.S. or foreign governments, central banks or supranational entities such as the International Monetary Fund, or by the imposition of currency controls or other political developments in the United States or abroad. These can result in losses to the fund if it is unable to deliver or receive currency or funds in settlement of obligations and could also cause hedges it has entered into to be rendered useless, resulting in full currency exposure as well as incurring transaction costs. Forward contracts on foreign currencies are not traded on exchanges; rather, a bank or dealer will act as agent or as principal in order to make or take future delivery of a specified lot of a particular currency for the fund’s account. The fund is subject to the risk of a principal’s failure, inability or refusal to perform with respect to such contracts.

Derivatives risk. Examples of derivatives are options, futures, options on futures, swaps and warrants. An option is the right to buy or sell an instrument at a specific price before a specific date. A future is an agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specific price on a specific day. A swap is an agreement whereby two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities and a predetermined amount. A credit default swap is an agreement in which the seller agrees to make a payment to the buyer in the event of a specified credit event in exchange for a fixed payment or series of fixed payments. A warrant is a security that gives the holder the right, but not the obligation, to subscribe for newly created equity issues of the issuing company or a related company at a fixed price either on a certain date or during a set period. Changes in the value of a warrant do not necessarily correspond to changes in the value of its underlying security. The price of a warrant may be more volatile than the price of its underlying security, and a warrant may offer greater potential for capital appreciation as well as capital loss. Warrants do not entitle a holder to dividends or voting rights with respect to the underlying security and do not represent any rights in the assets of the issuing company.

The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments. Certain of these risks, such as liquidity risk, leverage risk, market risk and management risk, are discussed elsewhere in this section. The fund’s use of derivatives is also subject to credit risk, lack of availability risk, valuation risk, correlation risk and tax risk. Credit risk is the risk that the fund could lose money if the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Lack of availability risk is the risk that suitable derivative transactions may not be available in all circumstances for risk management or other purposes. Valuation risk is the risk that a particular derivative may be valued incorrectly. Correlation risk is the risk that changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index. Tax risk is the risk that the use of derivatives may cause the fund to realize higher amounts of short-term capital gain. These risks could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested.

Securities lending risk. The fund may lend its portfolio securities to brokers, dealers and other financial institutions provided a number of conditions are satisfied, including that the loan is fully collateralized. When the fund lends portfolio securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned, and the fund also will receive a fee or interest on the collateral. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral (if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent. The fund will also bear the risk of any decline in value of securities acquired with cash collateral. The fund may pay lending fees to a party arranging the loan.

Exchange traded fund (ETF) risk. The fund may purchase shares of ETFs to gain exposure to a particular portion of the market while awaiting an opportunity to purchase securities directly. When the fund invests in an ETF, in addition to directly bearing the expenses associated with its own operations, it will bear a pro rata portion of the ETF’s expenses. Therefore, it may be more costly to own an ETF than to own the underlying securities directly. In addition, while the risks of owning shares of an ETF generally reflect the risks of owning the underlying securities the ETF is designed to track, lack of liquidity in an ETF can result in its value being more volatile than the underlying portfolio securities.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

 

26   Fund details


Table of Contents

Convertible securities risk. A convertible security is a bond, debenture, note, preferred stock or other security that may be converted into or exercised for a prescribed amount of common stock at a specified time and price. Convertible securities provide an opportunity for equity participation, with the potential for a higher dividend or interest yield and lower price volatility compared to common stock. The value of a convertible security is influenced by changes in interest rates, with investment value declining as interest rates increase and increasing as interest rates decline, and the credit standing of the issuer. The price of a convertible security will also normally vary in some proportion to changes in the price of the underlying common stock because of the conversion or exercise feature.

Liquidity risk. Liquidity risk exists when particular investments are difficult to purchase or sell. The market for certain investments may become illiquid due to specific adverse changes in the conditions of a particular issuer or under adverse market or economic conditions independent of the issuer. The fund’s investments in illiquid securities may reduce the returns of the fund because it may be unable to sell the illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price. Further, transactions in illiquid securities may entail transaction costs that are higher than those for transactions in liquid securities.

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term total return consistent with its value-oriented investment approach.

The fund’s investment objective is not fundamental, and therefore, may be changed by the fund’s Board of Trustees without shareholder approval.

Investment strategies

The fund invests primarily in fixed income securities that may also provide the potential for capital appreciation. The fund is an international fund that invests primarily in issuers that are organized, have a majority of their assets or derive most of their operating income outside of the United States. As such, it may invest in securities issued in any currency and may hold foreign currency. Under normal circumstances, the fund intends to invest primarily in securities which are denominated in foreign currencies. Securities of issuers within a given country may be denominated in the currency of such country, in the currency of another country or in multinational currency units, such as the euro. The fund will attempt to achieve its objective by investing in a broad range of fixed income securities, including debt obligations of governments, their agencies, instrumentalities or political subdivisions and companies. They will generally be rated, at the time of investment, BBB or better by S&P or Moody’s or, if unrated, are deemed to be of comparable quality by the subadviser. The fund may invest up to 5% of its assets (determined at time of purchase) in fixed-income securities rated below investment grade (sometimes called junk bonds), including government securities as discussed below. The fund may invest up to 5% of its assets (determined at time of purchase) in emerging markets. The fund considers an “emerging country” to be any country except those in either the Citigroup Non-U.S. Dollar World Government Bond Index or the JP Morgan Government Bond Index Broad. It is anticipated that no more than 25% of the fund’s assets (determined at time of purchase) will be invested in corporate debt obligations under normal circumstances. The fund may also invest in sponsored or unsponsored American Depositary Receipts or European Depositary Receipts. While the fund may purchase securities of issuers in any foreign country, developed or developing, it is currently anticipated that the countries in which the fund may invest will include, but not be limited to, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Korea, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, United Kingdom and the United States.

The fund is considered “non-diversified”, which means that it may invest in the securities of relatively few issuers.

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets in fixed income securities. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy.

The subadviser’s approach in selecting investments for the fund is oriented to country selection and is value driven. In selecting fixed income instruments for the fund, the subadviser identifies those countries’ fixed income markets that it believes will provide the United States domiciled investor the highest yield over a market cycle while also offering the opportunity for capital gain and currency appreciation. The subadviser conducts extensive fundamental research on a global basis, and it is through this effort that attractive fixed income markets are selected for investment. The core of the fundamental research effort is a value-oriented prospective real yield approach which looks at today’s yield in each market and subtracts from it forecasted inflation for the next two years to identify value as a forward looking potential real yield. Comparisons of the values of different possible investments are then made. The higher the prospective real yield the higher the relative allocation and conversely the lower the prospective real yield the lower the allocation or even a zero allocation.

The fund may also invest in zero coupon bonds, and in the debt securities of supranational entities denominated in any currency. A supranational entity is an entity established or financially supported by the national governments of one or more countries to promote reconstruction or development. Examples of supranational entities include, among others, the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (more commonly known as the World Bank), the European Economic Community, the European Investment Bank, the

 

Fund details     27   


Table of Contents

Inter-American Development Bank, and the Asian Development Bank. For increased safety, the fund currently anticipates that a large percentage of its assets will be invested in foreign government securities and securities of supranational entities.

With respect to U.S. Government securities, the fund may invest in securities guaranteed as to the payment of principal and interest by the U.S. Government, and those of its agencies or instrumentalities which are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, such as Ginnie Mae. The fund also may invest in securities issued by the U.S. Government or its agencies and instrumentalities, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Currency considerations carry a special risk for a portfolio of international securities. The subadviser uses a purchasing power parity approach to evaluate currency risk. In this regard, the fund may actively carry on hedging activities, and may utilize a wide range of hedging instruments, including options, futures contracts and related options, and forward foreign currency exchange contracts to hedge currency risks associated with its portfolio securities. This hedging may be in the form of cross hedging where currency is the U.S. dollar. Hedging and cross hedging may be used to identify value opportunities in the currency markets.

It is anticipated that the average weighted maturity of the fund will be in the three- to 10-year range. If the subadviser anticipates a declining interest rate environment, the average weighted maturity may be extended beyond 10 years. Conversely, if the subadviser anticipates a rising rate environment, the average weighted maturity may be shortened to less than three years.

The fund may invest in derivative instruments, such as futures contracts. The fund typically uses derivatives as a substitute for taking a position in the underlying asset or as part of a strategy designed to reduce exposure to other risks. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

The fund may buy and sell portfolio securities actively. As a result, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate and transaction costs will rise, which may lower fund performance and increase the likelihood of capital gain distributions. The turnover rate may also be affected by cash requirements from redemptions of the fund’s shares.

For temporary defensive purposes, during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money.

Market risk. Bond markets and the values of the securities owned by the fund rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. The subadviser applies its own investment techniques and risk analyses in making investment decisions for the fund, but there can be no guarantee that they will produce the desired results. These risks may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Non-diversification risk. The fund is non-diversified and, as such, may invest a greater percentage of its assets in the securities in a single issuer than a fund that is diversified. A non-diversified fund is more susceptible to risks associated with a single economic, political or regulatory occurrence than a diversified fund.

Debt securities risk. Bond prices generally fall when interest rates rise. Bonds with longer maturities tend to be more sensitive to this risk. Fund performance also could be affected if an issuer or guarantor of a bond held by the fund fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Lower-quality bonds are considered speculative with respect to its issuer’s ability to make timely payments or otherwise honor its obligations. In addition, prices of lower-quality bonds tend to be more volatile than those of investment-grade bonds, and may fall based on bad news about the issuer, an industry or the overall economy. Mortgage- or asset-backed securities are subject to the risk that these bonds may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower than market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price. Also, bonds of foreign issuers may be more volatile than those of comparable bonds from U.S. issuers, for reasons ranging from limited issuer information to the risk of political upheaval. The fund’s use of mortgage dollar rolls could cause the fund to lose money if the price of the mortgage-backed securities sold fall below the agreed upon repurchase price, or if the counterparty is unable to honor the agreement.

Interest rate risk. The fund is subject to the risk that interest rates rise and fall over time. As with any investment whose yield reflects current interest rates, the fund’s yield will change over time. During periods when interest rates are low, the fund’s yield (and total return) also may be low. When interest rates rise, bond prices usually fall which could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The longer the fund’s duration, the more sensitive to interest rate movements its share price is likely to be.

Credit risk. The fund is subject to the risk that a decline in the credit quality of a portfolio investment could cause the fund’s share price to fall. Although the fund invests primarily in investment-grade securities, the fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio

 

28   Fund details


Table of Contents

investment or the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Securities rated below investment-grade (junk bonds) involve greater risks of default or downgrade and are more volatile than investment-grade securities. Below investment-grade securities involve greater risk of price declines than investment-grade securities due to actual or perceived changes in an issuer’s creditworthiness. In addition, issuers of below investment-grade securities may be more susceptible than other issuers to economic downturns. Such securities are subject to the risk that the issuer may not be able to pay interest or dividends and ultimately to repay principal upon maturity. Discontinuation of these payments could substantially adversely affect the market value of the securities.

Prepayment and extension risk. The fund’s investments are subject to the risk that the securities may be paid off earlier or later than expected. Either situation could cause the fund to hold securities paying lower-than-market rates of interest, which could hurt the fund’s yield or share price. In addition, rising interest rates tend to extend the duration of certain fixed income securities, making them more sensitive to changes in interest rates. As a result, in a period of rising interest rates, the fund may exhibit additional volatility. This is known as extension risk. When interest rates decline, borrowers may pay off their fixed income securities sooner than expected. This can reduce the returns of the fund because the fund will have to reinvest that money at the lower prevailing interest rates. This is known as prepayment risk.

U.S. Government securities credit risk. The fund may invest in securities that are guaranteed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government. The fund may also invest in securities that are not guaranteed or insured by the U.S. Government. Issuers of securities such as Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Student Loan Marketing Association and the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) are supported by limited lines of credit maintained by their issuers with the U.S. Treasury. Other securities, such as obligations issued by the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation, are supported solely by the credit of their issuer. There can be no assurance that the U.S. Government will provide financial support to securities of its agencies and instrumentalities if it is not obligated to do so under law. Therefore, the fund could lose money if an issuer or guarantor of these investments fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. Also, any government guarantees on securities the fund owns do not extend to shares of the fund themselves.

On September 7, 2008, the U.S. Treasury announced a federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, placing the two federal instrumentalities in conservatorship. The actions of the U.S. Treasury are intended to ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac maintain a positive net worth and meet their financial obligations, preventing mandatory triggering of receivership. No assurance can be given that the U.S. Treasury initiatives will be successful.

Foreign investment risk. Investments in securities of foreign issuers involve certain risks that are more significant than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions, or changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges). In certain countries, legal remedies available to investors may be more limited than those available with respect to investments in the United States. The securities of some foreign companies may be less liquid and at times more volatile than securities of comparable U.S. companies. A fund with foreign investments may also experience more rapid or extreme changes in value than a fund that invests solely in securities of U.S. companies because the securities markets of many foreign countries are relatively small, with a limited number of companies representing a small number of industries. There also is the risk that the cost of buying, selling, and holding foreign securities, including brokerage, tax, and custody costs, may be higher than those involved in domestic transactions.

Sovereign debt risk. Foreign government securities can involve a high degree of risk. The governmental entity that controls the repayment of sovereign debt may not be able or willing to repay the principal and/or interest when due in accordance with the terms of the debt. A governmental entity’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest due in a timely manner may be affected by, among other factors, its cash flow situation, the extent of its foreign reserves, the availability of sufficient foreign exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the governmental entity’s policy toward the International Monetary Fund, and the political constraints to which a governmental entity may be subject. Governmental entities also may depend on expected disbursements from foreign governments, multilateral agencies and others to reduce principal and interest arrearages on their debt.

Emerging markets risk. Emerging markets may be more likely to experience political turmoil or rapid changes in market or economic conditions than more developed countries. Emerging market countries often have less uniformity in accounting and reporting requirements, unreliable securities valuation and greater risk associated with the custody of securities. It is sometimes difficult to obtain and enforce court judgments in such countries and there is often a greater potential for nationalization and/or expropriation of assets by the government of an emerging market country. In addition, the financial stability of issuers (including governments) in emerging market countries may be more precarious than in other countries. As a result, there will tend to be an increased risk of price volatility associated with the fund’s investments in emerging market countries, which may be magnified by currency fluctuations relative to the U.S. dollar.

Currency risk. As a result of its investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies, the fund will be subject to currency risk. This is the risk that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. Dollar, or, in the case of hedging positions, that the U.S. Dollar will decline in value relative to the currency hedged. In either event, the dollar value of an investment in the

 

Fund details     29   


Table of Contents

fund would be adversely affected. Currency exchange rates may fluctuate in response to factors extrinsic to that country’s economy, which makes the forecasting of currency market movements extremely difficult. Currency rates in foreign countries may fluctuate significantly over short periods of time for a number of reasons, including changes in interest rates, intervention (or failure to intervene) by U.S. or foreign governments, central banks or supranational entities such as the International Monetary Fund, or by the imposition of currency controls or other political developments in the United States or abroad. These can result in losses to the fund if it is unable to deliver or receive currency or funds in settlement of obligations and could also cause hedges it has entered into to be rendered useless, resulting in full currency exposure as well as incurring transaction costs. Forward contracts on foreign currencies are not traded on exchanges; rather, a bank or dealer will act as agent or as principal in order to make or take future delivery of a specified lot of a particular currency for the fund’s account. The fund is subject to the risk of a principal’s failure, inability or refusal to perform with respect to such contracts.

Derivatives risk. Examples of derivatives are options, futures, options on futures, swaps and warrants. An option is the right to buy or sell an instrument at a specific price before a specific date. A future is an agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specific price on a specific day. A swap is an agreement whereby two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities and a predetermined amount. A credit default swap is an agreement in which the seller agrees to make a payment to the buyer in the event of a specified credit event in exchange for a fixed payment or series of fixed payments. A warrant is a security that gives the holder the right, but not the obligation, to subscribe for newly created equity issues of the issuing company or a related company at a fixed price either on a certain date or during a set period. Changes in the value of a warrant do not necessarily correspond to changes in the value of its underlying security. The price of a warrant may be more volatile than the price of its underlying security, and a warrant may offer greater potential for capital appreciation as well as capital loss. Warrants do not entitle a holder to dividends or voting rights with respect to the underlying security and do not represent any rights in the assets of the issuing company.

The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments. Certain of these risks, such as liquidity risk, credit risk, leverage risk, market risk and management risk, are discussed elsewhere in this section. The fund’s use of derivatives is also subject to lack of availability risk, valuation risk, correlation risk and tax risk. Lack of availability risk is the risk that suitable derivative transactions may not be available in all circumstances for risk management or other purposes. Valuation risk is the risk that a particular derivative may be valued incorrectly. Correlation risk is the risk that changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index. Tax risk is the risk that the use of derivatives may cause the fund to realize higher amounts of short-term capital gain. These risks could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested.

Leverage risk. Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

Liquidity risk. Liquidity risk exists when particular investments are difficult to purchase or sell. The market for certain investments may become illiquid due to specific adverse changes in the conditions of a particular issuer or under adverse market or economic conditions independent of the issuer. The fund’s investments in illiquid securities may reduce the returns of the fund because it may be unable to sell the illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price. Further, transactions in illiquid securities may entail transaction costs that are higher than those for transactions in liquid securities.

Convertible securities risk. A convertible security is a bond, debenture, note, preferred stock or other security that may be converted into or exercised for a prescribed amount of common stock at a specified time and price. Convertible securities provide an opportunity for equity participation, with the potential for a higher dividend or interest yield and lower price volatility compared to common stock. The value of a convertible security is influenced by changes in interest rates, with investment value declining as interest rates increase and increasing as interest rates decline, and the credit standing of the issuer. The price of a convertible security will also normally vary in some proportion to changes in the price of the underlying common stock because of the conversion or exercise feature.

Securities lending risk. The fund may lend its portfolio securities to brokers, dealers and other financial institutions provided a number of conditions are satisfied, including that the loan is fully collateralized. When the fund lends portfolio securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned, and the fund also will receive a fee or interest on the collateral. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent. The fund will also bear the risk of any decline in value of securities acquired with cash collateral. The fund may pay lending fees to a party arranging the loan.

 

30   Fund details


Table of Contents

Portfolio holdings

The funds may make various types of portfolio securities information available to shareholders. The funds generally post a detailed list of the securities held by each fund at www.laudus.com/prospectus (under “Portfolio Holdings”), as of the most recent calendar quarter-end. This list is generally updated approximately 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter remaining posted until at least the following calendar quarter. The funds also post in the “Analysis & Commentary” section of the website fund fact sheets containing certain summary portfolio attributes, including top ten holdings, approximately 20-30 days after the end of the calendar quarter. The funds may exclude any portion of these portfolio holdings from publication when deemed in the best interest of a fund. Further, information regarding the funds’ policy and procedures on the disclosure of portfolio securities information is available in the SAI. In addition, shareholders can learn more about the availability of portfolio securities information by calling the funds at 1-800-447-3332.

 

Fund details     31   


Table of Contents

Financial highli ghts

This section provides further details about the financial history of each share class of each fund for its period of operations. Certain information reflects financial results for a single fund share. “Total return” shows the percentage that an investor in a fund would have earned or lost during a given period, assuming all distributions were reinvested. The funds’ independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, audited these figures. Their full report is included in the funds’ annual report (see back cover).

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

 

Investor Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    6/17/08 1
3/31/09
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     7.73        7.52        5.43        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                

Net investment income (loss)

     0.26 2       0.16 2       0.18 2       0.07           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     (0.45     0.28        2.02        (4.59        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     (0.19     0.44        2.20        (4.52        

Less distributions:

                

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.30     (0.23     (0.11     (0.05        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.05                   (0.00 ) 3          
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.35     (0.23     (0.11     (0.05        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     7.19        7.73        7.52        5.43           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     (2.02     5.94        40.53        (45.31 ) 4          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                

Net operating expenses

     1.40        1.40        1.40        1.39 5,6          

Gross operating expenses

     1.63        1.63        1.60        2.78 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     3.49        2.19        2.47        2.46 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     35        33        14        8 4          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     1,048        1,009        403        168           
Select Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    6/17/08 1
3/31/09
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     7.75        7.53        5.44        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                

Net investment income (loss)

     0.26 2       0.21 2       0.18 2       0.12           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     (0.44     0.25        2.03        (4.63        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     (0.18     0.46        2.21        (4.51        

Less distributions:

                

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.32     (0.24     (0.12     (0.05        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.05                   (0.00 ) 3          
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.37     (0.24     (0.12     (0.05        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     7.20        7.75        7.53        5.44           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     (1.82     6.20        40.68        (45.16 ) 4          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                

Net operating expenses

     1.12        1.12        1.12        1.12 5          

Gross operating expenses

     1.40        1.36        1.31        3.10 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     3.51        2.86        2.43        2.22 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     35        33        14        8 4          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     938        542        458        90           

 

1  

Commencement of operations.

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Distribution from realized gains is less than 0.01.

 

4  

Not annualized.

 

5  

Annualized.

 

6  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.40% for the Investor Shares, if custody credits had not been included.

 

32   Financial highlights


Table of Contents

 

Institutional Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    6/17/08 1
3/31/09
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     7.76        7.54        5.44        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                

Net investment income (loss)

     0.29 2       0.23 2       0.21 2       0.08           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     (0.46     0.24        2.02        (4.59        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     (0.17     0.47        2.23        (4.51        

Less distributions:

                

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.32     (0.25     (0.13     (0.05        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.05                   (0.00 ) 3          
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.37     (0.25     (0.13     (0.05        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     7.22        7.76        7.54        5.44           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     (1.63     6.28        40.90        (45.15 ) 4          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                

Net operating expenses

     1.05        1.05        1.05        1.05 5          

Gross operating expenses

     1.23        1.21        1.24        2.11 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     3.92        3.08        2.90        2.52 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     35        33        14        8 4          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     119,049        126,758        85,424        18,694           

 

1  

Commencement of operations.

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Distribution from realized gains is less than 0.01.

 

4  

Not annualized.

 

5  

Annualized.

 

Financial highlights     33   


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

 

Investor Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    6/17/08 1
3/31/09
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     8.61        8.05        5.68        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                

Net investment income (loss)

     0.23 2       0.17 2       0.17 2       0.17           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     0.16        0.58        2.38        (4.27        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     0.39        0.75        2.55        (4.10        

Less distributions:

                

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.21     (0.19     (0.18     (0.22        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     8.79        8.61        8.05        5.68           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     4.89        9.40        44.94        (41.35 ) 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                

Net operating expenses

     1.40        1.40        1.39        1.40 4          

Gross operating expenses

     5.14        4.97        5.30        4.43 4          

Net investment income (loss)

     2.72        2.16        2.30        2.63 4          

Portfolio turnover rate

     31        26        22        14 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     109        91        80        34           
                
Select Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    6/17/08 1
3/31/09
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     8.63        8.06        5.68        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                

Net investment income (loss)

     0.25 2       0.19 2       0.19 2       0.16           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     0.17        0.58        2.39        (4.25        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     0.42        0.77        2.58        (4.09        

Less distributions:

                

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.24     (0.20     (0.20     (0.23        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     8.81        8.63        8.06        5.68           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     5.17        9.77        45.43        (41.27 ) 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                

Net operating expenses

     1.12        1.12        1.11        1.12 4          

Gross operating expenses

     4.90        4.76        5.13        4.27 4          

Net investment income (loss)

     2.98        2.40        2.59        2.89 4          

Portfolio turnover rate

     31        26        22        14 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     284        270        182        33           

 

1  

Commencement of operations.

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Not annualized.

 

4  

Annualized.

 

34   Financial highlights


Table of Contents

 

Institutional Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    6/17/08 1
3/31/09
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     8.63        8.06        5.68        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                

Net investment income (loss)

     0.26 2       0.20 2       0.20 2       0.16           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     0.16        0.58        2.38        (4.25        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     0.42        0.78        2.58        (4.09        

Less distributions:

                

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.24     (0.21     (0.20     (0.23        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     8.81        8.63        8.06        5.68           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     5.25        9.84        45.49        (41.25 ) 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                

Net operating expenses

     1.05        1.05        1.03        1.05 4          

Gross operating expenses

     4.75        4.57        4.96        4.08 4          

Net investment income (loss)

     3.05        2.55        2.68        2.74 4          

Portfolio turnover rate

     31        26        22        14 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     4,777        4,539        4,132        2,840           

 

1  

Commencement of operations.

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Not annualized.

 

4  

Annualized.

 

Financial highlights     35   


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

 

Investor Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    4/1/08–
3/31/09
    11/2/07 1
3/31/08
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                             

Net asset value at beginning of period

     9.67        8.79        5.33        9.29        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                  

Net investment income (loss)

     0.16 2       0.14 2       0.09 2       0.11        0.02           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     (0.20     0.90        3.46        (4.01     (0.72        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     (0.04     1.04        3.55        (3.90     (0.70        

Less distributions:

                  

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.08     (0.16     (0.09     (0.06     (0.01        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.07                                    
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.15     (0.16     (0.09     (0.06     (0.01        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     9.48        9.67        8.79        5.33        9.29           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     (0.19     11.89        66.74        (42.02     (6.98 ) 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                             

Ratios to average net assets:

                  

Net operating expenses

     1.80        1.80        1.81 4       1.80        1.82 5,6          

Gross operating expenses

     1.90        1.91        2.08        2.46        2.79 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     1.74        1.56        1.17        1.54        0.89 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     43        33        44        52        49 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     9,639        10,862        9,437        1,927        1,937           
                  
Select Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    4/1/08–
3/31/09
    11/2/07 1
3/31/08
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                             

Net asset value at beginning of period

     9.68        8.80        5.34        9.31        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                  

Net investment income (loss)

     0.18 2       0.17 2       0.10 2       0.08        0.02           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     (0.19     0.90        3.47        (3.97     (0.70        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     (0.01     1.07        3.57        (3.89     (0.68        

Less distributions:

                  

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.11     (0.19     (0.11     (0.08     (0.01        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.07                                    
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.18     (0.19     (0.11     (0.08     (0.01        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     9.49        9.68        8.80        5.34        9.31           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     0.15        12.18        66.91        (41.82     (6.75 ) 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                             

Ratios to average net assets:

                  

Net operating expenses

     1.52        1.52        1.53 7       1.52        1.54 5,8          

Gross operating expenses

     1.66        1.66        1.78        2.23        2.74 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     1.94        1.83        1.17        1.70        0.69 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     43        33        44        52        49 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     5,993        5,554        4,531        559        760           

 

1  

Commencement of operations.

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Not annualized.

 

4  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.80% if certain non-routine expenses (proxy expense) had not been incurred.

 

5  

Annualized.

 

6  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.80%, if interest expense had not been included.

 

7  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.52% if certain non-routine expenses (proxy expense) had not been incurred.

 

8  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.52%, if interest expense had not been included.

 

36   Financial highlights


Table of Contents

 

Institutional Shares    4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
    4/1/08–
3/31/09
    11/2/07 1
3/31/08
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                             

Net asset value at beginning of period

     9.68        8.80        5.33        9.29        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                  

Net investment income (loss)

     0.19 2       0.15 2       0.14 2       0.10        0.02           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     (0.19     0.92        3.44        (3.98     (0.71        
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

            1.07        3.58        (3.88     (0.69        

Less distributions:

                  

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.12     (0.19     (0.11     (0.08     (0.02        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.07                                    
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.19     (0.19     (0.11     (0.08     (0.02        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     9.49        9.68        8.80        5.33        9.29           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     0.23        12.25        67.27        (41.78     (6.94 ) 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                             

Ratios to average net assets:

                  

Net operating expenses

     1.45        1.45        1.46 4       1.45        1.47 5,6          

Gross operating expenses

     1.50        1.51        1.70        2.13        2.62 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     2.07        1.69        1.79        1.94        0.59 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     43        33        44        52        49 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     148,187        171,432        90,486        25,234        19,414           

 

1  

Commencement of operations.

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Not annualized.

 

4  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.45% if certain non-routine expenses (proxy expense) had not been incurred.

 

5  

Annualized.

 

6  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.45%, if interest expense had not been included.

 

Financial highlights     37   


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

On July 27, 2009, the Investor Share class, Select Share class and Institutional Share class were combined into a single class of shares of the fund and the fund no longer offered multiple classes of shares. The performance and financial history of the fund is that of the fund’s former Institutional Shares. Accordingly, the financial highlights of the fund’s former Institutional Shares are shown below.

 

     4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    4/1/09–
3/31/10
1
    4/1/08–
3/31/09
    11/2/07 2
3/31/08
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                             

Net asset value at beginning of period

     11.86        11.20        10.32        11.29        10.00           
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                  

Net investment income (loss)

     0.20        0.16        0.26        0.27        0.07           

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     0.09        0.71        1.06        (0.86     1.27           
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     0.29        0.87        1.32        (0.59     1.34           

Less distributions:

                  

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.46     (0.20     (0.42     (0.38     (0.05        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.08     (0.01     (0.02                      
  

 

 

Total distributions

     (0.54     (0.21     (0.44     (0.38     (0.05        
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     11.61        11.86        11.20        10.32        11.29           
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     2.48        7.86        12.85        (5.40     13.42 3          
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                             

Ratios to average net assets:

                  

Net operating expenses

     0.71        0.74        0.76 4       0.75        0.75 5          

Gross operating expenses

     0.71        0.74        0.79        0.87        1.23 5          

Net investment income (loss)

     1.51        1.67        2.42        2.24        1.98 5          

Portfolio turnover rate

     68        58        67        92        1 3          

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     881,405        966,800        279,274        64,562        52,214           

 

1  

Effective July 27, 2009, all outstanding Investor Shares and Select Shares were converted into Institutional Shares. The figures in the Financial Highlights reflect only the remaining share class.

 

2  

Commencement of operations.

 

3  

Not annualized.

 

4  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 0.75% if certain non-routine expenses (proxy expense) had not been incurred.

 

5  

Annualized.

 

38   Financial highlights


Table of Contents

Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts

Performance information for the subadviser’s other focused international equity accounts

The subadviser also serves as adviser to other focused international equity accounts (Other International Equity Accounts) that have investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund. The information below does not represent the historical performance of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund and should not be considered a prediction of its future performance. The performance of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund may vary from the performance of the Other International Equity Accounts. The performance information shown below is based on a composite of all of Mondrian’s accounts with investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund and has been adjusted to give effect to the annualized net expenses of the Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund (as set forth in the Annual Fund Operating Expenses table, above). None of the Other International Equity Accounts have been registered under the 1940 Act and therefore they are not subject to certain investment restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act. If the Other International Equity Accounts had been registered under the 1940 Act, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. In addition, the Other International Equity Accounts were not subject to Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. If the Other International Equity Accounts had been subject to Subchapter M, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. As noted below, the returns in the bar chart reflect adjustments for the fees and net expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, which has a higher expense ratio than the Select Shares and Institutional Shares.

The bar chart and table below show:

 

 

Changes in the Other International Equity Accounts’ performance from year to year over the last ten calendar years; and

 

 

How the Other International Equity Accounts’ average annual returns over one year, five years and since inception compare to those of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Yearly performance (%)

Other International Equity Accounts (Adjusted for Fees and Net Expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund)

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 23.33% Q2 2003 Worst quarter: (21.00%) Q3 2002

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and pre-tax) of the Other International Equity

Accounts (adjusted for fees and net expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund) as of 6/30/2012: (0.20%)

 

Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts     39   


Table of Contents

Performance table

This table shows how the Other International Equity Accounts’ performance compares with the returns of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Average annual total returns (for periods ending December 31, 2011) 1

 

      

Past

one year

      

Past

five years

      

Past

ten years

      

Since

inception

 

Other International Equity Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Institutional Shares)

     (5.14%        (4.51%        6.17%           5.38% 3  

Other International Equity Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Select Shares)

     (5.21%        (4.58%        6.09%           5.31% 3  

Other International Equity Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Investor Shares)

     (5.47%        (4.85%        5.80%           5.02% 3  

MSCI EAFE Net Index 2

     (12.14%        (4.72%        4.67%           1.68% 4  

 

1  

All returns are stated before the imposition of taxes. After-tax returns would be lower than those shown.

2

Reflects dividends reinvested monthly, net of the withholding taxes and net of tax credit for foreigners not benefitting from any double taxation treaty. The MSCI Europe, Australasia, Far East (EAFE) Net Index is a free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure market equity performance in 22 developed countries, excluding the U.S. and Canada.

3

Inception: September 30, 2000.

4  

From: September 30, 2000.

Performance information for the subadviser’s other global equity accounts

The subadviser also serves as adviser to other global equity accounts (Other Global Equity Accounts) that have investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund. The information below does not represent the historical performance of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund and should not be considered a prediction of its future performance. The performance of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund may vary from the performance of the Other Global Equity Accounts. The performance information shown below is based on a composite of all of Mondrian’s accounts with investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund and has been adjusted to give effect to the annualized net expenses of the Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund (as set forth in the Annual Fund Operating Expenses table, above). The majority of the Other Global Equity Accounts have not been registered under the 1940 Act and therefore they are not subject to certain investment restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act. If all of the Other Global Equity Accounts had been registered under the 1940 Act, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. In addition, the majority of the Other Global Equity Accounts were not subject to Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. If all of the Other Global Equity Accounts had been subject to Subchapter M, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. As noted below, the returns in the bar chart reflect adjustments for the fees and net expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund, which has a higher expense ratio than the Select Shares and Institutional Shares.

The bar chart and table below show:

 

 

Changes in the Other Global Equity Accounts’ performance from year to year over the last ten calendar years; and

 

 

How the Other Global Equity Accounts’ average annual returns over one year, five years, ten years and since inception compare to those of a broad-based securities market index.

 

40   Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts


Table of Contents

 

Yearly performance (%)

Other Global Equity Accounts (Adjusted for Fees and Net Expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund)

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 21.07% Q2 2003

Worst quarter: (18.97%) Q3 2002

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and pre-tax) of the Other Global Equity

Accounts (adjusted for fees and net expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund) as of 6/30/2012: 3.67%

Performance table

This table shows how the Other Global Equity Accounts’ performance compares with the returns of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Average annual total returns (for periods ending December 31, 2011) 1

 

      

Past

one year

      

Past

five years

      

Past

ten years

      

Since

inception

 

Other Global Equity Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Institutional Shares)

     1.10%           (2.78%        5.43%           7.52% 3  

Other Global Equity Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Select Shares)

     1.02%           (2.84%        5.36%           7.45% 3  

Other Global Equity Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Investor Shares)

     0.74%           (3.12%        5.06%           7.15% 3  

MSCI World Net Index 2

     (5.54%        (2.37%        3.62%           5.98% 4  

 

1  

All returns are stated before the imposition of taxes. After-tax returns would be lower than those shown.

2  

Reflects dividends reinvested monthly, net of the withholding taxes and net of tax credit for foreigners not benefiting from any double taxation treaty. The MSCI World Net Index is a free float-adjusted market capitalization weighted index that is designed to measure the equity market performance of developed markets and is net of dividends and taxes. The MSCI World Net Index consists of the following 24 developed market country indices: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hong Kong, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States.

3  

Inception: March 31, 1991. During the period April 1991 to September 2004 this performance was achieved with US stock selection input from Mondrian Investment Partners Limited’s (Mondrian) former affiliate, Delaware Investment Advisers (“DIA”). Mondrian had overall responsibility for the asset allocation decisions between the US and non-US portions of this composite. Shortly after the management buy out of Mondrian in September 2004, the services of DIA were no longer utilized and the entire responsibility for US and non-US stock selection for this composite resided with Mondrian. From September 2004 to May 2007, the composite consisted only of a Mondrian sponsored limited partnership with no external investors.

4  

From: March 31, 1991.

Performance information for the subadviser’s other focused emerging markets accounts

The subadviser also serves as adviser to other focused emerging markets accounts (Other Emerging Markets Accounts) that have investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund. The information below does not represent the historical performance of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund and should not be considered a prediction of its future performance. The performance of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund may vary from the performance of the Other Emerging Markets Accounts. The performance information shown below is based on a composite of all of Mondrian’s accounts with investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund and has been adjusted to give effect to the annualized net expenses of the Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund (as set forth in the Annual Fund Operating Expenses table, above). None of the Other Emerging Markets Accounts have been registered under the 1940 Act and therefore they are not subject to certain investment restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act. If the Other Emerging

 

Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts     41   


Table of Contents

Markets Accounts had been registered under the 1940 Act, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. In addition, the Other Emerging Markets Accounts were not subject to Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. If the Other Emerging Markets Accounts had been subject to Subchapter M, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. As noted below, the returns in the bar chart reflect adjustments for the fees and net expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund, which has a higher expense ratio than the Select Shares and Institutional Shares.

The bar chart and table below show:

 

 

Changes in the Other Emerging Markets Accounts’ performance from year to year since inception; and

 

 

How the Other Emerging Markets Accounts’ average annual returns over one year and since inception compare to those of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Yearly performance (%)

Other Emerging Markets Accounts (Adjusted for Fees and Net Expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund)

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 31.06% Q2 2009

Worst quarter: (25.27%) Q4 2008

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and pre-tax) of the Other Emerging Markets

Accounts (adjusted for fees and net expenses of Investor Shares of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund) as of 6/30/2012: 4.50%

Performance table

This table shows how the Other Emerging Markets Accounts’ performance compares with the returns of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Average annual total returns (for periods ending December 31, 2011) 1

 

      

Past

one year

      

Past

five years

      

Since

inception

 

Other Emerging Markets Accounts

            

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Institutional Shares)

     (12.25%        2.71%           7.47% 3  

Other Emerging Markets Accounts

            

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Select Shares)

     (12.32%        2.64%           7.40% 3  

Other Emerging Markets Accounts

            

(adjusted for the fees and expenses of Investor Shares)

     (12.56%        2.35%           7.10% 3  

MSCI Emerging Markets Net Index 2

     (18.42%        2.40%           7.77% 4  

 

1

All returns are stated before the imposition of taxes. After-tax returns would be lower than those shown.

2

Reflects dividends reinvested monthly, net of the withholding taxes and net of tax credit for foreigners not benefitting from any double taxation treaty. The MSCI Emerging Markets Net Index is a free float-adjusted market capitalization index that is designed to measure market equity performance in 21 emerging market countries.

3

Inception: 12/1/2005.

4

From: 12/1/2005.

 

42   Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts


Table of Contents

Performance information for the subadviser’s other international fixed income accounts

The subadviser also serves as adviser to other international fixed income accounts (Other International Fixed Income Accounts) that have investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund. The information below does not represent the historical performance of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund and should not be considered a prediction of its future performance. The performance of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund may vary from the performance of the Other International Fixed Income Accounts. The performance information shown below is based on a composite of all of Mondrian’s accounts with investment objectives, policies and strategies that are substantially similar to those of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund and has been adjusted to give effect to the annualized net expenses of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund (as set forth in the Annual Fund Operating Expenses table, above). The majority of the Other International Fixed Income Accounts have not been registered under the 1940 Act and therefore they are not subject to certain investment restrictions imposed by the 1940 Act. If all of the Other International Fixed Income Accounts had been registered under the 1940 Act, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. In addition, the majority of the Other International Fixed Income Accounts were not subject to Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. If all of the Other International Fixed Income Accounts had been subject to Subchapter M, their performance and the composite performance might have been adversely affected. As noted below, the returns in the bar chart and performance table reflect adjustments for the fees and net expenses of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund.

The bar chart and table below show:

 

 

Changes in the Other International Fixed Income Accounts’ performance from year to year over the last ten calendar years; and

 

 

How the Other International Fixed Income Accounts’ average annual returns over one year, five years, ten years and since inception compare to those of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Yearly performance (%)

Other International Fixed Income Accounts (Adjusted for Fees and Net Expenses of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund)

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 14.43% Q2 2002

Worst quarter: (5.50%) Q2 2008

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and pre-tax) of the Other International Fixed

Income Accounts (adjusted for fees and net expenses of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed

Income Fund) as of 6/30/2012: 0.79%

 

Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts     43   


Table of Contents

Performance table

This table shows how the Other International Fixed Income Accounts’ performance compares with the returns of a broad-based securities market index.

 

Average annual total returns (for periods ending December 31, 2011) 1

 

      

Past

one year

      

Past

five years

      

Past

ten years

      

Since

inception

 

Other International Fixed Income Accounts

                 

(adjusted for the fees and net expenses of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund)

     4.18%           8.13%           9.45%           7.37% 3  

Citigroup Non-USD World Government Bond Index 2

     4.18%           6.39%           7.98%           5.93% 4  

 

1

All returns are stated before the imposition of taxes. After-tax returns would be lower than those shown.

2  

Reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes. The Citigroup Non-USD World Government Bond Index includes the 21 government bond markets of Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Singapore, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.

3

Inception: 10/1/1993.

4  

From: 10/1/1993.

 

44   Performance information on the subadviser’s other accounts


Table of Contents

Management of the funds

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (CSIM), 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, serves as the funds’ investment adviser. Mondrian Investment Partners Limited (Mondrian), 10 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7JD, serves as subadviser to the funds.

Founded in 1989, CSIM today serves as investment adviser for all of the Schwab Funds, Schwab ETFs and Laudus Funds. The firm had more than $204 billion under management as of June 30, 2012.

Mondrian provides investment advisory services to a number of institutional investors. The firm had more than $66 billion under management as of June 30, 2012.

In its capacity as subadviser, Mondrian provides day-to-day portfolio management services to the funds, while, as adviser, CSIM supervises Mondrian and assumes other functions, including managing the funds’ other affairs and business, subject to the supervision of the Board of Trustees.

The funds pay CSIM monthly an advisory fee for these services. The fee paid is based on a percentage of each fund’s average daily net assets. CSIM — and not the funds — pays a portion of the advisory fees it receives to Mondrian in return for its services.

For the 12 months ended March 31, 2012, the advisory fee paid to CSIM, after waivers and/or reimbursements, was 0.67% for the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, 0.00% for the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund, 1.15% for the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund and 0.60% of investment advisory fees for the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, expressed as a percentage of each fund’s average daily net assets.

A discussion regarding the basis for the Board’s approval of the funds’ investment advisory and subadvisory agreements is available in the funds’ semi-annual report dated September 30, 2011, which covers the period April 1, 2011 to September 30, 2011.

CSIM has entered into an expense limitation agreement to waive its management fees and bear certain expenses until July 30, 2014, to limit the total annual operating expenses of the funds. Under that agreement, any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by a fund to CSIM during the next two fiscal years to the extent that repayment will not cause the fund’s expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the expense limitation agreement) during the respective year.

Elizabeth Desmond, Russell Mackie and Melissa Platt are responsible for the day-to-day management of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund. Ms. Desmond has been with Mondrian since 1991, where she is currently Director and Chief Investment Officer-International Equity Team. Ms. Desmond is also the chair of the Equity Strategy Committee. Mr. Mackie has been with Mondrian since 1997, where he is currently a Senior Portfolio Manager on the International Equity Team. Ms. Platt has been with Mondrian since 2004, where she is currently a Portfolio Manager on the International Equity Team. Ms. Desmond and Ms. Platt are members of the CFA Society of the United Kingdom.

Nigel May, Brendan Baker and Aileen Gan are responsible for the day-to-day management of the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund. Mr. May has been with Mondrian since 1991, where he is currently Deputy Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Baker has been with Mondrian since 2001, where he is currently a Senior Portfolio Manager on the Global Equity Team. Ms. Gan has been with Mondrian since 2005, where she is currently a Senior Portfolio Manager for the International Equity Team. Ms. Gan is also a member of the CPA Australia, the CFA Institute and the CFA Society of the United Kingdom. Mr. May and Mr. Baker are both members of the Global Strategy Committee.

Andrew Miller and Ginny Chong are responsible for the day-to-day management of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund. Mr. Miller and Mrs. Chong have been with Mondrian since 2000, where both are currently Senior Portfolio Managers for the Global Emerging Markets Team. Both are active members of the Global Emerging Markets Equity Investment Committee.

 

Management of the funds     45   


Table of Contents

Christopher Moth , David Wakefield and Matt Day are responsible for the day-to-day management of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund. Mr. Moth has been with Mondrian since 1992, where he is a Director and Chief Investment Officer for Global Fixed Income and Currency. Mr. Moth also chairs the Global Fixed Income and Currency Committee meetings. Mr. Wakefield has been with Mondrian since 2001, where he is currently a Senior Portfolio Manager for the Global Fixed Income Team and is an active member of the Global Fixed Income and Currency Committee. Mr.Day Joined the Mondrian Global Fixed Income & Currency Team in 2007.

The Statement of Additional Information (SAI) provides additional information about portfolio manager compensation, other accounts managed, and ownership of securities of the funds.

 

46   Management of the funds


Table of Contents

Investing in the funds

In this section, you will find information on buying, selling and exchanging shares. You may invest directly in a fund by placing orders through the funds’ transfer agent (direct orders). You may invest in a fund through an intermediary by placing orders through your brokerage account with a broker/dealer, investment adviser, 401(k) plan, employee benefit plan, administrator, bank, or other financial intermediary (intermediary) that is authorized to accept orders on behalf of the fund (intermediary orders). Helpful information on taxes is included as well.

Investing directly with the funds

Opening an account to place direct orders

You may place direct orders for a fund’s shares. First, you must open an account with a fund through the funds’ transfer agent, Boston Financial Data Services (transfer agent), prior to placing direct orders. You may obtain an account application by calling the transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332. Your completed application and supporting documents must be returned to, and accepted by, the transfer agent before you can place direct orders. You cannot place direct orders through your account at an intermediary.

Initial and additional direct purchases by wire

Subject to acceptance by the funds, shares of a fund may be purchased by wiring federal funds. Please first contact the funds at 1-800-447-3332 for complete wiring instructions. Notification must be given to the funds at 1-800-447-3332 prior to the close of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) (generally 4:00 p.m., Eastern time) on the wire date. Federal funds purchases will be accepted only on a day on which the funds, the distributor and the custodian are all open for business. A completed account application must be faxed to the funds on the day the wire is sent and must also be overnighted to the funds at Boston Financial Data Services, Inc., Attn: Laudus Trust, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266. Please call 1-800-447-3332 for details.

Initial and additional direct purchases by mail

Subject to acceptance by a fund, you may open an account and make your initial purchase and any additional purchases of the fund’s shares by mail. To open an account by mail, complete and sign the account application and mail the account application, all supporting documents and a check for the desired purchase amount to the transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266. The name of the fund should be specified on the account application. Additional investments may be made at any time by mailing a check (payable to Laudus Trust) to the transfer agent at the address above. Be sure to include your account number on your check.

Subject to acceptance by a fund, payment for the purchase of shares received by mail will be credited to a shareholder’s account at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after receipt, even though the check may not yet have been converted into federal funds. For purposes of calculating the purchase price of fund shares, a purchase order is received by a fund on the day that it is in good order unless it is rejected by the fund’s transfer agent. For a cash purchase order of fund shares to be in good order on a particular day, a check must be received on or before the close of the fund (generally 4:00 p.m. Eastern time or the close of the NYSE, whichever is earlier) on that day. If the payment is received by a fund after the deadline, the purchase price of fund shares will be based upon the next determination of net asset value of fund shares. No currency, third party checks, foreign checks, starter checks, credit card checks, traveler’s checks or money orders will be accepted by the funds.

Automatic investment program

An eligible shareholder may also participate in the Laudus Funds Automatic Investment Program, an investment plan that automatically debits money from the shareholder’s bank account or an account at a broker or other intermediary and invests it in a fund through the use of electronic funds transfers. Investors may commence their participation in this program by making a minimum initial investment that satisfies the minimum investment amount for a fund and may elect to make subsequent investments by transfers of a minimum of $50 into their established fund account. You should contact the Trust for more information about the Laudus Funds Automatic Investment Program.

Individual retirement accounts

The funds may be used to fund individual retirement accounts (IRAs). A special application must be completed in order to create such an account. Contributions to IRAs are subject to prevailing amount limits set by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information about IRAs, call the Trust at 1-800-447-3332.

 

Investing in the funds     47   


Table of Contents

Direct redemptions by telephone

If you authorized the telephone redemption option in the account application, you may place a redemption order by calling the transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332 and requesting that the redemption proceeds be wired per the authorized instructions in the account application or mailed to the primary registration address. Your redemption order will be processed at the net asset value per share of a fund next determined after receipt of your telephone redemption order by the transfer agent. Please note that the transfer agent may only act on telephone instructions believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. The transfer agent’s records of such instructions are binding on the shareholder. The shareholder, not the funds or the transfer agent, bears the risk of loss in the event of unauthorized instructions reasonably believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. The transfer agent will employ reasonable procedures to confirm that instructions communicated are genuine. These procedures include tape recording of telephone instructions and requiring some form of personal identification prior to acting upon instructions received by telephone.

Direct redemptions by mail

You may redeem your fund shares by mail by sending a request letter to the funds’ transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, PO Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266. Your redemption request will be processed by a fund at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after the request is received in good order. To be in good order, the redemption request must include the name of the fund and the number of shares or the dollar amount to be redeemed, all required signatures, authorizations and any required signature guarantees, and other supporting legal documents, if required, in the case of estates, trusts, guardianships, custodianships, corporations, pension and profit sharing plans and other organizations.

Additional direct redemption information

To protect you, the funds and their service providers from fraud, signature guarantees may be required to enable the transfer agent to verify the identity of the person who has authorized a redemption from an account. Signature guarantees are required for (1) redemptions where the proceeds are to be sent to someone other than the registered shareholder(s) at the registered address, (2) redemptions if your account address has changed within the last 10 business days, (3) share transfer requests, and (4) redemptions where the proceeds are wired in connection with bank instructions not already on file with the transfer agent. Signature guarantees may be obtained from certain eligible financial institutions, including, but not limited to, the following: U.S. banks, trust companies, credit unions, securities brokers and dealers, savings and loan associations and participants in the Securities and Transfer Association Medallion Program (STAMP), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program (SEMP) or the New York Stock Exchange Medallion Signature Program (MSP). Signature guarantees from non-U.S. banks that do not include a stamp may require a U.S. consulate stamp. You may contact the transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332 for further details.

The funds will not make payment on redemptions of shares purchased by check until payment of the purchase price has been collected, which may take up to fifteen days after purchase. Shareholders can avoid this delay by utilizing the wire purchase option.

Systematic withdrawal plan

An owner of $12,000 or more of shares of a fund may elect to have periodic redemptions made from the investor’s account to be paid on a monthly, quarterly, semiannual or annual basis. The maximum payment per year is 12% of the account value at the time of the election. The Trust will normally redeem a sufficient number of shares to make the scheduled redemption payments on a date selected by the shareholder. Depending on the size of the payment requested and fluctuation in the net asset value, if any, of the shares redeemed, redemptions for the purpose of making such payments may reduce or even exhaust the account. A shareholder may request that these payments be sent to a predesignated bank or other designated party. Capital gains and dividend distributions paid to the account will automatically be reinvested at net asset value on the distribution payment date.

Direct exchange and conversion privileges

Upon request, and subject to certain limitations, shares of a fund may be exchanged into shares of any other fund of the Trust or converted to shares of another class of the same fund. In order to exchange your shares to another fund of the Trust, you must satisfy the minimum requirements for a class of shares of the new fund. In order to convert your shares, you must satisfy the minimum requirements of the new class. Direct investors should contact the Trust at 1-800-447-3332. Although the Trust has no current intention of terminating or modifying the exchange or conversion privileges, it reserves the right to do so at any time. An exchange of your shares for shares of another Laudus Fund is taxable as a sale of a security on which a gain or loss may be recognized. Shareholders should receive written confirmation of an exchange or conversion within a few days of the completion of the transaction. A new account opened by exchange must be established with the same name(s), address(es) and social security number(s) as the existing account. All exchanges or conversions will be made based on the respective net asset values next determined following receipt of the request by the funds containing the information indicated below. Shareholders should obtain and read the prospectus for the fund into which you are exchanging prior to placing your order.

 

48   Investing in the funds


Table of Contents

Direct exchanges or conversions by telephone

If you authorized the telephone redemption option in the account application, you may exchange or convert fund shares by telephone by calling the funds’ transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332. Please be prepared to provide the following information: (a) the account number, tax identification number and account registration; (b) the class of shares to be exchanged from and into; (c) the name of the fund from which and the fund into which the exchange is to be made; and (d) the dollar or share amount to be exchanged. Please note that the transfer agent may act only on telephone instructions believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. Please see the section entitled “Direct redemptions by telephone” for more information regarding transacting with the funds’ transfer agent via telephone.

Direct exchanges or conversion by mail

To exchange or convert fund shares by mail, simply send a letter of instruction to the funds’ transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, PO Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266. The letter of instruction must include: (a) your account number; (b) the class of shares to be exchanged from and into; (c) the fund from and the fund into which the exchange is to be made; (d) the dollar or share amount to be exchanged; and (e) the signatures of all registered owners or authorized parties.

The funds reserve the right to suspend or terminate the privilege of exchanging or converting shares of a fund by mail or by telephone at any time.

Investing t hrough a financial intermediary

Placing orders through your intermediary

When you place orders through an intermediary, you are not placing your orders directly with a fund, and you must follow the intermediary’s transaction procedures. Your intermediary may impose different or additional conditions than the fund on purchases, redemptions and exchanges of fund shares. These differences may include initial, subsequent and maintenance investment requirements, exchange policies, fund choices, cut-off times for investment and trading restrictions. Your intermediary may independently establish and charge its customers transaction fees, account fees and other fees in addition to the fees charged by the funds. These additional fees may vary over time and would increase the cost of your investment and lower investment returns. You should consult your intermediary directly for information regarding these conditions and fees. The funds are not responsible for the failure of your intermediary to carry out its responsibilities.

Only certain intermediaries are authorized to accept orders on behalf of a fund. If your fund shares are no longer held by an authorized intermediary, the funds may impose restrictions on your ability to manage or maintain your shares. For example, you may not be able to place orders to purchase additional shares. To remove these restrictions, you have two options. First, you may move your shares to another intermediary that is authorized to accept fund orders. Second, you may maintain a direct account with the funds if your completed account application and supporting documentation is returned to and accepted by the funds’ transfer agent.

Other investing information

For purposes of calculating the purchase price of fund shares, a purchase order is received by the Trust on the day that it is in “good order” unless it is rejected by the transfer agent. For a cash purchase order of fund shares to be in “good order” on a particular day, a check or money wire must be received on or before the close of the NYSE (generally 4:00 p.m., Eastern time) on that day. If the payment is received by the Trust after the deadline, the purchase price of fund shares will be based upon the next determination of net asset value of fund shares. No currency, third party checks, foreign checks, starter checks, credit card checks, traveler’s checks or money orders will be accepted.

The Trust reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to suspend the offering of shares of the funds or to reject purchase orders when, in its judgment, such suspension or rejection would be in the best interests of the Trust or the funds. The Trust discourages market timing and maintains procedures designed to provide reasonable assurances that such activity will be identified and terminated, including the imposition of the redemption fee. You may be subject to a fee of 2% if you redeem or exchange your shares within 30 days of purchase. Purchases of the funds’ shares may be made in full or in fractional shares of the fund (calculated to three decimal places). In the interest of economy and convenience, certificates for shares will not be issued.

When selling, converting or exchanging shares, you should be aware of the following fund policies:

 

 

The funds may take up to seven days to pay sale proceeds.

 

 

The funds reserve the right to redeem your shares in-kind (i.e., for portfolio securities) in accordance with the funds’ procedures and applicable regulatory requirements.

 

 

Exchange orders are limited to other funds of the Laudus Trust and must meet the minimum investment and other requirements for the fund and share class into which you are exchanging.

 

 

Investing in the funds     49   


Table of Contents
 

If you are selling shares that were recently purchased by check, the proceeds may be delayed until the check for purchase clears; this may take up to 15 days from the date of purchase.

 

 

You should read the prospectus for the fund into which you are exchanging prior to placing your order.

Investments in-kind

Institutional Shares and shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund may be purchased in exchange for common stocks or bonds or by a combination of such securities and cash. Purchase of Institutional Shares and shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund in exchange for securities is subject in each case to CSIM’s and the subadviser’s determination that the securities to be exchanged are acceptable. Securities accepted in exchange for fund shares will be valued as set forth under “Share price” (generally the last quoted sale price) as of the time of the next determination of net asset value after such acceptance. All dividends, subscription or other rights which are reflected in the market price of accepted securities at the time of valuation become the property of the fund and must be delivered to the fund upon receipt by the investor from the issuer. Generally, the exchange of common stocks for Institutional Shares and shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund will be a taxable event for federal income tax purposes, which will trigger gain or loss to an investor subject to federal income taxation, measured by the difference between the value of the Institutional Shares or shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund received and the investor’s basis in the securities tendered. Accordingly, you should consult your tax adviser before making such an in-kind purchase.

A fund will not accept securities in exchange for fund shares unless: (i) CSIM and the subadviser believe the securities are appropriate investments for the fund; (ii) the investor represents and agrees that all securities offered to the fund are not subject to any restrictions upon their sale by the fund under the Securities Act of 1933, or otherwise; and (iii) the securities may be acquired under the fund’s investment restrictions.

Due to local restrictions, certain emerging markets may not permit in-kind transactions.

Further redemption information

The funds reserve the right to redeem your shares in-kind in accordance with the funds’ procedures and applicable regulatory requirements. If CSIM determines that it would not be in the best interests of the remaining shareholders of a fund to make a redemption payment wholly or partly in cash, such fund may instead pay the redemption price in whole or in part by a distribution in-kind of readily marketable securities held by such fund. The Trust may commit itself to pay in cash all requests for redemption by any shareholder of record, limited in amount with respect to each shareholder during any 90-day period to the lesser of: (i) $250,000, or (ii) one percent of net asset value of such fund at the beginning of such period. Securities used to redeem fund shares in-kind will be valued in accordance with the funds’ valuation procedures described in this prospectus. Securities distributed by a fund in-kind will be selected by the subadviser, under CSIM’s supervision, in light of each fund’s objective and generally will be a pro rata distribution of each security held in a fund’s portfolio. Investors may incur brokerage charges on the sale of securities received. Redemptions in-kind are taxable for federal income tax purposes in the same manner as redemptions for cash.

The funds may suspend the right of redemption and may postpone payment for a reasonable period when the NYSE is closed for other than weekends or holidays, or if permitted by the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), during periods when trading on the NYSE is restricted or during an emergency declared by the SEC which makes it impracticable for the funds to dispose of their securities or to determine the value of their net assets fairly, or during any other period permitted by the SEC for the protection of investors.

Share price

The funds are open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is open. Each fund calculates its share price each business day as of the close of the NYSE (generally 4 p.m. Eastern time). A fund’s share price is its net asset value per share, or NAV, which is a fund’s net assets divided by the number of its shares outstanding. Orders to buy, sell or exchange shares that are received by the fund in good order on or prior to the close of the fund (generally 4 p.m. Eastern time) will be executed at the next share price calculated that day.

When you place an order through your account at an intermediary, please consult with your intermediary to determine when your order will be executed. Generally, you will receive the share price next calculated after the fund receives your order from your intermediary. However, some intermediaries may arrange with the fund for you to receive the share price next calculated after your intermediary has received your order. Some intermediaries may require that they receive orders prior to a specified cut-off time.

In valuing its securities, a fund uses market quotes or official closing prices if they are readily available. In cases where quotes are not readily available or the adviser deems them unreliable, the fund may value securities based on fair values developed using methods approved by the fund’s Board of Trustees.

 

 

50   Investing in the funds


Table of Contents

When valuing fixed income securities with remaining maturities of more than 60 days, the funds use the value of the security provided by pricing services. The pricing services may value fixed income securities at an evaluated price by employing methodologies that utilize actual market transactions, broker-supplied valuations, or other methodologies designed to identify the market value for such securities. When valuing fixed income securities with remaining maturities of 60 days or less, a fund may use the security’s amortized cost, which approximates the security’s market value.

Shareholders of the funds should be aware that because foreign markets are often open on weekends and other days when the funds are closed, the value of a fund’s portfolio may change on days when it is not possible to buy or sell shares of the fund.

Additio nal policies affecting your investment

Distributor

Shares of the funds are offered on a continuous basis through the Trust’s principal underwriter, ALPS Distributors, Inc. (distributor). The distributor’s principal offices are located at 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, Co 80203.

Investment minimums

Each of the funds, except the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, offer three classes of shares in this prospectus to investors, with eligibility for purchase depending on the amount invested in a particular fund. The three classes of shares are Institutional Shares, Select Shares and Investor Shares. The following table sets forth basic investment and fee information for each class for each of the funds, except the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund.

 

Name of class   

Minimum initial

fund investment*

    

Subsequent

investment

    

Annual distribution

and shareholder

service fee

 

Institutional

   $ 500,000         None         None   

Select

   $ 50,000         None         None   

Investor

   $ 100         None         0.25

 

* Certain exceptions apply. See below.

With respect to the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, the following table sets forth basic investment and fee information for the fund.

 

      

Minimum initial

fund investment*

    

Subsequent

investment

    

Annual distribution

and shareholder

service fee

 
   $ 100         None         None   

 

* Certain exceptions apply. See below.

Institutional Shares may be purchased by institutions such as endowments and foundations, plan sponsors of 401(a), 401(k), 457 and 403(b) benefit plans and individuals, including clients of investment advisers. In order to be eligible to purchase Institutional Shares, an investor must make an initial investment of at least $500,000 in the particular fund. Investment advisers may aggregate investments across client accounts in order to reach this minimum investment requirement.

Investor and Select Shares may be purchased by institutions, certain individual retirement accounts and individuals. In order to be eligible to purchase Investor and Select Shares, an investor must make an initial investment of at least $100 and $50,000, respectively, in the particular fund. The Trustees have authorized the Trust to reimburse, out of the Investor and Select Classes assets of the funds, intermediaries that provide sub-accounting and sub-transfer agency services an amount up to 0.15% of the average daily net assets of such class on an annual basis.

Shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund may be purchased by institutions, certain individual retirement accounts and individuals. In order to be eligible to purchase shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, an investor must make an initial investment of at least $100 in the fund.

The minimums may be waived for certain retirement plans and plan participants, and for certain investment programs, or in a fund’s sole discretion.

Shares of a fund may be sold to corporations or other institutions such as trusts, foundations, broker-dealers or other intermediaries purchasing for the accounts of others. Investors purchasing and redeeming shares of the fund through an intermediary may be charged a transaction-based fee or other fee for the services provided by the intermediary. Each such intermediary is responsible for transmitting to its customers a schedule of any such fees and information regarding any additional or different conditions with respect to purchases and redemptions of fund shares. Customers of intermediaries should read this prospectus in light of the terms governing accounts with their particular organization.

 

Investing in the funds     51   


Table of Contents

Please note that intermediaries may impose additional or different conditions than the funds on purchases, redemptions or exchanges of fund shares, including different initial, subsequent and maintenance investment requirements.

Each fund reserves certain rights, including the following:

 

 

To materially modify or terminate the exchange privilege upon 60 days’ written notice to shareholders.

 

 

To change or waive a fund’s investment minimums.

 

 

To withdraw or suspend any part of the offering made by this prospectus.

Distribution and shareholder service plan

Investor Class Shares are subject to an annual distribution and shareholder service fee (Distribution and Shareholder Service Fee) of up to 0.25% of the Investor Shares’ average daily net assets attributable thereto in accordance with a distributor and shareholder service plan (Distributor and Shareholder Service Plan) adopted by the Trustees pursuant to Rule 12b-1 under the 1940 Act. The Distribution and Shareholder Service Fee is intended to compensate the distributor for services and expenses primarily intended to result in the sale of Investor Shares and/or in connection with the provision of direct client service, personal services, maintenance of shareholder accounts and reporting services to holders of Investor Shares. The Distribution and Shareholder Service Fee will not be retained by the distributor but will instead be reallowed to intermediaries who provide these services. Although the distributor acts as principal underwriter for shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund and Institutional Shares and Select Shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Equity, Laudus Mondrian Global Equity and Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Funds, no fee is paid to the distributor in connection with such shares under the Distribution and Shareholder Service Plan.

Expenses and services for which the distributor or another intermediary or agent may be compensated include, without limitation, expenses (including overhead and telephone expenses) of, and compensation to, employees of the Distributor or of intermediaries who engage in distribution or servicing of Investor Shares, printing of prospectuses and reports for other than existing Investor Class shareholders, advertising, preparing, printing and distributing sales literature and forwarding communications from the funds to such persons. The Distribution and Shareholder Service Plan is of the type known as a “compensation” plan. This means that the fees are payable to compensate the distributor or intermediary for services rendered even if the amount paid exceeds the Distributor’s or intermediary’s expenses. Because these fees are paid out of Investor Shares’ assets on an ongoing basis, over time these fees will increase the cost of your investment and may cost you more than other types of sales charges.

Payments by the investment adviser or its affiliates

The investment adviser or its affiliates may make cash payments out of their own resources, or provide products and services at a discount, to certain brokerage firms, banks, retirement plan service providers and other financial intermediaries that perform shareholder, recordkeeping, sub-accounting and other administrative services in connection with investments in fund shares. These payments or discounts are separate from, and may be in addition to, any shareholder service fees or other administrative fees the funds may pay to those intermediaries The investment adviser or its affiliates may also make cash payments out of their own resources, or provide products and services at a discount, to certain financial intermediaries that perform distribution, marketing, promotional or other distribution-related services. The payments or discounts described by this paragraph may be substantial; however, distribution-related services provided by such intermediaries are paid by the investment adviser or its affiliates, not by the funds or their shareholders.

Policy regarding short-term or excessive trading

The funds are intended for long-term investment and not for short-term or excessive trading (collectively “market timing”). Market timing may adversely impact the funds’ performance by disrupting the efficient management of the fund, increasing fund transaction costs and taxes, causing the fund to maintain higher cash balances, and diluting the value of the fund’s shares.

To discourage market timing, the funds’ Board of Trustees has adopted policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to reduce the risk of market timing by fund shareholders. The funds seek to deter market timing through several methods. These methods may include: fair value pricing, imposition of redemption fees and trade activity monitoring. Fair value pricing and redemption fees are discussed more thoroughly in the subsequent pages of this prospectus and are considered to be key elements of the fund’s policy regarding short term or excessive trading. Trade activity monitoring is risk based and seeks to identify patterns of activity in amounts that might be detrimental to the fund.

Although these methods are designed to discourage market timing, there can be no guarantee that the fund will be able to identify and restrict investors that engage in such activities. In addition, some of these methods are inherently subjective and involve judgment in their application. The fund and its service providers seek to make these judgments and applications uniformly and in a manner that they believe is consistent with interests of the fund’s long-term shareholders. The fund may amend these policies and procedures in response to changing regulatory requirements or to enhance the effectiveness of the program.

 

52   Investing in the funds


Table of Contents

Each fund or its service providers maintain risk-based surveillance procedures designed to detect market timing in fund shares in amounts that might be detrimental to the fund. Under these procedures, each fund has requested that service providers to the fund monitor transactional activity in amounts and frequency determined by the fund to be significant to the fund and in a pattern of activity that potentially could be detrimental to the fund. If a fund, in its sole discretion based on these or other factors, determines that a shareholder has engaged in market timing, it may refuse to process future purchases or exchanges into the fund by that shareholder. These procedures may be modified from time to time as appropriate to improve the detection of market timing and to comply with applicable laws.

If trades are effected through a financial intermediary, a fund or its service providers will work with the intermediary to monitor possible market timing activity. Each fund reserves the right to contact the intermediary to provide certain shareholder transaction information and may require the intermediary to restrict the shareholder from future purchases or exchanges in the fund. Transactions by fund shareholders investing through intermediaries may also be subject to the restrictions of the intermediary’s own frequent trading policies, which may differ from those of a fund. A fund may defer to an intermediary’s frequent trading policies with respect to those shareholders who invest in the fund through such intermediary. Each fund will defer to an intermediary’s policies only after the fund determines that the intermediary’s frequent trading policies are reasonably designed to deter transactional activity in amounts and frequency that are deemed to be significant to the fund and in a pattern of activity that potentially could be detrimental to the fund. Shareholders should consult with their intermediary to determine if additional frequent trading restrictions apply to their fund transactions.

The funds reserve the right to restrict, reject or cancel within a reasonable time, without prior notice, any purchase or exchange order for any reason.

Fair value pricing

The Board of Trustees has adopted procedures to fair value the funds’ securities when market prices are not “readily available” or are unreliable. For example, a fund may fair value a security when a security is de-listed or its trading is halted or suspended; when a security’s primary pricing source is unable or unwilling to provide a price; when a security’s primary trading market is closed during regular market hours; or when a security’s value is materially affected by events occurring after the close of the security’s primary trading market.

By fair valuing securities whose prices may have been affected by events occurring after the close of trading, the funds seek to establish prices that investors might expect to realize upon the current sales of these securities. This methodology is designed to deter “arbitrage” market timers, who seek to exploit delays between the change in the value of a fund’s portfolio holdings and the net asset value of the fund’s shares, and seeks to help ensure that the prices at which the fund’s shares are purchased and redeemed are fair and do not result in dilution of shareholder interest or other harm to shareholders.

The funds make fair value determinations in good faith in accordance with the funds’ valuation procedures. Due to the subjective and variable nature of fair value pricing, there can be no assurance that a fund could obtain the fair value assigned to the security upon the sale of such security.

Redemption fee

Shares redeemed or exchanged within 30 days of purchase, which shall be calculated to include the 30th day, will be subject to a fee of 2%, which is intended to limit short-term trading in a fund, or to the extent that short-term trading persists, to impose the costs of that type of activity on the shareholders who engage in it. Such fee will be paid to the funds. The funds treat shares that have been held the longest as being redeemed first. Fund shares purchased with reinvested dividends are not subject to redemption fees. Each fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to waive such fee when, in its judgment, such waiver would be in the best interests of the fund. Each fund may waive the redemption fee for retirement plans, wrap or fee-based programs, charitable giving funds, unregistered separate accounts, redemptions pursuant to rebalancing programs or systematic withdrawal plans established by the fund or financial intermediaries, and registered investment companies and redemptions initiated by the fund. In addition, certain financial intermediaries may use criteria and methods for tracking, applying and calculating the fees that are different from the funds but which the funds, in their discretion, may determine are in the best interests of the funds. While the funds discourage mutual fund market timing and maintains procedures designed to provide reasonable assurances that such activity will be identified and terminated, including the imposition of the redemption fee described above, no policy or procedure can guarantee that all such activity will in fact be identified or that such activity can be completely eliminated. Each fund reserves the right to modify or eliminate the redemption fees or waivers at any time.

Customer identification and verification and anti-money laundering program

Federal law requires all financial institutions to obtain, verify and record information that identifies each person who opens an account. When you open your account, you will have to provide your name, address, date of birth, identification number and other information that will allow a fund or your financial intermediary to identify you. This information is subject to verification to ensure the identity of all persons opening an account.

Each fund or your financial intermediary is required by law to reject your new account application if the required identifying information is not provided. A fund or your financial intermediary may contact you in an attempt to collect any missing information required on the

 

Investing in the funds     53   


Table of Contents

application, and your application may be rejected if they are unable to obtain this information. In certain instances, each fund or your financial intermediary is required to collect documents, which will be used solely to establish and verify your identity.

A fund will accept investments and your order will be processed at the NAV next determined after receipt of your application in proper form (or upon receipt of all identifying information required on the application). Each fund, however, reserves the right to close and/or liquidate your account at the then-current day’s price if a fund or your financial intermediary is unable to verify your identity. As a result, you may be subject to a gain or loss on fund shares and will be subject to corresponding tax consequences.

Customer identification and verification is part of each fund’s overall obligation to deter money laundering under Federal law. The funds have adopted an Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program designed to prevent a fund from being used for money laundering or the financing of terrorist activities. In this regard, each fund reserves the right to (i) refuse, cancel or rescind any purchase or exchange order; (ii) freeze any account and/or suspend account services; or (iii) involuntarily close your account in cases of threatening conduct or suspected fraudulent or illegal activity. These actions will be taken when, in the sole discretion of fund management, they are deemed to be in the best interest of a fund or in cases when a fund is requested or compelled to do so by governmental or law enforcement authority. If your account is closed at the request of governmental or law enforcement authority, you may not receive proceeds of the redemption if the fund is required to withhold such proceeds.

A note on mailing procedures: If two or more members of a household own a fund, we may economize on fund expenses by sending only one financial report and prospectus. If you need additional copies or do not want your mailings to be “householded”, please call the Trust at 1-800-447-3332 or write to the Trust.

Distributions and taxes

Each fund intends to pay out as dividends substantially all of its net income and net short-term and long-term capital gains (after reduction by any available capital loss carry-forwards). The Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund’s policy is to declare and pay distributions of its dividends and interest quarterly, although it may do so less frequently. It is the policy of each fund, other than Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, to declare and pay distributions of its dividends and interest annually, although it may do so more frequently as determined by the Trustees of the Trust. During the fourth quarter of the year, typically in early November, an estimate of each fund’s year-end distribution, if any, may be made available on the funds’ website: www.laudus.com. Each fund’s policy is to distribute net short-term capital gains and net long-term gains annually, although it may do so more frequently as determined by the Trustees of the Trust to the extent permitted by applicable regulations. The amount of any distribution will change and there is no guarantee the funds will declare and pay dividend income or distribute a capital gain.

All dividends and/or distributions will be paid out in the form of additional shares of the fund at net asset value unless the shareholder elects to receive cash. Shareholders may make this election by marking the appropriate box on the account application or by writing to the Trust.

If you elect to receive distributions in cash and checks are returned and marked as “undeliverable” or remain uncashed for six months, your cash election will be changed automatically and your future dividend and capital gains distributions will be reinvested in that fund at the per share net asset value determined as of the date of payment of the distribution. In addition, any undeliverable checks or checks that remain uncashed for six months will be canceled and will be reinvested in that fund at the per share net asset value determined as of the date of cancellation.

Each fund intends to qualify each year as a regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Code) and to meet all requirements necessary to avoid paying any federal income or excise taxes. For federal income tax purposes, distributions of investment income are generally taxable as ordinary income. Taxes on distributions of capital gains are determined by how long a fund owned the investments that generated them, rather than how long a shareholder has owned his or her shares. Distributions of net capital gains from the sale of investments that a fund owned for more than one year and that are properly reported by the fund as capital gain dividends will be taxable as long-term capital gains. Distributions of gains from the sale of investments that a fund owned for one year or less will be taxable as ordinary income. For taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012, distributions of investment income reported by the fund as derived from “qualified dividend income” will be taxed in the hands of individuals at the rates applicable to long-term capital gain, provided holding period and other requirements are met at both the shareholder and fund level. Each fund will notify its shareholders as to what portion of fund distributions are reported as qualified dividend income.

Distributions are taxable to shareholders even if they are paid from income or gains earned by a fund before a shareholder’s investment (and thus were included in the price the shareholder paid). Distributions are taxable whether shareholders receive them in cash or in the form of additional shares of the fund to which the distribution relates. Any gain resulting from the sale or exchange of fund shares generally will be taxable as capital gains. For tax purposes, an exchange of your fund shares for shares of a different fund is the same as a sale. The gain or loss generally will be treated as short term if you held the shares for one year or less, long term if you held the shares for longer.

 

54   Investing in the funds


Table of Contents

Long-term capital gain rates applicable to individuals have been temporarily reduced — in general, to 15% with lower rates applying to taxpayers in the 10% and 15% rate brackets — for taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012.

The funds will provide federal tax information annually, including information about dividends and distributions paid during the preceding year.

A fund’s investments in foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes. In that case, a fund’s return on those securities would be decreased. In addition, a fund’s investments in foreign securities or foreign currencies may increase or accelerate a fund’s recognition of ordinary income and may affect the timing or amount of a fund’s distributions. If more than 50% of a fund’s assets at fiscal year-end is represented by debt and equity securities of foreign corporations, the funds intend to elect to permit shareholders who are U.S. citizens, resident aliens or U.S. corporations to claim a foreign tax credit or deduction (but not both) on their U.S. income tax returns for their pro rata portion of qualified taxes paid by a fund to foreign countries in respect of foreign securities the fund has held for at least the minimum period specified in the Code. For the purposes of the foreign tax credit, each such shareholder would include in gross income from foreign sources its pro rata share of such taxes. Certain limitations imposed by the Code may prevent shareholders from receiving a full foreign tax credit or deduction for their allocable amount of such taxes.

To the extent such investments are permissible for a fund, the fund’s transactions in options, futures contracts, hedging transactions, forward contracts, equity swap contracts and straddles will be subject to special tax rules (including mark-to-market, constructive sale, straddle, and wash sale rules), the effect of which may be to accelerate income to the fund, defer losses to the fund, cause adjustments in the holding periods of the fund’s securities, convert long-term capital gains into short-term gains or convert short-term capital losses into long-term capital losses. These rules could therefore affect the amount, timing and character of distributions to shareholders. A fund’s use of such transactions may result in the fund realizing more short-term capital gains (subject to tax at ordinary income tax rates) and ordinary income subject to tax at ordinary income tax rates than it would if it did not engage in such transactions.

The foregoing is a general summary of the federal income tax consequences of investing in a fund to shareholders who are U.S. citizens or U.S. corporations. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisors about the tax consequences of an investment in a fund in light of each shareholder’s particular tax situation. Shareholders should also consult their own tax advisors about consequences under foreign, state, local or other applicable tax laws.

 

Investing in the funds     55   


Table of Contents

Notes


Table of Contents

Notes


Table of Contents

LOGO

 

    

COMMAND PERFORMANCE TM

 

For More Information About the Funds:

Statement of Additional Information (SAI):

The SAI provides additional information about the funds. It is incorporated by reference into this prospectus and is legally considered a part of this prospectus.

Annual and Semi-Annual Reports:

Additional information about the funds’ investments is available in the funds’ Annual and Semi-Annual Reports to shareholders. In the funds’ Annual Report, you will find a discussion of market conditions and investment strategies that significantly affected the funds’ performance during the last fiscal year.

You may review and copy, for a fee, the Trust’s Annual and Semi-Annual Reports and the SAI in person at, or by writing to, the Public Reference Section of the Commission, Washington D.C. 20549-1520, or by electronic request via e-mail at the following address: publicinfo@sec.gov. Information on the operation of the Commission’s Public Reference Room can be obtained by calling 1-202-551-8090. You may obtain reports and other information about the funds for free from the EDGAR database on the Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

You may also obtain free copies of the SAI and the Annual and Semi-Annual Reports on the funds’ website at www.laudus.com/prospectus. To request that a copy of the SAI and the Annual and Semi-Annual Reports be mailed to you, free of charge, or to request other information about the funds or make shareholder inquiries, you may contact the funds at:

Laudus Trust

P.O. Box 8032

Boston, Massachusetts 02266

1.866.452.8387 Registered Investment Professionals

1.800.447.3332 Retail Investors

 

LAUDUS TRUST

Investment Company Act File No. 811-5547

REG38764FLT-06 (7/2012)


Table of Contents

Prospectus

July 29, 2012

   LOGO

 

    

COMMAND PERFORMANCE TM

 

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

   LGILX

Investment Adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc.

As with all mutual funds, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has not approved these securities or passed on whether the information in this prospectus is adequate and accurate. Anyone who indicates otherwise is committing a federal crime.

Shareholder Services

1.800.447.3332 Retail Investors

1.866.452.8387 Registered Investment Professionals

www.laudus.com


Table of Contents

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

 

Fund summary   
Fund details   

Investment objective, strategies and risks

     4   

Portfolio holdings

     6   

Financial highlights

     7   
Fund management      8   
Investing in the fund      9   

Investing directly with the fund

     9   

Investing through a financial intermediary

     11   

Other investing information

     11   

Further redemption information

     12   

Share price

     12   

Additional policies affecting your investment

     12   

Distribution and taxes

     15   


Table of Contents
 

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

Ticker Symbol:    LGILX

 

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

Fund fees and expenses

This table describes the fees and expenses you may pay if you buy and hold shares of the fund.

 

Shareholder fees (fees paid directly from your investment)  

Redemption fee (as a % of the amount sold or exchanged within 30 days of purchase)

     2.00   
  
Annual fund operating expenses (expenses that you pay each year
as a % of the value of your investment)
 

Management fees

     0.69   

Distribution and shareholder service (12b-1) fees

     None   

Other expenses

     0.19   
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses

     0.88   

Less expense reduction

     (0.10
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction 1

     0.78   
  

 

 

 

 

1  

The investment adviser has contractually agreed to limit total annual fund operating expenses (exclusive of interest, taxes and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 0.78% until at least July 30, 2014. During this term, the agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the fund’s Board of Trustees. Any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by the fund to the investment adviser during the next two fiscal years to the extent that the repayment will not cause the fund’s total annual fund operating expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the agreement) during the respective year. The investment adviser may, but is not required to, extend the agreement for additional years.

 

Example

This example is intended to help you compare the cost of investing in the fund with the cost of investing in other mutual funds. The example assumes that you invest $10,000 in the fund for the time periods indicated and then redeem all of your shares at the end of those time periods. The example also assumes that your investment has a 5% return each year and that the fund’s operating expenses remain the same. The one-year figure is based on total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction. The expenses would be the same whether you stayed in the fund or sold your shares at the end of each period. Your actual costs may be higher or lower.

Expenses on a $10,000 investment

 

1 year   3 years   5 years   10 years

$80

  $260   $468   $1,065

 

 

Portfolio turnover

The fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction costs and may result in higher taxes when fund shares are held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in the annual fund operating expenses or in the example, affect the fund’s performance. During the most recent fiscal year, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 96% of the average value of its portfolio.

Principal investment strategies

Under normal circumstances, the fund invests at least 80% of its net assets (plus borrowings for investment purposes, if any) in equity securities of U.S. large capitalization companies. The fund defines large capitalization companies as those with a market capitalization of at least $3 billion at the time of investment. In addition, up to 20% of the fund’s net assets may be invested in foreign equity securities. Investments in equity securities include common stock and preferred stock. The fund may, but is not required to, use derivative instruments for risk management purposes or as part of the fund’s investment strategies.

In selecting securities, the subadviser seeks to invest in companies that possess dominant market positions or franchises, a major technological edge, or a unique competitive advantage. To this end, the subadviser considers earnings revision trends, expected earnings growth rates, sales acceleration, price earnings multiples and positive stock price momentum, when selecting securities. The subadviser expects that these companies can sustain an above average return on invested capital at a higher level and over a longer period of time than is reflected in the current market prices.

In deciding whether an investment is tied to the U.S., the subadviser considers a number of factors including whether the investment is issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of its agencies; the investment has its primary trading market in the U.S.; the issuer is organized under the laws of, derives at least 50% of its revenues from, or has at least 50% of its assets in, the U.S.; the investment is included in an index representative of the U.S.; and the investment is exposed to the economic fortunes and risks of the U.S.

 

 

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund     1   


Table of Contents

For temporary defensive purposes during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money. The fund’s principal risks include:

Market risk.  Stock markets rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk.  As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. Poor stock selection or a focus on securities in a particular sector may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

Equity risk.  The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. In addition, equity markets tend to move in cycles, which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time.

Large-cap risk.  The fund will principally invest in large-cap segments of the U.S. stock market. Large-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. During a period when large-cap U.S. stocks fall behind other types of investments — mid-or small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s large-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Growth investing risk.  Growth stocks can be volatile. Growth companies usually invest a high portion of earnings in their businesses and may lack the dividends of value stocks that can cushion stock prices in a falling market. The prices of growth stocks are based largely on projections of the issuer’s future earnings and revenues. If a company’s earnings or revenues fall short of expectations, its stock price may fall dramatically. Growth stocks may also be more expensive relative to their earnings or assets compared to value or other stocks.

Foreign investment risk.  The fund’s investments in securities of foreign issuers may involve certain risks that are greater than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions; changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges); differing accounting, auditing, financial reporting and legal standards and practices; differing securities market structures; and higher transaction costs.

Derivatives risk.  The fund’s use of derivative instruments involves risks different from, or possibly greater than, the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments and could cause the fund to lose more than the

principal amount invested. In addition, investments in derivatives may involve leverage, which means a small percentage of assets invested in derivatives can have a disproportionately larger impact on the fund.

Leverage risk.  Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any increase or decrease in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities.

Liquidity risk.  A particular investment may be difficult to purchase or sell. The fund may be unable to sell illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price.

Securities lending risk.  Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent.

Your investment in the fund is not a bank deposit and is not insured or guaranteed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation or any other government agency.

For more information on the risks of investing in the fund please see the “Fund details” section in the prospectus.

Performance

The bar chart below shows how the fund’s investment results have varied from year to year, and the following table shows how the fund’s average annual total returns for various periods compared to that of an index. This information provides some indication of the risks of investing in the fund. All figures assume distributions were reinvested. Keep in mind that future performance (both before and after taxes) may differ from past performance. For current performance information, please see www.laudus.com/prospectus .

On July 13, 2009, the fund commenced operations as a member of Laudus Trust by acquiring all of the assets and liabilities of the UBS U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund (UBS Fund) in a tax-free reorganization. The fund has investment objectives, strategies, and policies substantially similar to those of the UBS Fund, which was advised by UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc., the subadviser to the fund. The performance history of the fund prior to July 13, 2009 is that of the Class Y Shares of the UBS Fund.

 

Annual total returns (%) as of 12/31

 

LOGO

Best quarter: 17.30% Q2 2009

Worst quarter: (22.54%) Q4 2008

Year-to-date performance (non-annualized and before

taxes) as of 6/30/2012:  11.09 %

 

 

2   Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund


Table of Contents
Average annual total returns (%) as of 12/31/11
       One year      Five years      Ten years  

Before taxes

     1.19%         4.99%         4.78%   

After taxes on distributions

     0.84%         4.85%         4.71%   

After taxes on distributions and sale of shares

     1.21%         4.27%         4.17%   

Comparative Index (reflects no deduction for expenses or taxes)

        

Russell 1000 Growth Index

     2.64%         2.50%         2.60%   

The after-tax figures reflect the highest individual federal income tax rates in effect during the period and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. Your actual after-tax returns depend on your individual tax situation. In addition, after-tax returns are not relevant if you hold your fund shares through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan, IRA or other tax-advantaged account.

Investment adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Subadviser

UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc. (UBS Global AM)

Portfolio manager

Lawrence G. Kemp, Managing Director of UBS Global AM and Head of the U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity portfolio construction team, has been portfolio manager of the fund since July 2009 and the predecessor fund since 2002.

Purchase and sale of fund shares

The fund is open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange is open. The minimum initial investment for the fund is $100. The minimum may be waived for certain investors or in the fund’s sole discretion.

You may invest directly in the fund by placing purchase, exchange and redemption orders through the fund’s transfer agent. Investors must contact the transfer agent by phone or in writing to obtain an account application. Investors may contact the transfer agent:

 

   

by telephone at 1-800-447-3332; or

 

   

by mail in writing at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266.

When you place orders to purchase, exchange or redeem fund shares through an account at Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Schwab) or another financial intermediary, you must follow Schwab’s or the other financial intermediary’s transaction procedures.

Tax information

Dividends and capital gains distributions received from the fund will generally be taxable as ordinary income or capital gains, unless you are investing through an IRA, 401(k) or other tax-advantaged account.

Payments to financial intermediaries

If you purchase shares of the fund through a broker-dealer or other financial intermediary (such as a bank), the fund and its related companies may pay the intermediary for the sale of fund shares and related services. These payments may create a conflict of interest by influencing the broker-dealer or other financial intermediary and your salesperson to recommend the fund over another investment. Ask your salesperson or visit your financial intermediary’s website for more information.

 

 

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund     3   


Table of Contents

Fund details

Investment objectives, strategies and risks

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

The following is a description of the investment objective, investment strategies and principal risks of the fund. Except as explicitly described otherwise, the investment objective, strategies and policies of the fund may be changed without shareholder approval.

Investment objective

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation.

The fund’s investment objective is not fundamental, and, therefore, may be changed by the fund’s Board of Trustees without shareholder approval.

Investment strategy

Under normal circumstances, the fund invests at least 80% of its net assets (plus borrowings for investment purposes, if any) in equity securities of U.S. large capitalization companies. The fund defines large capitalization companies as those with a market capitalization of at least $3 billion at the time of investment. In addition, up to 20% of the fund’s net assets may be invested in foreign equity securities. Investments in equity securities include common stock and preferred stock. The fund may, but is not required to, use derivative instruments (“derivatives”) for risk management purposes or as part of the fund’s investment strategies. Generally, derivatives are financial contracts whose value depends upon, or is derived from, the value of an underlying asset, reference rate, or index, and may relate to stocks, bonds, interest rates, currencies or currency exchange rates, and related indexes. The principal types of derivatives used by the fund include options, futures and forward currency agreements. The fund may use derivatives to earn income and enhance returns, to manage or adjust the risk profile of the fund, to replace more traditional direct investments, or to obtain exposure to certain markets. The fund will notify shareholders at least 60 days prior to any change in its policy of investing at least 80% of its net assets (plus borrowings for investment purposes, if any) in equity securities of U.S. large capitalization companies.

The fund will invest in companies within its capitalization range as described above. However, the fund may invest a portion of its assets in securities outside of this range. Further, if movement in the market price causes a security to change from one capitalization range to another, the fund is not required to dispose of the security.

The fund may engage in active and frequent trading of the securities in its portfolio (e.g., greater than 100% turnover), which would increase transaction costs incurred by the fund. In addition, when the fund engages in active and frequent trading, a larger portion of the distributions investors receive from the fund may reflect short-term capital gains which are taxed like ordinary income, rather than long-term capital gain distributions.

For temporary defensive purposes during unusual economic or market conditions or for liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short-term obligations. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

In selecting securities, the subadviser seeks to invest in companies that possess dominant market positions or franchises, a major technological edge, or a unique competitive advantage. To this end, the subadviser considers earnings revision trends, expected earnings growth rates, sales acceleration, price earnings multiples and positive stock price momentum, when selecting securities. The subadviser expects that these companies can sustain an above average return on invested capital at a higher level and over a longer period of time than is reflected in the current market prices.

In deciding whether an investment is tied to the U.S., the subadviser considers a number of factors including whether the investment is issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of its agencies; the investment has its primary trading market in the U.S.; the issuer is organized under the laws of, derives at least 50% of its revenues from, or has at least 50% of its assets in, the U.S.; the investment is included in an index representative of the U.S.; and the investment is exposed to the economic fortunes and risks of the U.S.

Principal risks

The fund is subject to risks, any of which could cause an investor to lose money.

Market risk. Stock markets rise and fall daily. As with any investment whose performance is tied to these markets, the value of your investment in the fund will fluctuate, which means that you could lose money.

Management risk. As with all actively managed funds, the strategies of the fund’s subadviser may not achieve their desired results. Poor stock selection or a focus on securities in a particular sector may cause the fund to underperform its benchmark or other funds with a similar investment objective.

 

4   Fund details


Table of Contents

Equity risk. The prices of equity securities rise and fall daily. These price movements may result from factors affecting individual companies, industries or the securities market as a whole. Individual companies may report poor results or be negatively affected by industry and/or economic trends and developments. The prices of securities issued by such companies may suffer a decline in response. In addition, the equity market tends to move in cycles which may cause stock prices to fall over short or extended periods of time. Due to their fixed income features, preferred stocks provide higher income potential than issuers’ common stocks, but typically are more sensitive to interest rate changes than the underlying common stock. The rights of common stockholders are generally subordinate to the rights associated with an issuer’s preferred stocks and the rights of preferred stockholders are generally subordinate to the rights associated with an issuer’s debt securities on the distribution of an issuer’s assets in the event of a liquidation.

Large-cap risk. Many of the risks of this fund are associated with its investment in the large-cap segments of the U.S. stock market. Large-cap stocks tend to go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. During a period when large-cap U.S. stocks fall behind other types of investments — mid-or small-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s large-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Growth investing risk. Growth stocks can be volatile for several reasons. Since growth companies usually invest a high portion of earnings in their businesses, they may lack the dividends of value stocks that can cushion stock prices in a falling market. The prices of growth stocks are based largely on projections of the issuer’s future earnings and revenues. If a company’s earnings or revenues fall short of expectations, its stock price may fall dramatically. Growth stocks may also be more expensive relative to their earnings or assets compared to value or other stocks.

Foreign investment risk. The fund’s investments in securities of foreign issuers involve certain risks that are greater than those associated with investments in securities of U.S. issuers. These include risks of adverse changes in foreign economic, political, regulatory and other conditions, or changes in currency exchange rates or exchange control regulations (including limitations on currency movements and exchanges). In certain countries, legal remedies available to investors may be more limited than those available with respect to investments in the United States. The securities of some foreign companies may be less liquid and, at times, more volatile than securities of comparable U.S. companies. The fund may also experience more rapid or extreme changes in value as compared to a fund that invests solely in securities of U.S. companies because the securities markets of many foreign countries are relatively small, with a limited number of companies representing a small number of industries. There also is the risk that the cost of buying, selling, and holding foreign securities, including brokerage, tax, and custody costs, may be higher than those involved in domestic transactions.

Currency risk. As a result of the fund’s investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies, the fund will be subject to currency risk. This is the risk that those currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. dollar, or, in the case of hedging positions, that the U.S. dollar will decline in value relative to the currency hedged. In either event, the dollar value of an investment in the fund would be adversely affected. Currencies in non-U.S. countries may fluctuate significantly over short periods of time for a number of reasons, including changes in interest rates, intervention by U.S. or foreign governments, central banks or supranational agencies, such as the International Monetary Fund, or by the imposition of currency controls or other political developments in the United States or abroad.

Derivatives risk. The fund may, but is not required to, use derivatives to earn income and enhance returns, to manage or adjust the risk profile of the fund, to replace more traditional direct investments, or to obtain exposure to certain markets. A future is an agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specific price on a specific day. An option is the right to buy or sell an instrument at a specific price before a specific date. A forward currency agreement involves an obligation to purchase or sell a specific currency at a future date, which may be any fixed number of days from the date of the contract agreed upon by the parties, at a price set at the time of the contract. The fund’s use of derivatives involves risks different from or possibly greater than the risks associated with investing directly in securities and other traditional investments. Certain of these risks, such as leverage risk, market risk, liquidity risk and management risk, are discussed elsewhere in this section. The fund’s use of derivatives is also subject to credit risk, lack of availability risk, valuation risk, correlation risk and tax risk. Credit risk is the risk that the counterparty to a derivative may not fulfill its contractual obligations. Lack of availability risk is the risk that suitable derivatives may not be available in all circumstances for risk management or other purposes. Valuation risk is the risk that a particular derivative may be valued incorrectly. Correlation risk is the risk that changes in the value of the derivative may not correlate perfectly with the underlying asset, rate or index. Tax risk is the risk that the use of derivatives may cause the fund to realize higher amounts of short-term capital gain. These risks could cause the fund to lose more than the principal amount invested.

Leverage risk. The fund’s transactions in derivatives may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

Liquidity risk. Liquidity risk exists when particular investments are difficult to purchase or sell. The market for certain investments may become illiquid due to specific adverse changes in the conditions of a particular issuer or under adverse market or economic conditions independent of the issuer. The fund’s investments in illiquid securities may reduce the returns of the fund because it may be unable to sell the illiquid securities at an advantageous time or price. Further, transactions in illiquid securities may entail transaction costs that are higher than those for transactions in liquid securities.

 

Fund details     5   


Table of Contents

Securities lending risk. The fund may lend its portfolio securities to brokers, dealers, and other financial institutions provided a number of conditions are satisfied, including that the loan is fully collateralized. When the fund lends portfolio securities, its investment performance will continue to reflect changes in the value of the securities loaned, and the fund will also receive a fee or interest on the collateral. Securities lending involves the risk of loss of rights in the collateral or delay in recovery of the collateral if the borrower fails to return the security loaned or becomes insolvent. The fund will also bear the risk of any decline in value of securities acquired with cash collateral. The fund may pay lending fees to a party arranging the loan.

P ortfolio holdings

The fund may make various types of portfolio securities information available to shareholders. The fund generally posts a detailed list of the securities held by the fund at www.laudus.com/prospectus (under “Portfolio Holdings”), as of the most recent calendar quarter-end. This list is generally updated approximately 30 days after the end of the calendar quarter remaining posted until at least the following calendar quarter. The fund also posts in the “Analysis & Commentary” section of the website fund fact sheets containing certain summary portfolio attributes, including top ten holdings, approximately 20-30 days after the end of the calendar quarter. The fund may exclude any portion of these portfolio holdings from publication when deemed in the best interest of the fund. Further, information regarding the fund’s policy and procedures on the disclosure of portfolio securities information is available in the SAI. In addition, shareholders can learn more about the availability of portfolio securities information by calling the fund at 1-800-447-3332.

 

6   Fund details


Table of Contents

Financial highlights

This section provides further details about the fund’s financial history for the past five years. Certain information reflects financial results for a single fund share. “Total return” shows the percentage that an investor in the fund would have earned or lost during a given period, assuming all distributions were reinvested. The fund’s independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, audited these figures for fiscal years ended 2010, 2011 and 2012. Their full report is included in the fund’s annual report (see back cover). Prior fiscal periods before 2010 were audited by the UBS Fund’s independent registered public accounting firm.

On July 13, 2009, the fund commenced operations as a member of Laudus Trust by acquiring all of the assets and liabilities of the UBS Fund in a tax-free reorganization. The financial history of the fund prior to that date is that of the Class Y Shares of the UBS Fund.

 

     4/1/11–
3/31/12
    4/1/10–
3/31/11
    7/1/09–
3/31/10
1
    7/1/08–
6/30/09
    7/1/07–
6/30/08
    7/1/06–
6/30/07
               
Per-Share Data ($)                                                                     

Net asset value at beginning of period

     13.36        11.23        8.68        11.45        10.94        9.02           
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

                    

Net investment income (loss)

     (0.02 ) 2       0.01 2       0.01 2       0.03 2       0.01 2       0.04 2          

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     1.77        2.13        2.58        (2.80     0.59        1.90           
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

Total from investment operations

     1.75        2.14        2.59        (2.77     0.60        1.94           

Less distributions:

                    

Distributions from net investment income

            (0.01     (0.04            (0.01     (0.02        

Distributions from net realized gains

     (0.28                          (0.08               
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

Total distributions

     (0.28     (0.01     (0.04            (0.09     (0.02        
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

Net asset value at end of period

     14.83        13.36        11.23        8.68        11.45        10.94           
  

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

 

   

 

  

 

  

 

Total return (%)

     13.58        19.07        30.02 3       (24.19     5.52        21.51           
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                                     

Ratios to average net assets:

                    

Net operating expenses

     0.78        0.78        0.78 4       0.80        0.80        0.80           

Gross operating expenses

     0.88        0.94        0.99 4       1.23        1.21        1.25           

Net investment income (loss)

     (0.17     0.06        0.12 4       0.41        0.05        0.35           

Portfolio turnover rate

     96        98        72 3       132        102        112           

Net assets, end of period ($ x 1,000)

     1,029,502        468,963        214,872        54,344        76,175        62,529           

 

1  

Effective July 13, 2009, all outstanding Class A, B, and C shares in the UBS U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund (UBS Growth Fund) were converted to Class Y shares, and the UBS Growth Fund’s assets were acquired by Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund which commenced operations on that day. The Financial Highlights above present the Y Class shares of the UBS Growth Fund prior to the acquisition date of July 13, 2009 and Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund subsequent to that date. (Note that the UBS Growth Fund had a fiscal year ending June 30 whereas the Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund has a fiscal year ending March 31).

 

2  

Calculated based on the average shares outstanding during the period.

 

3  

Not annualized.

 

4  

Annualized.

 

Financial highlights     7   


Table of Contents

Management of the fund

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (CSIM), 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, serves as the fund’s investment adviser. UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc. (UBS Global AM), 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10019, serves as subadviser to the fund.

Founded in 1989, CSIM today serves as investment adviser for all of the Schwab Funds, Schwab ETFs and Laudus Funds. The firm had more than $204 billion under management as of June 30, 2012.

UBS Global AM is an investment management firm managing approximately $151 billion, as of March 31, 2012, primarily for institutional pension and profit sharing funds. UBS Global AM is an indirect wholly owned subsidiary of UBS AG and a member of the UBS Global Asset Management Division, which had approximately $620 billion in assets under management as of March 31, 2012.

In its capacity as subadviser, UBS Global AM provides day-to-day portfolio management services to the fund, while, as adviser, CSIM supervises UBS Global AM and assumes other functions, including managing the fund’s other affairs and business, subject to the supervision of the Board of Trustees.

The fund pays CSIM an advisory fee for these services on a monthly basis. The fee paid is based on a percentage of the fund’s average daily net assets. CSIM — and not the fund — pays a portion of the advisory fees it receives to UBS Global AM in return for its services.

For the 12 months ended March 31, 2012, the advisory fee paid to CSIM, after waivers and/or reimbursements, was 0.59% for the fund, expressed as a percentage of the fund’s average daily net assets.

CSIM has entered into an expense limitation agreement to waive its management fees and bear certain expenses until July 30, 2014, to limit the total annual operating expenses of the fund. Under that agreement, any amounts waived or reimbursed in a particular fiscal year will be subject to reimbursement by the fund to CSIM during the next two fiscal years to the extent that repayment will not cause the fund’s expenses to exceed the limit (as stated in the expense limitation agreement) during the respective year.

A discussion regarding the basis for the Board of Trustee’s approval of the fund’s investment advisory and sub-advisory agreements is available in the fund’s semiannual report dated September 30, 2011, which covers the period March 1, 2011 through September 30, 2011.

Lawrence G. Kemp serves as the portfolio manager for the fund. Mr. Kemp, as portfolio manager and coordinator for management of the fund, is responsible for managing the portfolio and reviewing the overall composition of the portfolio to ensure its compliance with its stated investment objective and strategies. Mr. Kemp is Head of the U.S. Large Cap Growth Equity portfolio construction team at UBS Global AM. Mr. Kemp is also a Managing Director of UBS Global AM and has been an investment professional with the firm since 1992.

Additional information about the portfolio manager’s compensation, other accounts managed by the portfolio manager and the portfolio manager’s ownership of securities in the fund is available in the Statement of Additional Information (SAI).

 

8   Management of the fund


Table of Contents

Investing in the fund

In this section, you will find information on buying, selling and exchanging shares. You may invest directly in the fund by placing orders through the fund’s transfer agent (direct orders). You may invest in the fund through an intermediary by placing orders through your brokerage account with a broker/dealer, investment adviser, 401(k) plan, employee benefit plan, administrator, bank, or other financial intermediary (intermediary) that is authorized to accept orders on behalf of the fund (intermediary orders). Helpful information on taxes is included as well.

Investing directly with the fund

Opening an account to place direct orders

You may place direct orders for the fund’s shares. First, you must open an account with the fund through the fund’s transfer agent, Boston Financial Data Services (transfer agent), prior to placing direct orders. You may obtain an account application by calling the transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332. Your completed application and supporting documents must be returned to, and accepted by, the transfer agent before you can place direct orders. You cannot place direct orders through your account at an intermediary.

Initial and additional direct purchases by wire

Subject to acceptance by the fund, shares of the fund may be purchased by wiring federal funds. Please first contact the fund at 1-800-447-3332 for complete wiring instructions. Notification must be given to the fund at 1-800-447-3332 prior to the close of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) (generally 4:00 p.m., Eastern time) on the wire date. Federal funds purchases will be accepted only on a day on which the fund, the distributor and the custodian are all open for business. A completed account application must be faxed to the fund on the day the wire is sent and must also be overnighted to the fund at Boston Financial Data Services, Inc., Attn: Laudus Trust, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266. Please call 1-800-447-3332 for details.

Initial and additional direct purchases by mail

Subject to acceptance by the fund, you may open an account and make your initial purchase and any additional purchases of the fund’s shares by mail. To open an account by mail, complete and sign the account application and mail the account application, all supporting documents and a check for the desired purchase amount to the transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266. The name of the fund should be specified on the account application. Additional investments may be made at any time by mailing a check (payable to Laudus Trust) to the transfer agent at the address above. Be sure to include your account number on your check.

Subject to acceptance by the fund, payment for the purchase of shares received by mail will be credited to a shareholder’s account at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after receipt, even though the check may not yet have been converted into federal funds. For purposes of calculating the purchase price of fund shares, a purchase order is received by the fund on the day that it is in good order unless it is rejected by the fund’s transfer agent. For a cash purchase order of fund shares to be in good order on a particular day, a check must be received on or before the close of the fund (generally 4:00 p.m. Eastern time or the close of the NYSE, whichever is earlier) on that day. If the payment is received by the fund after the deadline, the purchase price of fund shares will be based upon the next determination of net asset value of fund shares. No currency, third party checks, foreign checks, starter checks, credit card checks, traveler’s checks or money orders will be accepted by the fund.

Automatic investment program

An eligible shareholder may also participate in the Laudus Funds Automatic Investment Program, an investment plan that automatically debits money from the shareholder’s bank account or an account at a broker or other intermediary and invests it in the fund through the use of electronic funds transfers. Investors may commence their participation in this program by making a minimum initial investment that satisfies the minimum investment amount for the fund and may elect to make subsequent investments by transfers of a minimum of $50 into their established fund account. Intermediaries may establish different minimum subsequent transaction amounts. You should contact the Trust for more information about the Laudus Funds Automatic Investment Program.

Individual retirement accounts

The fund may be used to fund individual retirement accounts (IRAs). A special application must be completed in order to create such an account. Contributions to IRAs are subject to prevailing amount limits set by the Internal Revenue Service. For more information about IRAs, call the Trust at 1-800-447-3332.

 

Investing in the fund     9   


Table of Contents

Direct redemptions by telephone

If you authorized the telephone redemption option in the account application, you may place a redemption order by calling the transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332 and requesting that the redemption proceeds be wired per the authorized instructions in the account application or mailed to the primary registration address. Your redemption order will be processed at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after receipt of your telephone redemption order by the transfer agent. Please note that the transfer agent may only act on telephone instructions believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. The transfer agent’s records of such instructions are binding on the shareholder. The shareholder, not the fund or the transfer agent, bears the risk of loss in the event of unauthorized instructions reasonably believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. The transfer agent will employ reasonable procedures to confirm that instructions communicated are genuine. These procedures include tape recording of telephone instructions and requiring some form of personal identification prior to acting upon instructions received by telephone.

Direct redemptions by mail

You may redeem your fund shares by mail by sending a request letter to the fund’s transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, PO Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266. Your redemption request will be processed by the fund at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after the request is received in good order. To be in good order, the redemption request must include the name of the fund and the number of shares or the dollar amount to be redeemed, all required signatures, authorizations and any required signature guarantees, and other supporting legal documents, if required, in the case of estates, trusts, guardianships, custodianships, corporations, pension and profit sharing plans and other organizations.

Additional direct redemption information

To protect you, the fund and its service providers from fraud, signature guarantees may be required to enable the transfer agent to verify the identity of the person who has authorized a redemption from an account. Signature guarantees are required for (1) redemptions where the proceeds are to be sent to someone other than the registered shareholder(s) at the registered address, (2) redemptions if your account address has changed within the last 10 business days, (3) share transfer requests, and (4) redemptions where the proceeds are wired in connection with bank instructions not already on file with the transfer agent. Signature guarantees may be obtained from certain eligible financial institutions, including, but not limited to, the following: U.S. banks, trust companies, credit unions, securities brokers and dealers, savings and loan associations and participants in the Securities and Transfer Association Medallion Program (STAMP), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program (SEMP) or the New York Stock Exchange Medallion Signature Program (MSP). Signature guarantees from non-U.S. banks that do not include a stamp may require a U.S. consulate stamp. You may contact the transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332 for further details.

The fund will not make payment on redemptions of shares purchased by check until payment of the purchase price has been collected, which may take up to fifteen days after purchase. Shareholders can avoid this delay by utilizing the wire purchase option.

Systematic withdrawal plan

An owner of $12,000 or more of shares of the fund may elect to have periodic redemptions made from the investor’s account to be paid on a monthly, quarterly, semiannual or annual basis. The maximum payment per year is 12% of the account value at the time of the election. The Trust will normally redeem a sufficient number of shares to make the scheduled redemption payments on a date selected by the shareholder. Depending on the size of the payment requested and fluctuation in the net asset value, if any, of the shares redeemed, redemptions for the purpose of making such payments may reduce or even exhaust the account. A shareholder may request that these payments be sent to a predesignated bank or other designated party. Capital gains and dividend distributions paid to the account will automatically be reinvested at net asset value on the distribution payment date.

Direct exchange privileges

Upon request, and subject to certain limitations, shares of the fund, may be exchanged into shares of any other fund of the Trust. In order to exchange your shares to another fund of the Trust, you must satisfy the minimum requirements for a class of shares of the new fund. Direct investors should contact the Trust at 1-800-447-3332. Although the Trust has no current intention of terminating or modifying the exchange privileges, it reserves the right to do so at any time. An exchange of your shares for shares of another Laudus Fund is taxable as a sale of a security on which a gain or loss may be recognized. Shareholders should receive written confirmation of an exchange within a few days of the completion of the transaction. A new account opened by exchange must be established with the same name(s), address(es) and social security number(s) as the existing account. All exchanges will be made based on the respective net asset values next determined following receipt of the request by the fund containing the information indicated below. Shareholders should obtain and read the prospectus for the fund into which you are exchanging prior to placing your order.

Direct exchanges by telephone

If you authorized the telephone redemption option in the account application, you may exchange fund shares by telephone by calling the fund’s transfer agent at 1-800-447-3332. Please be prepared to provide the following information: (a) the account number, tax identification

 

10   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

number and account registration; (b) the class of shares to be exchanged from and into; (c) the name of the fund from which and the fund into which the exchange is to be made; and (d) the dollar or share amount to be exchanged. Please note that the transfer agent may act only on telephone instructions believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. Please see the section entitled “Direct redemptions by telephone” for more information regarding transacting with the fund’s transfer agent via telephone.

Direct exchanges by mail

To exchange fund shares by mail, simply send a letter of instruction to the fund’s transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Laudus Trust, PO Box 8032, Boston, MA 02266. The letter of instruction must include: (a) your account number; (b) the class of shares to be exchanged from and into; (c) the fund from and the fund into which the exchange is to be made; (d) the dollar or share amount to be exchanged; and (e) the signatures of all registered owners or authorized parties.

The fund reserves the right to suspend or terminate the privilege of exchanging shares of the fund by mail or by telephone at any time.

Investing through a financial intermediary

Placing orders through your intermediary

When you place orders through an intermediary, you are not placing your orders directly with the fund, and you must follow the intermediary’s transaction procedures. Your intermediary may impose different or additional conditions than the fund on purchases, redemptions and exchanges of fund shares. These differences may include initial, subsequent and maintenance investment requirements, exchange policies, fund choices, cut-off times for investment and trading restrictions. Your intermediary may independently establish and charge its customers transaction fees, account fees and other fees in addition to the fees charged by the fund. These additional fees may vary over time and would increase the cost of your investment and lower investment returns. You should consult your intermediary directly for information regarding these conditions and fees. The fund is not responsible for the failure of your intermediary to carry out its responsibilities.

Only certain intermediaries are authorized to accept orders on behalf of the fund. If your fund shares are no longer held by an authorized intermediary, the fund may impose restrictions on your ability to manage or maintain your shares. For example, you will not be able to place orders to purchase additional shares. To remove these restrictions, you have two options. First, you may move your shares to another intermediary that is authorized to accept fund orders. Second, you may maintain a direct account with the fund if your completed account application and supporting documentation is returned to and accepted by the fund’s transfer agent.

Other investing information

For purposes of calculating the purchase price of fund shares, a purchase order is received by the Trust on the day that it is in “good order” unless it is rejected by the transfer agent. For a cash purchase order of fund shares to be in “good order” on a particular day, a check or money wire must be received on or before the close of the NYSE (generally 4:00 p.m., Eastern time) on that day. If the payment is received by the Trust after the deadline, the purchase price of fund shares will be based upon the next determination of net asset value of fund shares. No currency, third party checks, foreign checks, starter checks, credit card checks, traveler’s checks or money orders will be accepted.

The Trust reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to suspend the offering of shares of the fund or to reject purchase orders when, in its judgment, such suspension or rejection would be in the best interests of the Trust or the fund. The Trust discourages market timing and maintains procedures designed to provide reasonable assurances that such activity will be identified and terminated, including the imposition of the redemption fee. You may be subject to a fee of 2% if you redeem or exchange your shares within 30 days of purchase. Purchases of the fund’s shares may be made in full or in fractional shares of the fund (calculated to three decimal places). In the interest of economy and convenience, certificates for shares will not be issued.

When selling or exchanging shares, you should be aware of the following fund policies:

 

 

The fund may take up to seven days to pay sale proceeds.

 

 

The fund reserves the right to redeem your shares in-kind (i.e., for portfolio securities) in accordance with the fund’s procedures and applicable regulatory requirements.

 

 

Exchange orders are limited to other funds of the Laudus Trust and must meet the minimum investment and other requirements for the fund and share class into which you are exchanging.

 

 

If you are selling shares that were recently purchased by check, the proceeds may be delayed until the check for purchase clears; this may take up to 15 days from the date of purchase.

 

 

You should read the prospectus for the fund into which you are exchanging prior to placing your order.

Investments in-kind

Shares of the fund may be purchased in exchange for common stocks or bonds or by a combination of such securities and cash. Purchase of shares of the fund in exchange for securities is subject in each case to CSIM’s and the subadviser’s determination that the securities to be

 

Investing in the fund     11   


Table of Contents

exchanged are acceptable. Securities accepted in exchange for fund shares will be valued as set forth under “Share price” (generally the last quoted sale price) as of the time of the next determination of net asset value after such acceptance. All dividends, subscription or other rights which are reflected in the market price of accepted securities at the time of valuation become the property of the fund and must be delivered to the fund upon receipt by the investor from the issuer. Generally, the exchange of common stocks for shares of the fund will be a taxable event for federal income tax purposes, which will trigger gain or loss to an investor subject to federal income taxation, measured by the difference between the value of the shares of the fund received and the investor’s basis in the securities tendered. Accordingly, you should consult your tax adviser before making such an in-kind purchase.

The fund will not accept securities in exchange for fund shares unless: (i) CSIM and the subadviser believe the securities are appropriate investments for the fund; (ii) the investor represents and agrees that all securities offered to the fund are not subject to any restrictions upon their sale by the fund under the Securities Act of 1933, or otherwise; and (iii) the securities may be acquired under the fund’s investment restrictions.

Further redemption information

The fund reserves the right to redeem your shares in-kind in accordance with the fund’s procedures and applicable regulatory requirements. If CSIM determines that it would not be in the best interests of the remaining shareholders of the fund to make a redemption payment wholly or partly in cash, the fund may instead pay the redemption price in whole or in part by a distribution in-kind of readily marketable securities held by the fund. The Trust may commit itself to pay in cash all requests for redemption by any shareholder of record, limited in amount with respect to each shareholder during any 90-day period to the lesser of: (i) $250,000, or (ii) one percent of net asset value of such fund at the beginning of such period. Securities used to redeem fund shares in-kind will be valued in accordance with the fund’s valuation procedures described in this prospectus. Securities distributed by the fund in-kind will be selected by the subadviser, under CSIM’s supervision, in light of the fund’s objective and generally will be a pro rata distribution of each security held in the fund’s portfolio. Investors may incur brokerage charges on the sale of securities received. Redemptions in-kind are taxable for federal income tax purposes in the same manner as redemptions for cash.

The fund may suspend the right of redemption and may postpone payment for a reasonable period when the NYSE is closed for other than weekends or holidays, or if permitted by the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), during periods when trading on the NYSE is restricted or during an emergency declared by the SEC which makes it impracticable for the fund to dispose of their securities or to determine the value of their net assets fairly, or during any other period permitted by the SEC for the protection of investors.

Share price

The fund is open for business each day that the NYSE is open. The fund calculates its share price each business day as of the close of the NYSE (generally 4 p.m. Eastern time). The fund’s share price is its net asset value per share, or NAV, which is the fund’s net assets divided by the number of its shares outstanding. Orders to buy, sell or exchange shares that are received by the fund in good order on or prior to the close of the fund (generally 4 p.m. Eastern time) will be executed at the next share price calculated that day.

When you place an order through your account at an intermediary, please consult with your intermediary to determine when your order will be executed. Generally, you will receive the share price next calculated after the fund receives your order from your intermediary. However, some intermediaries, may arrange with the fund for you to receive the share price next calculated after your intermediary has received your order. Some intermediaries may require that they receive orders prior to a specified cut-off time.

In valuing its securities, the fund uses market quotes or official closing prices if they are readily available. In cases where quotes are not readily available or the adviser deems them unreliable, the fund may value securities based on fair values developed using methods approved by the fund’s Board of Trustees.

Shareholders of the fund should be aware that because foreign markets are often open on weekends and other days when the fund is closed, the value of the fund’s portfolio may change on days when it is not possible to buy or sell shares of the fund.

Additional policies affecting your investment

Distributor

Shares of the fund are offered on a continuous basis through the Trust’s principal underwriter, ALPS Distributors, Inc. (distributor). The distributor’s principal offices are located at 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, Co 80203.

Investment minimums

The following table sets forth basic investment information for the fund.

 

Minimum initial investment

$100

 

12   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

Shares may be purchased by institutions, certain individual retirement accounts and individuals. In order to be eligible to purchase fund shares, an investor must make an initial investment of at least $100. The minimums may be waived for certain retirement plans and plan participants, and for certain investment programs, or in the fund’s sole discretion.

The Trustees have authorized the Trust to reimburse, out of the assets of the fund, intermediaries that provide sub-accounting and sub-transfer agency services an amount up to 0.10% of the average daily net assets of the fund on an annual basis.

Shares of the fund may be sold to corporations or other institutions such as trusts, foundations, broker-dealers or other intermediaries purchasing for the accounts of others. Investors purchasing and redeeming shares of the fund through an intermediary may be charged a transaction-based fee or other fee for the services provided by the intermediary. Each such intermediary is responsible for transmitting to its customers a schedule of any such fees and information regarding any additional or different conditions with respect to purchases and redemptions of fund shares. Customers of intermediaries should read this prospectus in light of the terms governing accounts with their particular organization.

Please note that intermediaries may impose additional or different conditions than the fund on purchases, redemptions or exchanges of fund shares, including different initial, subsequent and maintenance investment requirements.

The fund reserves certain rights, including the following:

 

 

To materially modify or terminate the exchange privilege upon 60 days’ written notice to shareholders.

 

 

To change or waive the fund’s investment minimums.

 

 

To withdraw or suspend any part of the offering made by this prospectus.

Payments by the investment adviser or its affiliates

The investment adviser or its affiliates may make cash payments out of their own resources, or provide products and services at a discount, to certain brokerage firms, banks, retirement plan service providers and other financial intermediaries that perform shareholder, recordkeeping, sub-accounting and other administrative services in connection with investments in fund shares. These payments or discounts are separate from, and may be in addition to, any shareholder service fees or other administrative fees the fund may pay to those intermediaries The investment adviser or its affiliates may also make cash payments out of their own resources, or provide products and services at a discount, to certain financial intermediaries that perform distribution, marketing, promotional or other distribution-related services. The payments or discounts described by this paragraph may be substantial; however, distribution-related services provided by such intermediaries are paid by the investment adviser or its affiliates, not by the fund or its shareholders.

Policy regarding short-term or excessive trading

The fund is intended for long-term investment and not for short-term or excessive trading (collectively “market timing”). Market timing may adversely impact the fund’s performance by disrupting the efficient management of the fund, increasing fund transaction costs and taxes, causing the fund to maintain higher cash balances, and diluting the value of the fund’s shares.

To discourage market timing, the fund’s Board of Trustees has adopted policies and procedures that are reasonably designed to reduce the risk of market timing by fund shareholders. The fund seeks to deter market timing through several methods. These methods may include: fair value pricing, imposition of redemption fees and trade activity monitoring. Fair value pricing and redemption fees are discussed more thoroughly in the subsequent pages of this prospectus and are considered to be key elements of the fund’s policy regarding short term or excessive trading. Trade activity monitoring is risk based and seeks to identify patterns of activity in amounts that might be detrimental to the fund.

Although these methods are designed to discourage market timing, there can be no guarantee that the fund will be able to identify and restrict investors that engage in such activities. In addition, some of these methods are inherently subjective and involve judgment in their application. The fund and its service providers seek to make these judgments and applications uniformly and in a manner that they believe is consistent with interests of the fund’s long-term shareholders. The fund may amend these policies and procedures in response to changing regulatory requirements or to enhance the effectiveness of the program.

The fund or its service providers maintain risk-based surveillance procedures designed to detect market timing in fund shares in amounts that might be detrimental to the fund. Under these procedures, the fund has requested that service providers to the fund monitor transactional activity in amounts and frequency determined by the fund to be significant to the fund and in a pattern of activity that potentially could be detrimental to the fund. If the fund, in its sole discretion based on these or other factors, determines that a shareholder has engaged in market timing, it may refuse to process future purchases or exchanges into the fund by that shareholder. These procedures may be modified from time to time as appropriate to improve the detection of market timing and to comply with applicable laws.

If trades are effected through a financial intermediary, the fund or its service providers will work with the intermediary to monitor possible market timing activity. The fund reserves the right to contact the intermediary to provide certain shareholder transaction information and may require the intermediary to restrict the shareholder from future purchases or exchanges in the fund. Transactions by fund shareholders investing through intermediaries may also be subject to the restrictions of the intermediary’s own frequent trading policies, which may

 

Investing in the fund     13   


Table of Contents

differ from those of the fund. The fund may defer to an intermediary’s frequent trading policies with respect to those shareholders who invest in the fund through such intermediary. The fund will defer to an intermediary’s policies only after the fund determines that the intermediary’s frequent trading policies are reasonably designed to deter transactional activity in amounts and frequency that are deemed to be significant to the fund and in a pattern of activity that potentially could be detrimental to the fund. Shareholders should consult with their intermediary to determine if additional frequent trading restrictions apply to their fund transactions.

The fund reserves the right to restrict, reject or cancel within a reasonable time, without prior notice, any purchase or exchange order for any reason.

Fair value pricing

The Board of Trustees has adopted procedures to fair value the fund’s securities when market prices are not “readily available” or are unreliable. For example, the fund may fair value a security when a security is de-listed or its trading is halted or suspended; when a security’s primary pricing source is unable or unwilling to provide a price; when a security’s primary trading market is closed during regular market hours; or when a security’s value is materially affected by events occurring after the close of the security’s primary trading market.

By fair valuing securities whose prices may have been affected by events occurring after the close of trading, the fund seeks to establish prices that investors might expect to realize upon the current sales of these securities. This methodology is designed to deter “arbitrage” market timers, who seek to exploit delays between the change in the value of the fund’s portfolio holdings and the net asset value of the fund’s shares, and seeks to help ensure that the prices at which the fund’s shares are purchased and redeemed are fair and do not result in dilution of shareholder interest or other harm to shareholders.

The fund makes fair value determinations in good faith in accordance with the fund’s valuation procedures. Due to the subjective and variable nature of fair value pricing, there can be no assurance that the fund could obtain the fair value assigned to the security upon the sale of such security.

Redemption fee

Shares redeemed or exchanged within 30 days of purchase, which shall be calculated to include the 30th day, will be subject to a fee of 2%, which is intended to limit short-term trading in the fund, or to the extent that short-term trading persists, to impose the costs of that type of activity on the shareholders who engage in it. Such fee will be paid to the fund. The fund treats shares that have been held the longest as being redeemed first. Fund shares purchased with reinvested dividends are not subject to redemption fees. The fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to waive such fee when, in its judgment, such waiver would be in the best interests of the fund. The fund may waive the redemption fee for retirement plans, wrap or fee-based programs, charitable giving funds, unregistered separate accounts, redemptions pursuant to rebalancing programs or systematic withdrawal plans established by the fund or financial intermediaries, and registered investment companies and redemptions initiated by the fund. In addition, certain financial intermediaries may use criteria and methods for tracking, applying and calculating the fees that are different from the fund’s but which the fund, in its discretion, may determine are in the best interests of the fund. While the fund discourages mutual fund market timing and maintains procedures designed to provide reasonable assurances that such activity will be identified and terminated, including the imposition of the redemption fee described above, no policy or procedure can guarantee that all such activity will in fact be identified or that such activity can be completely eliminated. The fund reserves the right to modify or eliminate the redemption fees or waivers at any time.

Customer identification and verification and anti-money laundering program

Federal law requires all financial institutions to obtain, verify and record information that identifies each person who opens an account. When you open your account, you will have to provide your name, address, date of birth, identification number and other information that will allow the fund or your financial intermediary to identify you. This information is subject to verification to ensure the identity of all persons opening an account.

The fund or your financial intermediary is required by law to reject your new account application if the required identifying information is not provided. The fund or your financial intermediary may contact you in an attempt to collect any missing information required on the application, and your application may be rejected if they are unable to obtain this information. In certain instances, the fund or your financial intermediary is required to collect documents, which will be used solely to establish and verify your identity.

The fund will accept investments and your order will be processed at the NAV next determined after receipt of your application in proper form (or upon receipt of all identifying information required on the application). The fund, however, reserves the right to close and/or liquidate your account at the then-current day’s price if the fund or your financial intermediary is unable to verify your identity. As a result, you may be subject to a gain or loss on fund shares and will be subject to corresponding tax consequences.

Customer identification and verification is part of the fund’s overall obligation to deter money laundering under Federal law. The fund has adopted an Anti-Money Laundering Compliance Program designed to prevent the fund from being used for money laundering or the financing of terrorist activities. In this regard, the fund reserves the right to (i) refuse, cancel or rescind any purchase or exchange order; (ii) freeze any account and/or suspend account services; or (iii) involuntarily close your account in cases of threatening conduct or

 

14   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

suspected fraudulent or illegal activity. These actions will be taken when, in the sole discretion of fund management, they are deemed to be in the best interest of the fund or in cases when the fund is requested or compelled to do so by governmental or law enforcement authority. If your account is closed at the request of governmental or law enforcement authority, you may not receive proceeds of the redemption if the fund is required to withhold such proceeds.

A note on mailing procedures:  If two or more members of a household own the fund, we may economize on fund expenses by sending only one financial report and prospectus. If you need additional copies or do not want your mailings to be “householded”, please call the Trust at 1-800-447-3332 or write to the Trust.

Distributions and taxes

The fund intends to pay out as dividends substantially all of its net income and net short-term and long-term capital gains (after reduction by any available capital loss carry-forwards). It is the policy of the fund to declare and pay distributions of its dividends and interest annually, although it may do so more frequently as determined by the Trustees of the Trust. The fund’s policy is to distribute net short-term capital gains and net long-term gains annually, although it may do so more frequently as determined by the Trustees of the Trust to the extent permitted by applicable regulations. During the fourth quarter of the year, typically in early November, an estimate of the fund’s year-end distribution, if any, may be made available on the fund’s website: www.laudus.com. The amount of any distribution will change and there is no guarantee the fund will declare and pay dividend income or distribute a capital gain.

All dividends and/or distributions will be paid out in the form of additional shares of the fund at net asset value unless the shareholder elects to receive cash. Shareholders may make this election by marking the appropriate box on the account application or by writing to the Trust.

If you elect to receive distributions in cash and checks are returned and marked as “undeliverable” or remain uncashed for six months, your cash election will be changed automatically and your future dividend and capital gains distributions will be reinvested in that fund at the per share net asset value determined as of the date of payment of the distribution. In addition, any undeliverable checks or checks that remain uncashed for six months will be canceled and will be reinvested in that fund at the per share net asset value determined as of the date of cancellation.

The fund intends to qualify each year as a regulated investment company under Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Code) and to meet all requirements necessary to avoid paying any federal income or excise taxes. For federal income tax purposes, distributions of investment income are generally taxable as ordinary income. Taxes on distributions of capital gains are determined by how long the fund owned the investments that generated them, rather than how long a shareholder has owned his or her shares. Distributions of net capital gains from the sale of investments that the fund owned for more than one year and that are properly reported by the fund as capital gain dividends will be taxable as long-term capital gains. Distributions of gains from the sale of investments that the fund owned for one year or less will be taxable as ordinary income. For taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012, distributions of investment income reported by the fund as derived from “qualified dividend income” will be taxed in the hands of individuals at the rates applicable to long-term capital gain, provided holding period and other requirements are met at both the shareholder and fund level. The fund will notify its shareholders as to what portion of fund distributions are reported as qualified dividend income.

Distributions are taxable to shareholders even if they are paid from income or gains earned by the fund before a shareholder’s investment (and thus were included in the price the shareholder paid). Distributions are taxable whether shareholders receive them in cash or in the form of additional shares of the fund to which the distribution relates. Any gain resulting from the sale or exchange of fund shares generally will be taxable as capital gains. For tax purposes, an exchange of your fund shares for shares of a different fund is the same as a sale. The gain or loss generally will be treated as short term if you held the shares for one year or less, long term if you held the shares for longer.

Long-term capital gain rates applicable to individuals have been temporarily reduced — in general, to 15% with lower rates applying to taxpayers in the 10% and 15% rate brackets — for taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012.

The fund will provide federal tax information annually, including information about dividends and distributions paid during the preceding year.

The fund’s investments in foreign securities may be subject to foreign withholding taxes. In that case, the fund’s return on those securities would be decreased. 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. If more than 50% of the fund’s assets at fiscal year-end is represented by debt and equity securities of foreign corporations, the fund intends to elect to permit shareholders who are U.S. citizens, resident aliens or U.S. corporations to claim a foreign tax credit or deduction (but not both) on their U.S. income tax returns for their pro rata portion of qualified taxes paid by a fund to foreign countries in respect of foreign securities the fund has held for at least the minimum period specified in the Code. For the purposes of the foreign tax credit, each such shareholder would include in gross income from foreign sources its pro rata share of such taxes. Certain limitations imposed by the Code may prevent shareholders from receiving a full foreign tax credit or deduction for their allocable amount of such taxes.

 

Investing in the fund     15   


Table of Contents

To the extent such investments are permissible for the fund, the fund’s transactions in derivatives will be subject to special tax rules (including mark-to-market, constructive sale, straddle, and wash sale rules), the effect of which may be to accelerate income to the fund, defer losses to the fund, cause adjustments in the holding periods of the fund’s securities, convert long-term capital gains into short-term gains or convert short-term capital losses into long-term capital losses. These rules could therefore affect the amount, timing and character of distributions to shareholders. The fund’s use of such transactions may result in the fund realizing more short-term capital gains (subject to tax at ordinary income tax rates) and ordinary income subject to tax at ordinary income tax rates than it would if it did not engage in such transactions.

The foregoing is a general summary of the federal income tax consequences of investing in the fund to shareholders who are U.S. citizens or U.S. corporations. Shareholders should consult their own tax advisors about the tax consequences of an investment in the fund in light of each shareholder’s particular tax situation. Shareholders should also consult their own tax advisors about consequences under foreign, state, local or other applicable tax laws.

 

16   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

Notes


Table of Contents

LOGO

 

    

COMMAND PERFORMANCE TM

 

For More Information about the Fund:

Statement of Additional Information (SAI):

The SAI provides additional information about the fund. It is incorporated by reference into this Prospectus and is legally considered a part of this Prospectus.

Annual and Semi-Annual Reports:

Additional information about the fund’s investments will be available in the fund’s Annual and Semi-Annual Reports to shareholders. In the fund’s Annual Report, you will find a discussion of market conditions and investment strategies that significantly affected the fund’s performance during the last fiscal year.

You may review and copy, for a fee, the fund’s Annual and Semi-Annual Reports and the SAI in person at, or by writing to, the Public Reference Section of the Commission, Washington D.C. 20549-1520, or by electronic request via e-mail at the following addresses: publicinfo@sec.gov. Information on the operation of the Commission’s Public Reference Room can be obtained by calling 1-202-551-8090. You may obtain reports and other information about the fund for free from the EDGAR database on the Commission’s website at http://www.sec.gov.

You may also obtain free copies of the SAI and the Annual and Semi-Annual Reports on the fund’s website at www.laudus.com/prospectus. To request that a copy of the SAI and the Annual and Semi-Annual Reports be mailed to you, free of charge, or to request other information about the fund or make shareholder inquiries, you may contact the fund at:

Laudus Trust

P.O. Box 8032

Boston, Massachusetts 02266

1.800.447.3332 Retail Investors

1.866.452.8387 Registered Investment Professionals

 

LAUDUS TRUST

Investment Company Act File No. 811-5547

REG48076FLT-04 (07/2012)


Table of Contents

LAUDUS TRUST

STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

LAUDUS MONDRIAN INTERNATIONAL EQUITY FUND

Investor Shares: LIEQX              Select Shares: LIEFX              Institutional Shares: LIEIX

LAUDUS MONDRIAN GLOBAL EQUITY FUND

Investor Shares: LGEQX                             Select Shares: LGESX                             Institutional Shares: LGEVX

LAUDUS MONDRIAN EMERGING MARKETS FUND

Investor Shares: LEMIX                             Select Shares: LEMSX                             Institutional Shares: LEMNX

LAUDUS MONDRIAN INTERNATIONAL FIXED INCOME FUND

LIFNX

JULY 29, 2012

The Statement of Additional Information (SAI) is not a prospectus. It should be read in conjunction with the funds’ prospectus dated July 29, 2012. To obtain a free copy of the prospectus, please contact Laudus Trust at P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266 or visit the funds’ website at www.laudus.com/prospectus.

Each fund is a series of the Laudus Trust (the “Trust”).

The Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and financial statements of the funds included in the funds’ Annual Report for the period ended March 31, 2012 (the “Annual Report”) are incorporated by reference into this SAI. A copy of the funds’ Annual Report is delivered with the SAI. You can get a copy of the Annual Report by contacting the funds at: 1.888.352.8387 or visiting the funds’ website at www.laudus.com/prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

    Page  

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES, SECURITIES, STRATEGIES, RISKS AND LIMITATIONS

    2   

MANAGEMENT OF THE FUNDS

    37   

INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES

    48   

DESCRIPTION OF THE TRUST AND OWNERSHIP OF SHARES

    65   

OWNERS OF 5% OR MORE OF A FUND’S SHARES

    67   

DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE

    68   

PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES

    69   

APPENDIX — RATINGS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES

 

APPENDIX — OWNERS OF 5% PERCENT OF SHARES OF A FUND

 

APPENDIX — DESCRIPTION OF PROXY VOTING POLICY AND PROCEDURES

 

REG42313-07


Table of Contents

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES, SECURITIES, STRATEGIES, RISKS AND LIMITATIONS

Notice on Shareholder Approval. Unless otherwise indicated in the Prospectus or this Statement of Additional Information, the investment objective and policies of each of the funds may be changed without shareholder approval.

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVES

LAUDUS MONDRIAN INTERNATIONAL EQUITY FUND seeks long-term capital appreciation.

LAUDUS MONDRIAN GLOBAL EQUITY FUND seeks long-term capital appreciation.

LAUDUS MONDRIAN EMERGING MARKETS FUND seeks long-term capital appreciation.

LAUDUS MONDRIAN INTERNATIONAL FIXED INCOME FUND seeks long-term total return consistent with its value-oriented investment approach.

The following investment policies, securities, strategies, risks and limitations supplement those set forth in the prospectus and may be changed without shareholder approval unless otherwise noted. Also, policies and limitations that state a maximum percentage of assets that may be invested in a security or other asset, or that set forth a quality standard, shall be measured immediately after and as a result of a fund’s acquisition of such security or asset unless otherwise noted. Thus, any subsequent change in values, net assets or other circumstances does not require a fund to sell an investment if it could not then make the same investment. There is no guarantee the funds will achieve their objectives.

FUND INVESTMENT POLICIES

The Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund will invest primarily in equity securities of non-U.S. large capitalization issuers, including the securities of emerging market companies, that in the Subadviser’s (as defined herein) opinion, are undervalued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed by the Subadviser. Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy. The fund considers an “emerging country” to be any country except the United States, Canada, and those in the MSCI EAFE Index. In considering possible emerging countries in which the fund may invest, the Subadviser will place particular emphasis on factors such as economic conditions (including growth trends, inflation rates, and trade balances), regulatory and currency controls, accounting standards, and political and social conditions.

The Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund will invest in equity securities of both U.S. and non-U.S. issuers, including the securities of emerging market companies, that, is the Subadviser’s opinion, are under valued at the time of purchase based on fundamental value analysis employed be the Subadviser. It is the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund’s policy that, under normal circumstances, it will invest at least 80% of its net assets (including, for this purpose, any borrowings for investment purposes) in equity securities. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy.

It is the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund’s policy that, under normal circumstances, it will invest at least 80% of its net assets in the securities of emerging markets issuers. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy. For purposes of this policy, net assets mean net assets plus the amount of any borrowings for investment purposes. The Subadviser considers an emerging country equity security to be one that is issued by a company that exhibits one or more of the following characteristics: (1) its principal securities trading market is in an emerging country, as defined above; (2) while traded in any market, alone or on a consolidated basis, the company derives 50% or more of its annual revenues or annual profits from either goods produced, sales made or services performed in emerging countries; or (3) the company has 50% of more of its assets located in an emerging country; or (4) it is organized under

 

2


Table of Contents

the laws of, and has a principal office in, an emerging country. The Subadviser determines eligibility based on publicly available information and inquiries made of the companies. The fund considers an ‘‘emerging country’’ to be any country that is included in the International Finance Corporation Free Index or MSCI Emerging Markets Index. In addition, any country which is generally recognized to be an emerging or developing country by the international financial community, including the World Bank and the International Finance Corporation, as well as any country that is classified by the United Nations or otherwise regarded by its authorities as developing, will be considered to be an ‘‘emerging country.’’ There are more than 130 countries that are generally considered to be emerging or developing countries by the international financial community, approximately 40 of which currently have stock markets. Almost every nation in the world is included within this group of developing or emerging countries except the United States, Canada, and those in the MSCI EAFE Index.

In considering possible emerging countries in which the fund may invest, the Subadviser will place particular emphasis on factors such as economic conditions (including growth trends, inflation rates, and trade balances), regulatory and currency controls, accounting standards, and political and social conditions.

It is the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund’s policy that, under normal circumstances, it will invest at least 80% of its net assets in fixed income securities. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy. For purposes of this policy, net assets mean net assets plus the amount of any borrowings for investment purposes.

Each fund seeks to qualify as a “diversified” investment company under provisions of Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code, as amended; however, the International Fixed-Income Fund will not be diversified under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). A non-diversified portfolio is believed to be subject to greater risk and volatility because adverse effects on the portfolio’s security holdings may affect a larger portion of the overall assets. When formed, the International Equity Fund and the Emerging Market’s Fund were classified as “non-diversified” funds, as defined in the 1940 Act. However, each fund has historically operated as a “diversified” fund. Therefore, the International Equity Fund and the Emerging Markets Fund will not operate in the future as “non-diversified” funds without first obtaining shareholder approval, except as allowed pursuant to the 1940 Act.

In determining whether a company is domestic or international, the funds will consider various factors, including where the company is headquartered, where the company’s principal operations are located, where the company’s revenues are derived, where the principal trading market is located and the country in which the company is legally organized.

INVESTMENT SECURITIES, STRATEGIES AND RISKS

The different types of investments that the funds typically may invest in, the investment techniques they may use and the risks normally associated with these investments are discussed below. Not all securities or techniques discussed below are eligible investments for each fund. A fund will make investments that are intended to help achieve its investment objective.

BANKERS’ ACCEPTANCES or notes are credit instruments evidencing a bank’s obligation to pay a draft drawn on it by a customer. These instruments reflect the obligation both of the bank and of the drawer to pay the full amount of the instrument upon maturity. A fund will invest only in bankers’ acceptances of banks that have capital, surplus and undivided profits in excess of $100 million.

BOND SUBSTITUTION is a strategy whereby a fund may, from time to time, substitute one type of investment-grade bond for another. This means that, as an example, a fund may have a higher weighting in corporate bonds and a lower weighting in U.S. Treasury securities than its index in order to increase income. This particular substitution – a corporate bond substitution – may increase a fund's credit risk, although this may be mitigated through increased diversification in the corporate sector of the bond market.

 

3


Table of Contents

BORROWING. A fund may borrow for temporary or emergency purposes; for example, a fund may borrow at times to meet redemption requests rather than sell portfolio securities to raise the necessary cash. A fund’s borrowings will be subject to interest costs. Borrowing can also involve leveraging when securities are purchased with the borrowed money. Leveraging creates interest expenses that can exceed the income from the assets purchased with the borrowed money. In addition, leveraging may magnify changes in the net asset value of a fund’s shares and in its portfolio yield. A fund will earmark or segregate assets to cover such borrowings in accordance with positions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). If assets used to secure a borrowing decrease in value, a fund may be required to pledge additional collateral to avoid liquidation of those assets.

Each fund may establish lines-of-credit (“lines”) with certain banks by which it may borrow funds for temporary or emergency purposes. A borrowing is presumed to be for temporary or emergency purposes if it is repaid by a fund within 60 days and is not extended or renewed. Each fund may use the lines to meet large or unexpected redemptions that would otherwise force a fund to liquidate securities under circumstances which are unfavorable to the fund’s remaining shareholders. Each fund will pay a fee to the bank for using the lines.

BRADY BONDS. The funds may invest in Brady Bonds. Brady Bonds are debt securities issued under the framework of the Brady Plan, an initiative announced by the U.S. Treasury Secretary, Nicholas F. Brady in 1989, as a mechanism for debtor nations to restructure their outstanding external indebtedness (generally, commercial bank debt). Brady Bonds tend to be lower quality and more speculative than securities of developed country issuers.

Each fund may invest in Brady Bonds. Brady Bonds are securities created through the exchange of existing commercial bank loans to sovereign entities for new obligations in connection with debt restructurings under a debt restructuring plan introduced by former U.S. Secretary of the Treasury, Nicholas F. Brady (the “Brady Plan”). Brady Plan debt restructurings have been implemented in a number of countries, including: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Bulgaria, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Jordan, Mexico, Niger, Nigeria, Panama, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Uruguay, and Venezuela. Brady Bonds may be collateralized or uncollateralized, are issued in various currencies (primarily the U.S. dollar) and are actively traded in the over-the-counter secondary market. Brady Bonds are not considered to be U.S. Government securities. U.S. dollar-denominated, collateralized Brady Bonds, which may be fixed rate par bonds or floating rate discount bonds, are generally collateralized in full as to principal by U.S. Treasury zero coupon bonds having the same maturity as the Brady Bonds. Interest payments on these Brady Bonds generally are collateralized on a one-year or longer rolling-forward basis by cash or securities in an amount that, in the case of fixed rate bonds, is equal to at least one year of interest payments or, in the case of floating rate bonds, initially is equal to at least one year’s interest payments based on the applicable interest rate at that time and is adjusted at regular intervals thereafter. Certain Brady Bonds are entitled to “value recovery payments” in certain circumstances, which in effect constitute supplemental interest payments but generally are not collateralized. Brady Bonds are often viewed as having three or four valuation components: (i) the collateralized repayment of principal at final maturity; (ii) the collateralized interest payments; (iii) the uncollateralized interest payments; and (iv) any uncollateralized repayment of principal at maturity (these uncollateralized amounts constitute the “residual risk”). Most Mexican Brady Bonds issued to date have principal repayments at final maturity fully collateralized by U.S. Treasury zero coupon bonds (or comparable collateral denominated in other currencies) and interest coupon payments collateralized on an 18-month rolling-forward basis by funds held in escrow by an agent for the bondholders. A significant portion of the Venezuelan Brady Bonds and the Argentine Brady Bonds issued to date have principal repayments at final maturity collateralized by U.S. Treasury zero coupon bonds (or comparable collateral denominated in other currencies) and/or interest coupon payments collateralized on a 14-month (for Venezuela) or 12-month (for Argentina) rolling-forward basis by securities held by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York as collateral agent.

Brady Bonds involve various risk factors including residual risk and the history of defaults with respect to commercial bank loans by public and private entities of countries issuing Brady Bonds. There can be no assurance that Brady Bonds in which a fund may invest will not be subject to restructuring arrangements or to requests for new credit, which may cause the fund to suffer a loss of interest or principal on any of its holdings.

 

4


Table of Contents

CAPITAL SECURITIES are certain subordinated bank securities. They are bank obligations that fall below senior unsecured debt and deposits in liquidation. A bank’s capital comprises share capital reserves and a series of hybrid instruments also known as capital securities. These securities are used to augment equity Tier 1 and are usually in the form of subordinated debt. A capital security has to adhere to supervisory guidelines concerning its characteristics such as amount, maturity, subordination and deferral language in order to count as capital. Regulators across the world tend to look toward the Bank for International Settlements (“BIS”) for guidance in setting the capital adequacy framework for banks. Regulators use these guidelines to place limits on the proportions and type of capital (including capital securities) allowed to make up the capital base. Capital adequacy requires not just a certain quantity of capital but certain types in relationship to the nature of a bank’s assets. Capital securities may be denominated in U.S. or local currency.

CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT or time deposits are issued against funds deposited in a banking institution for a specified period of time at a specified interest rate. A fund will invest only in certificates of deposit of banks that have capital, surplus and undivided profits in excess of $100 million.

COMMERCIAL PAPER consists of short term, promissory notes issued by banks, corporations and other institutions to finance short term credit needs. These securities generally are discounted but sometimes may be interest bearing. Commercial paper, which also may be unsecured, is subject to credit risk.

CONCENTRATION means that substantial amounts of assets are invested in a particular industry or group of industries. Concentration increases investment exposure to industry risk. For example, the automobile industry may have a greater exposure to a single factor, such as an increase in the price of oil, which may adversely affect the sale of automobiles and, as a result, the value of the industry’s securities. Each fund will not concentrate its investments in a particular industry or group of industries.

CREDIT DEFAULT SWAPS may be entered into for investment purposes. As the seller in a credit default swap contract, a fund would be required to pay the par (or other agreed-upon) value of a referenced debt obligation to the counterparty in the event of a default by a third party, such as a U.S. or foreign corporate issuer, on the debt obligation. In return, the fund would receive from the counterparty a periodic stream of payments over the term of the contract provided that no event of default has occurred. If no default occurs, the fund would keep the stream of payments and would have no payment obligations. As the seller, the fund would be subject to investment exposure on the notional amount of the swap.

A fund may also purchase credit default swap contracts in order to hedge against the risk of default of debt securities held in its portfolio, in which case the fund would function as the counterparty referenced in the preceding paragraph. This would involve the risk that the investment may expire worthless and would only generate income in the event of an actual default by the issuer of the underlying obligation (as opposed to a credit downgrade or other indication of financial instability). It would also involve credit risk – that the seller may fail to satisfy its payment obligations to the fund in the event of a default.

CREDIT AND LIQUIDITY supports may be employed by issuers to reduce the credit risk of their securities. Credit supports include letters of credit, insurance, total return and credit swap agreements and guarantees provided by foreign and domestic entities. Liquidity supports include puts, and demand features. Most of these arrangements move the credit risk of an investment from the issuer of the security to the support provider. Changes in the credit quality of a support provider could cause losses to a fund, and affect its share price.

DEBT SECURITIES are obligations issued by domestic and foreign entities, including governments and corporations, in order to raise money. They are basically “IOUs,” but are commonly referred to as bonds or money market securities. These securities normally require the issuer to pay a fixed, variable or floating rate of interest on the amount of money borrowed (“principal”) until it is paid back upon maturity.

Debt securities experience price changes when interest rates change. For example, when interest rates fall, the prices of debt securities generally rise. Also, issuers tend to pre-pay their outstanding debts and issue new ones paying lower

 

5


Table of Contents

interest rates. This is especially true for bonds with sinking fund provisions, which commit the issuer to set aside a certain amount of money to cover timely repayment of principal and typically allow the issuer to annually repurchase certain of its outstanding bonds from the open market or at a pre-set call price.

Conversely, in a rising interest rate environment, prepayment on outstanding debt securities generally will not occur. This is known as extension risk and may cause the value of debt securities to depreciate as a result of the higher market interest rates. Typically, longer-maturity securities react to interest rate changes more severely than shorter-term securities (all things being equal), but generally offer greater rates of interest.

Debt securities also are subject to the risk that the issuers will not make timely interest and/or principal payments or fail to make them at all. This is called credit risk. Corporate debt securities (“bonds”) tend to have higher credit risk generally than U.S. government debt securities. Debt instruments also may be subject to price volatility due to market perception of future interest rates, the creditworthiness of the issuer and general market liquidity (market risk). Investment-grade debt securities are considered medium- or/and high-quality securities, although some still possess varying degrees of speculative characteristics and risks. Debt securities rated below investment-grade are riskier, but may offer higher yields. These securities are sometimes referred to as high yield securities or “junk bonds.”

The market for these securities has historically been less liquid than investment grade securities.

DELAYED-DELIVERY TRANSACTIONS include purchasing and selling securities on a delayed-delivery or when-issued basis. These transactions involve a commitment to buy or sell specific securities at a predetermined price or yield, with payment and delivery taking place after the customary settlement period for that type of security. When purchasing securities on a delayed-delivery basis, a fund assumes the rights and risks of ownership, including the risk of price and yield fluctuations. Typically, no interest will accrue to the purchaser until the security is delivered. A fund will earmark or segregate appropriate liquid assets to cover its delayed-delivery purchase obligations. When a fund sells a security on a delayed-delivery basis, it does not participate in further gains or losses with respect to that security. If the other party to a delayed-delivery transaction fails to deliver or pay for the securities, a fund could suffer losses.

DEPOSITARY RECEIPTS include American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) as well as other “hybrid” forms of ADRs, including European Depositary Receipts (EDRs) and Global Depositary Receipts (GDRs), and are certificates evidencing ownership of shares of a foreign issuer. Depositary receipts may be sponsored or unsponsored. These certificates are issued by depository banks and generally trade on an established market in the United States or elsewhere. The underlying shares are held in trust by a custodian bank or similar financial institution in the issuer’s home country. The depository bank may not have physical custody of the underlying securities at all times and may charge fees for various services, including forwarding dividends and interest and corporate actions. ADRs are alternatives to directly purchasing the underlying foreign securities in their national markets and currencies. However, ADRs continue to be subject to many of the risks associated with investing directly in foreign securities.

Investments in the securities of foreign issuers may subject the funds to investment risks that differ in some respects from those related to investments in securities of U.S. issuers. Such risks include future adverse political and economic developments, withholding taxes on income or possible imposition of withholding taxes on income, possible seizure, nationalization or expropriation of foreign deposits, possible establishment of exchange controls or taxation at the source or greater fluctuation in value due to changes in exchange rates. Foreign issuers of securities often engage in business practices different from those of domestic issuers of similar securities, and there may be less information publicly available about foreign issuers. In addition, foreign issuers are, generally speaking, subject to less government supervision and regulation and different accounting treatment than are those in the United States.

Although the two types of depositary receipt facilities (unsponsored or sponsored) are similar, there are differences regarding a holder’s rights and obligations and the practices of market participants. A depository may establish an unsponsored facility without participation by (or acquiescence of) the underlying issuer; typically, however, the depository requests a letter of non-objection from the underlying issuer prior to establishing the facility. Holders of

 

6


Table of Contents

unsponsored depositary receipts generally bear all the costs of the facility. The depository usually charges fees upon the deposit and withdrawal of the underlying securities, the conversion of dividends into U.S. dollars or other currency, the disposition of non-cash distributions, and the performance of other services. The depository of an unsponsored facility frequently is under no obligation to distribute shareholder communications received from the underlying issuer or to pass through voting rights to depositary receipt holders with respect to the underlying securities.

Sponsored depositary receipt facilities are created in generally the same manner as unsponsored facilities, except that sponsored depositary receipts are established jointly by a depository and the underlying issuer through a deposit agreement. The deposit agreement sets out the rights and responsibilities of the underlying issuer, the depository, and the depositary receipt holders. With sponsored facilities, the underlying issuer typically bears some of the costs of the depositary receipts (such as dividend payment fees of the depository), although most sponsored depositary receipts holders may bear costs such as deposit and withdrawal fees. Depositories of most sponsored depositary receipts agree to distribute notices of shareholder meetings, voting instructions, and other shareholder communications and information to the depositary receipt holders at the underlying issuer’s request.

DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS are commonly defined to include securities or contracts whose values depend on (or “derive” from) the value of one or more other assets such as securities, currencies or commodities. These “other assets” are commonly referred to as “underlying assets.”

A derivative instrument generally consists of, is based upon, or exhibits characteristics similar to options or forward contracts. Options and forward contracts are considered to be the basic “building blocks” of derivatives. For example, forward-based derivatives include forward contracts, as well as exchange-traded futures. Option-based derivatives include privately negotiated, over-the-counter (OTC) options (including caps, floors, collars, and options on forward and swap contracts) and exchange-traded options on futures. Diverse types of derivatives may be created by combining options or forward contracts in different ways, and applying these structures to a wide range of underlying assets.

Risk management strategies include investment techniques designed to facilitate the sale of portfolio securities, manage the average duration of the portfolio or create or alter exposure to certain asset classes, such as equity, other debt or foreign securities.

In addition to the derivative instruments and strategies described in this SAI, the Investment Adviser (as defined herein) or Subadviser expects to discover additional derivative instruments and other hedging or risk management techniques. The investment adviser or Subadviser may utilize these new derivative instruments and techniques to the extent that they are consistent with a fund’s investment objective and permitted by a fund’s investment limitations, operating policies, and applicable regulatory authorities.

EMERGING OR DEVELOPING MARKETS exist in countries that are considered to be in the initial stages of industrialization. The risks of investing in these markets are similar to the risks of international investing in general, although the risks are greater in emerging and developing markets. Countries with emerging or developing securities markets tend to have economic structures that are less stable than countries with developed securities markets. This is because their economies may be based on only a few industries and their securities markets may trade a small number of securities. Prices on these exchanges tend to be volatile, and securities in these countries historically have offered greater potential for gain (as well as loss) than securities of companies located in developed countries. There are no strict definitions of what is emerging or developing versus what is considered developed and certain countries are considered emerging or developing in some indices yet developed in others.

EQUITY LINKED SECURITIES. The funds may invest a portion of their assets in equity linked securities. Equity linked securities are privately issued derivative securities which have a return component based on the performance of a single security, a basket of securities, or an index. Equity linked securities are primarily used by the funds as an alternative means to more efficiently and effectively access the securities market of what is generally an emerging country. To the extent that the funds invest in equity linked securities whose return corresponds to the performance of a foreign securities index or one or more of foreign stocks, investing in equity linked securities will involve risks similar to the risks of investing in foreign securities. See “Foreign Securities” below.

 

7


Table of Contents

The funds deposit an amount of cash with its custodian (or broker, if legally permitted) in an amount near or equal to the selling price of the underlying security in exchange for an equity linked security. Upon sale, the fund receives cash from the broker or custodian equal to the value of the underlying security. Aside from the market risk associated with the underlying security, there is the risk of default by the other party to the transaction. In the event of insolvency of the other party, the fund might be unable to obtain its expected benefit. In addition, while the fund will seek to enter into such transactions only with parties which are capable of entering into closing transactions with the fund, there can be no assurance that the fund will be able to close out such a transaction with the other party or obtain an offsetting position with any other party, at any time prior to the end of the term of the underlying agreement. This may impair the fund’s ability to enter into other transactions at a time when doing so might be advantageous.

Equity linked securities are often used for many of the same purposes as, and share many of the same risks with, derivative instruments such as options. See “Options Contracts” below. Equity linked securities may be considered illiquid and thus subject to a fund’s restrictions on investments in illiquid securities. In some instances, investments in equity linked securities may also be subject to a fund’s limitations on investing in investment companies; see “Securities of Other Investment Companies” below.

EQUITY SECURITIES represent ownership interests in a company, and are commonly called “stocks.” Equity securities historically have outperformed most other securities, although their prices can fluctuate based on changes in a company’s financial condition, market conditions and political, economic or even company-specific news. When a stock’s price declines, its market value is lowered even though the intrinsic value of the company may not have changed. Sometimes factors, such as economic conditions or political events, affect the value of stocks of companies of the same or similar industry or group of industries, and may affect the entire stock market.

Types of equity securities include common stocks, preferred stocks, convertible securities, warrants, ADRs, EDRs, GDRs, and interests in real estate investment trusts, (for more information on real estate investment trusts, “REITs”, see the section entitled “Real Estate Investment Trusts”).

Common stocks, which are probably the most recognized type of equity security, represent an equity or ownership interest in an issuer and usually entitle the owner to voting rights in the election of the corporation’s directors and any other matters submitted to the corporation’s shareholders for voting, as well as to receive dividends on such stock. The market value of common stock can fluctuate widely, as it reflects increases and decreases in an issuer’s earnings. In the event an issuer is liquidated or declares bankruptcy, the claims of bond owners, other debt holders and owners of preferred stock take precedence over the claims of common stock owners.

Preferred stocks represent an equity or ownership interest in an issuer but do not ordinarily carry voting rights, though they may carry limited voting rights. Preferred stocks normally have preference over the corporation’s assets and earnings, however. For example, preferred stocks have preference over common stock in the payment of dividends. Preferred stocks normally pay dividends at a specified rate. However, preferred stock may be purchased where the issuer has omitted, or is in danger of omitting, payment of its dividend. Such investments would be made primarily for their capital appreciation potential. In the event an issuer is liquidated or declares bankruptcy, the claims of bond owners take precedence over the claims of preferred and common stock owners. Certain classes of preferred stock are convertible into shares of common stock of the issuer. By holding convertible preferred stock, a fund can receive a steady stream of dividends and still have the option to convert the preferred stock to common stock. Preferred stock is subject to many of the same risks as common stock and debt securities.

Convertible securities are typically preferred stocks or bonds that are exchangeable for a specific number of another form of security (usually the issuer’s common stock) at a specified price or ratio. A convertible security generally entitles the holder to receive interest paid or accrued on bonds or the dividend paid on preferred stock until the convertible security

 

8


Table of Contents

matures or is redeemed, converted or exchanged. A company may issue a convertible security that is subject to redemption after a specified date, and usually under certain circumstances. A holder of a convertible security that is called for redemption would be required to tender it for redemption to the issuer, convert it to the underlying common stock or sell it to a third party. The convertible structure allows the holder of the convertible bond to participate in share price movements in the company’s common stock. The actual return on a convertible bond may exceed its stated yield if the company’s common stock appreciates in value and the option to convert to common stocks becomes more valuable.

Convertible securities typically pay a lower interest rate than nonconvertible bonds of the same quality and maturity because of the convertible feature. Convertible securities are also rated below investment grade (“high yield”) or are not rated, and are subject to credit risk.

Prior to conversion, convertible securities have characteristics and risks similar to nonconvertible debt and equity securities. In addition, convertible securities are often concentrated in economic sectors, which, like the stock market in general, may experience unpredictable declines in value, as well as periods of poor performance, which may last for several years. There may be a small trading market for a particular convertible security at any given time, which may adversely impact market price and a fund’s ability to liquidate a particular security or respond to an economic event, including deterioration of an issuer’s creditworthiness.

Convertible preferred stocks are nonvoting equity securities that pay a fixed dividend. These securities have a convertible feature similar to convertible bonds, but do not have a maturity date. Due to their fixed income features, convertible securities provide higher income potential than the issuer’s common stock, but typically are more sensitive to interest rate changes than the underlying common stock. In the event of a company’s liquidation, bondholders have claims on company assets senior to those of shareholders; preferred shareholders have claims senior to those of common shareholders.

Convertible securities typically trade at prices above their conversion value, which is the current market value of the common stock received upon conversion, because of their higher yield potential than the underlying common stock. The difference between the conversion value and the price of a convertible security will vary depending on the value of the underlying common stock and interest rates. When the underlying value of the common stocks declines, the price of the issuer’s convertible securities will tend not to fall as much because the convertible security’s income potential will act as a price support. While the value of a convertible security also tends to rise when the underlying common stock value rises, it will not rise as much because their conversion value is more narrow. The value of convertible securities also is affected by changes in interest rates. For example, when interest rates fall, the value of convertible securities may rise because of their fixed income component.

Warrants are types of securities usually issued with bonds and preferred stock that entitle the holder to purchase a proportionate amount of common stock at a specified price for a specific period of time. The prices of warrants do not necessarily move parallel to the prices of the underlying common stock. Warrants have no voting rights, receive no dividends and have no rights with respect to the assets of the issuer. If a warrant is not exercised within the specified time period, it will become worthless and the fund will lose the purchase price it paid for the warrant and the right to purchase the underlying security.

Initial Public Offering . The funds may purchase shares issued as part of, or a short period after, a company’s initial public offering (“IPOs”), and may at times dispose of those shares shortly after their acquisition. A fund’s purchase of shares issued in IPOs exposes it to the risks associated with companies that have little operating history as public companies, as well as to the risks inherent in those sectors of the market where these new issuers operate. The market for IPO issuers has been volatile, and share prices of newly-public companies have fluctuated significantly over short periods of time.

Master Limited Partnerships (“MLPs”). MLPs are limited partnerships in which the common units are publicly traded. MLP common units are freely traded on a securities exchange or in the over-the-counter market and are generally

 

9


Table of Contents

registered with the SEC. MLPs often own several properties or businesses (or own interests) that are related to real estate development and oil and gas industries, but they also may finance motion pictures, research and development and other projects. MLPs generally have two classes of owners, the general partner and limited partners. The general partner is typically owned by a major energy company, an investment fund, the direct management of the MLP or is an entity owned by one or more of such parties. The general partner may be structured as a private or publicly traded corporation or other entity. The general partner typically controls the operations and management of the MLP through an up to 2% equity interest in the MLP plus, in many cases, ownership of common units and subordinated units. Limited partners own the remainder of the partnership, through ownership of common units, and have a limited role, if any, in the partnership’s operations and management.

MLPs are typically structured such that common units and general partner interests have first priority to receive quarterly cash distributions up to an established minimum amount (“minimum quarterly distributions”). Common and general partner interests also accrue arrearages in distributions to the extent the minimum quarterly distribution is not paid. Once common and general partner interests have been paid, subordinated units receive distributions of up to the minimum quarterly distribution; however, subordinated units do not accrue arrearages. Distributable cash in excess of the minimum quarterly distribution paid to both common and subordinated units is distributed to both common and subordinated units generally on a pro rata basis. The general partner is also eligible to receive incentive distributions if the general partner operates the business in a manner which results in distributions paid per common unit surpassing specified target levels. As the general partner increases cash distributions to the limited partners, the general partner receives an increasingly higher percentage of the incremental cash distributions. A common arrangement provides that the general partner can reach a tier where it receives 50% of every incremental dollar paid to common and subordinated unit holders. These incentive distributions are intended to encourage the general partner to streamline costs, increase capital expenditures and acquire assets in order to increase the partnership’s cash flow and raise the quarterly cash distribution in order to reach higher tiers. Such results are intended to benefit all security holders of the MLP, however, such incentive distribution payments give rise to potential conflicts of interest between the common unit holders and the general partner.

MLP common units represent a limited partnership interest in the MLP. Common units are listed and traded on U.S. securities exchanges or over-the-counter, with their value fluctuating predominantly based on prevailing market conditions and the success of the MLP. The funds may purchase common units in market transactions as well as directly from the MLP or other parties in private placements. Unlike owners of common stock of a corporation, owners of common units have limited voting rights and have no ability to annually elect directors. MLPs generally distribute all available cash flow (cash flow from operations less maintenance capital expenditures) in the form of quarterly distributions. Common units along with general partner units have first priority to receive quarterly cash distributions up to the minimum quarterly distribution and have arrearage rights. In the event of liquidation, common units have preference over subordinated units, but not debt or preferred units, to the remaining assets of the MLP.

MLP subordinated units are typically issued by MLPs to their original sponsors, such as their founders, corporate general partners of MLPs, entities that sell assets to the MLP, and investors. Subordinated units may be purchased directly from these persons as well as newly-issued subordinated units from MLPs themselves. Subordinated units have similar voting rights as common units and are generally not publicly traded. Once the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units, including any arrearages, has been paid, subordinated units receive cash distributions up to the minimum quarterly distribution prior to any incentive payments to the MLP’s general partner. Unlike common units, subordinated units do not have arrearage rights. In the event of liquidation, common units and general partner interests have priority over subordinated units. Subordinated units are typically converted into common units on a one-to-one basis after certain time periods and/or performance targets have been satisfied. The purchase or sale price of subordinated units is generally tied to the common unit price less a discount. The size of the discount varies depending on the likelihood of conversion, the length of time remaining to conversion, the size of the block purchased relative to trading volumes, and other factors, including smaller capitalization partnerships or companies potentially having limited product lines, markets or financial resources, lacking management depth or experience, and being more vulnerable to adverse general market or economic development than larger more established companies.

 

10


Table of Contents

General partner interests of MLPs are typically retained by an MLP’s original sponsors, such as its founders, corporate partners, entities that sell assets to the MLP and investors. A holder of general partner interests can be liable under certain circumstances for amounts greater than the amount of the holder’s investment in the general partner interest. General partner interests often confer direct board participation rights and, in many cases, operating control, over the MLP. These interests themselves are not publicly traded, although they may be owned by publicly traded entities. General partner interests receive cash distributions, typically 2% of the MLP’s aggregate cash distributions, which are contractually defined in the partnership agreement. In addition, holders of general partner interests typically hold incentive distribution rights, which provide them with a larger share of the aggregate MLP cash distributions as the distributions to limited partner unit holders are increased to prescribed levels. General partner interests generally cannot be converted into common units. The general partner interest can be redeemed by the MLP if the MLP unitholders choose to remove the general partner, typically with a supermajority vote by limited partner unitholders.

Additional risks involved with investing in an MLP are risks associated with the specific industry or industries in which the partnership invests, such as the risks of investing in real estate, or oil and gas industries.

Certain MLPs are dependent on their parent companies or sponsors for a majority of their revenues. Any failure by an MLP’s parents or sponsors to satisfy their payments or obligations would impact the MLP’s revenues and cash flows and ability to make distributions.

EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS (“ETFs”), such as Standard and Poor’s Depositary Receipts (“SPDRs”) Trust, are investment companies that typically are registered under the 1940 Act as open-end funds or unit investment trusts (“UITs”). ETFs are actively traded on national securities exchanges and are generally based on specific domestic and foreign market indices. Shares of an ETF may be bought and sold throughout the day at market prices, which may be higher or lower than the shares’ net asset value. An “index-based ETF” seeks to track the performance of an index holding in its portfolio either the contents of the index or a representative sample of the securities in the index. Because ETFs are based on an underlying basket of stocks or an index, they are subject to the same market fluctuations as these types of securities in volatile market swings. ETFs, like mutual funds, have expenses associated with their operation, including advisory fees. When a fund invests in an ETF, in addition to directly bearing expenses associated with its own operations, it will bear a pro rata portion of the ETF’s expenses. As with any exchange listed security, ETF shares purchased in the secondary market are subject to customary brokerage charges.

Pursuant to an exemptive order issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission to iShares and procedures approved by the funds’ Board of Trustees, each fund may invest in iShares beyond the limits set forth in Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act but not to exceed 25% of a fund’s total assets, provided that the fund has described exchange-traded fund investments in its prospectus and otherwise complies with the conditions of the exemptive order and other applicable investment limitations. Neither the iShares ® Funds nor their investment adviser make any representations regarding the advisability of investing in a fund.

EVENT-LINKED BONDS. Each fund may invest up to 5% of its net assets in “event-linked bonds,” which are fixed income securities for which the return of principal and payment of interest is contingent on the non-occurrence of a specific “trigger” event, such as a hurricane, earthquake, or other physical or weather-related phenomenon. Some event-linked bonds are commonly referred to as “catastrophe bonds.” If a trigger event occurs, a fund may lose a portion or all of its principal invested in the bond. Event-linked bonds often provide for an extension of maturity to process and audit loss claims where a trigger event has, or possibly has, occurred. An extension of maturity may increase volatility. Event-linked bonds may also expose a fund to certain unanticipated risks including credit risk, adverse regulatory or jurisdictional interpretations, and adverse tax consequences. Event-linked bonds may also be subject to liquidity risk.

FIXED RATE CAPITAL SECURITIES (FRCSs) are hybrid securities that combine the features of both corporate bonds and preferred stock. FRCSs pay dividends monthly or quarterly. FRCSs are listed on major exchanges and, also, trade on the OTC markets. FRCSs are generally issued by large corporations and are rated by a national rating service

 

11


Table of Contents

organizations (“NRSOs”). FRCSs bear the creditworthiness of the corporate issuer, generally have a stated maturity (20 to 49 years), and, unlike preferred stock, are fully taxable. There are currently three types of FRCSs offered in the marketplace: direct subordinate FRCSs which are offered directly by a corporation and zero coupon partnership preferred and trust preferred FRCSs which are issued indirectly by a corporation through a conduit financing vehicle. FRCSs generally rank senior to common stock and preferred stock in a corporation’s capital structure, but have a lower security claim than the issuer’s corporate bonds. FRCSs generally offer higher yields than corporate bonds or agency securities, but they carry more risks than the higher lien debt. In addition to risks commonly associated with other fixed income securities, FRCSs are subject to certain additional risks. Many FRCSs include a “special event” redemption option, allowing the issuer to redeem the securities at the liquidation value if a tax law change disallows the deductibility of payments by the issuer’s parent company, or subjects the issue to taxation separate from the parent company. FRCSs permit the deferral of payments (without declaring default), if the issuer experiences financial difficulties. Payments may be suspended for some stipulated period, usually up to five years. If the issuer defers payments, the deferred income continues to accrue for tax purposes, even though the investor does not receive cash payments. Such deferrals can only occur if the parent company stops all other stock dividend payments on both common and preferred stock classes. The treatment of investment income from trust and debt securities for federal tax purposes is uncertain and may vary depending on whether the possibility of the issuer deferring payments is, or is not, considered a remote contingency.

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. A fund will not invest in fixed time deposits, which (1) are not subject to prepayment or (2) provide for withdrawal penalties upon prepayment (other than overnight deposits) if, in the aggregate, more than 15% of its net assets would be invested in such deposits, repurchase agreements maturing in more than seven days and other illiquid assets.

FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS. The funds that may invest in foreign currency-denominated securities also may purchase and sell foreign currency options and foreign currency futures contracts and related options and may engage in foreign currency transactions either on a spot (cash) basis at the rate prevailing in the currency exchange market at the time or through forward currency contracts (“forwards”) with terms generally of less than one year. Funds may engage in these transactions in order to protect against uncertainty in the level of future foreign exchange rates in the purchase and sale of securities.

The funds may also use foreign currency options and foreign currency forward contracts to increase exposure to a foreign currency or to shift exposure to foreign currency fluctuations from one country to another (as in cross hedging, see below). Each fund will earmark or segregate assets for any open positions in forwards used for non-hedging purposes and mark to market daily as may be required under the federal securities laws.

A forward involves an obligation to purchase or sell a specific currency at a future date, which may be any fixed number of days from the date of the contract agreed upon by the parties, at a price set at the time of the contract. These contracts may be bought or sold to protect a fund against a possible loss resulting from an adverse change in the relationship between foreign currencies and the U.S. dollar or to increase exposure to a particular foreign currency. Many foreign securities markets do not settle trades within a time frame that would be considered customary in the U.S. stock market. Therefore, a fund may engage in forward foreign currency exchange contracts in order to secure exchange rates for fund securities purchased or sold, but awaiting settlement. These transactions do not seek to eliminate any fluctuations in the underlying prices of the securities involved. Instead, the transactions simply establish a rate of exchange that can be expected when the fund settles its securities transactions in the future. Forwards involve certain risks. For example, if the counterparties to the contracts are unable to meet the terms of the contracts or if the value of the foreign currency changes unfavorably, the fund could sustain a loss.

Funds also may engage in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to protect the value of specific portfolio positions, which is called “position hedging.” When engaging in position hedging, a fund may enter into forward foreign currency exchange transactions to protect against a decline in the values of the foreign currencies in which portfolio securities are denominated (or against an increase in the value of currency for securities that the fund expects to purchase).

 

12


Table of Contents

Buying and selling foreign currency exchange contracts involves costs and may result in losses. The ability of a fund to engage in these transactions may be limited by tax considerations. Although these techniques tend to minimize the risk of loss due to declines in the value of the hedged currency, they tend to limit any potential gain that might result from an increase in the value of such currency. Transactions in these contracts involve certain other risks. Unanticipated fluctuations in currency prices may result in a poorer overall performance for the funds than if they had not engaged in any such transactions. Moreover, there may be imperfect correlation between the fund’s holdings of securities denominated in a particular currency and forward contracts into which the fund enters. Such imperfect correlation may cause a fund to sustain losses, which will prevent it from achieving a complete hedge or expose it to risk of foreign exchange loss.

Suitable hedging transactions may not be available in all circumstances and there can be no assurance that a fund will engage in such transactions at any given time or from time to time. Also, such transactions may not be successful and may eliminate any chance for a fund to benefit from favorable fluctuations in relevant foreign currencies.

Forwards will be used primarily to adjust the foreign exchange exposure of each fund with a view to protecting the outlook, and the funds might be expected to enter into such contracts under the following circumstances:

LOCK IN. When the Investment Adviser or Subadviser desires to lock in the U.S. dollar price on the purchase or sale of a security denominated in a foreign currency.

CROSS HEDGE. If a particular currency is expected to decrease against another currency, a fund may sell the currency expected to decrease and purchase a currency which is expected to increase against the currency sold in an amount approximately equal to some or all of the fund’s portfolio holdings denominated in the currency sold.

DIRECT HEDGE. If the Investment Adviser or Subadviser wants to a eliminate substantially all of the risk of owning a particular currency, and/or if the Investment Adviser or Subadviser thinks that a fund can benefit from price appreciation in a given country’s bonds but does not want to hold the currency, it may employ a direct hedge back into the U.S. dollar. In either case, a fund would enter into a forward contract to sell the currency in which a portfolio security is denominated and purchase U.S. dollars at an exchange rate established at the time it initiated the contract. The cost of the direct hedge transaction may offset most, if not all, of the yield advantage offered by the foreign security, but a fund would benefit from an increase in value of the bond.

PROXY HEDGE. The Investment Adviser or Subadviser might choose to use a proxy hedge, which may be less costly than a direct hedge. In this case, a fund, having purchased a security, will sell a currency whose value is believed to be closely linked to the currency in which the security is denominated. Interest rates prevailing in the country whose currency was sold would be expected to be closer to those in the U.S. and lower than those of securities denominated in the currency of the original holding. This type of hedging entails greater risk than a direct hedge because it is dependent on a stable relationship between the two currencies paired as proxies and the relationships can be very unstable at times.

COSTS OF HEDGING. When a fund purchases a foreign bond with a higher interest rate than is available on U.S. bonds of a similar maturity, the additional yield on the foreign bond could be substantially reduced or lost if the fund were to enter into a direct hedge by selling the foreign currency and purchasing the U.S. dollar. This is what is known as the “cost” of hedging. Proxy hedging attempts to reduce this cost through an indirect hedge back to the U.S. dollar. It is important to note that hedging costs are treated as capital transactions and are not, therefore, deducted from a fund’s dividend distribution and are not reflected in its yield. Instead such costs will, over time, be reflected in a fund’s net asset value per share.

TAX CONSEQUENCES OF HEDGING. Under applicable tax law, the funds may be required to limit their gains from

 

13


Table of Contents

hedging in foreign currency forwards, futures, and options. Although the funds are expected to comply with such limits, the extent to which these limits apply is subject to tax regulations as yet unissued. Hedging may also result in the application of the mark-to-market and straddle provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Those provisions could result in an increase (or decrease) in the amount of taxable dividends paid by the funds and could affect whether dividends paid by the funds are classified as capital gains or ordinary income.

FOREIGN SECURITIES involve additional risks, including foreign currency exchange rate risks, because they are issued by foreign entities, including foreign governments, banks and corporations or because they are traded principally overseas. Foreign securities in which the funds may invest include foreign entities that are not subject to uniform accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, practices and requirements comparable to those applicable to U.S. corporations. In addition, there may be less publicly available information about foreign entities. Foreign economic, political and legal developments, as well as fluctuating foreign currency exchange rates and withholding taxes, could have more dramatic effects on the value of foreign securities. For example, conditions within and around foreign countries, such as the possibility of expropriation or confiscatory taxation, political or social instability, diplomatic developments, change of government or war could affect the value of foreign investments. Moreover, individual foreign economies may differ favorably or unfavorably from the U.S. economy in such respects as growth of gross national product, rate of inflation, capital reinvestment, resource self-sufficiency and balance of payments position.

Foreign securities typically have less volume and are generally less liquid and more volatile than securities of U.S. companies. Fixed commissions on foreign securities exchanges are generally higher than negotiated commissions on U.S. exchanges, although the funds will endeavor to achieve the most favorable overall results on portfolio transactions. There is generally less government supervision and regulation of foreign securities exchanges, brokers, dealers and listed companies than in the United States, thus increasing the risk of delayed settlements of portfolio transactions or loss of certificates for portfolio securities. There may be difficulties in obtaining or enforcing judgments against foreign issuers as well. Bankruptcy laws in some foreign countries are sometimes biased to the borrowers and against the creditors. These factors and others may increase the risks with respect to the liquidity of a fund, and its ability to meet a large number of shareholder redemption requests.

Foreign markets also have different clearance and settlement procedures and, in certain markets, there have been times when settlements have been unable to keep pace with the volume of securities transactions, making it difficult to conduct such transactions. Such delays in settlement could result in temporary periods when a portion of the assets of a fund is uninvested and no return is earned thereon. The inability to make intended security purchases due to settlement problems could cause a fund to miss attractive investment opportunities. Losses to a fund arising out of the inability to fulfill a contract to sell such securities also could result in potential liability for a fund.

Investments in the securities of foreign issuers may be made and held in foreign currencies. In addition, the funds may hold cash in foreign currencies. These investments may be affected favorably or unfavorably by changes in currency rates and in exchange control regulations, and may cause a fund to incur costs in connection with conversions between various currencies. The rate of exchange between the U.S. dollar and other currencies is determined by the forces of supply and demand in the foreign exchange market as well as by political and economic factors. Changes in the foreign currency exchange rates also may affect the value of dividends and interest earned, gains and losses realized on the sale of securities, and net investment income and gains, if any, to be distributed to shareholders by a fund.

European financial markets have recently experienced volatility due, in part, to concerns about rising levels of government debt and the prevalence of increased budget deficits on the continent. Recent events such as credit rating downgrades, emergency public financings and political instability have increased the possibility of recession in Europe. As a result, the value of the euro, the common currency used by members of the Economic and Monetary Union of the European Union (EU), has declined.

These events have also caused certain individuals and institutions to question the continued viability of the euro as a unit of currency. It is possible individual EU member countries that have already adopted the euro may abandon that currency

 

14


Table of Contents

and revert to a national currency or that certain countries may be expelled from the EU. It is also possible that the euro will cease to exist as a single unit of currency in its current form. The precise effects of any such outcome on regional or global financial markets is impossible to predict. However, the abandonment of the euro or the exit of any country out of the EU would likely have an extremely destabilizing effect on all EU member countries and their economies, which would likely spread to the global economy as a whole.

As the funds may hold certain investments that are economically linked to the euro or EU member states, any negative impacts sustained by EU member states or the euro would likely have a negative impact on the investments held by the funds, which could hurt their overall performance. In addition, should events in Europe continue to deteriorate, the funds may have difficulty valuing portfolio investments denominated in the euro or a possible replacement currency.

FORWARD CONTRACTS are sales contracts between a buyer (holding the “long” position), and the seller (holding the “short” position) for an asset with delivery deferred to a future date. The buyer agrees to pay a fixed price at the agreed future date and the seller agrees to deliver the asset. The seller hopes that the market price on the delivery date is less than the agreed upon price, while the buyer hopes for the contrary. The change in value of a forward-based derivative generally is roughly proportional to the change in value of the underlying asset.

FUTURES CONTRACTS are instruments that represent an agreement between two parties that obligates one party to buy, and the other party to sell, specific instruments at an agreed-upon price on a stipulated future date. In the case of futures contracts relating to an index or otherwise not calling for physical delivery at the close of the transaction, the parties usually agree to deliver the final cash settlement price of the contract. A fund may purchase and sell futures contracts based on securities, securities indices and foreign currencies, interest rates, or any other futures contracts traded on U.S. exchanges or boards of trade that the Commodities Future Trading Commission (“CFTC”) licenses and regulates on foreign exchanges. Consistent with CFTC regulations, the trust has claimed an exclusion from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” under the Commodity Exchange Act and, therefore, is not subject to registration or regulation as a pool operator under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA). However, investors should note that the CFTC has adopted certain rules that significantly affect the exemptions available to a fund. As of the date of this SAI, there is no certainty that a fund, its investment adviser, subadviser and other parties will be able to rely on these exclusions and exemptions in the future. Additional CFTC regulation (or a choice to no longer use strategies that trigger additional regulation) may cause a fund to change its investment strategies or to incur additional expenses. Although positions are usually marked to market on a daily basis with an intermediary (executing broker) there remains a credit risk with the futures exchange.

Each fund must maintain a small portion of its assets in cash to process shareholder transactions in and out of the fund and to pay its expenses. In order to reduce the effect this otherwise uninvested cash would have on its performance, a fund may purchase futures contracts. Such transactions allow the fund’s cash balance to produce a return similar to that of the underlying security or index on which the futures contract is based. Also, a fund may purchase or sell futures contracts on a specified foreign currency to “fix” the price in U.S. dollars of the foreign security it has acquired or sold or expects to acquire or sell. A fund may enter into futures contracts for other reasons as well. For example, to efficiently change the duration stance of the fund by buying and/or selling government bond futures.

When buying or selling futures contracts, a fund must place a deposit with its broker equal to a fraction of the contract amount. This amount is known as “initial margin” and must be in the form of liquid debt instruments, including cash, cash-equivalents and U.S. government securities. Subsequent payments to and from the broker, known as “variation margin” may be made daily, if necessary, as the value of the futures contracts fluctuate. This process is known as “marking-to-market.” The margin amount will be returned to the fund upon termination of the futures contracts assuming all contractual obligations are satisfied. Because margin requirements are normally only a fraction of the amount of the futures contracts in a given transaction, futures trading can involve a great deal of leverage. In order to avoid this, each fund will earmark or segregate assets for any outstanding futures contracts as may be required under the federal securities laws.

 

15


Table of Contents

While a fund intends to purchase and sell futures contracts in order to simulate full investment, there are risks associated with these transactions. Adverse market movements could cause a fund to experience substantial losses when buying and selling futures contracts. Of course, barring significant market distortions, similar results would have been expected if a fund had instead transacted in the underlying securities directly. There also is the risk of losing any margin payments held by a broker in the event of its bankruptcy. Additionally, a fund incurs transaction costs (i.e., brokerage fees) when engaging in futures trading. To the extent a fund also invests in futures in order to simulate full investment, these same risks apply.

When interest rates are rising or securities prices are falling, a fund may seek, through the sale of futures contracts, to offset a decline in the value of their current portfolio securities. When rates are falling or prices are rising, a fund, through the purchase of futures contracts, may attempt to secure better rates or prices than might later be available in the market when they effect anticipated purchases. Similarly, a fund may sell futures contracts on a specified currency to protect against a decline in the value of that currency and their portfolio securities that are denominated in that currency. A fund may purchase futures contracts on a foreign currency to fix the price in U.S. dollars of a security denominated in that currency that a fund has acquired or expects to acquire.

Futures contracts normally require actual delivery or acquisition of an underlying security or cash value of an index on the expiration date of the contract. In most cases, however, the contractual obligation is fulfilled before the date of the contract by buying or selling, as the case may be, identical futures contracts. Such offsetting transactions terminate the original contracts and cancel the obligation to take or make delivery of the underlying securities or cash. There may not always be a liquid secondary market at the time a fund seeks to close out a futures position. If a fund is unable to close out its position and prices move adversely, the fund would have to continue to make daily cash payments to maintain its margin requirements. If a fund had insufficient cash to meet these requirements it may have to sell portfolio securities at a disadvantageous time or incur extra costs by borrowing the cash. Also, a fund may be required to make or take delivery and incur extra transaction costs buying or selling the underlying securities. A fund seeks to reduce the risks associated with futures transactions by buying and selling futures contracts that are traded on national exchanges or for which there appears to be a liquid secondary market.

HYBRID INSTRUMENTS are a type of potentially high-risk derivative that combines a traditional stock, bond, or commodity 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 commodity, 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 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 commodity shortages and 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 a fund to the credit risk of the issuer of the hybrids. These risks may cause significant fluctuations in the net asset value of the fund. Each fund will not invest more than 5% of its total assets in hybrid instruments.

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, and are

 

16


Table of Contents

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. The funds will only invest in commodity-linked hybrid instruments that qualify under applicable rules of the CFTC for an exemption from the provisions of the CEA.

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, the funds’ 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.

ILLIQUID SECURITIES generally are any securities that cannot be disposed of promptly and in the ordinary course of business at approximately the amount at which a fund has valued the instruments. The liquidity of a fund’s investments is monitored under the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees. Investments currently not considered liquid include repurchase agreements not maturing within seven days and certain restricted securities. Any security may become illiquid at times of market dislocation.

INTERNATIONAL BONDS are certain obligations or securities of foreign issuers, including Eurodollar Bonds, which are U.S. dollar-denominated bonds issued by foreign issuers payable in Eurodollars (U.S. dollars held in banks located outside the United States, primarily Europe), Yankee Bonds, which are U.S. dollar-denominated bonds issued in the U.S. by foreign banks and corporations, and EuroBonds, which are bonds denominated in U.S. dollars and usually issued by large underwriting groups composed of banks and issuing houses from many countries. Investments in securities issued by foreign issuers, including American Depositary Receipts and securities purchased on foreign securities exchanges, may subject a fund to additional investment risks, such as adverse political and economic developments, possible seizure, nationalization or expropriation of foreign investments, less stringent disclosure requirements, non-U.S. withholding taxes and the adoption of other foreign governmental restrictions.

Additional risks include less publicly available information, the risk that companies may not be subject to the accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards and requirements of U.S. companies, the risk that foreign securities markets may have less volume and therefore may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than U.S. securities, and the risk that custodian and transaction costs may be higher. Foreign issuers of securities or obligations are often subject to accounting requirements and engage in business practices different from those respecting domestic issuers of similar securities or obligations. Foreign branches of U.S. banks and foreign banks may be subject to less stringent reserve requirements than those applicable to domestic branches of U.S. banks.

Sovereign debt investment can involve a high degree of risk. The governmental entity that controls the repayment of sovereign debt may not be able or willing to repay the principal and/or interest when due in accordance with the terms of the debt. A governmental entity’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest due in a timely manner may be affected by, among other factors, its cash flow situation, the extent of its foreign reserves, the availability of sufficient foreign exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the governmental entity’s policy toward the International Monetary Fund, and the political constraints to which a governmental entity may be subject. Governmental entities also may depend on expected disbursements from foreign governments, multilateral agencies and others to reduce principal and interest arrearages on their debt. The commitment on the part of these governments, agencies and others to make such disbursements may be conditioned on a governmental entity’s implementation of economic reforms and/or economic performance and the timely service of such debtor’s obligations. Failure to implement such reforms, achieve such levels of economic performance or repay principal or interest when due may result in the cancellation of such third parties’ commitments to lend funds to the governmental entity, which may further impair such debtor’s ability or willingness to service its debts in a timely manner. Consequently, governmental entities may default on their sovereign debt. Holders of sovereign debt (including the funds) may be requested to participate in the rescheduling of such debt and to extend further loans to governmental entities. There is no bankruptcy proceeding by which sovereign debt on which governmental entities have defaulted may be collected in whole or in part.

 

17


Table of Contents

A fund’s investments in foreign currency denominated debt obligations and hedging activities will likely produce a difference between its book income and its taxable income. This difference may cause a portion of the fund’s income distributions to constitute returns of capital for tax purposes or require the fund to make distributions exceeding book income to qualify as a regulated investment company for federal tax purposes.

LOAN INTERESTS , and other direct debt instruments or interests therein, may be acquired by a fund. A loan interest is typically originated, negotiated, and structured by a U.S. or foreign commercial bank, insurance company, finance company, or other financial institution (“Agent”) for a lending syndicate of financial institutions. The Agent typically administers and enforces the loan on behalf of the other lenders in the syndicate. In addition, an institution, typically but not always the Agent (“Collateral Bank”), holds collateral (if any) on behalf of the lenders. When a Collateral Bank holds collateral, such collateral typically consists of one or more of the following asset types: inventory, accounts receivable, property, plant and equipment, intangibles, common stock of subsidiaries or other investments. These loan interests may take the form of participation interests in, assignments of or novations of a loan during its second distribution, or direct interests during a primary distribution. Such loan interests may be acquired from U.S. or foreign banks, insurance companies, finance companies, or other financial institutions who have made loans or are members of a lending syndicate or from other holders of loan interests. A fund may also acquire loan interests under which the fund derives its rights directly from the borrower. Such loan interests are separately enforceable by a fund against the borrower and all payments of interest and principal are typically made directly to the fund from the borrower. In the event that a fund and other lenders become entitled to take possession of shared collateral, it is anticipated that such collateral would be held in the custody of the Collateral Bank for their mutual benefit. A fund may not act as an Agent, a Collateral Bank, a guarantor or sole negotiator or structurer with respect to a loan.

The Investment Adviser or Subadviser will analyze and evaluate the financial condition of the borrower in connection with the acquisition of any loan interest. Credit ratings are typically assigned to loan interests in the same manner as with other fixed income debt securities, and the Investment Adviser analyzes and evaluates these ratings, if any, in deciding whether to purchase a loan interest. The Investment Adviser also analyzes and evaluates the financial condition of the Agent and, in the case of loan interests in which the fund does not have privity with the borrower, those institutions from or through whom the fund derives its rights in a loan (“Intermediate Participants”).

In a typical loan, the Agent administers the terms of the loan agreement. In such cases, the Agent is normally responsible for the collection of principal and interest payments from the borrower and the apportionment of these payments to the credit of all the institutions which are parties to the loan agreement. A fund will generally rely upon the Agent or Intermediate Participant to receive and forward to the fund its portion of the principal and interest payments on the loan. Furthermore, unless under the terms of a participation agreement a fund has direct recourse against the borrower, the fund will rely on the Agent and the other members of the lending syndicate to use appropriate credit remedies against the borrower. The Agent is typically responsible for monitoring compliance with covenants contained in the loan agreement based upon reports prepared by the borrower. The seller of the loan interest usually does, but is often not obligated to, notify holders of loan interests of any failures of compliance. The Agent may monitor the value of the collateral and, if the value of the collateral declines, may accelerate the loan, may give the borrower an opportunity to provide additional collateral or may seek other protection for the benefit of the participants in the loan. The Agent is compensated by the borrower for providing these services under a loan agreement, and such compensation may include special fees paid upon structuring and funding the loan and other fees paid on a continuing basis. With respect to loan interests for which the Agent does not perform such administrative and enforcement functions, the fund will perform such tasks on its own behalf, although a Collateral Bank will typically hold any collateral on behalf of the fund and the other holders pursuant to the applicable loan agreement.

A financial institution’s appointment as Agent may usually be terminated in the event that it fails to observe the requisite standard of care or becomes insolvent, enters Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) receivership, or, if not FDIC insured, enters into bankruptcy proceedings. A successor agent generally would be appointed to replace the terminated Agent, and assets held by the Agent under the loan agreement should remain available to holders of

 

18


Table of Contents

loan interests. However, if assets held by the Agent for the benefit of a fund were determined to be subject to the claims of the Agent’s general creditors, the fund might incur certain costs and delays in realizing payment on a loan interest, or suffer a loss of principal and/or interest. In situations involving Intermediate Participants, similar risks may arise.

Purchasers of loan interests depend primarily upon the creditworthiness of the borrower for payment of principal and interest. If a fund does not receive a scheduled interest or principal payment on such indebtedness, the fund’s share price and yield could be adversely affected. Loans that are fully secured offer a fund more protections than an unsecured loan in the event of non-payment of scheduled interest or principal. However, there is no assurance that the liquidation of collateral from a secured loan would satisfy the borrower’s obligation, or that the collateral can be liquidated. Indebtedness of borrowers whose creditworthiness is poor involves substantially greater risks, and may be highly speculative. Borrowers that are in bankruptcy or restructuring may never pay off their indebtedness, or may pay only a small fraction of the amount owed. Direct indebtedness of developing countries also will involve a risk that the governmental entities responsible for the repayment of the debt may be unable, or unwilling, to pay interest and repay principal when due.

The loan interests market is in a developing phase with increased participation among several investor types. The dealer community has become increasingly involved in this secondary market. If, however, a particular loan interest is deemed to be illiquid, it would be valued using procedures adopted by the Board of Trustees. In such a situation, there is no guarantee that the fund will be able to sell such loan interests, which could lead to a decline in the value of the loan interests and the value of the fund’s shares.

LOAN PARTICIPATIONS . A fund may purchase participations in commercial loans. Such indebtedness may be secured or unsecured. Loan participations typically represent direct participation in a loan to a corporate borrower, and generally are offered by banks or other financial institutions or lending syndicates. A fund may participate in such syndications, or can buy part of a loan, becoming a part lender. When purchasing loan participations, the fund assumes the credit risk associated with the corporate borrower and may assume the credit risk associated with an interposed bank or other financial intermediary. The participation interests in which the fund intends to invest may not be rated by any nationally recognized rating service.

A loan is often administered by an agent bank acting as agent for all holders. The agent bank administers the terms of the loan, as specified in the loan agreement. In addition, the agent bank is normally responsible for the collection of principal and interest payments from the corporate borrower and the apportionment of these payments to the credit of all institutions which are parties to the loan agreement. Unless, under the terms of the loan or other indebtedness, a fund has direct recourse against the corporate borrower, the fund may have to rely on the agent bank or other financial intermediary to apply appropriate credit remedies against a corporate borrower.

A financial institution’s employment as agent bank might be terminated in the event that it fails to observe a requisite standard of care or becomes insolvent. A successor agent bank would generally be appointed to replace the terminated agent bank, and assets held by the agent bank under the loan agreement should remain available to holders of such indebtedness. However, if assets held by the agent bank for the benefit of the fund were determined to be subject to the claims of the agent bank’s general creditors, the fund might incur certain costs and delays in realizing payment on a loan or loan participation and could suffer a loss of principal and/or interest. In situations involving other interposed financial institutions (e.g., an insurance company or governmental agency) similar risks may arise.

Purchasers of loans and other forms of direct indebtedness depend primarily upon the creditworthiness of the corporate borrower for payment of principal and interest. If a fund does not receive scheduled interest or principal payments on such indebtedness, the fund’s share price and yield could be adversely affected. Loans that are fully secured offer the fund more protection than an unsecured loan in the event of non-payment of scheduled interest or principal. However, there is no assurance that the liquidation of collateral from a secured loan would satisfy the corporate borrower’s obligation, or that the collateral can be liquidated.

 

19


Table of Contents

A fund may invest in loan participations with credit quality comparable to that of issuers of its securities investments. Indebtedness of companies whose creditworthiness is poor involves substantially greater risks, and may be highly speculative. Some companies may never pay off their indebtedness, or may pay only a small fraction of the amount owed. Consequently, when investing in indebtedness of companies with poor credit, the fund bears a substantial risk of losing the entire amount invested.

A fund limits the amount of its total assets that it will invest in any one issuer or in issuers within the same industry. For purposes of these limits, the fund generally will treat the corporate borrower as the “issuer” of indebtedness held by the fund. In the case of loan participations where a bank or other lending institution serves as a financial intermediary between the fund and the corporate borrower, if the participation does not shift to a fund the direct debtor-creditor relationship with the corporate borrower, SEC interpretations require the fund to treat both the lending bank or other lending institution and the corporate borrower as “issuers” for the purposes of determining whether the fund has invested more than 5% of its assets in a single issuer. Treating a financial intermediary as an issuer of indebtedness may restrict the fund’s ability to invest in indebtedness related to a single financial intermediary, or a group of intermediaries engaged in the same industry, even if the underlying borrowers represent many different companies and industries.

Loans and other types of direct indebtedness may not be readily marketable and may be subject to restrictions on resale. In some cases, negotiations involved in disposing of indebtedness may require weeks to complete. Consequently, some indebtedness may be difficult or impossible to dispose of readily at what the Investment Adviser believes to be a fair price. In addition, valuation of illiquid indebtedness involves a greater degree of judgment in determining the fund’s net asset value than if that value were based on available market quotations, and could result in significant variations in the fund’s daily share price. At the same time, some loan interests are traded among certain financial institutions and accordingly may be deemed liquid. As the market for different types of indebtedness develops, the liquidity of these instruments is expected to improve. In addition, a fund currently intends to treat indebtedness for which there is no readily available market as illiquid for purposes of the fund's limitation on illiquid investments. Investments in loan participations are considered to be debt obligations for purposes of the fund’s investment restriction relating to the lending of funds or assets by a fund.

Investments in loans through a direct assignment of the financial institution’s interests with respect to the loan may involve additional risks to the fund. For example, if a loan is foreclosed, a fund could become part owner of any collateral, and would bear the costs and liabilities associated with owning and disposing of the collateral. In addition, it is conceivable that under emerging legal theories of lender liability, the fund could be held liable as co-lender. It is unclear whether loans and other forms of direct indebtedness offer securities law protections against fraud and misrepresentation. In the absence of definitive regulatory guidance, a fund relies on the Investment Adviser’s research in an attempt to avoid situations where fraud or misrepresentation could adversely affect the fund.

MATURITY OF INVESTMENTS will generally be determined using a portfolio security’s final maturity date (date on which the final principal payment of a bond is scheduled to be paid); however, for securitized products, such as mortgage-backed securities and certain other asset-backed securities, maturity will be determined on an average life basis (weighted average time to receipt of all principal payments) by the investment adviser. Because pre-payment rates

 

20


Table of Contents

of individual mortgage pools vary widely, the average life of a particular pool cannot be predicted precisely. For securities with embedded demand features, such as puts or calls, either the demand date or the final maturity date will be used depending on interest rates, yields and other market conditions. The average portfolio maturity of a fund is dollar-weighted based upon the market value of a fund’s securities at the time of the calculation.

MONEY MARKET SECURITIES are high-quality, short term debt securities that may be issued by entities such as the U.S. government, corporations and financial institutions (like banks). Money market securities include commercial paper, certificates of deposit, banker’s acceptances, notes and time deposits. Certificates of deposit and time deposits are issued against funds deposited in a banking institution for a specified period of time at a specified interest rate. Banker’s acceptances are credit instruments evidencing a bank’s obligation to pay a draft drawn on it by a customer. These instruments reflect the obligation both of the bank and of the drawer to pay the full amount of the instrument upon maturity. Commercial paper consists of short term, unsecured promissory notes issued to finance short term credit needs.

Money market securities pay fixed, variable or floating rates of interest and are generally subject to credit and interest rate risks. The maturity date or price of and financial assets collateralizing a security may be structured in order to make it qualify as or act like a money market security. These securities may be subject to greater credit and interest rate risks than other money market securities because of their structure. Money market securities may be issued with puts or sold separately, sometimes called demand features or guarantees, which are agreements that allow the buyer to sell a security at a specified price and time to the seller or “put provider.” When a fund buys a put, losses could occur as a result of the costs of the put or if it exercises its rights under the put and the put provider does not perform as agreed. Standby commitments are types of puts.

Each fund may keep a portion of its assets in cash for business operations. In order to reduce the effect this otherwise uninvested cash would have on its performance, a fund may invest in money market securities. Each fund may also invest in money market securities to the extent it is consistent with its investment objective.

MORTGAGE-BACKED SECURITIES (“MBS”) and other ASSET-BACKED SECURITIES (“ABS”) may be purchased by a fund. MBS represent participations in mortgage loans, and include pass-through securities, adjustable rate mortgages, collateralized mortgage obligations and stripped mortgage-backed securities. MBS may be issued or guaranteed by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities, such as the Government National Mortgage Association (GNMA or Ginnie Mae) and Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac, or by private issuers, generally originators and investors in mortgage loans, including savings associations, mortgage banks, commercial banks, and special purpose entities (collectively, “private lenders”). MBS are based on different types of mortgages including those on commercial real estate and residential property. MBS issued by private lenders may be supported by pools of mortgage loans or other MBS that are guaranteed, directly or indirectly, by the U.S. government or one of its agencies or instrumentalities, or they may be issued without any governmental guarantee of the underlying mortgage assets but with some form of credit enhancement.

ABS have structural characteristics similar to MBS. ABS represent direct or indirect participation in assets such as automobile loans, credit card receivables, trade receivables, home equity loans (which sometimes are categorized as MBS) or other financial assets. Therefore, repayment depends largely on the cash flows generated by the assets backing the securities. The credit quality of most ABS depends primarily on the credit quality of the assets underlying such securities, how well the entity issuing the security is insulated from the credit risk of the originator or any other affiliated entities, and the amount and quality of any credit enhancement of the securities. Payments or distributions of principal and interest on ABS may be supported by credit enhancements including letters of credit, an insurance guarantee, reserve

 

21


Table of Contents

funds and overcollateralization. Based on the characteristics of mortgage-backed securities, the funds have identified mortgage-backed securities issued by private lenders and not guaranteed by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities or by a foreign government, its agencies or instrumentalities as a separate industry for purposes of a fund’s concentration policy.

Commercial mortgage-backed securities include securities that reflect an interest in, and are secured by, mortgage loans on commercial real property. The market for commercial mortgage-backed securities developed more recently and in terms of total outstanding principal amount of issues is relatively small compared to the market for residential single-family MBS. Many of the risks of investing in commercial MBS reflect the risks of investing in the real estate securing the underlying mortgage loans. These risks reflect the effects of local and other economic conditions on real estate markets, the ability of tenants to make loan payments, and the ability of a property to attract and retain tenants. Commercial MBS may be less liquid and exhibit greater price volatility than other types of mortgage- or asset-backed securities.

The funds may invest in collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”), which includes collateralized bond obligations (“CBOs”), collateralized loan obligations (“CLOs”) and other similarly structured securities such as credit derivatives or even derivatives of credit derivatives. CBOs and CLOs are types of asset-backed securities. A CBO is a trust which is backed by a diversified pool of high risk, below investment grade fixed income securities. 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.

For both CBOs and CLOs, the cashflows from the trust are split into two or more portions, called tranches, varying in risk and yield. The riskiest portion is the “equity” tranche which bears the bulk of defaults from the bonds or loans in the trust and serves to protect the other, more senior tranches from default in all but the most severe circumstances. Since it is partially protected from defaults, a senior tranche from a CBO trust or CLO trust typically has higher ratings and lower yields than their underlying securities, and can be rated investment grade. Despite the protection from the equity tranche, CBO or CLO tranches can experience substantial losses due to actual defaults, increased sensitivity to defaults due to collateral default and disappearance of protecting tranches, market anticipation of defaults, as well as aversion to CBO or CLO securities as a class.

The risks of an investment in a CDO depend largely on the type of the collateral securities and the class of the CDO in which a fund invests. Normally, CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs are privately offered and sold, and thus, are not registered under the securities laws. As a result, investments in CDOs may be characterized by the funds as illiquid securities, however an active dealer market may exist for CDOs allowing a CDO to qualify for Rule 144A transactions. In addition to the normal risks associated with fixed income securities discussed elsewhere in this SAI and the funds’ prospectuses (e.g., interest rate risk and default risk), CDOs carry additional risks including, but not limited to: (i) the possibility that distributions from collateral securities will not be adequate to make interest or other payments; (ii) the quality of the collateral may decline in value or default; (iii) the funds may invest in CDOs that are subordinate to other classes; (iv) the complex structure of the security may not be fully understood at the time of investment and may produce disputes with the issuer or unexpected investment results and (v) credit ratings by major credit rating agencies may be no indication of the credit worthiness of the security.

Collateralized mortgage obligation (“CMO”) is a hybrid between a mortgage-backed bond and a mortgage pass-through security. Similar to a bond, interest and prepaid principal is paid, in most cases, on a monthly basis. CMOs may be collateralized by whole mortgage loans, but are more typically collateralized by portfolios of mortgage pass-through securities guaranteed by Ginnie Mae, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and their income streams.

CMOs are structured into multiple classes, each bearing a different stated maturity. Actual maturity and average life will depend upon the prepayment experience of the collateral. CMOs provide for a modified form of call protection through a de facto breakdown of the underlying pool of mortgages according to how quickly the loans are repaid. Monthly payment

 

22


Table of Contents

of principal received from the pool of underlying mortgages, including prepayments, is first returned to investors holding the shortest maturity class. Investors holding the longer maturity classes receive principal only after the first class has been retired. An investor is partially guarded against a sooner than desired return of principal because of the sequential payments.

In a typical CMO transaction, a corporation (“issuer”) issues multiple series (e.g., A, B, C, Z) of CMO bonds (“Bonds”). Proceeds of the Bond offering are used to purchase mortgages or mortgage pass-through certificates (“Collateral”). The Collateral is pledged to a third party trustee as security for the Bonds. Principal and interest payments from the Collateral are used to pay principal on the Bonds in the order A, B, C, Z. The Series A, B, and C Bonds all bear current interest. Interest on the Series Z Bond is accrued and added to principal and a like amount is paid as principal on the Series A, B, or C Bond currently being paid off. When the Series A, B, and C Bonds are paid in full, interest and principal on the Series Z Bond begins to be paid currently. With some CMOs, the issuer serves as a conduit to allow loan originators (primarily builders or savings and loan associations) to borrow against their loan portfolios.

The rate of principal payment on MBS and ABS generally depends on the rate of principal payments received on the underlying assets which in turn may be affected by a variety of economic and other factors. As a result, the price and yield on any MBS or ABS is difficult to predict with precision and price and yield to maturity may be more or less than the anticipated yield to maturity. If a fund purchases these securities at a premium, a prepayment rate that is faster than expected will reduce yield to maturity, while a prepayment rate that is slower than expected will have the opposite effect of increasing the yield to maturity. Conversely, if a fund purchases these securities at a discount, a prepayment rate that is faster than expected will increase yield to maturity, while a prepayment rate that is slower than expected will reduce yield to maturity. 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.

While many MBS and ABS are issued with only one class of security, many are issued in more than one class, each with different payment terms. Multiple class MBS and ABS are issued as a method of providing credit support, typically through creation of one or more classes whose right to payments on the security is made subordinate to the right to such payments of the remaining class or classes. In addition, multiple classes may permit the issuance of securities with payment terms, interest rates, or other characteristics differing both from those of each other and from those of the underlying assets. Examples include stripped securities, which are MBS and ABS entitling the holder to disproportionate interest or principal compared with the assets backing the security, and securities with classes having characteristics different from the assets backing the securities, such as a security with floating interest rates with assets backing the securities having fixed interest rates. The market value of such securities and CMO’s generally is more or less sensitive to changes in prepayment and interest rates than is the case with traditional MBS and ABS, and in some cases such market value may be extremely volatile.

CMO residuals are mortgage securities issued by agencies or instrumentalities of the U.S. Government or by private originators of, or investors in, mortgage loans, including savings and loan associations, homebuilders, mortgage banks, commercial banks, investment banks and special purpose entities of the foregoing.

The cash flow generated by the mortgage assets underlying a series of CMOs is applied first to make required payments of principal and interest on the CMOs and second to pay the related administrative expenses of the issuer. The residual in a CMO structure generally represents the interest in any excess cash flow remaining after making the foregoing payments. Each payment of such excess cash flow to a holder of the related CMO residual represents income and/or a return of capital. The amount of residual cash flow resulting from a CMO will depend on, among other things, the characteristics of the mortgage assets, the coupon rate of each class of CMO, prevailing interest rates, the amount of administrative expenses and the prepayment experience on the mortgage assets. In particular, the yield to maturity on CMO residuals is extremely sensitive to prepayments on the related underlying mortgage assets, in the same manner as an interest-only (“IO”) class of stripped mortgage-backed securities. See “Stripped Mortgage-Backed Securities.” In addition, if a series of a CMO includes a class that bears interest at an adjustable rate, the yield to maturity on the related CMO residual will also be extremely sensitive to changes in the level of the index upon which interest rate adjustments are based. As described below with respect to stripped mortgage-backed securities, in certain circumstances a fund may fail to recoup fully its initial investment in a CMO residual.

 

23


Table of Contents

CMO residuals are generally purchased and sold by institutional investors through several investment banking firms acting as brokers or dealers. The CMO residual market has only very recently developed and CMO residuals currently may not have the liquidity of other more established securities trading in other markets. Transactions in CMO residuals are generally completed only after careful review of the characteristics of the securities in question. In addition, CMO residuals may, or pursuant to an exemption therefrom, may not have been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”). CMO residuals, whether or not registered under the 1933 Act, may be subject to certain restrictions on transferability, and may be deemed “illiquid” and subject to a fund’s limitations on investment in illiquid securities.

Stripped mortgage-backed securities are derivative multi-class mortgage securities. SMBS may be issued by agencies or instrumentalities of the U.S. Government, or by private originators of, or investors in, mortgage loans, including savings and loan associations, mortgage banks, commercial banks, investment banks and special purpose entities of the foregoing.

SMBS are usually structured with two classes that receive different proportions of the interest and principal distributions on a pool of mortgage assets. A common type of SMBS will have one class receiving some of the interest and most of the principal from the mortgage assets, while the other class will receive most of the interest and the remainder of the principal. In the most extreme case, one class will receive all of the interest (the “IO” class), while the other class will receive all of the principal (the principal-only or “PO” class). The yield to maturity on an IO class is extremely sensitive to the rate of principal payments (including prepayments) on the related underlying mortgage assets, and a rapid rate of principal payments may have a material adverse effect on a fund’s yield to maturity from these securities. If the underlying mortgage assets experience greater than anticipated prepayments of principal, a fund may fail to recoup some or all of its initial investment in these securities even if the security is in one of the highest rating categories.

Under certain circumstances these securities may be deemed “illiquid” and subject to a fund’s limitations on investment in illiquid securities.

NON-PUBLICLY TRADED SECURITIES AND PRIVATE PLACEMENTS. A fund may invest in securities that are neither listed on a stock exchange nor traded over-the-counter, including privately placed securities. Such unlisted securities may involve a higher degree of business and financial risk that can result in substantial losses. As a result of the absence of a public trading market for these securities, they may be less liquid than publicly traded securities. Although these securities may be resold in privately negotiated transactions, the prices realized from these sales could be less than those originally paid by the fund or less than what may be considered the fair value of such securities. Furthermore, companies whose securities are not publicly traded may not be subject to the disclosure and other investor protection requirements which might be applicable if their securities were publicly traded. If such securities are required to be registered under the securities laws of one or more jurisdictions before being sold, a fund may be required to bear the expenses of registration.

NON-TRADITIONAL EQUITY SECURITIES. The funds may invest in convertible preferred stocks that offer enhanced yield features, such as Preferred Equity Redemption Cumulative Stock (“PERCS”), which provide an investor, such as the funds, with the opportunity to earn higher dividend income than is available on a company’s common stock. A PERCS is a preferred stock which generally features a mandatory conversion date, as well as a capital appreciation limit which is usually expressed in terms of a stated price. Upon the conversion date, most PERCS convert into common stock of the issuer (PERCS are generally not convertible into cash at maturity). Under a typical arrangement, if after a predetermined number of years the issuer’s common stock is trading at a price below that set by the capital appreciation limit, each PERCS would convert to one share of common stock. If, however, the issuer’s common stock is trading at a price above that set by the capital appreciation limit, the holder of the PERCS would receive less than one full share of common stock. The amount of that fractional share of common stock received by the PERCS holder is determined by

 

24


Table of Contents

dividing the price set by the capital appreciation limit of the PERCS by the market price of the issuer’s common stock. PERCS can be called at any time prior to maturity, and hence do not provide call protection. However, if called early, the issuer may pay a call premium over the market price to the investor. This call premium declines at a preset rate daily, up to the maturity date of the PERCS.

The funds may also invest in other enhanced convertible securities. These include but are not limited to ACES (Automatically Convertible Equity Securities), PEPS (Participating Equity Preferred Stock), PRIDES (Preferred Redeemable Increased Dividend Equity Securities), SAILS (Stock Appreciation Income Linked Securities), TECONS (Term Convertible Notes), QICS (Quarterly Income Cumulative Securities), and DECS (Dividend Enhanced Convertible Securities). ACES, PEPS, PRIDES, SAILS, TECONS, QICS, and DECS all have the following features: they are company-issued convertible preferred stock; unlike PERCS, they do not have capital appreciation limits; they seek to provide the investor with high current income, with some prospect of future capital appreciation; they are typically issued with three- to four-year maturities; they typically have some built-in call protection for the first two to three years; investors have the right to convert them into shares of common stock at a preset conversion ratio or hold them until maturity; and upon maturity, they will automatically convert to either cash or a specified number of shares of common stock.

OPTIONS CONTRACTS generally provide the right to buy or sell a security, commodity, futures contract or foreign currency in exchange for an agreed upon price. If the right is not exercised after a specified period, the option expires and the option buyer forfeits the money paid to the option seller.

A call option gives the buyer the right to buy a specified number of shares of a security at a fixed price on or before a specified date in the future. For this right, the call option buyer pays the call option seller, commonly called the call option writer, a fee called a premium. Call option buyers are usually anticipating that the price of the underlying security will rise above the price fixed with the call writer, thereby allowing them to profit. If the price of the underlying security does not rise, the call option buyer’s losses are limited to the premium paid to the call option writer. For call option writers, a rise in the price of the underlying security will be offset in part by the premium received from the call option buyer. If the call option writer does not own the underlying security, however, the losses that may ensue if the price rises could be potentially unlimited. If the call option writer owns the underlying security or commodity, this is called writing a covered call. All call and put options written by a fund will be covered, which means that a fund will own the securities subject to the option so long as the option is outstanding or the fund will earmark or segregate assets for any outstanding option contracts.

A put option is the opposite of a call option. It gives the buyer the right to sell a specified number of shares of a security at a fixed price on or before a specified date in the future. Put option buyers are usually anticipating a decline in the price of the underlying security, and wish to offset those losses when selling the security at a later date. All put options the funds write will be covered, which means that a fund will earmark or segregate cash, U.S. government securities or other liquid securities with a value at least equal to the exercise price of the put option. The purpose of writing such options is to generate additional income for the funds. However, in return for the option premium, the funds accept the risk that they may be required to purchase the underlying securities at a price in excess of the securities’ market value at the time of purchase.

A fund may purchase and write put and call options on any securities in which it may invest or any securities index or basket of securities based on securities in which it may invest. In addition, the funds may purchase and sell foreign currency options and foreign currency futures contracts and related options. The funds may purchase and write such options on securities that are listed on domestic or foreign securities exchanges or traded in the over-the-counter market. Like futures contracts, option contracts are rarely exercised. Option buyers usually sell the option before it expires. Option writers may terminate their obligations under a written call or put option by purchasing an option identical to the one it has written. Such purchases are referred to as “closing purchase transactions.” A fund may enter into closing sale transactions in order to realize gains or minimize losses on options they have purchased or wrote.

 

25


Table of Contents

An exchange-traded currency option position may be closed out only on an options exchange that provides a secondary market for an option of the same series. Although the funds generally will purchase or write only those options for which there appears to be an active secondary market, there is no assurance that a liquid secondary market will exist for any particular option or at any particular time. If a fund is unable to effect a closing purchase transaction with respect to options it has written, it will not be able to sell the underlying securities or dispose of assets earmarked or held in a segregated account until the options expire or are exercised. Similarly, if a fund is unable to effect a closing sale transaction with respect to options it has purchased, it would have to exercise the options in order to realize any profit and will incur transaction costs upon the purchase or sale of underlying securities.

Reasons for the absence of a liquid secondary market on an exchange include the following: (1) there may be insufficient trading interest in certain options; (2) an exchange may impose restrictions on opening transactions or closing transactions or both; (3) trading halts, suspensions or other restrictions may be imposed with respect to particular classes or series of options; (4) unusual or unforeseen circumstances may interrupt normal operations on an exchange; (5) the facilities of an exchange or the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) may not at all times be adequate to handle current trading volume; or (6) one or more exchanges could, for economic or other reasons, decide or be compelled at some future date to discontinue the trading of options (or a particular class or series of options), although outstanding options on that exchange that had been issued by the OCC as a result of trades on that exchange would continue to be exercisable in accordance with their terms.

The ability to terminate over-the-counter options is more limited than with exchange-traded options and may involve the risk that broker-dealers participating in such transactions will not fulfill their obligations. Until such time as the staff of the SEC changes its position, the funds will treat purchased over-the-counter options and all assets used to cover written over-the-counter options as illiquid securities, except that with respect to options written with primary dealers in U.S. government securities pursuant to an agreement requiring a closing purchase transaction at a formula price, the amount of illiquid securities may be calculated with reference to a formula the staff of the SEC approves.

Additional risks are involved with options trading because of the low margin deposits required and the extremely high degree of leverage that may be involved in options trading. There may be imperfect correlation between the change in market value of the securities held by a fund and the prices of the options, possible lack of a liquid secondary market, and the resulting inability to close such positions prior to their maturity dates.

A fund may write or purchase an option only when the market value of that option, when aggregated with the market value of all other options transactions made on behalf of the fund, does not exceed 5% of its net assets.

An option contract may be implicitly entered into by purchasing certain securities with built in options. An example of such would be a reverse floating rate note where the buyer is also selling one or more caps on short dated interest rates.

PAY-IN-KIND (‘PIK’) are instruments that give the issuer an option (during an initial period) either to make coupon payments in cash or in the form of additional bonds.

PROMISSORY NOTES are written agreements committing the maker or issuer to pay the payee a specified amount either on demand or at a fixed date in the future, with or without interest. These are sometimes called negotiable notes or instruments and are subject to credit risk. Bank notes are notes used to represent obligations issued by banks in large denominations.

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs) are pooled investment vehicles, which invest primarily in income producing real estate or real estate related loans or interests and, in some cases, manage real estate. REITs are sometimes referred to as equity REITs, mortgage REITs or hybrid REITs. An equity REIT invests primarily in properties and generates income from rental and lease properties and, in some cases, from the management of real estate. Equity REITs also offer the potential for growth as a result of property appreciation and from the sale of appreciated property. Mortgage REITs invest primarily in real estate mortgages, which may secure construction, development or long term

 

26


Table of Contents

loans, and derive income for the collection of interest payments. Hybrid REITs may combine the features of equity REITs and mortgage REITs. REITs are generally organized as corporations or business trusts, but are not taxed as a corporation if they meet certain requirements of Subchapter M of the Code.

Like any investment in real estate, a REIT’s performance depends on many factors, such as its ability to find tenants for its properties, to renew leases, and to finance property purchases and renovations. In general, REITs may be affected by changes in underlying real estate values, which may have an exaggerated effect to the extent a REIT concentrates its investment in certain regions or property types. For example, rental income could decline because of extended vacancies, increased competition from nearby properties, tenants’ failure to pay rent, or incompetent management. Property values could decrease because of overbuilding, environmental liabilities, uninsured damages caused by natural disasters, a general decline in the neighborhood, losses due to casualty or condemnation, increases in property taxes, or changes in zoning laws. Ultimately, a REIT’s performance depends on the types of properties it owns and how well the REIT manages its properties.

In general, during periods of rising interest rates, REITs may lose some of their appeal for investors who may be able to obtain higher yields from other income-producing investments, such as long term bonds. Higher interest rates also mean that financing for property purchases and improvements is more costly and difficult to obtain. During periods of declining interest rates, certain mortgage REITs may hold mortgages that mortgagors elect to prepay, which can reduce the yield on securities issued by mortgage REITs. Mortgage REITs may be affected by the ability of borrowers to repay debts to the REIT when due and equity REITs may be affected by the ability of tenants to pay rent.

Like small-cap stocks in general, certain REITs have relatively small market capitalizations and their securities can be more volatile than—and at times will perform differently from—large-cap stocks. In addition, because small-cap stocks are typically less liquid than large-cap stocks, REIT stocks may sometimes experience greater share-price fluctuations than the stocks of larger companies. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills, have limited diversification, and are therefore subject to risks inherent in operating and financing a limited number of projects. By investing in REITs indirectly through a fund, a shareholder will bear indirectly a proportionate share of the REIT’s expenses in addition to their proportionate share of a fund’s expenses. Finally, REITs could possibly fail to qualify for tax-free pass-through of income under the Code or to maintain their exemptions from registration under the 1940 Act.

REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS are instruments under which a buyer acquires ownership of certain securities (usually U.S. government securities) from a seller who agrees to repurchase the securities at a mutually agreed-upon time and price, thereby determining the yield during the buyer’s holding period. Any repurchase agreements a fund enters into will involve the fund as the buyer and banks or broker-dealers as sellers. The period of repurchase agreements is usually short—from overnight to one week, although the securities collateralizing a repurchase agreement may have longer maturity dates. Default by the seller might cause a fund to experience a loss or delay in the liquidation of the collateral securing the repurchase agreement. A fund also may incur disposition costs in liquidating the collateral. In the event of a bankruptcy or other default of a repurchase agreement’s seller, the fund might incur expenses in enforcing its rights, and could experience losses, including a decline in the value of the underlying securities and loss of income. A fund will make payment under a repurchase agreement only upon physical delivery or evidence of book entry transfer of the collateral to the account of its custodian bank.

RESTRICTED SECURITIES are securities that are subject to legal restrictions on their sale. Restricted securities may be considered to be liquid if an institutional or other market exists for these securities. In making this determination, a fund, under the direction and supervision of the Board of Trustees will take into account various factors, including: (1) the frequency of trades and quotes for the security; (2) the number of dealers willing to purchase or sell the security and the number of potential purchasers; (3) dealer undertakings to make a market in the security; and (4) the nature of the security and marketplace trades (e.g., the time needed to dispose of the security, the method of soliciting offers and the mechanics of transfer). To the extent a fund invests in restricted securities that are deemed liquid, its general level of illiquidity may be increased if qualified institutional buyers become uninterested in purchasing these securities.

 

27


Table of Contents

REVERSE REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS AND MORTGAGE DOLLAR ROLLS may be used by a fund. A fund may engage in reverse repurchase agreements to facilitate portfolio liquidity, a practice common in the mutual fund industry, or for arbitrage transactions as discussed below. In a reverse repurchase agreement, a fund would sell a security and enter into an agreement to repurchase the security at a specified future date and price. A fund generally retains the right to interest and principal payments on the security. If a fund uses the cash it obtains to invest in other securities, this may be considered a form of leverage and may expose the fund to a greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value on a fund’s portfolio’s securities. Because a fund receives cash upon entering into a reverse repurchase agreement, it may be considered a borrowing. When required by guidelines of the SEC, a fund will set aside permissible liquid assets earmarked or in a segregated account to secure its obligations to repurchase the security.

A fund also may enter into mortgage dollar rolls, in which a fund would sell MBS for delivery in the current month and simultaneously contract to purchase substantially similar securities on a specified future date. While a fund would forego principal and interest paid on the MBS during the roll period, a fund would be compensated by the difference between the current sales price and the lower price for the future purchase as well as by any interest earned on the proceeds of the initial sale. A fund also could be compensated through the receipt of fee income equivalent to a lower forward price. At the time a fund would enter into a mortgage dollar roll, it would set aside permissible liquid assets earmarked or in a segregated account to secure its obligation for the forward commitment to buy MBS. Mortgage dollar roll transactions may be considered a borrowing by a fund.

The mortgage dollar rolls and reverse repurchase agreements entered into by a fund may be used as arbitrage transactions in which a fund will maintain an offsetting position in short duration investment-grade debt obligations. Since a fund will receive interest on the securities or repurchase agreements in which it invests the transaction proceeds, such transactions may involve leverage. However, since such securities or repurchase agreements will be high quality and short duration, the Investment Adviser believes that such arbitrage transactions present lower risks to a fund than those associated with other types of leverage. There can be no assurance that a fund’s use of the cash it receives from a mortgage dollar roll will provide a positive return.

SECURITIES LENDING of portfolio securities is a common practice in the securities industry. A fund will engage in security lending arrangements. For example, a fund may receive cash collateral, and it may invest it in short term, interest-bearing obligations, but will do so only to the extent that it will not lose the tax treatment available to regulated investment companies. Lending portfolio securities involves risks that the borrower may fail to return the securities or provide additional collateral. Also, voting rights with respect to the loaned securities may pass with the lending of the securities.

A fund may loan portfolio securities to qualified broker-dealers or other institutional investors provided: (1) the loan is secured continuously by collateral consisting of U.S. government securities, letters of credit, cash or cash equivalents or other appropriate instruments maintained on a daily marked-to-market basis in an amount at least equal to the current market value of the securities loaned; (2) the fund may at any time call the loan and obtain the return of the securities loaned; (3) the fund will receive any interest or dividends paid on the loaned securities; and (4) the aggregate market value of securities loaned will not at any time exceed one-third of the total assets of the fund, including collateral received from the loan (at market value computed at the time of the loan).

Although voting rights with respect to loaned securities pass to the borrower, the lender retains the right to recall a security (or terminate a loan) for the purpose of exercising the security’s voting rights. Efforts to recall such securities promptly may be unsuccessful, especially for foreign securities or thinly traded securities such as small-cap stocks. In addition, because recalling a security may involve expenses to a fund, it is expected that a fund will do so only where the items being voted upon are, in the judgment of the Investment Adviser, either material to the economic value of the security or threaten to materially impact the issuer’s corporate governance policies or structure.

SECURITIES OF OTHER INVESTMENT COMPANIES may be purchased and sold by a fund and include those

 

28


Table of Contents

issued by foreign investment companies. Mutual funds are registered investment companies, which may issue and redeem their shares on a continuous basis (open-end mutual funds) or may offer a fixed number of shares usually listed on an exchange (closed-end mutual funds). Mutual funds generally offer investors the advantages of diversification and professional investment management, by combining shareholders’ money and investing it in various types of securities, such as stocks, bonds and money market securities. Mutual funds also make various investments and use certain techniques in order to enhance their performance. These may include entering into delayed-delivery and when-issued securities transactions or swap agreements; buying and selling futures contracts, illiquid and restricted securities and repurchase agreements and borrowing or lending money and/or portfolio securities. The risks of investing in mutual funds generally reflect the risks of the securities in which the mutual funds invest and the investment techniques they may employ. Also, mutual funds charge fees and incur operating expenses.

If a fund decides to purchase securities of other investment companies, a fund intends to purchase shares of mutual funds in compliance with the requirements of federal law or any applicable exemptive relief received from the SEC. Mutual fund investments for a fund are currently restricted under federal regulations, and therefore, the extent to which a fund may invest in another mutual fund may be limited.

Funds in which a fund also may invest include unregistered or privately-placed funds, such as hedge funds and offshore funds. Hedge funds and offshore funds are not registered with the SEC, and therefore are largely exempt from the regulatory requirements that apply to registered investment companies (mutual funds). As a result, these types of funds have greater ability to make investments or use investment techniques, such as leveraging, that can increase investment return but also may substantially increase the risk of losses. Investments in these funds also may be more difficult to sell, which could cause losses to a fund. For example, hedge funds typically require investors to keep their investment in a hedge fund for some period of time, such as 1 year or more. This means investors would not be able to sell their shares of a hedge fund until such time had past, and the investment may be deemed to be illiquid. In addition, because hedge funds may not value their portfolio holdings on a frequent basis, investments in those hedge funds may be difficult to price.

The Laudus Mondrian International Equity, Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets and Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Funds are prohibited from acquiring any securities of registered open-end investment companies or registered unit investment trusts in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(G) or Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the 1940 Act.

SHORT SALES may be used by a fund as part of its overall portfolio management strategies or to offset (hedge) a potential decline in the value of a security. A fund may engage in short sales that are either “against the box” or “uncovered.” A short sale is “against the box” if at all times during which the short position is open, a fund owns at least an equal amount of the securities or securities convertible into, or has the right to acquire, at no added cost, the securities of the same issue as the securities that are sold short. A short sale against the box is a taxable transaction to a fund with respect to the securities that are sold short. “Uncovered” short sales are transactions under which a fund sells a security it does not own. To complete such transaction, a fund may borrow the security through a broker to make delivery to the buyer and, in doing so, the fund becomes obligated to replace the security borrowed by purchasing the security at the market price at the time of the replacement. A fund also may have to pay a fee to borrow particular securities, which would increase the cost of the security. In addition, a fund is often obligated to pay any accrued interest and dividends on the securities until they are replaced. The proceeds of the short sale position will be retained by the broker until a fund replaces the borrowed securities.

A fund will incur a loss if the price of the security sold short increases between the time of the short sale and the time the fund replaces the borrowed security and, conversely, the fund will realize a gain if the price declines. Any gain will be decreased, and any loss increased, by the transaction costs described above. A short sale creates the risk of an unlimited loss, as the price of the underlying securities could theoretically increase without limit, thus increasing the cost of buying those securities to cover the short position. If a fund sells securities short “against the box,” it may protect unrealized gains, but will lose the opportunity to profit on such securities if the price rises. The successful use of short selling as a hedging strategy may be adversely affected by imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the security sold short and the securities being hedged.

 

29


Table of Contents

A fund’s obligation to replace the securities borrowed in connection with a short sale will be secured by collateral deposited with the broker that consists of cash or other liquid securities. In addition, a fund will earmark cash or liquid assets or place in a segregated account an amount of cash or other liquid assets equal to the difference, if any, between (1) the market value of the securities sold short, marked-to-market daily, and (2) any cash or other liquid securities deposited as collateral with the broker in connection with the short sale.

SPREAD TRANSACTIONS may be used for hedging or managing risk. A fund may purchase covered spread options from securities dealers. Such covered spread options are not presently exchange-listed or exchange-traded. The purchase of a spread option gives a fund the right to put, or sell, a security that it owns at a fixed dollar spread or fixed yield spread in relation to another security that a fund does not own, but which is used as a benchmark. The risk to a 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 purchase of spread options will be used to protect a fund against adverse changes in prevailing credit quality spreads, i.e., the yield spread between high quality and lower quality securities. Such protection is only provided during the life of the spread option.

STRIPPED SECURITIES are securities whose income and principal components are detached and sold separately. While risks associated with stripped securities are similar to other fixed income securities, stripped securities are typically subject to greater changes in value. U.S. Treasury securities that have been stripped by the Federal Reserve Bank are obligations of the U.S. Treasury.

SWAP AGREEMENTS are privately negotiated over-the-counter derivative products in which two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities (referred to as the “underlying”) and a predetermined amount (referred to as the “notional amount”). The underlying for a swap may be an interest rate (fixed or floating), a currency exchange rate, a commodity price index, a credit derivative contract (single name or multiname or index), a security, group of securities or a securities index, a combination of any of these, or various other rates, assets or indices. Swap agreements generally do not involve the delivery of the underlying or principal, and a party’s obligations generally are equal to only 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 swap agreement.

Swap agreements can be structured to increase or decrease a fund’s exposure to long or short term interest rates, corporate borrowing rates and other conditions, such as changing security prices and inflation rates. They also can be structured to increase or decrease a fund’s exposure to specific issuers or specific sectors of the bond market such as mortgage securities. For example, if a fund agreed to pay a longer-term fixed rate in exchange for a shorter-term floating rate while holding longer-term fixed rate bonds, the swap would tend to decrease a fund’s exposure to longer-term interest rates. Swap agreements tend to increase or decrease the overall volatility of a fund’s investments and its share price and yield. Changes in interest rates, or other factors determining the amount of payments due to and from a fund, can be the most significant factors in the performance of a swap agreement. If a swap agreement calls for payments from a fund, a fund must be prepared to make such payments when they are due. In order to help minimize risks, a fund will earmark or segregate appropriate assets for any accrued but unpaid net amounts owed under the terms of a swap agreement entered into on a net basis. All other swap agreements will require a fund to earmark or segregate assets in the amount of the accrued amounts owed under the swap. A fund could sustain losses if a counterparty does not perform as agreed under the terms of the swap. A fund will enter into swap agreements with counterparties deemed creditworthy by the Investment Adviser.

In addition, the funds may invest in swaptions, which are privately-negotiated option-based derivative products. Swaptions give the holder the right to enter into a swap. A fund may use a swaption in addition to or in lieu of a swap involving a similar rate or index.

For purposes of applying the funds’ investment policies and restrictions (as stated in the prospectus and this SAI) swap agreements are generally valued by the funds at market value. In the case of a credit default swap sold by a fund (i.e.,

 

30


Table of Contents

where the fund is selling credit default protection), however, the fund will generally value the swap at its notional amount. The manner in which certain securities or other instruments are valued by the funds for purposes of applying investment policies and restrictions may differ from the manner in which those investments are valued by other types of investors.

TEMPORARY DEFENSIVE STRATEGIES are strategies the funds may take for temporary or defensive purposes. The investment strategies for the funds are those that the funds use during normal circumstances. During unusual economic or market conditions or for temporary defensive or liquidity purposes, each fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short term obligations that would not ordinarily be consistent with the funds’ objectives. A fund will do so only if the Investment Adviser or Subadviser believes that the risk of loss outweighs the opportunity for capital gains or higher income. When a fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

U.S. GOVERNMENT SECURITIES are issued by the U.S. Treasury or issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities. Not all U.S. government securities are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some U.S. government securities, such as those issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Student Loan Marketing Association (SLMA or Sallie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB), are supported by a line of credit the issuing entity has with the U.S. Treasury. Others are supported solely by the credit of the issuing agency or instrumentality such as obligations issued by the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation (FFCB). There can be no assurance that the U.S. government will provide financial support to U.S. government securities of its agencies and instrumentalities if it is not obligated to do so under law. U.S. government securities, including U.S. Treasury securities, are among the safest securities, however, not unlike other debt securities, they are still sensitive to interest rate changes, which will cause their yields and prices to fluctuate.

On September 7, 2008, the U.S. Treasury announced a federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, placing the two federal instrumentalities in conservatorship. Under the takeover, the U.S. Treasury agreed to acquire $1 billion of senior preferred stock of each instrumentality and obtained warrants for the purchase of common stock of each instrumentality. Under these Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (SPAs), the U.S. Treasury has pledged to provide up to $100 billion per instrumentality as needed, including the contribution of cash capital to the instrumentalities in the event their liabilities exceed their assets. On May 6, 2009, the U.S. Treasury increased its maximum commitment to each instrumentality under the SPAs to $200 billion per instrumentality. On December 24, 2009, the U.S. Treasury further amended the SPAs to allow the cap on Treasury's funding commitment to increase as necessary to accommodate any cumulative reduction in Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s net worth through the end of 2012. At the conclusion of 2012, the remaining U.S. Treasury commitment will then be fully available to be drawn per the terms of the SPAs. In December 2009, the U.S. Treasury also amended the SPAs to provide Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with some additional flexibility to meet the requirement to reduce their mortgage portfolios.

The actions of the U.S. Treasury are intended to ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac maintain a positive net worth and meet their financial obligations preventing mandatory triggering of receivership. No assurance can be given that the U.S. Treasury initiatives will be successful.

On August 5, 2011, S&P lowered the long-term sovereign credit rating assigned to the United States to AA+ with a negative outlook. On August 8, 2011, S&P downgraded the long-term senior debt rating of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to AA+ with a negative outlook. The long-term impacts of the downgrades or the impacts of any future downgrade are unknown. However, the downgrades could have a material adverse impact on global financial markets and worldwide economic conditions, and could negatively impact the funds.

ZERO-COUPON SECURITIES are debt obligations that do not entitle the holder to any periodic payments of interest before maturity or a specific date when the securities begin paying current interest. Therefore, they are issued and traded at a discount from their face amounts or par value. The market prices of zero-coupon securities are generally 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 do non-zero-coupon securities having similar maturities and credit quality. Current federal income tax

 

31


Table of Contents

law requires that a holder of a taxable zero-coupon security report as income each year the portion of the original issue discount of such security that accrues that year, even though the holder receives no cash payments of interest during the year. Each fund has qualified as a regulated investment company under the Code. Accordingly, during periods when a fund receives no interest payments on its zero-coupon securities, it will be required, in order to maintain its desired tax treatment, to distribute cash approximating the income attributable to such securities.

Such distribution may require the sale of portfolio securities to meet the distribution requirements and such sales may be subject to the risk factor discussed above.

INVESTMENT LIMITATIONS

The following investment limitations are fundamental and may be changed only by vote of a majority of each fund’s outstanding voting securities.

The Laudus Mondrian Funds may not:

 

1) Concentrate investments in a particular industry or group of industries, as concentration is defined under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

2) Purchase or sell commodities or real estate, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

3) Make loans to other persons, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

4) Borrow money, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

5) Issue senior securities, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

6) Underwrite securities issued by other persons, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

In addition, the Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund may not:

 

1) Purchase securities of an issuer, except as consistent with the maintenance of its status as an open-end diversified company under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

The following descriptions of the 1940 Act may assist investors in understanding the above policies and restrictions.

Diversification. Under the 1940 Act and the rules, regulations and interpretations thereunder, a “diversified company,” as to 75% of its total assets, may not purchase securities of any issuer (other than obligations of, or guaranteed by, the U.S. government or its agencies, or instrumentalities or securities of other investment companies) if, as a result, more than 5% of its total assets would be invested in the securities of such issuer, or more than 10% of the issuer’s voting securities would be held by a fund.

 

32


Table of Contents

Borrowing. The 1940 Act restricts an investment company from borrowing (including pledging, mortgaging or hypothecating assets) in excess of 33 1/3% of its total assets (not including temporary borrowings not in excess of 5% of its total assets). Transactions that are fully collateralized in a manner that does not involve the prohibited issuance of a “senior security” within the meaning of Section 18(f) of the 1940 Act, shall not be regarded as borrowings for the purposes of a fund’s investment restriction.

Concentration. The SEC has defined concentration as investing 25% or more of an investment company’s total assets in an industry or group of industries, with certain exceptions.

Lending. Under the 1940 Act, an investment company may only make loans if expressly permitted by its investment policies.

Real Estate. The 1940 Act does not directly restrict an investment company’s ability to invest in real estate, but does require that every investment company have a fundamental investment policy governing such investments. Each fund has adopted a fundamental policy that would permit direct investment in real estate. However, each fund has a non-fundamental investment limitation that prohibits it from investing directly in real estate. This non-fundamental policy may be changed only by vote of a fund’s Board of Trustees.

Senior Securities. Senior securities may include any obligation or instrument issued by an investment company evidencing indebtedness. The 1940 Act generally prohibits each fund from issuing senior securities, although it provides allowances for certain borrowings and certain other investments, such as short sales, reverse repurchase agreements, firm commitment agreements and standby commitments, when such investments are “covered” or with appropriate earmarking or segregation of assets to cover such obligations.

Underwriting. Under the 1940 Act, underwriting securities involves an investment company purchasing securities directly from an issuer for the purpose of selling (distributing) them or participating in any such activity either directly or indirectly.

The following are non-fundamental investment policies and restrictions, and may be changed by the board of trustees.

Each fund may not:

 

1) Invest more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid securities.

 

2) Purchase securities of other investment companies, except as permitted by the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

3) Sell securities short unless it owns the security or the right to obtain the security or equivalent securities, or unless it covers such short sale as required by current SEC rules and interpretations (transactions in futures contracts, options and other derivative instruments are not considered selling securities short).

 

4) Purchase securities on margin, except such short term credits as may be necessary for the clearance of purchases and sales of securities and provided that margin deposits in connection with futures contracts, options on futures or other derivative instruments shall not constitute purchasing securities on margin.

 

5) Borrow money except that the fund may (i) borrow money from banks or through an interfund lending facility, if

 

 

33


Table of Contents
  any, only for temporary or emergency purposes (and not for leveraging) and (ii) engage in reverse repurchase agreements with any party; provided that (i) and (ii) in combination do not exceed 33 1/3% of its total assets (any borrowings that come to exceed this amount will be reduced to the extent necessary to comply with the limitation within three business days).

 

6) Lend any security or make any other loan if, as a result, more than 33 1/3% of its total assets would be lent to other parties (this restriction does not apply to purchases of debt securities or repurchase agreements).

 

7) Purchase or sell commodities, commodity contracts or real estate, including interests in real estate limited partnerships, provided that the fund may (i) purchase securities of companies that deal in real estate or interests therein (including REITs), (ii) purchase or sell futures contracts, options contracts, equity index participations and index participation contracts, and (iii) purchase securities of companies that deal in precious metals or interests therein.

Policies and investment limitations that state a maximum percentage of assets that may be invested in a security or other asset, or that set forth a quality standard shall be measured immediately after and as a result of the fund’s acquisition of such security or asset, unless otherwise noted. Except with respect to limitations on borrowing and futures and option contracts, any subsequent change in net assets or other circumstances does not require a fund to sell an investment if it could not then make the same investment. With respect to the limitation on illiquid securities, in the event that a subsequent change in net assets or other circumstances cause a fund to exceed its limitation, the fund will take steps to bring the aggregate amount of illiquid instruments back within the limitations as soon as reasonably practicable.

The phrase “shareholder approval” as used in the prospectus and herein, and the phrase “vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities,” as used herein, means the affirmative vote of the lesser of (1) more than 50% of the outstanding shares of a class, a fund or the Trust, as the case may be, or (2) 67% or more of the shares of a class, a fund or the Trust, as the case may be, present at a meeting if more than 50% of the outstanding shares are represented at the meeting in person or by proxy.

PORTFOLIO TURNOVER

A change in securities held by a fund is known as “portfolio turnover” and almost always involves the payment by a fund of brokerage commissions or dealer markup and other transaction costs on the sale of securities as well as on the reinvestment of the proceeds in other securities. Portfolio turnover is not a limiting factor with respect to investment decisions.

As disclosed in the Prospectus, high portfolio turnover involves correspondingly greater brokerage commissions and other transaction costs, which will be borne directly by the funds, and could involve realization of capital gains that would be taxable when distributed to shareholders of a fund. To the extent that portfolio turnover results in the realization of net short-term capital gains, such gains are ordinarily taxed to shareholders at ordinary income tax rates.

The portfolio turnover rate for each fund for the fiscal years ended March 31, was:

 

     2012     2011  

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     35     33

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     31     26

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     43     33

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     68     58

 

34


Table of Contents

INCOME, DIVIDENDS, DISTRIBUTIONS AND TAX STATUS

This discussion of federal income tax consequences is based on Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) and the regulations issued thereunder as in effect on the date of this Statement of Additional Information. New legislation, as well as administrative changes or court decisions, may significantly change the conclusions expressed herein, and may have a retroactive effect with respect to the transaction contemplated herein.

The tax status of the funds and the distributions which they may make are summarized in the Prospectus under the headings “Distributions” and “Taxes.” Each fund intends to qualify each year as a regulated investment company (“RIC”) under the Code. In order to qualify as a RIC and to qualify for the special tax treatment accorded RICs and their shareholders, each fund must, among other things: (a) derive at least 90% of its gross income from dividends, interest, payments with respect to certain securities loans, gains from the sale or other disposition of stock, securities or foreign currencies, or other income (including but not limited to gains from options, futures or forward contracts) derived with respect to its business of investing in such stock, securities or currencies and net income derived from an interest in a qualified publicly traded partnership; (b) diversify its holdings so that, at the close of each quarter of its taxable year, (i) at least 50% of the value of its total assets consists of cash, cash items, U.S. Government securities, securities of other RICs or other securities limited generally with respect to any one issuer to a value not more than 5% of the value of the total assets of such fund and not more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer, and (ii) not more than 25% of the value of its total assets is invested in the securities (other than U.S. Government securities or securities of other RICs) of any one issuer, of two or more issuers of which the fund owns at least 20% of the voting power of each issuer and that are engaged in the same, similar, or related businesses, or the securities of one or more qualified publicly traded partnerships; and (c) distribute with respect to each taxable year at least 90% of the sum of its taxable net investment income, its net tax-exempt income (if any), and the excess, if any, of net short-term capital gains over net long-term capital losses for such year. To the extent a fund qualifies for treatment as a RIC, the fund will not be subject to federal income tax on income paid to its shareholders in the form of dividends or capital gain distributions.

If a fund fails to qualify as a RIC accorded special tax treatment in any taxable year, the fund will be subject to tax on its taxable income at corporate rates, and all distributions from earnings and profits, including any distributions of net tax-exempt income and net long-term capital gains, will be taxable to shareholders as ordinary income. Subject to certain limitations, such distributions should qualify for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders and for the lower tax rates applicable to qualified dividend income for individual shareholders. In addition, the fund could be required to recognize unrealized gains, pay substantial taxes and interest and make substantial distributions before requalifying as a RIC that is accorded special tax treatment.

In order to avoid an excise tax imposed on certain under-distributed amounts, a fund must distribute prior to each calendar year end without regard to the fund’s fiscal year end (i) 98% of the fund’s ordinary income, (ii) 98.2% of the fund’s capital gain net income, if any, realized in the one-year period ending on October 31 (or later if the fund is permitted and so elects), and (iii) 100% of any undistributed income from prior years. A dividend paid to shareholders by a fund in January of a year is generally deemed to have been paid by the fund on December 31 of the preceding year, if the dividend was declared and payable to shareholders of record on a date in October, November or December of that preceding year.

Each of the funds may be subject to foreign withholding taxes on income and gains derived from foreign investments. Such taxes would reduce the yield on such funds’ investments, but, as discussed in such fund’s Prospectus, may in some situations be taken as either a deduction or a credit by U.S. shareholders. Investment by each fund in certain “passive foreign investment companies” could subject the fund to a U.S. federal income tax or other charge on distributions received from, or on the sale of its investment in, such a company. Such a tax cannot be eliminated by making distributions to fund shareholders. A fund may avoid this tax by making an election to mark certain of such securities to

 

35


Table of Contents

the market annually. Alternatively, where it is in a position to do so, a fund may elect to treat a passive foreign investment company as a “qualified electing fund,” in which case different rules will apply, although the funds generally do not expect to be in the position to make such elections.

For federal income tax purposes, distributions of investment income are generally taxable as ordinary income. Taxes on distributions of capital gains are determined by how long the fund owned the investments that generated them, rather than how long a shareholder has owned his or her shares. Distributions of net capital gains from the sale of investments that the fund owned for more than one year and that are properly designated by the fund as capital gain dividends will be taxable as long-term capital gains. Distributions of gains from the sale of investments that the fund owned for one year or less will be taxable as ordinary income. The dividends-received deduction for corporations will generally be available to corporate shareholders with respect to their receipt of a fund’s dividends from investment income to the extent derived from dividends received by the fund from domestic corporations, provided the fund and the shareholder each meet the relevant holding period requirements.

For taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012, distributions of investment income designated by the fund as derived from “qualified dividend income” will be taxed in the hands of individuals at the rates applicable to long-term capital gain. In order for some portion of the dividends received by a fund shareholder to be qualified dividend income, the fund must meet holding period and other requirements with respect to some portion of the dividend paying stocks in its portfolio and the shareholder must meet holding period and other requirements with respect to the fund’s shares. A dividend will not be treated as qualified dividend income (1) if the dividend is received with respect to any share of stock held for fewer than 61 days during the 121-day period beginning on the date which is 60 days before the date on which such share becomes ex-dividend with respect to such dividend (or, in the case of certain preferred stock, 91 days during the 181-day period beginning 90 days before such date), (2) to the extent that the recipient is under an obligation (whether pursuant to a short sale or otherwise) to make related payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property, (3) if the recipient elects to have the dividend income treated as investment income for purposes of the limitation on deductibility of investment interest, or (4) if the dividend is received from a foreign corporation that is (a) not eligible for the benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States (with the exception of dividends paid on stock of such a foreign corporation readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States), or (b) treated as a foreign personal holding company, foreign investment company, or passive foreign investment company.

If the aggregate qualified dividends received by the fund during any taxable year are 95% or more of its gross income, then 100% of the fund’s dividends (other than properly designated capital gain dividends) will be eligible to be treated as qualified dividend income. For this purpose, the only gain included in the term “gross income” is the excess of net short-term capital gain over net long-term capital loss. In general, distributions of investment income designated by the fund as derived from qualified dividend income will be treated as qualified dividend income by a shareholder taxed as an individual provided the shareholder meets the holding period and other requirements described above with respect to the fund’s shares.

Distributions are taxable to shareholders even if they are paid from income or gains earned by the fund before a shareholder’s investment (and thus were included in the price the shareholder paid). Distributions are taxable whether shareholders receive them in cash or in the form of additional shares of the fund to which the distribution relates. Any gain resulting from the sale or exchange of fund shares generally will be taxable as capital gains.

Long-term capital gain rates applicable to individuals have been temporarily reduced—in general, to 15% with lower rates applying to taxpayers in the 10% and 15% rate brackets—for taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012.

Dividends and distributions on a fund’s shares are generally subject to federal income tax as described herein, even though such dividends and distributions may economically represent a return of a particular shareholder’s investment. Such distributions are likely to occur in respect of shares purchased at a time when a fund’s net asset value reflects gains that are either unrealized, or realized but not distributed.

 

36


Table of Contents

Certain tax-exempt organizations or entities may not be subject to federal income tax on dividends or distributions from a fund. Each organization or entity should review its own circumstances and the federal tax treatment of its income.

Under current law, each fund is generally required to withhold and remit to the U.S. Treasury a percentage of the taxable dividends and other distributions paid to and proceeds of share sales, exchanges or redemptions made by any individual shareholder who fails to furnish the fund with a correct taxpayer identification number, who has underreported income in the past or fails to provide certain certifications. However, the general backup withholding rules set forth above will not apply to a shareholder so long as the shareholder furnishes a fund with the appropriate certification required by the Internal Revenue Service. The backup withholding tax rate is 28%.

In order for a foreign investor to qualify for exemption from (or reduced rates for) withholding tax under income tax treaties, the foreign investor must comply with special certification and filing requirements. Foreign investors in a fund should consult their tax advisors in this regard.

To the extent such investments are permissible for a particular fund, the fund’s transactions in options, futures contracts, hedging transactions, forward contracts, straddles and certain foreign currencies will be subject to special tax rules (including mark-to-market, constructive sale, straddle, wash sale and short sale rules), the effect of which may be to accelerate income to the fund, defer losses to the fund, cause adjustments in the holding periods of the fund’s securities, convert long-term capital gains into short-term capital gains and convert short-term capital losses into long-term capital losses. These rules could therefore affect the amount, timing and character of distributions to shareholders.

Certain transactions effectively insulating a fund from substantially all risk of loss and all opportunity for gain in an appreciated financial position are treated as constructive sales of those positions for federal income tax purposes. Short sales, swap contracts, and forward or futures contracts to sell the appreciated position, or one or more other transactions that have substantially the same effect as those transactions as determined under regulations, are treated as “constructive sales” for this purpose. A fund that owns an appreciated financial position that enters into such a transaction generally recognizes gain for tax purposes prior to the generation of cash by such activities, which may require the fund to sell assets to meet its distribution requirement.

THE TAX DISCUSSION SET FORTH ABOVE IS A SUMMARY INCLUDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. EACH SHAREHOLDER IS ADVISED TO CONSULT HIS OR HER OWN TAX ADVISOR WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIFIC TAX CONSEQUENCES TO HIM OR HER OF AN INVESTMENT IN ANY OF THE FUNDS, INCLUDING THE EFFECT AND APPLICABILITY OF STATE, LOCAL, FOREIGN, AND OTHER TAX LAWS AND THE POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN FEDERAL OR OTHER TAX LAWS. THIS DISCUSSION IS NOT INTENDED, AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED, TO BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR CAREFUL TAX PLANNING.

MANAGEMENT OF THE FUNDS

The funds are overseen by a Board of Trustees. The trustees are responsible for protecting shareholder interests. The trustees regularly meet to review the investment activities, contractual arrangements and the investment performance of each fund. The trustees met 7 times during the most recent fiscal year.

Certain trustees are “interested persons.” A trustee is considered an interested person of a trust under the 1940 Act if he or she is an officer, director, or an employee of Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM” or the “investment adviser”) or Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (“Schwab”). A

 

37


Table of Contents

trustee also may be considered an interested person of a trust under the 1940 Act if he or she owns stock of The Charles Schwab Corporation, a publicly traded company and the parent company of the funds’ investment adviser and distributor.

As used herein the terms “Fund Complex” and “Family of Investment Companies” each refer collectively to The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Strategic Trust, Laudus Trust, and Laudus Institutional Trust which, as of June 30, 2012, included 92 funds.

Each of the trustees also serves in the same capacity as described for the trust, for Schwab Capital Trust, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, and Laudus Institutional Trust. The tables below provide information about the trustees and officers for the trust, which includes funds in this SAI. The address of each individual listed below is 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

 

38


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND LENGTH
OF TIME SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS
DURING THE PAST FIVE
YEARS

   NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN  FUND

COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE TRUSTEE
  

OTHER DIRECTORSHIPS
DURING THE PAST FIVE
YEARS

INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES

Mariann Byerwalter

1960

Trustee

(Trustee since 2004)

   Chairman of JDN Corporate Advisory LLC.    75   

Director, Redwood Trust, Inc. (1998 – present)

 

Director, PMI Group Inc. (2001 – 2009)

John F. Cogan

1947

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

   Senior Fellow: The Hoover Institution at Stanford University (Oct. 1979 – present); Senior Fellow Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research; Professor of Public Policy, Stanford University (Sept. 1994 – present).    75   

Director, Gilead Sciences, Inc. (2005 – present)

 

Director, Monaco Coach Corporation (2005 – 2009)

William A. Hasler

1941

Trustee

(Trustee since 2004)

   Dean Emeritus, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley (July 1998 – present).    75   

Director, TOUSA (1998 – present)

 

Director, Mission West Properties (1998 – present)

 

Director, Globalstar, Inc. (2009 – present)

 

Director, Aviat Networks (2001 – present)

 

Director, Ditech Networks Corporation (1997 – present)

 

Director, Aphton Corp. (1991 – 2007)

 

Director, Solectron Corporation (1998 –2007)

 

Director, Genitope Corporation (2000 –2009)

 

39


Table of Contents

David L. Mahoney

1954

Trustee

(Trustee since 2011)

   Private Investor.    75   

Director, Symantec Corporation (2003 – present)

 

Director, Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated (2004 – present)

 

Director, Tercica Inc. (2004 – 2008)

Kiran M. Patel

1948

Trustee

(Trustee since 2011)

   Executive Vice President and General Manager of Small Business Group, Intuit, Inc. (financial software and services for consumers and small businesses) (Dec. 2008 – present); Senior Vice President and General Manager of Consumer Group, Intuit, Inc. (June 2007 – Dec. 2008); Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Intuit, Inc. (Sept. 2005 – Jan. 2008).    75   

 

Director, KLA-Tencor Corporation (2008 – present)

 

Director, BEA Systems, Inc. (2007 – 2008)

 

Director, Eaton Corp. (2003 – 2006)

Gerald B. Smith

1950

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

   Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Smith Graham & Co. (investment advisor) (1990 – present).    75   

Lead Independent Director, Board of Cooper Industries (2002 – present)

 

Director and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Oneok Partners LP (2003 – present)

 

Director, Oneok, Inc. (2009 – present)

 

Joseph H. Wender

1944

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

   Senior Consultant, Goldman Sachs & Co., Inc. (Jan. 2008– present); Partner, Colgin Partners, LLC (vineyards) (February 1998 – present); Senior Director, Chairman of the Finance Committee, GSC Group (July 2005 – Dec. 2007); General Partner, Goldman Sachs & Co., Inc. (Oct. 1982 – June 2005).    75    Board Member and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Isis Pharmaceuticals (1994 – present)

 

INTERESTED TRUSTEES

 

40


Table of Contents

Charles R. Schwab 2

1937

Chairman and Trustee

(Chairman and Trustee since 2010)

   Chairman and Director, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., Charles Schwab Bank, N. A.; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Schwab (SIS) Holdings Inc. I, Schwab International Holdings, Inc.; Chief Executive Officer, Schwab Holdings, Inc.; Through June 2007, Director, U.S. Trust Company, N. A., U.S. Trust Corporation, United States Trust Company of New York. Until October 2008, Chief Executive Officer, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    75    None.

Walter W. Bettinger II 2

1960

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

  

As of October 2008, President and Chief Executive Officer, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation. Since October 2008, Director, The Charles Schwab Corporation. Since May 2008, Director, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and Schwab Holdings, Inc. Since 2006, Director, Charles Schwab Bank.

From 2004 through 2007, Executive Vice President and President, Schwab Investor Services. From 2004 through 2005, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Individual Investor Enterprise, and from 2002 through 2004, Executive Vice President, Corporate Services.

 

Until October 2008, President and Chief Operating Officer, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation.

   92    None.

 

41


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND LENGTH OF TIME SERVED 3 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS

OFFICERS

Marie Chandoha

1961

President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer

(Officer since 2010)

   Executive Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Sept. 2010 – present); Director, President and Chief Executive Officer (Dec. 2010 – present), Chief Investment Officer (Sept. 2010 – Oct. 2011), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.; President and Chief Executive Officer (Dec. 2010 – present) and Chief Investment Officer (Dec. 2010 – Oct. 2011), Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds and Schwab ETFs; Global Head of Fixed Income Business Division, BlackRock, Inc. (formerly Barclays Global Investors) (March 2007 – August 2010); Co-Head and Senior Portfolio Manager, Wells Capital Management (June 1999 – March 2007).

George Pereira

1964

Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer

(Officer since 2006)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Nov. 2004 – present); Chief Operating Officer (Jan. 2011 – present), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.; Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, Laudus Funds (June 2006 – present); Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer, Schwab Funds (Nov. 2004 – present) and Schwab ETFs (Oct. 2009 – present); Director, Charles Schwab Worldwide Fund, PLC and Charles Schwab Asset Management (Ireland) Limited (April 2005 – present).

Omar Aguilar

1970

Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Equities

(Officer since 2011)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Equities, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (April 2011 – present); Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer - Equities, Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds (June 2011 – present); Head of the Portfolio Management Group and Vice President of Portfolio Management, Financial Engines, Inc. (May 2009 – April 2011); Head of Quantitative Equity, ING Investment Management (July 2004 – Jan. 2009).

Brett Wander

1961

Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer

– Fixed Income

(Officer since 2011)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Fixed Income, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (April 2011 – present); Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Fixed Income, Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds (June 2011 – present); Senior Managing Director, Global Head of Active Fixed Income Strategies, State Street Global Advisors (Jan. 2008 – Oct. 2010); Director of Alpha Strategies Loomis, Sayles & Company (April 2006 – Jan. 2008); Managing Director, Head of Market-Based Strategies State Street Research (August 2003 – Jan. 2005).

Catherine MacGregor

1964

(Chief Legal Officer and Clerk since 2007, Vice President since 2005)

   Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (July 2005 – present); Vice President (Dec. 2005 – present), Chief Legal Officer and Clerk (March 2007 – present), Laudus Funds; Vice President (Nov. 2005 – present) and Assistant Secretary (June 2007 – present), Schwab Funds; Vice President and Assistant Secretary, Schwab ETFs (Oct. 2009 – present).

 

42


Table of Contents

David Lekich

1964

Secretary

(Officer since 2011)

   Senior Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., (Sept. 2011 – present); Senior Vice President, Chief Counsel, Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. (Sept. 2011 – present); Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., (March 2004 – Sept. 2011) and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (Jan 2011 – Sept. 2011); Secretary, Schwab Funds (April 2011 – present); Vice President and Assistant Clerk, Laudus Funds (April 2011 – present); Secretary (May 2011 – present ) and Chief Legal Officer (Nov. 2011 – present), Schwab ETFs.

 

1

Trustees remain in office until they resign, retire or are removed by shareholder vote. The Laudus Funds retirement policy requires that independent trustees elected after January 1, 2000 retire at age 72 or after 20 years of service as a trustee, whichever comes first, provided that any trustee who serves on both Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds retires from both boards when first required to retire by either board.

2  

Mr. Schwab and Mr. Bettinger are Interested Trustees because they are employees of Schwab and/or the adviser. In addition to their employment, Messrs. Schwab and Bettinger also own stock of The Charles Schwab Corporation.

3  

The President, Treasurer and Clerk hold office until their respective successors are chosen and qualified or until he or she sooner dies, resigns, is removed or becomes disqualified. Each of the other officers serves at the pleasure of the Board.

Board Leadership Structure

The Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Charles R. Schwab, is Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Charles Schwab Corporation and an interested person of the trusts as that term is defined in the 1940 Act. The trusts do not have a single lead independent trustee. The Board is comprised of a super-majority (77 percent) of trustees who are not interested persons of the trusts (i.e., “independent trustees”). There are three primary committees of the Board: the Audit and Compliance Committee; the Governance Committee; and the Investment Oversight Committee. Each of the Committees is chaired by an independent trustee, and each Committee is comprised solely of independent trustees. The Committee chairs preside at Committee meetings, participate in formulating agendas for those meetings, and coordinate with management to serve as a liaison between the independent trustees and management on matters within the scope of the responsibilities of each Committee as set forth in its Board-approved charter. The Board has determined that this leadership structure is appropriate given the specific characteristics and circumstances of the trusts. The Board made this determination in consideration of, among other things, the fact that the independent trustees of the trusts constitute a super-majority of the Board, the fact that Committee chairs are independent trustees, the number of funds (and classes) overseen by the Board, and the total number of trustees on the Board.

Board Oversight of Risk Management

Like most mutual funds, fund management and its other service providers have responsibility for day-to-day risk management for the funds. The Board duties, as part of its risk oversight of the trusts, consists of monitoring risks identified during regular and special reports to the Committees of the Board, as well as regular and special reports to the full Board. In addition to monitoring such risks, the Committees and the Board oversee efforts of fund management and service providers to manage risks to which the funds of the trusts may be exposed. For example, the Investment Oversight Committee meets with portfolio managers and receives regular reports regarding investment risk and credit risk of a fund’s portfolio. The Audit and Compliance Committee meets with the funds’ Chief Compliance Officer and Chief

 

43


Table of Contents

Financial Officer and receives regular reports regarding compliance risks , operational risks and risks related to the valuation and liquidity of portfolio securities. From its review of these reports and discussions with management, each Committee receives information about the material risks of the funds of the trusts and about how management and service providers mitigate those risks, enabling the independent Committee chairs and other independent members of the Committees to discuss these risks with the full Board.

The Board recognizes that not all risks that may affect the funds can be identified nor can processes and controls be developed to eliminate or mitigate the occurrence or effects of certain risks; some risks are simply beyond the reasonable control of the funds, their management, and service providers. Although the risk oversight functions of the Board, and the risk management policies of fund management and fund service providers, are designed to be effective, there is no guarantee that they will eliminate or mitigate all risks. In addition, it may be necessary to bear certain risks (such as investment-related risks) to achieve each fund’s investment objective. As a result of the foregoing and other factors, the funds’ ability to manage risk is subject to significant limitations.

Individual Trustee Qualifications

The Board has concluded that each of the trustees should initially and continue to serve on the Board because of (i) his or her ability to review and understand information about the trusts provided to them by management, to identify and request other information they may deem relevant to the performance of their duties, to question management regarding material factors bearing on the management of the trusts, and to exercise their business judgment in a manner that serves the best interests of the trusts’ shareholders and (ii) the trustee’s experience, qualifications, attributes or skills as described below.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Bettinger should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained as president and chief executive officer of The Charles Schwab Corporation, his knowledge of and experience in the financial services industry, and the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008.

The Board has concluded that Ms. Byerwalter should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience she gained as chairman of her own corporate advisory and consulting firm and as former chief financial officer of a university and a bank, the experience she has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000 and the Laudus Funds since 2004, and her service on other public company and mutual insurance company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Cogan should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he has gained serving as a senior fellow and professor of public policy at a university and his former service in government, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Hasler should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained serving as former vice chair of the consulting practice of an accounting firm and as former co-chief executive officer of a public company, his service as former dean of a business school, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000 and the Laudus Funds since 2004, his service on other public company boards, and his experience serving as Chair of the trusts’ Audit and Compliance Committee.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Mahoney should serve as a trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained as co-chief executive officer of a healthcare services company, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Patel should serve as a trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained as executive vice president, general manager and chief financial officer of a software company, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Schwab should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he has gained as founder and chairman of the board of Schwab, and subsequently its parent corporation, The Charles Schwab Corporation, his experience in and knowledge of the financial services industry, the experience he has gained serving as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Schwab Funds since their inception, and his former service on other public company boards.

 

44


Table of Contents

The Board has concluded that Mr. Smith should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he has gained as managing partner of his own investment advisory firm, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000, his service on other public company boards, and his experience serving as Chair of the trusts’ Investment Oversight Committee.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Wender should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained serving as former partner and chairman of the finance committee of an investment bank, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008, and his service on other public company boards.

Trustee Committees

The Board of Trustees has established certain committees and adopted Committee charters with respect to those committees, each as described below:

• The Audit and Compliance Committee reviews the integrity of the Trust’s financial reporting processes and compliance policies, procedures and processes, and the Trust’s overall system of internal controls. The Audit and Compliance Committee also reviews and evaluates the qualifications, independence and performance of the Trust’s independent auditors. This Committee is comprised of at least three Independent Trustees and currently has the following members: William A. Hasler (Chairman), Mariann Byerwalter and Kiran M. Patel. The charter directs that the Committee must meet four times annually, with additional meetings as the Committee deems appropriate. The Committee met 4 times during the most recent fiscal year.

• The Governance Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding Trust governance-related matters, including but not limited to Board compensation practices, retirement policies and term limits, Board self-evaluations, the effectiveness and allocation of assignments and functions by the Board, the composition of Committees of the Board, and the training of Trustees. The Governance Committee is also responsible for selecting and nominating candidates to serve as Trustees. The Governance Committee does not have a policy with respect to consideration of candidates for Trustee submitted by shareholders. However, if the Governance Committee determined that it would be in the best interests of the Trust to fill a vacancy on the Board of Trustees, and a shareholder submitted a candidate for consideration by the Board of Trustees to fill the vacancy, the Governance Committee would evaluate that candidate in the same manner as it evaluates nominees identified by the Governance Committee. Nominee recommendations may be submitted to the Secretary of the trust at the trust’s principal business address. This Committee is comprised of at least three Independent Trustees and currently has the following members: Mariann Byerwalter (Chairman), John F. Cogan, William A. Hasler and Joseph H. Wender. The charter directs that the Committee meets at such times and with such frequency as is deemed necessary or appropriate by the Committee. The Committee met 5 times during the most recent fiscal year.

• The Investment Oversight Committee reviews the investment activities of the Trust and the performance of the Funds’ investment adviser. This Committee is comprised of at least three Trustees (at least two-thirds of whom shall be Independent Trustees) and currently has the following members: Gerald B. Smith (Chairman), John F. Cogan, David L. Mahoney and Joseph H. Wender. The charter directs that the Committee meet at such times and with such frequency as is deemed necessary or appropriate by the Committee. The Committee met 4 times during the most recent fiscal year.

Trustee Compensation

The following table provides Trustee compensation for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012.

 

45


Table of Contents

NAME OF

PERSON

  

AGGREGATE

COMPENSATION

FROM
REGISTRANT

    

PENSION OR

RETIREMENT

BENEFITS

ACCRUED AS

PART OF FUND

EXPENSES 1

    

ESTIMATED

ANNUAL

BENEFITS UPON

RETIREMENT 1

    

TOTAL

COMPENSATION

FROM
REGISTRANT

AND FUND

COMPLEX PAID

TO TRUSTEES

 

TRUSTEES:

           

Interested Trustees

           

Charles R. Schwab

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 0   

Walter W. Bettinger

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 0   

Independent Trustees

           

Mariann Byerwalter

   $ 9,065       $ 28,255       $ 28,225       $ 243,500   

John F. Cogan

   $ 8,802       $ 0       $ 0       $ 236,000   

William A. Hasler

   $ 9,065       $ 28,255       $ 28,225       $ 243,500   

David L. Mahoney

   $ 8,802       $ 0       $ 0       $ 236,000   

Kiran M. Patel

   $ 8,802       $ 0       $ 0       $ 234,000   

Gerald B. Smith

   $ 9,065       $ 0       $ 0       $ 243,500   

Donald R. Stephens 2

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 75,000   

Joseph H. Wender

   $ 8,802       $ 0       $ 0       $ 236,000   

Michael W. Wilsey 2

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 75,000   

 

1  

Cumulative.

2  

Retired from the Board on December 31, 2010. The compensation paid to Mr. Stephens and Mr. Wilsey included consulting fees for the period January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011.

A retirement plan was instituted for all of the Independent Trustees of the Trust and the Laudus Institutional Trust (the “Retirement Plan”). Under the terms of the Retirement Plan, upon retirement or other termination from service from the Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust (other than termination for cause), a retiring Independent Trustee who has served as Independent Trustee for at least five years shall be paid a lump sum cash payment (the “Retirement Payment”). The Retirement Payment shall be equal to $10,000 for each year that the Trustee served as an Independent Trustee of the Trust and the Laudus Institutional Trust, including years of service prior to the adoption of the Retirement Plan. Each Independent Trustee was permitted to make a one-time election to have the $10,000 attributable to service for the coming year adjusted up or down at the end of each subsequent year based on the unweighted average performance of the lowest cost share class of each fund of the Trust and the Laudus Institutional Trust that is in operation for all of such year. Each Independent Trustee also was given the opportunity to make a one-time election to have previously accrued benefits fluctuate beginning April 1, 2005 based on performance of the funds as described in the previous sentence. As a result, the amount of the Retirement Payment payable to any Independent Trustee may increase or decrease based upon performance of the funds. The portion of the total Retirement Payment owed to an Independent Trustee upon his or her retirement that is payable by any fund will be determined based on the relative net assets of the funds of the Trust in operation on the date of the Independent Trustee’s retirement.

 

46


Table of Contents

Effective June 28, 2006, the Retirement Plan terminated with respect to new Participants. With respect to Participants prior to June 26, 2006 (a “Current Participant”), the Account Balance of each Current Participant under the Plan was frozen at the value determined as of September 29, 2006, except that each Account Balance was credited with an amount equal to one-half of the amount that would be credited to such Account Balance as of the last day of the Plan Year ending March 31, 2007. The terms of the Plan, including without limitation provisions relating to vesting and payment upon termination of service, remain in full force and effect.

Securities Beneficially Owned By Each Trustee

The following table provides each Trustee’s equity ownership of the fund and ownership of all registered investment companies overseen by each Trustee in the Family of Investment Companies as of December 31, 2011.

 

47


Table of Contents

NAME OF

TRUSTEE

  

DOLLAR RANGE OF EQUITY

SECURITIES IN A FUND

  

AGGREGATE

DOLLAR RANGE

OF EQUITY

SECURITIES IN

THE FAMILY OF

INVESTMENT

COMPANIES *

INDEPENDENT

TRUSTEES:

   LAUDUS
MONDRIAN
INTERNATIONAL
EQUITY FUND
   LAUDUS
MONDRIAN

GLOBAL
EQUITY FUND
   LAUDUS
MONDRIAN
EMERGING
MARKETS
FUND
   LAUDUS
MONDRIAN
INTERNATIONAL
FIXED INCOME
FUND
  

 

Mariann Byerwalter

   $0    $0    $0    $0    Over $100,000

John F. Cogan

   $0    $0    $0    $0    Over $100,000

William A. Hasler

   $0    $0    $50,001-100,000    $50,001-100,000    Over $100,000

David L. Mahoney**

   $0    $0    $0    $0    Over $100,000

Kiran M. Patel**

   $0    $0    $0    $0    None

Gerald B. Smith

   $0    $0    $0    $0    $10,001 - $50,000

Joseph H. Wender

   $0    $0    $0    $0    None

Interested Trustees:

              

Charles R. Schwab

   $0    $0    $0    Over $100,000    Over $100,000

Walter W. Bettinger

   $0    $0    $0    $0    Over $100,000

 

* As of December 31, 2011, the Family of Investment Companies included 88 funds.

INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES

ADVISORY AGREEMENTS

After its initial two year term, the continuation of each fund’s advisory agreement must be specifically approved at least annually (1) by the vote of the Trustees or by a vote of the shareholders of the fund, and (2) by the vote of a majority of the Trustees who are not parties to the investment advisory agreement or “interested persons” of any party (the “Independent Trustees”), cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval.

After its initial two year term, each year, the Board of Trustees will call and hold one or more meetings to decide whether to renew the advisory agreements between the Trust and CSIM (the “Investment Adviser”), and the sub-advisory agreement between, CSIM and Mondrian Investment Partners Limited (the “Subadviser” or “Mondrian”) with respect to the funds. In preparation for the meetings, the Board requests and reviews a wide variety of materials provided by CSIM and Mondrian as well as extensive data provided by third parties and the Independent Trustees receive advice from counsel to the Independent Trustees.

Mondrian serves as a subadviser to the funds. Mondrian was established as a limited company organized under the laws of England and Wales in 1990 under the name Delaware International Advisers Limited, an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Delaware Holdings, Inc. In 2004, a senior management team, together with private equity funds sponsored by Hellman & Friedman LLC, acquired Delaware International Advisers Limited and changed its name to Mondrian Investment Partners Limited. On July 12, 2011, Mondrian completed a transaction to acquire the remaining 27% of the

 

48


Table of Contents

company that was not already held by the employee-owned partnership. Mondrian is now 100% owned by its senior employees, including the majority of investment professionals, senior client service officers, and senior operations personnel. Mondrian’s principal office is located at Fifth Floor 10 Gresham Street London EC2V 7JD. A new subadvisory contract was were approved by the shareholders at a special meeting held on October 5, 2011.

CSIM oversees the advisory services provided to the funds. Pursuant to a separate sub-advisory agreement, and under the supervision of the Investment Adviser and the funds’ Board of Trustees, Mondrian is responsible for the day-to-day investment management of each fund’s assets. Mondrian also is responsible for managing their employees who provide services to the funds.

MANAGEMENT CONTRACTS

About CSIM

CSIM is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Charles Schwab Corporation. Both CSIM and The Charles Schwab Corporation are located at 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

Principal Executive Officer and Directors—Listed below are the directors and principal executive officer of CSIM. The principal business address of each director and the principal executive officer, as it relates to their duties at CSIM, is the same as above.

 

NAME

  

POSITION

Marie Chandoha    Director, President and Chief Executive Officer
Charles R. Schwab    Chairman and Director

As disclosed in the Prospectus under the heading “Management of the funds” under management contracts (each a “Management Contract”) between the Trust, on behalf of each fund, and CSIM, subject to the supervision of the Trustees of the Trust and such policies as the Trustees may determine, CSIM furnishes office space and equipment, provides certain bookkeeping and clerical services and pays all salaries, fees and expenses of officers and Trustees of the Trust who are affiliated with CSIM. In addition, pursuant to a sub-advisory agreement between CSIM and Mondrian, Mondrian will continuously furnish an investment program for each fund and will make investment decisions on behalf of each fund and place all orders for the purchase and sale of portfolio securities.

Each of the funds has agreed to pay CSIM a monthly management fee at the annual percentage rate of the relevant fund’s average daily net assets. The table below shows the advisory fee payable to CSIM by each fund.

 

FUND

   AGREEMENT
RATE
 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

    

 

First $1 billion – 0.85

Over $1 billion – 0.80

%

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

    

 

First $1 billion – 0.85

Over $1 billion – 0.80


%

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

    

 

First $1 billion – 1.20

Over $1 billion – 1.15


Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     0.60

 

49


Table of Contents

CSIM has agreed with the Trust that it will waive some or all of its management fees under the Management Contract and, if necessary, will bear certain expenses of each fund until July 30, 2014 (unless the waiver is extended, modified or terminated by mutual agreement of the Trust and CSIM; provided that termination by CSIM must be authorized by the Board of Trustees) so that each fund’s total annual operating expenses (exclusive of nonrecurring account fees, fees on securities transactions such as exchange fees, service fees, interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the funds’ business) applicable to each class will not exceed the limit stated in the Prospectus. In addition, CSIM’s compensation under each Management Contract is subject to reduction to the extent that in any year the expenses of a fund (including investment advisory fees but excluding taxes, portfolio brokerage commissions and any distribution and shareholder service expenses paid by a class of shares of a fund pursuant to a distribution and shareholder service plan or otherwise) exceed the limits on investment company expenses imposed by any statute or regulatory authority of any jurisdiction in which shares of the fund are qualified for offer and sale.

Each Management Contract provides that CSIM shall not be subject to any liability to the Trust or to any shareholder of the Trust in connection with the performance of its services thereunder in the absence of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of its obligations and duties thereunder.

Each Management Contract will continue in effect for a period no more than two years from the date of its execution, and annual renewals thereof must be approved by (i) vote, cast in person at a meeting called for that purpose, of a majority of those Trustees who are not “interested persons” of CSIM or the Trust, and by (ii) the majority vote of either the full Board of Trustees or the vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of the relevant fund. Each Management Contract automatically terminates on assignment and is terminable on not more than 60 days’ notice by the Trust to CSIM or by CSIM to the Trust.

For the fiscal years ended March 31, the funds paid to CSIM as management fees, and CSIM, in its capacity as adviser, has waived and reimbursed to the funds, the following amounts:

 

Fund

   Time Period      Net
Management
Fee
     Amount
Waived/Reimbursed
 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 774,190       $ 208,878   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 600,021       $ 135,320   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 413,267       $ 117,738   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 0       $ 178,690   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 0       $ 155,867   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 0       $ 155,862   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 1,964,185       $ 86,796   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 1,641,718       $ 91,974   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 644,468       $ 166,130   

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 5,599,475       $ 0   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 3,114,997       $ 9,665   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 1,072,190       $ 79,404   

 

50


Table of Contents

SUBADVISORY AGREEMENT

On October 5, 2011, the shareholders of the funds approved the new Subadviser Agreement between CSIM and Mondrian which was substantially identical to the interim subadvisory agreement in place on July 12, 2011 (with the exception of effective and termination dates and certain items required by the 1940 Act). The Interim Agreement was substantially identical to the prior subadvisory agreement in effect prior to July 12, 2011 between CSIM and Mondrian with respect to the funds. Under the Subadviser Agreement, Mondrian, at its expense, continuously furnishes an investment management program for the particular fund and makes investment decisions on behalf of such fund and places all orders for the purchase and sale of portfolio securities and all other investments, subject to the supervision of CSIM and the Trustees.

Subadvisory Fee

This section describes the subadvisory fee payable by CSIM to Mondrian. Please remember, however, that the following fees described are paid by CSIM to Mondrian; they do not affect how much you pay or your fund pays.

 

FUND

  

SUBADVISORY FEE

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

  

First $250 million – 0.40%

Over $250 million – 0.325%

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

  

First $250 million – 0.40%

Over $250 million – 0.325%

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

  

First $250 million – 0.65%

Over $250million – 0.60%

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

  

First $250 million – 0.30%

Over $250 million – 0.265%

During the fiscal years ended March 31, CSIM paid to Mondrian as subadvisory fees, and Mondrian in its capacity as Subadviser, has waived the following amounts:

 

Fund

  

Time Period

   Net
Subadvisory
Fee
     Amount
Waived

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

   4/1/11 to 3/31/12    $ 463,486       $0
   4/1/10 to 3/31/11    $ 346,637       $0
   4/1/09 to 3/31/10    $ 250,862       $0

 

51


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

   4/1/11 to 3/31/12    $ 19,352       $0
   4/1/10 to 3/31/11    $ 17,693       $0
   4/1/09 to 3/31/10    $ 15,838       $0

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

   4/1/11 to 3/31/12    $ 1,113,913       $0
   4/1/10 to 3/31/11    $ 941,589       $0
   4/1/09 to 3/31/10    $ 440,915       $0

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

   4/1/11 to 3/31/12    $ 2,566,330       $0
   4/1/10 to 3/31/11    $ 1,474,346       $0
   4/1/09 to 3/31/10    $ 575,867       $0

Administrative Services . The Trust has entered into a Fund Administration Agreement with State Street Bank and Trust Company (in such capacity, the “Administrator”) pursuant to which the Administrator provides certain management and administrative services necessary for the funds’ operations including: (i) regulatory compliance, including the compilation of information for documents such as reports to, and filings with, the SEC and state securities commissions, and preparation of proxy statements and shareholder reports for the funds; (ii) general supervision relative to the compilation of data required for the preparation of periodic reports distributed to the funds’ officers and Board of Trustees; and (iii) furnishing office space and certain facilities required for conducting the business of the funds. For these services, the Administrator is entitled to receive $1,000 per fund per annum, as well as a fee based on the average daily net assets of the Trust (the “Administrator’s Asset-Based Fee”). In calculating the Administrator’s Asset Based-Fee payable by the Trust, the assets of the Trust are aggregated with the average daily net assets of each of the other portfolios for which CSIM serves as investment adviser and State Street Bank and Trust Company serves as administrator 1 . The Administrator’s Asset-Based Fee will be calculated as follows:

 

AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS

   FEE  

First $100 billion

     0.11 bp   

Next $60 billion

     0.07 bp   

Thereafter

     0.05 bp   

 

1 In addition to the funds of the Trust, this list includes each of the funds of the Laudus Institutional Trust, Schwab Investments, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, and Schwab Capital Trust.

For the fiscal years ended March 31, State Street Bank and Trust Company in its capacity as the Administrator was paid, and waived, the following amounts:

 

Fund

   Time Period      Fees
Received
     Fees
Waived

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 3,968       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 3,307       $0
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 1,622       $0

 

52


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 2,942       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 2,638      
     3/31/09 to 3/31/10       $ 1,132       $0

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 4,442       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 3,863      
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 1,641       $0

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 9,786       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 5,242      
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 2,660       $0

The Trust also has entered into a Fund Accounting Agreement with State Street Bank and Trust Company (in such capacity, the “Fund Accountant”) pursuant to which the Fund Accountant provides certain accounting services necessary for the funds’ operations. For these services, the Fund Accountant is entitled to receive a base fee of $29,000 per annum for each of the funds. The Fund Accountant is also entitled to a fee based on the average daily net assets of the Trust (the “Fund Accountant’s Asset-Based Fee”). In calculating the Fund Accountant’s Asset-Based Fee payable by the Trust, the assets of the Trust are aggregated with the average daily net assets of certain of the portfolios for which CSIM serves as investment adviser and State Street Bank and Trust Company serves as fund accountant (see footnote 1 above). The Fund Accountant’s Asset-Based Fee will be calculated as follows:

 

AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS

   FEE  

First $100 billion

     0.25 bp   

Next $60 billion

     0.18 bp   

Thereafter

     0.13 bp   

In addition, the Fund Accountant is entitled to a per security pricing fee based on the monthly holdings of each fund equal to $2 for equity securities and $8 for fixed income securities. For certain of the funds this fee could be quite substantial. Lastly, for each fund, the Fund Accountant is entitled to a fair valuation fee of $4,000 per annum.

For the fiscal years ended March 31, State Street Bank and Trust Company in its capacity as Fund Accountant was paid, and waived, the following amounts:

 

Fund

   Time Period      Fees
Received
     Waived

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 52,284       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 49,414       $0
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 50,484       $0

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 48,804       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 46,633       $0
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 49,906       $0

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 52,425       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 49,750       $0
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 47,520       $0

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 64,628       $0
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 54,612       $0
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 47,811       $0

 

53


Table of Contents

Distributor and Distribution and Shareholder Service Plans. As stated in the Prospectus, shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund and Institutional Shares, Select Shares and Investor Shares of each other fund are sold on a continuous basis by the Trust’s distributor, ALPS Distributors, Inc. (the “Distributor”). The Trust reserves the right at any time to modify the restrictions set forth above, including the suspension of all sales of all shares or the lifting of restrictions on different classes of investors and/or transactions. The Distributor’s principal offices are located at 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado, 80203. Under the Distributor’s Contract between the Trust and the Distributor (the “Distributor’s Contract”), the Distributor is not obligated to sell any specific amount of shares of the Trust and will purchase shares for resale only against orders for shares.

Pursuant to the Distribution and Shareholder Service Plan described in the Prospectus (the “Plan”), in connection with the distribution of Investor Shares of a fund and/or in connection with the provision of direct client service, personal services, maintenance of shareholder accounts and reporting services to holders of such shares, the Distributor receives certain distribution and shareholder service fees from the Trust. The distribution and shareholder service fees will not be retained by the Distributor but will instead be reallowed to the financial intermediaries who provide these services. The Distributor may pay all or a portion of the distribution and shareholder service fees it receives from the Trust to intermediaries. The funds pay no fees in connection with the distribution of shares of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund and Select Shares or Institutional Shares of a fund.

The Plan shall continue in effect for so long as its continuance is specifically approved at least annually by votes of the majority of both (i) the Trustees of the Trust and (ii) those Trustees of the Trust who are not “interested persons” (as defined under the 1940 Act) of the Trust, and have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Plan or any agreements related to it (the “Independent Trustees”), cast in person at a Board of Trustees meeting called for the purpose of voting on the Plan. The Plan requires that quarterly written reports of amounts spent under the Plan and the purposes of such expenditures be furnished to and reviewed by the Trustees. The Plan may not be amended to increase materially the amount of distribution expenses permitted to be paid under the Plan without the approval of shareholders holding a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the relevant class of the fund. All material amendments to the Plan must be approved by votes of the majority of both (i) the Trustees of the fund and (ii) the Independent Trustees. For so long as the plans are in effect, selection and nomination of those Trustees of the Trust who are not interested persons of the Trust shall be committed to the discretion of such disinterested persons.

The Distributor’s Contract may be terminated with respect to any fund or shares class thereof at any time on 60 days’ written notice without penalty either by the Distributor, by the fund or class, or by the Trust and will terminate automatically in the event of its assignment.

The Distributor’s Contract will continue in effect with respect to each class of shares to which it relates for two years and thereafter for successive one-year periods, provided that each such continuance is specifically approved (i) by the Trust’s Board of Trustees or (ii) by the vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of a class, provided that in either event the continuance is also approved by a majority of the Independent Trustees of the Trust by vote cast in person at a meeting called for that purpose.

If the Plan or the Distributor’s Contract is terminated (or not renewed with respect to one or more classes), it may continue in effect with respect to any class of any fund as to which it has not been terminated (or has not been renewed).

 

54


Table of Contents

The Trustees believe that the Plan will benefit the funds and their shareholders. Based on the experience of the funds under the Plan, and the relative success that this method of distribution has had for the funds, the Trustees believe that the Plan will likely result in higher fund asset levels. Higher fund asset levels can be expected to reduce fund expense ratios and increase the ability of the Adviser to seek out more investment opportunities for the funds in order to obtain greater portfolio diversification.

The Plan is a “compensation” plan. This means that the fees are payable to compensate the Distributor or another intermediary for services rendered even if the amount paid exceeds the Distributor’s or intermediary’s expenses. Because these fees are paid out of the funds’ assets on an ongoing basis, over time these fees will increase the cost of your investment and may cost you more than paying other types of sales charges.

Prior to June 2009, the funds paid intermediaries directly under the Plan. As of June 2009, the Distributor will pay intermediaries on behalf of the funds for the expenses incurred by the funds under the Plan. For the fiscal years ended March 31, the funds incurred distribution expenses and paid intermediaries as follows:

 

Fund

   Time Period      Distribution Expenses
Incurred by the Fund
     Distribution Expenses
Paid to Intermediaries
 

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 2,402       $ 0   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 1,903       $ 1,903   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 794       $ 794   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 260       $ 0   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 232       $ 232   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 141       $ 141   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 23,943       $ 0   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 24,064       $ 24,064   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 17,403       $ 17,403   
        

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 0       $ 0   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 0       $ 0   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 0       $ 0   

 

* Commencement of operations.

Custodial Arrangements. The Trust’s custodian is State Street Bank and Trust Company (in such capacity, the “Custodian”), One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111. As such, the Custodian holds in safekeeping certificated securities and cash belonging to the Trust and, in such capacity, is the registered owner of securities in book-entry form belonging to each fund. Upon instruction, the Custodian receives and delivers cash and securities of the fund in connection with fund transactions and collects all dividends and other distributions made with respect to fund portfolio securities.

 

55


Table of Contents

Transfer Agent. The Trust’s transfer agent and dividend paying agent is Boston Financial Data Services, Inc., 2 Heritage Drive, Quincy, MA 02171.

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. The Trust’s independent registered public accounting firm is PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, 3 Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, California 94111. The firm conducts an annual audit of the financial statements, assists in the preparation of the Trust’s federal and state income tax returns and filings with the SEC, and consults with the Trust as to matters of accounting and federal and state income taxation.

Codes Of Ethics. Each of the Trust (on behalf of each fund), CSIM, Mondrian and the Distributor (as the funds’ principal underwriter) have adopted codes of ethics (each a “Code”) pursuant to Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act. Each permits personnel subject thereto to invest in securities subject to certain conditions or restrictions. CSIM’s and the Trust’s Code permits personnel to buy or sell, directly or indirectly, securities for their own accounts. This includes securities that may be purchased or held by the funds CSIM manages. Securities transactions by some of these individuals are subject to prior approval of CSIM’s Chief Compliance Officer or designee and are subject to certain restrictions. Covered securities transactions are subject to quarterly and annual reporting and review requirements.

Mondrian’s Code permits personnel to buy or sell securities for their own accounts and accounts for which they are the beneficial owner so long as the investment does not lead to an actual or potential conflict of interest. This includes securities that may be purchased or held by the funds Mondrian advises or subadvises. Securities transactions may be subject to prior approval of Mondrian’s Chief Compliance Officer or his or her alternate. Most securities transactions are subject to quarterly reporting and review requirements.

The Distributor’s Code permits personnel subject thereto to invest in securities, including securities that the fund may purchase or hold, so long as the individual, in the ordinary course of fulfilling his or her duties, does not have knowledge of a pending buy or sell order by the funds. In such cases where such knowledge may exist, the individual is prohibited from engaging in such transactions while the buy or sell order is pending.

 

56


Table of Contents

PORTFOLIO MANAGERS

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited (“Mondrian”) sub-advises each of the funds.

Other Accounts . In addition to the funds, the portfolio managers are responsible for the day-to-day management of certain other accounts, as listed below, as of March 31, 2012. There are no accounts on which the advisory fee is based on performance of the account.

 

Name    Registered Investment
Companies
     Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles
    

Other Accounts

(separate accounts)

 
     Number of
Accounts
     Total
Assets
     Number of
Accounts
     Total
Assets
     Number of
Accounts
     Total
Assets
 

Other Accounts Managed by:

  

Emerging Markets Manager

  

Andrew Miller

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         2       $ 607M         13       $ 3,540M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     2       $ 777M         4       $ 810M         0       $ 0M   

Ginny Chong

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         1       $ 461M         9       $ 3,878M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     3       $ 859M         3       $ 664M         0       $ 0M   

International Equity Managers†

                 

Elizabeth Desmond

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0         1       $ 3,334M         20       $ 7,110M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     9       $ 3,298M         2       $ 189M         0       $ 0M   

Russell Mackie

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M         27       $ 3,162M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     5       $ 1,401M         3       $ 248M         0       $ 0M   

Melissa Platt

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         1       $ 16M         6       $ 605M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     6       $ 2,154M         2       $ 95M         0       $ 0M   

Global Equity Managers

                 

Brendan Baker

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         2       $ 161M         7       $ 2,892M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     1       $ 321M         0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M   

Aileen Gan

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M         3       $ 514M   

 

57


Table of Contents

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M   

Nigel May

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M         16       $ 5,876M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     3       $ 975M         3       $ 415M         0       $ 0M   

International Fixed Income

                 

Chris Moth

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         3       $ 1,602M         19       $ 10,283M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     2       $ 365M         0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M   

David Wakefield

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         1       $ 10M         22       $ 8,255M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     1       $ 316M         0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M   

Matt Day

  

Advisory Relationship

     0       $ 0M         3       $ 20M         7       $ 2,985M   

Sub-Advisory Relationship

     1       $ 316M         0       $ 0M         0       $ 0M   

 

Mondrian manages its accounts using a team-based approach. Accordingly, client accounts are assigned to more than one portfolio manager, therefore the accounts listed above may be attributed to more than one of the portfolio managers listed.

Conflicts of Interest. Mondrian does not foresee any material conflicts of interest that may arise in the management of the funds and any other accounts managed with similar investment guidelines. Mondrian acts solely as an investment manager and does not engage in any other business activities. The following is a list of some potential conflicts of interest that can arise in the course of normal investment management business activities together with a summary of Mondrian’s policy in that area:

Allocation of aggregated trades

Mondrian may from time to time aggregate trades for a number of its clients.

Mondrian’s policy requires that all allocations of aggregated trades must be fair between clients. Transactions involving commingled orders are allocated in a manner deemed equitable to each account. When a combined order is executed in a series of transactions, at different prices, each account participating in the order may be allocated an average price obtained from the broker/dealer. When a trade can be allocated in a cost efficient manner to our clients, it will be prorated across all participating accounts. Mondrian may randomly allocate purchases or sales among participating accounts when the amounts involved are too small to be evenly proportioned in a cost efficient manner. In performing random allocations, Mondrian will consider consistency of strategy implementation among participating accounts.

Allocation of investment opportunities

Mondrian is an investment manager of multiple client portfolios. As such, it has to ensure that investment opportunities are allocated fairly between clients. There is a potential risk that Mondrian may favor one client over another client in making allocations of investment opportunities.

Mondrian makes security selection decisions at committee level. Those securities identified as investment opportunities are added to a list of approved securities; portfolios will hold only such approved securities.

All portfolios governed by the same or a similar mandate will be structured similarly (that is, will hold the same or comparable stocks), and will exhibit similar characteristics. Sale and purchase opportunities identified at regular investment meetings will be applied to portfolios across the board, subject to the requirements of individual client mandates.

 

58


Table of Contents

Allocation of IPO opportunities

Initial Public Offerings (“IPOs”) present a potential conflict of interest when they are priced at a discount to the anticipated secondary market price and the issuer has restricted or scaled back its allocation due to market demand. In such instances, the IPO allocation could be divided among a small select group of clients with others not receiving the allocation they would otherwise be entitled to.

Mondrian clients with relevant mandates are given an equal opportunity, proportionate to the size of their portfolio, to participate in IPO trades. All IPO purchases are allocated on a strict pro-rata basis.

Dealing in investments as principal in connections with the provision of seed capital

A conflict of interest exists when a portfolio management firm manages its own money alongside client money.

Mondrian generally does not trade for its own account. However, Mondrian and its affiliates have provided the seed capital to certain investment vehicles that have been established by Mondrian group entities. Mondrian serves as the investment manager to these investment vehicles.

Mondrian operates dealing policies designed to ensure the fair and equal treatment of all clients e.g. the allocation of aggregated trades among clients. These policies ensure that any portfolios in which Mondrian has an investment interest do not receive favorable treatment relative to other client portfolios.

Directorships and external arrangements

Certain Mondrian staff may hold positions in external organizations. There is a potential risk that Mondrian personnel may place their own interests (resulting from outside employment / directorships) ahead of the interests of Mondrian clients.

Before accepting an executive or non-executive directorship or any other appointment in another company, employees, including executive directors, must obtain the prior approval of the Chief Executive Officer. The Chief Compliance Officer must also be informed of all such appointments and changes.

The CEO and CCO will only permit appointments that would not present a conflict of interest with the individual’s responsibilities to Mondrian clients.

Dual agency

Dual Agency (also known as Cross Trading) concerns those transactions where Mondrian may act as agent for both the buyer and seller. In such circumstances there is a potential conflict of interest as it may be possible to favor one client over another when establishing the execution price and/or commission rate.

Although it rarely does so, Mondrian may act as agent for both buying and selling parties with respect to transactions in investments. If Mondrian proposes to act in such capacity, the Portfolio Manager will first obtain approval from the Chief Compliance Officer. The CCO has an obligation to ensure that both parties are treated fairly in any such trade.

Employee personal account dealing

There are a number of potential conflicts when staff of an investment firm engage in buying and selling securities for their personal account.

 

59


Table of Contents

Mondrian has arrangements in place to ensure that none of its directors, officers or employees (or persons connected to them by way of a business or domestic relationship) effects any transaction on their own account which conflicts with client interests.

Mondrian’s rules which govern personal account dealing and general ethical standards are set out in the Mondrian Investment Partners Code of Ethics.

Gifts and entertainment (received)

In the normal course of business Mondrian employees may receive gifts and entertainment from third parties e.g. brokers and other service providers. This results in a potential conflict of interest when selecting third parties to provide services to Mondrian and its clients.

Mondrian has a policy which requires that gifts and entertainment received are reported to the Chief Compliance Officer (any items in excess of £100 require pre-approval).

All gifts and entertainment are reviewed to ensure that they are not inappropriate and that staff have not been unduly influenced by them.

Gifts and entertainment (given)

In the normal course of business, Mondrian employees may provide gifts and entertainment to third parties. Excessively lavish gifts and entertainment would be inappropriate.

Mondrian has a policy which requires that any gifts and entertainment provided are reported to the Chief Compliance Officer (any items in excess of £200 require pre-approval).

All gifts and entertainment are reviewed to ensure that they are not inappropriate and that staff have not attempted to obtain undue influence from them.

Performance fees

Where an investment firm has clients with a performance fee arrangement there is a risk that those clients could be favored over clients without performance fees.

Mondrian charges fees as a proportion of assets under management. In a very limited number of situations, in addition to this fee basis, certain accounts also include a performance fee basis.

The potential conflict of interest arising from these fee arrangements is addressed by Mondrian’s procedures for the allocation of aggregated trades among clients. Investment opportunities are allocated totally independently of fee arrangements.

Soft dollar arrangements

Where an investment manager has soft dollar arrangements in place with a broker/dealer there is a potential conflict of interest as trading volumes through that broker/dealer are usually important in ensuring that soft dollar targets are met.

As is typical in the investment management industry, Mondrian client funds are used to pay brokerage commissions for the execution of transactions in the client’s portfolio. As part of that execution service, brokers generally provide proprietary research to their clients as to the value of securities, the advisability of investing in, purchasing or selling securities, and the availability of securities or purchasers or sellers of securities; furnishing of analyses and reports concerning issuers, securities or industries; and providing information on economic factors and trends.

 

60


Table of Contents

Proprietary research may be used by Mondrian in connection with its investment decision-making process with respect to one or more accounts managed by it, and it may or may not be used, or used exclusively, with respect to the account generating the brokerage.

With the exception of the receipt of proprietary research, Mondrian has no other soft dollar or commission sharing arrangements in place with brokers.

Compensation. Mondrian’s compensation arrangements are designed to attract and retain high caliber staff. The compensation structure does not provide incentives for any member staff to favor any client (or group of clients). Incentives (bonus and equity programs) focus on the key areas of research quality, long-term and short-term performance, teamwork, client service and marketing.

Competitive Salary — All investment professionals are remunerated with a competitive base salary that periodically changes over time.

Profit Sharing Bonus Pool — All Mondrian staff, including portfolio managers and senior officers, qualify for participation in an annual profit sharing pool determined by the company’s profitability (approximately 30% of profits).

Equity Ownership — Mondrian is majority management-owned. A high proportion of senior Mondrian staff (investment professionals and other support functions) are shareholders in the business.

Incentives (Bonus and Equity Programs) focus on the key areas of research quality, long-term and short-term performance, teamwork, client service and marketing. As an individual’s ability to influence these factors depends on that individual’s position and seniority within the firm, so the allocation of participation in these programs will reflect this.

At Mondrian, the investment management of particular portfolios is not “star manager” based but uses a team system. This means that Mondrian’s investment professionals are primarily assessed on their contribution to the team’s effort and results, though with an important element of their assessment being focused on the quality of their individual research contribution.

Compensation Committee . In determining the amount of bonuses and equity awarded, Mondrian’s Board of Directors consults with the company’s Compensation Committee, which makes recommendations based on a number of factors including investment research, organization management, team work, client servicing and marketing.

Defined Contribution Pension Plan. All portfolio managers are members of the Mondrian defined contribution pension plan where Mondrian pays a regular monthly contribution and the member may pay additional voluntary contributions if they wish. The plan is governed by trustees who have responsibility for the trust fund and payments of benefits to members. In addition, the plan provides death benefits for death in service and a spouse’s or dependant’s pension may also be payable.

No element of portfolio manager compensation is based on the performance of individual client accounts.

Ownership of Fund Shares. As of June 30, 2012, none of the portfolio managers beneficially owned shares of the funds they managed.

PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS

Investment Decisions. The purchase and sale of portfolio securities for the funds and for the other investment advisory clients of Mondrian are made by it with a view to achieving each client’s investment objective. For example, a particular security may be purchased or sold on behalf of certain clients of Mondrian even though it could also have been purchased or sold for other clients at the same time.

 

61


Table of Contents

Likewise, a particular security may be purchased on behalf of one or more clients when Mondrian is selling the same security on behalf of one or more other clients. In some instances, therefore, Mondrian, acting for one client may sell a particular security to another client indirectly. It also happens that two or more clients may simultaneously buy or sell the same security, in which event purchases or sales are effected pro rata on the basis of cash available or another equitable basis so as to avoid any one account being preferred over any other account.

Mondrian makes decisions with respect to the purchase and sale of portfolio securities on behalf of the funds. Mondrian is responsible for implementing these decisions, including the negotiation of commissions and the allocation of principal business and portfolio brokerage. Purchases and sales of securities on a stock exchange or certain riskless principal transactions placed on NASDAQ are typically effected through brokers who charge a commission for their services. Purchases and sales of fixed income securities may be transacted with the issuer, the issuer’s underwriter, or a dealer. The funds do not usually pay brokerage commissions on purchases and sales of fixed income securities, although the price of the securities generally includes compensation, in the form of a spread or a mark-up or mark-down, which is not disclosed separately. The prices the funds pay to underwriters of newly-issued securities usually include a commission paid by the issuer to the underwriter. Transactions placed through dealers who are serving as primary market makers reflect the spread between the bid and asked prices. The money market securities in which certain of the funds invest are traded primarily in the over-the-counter market on a net basis and do not normally involve either brokerage commissions or transfer taxes.

Brokerage and Research Services. It is Mondrian’s policy to select brokers for fund trades on the basis of “best execution.” As a fiduciary to its advisory clients, Mondrian endeavors to seek best execution for client transactions by executing securities transactions for its clients in such a manner that the client’s net costs or proceeds in each transaction are the most favorable under the circumstances, i.e., by seeking to obtain not necessarily the lowest commission cost, but the best overall qualitative execution.

In determining which broker offers best execution for a particular transaction, Mondrian maintains a list of approved brokers and Mondrian’s traders consider a number of factors, including: (i) the broker’s effectiveness in executing trades; (ii) the reliability, integrity, confidentiality, promptness, reputation and financial condition of the broker (including the trader’s past execution history with the broker); (iii) the size of the trade, its relative difficulty and the security’s trading characteristics and liquidity; (iv) the quality and breadth of products offered by the broker; and (v) the broker’s willingness to accept Mondrian’s standardized commission rates.

Mondrian may aggregate client orders for the purpose of purchasing or selling particular securities. The aggregation of orders may provide an overall benefit to Mondrian’s clients by achieving, in aggregate, a relatively better purchase or sale price, lower commission expenses, lower market impact, beneficial timing of transactions, or a combination of such factors. Aggregated trades are allocated automatically among various clients by Mondrian’s investment model which includes “fairness rules” designed to allocate the aggregated trades across individual client accounts in a way that is intended to ensure fair and equitable treatment on average over time for all clients.

Mondrian may cause a fund to pay a higher commission than otherwise obtainable from other brokers or dealers in return for brokerage or research services if Mondrian believes that such commission is reasonable in relation to the services provided. In addition to agency transactions, Mondrian may receive brokerage and research services in connection with certain riskless principal transactions, in accordance with applicable SEC and other regulatory guidelines. In both instances, these services may include: economic, industry, or company research reports or investment recommendations. Mondrian may use research services furnished by brokers or dealers in servicing all fund accounts, and not all services may necessarily be used in connection with the account that paid commissions or spreads to the broker or dealer providing such services.

Performance Comparisons. Investors may judge the performance of the funds by comparing them to the performance of other mutual fund portfolios with comparable investment objectives and policies through various mutual fund or

 

62


Table of Contents

market indices such as those prepared by Dow Jones & Co., Inc. and Standard & Poor’s and to data prepared by Lipper, Inc., a widely recognized independent service which monitors the performance of mutual funds. Comparisons may also be made to indices or data published in Money Magazine, Forbes, Barron’s, The Wall Street Journal, Morningstar, Inc., Ibbotson Associates, CDA/Weisenberger, The New York Times, Business Week, U.S.A. Today, Institutional Investor and other periodicals. In addition to performance information, general information about the funds that appears in publications such as those mentioned above may be included in advertisements, sales literature and reports to shareholders. The funds may also include in advertisements and reports to shareholders information discussing the performance of Mondrian in comparison to other investment advisers and to other institutions.

From time to time, the Trust may include the following types of information in advertisements, supplemental sales literature and reports to shareholders: (1) discussions of general economic or financial principles (such as the effects of inflation, the power of compounding and the benefits of dollar cost averaging); (2) discussions of general economic trends; (3) presentations of statistical data to supplement such discussions; (4) descriptions of past or anticipated portfolio holdings for the funds; (5) descriptions of investment strategies for the funds; (6) descriptions or comparisons of various investment products, which may or may not include the funds; (7) comparisons of investment products (including the funds) with relevant market or industry indices or other appropriate benchmarks; (8) discussions of fund rankings or ratings by recognized rating organizations; and (9) testimonials describing the experience of persons that have invested in a fund. The Trust may also include calculations, such as hypothetical compounding examples, which describe hypothetical investment results in such communications. Such performance examples will be based on an express set of assumptions and are not indicative of the performance of a fund.

For the fiscal years ended March 31, the funds paid brokerage commissions as follows:

 

Fund    Time Period      Amount  

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 50,795   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 92,305
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 40,243   
     

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 1,900   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 1,433   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 1,034   
     

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 219,526   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 208,192   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 160,493
     

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

     4/1/11 to 3/31/12       $ 0   
     4/1/10 to 3/31/11       $ 0   
     4/1/09 to 3/31/10       $ 0   

 

* The increase in commissions paid is mainly due to the large increase in the size of the fund, with the small additional impact of increased activity in countries where a higher than average commission is paid.

 

63


Table of Contents

REGULAR BROKER-DEALERS

A fund’s regular broker-dealers during its most recent fiscal year would be: (1) the ten broker-dealers that received the greatest dollar amount of brokerage commissions from a fund; (2) the ten broker-dealers that engaged as principal in the largest dollar amount of portfolio transactions; and (3) the ten broker-dealers that sold the largest dollar amount of a fund's shares.

During the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012 the following fund purchased securities issued by the following regular broker-dealer :

 

64


Table of Contents

Fund

   Broker Dealer   Value of Holdings as of March 31,
2012
 

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

   HSBC Securities

(USA), Inc.

  $ 17,534,039   

DESCRIPTION OF THE TRUST AND OWNERSHIP OF SHARES

The Trust is an open-end series investment company organized as a Massachusetts business trust. A copy of the Third Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust of the Trust (the “Declaration of Trust”), is on file with the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The fiscal year of the Trust ends on March 31. The Trust changed its name to “Barr Rosenberg Series Trust” from “Rosenberg Series Trust” on August 5, 1996. Effective March 30, 2004, the Trust changed its name to the “Laudus Trust.”

Interests in the Trust’s portfolios are currently represented by shares of 6 series, the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund and Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund issued pursuant to the Declaration of Trust.

Each of the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, and Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund is divided into three classes of shares: Institutional Shares, Select Shares and Investor Shares. As of July 27, 2009, the three share classes of the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund were combined into a single share class and the Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund no longer offered multiple classes of shares.

As outlined in the funds’ prospectus, each share class has different minimum investments and different expenses.

Each class of shares of each fund represents interests in the assets of such fund and has identical dividend, liquidation and other rights and the same terms and conditions, except that expenses, if any, related to the distribution and shareholder servicing of a particular class are borne solely by such class, and each class may, at the discretion of the Trustees of the Trust, also pay a different share of other expenses, not including advisory or custodial fees or other expenses related to the management of the Trust’s assets, if these expenses are actually incurred in a different amount by that class, or if the class receives services of a different kind or to a different degree than the other classes. All other expenses are allocated to each class on the basis of the net asset value of that class in relation to the net asset value of the particular fund.

The Declaration of Trust provides for the perpetual existence of the Trust. The Trust may, however, be terminated at any time by vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each series of the Trust or by the vote of the Trustees by written notice to shareholders.

VOTING RIGHTS

Shareholders are entitled to one vote for each full share held (with fractional votes for fractional shares held) and will vote (to the extent provided herein) in the election of Trustees and the termination of the Trust and on other matters submitted to the vote of shareholders. Shareholders will vote by individual series on all matters except (i) when required by the 1940 Act, shares shall be voted in the aggregate and not by individual series and (ii) when the Trustees have determined that the matter affects only the interests of one or more series, then only shareholders of such series shall be entitled to vote thereon. Shareholders of one series shall not be entitled to vote on matters exclusively affecting another series, such matters including, without limitation, the adoption of or change in any fundamental policies or restrictions of the other series and the approval of the investment advisory contracts of the other series.

 

65


Table of Contents

Each class of shares of a fund has identical voting rights except that each class has exclusive voting rights on any matter submitted to shareholders that relates solely to that class, and has separate voting rights on any matter submitted to shareholders in which the interests of one class differ from the interests of any other class. Each class of shares has exclusive voting rights with respect to matters pertaining to any distribution and shareholder service plan applicable to that class. All classes of shares of a fund will vote together, except with respect to any distribution and shareholder service plan applicable to a class or when a class vote is required as specified above or otherwise by the 1940 Act.

There will normally be no meetings of shareholders for the purpose of electing Trustees, except that in accordance with the 1940 Act (i) the Trust will hold a shareholders’ meeting for the election of Trustees at such time as less than a majority of the Trustees holding office have been elected by shareholders, and (ii) if, as a result of a vacancy in the Board of Trustees, less than two-thirds of the Trustees holding office have been elected by the shareholders, that vacancy may only be filled by a vote of the shareholders. In addition, Trustees may be removed from office by a written consent signed by the holders of two-thirds of the outstanding shares and filed with the Trust’s custodian or by a vote of the holders of two-thirds of the outstanding shares at a meeting duly called for the purpose, which meeting shall be held upon the written request of the holders of not less than 10% of the outstanding shares. Upon written request by the holders of at least 1% of the outstanding shares stating that such shareholders wish to communicate with the other shareholders for the purpose of obtaining the signatures necessary to demand a meeting to consider removal of a Trustee, the Trust has undertaken to provide a list of shareholders or to disseminate appropriate materials (at the expense of the requesting shareholders). Except as set forth above, the Trustees shall continue to hold office and may appoint successor Trustees. Voting rights are not cumulative.

No amendment may be made to the Declaration of Trust without the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of the Trust except (i) to change the Trust’s name or to cure technical problems in the Declaration of Trust and (ii) to establish, liquidate, designate or modify new and existing series, sub-series or classes of shares of any series of Trust shares or other provisions relating to Trust shares in response to applicable laws or regulations. Trustees may, without approval of the relevant shareholders, amend the Declaration of Trust to combine one or more series or classes of the Trust into a single series or class on such terms and conditions as the Trustees shall determine.

Shareholders wishing to submit proposals for inclusion in a proxy statement for a future shareholder meeting should send their written submissions to the Trust at P. O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266. Proposals must be received a reasonable time in advance of a proxy solicitation to be included. Submission of a proposal does not guarantee inclusion in a proxy statement because proposals must comply with certain federal securities regulations.

PROXY VOTING

The Trust’s proxy voting policy is attached as an appendix to this Statement of Additional Information. Information regarding how the funds voted proxies related to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 is available, without charge, on the funds’ website at www.laudus.com/prospectus. It is also available in the funds’ Form N-PX which can be obtained on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

SHAREHOLDER AND TRUSTEE LIABILITY

Under Massachusetts law, shareholders could, under certain circumstances, be held personally liable for the obligations of the Trust. However, the Declaration of Trust disclaims shareholder liability for acts or obligations of the Trust and requires that notice of such disclaimer be given in each agreement, obligation, or instrument entered into or executed by the Trust or the Trustees. The Declaration of Trust provides for indemnification out of all the property of the relevant series for all loss and expense of any shareholder of that series held personally liable for the obligations of the Trust. Thus, the risk of a shareholder incurring financial loss on account of shareholder liability is considered remote since it is limited to circumstances in which the disclaimer is inoperative and the series of which he is or was a shareholder would be unable to meet its obligations.

 

66


Table of Contents

The Declaration of Trust further provides that the Trustees will not be liable for errors of judgment or mistakes of fact or law. However, nothing in the Declaration of Trust protects a Trustee against any liability to which the Trustee would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his office. The Declaration of Trust also provides for indemnification by the Trust of the Trustees and the officers of the Trust against liabilities and expenses reasonably incurred in connection with litigation in which they may be involved because of their offices with the Trust, except if it is determined in the manner specified in the Declaration of Trust that such Trustees are liable to the Trust or its shareholders by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of his or her duties.

OWNERS OF 5% OR MORE OF A FUND’S SHARES

As of July 17, 2012, William A. Hasler owned 1.6% of the Select Shares of Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund. Except as set forth in the previous sentence, each of the Trustees and executive officers of each fund, in the aggregate, owned less than 1% of each fund’s outstanding shares as of July 17, 2012.

The appendix, “Owners of 5% Shares of a Fund Shares”, lists persons or entities that owned, of record or beneficially, more than 5% of the outstanding equity securities of each class of a fund as of July 2, 2012. Those persons who beneficially own more than 25% of a particular class of shares in a particular fund may be deemed to control such class. As a result, it may not be possible for matters subject to a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of such fund to be approved without the affirmative vote of such shareholder, and it may be possible for such matters to be approved by such shareholder without the affirmative vote of any other shareholder.

DISCLOSURE OF PORTFOLIO SECURITIES INFORMATION

Information regarding the availability of the funds’ portfolio securities can be obtained by calling 1.800.447.3332.

The disclosure of portfolio securities information to shareholders and other parties, prior to regular public filings, may be authorized only by the Trust’s President upon prior consultation with the funds’ Subadviser and the funds’ Chief Legal Officer. Prior to authorizing the disclosure of portfolio securities, the Trust’s President must determine that: (i) such disclosure is in the best interests of the funds’ shareholders; and (ii) that no conflict exists between the interests of the funds’ shareholders and those of the funds’ Investment Adviser, Subadviser or principal underwriter.

Portfolio securities information also may be made available on a selective basis to service providers, ratings agencies, consultants and other qualified financial professionals when the President upon prior consultation with the funds’ Subadviser and the funds’ Chief Legal Officer, determines such disclosure meets the requirements for non-selective disclosure and serves a legitimate business purpose. Agreements entered into with a service provider to whom the funds selectively disclose portfolio securities information will generally include the confidentiality provisions customary in such agreements. Although certain of the service providers are not under formal confidentiality obligations in connection with disclosure of portfolio securities information, a fund would not continue to conduct business with a person who the fund believes was misusing the disclosed information. Any third-party who is not a service provider to the funds to whom the funds selectively disclose portfolio securities information will, prior to that disclosure, be required to sign an agreement describing the permitted use of portfolio securities information and providing that: (i) the portfolio securities information will be kept confidential; (ii) the person will not trade on the basis of any material non-public information; and (iii) the information will be used only for the purpose described in the agreement. As part of its ongoing review of fund operations, the Board of Trustees will periodically review any agreements that the Trust has entered into to selectively disclose portfolio securities information.

The funds’ service providers, including, without limitation, the Investment Adviser, Subadviser, distributor, transfer agent, auditor, proxy voting service provider, pricing information vendors, publisher, printer and mailing agent may receive early disclosure of portfolio securities information as frequently as daily in connection with the services they

 

67


Table of Contents

perform for the funds. The names of those persons to whom the funds selectively disclose portfolio securities information will be disclosed in this Statement of Additional Information. CSIM, Mondrian, Glass Lewis and State Street Bank and Trust Company, as service providers to the funds, are currently receiving this information on a daily basis. RR Donnelley, as a service provider to the funds, is currently receiving this information on a quarterly basis. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and ALPS, as service providers to the funds, receive this information on an as-needed basis. Service providers will be subject to a duty of confidentiality with respect to any portfolio securities information whether imposed by the provisions of the service provider’s contract with the Trust or by the nature of the service provider’s relationship with the Trust. In accordance with the exemptive order issued by the SEC to iShares and procedures approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees, the Trust will promptly notify iShares Funds in writing of any purchase or acquisition of shares of an iShares Fund that causes a fund to hold (i) 5% or more of such iShares Fund’s total outstanding voting securities, and (ii) 10% or more of such iShares Fund’s total outstanding voting securities. In addition, the adviser or Subadviser will, upon causing a fund to acquire more than 3% of an open-end iShares Fund’s outstanding shares, notify the open-end iShares Fund of the investment.

A complete list of each fund’s portfolio holdings is published on the Laudus website at www.laudus.com/prospectus, under “Analysis & Commentary”, approximately 30 days after the end of each Laudus Mondrian Fund’s fiscal quarter (which is also a calendar quarter-end). The portfolio holdings information available on the funds’ website is the same that is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form N-Q or Form N-CSR. The funds provide on the website quarterly information regarding certain attributes of a fund’s portfolio, such as a fund’s top ten holdings, sector weightings, composition, credit quality and duration and maturity, as applicable. This information is generally updated within 20-30 days after the end of the fiscal quarter. The information on the website is publicly available to all categories of persons.

Each fund’s top ten holdings list is posted on Schwab.com monthly, typically with a 10-day lag. In addition to the top ten holdings information, the funds also provide monthly information regarding certain attributes of a fund’s portfolio, such as sector weightings, composition, credit quality, duration and maturity, as applicable. This information is available publicly to all persons under “Research & Strategies” on Schwab.com.

The funds may disclose non-material information including commentary and aggregate information about the characteristics of a fund in connection with or relating to a fund or its portfolio securities to any person if such disclosure is for a legitimate business purpose, such disclosure does not effectively result in the disclosure of the complete portfolio securities of any fund (which can only be disclosed in accordance with the above requirements), and such information does not constitute material non-public information. Such disclosure does not fall within the portfolio securities disclosure requirements outlined above.

Whether the information constitutes material non-public information will be made on a good faith determination, which involves an assessment of the particular facts and circumstances. In most cases commentary or analysis would be immaterial and would not convey any advantage to a recipient in making a decision concerning a fund. Commentary and analysis includes, but is not limited to, the allocation of a fund’s portfolio securities and other investments among various asset classes, sectors, industries, and countries, the characteristics of the stock components and other investments of a fund, the attribution of fund returns by asset class, sector, industry and country, and the volatility characteristics of a fund.

Neither the funds nor the funds’ Adviser or Subadviser may receive compensation or other consideration in connection with the disclosure of information about portfolio securities.

DET ERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE

Each business day, each fund calculates its share price, or NAV, as of the close of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”). This means that NAVs are calculated using the values of each fund’s portfolio securities as of the close of the NYSE. Such values are required to be determined in one of two ways: securities for which market quotations are readily available are required to be valued at current market value; and securities for which market quotations are not readily

 

68


Table of Contents

available or the investment adviser deems them to be unreliable are required to be valued at fair value using procedures approved by the Board of Trustees. Each fund uses approved pricing services to provide values for its portfolio securities. Current market values are generally determined by the approved pricing services as follows: securities traded on stock exchanges are valued at the last-quoted sales price on the exchange on which such securities are primarily traded (closing values), or, lacking any sales, at the mean between the bid and ask prices; securities traded in the over-the-counter market are valued at the last sales price that day, or, if there are no sales that day, at the mean between the bid and ask prices. In addition, securities that are primarily traded on foreign exchanges are generally valued at the official closing price or last sales price on the exchange where the securities are primarily traded with these values then translated into U.S. dollars at the current exchange rate. Fixed income securities normally are valued based on valuations provided by approved pricing services. Securities may be fair valued pursuant to procedures approved by the funds’ Board of Trustees when approved pricing services do not provide a value for a security, a furnished price appears manifestly incorrect or events occur prior to the close of the NYSE that materially affect the furnished price. The Board of Trustees regularly reviews fair value determinations made by the funds pursuant to the procedures.

PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES

The funds are open each day that the NYSE is open. The NYSE's trading session is normally conducted from 9:30 a.m. Eastern time until 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday, although some days, such as in advance of and following holidays, the NYSE's trading session closes early. The following holiday closings are currently scheduled for 2012—2013: New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Jr.'s Birthday, Presidents' Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. The procedures for purchasing shares of each of the funds and for determining the offering price of such shares are described in the Prospectus. The Trust has elected to be governed by Rule 18f-1 under the 1940 Act pursuant to which the Trust is obligated to redeem shares solely in cash for any shareholder during any 90-day period up to the lesser of (i) $250,000 or (ii) 1% of the total net asset value of the Trust at the beginning of such period. The procedures for redeeming shares of each of the funds are described in the Prospectus.

As described in the Prospectus, the Trust reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to reject purchase orders for shares of a fund. As a general matter, the Trust expects that it will not accept purchase orders when the purchase price is to be paid by cash (in the form of actual currency), third party checks, checks payable in foreign currency, credit card convenience checks or traveler’s checks.

The funds have authorized one or more brokers to accept on their behalf purchase and redemption orders. Such brokers have also been authorized to designate other intermediaries to accept purchase and redemption orders on the funds’ behalf. The funds will be deemed to have received a purchase or redemption order when an authorized broker or, if applicable, a broker’s authorized designee, receives such order. Such orders will be priced at the respective fund’s net asset value per share next determined after such orders are received by an authorized broker or the broker’s authorized designee.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and financial statements of the funds in the Trust’s Annual Report for the period ended March 31, 2012 (the “Annual Report”) are incorporated herein by reference to such Annual Report. Copies of such Annual Report are available without charge upon request by writing to Laudus Trust, P. O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266 or telephoning 1.888.352.8387 or visiting the funds’ website at www.laudus.com/prospectus.

The financial statements incorporated by reference into this Statement of Additional Information have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm

 

69


Table of Contents

APPENDIX - RATINGS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES

From time to time, the fund may report the percentage of its assets that fall into the rating categories set forth below.

BONDS

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE

Aaa Bonds which are rated Aaa are judged to be of the best quality. They carry the smallest degree of investment risk and are generally referred to as “gilt edged.” Interest payments are protected by a large or by an exceptionally stable margin and principal is secure. While the various protective elements are likely to change, such changes as can be visualized are most unlikely to impair the fundamentally strong position of such issues.

Aa Bonds which are rated Aa are judged to be of high quality by all standards. Together with the Aaa group they comprise what are generally known as high-grade bonds. They are rated lower than the best bonds because margins of protection may not be as large as in Aaa securities or fluctuation of protective elements may be of greater amplitude or there may be other elements present which make the long term risk appear somewhat larger than the Aaa securities.

A Bonds which are rated A possess many favorable investment attributes and are to be considered as upper-medium grade obligations. Factors giving security to principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements may be present which suggest a susceptibility to impairment some time in the future.

Baa Bonds which are rated Baa are considered as medium-grade obligations (i.e., they are neither highly protected nor poorly secured). Interest payments and principal security appear adequate for the present but certain protective elements may be lacking or may be characteristically unreliable over any great length of time. Such bonds lack outstanding investment characteristics and in fact have speculative characteristics as well.

Ba Bonds which are rated Ba are judged to have speculative elements; their future cannot be considered as well-assured. Often the protection of interest and principal payments may be very moderate and thereby not well safeguarded during both good and bad times over the future. Uncertainty of position characterizes bonds in this class.

B Bonds which are rated B generally lack characteristics of the desirable investment. Assurance of interest and principal payments or of maintenance of other terms of the contract over any long period of time may be small.

STANDARD & POOR’S CORPORATION

INVESTMENT GRADE

AAA Debt rated ‘AAA’ has the highest rating assigned by S&P. Capacity to pay interest and repay principal is extremely strong.

AA Debt rated ‘AA’ has a very strong capacity to pay interest and repay principal and differs from the highest rated debt only in small degree.

A Debt rated ‘A’ has a strong capacity to pay interest and repay principal, although it is somewhat more susceptible to adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than debt in higher-rated categories.

BBB Debt rated ‘BBB’ is regarded as having an adequate capacity to pay interest and repay principal. Whereas it normally exhibits adequate protection parameters, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity to pay interest and repay principal for debt in this category than in higher rated categories.

 

70


Table of Contents

SPECULATIVE GRADE

Debt rated ‘BB’ and ‘B’ is regarded as having predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to capacity to pay interest and repay principal. While such debt will likely have some quality and protective characteristics, these are outweighed by large uncertainties or major risk exposures to adverse conditions.

BB Debt rated ‘BB’ has less near-term vulnerability to default than other speculative grade debt. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions that could lead to inadequate capacity to meet timely interest and principal payments. The ‘BB’ rating category is also used for debt subordinated to senior debt that is assigned an actual or implied ‘BBB-’ rating.

B Debt rate ‘B’ has greater vulnerability to default but presently has the capacity to meet interest payments and principal repayments. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions would likely impair capacity or willingness to pay interest and repay principal. The ‘B’ rating category also is used for debt subordinated to senior debt that is assigned an actual or implied ‘BB’ or ‘BB-’ rating.

FITCH, INC.

INVESTMENT GRADE BOND

 

AAA Bonds considered to be investment grade and of the highest credit quality. The obligor has an exceptionally strong ability to pay interest and repay principal, which is unlikely to be affected by reasonably foreseeable events.

 

AA Bonds considered to be investment grade and of very high credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is very strong, although not quite as strong as bonds rated ‘AAA’. Because bonds rated in the ‘AAA’ and ‘AA’ categories are not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable future developments, short term debt of these issuers is generally rated ‘F1+’.

 

A Bonds considered to be investment grade and of high credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is considered to be strong, but may be more vulnerable to adverse changes in economic conditions and circumstances than bonds with higher ratings.

 

BBB Bonds considered to be investment grade and of satisfactory credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is considered to be adequate. Adverse changes in economic conditions and circumstances, however, are more likely to have adverse impact on these bonds, and therefore impair timely payment. The likelihood that the ratings of these bonds will fall below investment grade is higher than for bonds with higher ratings.

SPECULATIVE GRADE BOND

 

BB Bonds are considered speculative. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal may be affected over time by adverse economic changes. However, business and financial alternatives can be identified which could assist the obligor in satisfying its debt service requirements.

 

B Bonds are considered highly speculative. While bonds in this class are currently meeting debt service requirements, the probability of continued timely payment of principal and interest reflects the obligor’s limited margin of safety and the need for reasonable business and economic activity throughout the life of the issue.

 

71


Table of Contents

DOMINION BOND RATING SERVICE

Bond and Long Term Debt Rating Scale

As is the case with all DBRS rating scales, long term debt ratings are meant to give an indication of the risk that the borrower will not fulfill its full obligations in a timely manner with respect to both interest and principal commitments. DBRS ratings do not take factors such as pricing or market risk into consideration and are expected to be used by purchasers as one part of their investment process. Every DBRS rating is based on quantitative and qualitative considerations that are relevant for the borrowing entity.

AAA: Highest Credit Quality

AA: Superior Credit Quality

A: Satisfactory Credit Quality

BBB: Adequate Credit Quality

BB: Speculative

B: Highly Speculative

CCC: Very Highly Speculative

CC: Very Highly Speculative

C: Very Highly Speculative

“AAA” Bonds rated “AAA” are of the highest credit quality, with exceptionally strong protection for the timely repayment of principal and interest. Earnings are considered stable, the structure of the industry in which the entity operates is strong, and the outlook for future profitability is favorable. There are few qualifying factors present which would detract from the performance of the entity, the strength of liquidity and coverage ratios is unquestioned and the entity has established a creditable track record of superior performance. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has established for this category, few entities are able to achieve a AAA rating.

“AA” Bonds rated “AA” are of superior credit quality, and protection of interest and principal is considered high. In many cases, they differ from bonds rated AAA only to a small degree. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has for the AAA category (which few companies are able to achieve), entities rated AA are also considered to be strong credits which typically exemplify above-average strength in key areas of consideration and are unlikely to be significantly affected by reasonably foreseeable events.

“A” Bonds rated “A” are of satisfactory credit quality. Protection of interest and principal is still substantial, but the degree of strength is less than with AA rated entities. While a respectable rating, entities in the “A” category are considered to be more susceptible to adverse economic conditions and have greater cyclical tendencies than higher rated companies.

“BBB” Bonds rated “BBB” are of adequate credit quality. Protection of interest and principal is considered adequate, but the entity is more susceptible to adverse changes in financial and economic conditions, or there may be other adversities present which reduce the strength of the entity and its rated securities.

“BB” Bonds rated “BB” are defined to be speculative, where the degree of protection afforded interest and principal is uncertain, particularly during periods of economic recession. Entities in the BB area typically have limited access to capital markets and additional liquidity support and, in many cases, small size or lack of competitive strength may be additional negative considerations.

“B” Bonds rated “B” are highly speculative and there is a reasonably high level of uncertainty which exists as to the ability of the entity to pay interest and principal on a continuing basis in the future, especially in periods of economic recession or industry adversity.

 

72


Table of Contents

“CCC” / “CC” / “C” Bonds rated in any of these categories are very highly speculative and are in danger of default of interest and principal. The degree of adverse elements present is more severe than bonds rated “B”. Bonds rated below “B” often have characteristics which, if not remedied, may lead to default. In practice, there is little difference between the “C” to “CCC” categories, with “CC” and “C” normally used to lower ranking debt of companies where the senior debt is rated in the “CCC” to “B” range.

“D” This category indicates Bonds in default of either interest or principal.

(“HIGH”, “LOW”) grades are used to indicate the relative standing of a credit within a particular rating category. The lack of one of these designations indicates a rating which is essentially in the middle of the category. Note that “high” and “low” grades are not used for the AAA category.

COMMERCIAL PAPER AND SHORT-TERM DEBT RATING SCALE

Dominion Bond Rating Service

As is the case with all DBRS rating scales, commercial paper ratings are meant to give an indication of the risk that the borrower will not fulfill its obligations in a timely manner. DBRS ratings do not take factors such as pricing or market risk into consideration and are expected to be used by purchasers as one part of their investment process. Every DBRS rating is based on quantitative and qualitative considerations which are relevant for the borrowing entity.

R-1: Prime Credit Quality

R-2: Adequate Credit Quality

R-3: Speculative

All three DBRS rating categories for short term debt use “high”, “middle” or “low” as subset grades to designate the relative standing of the credit within a particular rating category. The following comments provide separate definitions for the three grades in the Prime Credit Quality area, as this is where ratings for active borrowers in Canada continue to be heavily concentrated.

“R-1 (HIGH)” Short term debt rated “R-1 (high)” is of the highest credit quality, and indicates an entity which possesses unquestioned ability to repay current liabilities as they fall due. Entities rated in this category normally maintain strong liquidity positions, conservative debt levels and profitability which is both stable and above average. Companies achieving an “R-1 (high)” rating are normally leaders in structurally sound industry segments with proven track records, sustainable positive future results and no substantial qualifying negative factors. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has established for an “R-1 (high)”, few entities are strong enough to achieve this rating.

“R-1 (MIDDLE)” Short term debt rated “R-1 (middle)” is of superior credit quality and, in most cases, ratings in this category differ from “R-1 (high)” credits to only a small degree. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has for the “R-1 (high)” category (which few companies are able to achieve), entities rated “R-1 (middle)” are also considered strong credits which typically exemplify above average strength in key areas of consideration for debt protection.

“R-1 (LOW)” Short term debt rated “R-1 (low)” is of satisfactory credit quality. The overall strength and outlook for key liquidity, debt and profitability ratios is not normally as favorable as with higher rating categories, but these considerations are still respectable. Any qualifying negative factors which exist are considered manageable, and the entity is normally of sufficient size to have some influence in its industry.

“R-2 (HIGH)”, “R-2 (MIDDLE)”, “R-2 (LOW)” Short term debt rated “R-2” is of adequate credit quality and within the

 

73


Table of Contents

three subset grades, debt protection ranges from having reasonable ability for timely repayment to a level which is considered only just adequate. The liquidity and debt ratios of entities in the “R-2” classification are not as strong as those in the “R-1” category, and the past and future trend may suggest some risk of maintaining the strength of key ratios in these areas. Alternative sources of liquidity support are considered satisfactory; however, even the strongest liquidity support will not improve the commercial paper rating of the issuer. The size of the entity may restrict its flexibility, and its relative position in the industry is not typically as strong as an “R-1 credit”. Profitability trends, past and future, may be less favorable, earnings not as stable, and there are often negative qualifying factors present which could also make the entity more vulnerable to adverse changes in financial and economic conditions.

“R-3 (HIGH)”, “R-3 (MIDDLE)”, “R-3 (LOW)” Short term debt rated “R-3” is speculative, and within the three subset grades, the capacity for timely payment ranges from mildly speculative to doubtful. “R-3” credits tend to have weak liquidity and debt ratios, and the future trend of these ratios is also unclear. Due to its speculative nature, companies with “R-3” ratings would normally have very limited access to alternative sources of liquidity. Earnings would typically be very unstable, and the level of overall profitability of the entity is also likely to be low. The industry environment may be weak, and strong negative qualifying factors are also likely to be present.

SHORT TERM NOTES AND VARIABLE RATE DEMAND OBLIGATIONS

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE

Short term notes/variable rate demand obligations bearing the designations MIG-1/VMIG-1 are considered to be of the best quality, enjoying strong protection from established cash flows, superior liquidity support or demonstrated broad-based access to the market for refinancing. Obligations rated MIG-2/VMIG-3 are of high quality and enjoy ample margins of protection although not as large as those of the top rated securities.

STANDARD & POOR’S CORPORATION

An S&P SP-1 rating indicates that the subject securities’ issuer has a strong capacity to pay principal and interest. Issues determined to possess very strong safety characteristics are given a plus (+) designation. S&P’s determination that an issuer has a satisfactory capacity to pay principal and interest is denoted by an SP-2 rating.

FITCH, INC.

Obligations supported by the highest capacity for timely repayment are rated F1+. An F1 rating indicates that the obligation is supported by a very strong capacity for timely repayment. Obligations rated F2 are supported by a good capacity for timely repayment, although adverse changes in business, economic, or financial conditions may affect this capacity.

COMMERCIAL PAPER

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE

Prime-1 is the highest commercial paper rating assigned by Moody’s. Issuers (or related supporting institutions) of commercial paper with this rating are considered to have a superior ability to repay short term promissory obligations. Issuers (or related supporting institutions) of securities rated Prime-2 are viewed as having a strong capacity to repay short term promissory obligations. This capacity will normally be evidenced by many of the characteristics of issuers whose commercial paper is rated Prime-1 but to a lesser degree.

 

74


Table of Contents

STANDARD & POOR’S CORPORATION

A Standard & Poor’s Corporation (“S&P”) A-1 commercial paper rating indicates a strong degree of safety regarding timely payment of principal and interest. Issues determined to possess overwhelming safety characteristics are denoted A-1+. Capacity for timely payment on commercial paper rated A-2 is satisfactory, but the relative degree of safety is not as high as for issues designated A-1.

FITCH, INC.

F1+ is the highest category, and indicates the strongest degree of assurance for timely payment. Issues rated F1 reflect an assurance of timely payment only slightly less than issues rated F1+. Issues assigned an F2 rating have a satisfactory degree of assurance for timely payment, but the margin of safety is not as great as for issues in the first two rating categories.

 

75


Table of Contents

APPENDIX— OWNERS OF 5% OF SHARES OF A FUND

 

Fund

  

Customer Name and Address

   % owned

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund – Investor Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC    40%
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LLC    24%
   200 LIBERTY ST   
   ONE WORLD FINANCIAL CENTER   
   NEW YORK NY 10281-1003   
   OPPENHEIMER & CO INC    7%
   FBO FRED B DEVITT III SUCC TTEE   
   C DALE SCHWANT REV TRUST   
   UAD 05/21/87 PAS   
   30 SE 4TH AVE0   
   DELRAY BEACH FL 33483-4514   
   AMO CLEARING OMNIBUS ACCT    15% 1
   FBO JP MORGAN CLEARING #0352   
   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC   
   211 MAIN ST   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105   

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund – Select Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC    100%
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   CHARLES SCHWAB TRUST CO TTEE    40% 1
   HELLMAN & FRIEDMAN PS & 401K   
   FBO ALLEN R THORPE   
   235 W 71ST ST APT 7   
   NEW YORK NY 10023   


Table of Contents
  

N FRIEDLAND & J FLORCZAK TTEE

     9 % 1  
  

NANCY E FRIEDLAND REVOCABLE TR

  
  

SAINT LOUIS MO 63130

  
  

JAMES F BRECKER JR

     6 % 1  
  

WAYNE PA 19355

  
  

SHELDON KAPLAN

     5 % 1  
  

ALBUQUERQUE NM 87111

  
  

SHELDON KAPLAN

     5 % 1  
  

ALBUQUERQUE NM 87111

  
  

JACQUELYN CAROL MCCASLIN

     5 % 1  
  

ELKHORN NE 68022

  
  

J M FUSCO & K R PARKER TTEE

     5 % 1  
  

PARKER FUSCO FAM TRT

  
  

LOS ALTOS CA 94024

  
  

PATRICIA LYNN CERICOLA

     5 % 1  
  

AUSTIN TX 78703

  
  

REBECCA R COFFELT

     5 % 1  
  

ENGLEWOOD CO 80112

  
  

DANIEL E ROSSI &

     5 % 1  
  

MONICA N REYERO-ROSSI

  
  

GENOA NV 89411

  
  

JAMES R HANSELL

     5 % 1  
   CHAPEL HILL NC 27517   


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund – Institutional Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      79
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   SCHWAB TARGET 2040      13 % 1  
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105   
   SCHWAB TARGET 2030 FUND   
   211 MAIN STREET      11 % 1  
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105   
   GREATER TEXAS FOUNDATION      7 % 1  
   C/O AMBER BASS   
   1121 BRIARCREST DR STE 200   
   BRYAN TX 77802   
   SCHWAB TARGET 2020      6 % 1  
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund – Investor Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      84
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   MERRILL LYNCH PIERCE FENNER & SMITH      12
   FOR SOLE BENEFITS OF ITS CUSTOMERS   
   ATTN: FDS - GINGER COLE   
   4800 DEER LAKE DR E   
   BUILDING 1 SECOND FLOOR C WING   
   JACKSONVILLE FL 32246-6484   


Table of Contents
   MANUEL ALFONSO CARVALLO &      17 % 1  
   VERONICA GONZALEZ JT TEN   
   ALPHARETTA GA 30022   
   VIRGINIA PEREIRA DIRSCHL TTEE      12 % 1  
   VIRGINIA LEE PEREIRA DIRSCHL R   
   CHAPEL HILL NC 27517   
   JAY C MIHULKA      10 % 1  
   WENTZVILLE MO 63385   
   AMO CLEARING OMNIBUS ACCT      8 % 1  
   FBO SCOTTRADE DTCC #0705   
   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC   
   211 MAIN ST   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105   
   DOTTIE M ROBERTSON      5 % 1  
   BEND OR 97702   
   S LEE & D WU TTEE      5 % 1  
   LEE/WU FAMILY TRUST   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94127   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund – Select Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      55
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   


Table of Contents
   BARR ROSENBERG      45
   ORINDA CA 94563-2534   
   P REGAN & K REGAN TTEE      55 % 1  
   PATRICK R REGAN REVOCABLE TRUST   
   MINNEAPOLIS MN 55447   

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund – Institutional Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      100
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   THE CHARLES SCHWAB CORPORATION      100 % 1  
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund – Investor Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      53
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES FOR      16
   THE EXCLUSIVE BENEFIT OF OUR CUST   
   200 LIBERTY ST   
   ONE WORLD FINANCIAL CENTER   
   NEW YORK NY 10281-1003   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund – Select Shares

   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      67
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   
   STRAFE & CO      24
   THE KETTERING FUND   
   PO BOX 6924   
   NEWARK DE 19714-6924   


Table of Contents
   NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES      5
   200 LIBERTY ST   
   ONE WORLD FINANCIAL CENTER   
   NEW YORK NY 10281-1003   

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund – Institutional Shares

   NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES      52
   200 LIBERTY ST   
   ONE WORLD FINANCIAL CENTER   
   NEW YORK NY 10281-1003   
   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      40
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   


Table of Contents

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund – Institutional Shares

   WELLS FARGO BANK, NA FBO      66
   PO BOX 1533   
   MINNEAPOLIS MN 55480-1533   
   CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC      18
   211 MAIN STREET   
   SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905   

 

(1) These shares are held within the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. account listed elsewhere in this table. The shares held by the Charles Schwab Trust Company are held for the benefit of its customers.


Table of Contents

 

Page 1 of 5

 

Appendix – Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

The Charles Schwab Family of Funds

Schwab Investments

Schwab Capital Trust

Schwab Annuity Portfolios

Laudus Trust

Laudus Institutional Trust

Schwab Strategic Trust

Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures

As of April 2012

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM”), as an investment adviser, is generally responsible for voting proxies with respect to the securities held in accounts of investment companies and other clients for which it provides discretionary investment management services. CSIM’s Proxy Committee exercises and documents CSIM’s responsibility with regard to voting of client proxies (the “Proxy Committee”). The Proxy Committee is composed of representatives of CSIM’s Fund Administration, Portfolio Management, and Legal Departments, and chaired by CSIM’s Chief Investment Officer, Equities or his/her delegate. The Proxy Committee reviews and, as necessary, may amend periodically these Procedures to address new or revised proxy voting policies or procedures. The policies stated in these Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures (the “CSIM Proxy Procedures”) pertain to all of CSIM’s clients.

The Boards of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, and Schwab Annuity Portfolios (“Schwab Funds”) have delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through their respective Investment Advisory and Administration Agreements. In addition, the Boards of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust (“Laudus Funds”) and the Schwab Strategic Trust (“Schwab ETFs”; collectively, the Schwab Funds, the Laudus Funds and the Schwab ETFs are the “Funds”) have delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through their respective investment advisory and administration agreements. The Trustees have adopted these Proxy Procedures with respect to proxies voted on behalf of the various Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds, and Schwab ETFs portfolios. CSIM will present amendments to the Trustees for approval. However, there may be circumstances where the Proxy Committee deems it advisable to amend the Proxy Procedures between regular Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds and Schwab ETFs Board meetings. In such cases, the Trustees will be asked to ratify any changes at the next regular meeting of the Board.

To assist CSIM in its responsibility for voting proxies and the overall proxy voting process, CSIM has retained Glass Lewis & Co. (“Glass Lewis”) as an expert in the proxy voting and corporate governance area. The services provided by Glass Lewis include in-depth research, global issuer analysis, and voting recommendations as well as vote execution, reporting and record keeping.


Table of Contents

 

Page 2 of 5

 

Proxy Voting Policy

For investment companies and other clients for which CSIM exercises its responsibility for voting proxies, it is CSIM’s policy to vote proxies in the manner that CSIM and the Proxy Committee believes will maximize the economic benefit to CSIM’s clients. In furtherance of this policy, the Proxy Committee has received and reviewed Glass Lewis’ written proxy voting policies and procedures (“Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures”) and has determined that Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures are consistent with the CSIM Proxy Procedures and CSIM’s fiduciary duty with respect to its clients. The Proxy Committee has also implemented custom policies as set forth below. The Proxy Committee will review any material amendments to Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures to determine whether such procedures continue to be consistent with the CSIM Proxy Voting Procedures, and CSIM’s fiduciary duty with respect to its clients.

Except under each of the circumstances described below, the Proxy Committee will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting proxies, including timely submission of votes, on behalf of CSIM’s clients in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

For proxy issues that the Proxy Committee or the applicable portfolio manager or other relevant portfolio management staff believe raise significant concerns with respect to the accounts of CSIM clients, the Proxy Committee will review the analysis and recommendation of Glass Lewis. Examples of factors that could cause a matter to raise significant concerns include, but are not limited to: issues whose outcome has the potential to materially affect the company’s industry, or regional or national economy, and matters which involve broad public policy developments which may similarly materially affect the environment in which the company operates. The Proxy Committee also will solicit input from the assigned portfolio manager and other relevant portfolio management staff for the particular portfolio security. After evaluating all such recommendations, the Proxy Committee will decide how to vote the shares and will instruct Glass Lewis to vote consistent with its decision. The Proxy Committee has the ultimate responsibility for making the determination of how to vote the shares to seek to maximize the value of that particular holding.

With respect to proxies of a Fund, the Proxy Committee will vote such proxies in the same proportion as the vote of all other shareholders of the Fund ( i.e. , “echo vote”), unless otherwise required by law. When required by law or applicable exemptive order, the Proxy Committee will also “echo vote” proxies of an unaffiliated mutual fund or exchange traded fund (“ETF”). For example, certain exemptive orders issued to the Funds by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, require the Funds, under certain circumstances, to “echo vote” proxies of registered investment companies that serve as underlying investments of the Funds. When not required to “echo vote,” the Proxy Committee will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting proxies of an unaffiliated mutual fund or ETF in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures, subject to the custom policies set forth below.


Table of Contents

 

Page 3 of 5

 

In addition, with respect to holdings of The Charles Schwab Corporation (“CSC”) (ticker symbol: SCHW), the Proxy Committee will vote such proxies in the same proportion as the vote of all other shareholders of CSC (i.e., “echo vote”), unless otherwise required by law.

Exceptions from Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures : The Proxy Committee has reviewed the particular policies set forth in Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures and has determined that the implementation of the following custom policies is consistent with CSIM’s fiduciary duty to its clients:

 

   

Independent Chairman : With respect to shareholder proposals requiring that a company chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold, as calculated below. In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote the shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures. In cases where a company is a registered investment company, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals. Additionally, with respect to the election of a director who serves as the governance committee chair (or, in the absence of a governance committee, the chair of the nominating committee), the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote for the director in cases where the company chairman’s position is not filled by an independent director and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed.

 

   

Classified Boards : With respect to shareholder proposals declassifying a staggered board in favor of the annual election of directors, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold, as calculated below. In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote the shareholder proposals declassifying a staggered board in favor of the annual election of directors in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

 

   

Proxy Access : With respect to shareholder proposals requesting proxy access for shareholders, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet one of the following triggers:

 

   

The company did not implement a shareholder proposal that was passed by shareholders at two previous shareholder meetings.

 

   

The company nominated directors for election that did not receive a majority of shareholder support at the previous shareholder meeting.

 

   

The company had material financial statement restatements.

 

   

The company’s board adopted a poison pill during the past year and did not put the adoption up for shareholder approval.

In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote shareholder proposals requesting proxy access in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.


Table of Contents

 

Page 4 of 5

 

In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote shareholder proposals requesting proxy access in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

Glass Lewis uses a three-year total return performance methodology to calculate the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold. For Russell 3000 Index constituents, if a company’s total annual shareholder return is in the bottom 25% of Russell 3000 constituent companies’ total annual shareholder returns for three consecutive years, the company will be deemed not to have met the threshold. For companies not in the Russell 3000 Index, the universe of companies used for the minimum total shareholder return threshold calculation is all Glass Lewis covered companies outside of the Russell 3000 Index.

If Glass Lewis does not provide an analysis or recommendation for voting a particular proxy measure or measures, CSIM will generally abstain, however (1) two members of the Proxy Committee, including at least one representative from Portfolio Management, in consultation with the Chair of the Proxy Committee or his/her designee, may decide how to vote such proxy, or (2) the Proxy Committee may meet to decide how to vote such proxy.

Conflicts of Interest . Except as described above for proxies solicited by the Funds or CSC and the exceptions to Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures, proxy issues that present material conflicts of interest between CSIM, and/or any of its affiliates, and CSIM’s clients, CSIM will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting such proxies in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

Voting Foreign Proxies . CSIM has arrangements with Glass Lewis for voting proxies. However, voting proxies with respect to shares of foreign securities may involve significantly greater effort and corresponding cost than voting proxies with respect to domestic securities, due to the variety of regulatory schemes and corporate practices in foreign countries with respect to proxy voting. Problems voting foreign proxies may include the following:

 

  o proxy statements and ballots written in a foreign language;

 

  o untimely and/or inadequate notice of shareholder meetings;

 

  o restrictions of foreigner’s ability to exercise votes;

 

  o requirements to vote proxies in person;

 

  o requirements to provide local agents with power of attorney to facilitate CSIM’s voting instructions.

In consideration of the foregoing issues, Glass Lewis uses its best-efforts to vote foreign proxies. As part of its ongoing oversight, the Proxy Committee will monitor the voting of foreign proxies to determine whether all reasonable steps are taken to vote foreign proxies. If the Proxy Committee determines that the cost associated with the attempt to vote outweighs the potential benefits clients may derive from voting, the Proxy Committee may decide not to attempt to vote. In addition, certain foreign countries impose restrictions on the sale of securities for a period of time before and/or after the shareholder meeting. To avoid these trading restrictions, the Proxy Committee instructs Glass Lewis not to vote such foreign proxies.


Table of Contents

 

Page 5 of 5

 

Securities Lending Programs . Certain of the Funds enter into securities lending arrangements with lending agents to generate additional revenue for their portfolios. In securities lending arrangements, any voting rights that accompany the loaned securities generally pass to the borrower of the securities, but the lender retains the right to recall a security and may then exercise the security’s voting rights. In order to vote the proxies of securities out on loan, the securities must be recalled prior to the established record date. CSIM will use its best efforts to recall a Fund’s securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies if (a) the proxy relates to a special meeting of shareholders of the issuer (as opposed to the issuer’s annual meeting of shareholders), or (b) the Fund owns more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the issuer. Further, it is CSIM’s policy to use its best efforts to recall securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies if CSIM determines that the proxies involve a material event affecting the loaned securities. CSIM may utilize third-party service providers to assist it in identifying and evaluating whether an event is material. CSIM may also recall securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies in its discretion.

Sub-Advisory Relationships . Where CSIM has delegated day-to-day investment management responsibilities to an investment sub-adviser, CSIM may (but generally does not) delegate proxy voting responsibility to such investment sub-adviser. Each sub-adviser to whom proxy voting responsibility has been delegated will be required to review all proxy solicitation material and to exercise the voting rights associated with the securities it has been allocated in the best interest of each investment company and its shareholders, or other client. Prior to delegating the proxy voting responsibility, CSIM will review each sub-adviser’s proxy voting policy to determine whether it believes that each sub-adviser’s proxy voting policy is generally consistent with the maximization of economic benefits to the investment company or other client.

Reporting and Record Retention

CSIM will maintain, or cause Glass Lewis to maintain, records that identify the manner in which proxies have been voted (or not voted) on behalf of CSIM clients. CSIM will comply with all applicable rules and regulations regarding disclosure of its or its clients’ proxy voting records and procedures.

CSIM will retain all proxy voting materials and supporting documentation as required under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the rules and regulations thereunder.


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

PROXY PAPER GUIDELINES 2012 PROXY SEASON AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO PROXY ADVICE UNITED STATES


Table of Contents

C ONTENTS

 

I. A Board That Serves the Interests of Shareholders

     1   

Election of Directors

     1   

Independence

     1   

Performance

     4   

Experience

     13   

Other Considerations

     13   

Controlled Companies

     15   

Unofficially Controlled Companies and 20-50% Beneficial Owners

     16   

Exceptions for Recent IPOs

     16   

Mutual Fund Boards

     17   

Declassified Boards

     18   

Mandatory Director Term and Age Limits

     19   

Requiring Two or More Nominees per Board Seat

     19   

Shareholder Access

     19   

Majority Vote for the Election of Directors

     19   

The plurality vote standard

     20   

Advantages of a majority vote standard

     20   

II. Transparency and Integrity of Financial Reporting

     21   

Auditor Ratification

     21   

Voting Recommendations on Auditor Ratification

     21   

Pension Accounting Issues

     22   

III. The Link Between Compensation and Performance

     23   

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (“Say-on-Pay”)

     23   

Say-on-Pay Voting Recommendations

     24   

Additional Scrutiny for Companies with Significant Opposition in 2011

     25   

Short-Term Incentives

     25   

Long-Term Incentives

     25   

Pay for Performance

     26   

Recoupment (“Clawback”) Provisions

     27   

Frequency of Say-on-Pay

     27   

Vote on Golden Parachute Arrangements

     27   

Equity-Based Compensation Plan Proposals

     27   

Option Exchanges

     28   

Option Backdating, Spring-Loading, and Bullet-Dodging

     29   

162(m) Plans

     30   

Director Compensation Plans

     31   

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

I


Table of Contents

IV. Governance Structure and the Shareholder Franchise

     32   

Anti-Takeover Measure s

     32   

Poison Pills (Shareholder Rights Plans)

     32   

NOL Poison Pills

     32   

Fair Price Provisions

     33   

Reincorporation

     33   

Exclusive Forum Provisions

     34   

Authorized Shares

     34   

Advance Notice Requirements

     35   

Voting Structure

     36   

Cumulative Voting

     36   

SupermajorityVote Requirements

     36   

Transaction of Other Business

     37   

Anti-Greenmail Proposals

     37   

Mutual Funds: Investment Policies and Advisory Agreements

     37   

V. Compensation, Environmental, Social and Governance Shareholder Initiatives

     38   

Compensation

     38   

Disclosure of Individual Compensation

     38   

Linking Pay with Performance

     39   

Retirement Benefits & Severance

     39   

Bonus Recoupments (“Clawbacks”)

     39   

Golden Coffins

     40   

Retention of Shares until Retirement

     40   

Tax Gross-Ups

     41   

Linking Executive Pay to Environmental and Social Criteria

     41   

Governance

     41   

Declassification of the Board

     41   

Right of Shareholders to Call a Special Meeting

     41   

Right of Shareholders to Act by Written Consent

     42   

Board Composition

     43   

Reimbursement of Solicitation Expenses

     43   

Majority Vote for the Election of Directors

     43   

Cumulative Vote for the Election of Directors

     43   

SupermajorityVote Requirements

     44   

Independent Chairman

     44   

Proxy Access

     44   

Environment

     45   

Climate Change and Green House Gas Emission Disclosure

     46   

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

II


Table of Contents

Sustainability and other Environmentally-Related Reports

     46   

Oil Sands

     47   

Sustainable Forestry

     47   

Social Issues

     48   

Non-Discrimination Policies

     48   

MacBride Principles

     48   

Human Rights

     49   

Military and US Government Business Policies

     49   

Foreign Government Business Policies

     49   

Health Care Reform Principles

     49   

Tobacco

     50   

Reporting Contributions and Political Spending

     50   

Animal Welfare

     51   

Internet Censorship

     51   

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

III


Table of Contents

I. A B OARD T HAT S ERVES THE I NTERESTS OF S HAREHOLDERS

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The purpose of Glass Lewis’ proxy research and advice is to facilitate shareholder voting in favor of governance structures that will drive performance, create shareholder value and maintain a proper tone at the top. Glass Lewis looks for talented boards with a record of protecting shareholders and delivering value over the medium- and long-term. We believe that boards working to protect and enhance the best interests of shareholders are independent, have directors with diverse backgrounds, have a record of positive performance, and have members with a breadth and depth of relevant experience.

I NDEPENDENCE

The independence of directors, or lack thereof, is ultimately demonstrated through the decisions they make. In assessing the independence of directors, we will take into consideration, when appropriate, whether a director has a track record indicative of making objective decisions. Likewise, when assessing the independence of directors we will also examine when a director’s service track record on multiple boards indicates a lack of objective decision-making. Ultimately, we believe the determination of whether a director is independent or not must take into consideration both compliance with the applicable independence listing requirements as well as judgments made by the director.

We look at each director nominee to examine the director’s relationships with the company, the company’s executives, and other directors. We do this to evaluate whether personal, familial, or financial relationships (not including director compensation) may impact the director’s decisions. We believe that such relationships make it difficult for a director to put shareholders’ interests above the director’s or the related party’s interests. We also believe that a director who owns more than 20% of a company can exert disproportionate influence on the board and, in particular, the audit committee.

Thus, we put directors into three categories based on an examination of the type of relationship they have with the company:

Independent Director—An independent director has no material financial, familial or other current relationships with the company, its executives, or other board members, except for board service and standard fees paid for that service. Relationships that existed within three to five years 1 before the inquiry are usually considered “current” for purposes of this test.

In our view, a director who is currently serving in an interim management position should be considered an insider, while a director who previously served in an interim management position for less than one year and is no longer serving in such capacity is considered independent. Moreover, a director who previously served in an interim management position for over one year and is no longer serving in such capacity is considered an affiliate for five years following the date of his/her resignation or departure from the interim management position. Glass Lewis applies a three-year look-back period to all directors who have an affiliation with the company other than former employment, for which we apply a five-year look-back.

 

1 NASDAQ originally proposed a five-year look-back period but both it and the NYSE ultimately settled on a three-year look-back prior to finalizing their rules. A five-year standard is more appropriate, in our view, because we believe that the unwinding of conflicting relationships between former management and board members is more likely to be complete and final after five years. However, Glass Lewis does not apply the five-year look-back period to directors who have previously served as executives of the company on an interim basis for less than one year.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

1


Table of Contents

Affiliated Director—An affiliated director has a material financial, familial or other relationship with the company or its executives, but is not an employee of the company. 2 This includes directors whose employers have a material financial relationship with the company. 3 In addition, we view a director who owns or controls 20% or more of the company’s voting stock as an affiliate. 4

We view 20% shareholders as affiliates because they typically have access to and involvement with the management of a company that is fundamentally different from that of ordinary shareholders. More importantly, 20% holders may have interests that diverge from those of ordinary holders, for reasons such as the liquidity (or lack thereof) of their holdings, personal tax issues, etc.

Definition of “Material”: A material relationship is one in which the dollar value exceeds:

 

   

$50,000 (or where no amount is disclosed) for directors who are paid for a service they have agreed to perform for the company, outside of their service as a director, including professional or other services; or

 

   

$120,000 (or where no amount is disclosed) for those directors employed by a professional services firm such as a law firm, investment bank, or consulting firm where the company pays the firm, not the individual, for services. This dollar limit would also apply to charitable contributions to schools where a board member is a professor; or charities where a director serves on the board or is an executive; 5 and any aircraft and real estate dealings between the company and the director’s firm; or

 

   

1% of either company’s consolidated gross revenue for other business relationships (e.g., where the director is an executive officer of a company that provides services or products to or receives services or products from the company).

Definition of “Familial”: Familial relationships include a person’s spouse, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, nieces, nephews, in-laws, and anyone (other than domestic employees) who shares such person’s home. A director is an affiliate if the director has a family member who is employed by the company and who receives compensation of $120,000 or more per year or the compensation is not disclosed.

Definition of “Company”: A company includes any parent or subsidiary in a group with the company or any entity that merged with, was acquired by, or acquired the company.

Inside Director—An inside director simultaneously serves as a director and as an employee of the company. This category may include a chairman of the board who acts as an employee of the company or is paid as an employee of the company. In our view, an inside director who derives

 

2 If a company classifies one of its non-employee directors as non-independent, Glass Lewis will classify that director as an affiliate.
3 We allow a five-year grace period for former executives of the company or merged companies who have consulting agreements with the surviving company. (We do not automatically recommend voting against directors in such cases for the first five years.) If the consulting agreement persists after this five-year grace period, we apply the materiality thresholds outlined in the definition of “material.”
4 This includes a director who serves on a board as a representative (as part of his or her basic responsibilities) of an investment firm with greater than 20% ownership. However, while we will generally consider him/her to be affiliated, we will not recommend voting against unless (i) the investment firm has disproportionate board representation or (ii) the director serves on the audit committee.
5 We will generally take into consideration the size and nature of such charitable entities in relation to the company’s size and industry along with any other relevant factors such as the director’s role at the charity. However, unlike for other types of related party transactions, Glass Lewis generally does not apply a look-back period to affiliated relationships involving charitable contributions; if the relationship ceases, we will consider the director to be independent.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

2


Table of Contents

a greater amount of income as a result of affiliated transactions with the company rather than through compensation paid by the company (i.e., salary, bonus, etc. as a company employee) faces a conflict between making decisions that are in the best interests of the company versus those in the director’s own best interests. Therefore, we will recommend voting against such a director.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Board Independence

Glass Lewis believes a board will be most effective in protecting shareholders’ interests if it is at least two-thirds independent. We note that each of the Business Roundtable, the Conference Board, and the Council of Institutional Investors advocates that two-thirds of the board be independent. Where more than one-third of the members are affiliated or inside directors, we typically 6 recommend voting against some of the inside and/or affiliated directors in order to satisfy the two-thirds threshold.

In the case of a less than two-thirds independent board, Glass Lewis strongly supports the existence of a presiding or lead director with authority to set the meeting agendas and to lead sessions outside the insider chairman’s presence.

In addition, we scrutinize avowedly “independent” chairmen and lead directors. We believe that they should be unquestionably independent or the company should not tout them as such.

Committee Independence

We believe that only independent directors should serve on a company’s audit, compensation, nominating, and governance committees. 7 We typically recommend that shareholders vote against any affiliated or inside director seeking appointment to an audit, compensation, nominating, or governance committee, or who has served in that capacity in the past year.

Independent Chairman

Glass Lewis believes that separating the roles of CEO (or, more rarely, another executive position) and chairman creates a better governance structure than a combined CEO/chairman position. An executive manages the business according to a course the board charts. Executives should report to the board regarding their performance in achieving goals the board set. This is needlessly complicated when a CEO chairs the board, since a CEO/chairman presumably will have a significant influence over the board.

It can become difficult for a board to fulfill its role of overseer and policy setter when a CEO/ chairman controls the agenda and the boardroom discussion. Such control can allow a CEO to have an entrenched position, leading to longer-than-optimal terms, fewer checks on management, less scrutiny of the business operation, and limitations on independent, shareholder-focused goal-setting by the board.

A CEO should set the strategic course for the company, with the board’s approval, and the board should enable the CEO to carry out the CEO’s vision for accomplishing the board’s objectives.

 

6 With a staggered board, if the affiliates or insiders that we believe should not be on the board are not up for election, we will express our concern regarding those directors, but we will not recommend voting against the other affiliates or insiders who are up for election just to achieve two-thirds independence. However, we will consider recommending voting against the directors subject to our concern at their next election if the concerning issue is not resolved.
7 We will recommend voting against an audit committee member who owns 20% or more of the company’s stock, and we believe that there should be a maximum of one director (or no directors if the committee is comprised of less than three directors) who owns 20% or more of the company’s stock on the compensation, nominating, and governance committees.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

3


Table of Contents

Failure to achieve the board’s objectives should lead the board to replace that CEO with someone in whom the board has confidence.

Likewise, an independent chairman can better oversee executives and set a pro-shareholder agenda without the management conflicts that a CEO and other executive insiders often face. Such oversight and concern for shareholders allows for a more proactive and effective board of directors that is better able to look out for the interests of shareholders.

Further, it is the board’s responsibility to select a chief executive who can best serve a company and its shareholders and to replace this person when his or her duties have not been appropriately fulfilled. Such a replacement becomes more difficult and happens less frequently when the chief executive is also in the position of overseeing the board.

Glass Lewis believes that the installation of an independent chairman is almost always a positive step from a corporate governance perspective and promotes the best interests of shareholders. Further, the presence of an independent chairman fosters the creation of a thoughtful and dynamic board, not dominated by the views of senior management. Encouragingly, many companies appear to be moving in this direction—one study even indicates that less than 12 percent of incoming CEOs in 2009 were awarded the chairman title, versus 48 percent as recently as 2002. 8 Another study finds that 41 percent of S&P 500 boards now separate the CEO and chairman roles, up from 26 percent in 2001, although the same study found that of those companies, only 21 percent have truly independent chairs. 9

We do not recommend that shareholders vote against CEOs who chair the board. However, we typically encourage our clients to support separating the roles of chairman and CEO whenever that question is posed in a proxy (typically in the form of a shareholder proposal), as we believe that it is in the long-term best interests of the company and its shareholders.

P ERFORMANCE

The most crucial test of a board’s commitment to the company and its shareholders lies in the actions of the board and its members. We look at the performance of these individuals as directors and executives of the company and of other companies where they have served.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Performance

We disfavor directors who have a record of not fulfilling their responsibilities to shareholders at any company where they have held a board or executive position. We typically recommend voting against:

 

  1.

A director who fails to attend a minimum of 75% of board and applicable committee meetings, calculated in the aggregate. 10

 

  2. A director who belatedly filed a significant form(s) 4 or 5, or who has a pattern of late filings if the late filing was the director’s fault (we look at these late filing situations on a case-by-case basis).

 

8 Ken Favaro, Per-Ola Karlsson and Gary Neilson. “CEO Succession 2000-2009: A Decade of Convergence and Compression.” Booz & Company (from Strategy+Business, Issue 59, Summer 2010).
9 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 6.
10 However, where a director has served for less than one full year, we will typically not recommend voting against for failure to attend 75% of meetings. Rather, we will note the poor attendance with a recommendation to track this issue going forward. We will also refrain from recommending to vote against directors when the proxy discloses that the director missed the meetings due to serious illness or other extenuating circumstances.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

4


Table of Contents
  3. A director who is also the CEO of a company where a serious and material restatement has occurred after the CEO had previously certified the pre-restatement financial statements.

 

  4. A director who has received two against recommendations from Glass Lewis for identical reasons within the prior year at different companies (the same situation must also apply at the company being analyzed).

 

  5. All directors who served on the board if, for the last three years, the company’s performance has been in the bottom quartile of the sector and the directors have not taken reasonable steps to address the poor performance.

Audit Committees and Performance

Audit committees play an integral role in overseeing the financial reporting process because “[v]ibrant and stable capital markets depend on, among other things, reliable, transparent, and objective financial information to support an efficient and effective capital market process. The vital oversight role audit committees play in the process of producing financial information has never been more important.” 11

When assessing an audit committee’s performance, we are aware that an audit committee does not prepare financial statements, is not responsible for making the key judgments and assumptions that affect the financial statements, and does not audit the numbers or the disclosures provided to investors. Rather, an audit committee member monitors and oversees the process and procedures that management and auditors perform. The 1999 Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees stated it best:

A proper and well-functioning system exists, therefore, when the three main groups responsible for financial reporting—the full board including the audit committee, financial management including the internal auditors, and the outside auditors—form a ‘three legged stool’ that supports responsible financial disclosure and active participatory oversight. However, in the view of the Committee, the audit committee must be ‘first among equals’ in this process, since the audit committee is an extension of the full board and hence the ultimate monitor of the process.

Standards For Assessing The Audit Committee

For an audit committee to function effectively on investors’ behalf, it must include members with sufficient knowledge to diligently carry out their responsibilities. In its audit and accounting recommendations, the Conference Board Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise said “members of the audit committee must be independent and have both knowledge and experience in auditing financial matters.” 12

We are skeptical of audit committees where there are members that lack expertise as a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or corporate controller or similar experience. While we will not necessarily vote against members of an audit committee when such expertise is lacking, we are more likely to vote against committee members when a problem such as a restatement occurs and such expertise is lacking.

 

11 “Audit Committee Effectiveness—What Works Best.” PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation. 2005.
12 Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise. The Conference Board. 2003.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

5


Table of Contents

Glass Lewis generally assesses audit committees against the decisions they make with respect to their oversight and monitoring role. The quality and integrity of the financial statements and earnings reports, the completeness of disclosures necessary for investors to make informed decisions, and the effectiveness of the internal controls should provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are materially free from errors. The independence of the external auditors and the results of their work all provide useful information by which to assess the audit committee.

When assessing the decisions and actions of the audit committee, we typically defer to its judgment and would vote in favor of its members, but we would recommend voting against the following members under the following circumstances: 13

 

  1. All members of the audit committee when options were backdated, there is a lack of adequate controls in place, there was a resulting restatement, and disclosures indicate there was a lack of documentation with respect to the option grants.

 

  2. The audit committee chair, if the audit committee does not have a financial expert or the committee’s financial expert does not have a demonstrable financial background sufficient to understand the financial issues unique to public companies.

 

  3. The audit committee chair, if the audit committee did not meet at least four times during the year.

 

  4. The audit committee chair, if the committee has less than three members.

 

  5.

Any audit committee member who sits on more than three public company audit committees, unless the audit committee member is a retired CPA, CFO, controller or has similar experience, in which case the limit shall be four committees, taking time and availability into consideration including a review of the audit committee member’s attendance at all board and committee meetings. 14

 

  6. All members of an audit committee who are up for election and who served on the committee at the time of the audit, if audit and audit-related fees total one-third or less of the total fees billed by the auditor.

 

  7. The audit committee chair when tax and/or other fees are greater than audit and audit-related fees paid to the auditor for more than one year in a row (in which case we also recommend against ratification of the auditor).

 

  8. All members of an audit committee where non-audit fees include fees for tax services (including, but not limited to, such things as tax avoidance or shelter schemes) for senior executives of the company. Such services are now prohibited by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”).

 

13 Where the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against the members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.
14 Glass Lewis may exempt certain audit committee members from the above threshold if, upon further analysis of relevant factors such as the director’s experience, the size, industry-mix and location of the companies involved and the director’s attendance at all the companies, we can reasonably determine that the audit committee member is likely not hindered by multiple audit committee commitments.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

6


Table of Contents
  9. All members of an audit committee that reappointed an auditor that we no longer consider to be independent for reasons unrelated to fee proportions.

 

  10. All members of an audit committee when audit fees are excessively low, especially when compared with other companies in the same industry.

 

  11.

The audit committee chair 15 if the committee failed to put auditor ratification on the ballot for shareholder approval. However, if the non-audit fees or tax fees exceed audit plus audit-related fees in either the current or the prior year, then Glass Lewis will recommend voting against the entire audit committee.

 

  12.

All members of an audit committee where the auditor has resigned and reported that a section 10A 16 letter has been issued.

 

  13.

All members of an audit committee at a time when material accounting fraud occurred at the company. 17

 

  14. All members of an audit committee at a time when annual and/or multiple quarterly financial statements had to be restated, and any of the following factors apply:

 

   

The restatement involves fraud or manipulation by insiders;

 

   

The restatement is accompanied by an SEC inquiry or investigation;

 

   

The restatement involves revenue recognition;

 

   

The restatement results in a greater than 5% adjustment to costs of goods sold, operating expense, or operating cash flows; or

 

   

The restatement results in a greater than 5% adjustment to net income, 10% adjustment to assets or shareholders equity, or cash flows from financing or investing activities.

 

  15. All members of an audit committee if the company repeatedly fails to file its financial reports in a timely fashion. For example, the company has filed two or more quarterly or annual financial statements late within the last five quarters.

 

  16. All members of an audit committee when it has been disclosed that a law enforcement agency has charged the company and/or its employees with a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

 

  17. All members of an audit committee when the company has aggressive accounting policies and/or poor disclosure or lack of sufficient transparency in its financial statements.

 

  18. All members of the audit committee when there is a disagreement with the auditor and the auditor resigns or is dismissed.

 

15 In all cases, if the chair of the committee is not specified, we recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest.
16 Auditors are required to report all potential illegal acts to management and the audit committee unless they are clearly inconsequential in nature. If the audit committee or the board fails to take appropriate action on an act that has been determined to be a violation of the law, the independent auditor is required to send a section 10A letter to the SEC. Such letters are rare and therefore we believe should be taken seriously.
17 Recent research indicates that revenue fraud now accounts for over 60% of SEC fraud cases, and that companies that engage in fraud experience significant negative abnormal stock price declines—facing bankruptcy, delisting, and material asset sales at much higher rates than do non-fraud firms (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. “Fraudulent Financial Reporting: 1998-2007.” May 2010).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

7


Table of Contents
  19.

All members of the audit committee if the contract with the auditor specifically limits the auditor’s liability to the company for damages. 18

 

  20. All members of the audit committee who served since the date of the company’s last annual meeting, and when, since the last annual meeting, the company has reported a material weakness that has not yet been corrected, or, when the company has an ongoing material weakness from a prior year that has not yet been corrected.

We also take a dim view of audit committee reports that are boilerplate, and which provide little or no information or transparency to investors. When a problem such as a material weakness, restatement or late filings occurs, we take into consideration, in forming our judgment with respect to the audit committee, the transparency of the audit committee report.

Compensation Committee Performance

Compensation committees have the final say in determining the compensation of executives. This includes deciding the basis on which compensation is determined, as well as the amounts and types of compensation to be paid. This process begins with the hiring and initial establishment of employment agreements, including the terms for such items as pay, pensions and severance arrangements. It is important in establishing compensation arrangements that compensation be consistent with, and based on the long-term economic performance of, the business’s long-term shareholders returns.

Compensation committees are also responsible for the oversight of the transparency of compensation. This oversight includes disclosure of compensation arrangements, the matrix used in assessing pay for performance, and the use of compensation consultants. In order to ensure the independence of the compensation consultant, we believe the compensation committee should only engage a compensation consultant that is not also providing any services to the company or management apart from their contract with the compensation committee. It is important to investors that they have clear and complete disclosure of all the significant terms of compensation arrangements in order to make informed decisions with respect to the oversight and decisions of the compensation committee.

Finally, compensation committees are responsible for oversight of internal controls over the executive compensation process. This includes controls over gathering information used to determine compensation, establishment of equity award plans, and granting of equity awards. Lax controls can and have contributed to conflicting information being obtained, for example through the use of nonobjective consultants. Lax controls can also contribute to improper awards of compensation such as through granting of backdated or spring-loaded options, or granting of bonuses when triggers for bonus payments have not been met.

Central to understanding the actions of a compensation committee is a careful review of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) report included in each company’s proxy. We review the CD&A in our evaluation of the overall compensation practices of a company, as overseen by the compensation committee. The CD&A is also integral to the evaluation of compensation proposals at companies, such as advisory votes on executive compensation, which allow shareholders to vote on the compensation paid to a company’s top executives.

 

18 The Council of Institutional Investors. “Corporate Governance Policies,” p. 4, April 5, 2006; and “Letter from Council of Institutional Investors to the AICPA,” November 8, 2006.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

8


Table of Contents

When assessing the performance of compensation committees, we will recommend voting against for the following: 19

 

  1.

All members of the compensation committee who are up for election and served at the time of poor pay-for-performance (e.g., a company receives an F grade in our pay-for-performance analysis) when shareholders are not provided with an advisory vote on executive compensation at the annual meeting. 20

 

  2. Any member of the compensation committee who has served on the compensation committee of at least two other public companies that received F grades in our pay-for-performance model and who is also suspect at the company in question.

 

  3.

The compensation committee chair if the company received two D grades in consecutive years in our pay-for-performance analysis, and if during the past year the Company performed the same as or worse than its peers. 21

 

  4. All members of the compensation committee (during the relevant time period) if the company entered into excessive employment agreements and/or severance agreements.

 

  5. All members of the compensation committee when performance goals were changed (i.e., lowered) when employees failed or were unlikely to meet original goals, or performance-based compensation was paid despite goals not being attained.

 

  6. All members of the compensation committee if excessive employee perquisites and benefits were allowed.

 

  7. The compensation committee chair if the compensation committee did not meet during the year, but should have (e.g., because executive compensation was restructured or a new executive was hired).

 

  8. All members of the compensation committee when the company repriced options or completed a “self tender offer” without shareholder approval within the past two years.

 

  9. All members of the compensation committee when vesting of in-the-money options is accelerated or when fully vested options are granted.

 

  10. All members of the compensation committee when option exercise prices were backdated. Glass Lewis will recommend voting against an executive director who played a role in and participated in option backdating.

 

  11. All members of the compensation committee when option exercise prices were spring-loaded or otherwise timed around the release of material information.

 

19 Where the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair and the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.
20 Where there are multiple CEOs in one year, we will consider not recommending against the compensation committee but will defer judgment on compensation policies and practices until the next year or a full year after arrival of the new CEO. In addition, if a company provides shareholders with a say-on-pay proposal and receives an F grade in our pay-for-performance model, we will recommend that shareholders only vote against the say-on-pay proposal rather than the members of the compensation committee, unless the company exhibits egregious practices. However, if the company receives successive F grades, we will then recommend against the members of the compensation committee in addition to recommending voting against the say-on-pay proposal.
21 In cases where the company received two D grades in consecutive years, but during the past year the company performed better than its peers or improved from an F to a D grade year over year, we refrain from recommending to vote against the compensation chair. In addition, if a company provides shareholders with a say-on-pay proposal in this instance, we will consider voting against the advisory vote rather than the compensation committee chair unless the company exhibits unquestionably egregious practices.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

9


Table of Contents
  12. All members of the compensation committee when a new employment contract is given to an executive that does not include a clawback provision and the company had a material restatement, especially if the restatement was due to fraud.

 

  13. The chair of the compensation committee where the CD&A provides insufficient or unclear information about performance metrics and goals, where the CD&A indicates that pay is not tied to performance, or where the compensation committee or management has excessive discretion to alter performance terms or increase amounts of awards in contravention of previously defined targets.

 

  14.

All members of the compensation committee during whose tenure the committee failed to implement a shareholder proposal regarding a compensation-related issue, where the proposal received the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting shares at a shareholder meeting, and when a reasonable analysis suggests that the compensation committee (rather than the governance committee) should have taken steps to implement the request. 22

 

  15. All members of a compensation committee during whose tenure the committee failed to address shareholder concerns following majority shareholder rejection of the say-on-pay proposal in the previous year. Where the proposal was approved but there was a significant shareholder vote (i.e., greater than 25% of votes cast) against the say-on-pay proposal in the prior year, if there is no evidence that the board responded accordingly to the vote including actively engaging shareholders on this issue, we will also consider recommending voting against the chairman of the compensation committee or all members of the compensation committee, depending on the severity and history of the compensation problems and the level of vote against.

Nominating and Governance Committee Performance

The nominating and governance committee, as an agency for the shareholders, is responsible for the governance by the board of the company and its executives. In performing this role, the board is responsible and accountable for selection of objective and competent board members. It is also responsible for providing leadership on governance policies adopted by the company, such as decisions to implement shareholder proposals that have received a majority vote.

Consistent with Glass Lewis’ philosophy that boards should have diverse backgrounds and members with a breadth and depth of relevant experience, we believe that nominating and governance committees should consider diversity when making director nominations within the context of each specific company and its industry. In our view, shareholders are best served when boards make an effort to ensure a constituency that is not only reasonably diverse on the basis of age, race, gender and ethnicity, but also on the basis of geographic knowledge, industry experience and culture.

Regarding the nominating and or governance committee, we will recommend voting against the following: 23

 

22 In all other instances (i.e. a non-compensation-related shareholder proposal should have been implemented) we recommend that shareholders vote against the members of the governance committee.
23 Where we would recommend to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern regarding the committee chair

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

10


Table of Contents
  1.

All members of the governance committee 24 during whose tenure the board failed to implement a shareholder proposal with a direct and substantial impact on shareholders and their rights—i.e., where the proposal received enough shareholder votes (at least a majority) to allow the board to implement or begin to implement that proposal. 25 Examples of these types of shareholder proposals are majority vote to elect directors and to declassify the board.

 

  2.

The governance committee chair, 26 when the chairman is not independent and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed. 27

 

  3. In the absence of a nominating committee, the governance committee chair when there are less than five or the whole nominating committee when there are more than 20 members on the board.

 

  4. The governance committee chair, when the committee fails to meet at all during the year.

 

  5. The governance committee chair, when for two consecutive years the company provides what we consider to be “inadequate” related party transaction disclosure (i.e. the nature of such transactions and/or the monetary amounts involved are unclear or excessively vague, thereby preventing an average shareholder from being able to reasonably interpret the independence status of multiple directors above and beyond what the company maintains is compliant with SEC or applicable stock-exchange listing requirements).

 

  6.

The governance committee chair, when during the past year the board adopted a forum selection clause (i.e. an exclusive forum provision) 28 without shareholder approval, or, if the board is currently seeking shareholder approval of a forum selection clause pursuant to a bundled bylaw amendment rather than as a separate proposal.

Regarding the nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the following: 29

 

  1. All members of the nominating committee, when the committee nominated or renominated an individual who had a significant conflict of interest or whose past actions demonstrated a lack of integrity or inability to represent shareholder interests.

 

24 If the board does not have a governance committee (or a committee that serves such a purpose), we recommend voting against the entire board on this basis.
25 Where a compensation-related shareholder proposal should have been implemented, and when a reasonable analysis suggests that the members of the compensation committee (rather than the governance committee) bear the responsibility for failing to implement the request, we recommend that shareholders only vote against members of the compensation committee.
26 If the committee chair is not specified, we recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest. If the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, we will recommend voting against the longest-serving board member serving on the committee.
27 We believe that one independent individual should be appointed to serve as the lead or presiding director. When such a position is rotated among directors from meeting to meeting, we will recommend voting against as if there were no lead or presiding director.
28 A forum selection clause is a bylaw provision stipulating that a certain state, typically Delaware, shall be the exclusive forum for all intra-corporate disputes (e.g. shareholder derivative actions, assertions of claims of a breach of fiduciary duty, etc.). Such a clause effectively limits a shareholder’s legal remedy regarding appropriate choice of venue and related relief offered under that state’s laws and rulings.
29 Where we would recommend to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern regarding the committee chair.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

11


Table of Contents
  2. The nominating committee chair, if the nominating committee did not meet during the year, but should have (i.e., because new directors were nominated or appointed since the time of the last annual meeting).

 

  3.

In the absence of a governance committee, the nominating committee chair 30 when the chairman is not independent, and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed. 31

 

  4.

The nominating committee chair, when there are less than five or the whole nominating committee when there are more than 20 members on the board. 32

 

  5.

The nominating committee chair, when a director received a greater than 50% against vote the prior year and not only was the director not removed, but the issues that raised shareholder concern were not corrected. 33

Board-level Risk Management Oversight

Glass Lewis evaluates the risk management function of a public company board on a strictly case-by-case basis. Sound risk management, while necessary at all companies, is particularly important at financial firms which inherently maintain significant exposure to financial risk. We believe such financial firms should have a chief risk officer reporting directly to the board and a dedicated risk committee or a committee of the board charged with risk oversight. Moreover, many non-financial firms maintain strategies which involve a high level of exposure to financial risk. Similarly, since many non-financial firms have significant hedging or trading strategies, including financial and non-financial derivatives, those firms should also have a chief risk officer and a risk committee.

Our views on risk oversight are consistent with those expressed by various regulatory bodies. In its December 2009 Final Rule release on Proxy Disclosure Enhancements, the SEC noted that risk oversight is a key competence of the board and that additional disclosures would improve investor and shareholder understanding of the role of the board in the organization’s risk management practices. The final rules, which became effective on February 28, 2010, now explicitly require companies and mutual funds to describe (while allowing for some degree of flexibility) the board’s role in the oversight of risk.

When analyzing the risk management practices of public companies, we take note of any significant losses or writedowns on financial assets and/or structured transactions. In cases where a company has disclosed a sizable loss or writedown, and where we find that the company’s board-level risk committee contributed to the loss through poor oversight, we would recommend that shareholders vote against such committee members on that basis. In addition, in cases where a

 

30 If the committee chair is not specified, we will recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest. If the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, we will recommend voting against the longest-serving board member on the committee.
31 In the absence of both a governance and a nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the board on this basis.
32 In the absence of both a governance and a nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the board on this basis.
33 Considering that shareholder discontent clearly relates to the director who received a greater than 50% against vote rather than the nominating chair, we review the validity of the issue(s) that initially raised shareholder concern, follow-up on such matters, and only recommend voting against the nominating chair if a reasonable analysis suggests that it would be most appropriate. In rare cases, we will consider recommending against the nominating chair when a director receives a substantial (i.e., 25% or more) vote against based on the same analysis.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

12


Table of Contents

company maintains a significant level of financial risk exposure but fails to disclose any explicit form of board-level risk oversight (committee or otherwise) 34 , we will consider recommending to vote against the chairman of the board on that basis. However, we generally would not recommend voting against a combined chairman/CEO except in egregious cases.

E XPERIENCE

We find that a director’s past conduct is often indicative of future conduct and performance. We often find directors with a history of overpaying executives or of serving on boards where avoidable disasters have occurred appearing at companies that follow these same patterns. Glass Lewis has a proprietary database of directors serving at over 8,000 of the most widely held U.S. companies. We use this database to track the performance of directors across companies.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Director Experience

We typically recommend that shareholders vote against directors who have served on boards or as executives of companies with records of poor performance, inadequate risk oversight, overcompensation, audit-or accounting-related issues, and/or other indicators of mismanagement or actions against the interests of shareholders. 35

Likewise, we examine the backgrounds of those who serve on key board committees to ensure that they have the required skills and diverse backgrounds to make informed judgments about the subject matter for which the committee is responsible.

O THER C ONSIDERATIONS

In addition to the three key characteristics—independence, performance, experience—that we use to evaluate board members, we consider conflict-of-interest issues as well as the size of the board of directors when making voting recommendations.

Conflicts of Interest

We believe board members should be wholly free of identifiable and substantial conflicts of interest, regardless of the overall level of independent directors on the board. Accordingly, we recommend that shareholders vote against the following types of affiliated or inside directors:

 

  1. A CFO who is on the board: In our view, the CFO holds a unique position relative to financial reporting and disclosure to shareholders. Because of the critical importance of financial disclosure and reporting, we believe the CFO should report to the board and not be a member of it.

 

  2. A director who is on an excessive number of boards: We will typically recommend voting against a director who serves as an executive officer of any public company while serving on more than two other public company boards and any other director who serves on more than six public company boards typically receives an against recommendation from Glass Lewis. Academic literature suggests that one board takes up approximately

 

34 A committee responsible for risk management could be a dedicated risk committee, or another board committee, usually the audit committee but occasionally the finance committee, depending on a given company’s board structure and method of disclosure. At some companies, the entire board is charged with risk management.
35 We typically apply a three-year look-back to such issues and also research to see whether the responsible directors have been up for election since the time of the failure, and if so, we take into account the percentage of support they received from shareholders.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

13


Table of Contents
  200 hours per year of each member’s time. We believe this limits the number of boards on which directors can effectively serve, especially executives at other companies. 36 Further, we note a recent study has shown that the average number of outside board seats held by CEOs of S&P 500 companies is 0.6, down from 0.8 in 2006 and 1.2 in 2001. 37

 

  3. A director, or a director who has an immediate family member, providing material consulting or other material professional services to the company: These services may include legal, consulting, or financial services. We question the need for the company to have consulting relationships with its directors. We view such relationships as creating conflicts for directors, since they may be forced to weigh their own interests against shareholder interests when making board decisions. In addition, a company’s decisions regarding where to turn for the best professional services may be compromised when doing business with the professional services firm of one of the company’s directors.

 

  4. A director, or a director who has an immediate family member, engaging in airplane, real estate, or similar deals, including perquisite-type grants from the company, amounting to more than $50,000: Directors who receive these sorts of payments from the company will have to make unnecessarily complicated decisions that may pit their interests against shareholder interests.

 

  5.

Interlocking directorships: CEOs or other top executives who serve on each other’s boards create an interlock that poses conflicts that should be avoided to ensure the promotion of shareholder interests above all else. 38

 

  6.

All board members who served at a time when a poison pill was adopted without shareholder approval within the prior twelve months. 39 In the event a board is classified and shareholders are therefore unable to vote against all directors, we will recommend voting against the remaining directors the next year they are up for a shareholder vote.

Size of the Board of Directors

While we do not believe there is a universally applicable optimum board size, we do believe boards should have at least five directors to ensure sufficient diversity in decision-making and to enable the formation of key board committees with independent directors. Conversely, we believe that boards with more than 20 members will typically suffer under the weight of “too many cooks in the kitchen” and have difficulty reaching consensus and making timely decisions. Sometimes the presence of too many voices can make it difficult to draw on the wisdom and experience in the room by virtue of the need to limit the discussion so that each voice may be heard.

 

36 Our guidelines are similar to the standards set forth by the NACD in its “Report of the NACD Blue Ribbon Commission on Director Professionalism,” 2001 Edition, pp. 14-15 (also cited approvingly by the Conference Board in its “Corporate Governance Best Practices: A Blueprint for the Post-Enron Era,” 2002, p. 17), which suggested that CEOs should not serve on more than 2 additional boards, persons with full-time work should not serve on more than 4 additional boards, and others should not serve on more than six boards.
37 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 8.
38 We do not apply a look-back period for this situation. The interlock policy applies to both public and private companies. We will also evaluate multiple board interlocks among non-insiders (i.e. multiple directors serving on the same boards at other companies), for evidence of a pattern of poor oversight.
39 Refer to Section IV. Governance Structure and the Shareholder Franchise for further discussion of our policies regarding anti-takeover measures, including poison pills.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

14


Table of Contents

To that end, we typically recommend voting against the chairman of the nominating committee at a board with fewer than five directors. With boards consisting of more than 20 directors, we typically recommend voting against all members of the nominating committee (or the governance committee, in the absence of a nominating committee). 40

C ONTROLLED C OMPANIES

Controlled companies present an exception to our independence recommendations. The board’s function is to protect shareholder interests; however, when an individual or entity owns more than 50% of the voting shares, the interests of the majority of shareholders are the interests of that entity or individual. Consequently, Glass Lewis does not apply our usual two-thirds independence rule and therefore we will not recommend voting against boards whose composition reflects the makeup of the shareholder population.

Independence Exceptions

The independence exceptions that we make for controlled companies are as follows:

 

  1. We do not require that controlled companies have boards that are at least two-thirds independent. So long as the insiders and/or affiliates are connected with the controlling entity, we accept the presence of non-independent board members.

 

  2. The compensation committee and nominating and governance committees do not need to consist solely of independent directors.

 

  a. We believe that standing nominating and corporate governance committees at controlled companies are unnecessary. Although having a committee charged with the duties of searching for, selecting, and nominating independent directors can be beneficial, the unique composition of a controlled company’s shareholder base makes such committees weak and irrelevant.

 

  b. Likewise, we believe that independent compensation committees at controlled companies are unnecessary. Although independent directors are the best choice for approving and monitoring senior executives’ pay, controlled companies serve a unique shareholder population whose voting power ensures the protection of its interests. As such, we believe that having affiliated directors on a controlled company’s compensation committee is acceptable. However, given that a controlled company has certain obligations to minority shareholders we feel that an insider should not serve on the compensation committee. Therefore, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against any insider (the CEO or otherwise) serving on the compensation committee.

 

  3. Controlled companies do not need an independent chairman or an independent lead or presiding director. Although an independent director in a position of authority on the board—such as chairman or presiding director—can best carry out the board’s duties, controlled companies serve a unique shareholder population whose voting power ensures the protection of its interests.

 

40 The Conference Board, at p. 23 in its May 2003 report “Corporate Governance Best Practices, Id.,” quotes one of its roundtable participants as stating, “[w]hen you’ve got a 20 or 30 person corporate board, it’s one way of assuring that nothing is ever going to happen that the CEO doesn’t want to happen.”

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

15


Table of Contents

Size of the Board of Directors

We have no board size requirements for controlled companies.

Audit Committee Independence

We believe that audit committees should consist solely of independent directors. Regardless of a company’s controlled status, the interests of all shareholders must be protected by ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the company’s financial statements. Allowing affiliated directors to oversee the preparation of financial reports could create an insurmountable conflict of interest.

U NOFFICIALLY C ONTROLLED C OMPANIES AND 20-50% B ENEFICIAL O WNERS

Where an individual or entity owns more than 50% of a company’s voting power but the company is not a “controlled” company as defined by relevant listing standards, we apply a lower independence requirement of a majority of the board but believe the company should otherwise be treated like another public company; we will therefore apply all other standards as outlined above.

Similarly, where an individual or entity holds between 20-50% of a company’s voting power, but the company is not “controlled” and there is not a “majority” owner, we believe it is reasonable to allow proportional representation on the board and committees (excluding the audit committee) based on the individual or entity’s percentage of ownership.

E XCEPTIONS FOR R ECENT IPO S

We believe companies that have recently completed an initial public offering (“IPO”) should be allowed adequate time to fully comply with marketplace listing requirements as well as to meet basic corporate governance standards. We believe a one-year grace period immediately following the date of a company’s IPO is sufficient time for most companies to comply with all relevant regulatory re-quirements and to meet such corporate governance standards. Except in egregious cases, Glass Lewis refrains from issuing voting recommendations on the basis of corporate governance best practices (eg. board independence, committee membership and structure, meeting attendance, etc.) during the one-year period following an IPO.

However, two specific cases warrant strong shareholder action against the board of a company that completed an IPO within the past year:

 

  1. Adoption of a poison pill: in cases where a board implements a poison pill preceding an IPO, we will consider voting against the members of the board who served during the period of the poison pill’s adoption if the board (i) did not also commit to submit the poison pill to a shareholder vote within 12 months of the IPO or (ii) did not provide a sound rationale for adopting the pill and the pill does not expire in three years or less. In our view, adopting such an anti-takeover device unfairly penalizes future shareholders who (except for electing to buy or sell the stock) are unable to weigh in on a matter that could potentially negatively impact their ownership interest. This notion is strengthened when a board adopts a poison pill with a 5-10 year life immediately prior to having a public shareholder base so as to insulate management for a substantial amount of time while postponing and/or avoiding allowing public shareholders the ability to vote on the pill’s adoption. Such instances are indicative of boards that may subvert shareholders’ best interests following their IPO.

 

  2. Adoption of an exclusive forum provision: consistent with our general approach to boards that adopt exclusive forum provisions without shareholder approval (refer to our discussion of nominating and governance committee performance in Section I of the guidelines), in cases

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

16


Table of Contents
  where a board adopts such a provision for inclusion in a company’s charter or bylaws before the company’s IPO, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the governance committee, or, in the absence of such a committee, the chairman of the board, who served during the period of time when the provision was adopted.

Further, shareholders should also be wary of companies in this category that adopt supermajority voting requirements before their IPO. Absent explicit provisions in the articles or bylaws stipulating that certain policies will be phased out over a certain period of time (e.g. a predetermined declassification of the board, a planned separation of the chairman and CEO, etc.) long-term shareholders could find themselves in the predicament of having to attain a supermajority vote to approve future proposals seeking to eliminate such policies.

M UTUAL F UND B OARDS

Mutual funds, or investment companies, are structured differently from regular public companies (i.e., operating companies). Typically, members of a fund’s adviser are on the board and management takes on a different role from that of regular public companies. Thus, we focus on a short list of requirements, although many of our guidelines remain the same.

The following mutual fund policies are similar to the policies for regular public companies:

 

  1. Size of the board of directors: The board should be made up of between five and twenty directors.

 

  2. The CFO on the board: Neither the CFO of the fund nor the CFO of the fund’s registered investment adviser should serve on the board.

 

  3. Independence of the audit committee: The audit committee should consist solely of independent directors.

 

  4. Audit committee financial expert: At least one member of the audit committee should be designated as the audit committee financial expert.

The following differences from regular public companies apply at mutual funds:

 

  1. Independence of the board: We believe that three-fourths of an investment company’s board should be made up of independent directors. This is consistent with a proposed SEC rule on investment company boards. The Investment Company Act requires 40% of the board to be independent, but in 2001, the SEC amended the Exemptive Rules to require that a majority of a mutual fund board be independent. In 2005, the SEC proposed increasing the independence threshold to 75%. In 2006, a federal appeals court ordered that this rule amendment be put back out for public comment, putting it back into “proposed rule” status. Since mutual fund boards play a vital role in overseeing the relationship between the fund and its investment manager, there is greater need for independent oversight than there is for an operating company board.

 

  2. When the auditor is not up for ratification: We do not recommend voting against the audit committee if the auditor is not up for ratification because, due to the different legal structure of an investment company compared to an operating company, the auditor for the investment company (i.e., mutual fund) does not conduct the same level of financial review for each investment company as for an operating company.

 

  3. Non-independent chairman: The SEC has proposed that the chairman of the fund board be independent. We agree that the roles of a mutual fund’s chairman and CEO should be separate.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

17


Table of Contents

Although we believe this would be best at all companies, we recommend voting against the chairman of an investment company’s nominating committee as well as the chairman of the board if the chairman and CEO of a mutual fund are the same person and the fund does not have an independent lead or presiding director. Seven former SEC commissioners support the appointment of an independent chairman and we agree with them that “an independent board chairman would be better able to create conditions favoring the long-term interests of fund shareholders than would a chairman who is an executive of the adviser.” (See the comment letter sent to the SEC in support of the proposed rule at http://sec.gov/rules/proposed/s70304/s70304-179.pdf)

DECLASSIFIED BOARDS

Glass Lewis favors the repeal of staggered boards and the annual election of directors. We believe staggered boards are less accountable to shareholders than boards that are elected annually. Furthermore, we feel the annual election of directors encourages board members to focus on shareholder interests.

Empirical studies have shown: (i) companies with staggered boards reduce a firm’s value; and (ii) in the context of hostile takeovers, staggered boards operate as a takeover defense, which entrenches management, discourages potential acquirers, and delivers a lower return to target shareholders.

In our view, there is no evidence to demonstrate that staggered boards improve shareholder returns in a takeover context. Research shows that shareholders are worse off when a staggered board blocks a transaction. A study by a group of Harvard Law professors concluded that companies whose staggered boards prevented a takeover “reduced shareholder returns for targets . on the order of eight to ten percent in the nine months after a hostile bid was announced.” 41 When a staggered board negotiates a friendly transaction, no statistically significant difference in premiums occurs. 42 Further, one of those same professors found that charter-based staggered boards “reduce the market value of a firm by 4% to 6% of its market capitalization” and that “staggered boards bring about and not merely reflect this reduction in market value.” 43 A subsequent study reaffirmed that classified boards reduce shareholder value, finding “that the ongoing process of dismantling staggered boards, encouraged by institutional investors, could well contribute to increasing shareholder wealth.” 44

Shareholders have increasingly come to agree with this view. In 2011 more than 75% of S&P 500 companies had declassified boards, up from approximately 41% a decade ago. 45 Clearly, more shareholders have supported the repeal of classified boards. Resolutions relating to the repeal of staggered boards garnered on average over 70% support among shareholders in 2008, whereas in 1987, only 16.4% of votes cast favored board declassification. 46

Given the empirical evidence suggesting staggered boards reduce a company’s value and the increasing shareholder opposition to such a structure, Glass Lewis supports the declassification of boards and the annual election of directors.

 

41 Lucian Bebchuk, John Coates IV, Guhan Subramanian, “The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Further Findings and a Reply to Symposium Participants,” 55 Stanford Law Review 885-917 (2002), page 1.
42 Id. at 2 (“Examining a sample of seventy-three negotiated transactions from 2000 to 2002, we find no systematic benefits in terms of higher premia to boards that have [staggered structures].”).
43 Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen, “The Costs of Entrenched Boards” (2004).
44 Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen and Charles C.Y. Wang, “Staggered Boards and the Wealth of Shareholders: Evidence from a Natural Experiment,” SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1706806 (2010), p. 26.
45 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 14
46 Lucian Bebchuk, John Coates IV and Guhan Subramanian, “The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence, and Policy,” 54 Stanford Law Review 887-951 (2002).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

18


Table of Contents

MANDATORY DIRECTOR TERM AND AGE LIMITS

Glass Lewis believes that director age and term limits typically are not in shareholders’ best interests. Too often age and term limits are used by boards as a crutch to remove board members who have served for an extended period of time. When used in that fashion, they are indicative of a board that has a difficult time making “tough decisions.”

Academic literature suggests that there is no evidence of a correlation between either length of tenure or age and director performance. On occasion, term limits can be used as a means to remove a director for boards that are unwilling to police their membership and to enforce turnover. Some shareholders support term limits as a way to force change when boards are unwilling to do so.

While we understand that age limits can be a way to force change where boards are unwilling to make changes on their own, the long-term impact of age limits restricts experienced and potentially valuable board members from service through an arbitrary means. Further, age limits unfairly imply that older (or, in rare cases, younger) directors cannot contribute to company oversight.

In our view, a director’s experience can be a valuable asset to shareholders because of the complex, critical issues that boards face. However, we support periodic director rotation to ensure a fresh perspective in the boardroom and the generation of new ideas and business strategies. We believe the board should implement such rotation instead of relying on arbitrary limits. When necessary, shareholders can address the issue of director rotation through director elections.

We believe that shareholders are better off monitoring the board’s approach to corporate governance and the board’s stewardship of company performance rather than imposing inflexible rules that don’t necessarily correlate with returns or benefits for shareholders.

However, if a board adopts term/age limits, it should follow through and not waive such limits. If the board waives its term/age limits, Glass Lewis will consider recommending shareholders vote against the nominating and/or governance committees, unless the rule was waived with sufficient explanation, such as consummation of a corporate transaction like a merger.

REQUIRING TWO OR MORE NOMINEES PER BOARD SEAT

In an attempt to address lack of access to the ballot, shareholders sometimes propose that the board give shareholders a choice of directors for each open board seat in every election. However, we feel that policies requiring a selection of multiple nominees for each board seat would discourage prospective directors from accepting nominations. A prospective director could not be confident either that he or she is the board’s clear choice or that he or she would be elected. Therefore, Glass Lewis generally will vote against such proposals.

SHAREHOLDER ACCESS

We expect to see a number of shareholder proposals regarding this topic in 2012. For a discussion of recent regulatory events in this area, along with a detailed overview of the Glass Lewis approach to Shareholder Proposals regarding Proxy Access, refer to Section V. Compensation, Environmental, Social and Governance Shareholder Initiatives.

MAJORITY VOTE FOR THE ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

In stark contrast to the failure of shareholder access to gain acceptance, majority voting for the election of directors is fast becoming the de facto standard in corporate board elections. In our view, the majority voting proposals are an effort to make the case for shareholder impact on director elections on a company-specific basis.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

19


Table of Contents

While this proposal would not give shareholders the opportunity to nominate directors or lead to elections where shareholders have a choice among director candidates, if implemented, the proposal would allow shareholders to have a voice in determining whether the nominees proposed by the board should actually serve as the overseer-representatives of shareholders in the boardroom. We believe this would be a favorable outcome for shareholders.

During 2011, Glass Lewis tracked over 40 proposals seeking to require a majority vote to elect directors at annual meetings in the U.S., a slight increase over 2010 when we tracked just under 35 proposals, but a sharp contrast to the 147 proposals tracked during 2006. The large drop in the number of proposals being submitted in recent years compared to 2006 is a result of many companies having already adopted some form of majority voting, including approximately 79% of companies in the S&P 500 index, up from 56% in 2008. 47 During 2009 these proposals received on average 59% shareholder support (based on for and against votes), up from 54% in 2008.

T HE PLURALITY VOTE STANDARD

Today, most US companies still elect directors by a plurality vote standard. Under that standard, if one shareholder holding only one share votes in favor of a nominee (including himself, if the director is a shareholder), that nominee “wins” the election and assumes a seat on the board. The common concern among companies with a plurality voting standard was the possibility that one or more directors would not receive a majority of votes, resulting in “failed elections.” This was of particular concern during the 1980s, an era of frequent takeovers and contests for control of companies.

A DVANTAGES OF A MAJORITY VOTE STANDARD

If a majority vote standard were implemented, a nominee would have to receive the support of a majority of the shares voted in order to be elected. Thus, shareholders could collectively vote to reject a director they believe will not pursue their best interests. We think that this minimal amount of protection for shareholders is reasonable and will not upset the corporate structure nor reduce the willingness of qualified shareholder-focused directors to serve in the future.

We believe that a majority vote standard will likely lead to more attentive directors. Occasional use of this power will likely prevent the election of directors with a record of ignoring shareholder interests in favor of other interests that conflict with those of investors. Glass Lewis will generally support proposals calling for the election of directors by a majority vote except for use in contested director elections.

In response to the high level of support majority voting has garnered, many companies have voluntarily taken steps to implement majority voting or modified approaches to majority voting. These steps range from a modified approach requiring directors that receive a majority of withheld votes to resign (e.g., Ashland Inc.) to actually requiring a majority vote of outstanding shares to elect directors (e.g., Intel).

We feel that the modified approach does not go far enough because requiring a director to resign is not the same as requiring a majority vote to elect a director and does not allow shareholders a definitive voice in the election process. Further, under the modified approach, the corporate governance committee could reject a resignation and, even if it accepts the resignation, the corporate governance committee decides on the director’s replacement. And since the modified approach is usually adopted as a policy by the board or a board committee, it could be altered by the same board or committee at any time.

 

47 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 14

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

20


Table of Contents

II. T RANSPARENCY AND I NTEGRITY OF F INANCIAL R EPORTING

AUDITOR RATIFICATION

The auditor’s role as gatekeeper is crucial in ensuring the integrity and transparency of the financial information necessary for protecting shareholder value. Shareholders rely on the auditor to ask tough questions and to do a thorough analysis of a company’s books to ensure that the information provided to shareholders is complete, accurate, fair, and that it is a reasonable representation of a company’s financial position. The only way shareholders can make rational investment decisions is if the market is equipped with accurate information about a company’s fiscal health. As stated in the October 6, 2008 Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury:

“The auditor is expected to offer critical and objective judgment on the financial matters under consideration, and actual and perceived absence of conflicts is critical to that expectation. The Committee believes that auditors, investors, public companies, and other market participants must understand the independence requirements and their objectives, and that auditors must adopt a mindset of skepticism when facing situations that may compromise their independence.”

As such, shareholders should demand an objective, competent and diligent auditor who performs at or above professional standards at every company in which the investors hold an interest. Like directors, auditors should be free from conflicts of interest and should avoid situations requiring a choice between the auditor’s interests and the public’s interests. Almost without exception, shareholders should be able to annually review an auditor’s performance and to annually ratify a board’s auditor selection. Moreover, in October 2008, the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession went even further, and recommended that “to further enhance audit committee oversight and auditor accountability . disclosure in the company proxy statement regarding shareholder ratification [should] include the name(s) of the senior auditing partner(s) staffed on the engagement.” 48

Most recently on August 16, 2011, the PCAOB issued a Concept Release seeking public comment on ways that auditor independence, objectivity and professional skepticism could be enhanced, with a specific emphasis on mandatory audit firm rotation. The PCAOB will convene a public roundtable meeting in March 2012 to further discuss such matters. Glass Lewis believes auditor rotation can en-sure both the independence of the auditor and the integrity of the audit; we will typically recommend supporting proposals to require auditor rotation when the proposal uses a reasonable period of time (usually not less than 5-7 years) particularly at companies with a history of accounting problems.

V OTING R ECOMMENDATIONS ON A UDITOR R ATIFICATION

We generally support management’s choice of auditor except when we believe the auditor’s independence or audit integrity has been compromised. Where a board has not allowed shareholders to review and ratify an auditor, we typically recommend voting against the audit committee chairman. When there have been material restatements of annual financial statements or material weakness in internal controls, we usually recommend voting against the entire audit committee.

Reasons why we may not recommend ratification of an auditor include:

 

48 “Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury.” p. Vlll:20, October 6, 2008.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

21


Table of Contents
  1. When audit fees plus audit-related fees total less than the tax fees and/or other non-audit fees.

 

  2.

Recent material restatements of annual financial statements, including those resulting in the reporting of material weaknesses in internal controls and including late filings by the company where the auditor bears some responsibility for the restatement or late filing. 49

 

  3. When the auditor performs prohibited services such as tax-shelter work, tax services for the CEO or CFO, or contingent-fee work, such as a fee based on a percentage of economic benefit to the company.

 

  4. When audit fees are excessively low, especially when compared with other companies in the same industry.

 

  5. When the company has aggressive accounting policies.

 

  6. When the company has poor disclosure or lack of transparency in its financial statements.

 

  7. Where the auditor limited its liability through its contract with the company or the audit contract requires the corporation to use alternative dispute resolution procedures without adequate justification.

 

  8. We also look for other relationships or concerns with the auditor that might suggest a conflict between the auditor’s interests and shareholder interests.

PENSION ACCOUNTING ISSUES

A pension accounting question often raised in proxy proposals is what effect, if any, projected returns on employee pension assets should have on a company’s net income. This issue often arises in the executive-compensation context in a discussion of the extent to which pension accounting should be reflected in business performance for purposes of calculating payments to executives.

Glass Lewis believes that pension credits should not be included in measuring income that is used to award performance-based compensation. Because many of the assumptions used in accounting for retirement plans are subject to the company’s discretion, management would have an obvious conflict of interest if pay were tied to pension income. In our view, projected income from pensions does not truly reflect a company’s performance.

 

49 An auditor does not audit interim financial statements. Thus, we generally do not believe that an auditor should be opposed due to a restatement of interim financial statements unless the nature of the misstatement is clear from a reading of the incorrect financial statements.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

22


Table of Contents

III. T HE L INK B ETWEEN C OMPENSATION AND P ERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis carefully reviews the compensation awarded to senior executives, as we believe that this is an important area in which the board’s priorities are revealed. Glass Lewis strongly believes executive compensation should be linked directly with the performance of the business the executive is charged with managing. We believe the most effective compensation arrangements provide for an appropriate mix of performance-based short- and long-term incentives in addition to base salary.

Glass Lewis believes that comprehensive, timely and transparent disclosure of executive pay is critical to allowing shareholders to evaluate the extent to which the pay is keeping pace with company performance. When reviewing proxy materials, Glass Lewis examines whether the company discloses the performance metrics used to determine executive compensation. We recognize performance metrics must necessarily vary depending on the company and industry, among other factors, and may include items such as total shareholder return, earning per share growth, return on equity, return on assets and revenue growth. However, we believe companies should disclose why the specific performance metrics were selected and how the actions they are designed to incentivize will lead to better corporate performance.

Moreover, it is rarely in shareholders’ interests to disclose competitive data about individual salaries below the senior executive level. Such disclosure could create internal personnel discord that would be counterproductive for the company and its shareholders. While we favor full disclosure for senior executives and we view pay disclosure at the aggregate level (e.g., the number of employees being paid over a certain amount or in certain categories) as potentially useful, we do not believe shareholders need or will benefit from detailed reports about individual management employees other than the most senior executives.

ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (“SAY-ON-PAY”)

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) required most companies 50 to hold an advisory vote on executive compensation at the first shareholder meeting that occurs six months after enactment of the bill (January 21, 2011).

This practice of allowing shareholders a non-binding vote on a company’s compensation report is standard practice in many non-US countries, and has been a requirement for most companies in the United Kingdom since 2003 and in Australia since 2005. Although say-on-pay proposals are non-binding, a high level of “against” or “abstain” votes indicate substantial shareholder concern about a company’s compensation policies and procedures.

Given the complexity of most companies’ compensation programs, Glass Lewis applies a highly nuanced approach when analyzing advisory votes on executive compensation. We review each company’s compensation on a case-by-case basis, recognizing that each company must be examined in the context of industry, size, maturity, performance, financial condition, its historic pay for performance practices, and any other relevant internal or external factors.

We believe that each company should design and apply specific compensation policies and practices that are appropriate to the circumstances of the company and, in particular, will attract and retain competent executives and other staff, while motivating them to grow the company’s long-term shareholder value.

 

50 Small reporting companies (as defined by the SEC as below $75,000,000 in market capitalization) received a two-year reprieve and will only be subject to say-on-pay requirements beginning at meetings held on or after January 21, 2013.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

23


Table of Contents

Where we find those specific policies and practices serve to reasonably align compensation with performance, and such practices are adequately disclosed, Glass Lewis will recommend supporting the company’s approach. If, however, those specific policies and practices fail to demonstrably link compensation with performance, Glass Lewis will generally recommend voting against the say-on-pay proposal.

Glass Lewis focuses on four main areas when reviewing Say-on-Pay proposals:

 

   

The overall design and structure of the Company’s executive compensation program including performance metrics;

 

   

The quality and content of the Company’s disclosure;

 

   

The quantum paid to executives; and

 

   

The link between compensation and performance as indicated by the Company’s current and past pay-for-performance grades

We also review any significant changes or modifications, and rationale for such changes, made to the Company’s compensation structure or award amounts, including base salaries.

S AY - ON -P AY V OTING R ECOMMENDATIONS

In cases where we find deficiencies in a company’s compensation program’s design, implementation or management, we will recommend that shareholders vote against the say-on-pay proposal. Generally such instances include evidence of a pattern of poor pay-for-performance practices (i.e., deficient or failing pay for performance grades), unclear or questionable disclosure regarding the overall compensation structure (e.g., limited information regarding benchmarking processes, limited rationale for bonus performance metrics and targets, etc.), questionable adjustments to certain aspects of the overall compensation structure (e.g., limited rationale for significant changes to performance targets or metrics, the payout of guaranteed bonuses or sizable retention grants, etc.), and/or other egregious compensation practices.

Although not an exhaustive list, the following issues when weighed together may cause Glass Lewis to recommend voting against a say-on-pay vote:

 

   

Inappropriate peer group and/or benchmarking issues

 

   

Inadequate or no rationale for changes to peer groups

 

   

Egregious or excessive bonuses, equity awards or severance payments, including golden handshakes and golden parachutes

 

   

Guaranteed bonuses

 

   

Targeting overall levels of compensation at higher than median without adequate justification

 

   

Bonus or long-term plan targets set at less than mean or negative performance levels

 

   

Performance targets not sufficiently challenging, and/or providing for high potential payouts

 

   

Performance targets lowered, without justification

 

   

Discretionary bonuses paid when short- or long-term incentive plan targets were not met

 

   

Executive pay high relative to peers not justified by outstanding company performance

 

   

The terms of the long-term incentive plans are inappropriate (please see “Long-Term Incentives” below)

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

24


Table of Contents

In the instance that a company has simply failed to provide sufficient disclosure of its policies, we may recommend shareholders vote against this proposal solely on this basis, regardless of the appropriateness of compensation levels.

A DDITIONAL S CRUTINY FOR C OMPANIES WITH S IGNIFICANT O PPOSITION IN 2011

At companies that received a significant shareholder vote (anything greater than 25%) against their say on pay proposal in 2011, we believe the board should demonstrate some level of engagement and responsiveness to the shareholder concerns behind the discontent. While we recognize that sweeping changes cannot be made to a compensation program without due consideration and that a majority of shareholders voted in favor of the proposal, we will look for disclosure in the proxy statement and other publicly-disclosed filings that indicates the compensation committee is responding to the prior year’s vote results including engaging with large shareholders to identify the concerns causing the substantial vote against. In the absence of any evidence that the board is actively engaging shareholders on this issue and responding accordingly, we will recommend holding compensation committee members accountable for a failure to respond in consideration of the level of the vote against and the severity and history of the compensation problems.

Where we identify egregious compensation practices, we may also recommend voting against the compensation committee based on the practices or actions of its members during the year, such as approving large one-off payments, the inappropriate, unjustified use of discretion, or sustained poor pay for performance practices.

S HORT -T ERM I NCENTIVES

A short-term bonus or incentive (“STI”) should be demonstrably tied to performance. Whenever possible, we believe a mix of corporate and individual performance measures is appropriate. We would normally expect performance measures for STIs to be based on internal financial measures such as net profit after tax, EPS growth and divisional profitability as well as non-financial factors such as those related to safety, environmental issues, and customer satisfaction. However, we accept variations from these metrics if they are tied to the Company’s business drivers.

Further, the target and potential maximum awards that can be achieved under STI awards should be disclosed. Shareholders should expect stretching performance targets for the maximum award to be achieved. Any increase in the potential maximum award should be clearly justified to shareholders.

Glass Lewis recognizes that disclosure of some measures may include commercially confidential information. Therefore, we believe it may be reasonable to exclude such information in some cases as long as the company provides sufficient justification for non-disclosure. However, where a short-term bonus has been paid, companies should disclose the extent to which performance has been achieved against relevant targets, including disclosure of the actual target achieved.

Where management has received significant STIs but short-term performance as measured by such indicators as increase in profit and/or EPS growth over the previous year prima facie appears to be poor or negative, we believe the company should provide a clear explanation why these significant short-term payments were made.

L ONG - TERM I NCENTIVES

Glass Lewis recognizes the value of equity-based incentive programs. When used appropriately, they can provide a vehicle for linking an executive’s pay to company performance, thereby aligning their interests with those of shareholders. In addition, equity-based compensation can be an effective way to attract, retain and motivate key employees.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

25


Table of Contents

There are certain elements that Glass Lewis believes are common to most well-structured long-term incentive (“LTI”) plans. These include:

 

   

No re-testing or lowering of performance conditions

 

   

Performance metrics that cannot be easily manipulated by management

 

   

Two or more performance metrics

 

   

At least one relative performance metric that compares the company’s performance to a relevant peer group or index

 

   

Performance periods of at least three years

 

   

Stretching metrics that incentivize executives to strive for outstanding performance

 

   

Individual limits expressed as a percentage of base salary

Performance measures should be carefully selected and should relate to the specific business/industry in which the company operates and, especially, the key value drivers of the company’s business.

Glass Lewis believes that measuring a company’s performance with multiple metrics serves to provide a more complete picture of the company’s performance than a single metric, which may focus too much management attention on a single target and is therefore more susceptible to manipulation. External benchmarks should be disclosed and transparent, such as total shareholder return (“TSR”) against a well-selected sector index, peer group or other performance hurdle. The rationale behind the selection of a specific index or peer group should be disclosed. Internal benchmarks (e.g. earnings per share growth) should also be disclosed and transparent, unless a cogent case for confidentiality is made and fully explained.

We also believe shareholders should evaluate the relative success of a company’s compensation programs, particularly existing equity-based incentive plans, in linking pay and performance in evaluating new LTI plans to determine the impact of additional stock awards. We will therefore review the company’s pay-for-performance grade, see below for more information, and specifically the proportion of total compensation that is stock-based.

P AY FOR P ERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis believes an integral part of a well-structured compensation package is a successful link between pay and performance. Therefore, Glass Lewis developed a proprietary pay-for-performance model to evaluate the link between pay and performance of the top five executives at US companies. Our model benchmarks these executives’ pay and company performance against four peer groups and across seven performance metrics. Using a forced curve and a school letter-grade system, we grade companies from A-F according to their pay-for-performance linkage. The grades guide our evaluation of compensation committee effectiveness and we generally recommend voting against compensation committee of companies with a pattern of failing our pay-for-performance analysis.

We also use this analysis to inform our voting decisions on say-on-pay proposals. As such, if a company receives a failing grade from our proprietary model, we are likely to recommend shareholders to vote against the say-on-pay proposal. However, there may be exceptions to this rule such as when a company makes significant enhancements to its compensation programs.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

26


Table of Contents

R ECOUPMENT (“C LAWBACK ”) P ROVISIONS

Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC to create a rule requiring listed companies to adopt policies for recouping certain compensation during a three-year look-back period. The rule applies to incentive-based compensation paid to current or former executives if the company is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to erroneous data resulting from material non-compliance with any financial reporting requirements under the securities laws.

These recoupment provisions are more stringent than under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in three respects: (i) the provisions extend to current or former executive officers rather than only to the CEO and CFO; (ii) it has a three-year look-back period (rather than a twelve-month look-back period); and (iii) it allows for recovery of compensation based upon a financial restatement due to erroneous data, and therefore does not require misconduct on the part of the executive or other employees.

F REQUENCY OF S AY - ON -P AY

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires companies to allow shareholders a non-binding vote on the frequency of say-on-pay votes, i.e. every one, two or three years. Additionally, Dodd-Frank requires companies to hold such votes on the frequency of say-on-pay votes at least once every six years.

We believe companies should submit say-on-pay votes to shareholders every year. We believe that the time and financial burdens to a company with regard to an annual vote are relatively small and incremental and are outweighed by the benefits to shareholders through more frequent accountability. Implementing biannual or triennial votes on executive compensation limits shareholders’ ability to hold the board accountable for its compensation practices through means other than voting against the compensation committee. Unless a company provides a compelling rationale or unique circumstances for say-on-pay votes less frequent than annually, we will generally recommend that shareholders support annual votes on compensation.

V OTE ON G OLDEN P ARACHUTE A RRANGEMENTS

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires companies to provide shareholders with a separate non-binding vote on approval of golden parachute compensation arrangements in connection with certain change-in-control transactions. However, if the golden parachute arrangements have previously been subject to a say-on-pay vote which shareholders approved, then this required vote is waived.

Glass Lewis believes the narrative and tabular disclosure of golden parachute arrangements will benefit all shareholders. Glass Lewis will analyze each golden parachute arrangement on a case-by-case basis, taking into account, among other items: the ultimate value of the payments particularly compared to the value of the transaction, the tenure and position of the executives in question, and the type of triggers involved (single vs double).

EQUITY-BASED COMPENSATION PLAN PROPOSALS

We believe that equity compensation awards are useful, when not abused, for retaining employees and providing an incentive for them to act in a way that will improve company performance. Glass Lewis evaluates equity-based compensation plans using a detailed model and analytical review.

Equity-based compensation programs have important differences from cash compensation plans and bonus programs. Accordingly, our model and analysis takes into account factors such as plan administration, the method and terms of exercise, repricing history, express or implied rights to reprice, and the presence of evergreen provisions.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

27


Table of Contents

Our analysis is primarily quantitative and focused on the plan’s cost as compared with the business’s operating metrics. We run twenty different analyses, comparing the program with absolute limits we believe are key to equity value creation and with a carefully chosen peer group. In general, our model seeks to determine whether the proposed plan is either absolutely excessive or is more than one standard deviation away from the average plan for the peer group on a range of criteria, including dilution to shareholders and the projected annual cost relative to the company’s financial performance. Each of the twenty analyses (and their constituent parts) is weighted and the plan is scored in accordance with that weight.

In our analysis, we compare the program’s expected annual expense with the business’s operating metrics to help determine whether the plan is excessive in light of company performance. We also compare the option plan’s expected annual cost to the enterprise value of the firm rather than to market capitalization because the employees, managers and directors of the firm contribute to the creation of enterprise value but not necessarily market capitalization (the biggest difference is seen where cash represents the vast majority of market capitalization). Finally, we do not rely exclusively on relative comparisons with averages because, in addition to creeping averages serving to inflate compensation, we believe that some absolute limits are warranted.

We evaluate equity plans based on certain overarching principles:

 

  1. Companies should seek more shares only when needed.

 

  2. Requested share amounts should be small enough that companies seek shareholder approval every three to four years (or more frequently).

 

  3. If a plan is relatively expensive, it should not grant options solely to senior executives and board members.

 

  4. Annual net share count and voting power dilution should be limited.

 

  5. Annual cost of the plan (especially if not shown on the income statement) should be reasonable as a percentage of financial results and should be in line with the peer group.

 

  6. The expected annual cost of the plan should be proportional to the business’s value.

 

  7. The intrinsic value that option grantees received in the past should be reasonable compared with the business’s financial results.

 

  8. Plans should deliver value on a per-employee basis when compared with programs at peer companies.

 

  9. Plans should not permit re-pricing of stock options.

 

  10. Plans should not contain excessively liberal administrative or payment terms.

 

  11. Selected performance metrics should be challenging and appropriate, and should be subject to relative performance measurements.

 

  12. Stock grants should be subject to minimum vesting and/or holding periods sufficient to ensure sustainable performance and promote retention.

O PTION E XCHANGES

Glass Lewis views option repricing plans and option exchange programs with great skepticism. Shareholders have substantial risk in owning stock and we believe that the employees, officers, and directors who receive stock options should be similarly situated to align their interests with shareholder interests.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

28


Table of Contents

We are concerned that option grantees who believe they will be “rescued” from underwater options will be more inclined to take unjustifiable risks. Moreover, a predictable pattern of repricing or exchanges substantially alters a stock option’s value because options that will practically never expire deeply out of the money are worth far more than options that carry a risk of expiration.

In short, repricings and option exchange programs change the bargain between shareholders and employees after the bargain has been struck.

There is one circumstance in which a repricing or option exchange program is acceptable: if macroeconomic or industry trends, rather than specific company issues, cause a stock’s value to decline dramatically and the repricing is necessary to motivate and retain employees. In this circumstance, we think it fair to conclude that option grantees may be suffering from a risk that was not foreseeable when the original “bargain” was struck. In such a circumstance, we will recommend supporting a repricing only if the following conditions are true:

 

  1. Officers and board members cannot participate in the program;

 

  2. The stock decline mirrors the market or industry price decline in terms of timing and approximates the decline in magnitude;

 

  3. The exchange is value-neutral or value-creative to shareholders using very conservative assumptions and with a recognition of the adverse selection problems inherent in voluntary programs; and

 

  4. Management and the board make a cogent case for needing to motivate and retain existing employees, such as being in a competitive employment market.

O PTION B ACKDATING , S PRING -L OADING , AND B ULLET -D ODGING

Glass Lewis views option backdating, and the related practices of spring-loading and bullet-dodging, as egregious actions that warrant holding the appropriate management and board members responsible. These practices are similar to re-pricing options and eliminate much of the downside risk inherent in an option grant that is designed to induce recipients to maximize shareholder return.

Backdating an option is the act of changing an option’s grant date from the actual grant date to an earlier date when the market price of the underlying stock was lower, resulting in a lower exercise price for the option. Since 2006, Glass Lewis has identified over 270 companies that have disclosed internal or government investigations into their past stock-option grants.

Spring-loading is granting stock options while in possession of material, positive information that has not been disclosed publicly. Bullet-dodging is delaying the grants of stock options until after the release of material, negative information. This can allow option grants to be made at a lower price either before the release of positive news or following the release of negative news, assuming the stock’s price will move up or down in response to the information. This raises a concern similar to that of insider trading, or the trading on material non-public information.

The exercise price for an option is determined on the day of grant, providing the recipient with the same market risk as an investor who bought shares on that date. However, where options were backdated, the executive or the board (or the compensation committee) changed the grant date retroactively. The new date may be at or near the lowest price for the year or period. This would be like allowing an investor to look back and select the lowest price of the year at which to buy shares.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

29


Table of Contents

A 2006 study of option grants made between 1996 and 2005 at 8,000 companies found that option backdating can be an indication of poor internal controls. The study found that option backdating was more likely to occur at companies without a majority independent board and with a long-serving CEO; both factors, the study concluded, were associated with greater CEO influence on the company’s compensation and governance practices. 51

Where a company granted backdated options to an executive who is also a director, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against that executive/director, regardless of who decided to make the award. In addition, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against those directors who either approved or allowed the backdating. Glass Lewis feels that executives and directors who either benefited from backdated options or authorized the practice have breached their fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

Given the severe tax and legal liabilities to the company from backdating, Glass Lewis will consider recommending voting against members of the audit committee who served when options were backdated, a restatement occurs, material weaknesses in internal controls exist and disclosures indicate there was a lack of documentation. These committee members failed in their responsibility to ensure the integrity of the company’s financial reports.

When a company has engaged in spring-loading or bullet-dodging, Glass Lewis will consider recommending voting against the compensation committee members where there has been a pattern of granting options at or near historic lows. Glass Lewis will also recommend voting against executives serving on the board who benefited from the spring-loading or bullet-dodging.

162( M ) P LANS

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code allows companies to deduct compensation in excess of $1 million for the CEO and the next three most highly compensated executive officers, excluding the CFO, upon shareholder approval of the excess compensation. Glass Lewis recognizes the value of executive incentive programs and the tax benefit of shareholder-approved incentive plans.

We believe the best practice for companies is to provide robust disclosure to shareholders so that they can make fully-informed judgments about the reasonableness of the proposed compensation plan. To allow for meaningful shareholder review, we prefer that disclosure should include specific performance metrics, a maximum award pool, and a maximum award amount per employee. We also believe it is important to analyze the estimated grants to see if they are reasonable and in line with the company’s peers.

We typically recommend voting against a 162(m) plan where: a company fails to provide at least a list of performance targets; a company fails to provide one of either a total pool or an individual maximum; or the proposed plan is excessive when compared with the plans of the company’s peers.

The company’s record of aligning pay with performance (as evaluated using our proprietary pay-for-performance model) also plays a role in our recommendation. Where a company has a record of setting reasonable pay relative to business performance, we generally recommend voting in favor of a plan even if the plan caps seem large relative to peers because we recognize the value in special pay arrangements for continued exceptional performance.

As with all other issues we review, our goal is to provide consistent but contextual advice given the specifics of the company and ongoing performance. Overall, we recognize that it is generally not in shareholders’ best interests to vote against such a plan and forgo the potential tax benefit since shareholder rejection of such plans will not curtail the awards; it will only prevent the tax deduction associated with them.

 

51 Lucian Bebchuk, Yaniv Grinstein and Urs Peyer. “LUCKY CEOs.” November, 2006.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

30


Table of Contents

D IRECTOR C OMPENSATION P LANS

Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive reasonable and appropriate compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. Director fees should be competitive in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. But excessive fees represent a financial cost to the company and threaten to compromise the objectivity and independence of non-employee directors. Therefore, a balance is required. We will consider recommending supporting compensation plans that include option grants or other equity-based awards that help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders. However, equity grants to directors should not be performance-based to ensure directors are not incentivized in the same manner as executives but rather serve as a check on imprudent risk-taking in executive compensation plan design.

Glass Lewis uses a proprietary model and analyst review to evaluate the costs of equity plans compared to the plans of peer companies with similar market capitalizations. We use the results of this model to guide our voting recommendations on stock-based director compensation plans.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

31


Table of Contents

IV. G OVERNANCE S TRUCTURE AND THE S HAREHOLDER F RANCHISE

ANTI-TAKEOVER MEASURES

P OISON P ILLS (S HAREHOLDER R IGHTS P LANS )

Glass Lewis believes that poison pill plans are not generally in shareholders’ best interests. They can reduce management accountability by substantially limiting opportunities for corporate takeovers. Rights plans can thus prevent shareholders from receiving a buy-out premium for their stock. Typically we recommend that shareholders vote against these plans to protect their financial interests and ensure that they have an opportunity to consider any offer for their shares, especially those at a premium.

We believe boards should be given wide latitude in directing company activities and in charting the company’s course. However, on an issue such as this, where the link between the shareholders’ financial interests and their right to consider and accept buyout offers is substantial, we believe that shareholders should be allowed to vote on whether they support such a plan’s implementation. This issue is different from other matters that are typically left to board discretion. Its potential impact on and relation to shareholders is direct and substantial. It is also an issue in which management interests may be different from those of shareholders; thus, ensuring that shareholders have a voice is the only way to safeguard their interests.

In certain circumstances, we will support a poison pill that is limited in scope to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what we believe to be a reasonable qualifying offer clause. We will consider supporting a poison pill plan if the qualifying offer clause includes each of the following attributes:

 

  1. The form of offer is not required to be an all-cash transaction;

 

  2. The offer is not required to remain open for more than 90 business days;

 

  3. The offeror is permitted to amend the offer, reduce the offer, or otherwise change the terms;

 

  4. There is no fairness opinion requirement; and

 

  5. There is a low to no premium requirement.

Where these requirements are met, we typically feel comfortable that shareholders will have the opportunity to voice their opinion on any legitimate offer.

NOL P OISON P ILLS

Similarly, Glass Lewis may consider supporting a limited poison pill in the unique event that a company seeks shareholder approval of a rights plan for the express purpose of preserving Net Operating Losses (NOLs). While companies with NOLs can generally carry these losses forward to offset future taxable income, Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code limits companies’ ability to use NOLs in the event of a “change of ownership.” 52 In this case, a company may adopt or amend a poison pill (“NOL pill”) in order to prevent an inadvertent change of ownership by multiple investors purchasing small chunks of stock at the same time, and thereby preserve the ability to carry the NOLs forward. Often such NOL pills have trigger thresholds much lower than the common 15% or 20% thresholds, with some NOL pill triggers as low as 5%.

 

52 Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code refers to a “change of ownership” of more than 50 percentage points by one or more 5% shareholders within a three-year period. The statute is intended to deter the “trafficking” of net operating losses.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

32


Table of Contents

Glass Lewis evaluates NOL pills on a strictly case-by-case basis taking into consideration, among other factors, the value of the NOLs to the company, the likelihood of a change of ownership based on the size of the holding and the nature of the larger shareholders, the trigger threshold and whether the term of the plan is limited in duration (i.e., whether it contains a reasonable “sunset” provision) or is subject to periodic board review and/or shareholder ratification. However, we will recommend that shareholders vote against a proposal to adopt or amend a pill to include NOL protective provisions if the company has adopted a more narrowly tailored means of preventing a change in control to preserve its NOLs. For example, a company may limit share transfers in its charter to prevent a change of ownership from occurring.

Furthermore, we believe that shareholders should be offered the opportunity to vote on any adoption or renewal of a NOL pill regardless of any potential tax benefit that it offers a company. As such, we will consider recommending voting against those members of the board who served at the time when an NOL pill was adopted without shareholder approval within the prior twelve months and where the NOL pill is not subject to shareholder ratification.

F AIR P RICE P ROVISIONS

Fair price provisions, which are rare, require that certain minimum price and procedural requirements be observed by any party that acquires more than a specified percentage of a corporation’s common stock. The provision is intended to protect minority shareholder value when an acquirer seeks to accomplish a merger or other transaction which would eliminate or change the interests of the minority stockholders. The provision is generally applied against the acquirer unless the takeover is approved by a majority of “continuing directors” and holders of a majority, in some cases a supermajority as high as 80%, of the combined voting power of all stock entitled to vote to alter, amend, or repeal the above provisions.

The effect of a fair price provision is to require approval of any merger or business combination with an “interested stockholder” by 51% of the voting stock of the company, excluding the shares held by the interested stockholder. An interested stockholder is generally considered to be a holder of 10% or more of the company’s outstanding stock, but the trigger can vary.

Generally, provisions are put in place for the ostensible purpose of preventing a back-end merger where the interested stockholder would be able to pay a lower price for the remaining shares of the company than he or she paid to gain control. The effect of a fair price provision on shareholders, however, is to limit their ability to gain a premium for their shares through a partial tender offer or open market acquisition which typically raise the share price, often significantly. A fair price provision discourages such transactions because of the potential costs of seeking shareholder approval and because of the restrictions on purchase price for completing a merger or other transaction at a later time.

Glass Lewis believes that fair price provisions, while sometimes protecting shareholders from abuse in a takeover situation, more often act as an impediment to takeovers, potentially limiting gains to shareholders from a variety of transactions that could significantly increase share price. In some cases, even the independent directors of the board cannot make exceptions when such exceptions may be in the best interests of shareholders. Given the existence of state law protections for minority shareholders such as Section 203 of the Delaware Corporations Code, we believe it is in the best interests of shareholders to remove fair price provisions.

REINCORPORATION

In general, Glass Lewis believes that the board is in the best position to determine the appropriate jurisdiction of incorporation for the company. When examining a management proposal to reincorporate

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

33


Table of Contents

to a different state or country, we review the relevant financial benefits, generally related to improved corporate tax treatment, as well as changes in corporate governance provisions, especially those relating to shareholder rights, resulting from the change in domicile. Where the financial benefits are de minimis and there is a decrease in shareholder rights, we will recommend voting against the transaction.

However, costly, shareholder-initiated reincorporations are typically not the best route to achieve the furtherance of shareholder rights. We believe shareholders are generally better served by proposing specific shareholder resolutions addressing pertinent issues which may be implemented at a lower cost, and perhaps even with board approval. However, when shareholders propose a shift into a jurisdiction with enhanced shareholder rights, Glass Lewis examines the significant ways would the Company benefit from shifting jurisdictions including the following:

 

  1. Is the board sufficiently independent?

 

  2. Does the Company have anti-takeover protections such as a poison pill or classified board in place?

 

  3. Has the board been previously unresponsive to shareholders (such as failing to implement a shareholder proposal that received majority shareholder support)?

 

  4. Do shareholders have the right to call special meetings of shareholders?

 

  5. Are there other material governance issues at the Company?

 

  6. Has the Company’s performance matched or exceeded its peers in the past one and three years?

 

  7. How has the Company ranked in Glass Lewis’ pay-for-performance analysis during the last three years?

 

  8. Does the company have an independent chairman?

 

  9. We note, however, that we will only support shareholder proposals to change a company’s place of incorporation in exceptional circumstances.

EXCLUSIVE FORUM PROVISIONS

Glass Lewis believes that charter or bylaw provisions limiting a shareholder’s choice of legal venue are not in the best interests of shareholders. Such clauses may effectively discourage the use of shareholder derivative claims by increasing their associated costs and making them more difficult to pursue. As such, shareholders should be wary about approving any limitation on their legal recourse including limiting themselves to a single jurisdiction (e.g. Delaware) without compelling evidence that it will benefit shareholders.

For this reason, we recommend that shareholders vote against any bylaw or charter amendment seeking to adopt an exclusive forum provision. Moreover, in the event a board seeks shareholder approval of a forum selection clause pursuant to a bundled bylaw amendment rather than as a separate proposal, we will weigh the importance of the other bundled provisions when determining the vote recommendation on the proposal. We will nonetheless recommend voting against the chairman of the governance committee for bundling disparate proposals into a single proposal (refer to our discussion of nominating and governance committee performance in Section I of the guidelines).

AUTHORIZED SHARES

Glass Lewis believes that adequate capital stock is important to a company’s operation. When analyzing a request for additional shares, we typically review four common reasons why a company might need additional capital stock:

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

34


Table of Contents
  1. Stock Split—We typically consider three metrics when evaluating whether we think a stock split is likely or necessary: The historical stock pre-split price, if any; the current price relative to the company’s most common trading price over the past 52 weeks; and some absolute limits on stock price that, in our view, either always make a stock split appropriate if desired by management or would almost never be a reasonable price at which to split a stock.

 

  2. Shareholder Defenses—Additional authorized shares could be used to bolster takeover defenses such as a poison pill. Proxy filings often discuss the usefulness of additional shares in defending against or discouraging a hostile takeover as a reason for a requested increase. Glass Lewis is typically against such defenses and will oppose actions intended to bolster such defenses.

 

  3. Financing for Acquisitions—We look at whether the company has a history of using stock for acquisitions and attempt to determine what levels of stock have typically been required to accomplish such transactions. Likewise, we look to see whether this is discussed as a reason for additional shares in the proxy.

 

  4. Financing for Operations—We review the company’s cash position and its ability to secure financing through borrowing or other means. We look at the company’s history of capitalization and whether the company has had to use stock in the recent past as a means of raising capital.

Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in limited circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where we find that the company has not detailed a plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of shares far exceeds those needed to accomplish a detailed plan, we typically recommend against the authorization of additional shares.

While we think that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, we prefer that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of a large pool of unallocated shares available for any purpose.

ADVANCE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS

We typically recommend that shareholders vote against proposals that would require advance notice of shareholder proposals or of director nominees.

These proposals typically attempt to require a certain amount of notice before shareholders are allowed to place proposals on the ballot. Notice requirements typically range between three to six months prior to the annual meeting. Advance notice requirements typically make it impossible for a shareholder who misses the deadline to present a shareholder proposal or a director nominee that might be in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

We believe shareholders should be able to review and vote on all proposals and director nominees. Shareholders can always vote against proposals that appear with little prior notice. Shareholders, as owners of a business, are capable of identifying issues on which they have sufficient information and ignoring issues on which they have insufficient information. Setting arbitrary notice restrictions limits the opportunity for shareholders to raise issues that may come up after the window closes.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

35


Table of Contents

VOTING STRUCTURE

C UMULATIVE V OTING

Cumulative voting increases the ability of minority shareholders to elect a director by allowing shareholders to cast as many shares of the stock they own multiplied by the number of directors to be elected. As companies generally have multiple nominees up for election, cumulative voting allows shareholders to cast all of their votes for a single nominee, or a smaller number of nominees than up for election, thereby raising the likelihood of electing one or more of their preferred nominees to the board. It can be important when a board is controlled by insiders or affiliates and where the company’s ownership structure includes one or more shareholders who control a majority-voting block of company stock.

Glass Lewis believes that cumulative voting generally acts as a safeguard for shareholders by ensuring that those who hold a significant minority of shares can elect a candidate of their choosing to the board. This allows the creation of boards that are responsive to the interests of all shareholders rather than just a small group of large holders.

However, academic literature indicates that where a highly independent board is in place and the company has a shareholder-friendly governance structure, shareholders may be better off without cumulative voting. The analysis underlying this literature indicates that shareholder returns at firms with good governance structures are lower and that boards can become factionalized and prone to evaluating the needs of special interests over the general interests of shareholders collectively.

We review cumulative voting proposals on a case-by-case basis, factoring in the independence of the board and the status of the company’s governance structure. But we typically find these proposals on ballots at companies where independence is lacking and where the appropriate checks and balances favoring shareholders are not in place. In those instances we typically recommend in favor of cumulative voting.

Where a company has adopted a true majority vote standard (i.e., where a director must receive a majority of votes cast to be elected, as opposed to a modified policy indicated by a resignation policy only), Glass Lewis will recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals due to the incompatibility of the two election methods. For companies that have not adopted a true majority voting standard but have adopted some form of majority voting, Glass Lewis will also generally recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals if the company has not adopted antitakeover protections and has been responsive to shareholders.

Where a company has not adopted a majority voting standard and is facing both a shareholder proposal to adopt majority voting and a shareholder proposal to adopt cumulative voting, Glass Lewis will support only the majority voting proposal. When a company has both majority voting and cumulative voting in place, there is a higher likelihood of one or more directors not being elected as a result of not receiving a majority vote. This is because shareholders exercising the right to cumulate their votes could unintentionally cause the failed election of one or more directors for whom shareholders do not cumulate votes.

S UPERMAJORITY V OTE R EQUIREMENTS

Glass Lewis believes that supermajority vote requirements impede shareholder action on ballot items critical to shareholder interests. An example is in the takeover context, where supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit the voice of shareholders in making decisions on such crucial matters as selling the business. This in turn degrades share value and can limit the possibility of buyout premiums

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

36


Table of Contents

to shareholders. Moreover, we believe that a supermajority vote requirement can enable a small group of shareholders to overrule the will of the majority shareholders. We believe that a simple majority is appropriate to approve all matters presented to shareholders.

TRANSACTION OF OTHER BUSINESS

We typically recommend that shareholders not give their proxy to management to vote on any other business items that may properly come before an annual or special meeting. In our opinion, granting unfettered discretion is unwise.

ANTI-GREENMAIL PROPOSALS

Glass Lewis will support proposals to adopt a provision preventing the payment of greenmail, which would serve to prevent companies from buying back company stock at significant premiums from a certain shareholder. Since a large or majority shareholder could attempt to compel a board into purchasing its shares at a large premium, the anti-greenmail provision would generally require that a majority of shareholders other than the majority shareholder approve the buyback.

MUTUAL FUNDS: INVESTMENT POLICIES AND ADVISORY AGREEMENTS

Glass Lewis believes that decisions about a fund’s structure and/or a fund’s relationship with its investment advisor or sub-advisors are generally best left to management and the members of the board, absent a showing of egregious or illegal conduct that might threaten shareholder value. As such, we focus our analyses of such proposals on the following main areas:

 

   

The terms of any amended advisory or sub-advisory agreement;

 

   

Any changes in the fee structure paid to the investment advisor; and

 

   

Any material changes to the fund’s investment objective or strategy.

We generally support amendments to a fund’s investment advisory agreement absent a material change that is not in the best interests of shareholders. A significant increase in the fees paid to an investment advisor would be reason for us to consider recommending voting against a proposed amendment to an investment advisory agreement. However, in certain cases, we are more inclined to support an increase in advisory fees if such increases result from being performance-based rather than asset-based. Furthermore, we generally support sub-advisory agreements between a fund’s advisor and sub-advisor, primarily because the fees received by the sub-advisor are paid by the advisor, and not by the fund.

In matters pertaining to a fund’s investment objective or strategy, we believe shareholders are best served when a fund’s objective or strategy closely resembles the investment discipline shareholders understood and selected when they initially bought into the fund. As such, we generally recommend voting against amendments to a fund’s investment objective or strategy when the proposed changes would leave shareholders with stakes in a fund that is noticeably different than when originally contemplated, and which could therefore potentially negatively impact some investors’ diversification strategies.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

37


Table of Contents

V. C OMPENSATION , E NVIRONMENTAL , S OCIAL AND G OVERNANCE S HAREHOLDER I NITIATIVES

Glass Lewis typically prefers to leave decisions regarding day-to-day management and policy decisions, including those related to social, environmental or political issues, to management and the board, except when there is a clear link between the proposal and value enhancement or risk mitigation. We feel strongly that shareholders should not attempt to micromanage the company, its businesses or its executives through the shareholder initiative process. Rather, we believe shareholders should use their influence to push for governance structures that protect shareholders and promote director accountability. Shareholders should then put in place a board they can trust to make informed decisions that are in the best interests of the business and its owners, and then hold directors accountable for management and policy decisions through board elections. However, we recognize that support of appropriately crafted shareholder initiatives may at times serve to promote or protect shareholder value.

To this end, Glass Lewis evaluates shareholder proposals on a case-by-case basis. We generally recommend supporting shareholder proposals calling for the elimination of, as well as to require shareholder approval of, antitakeover devices such as poison pills and classified boards. We generally recommend supporting proposals likely to increase and/or protect shareholder value and also those that promote the furtherance of shareholder rights. In addition, we also generally recommend supporting proposals that promote director accountability and those that seek to improve compensation practices, especially those promoting a closer link between compensation and performance.

The following is a discussion of Glass Lewis’ approach to certain common shareholder resolutions. We note that the following is not an exhaustive list of all shareholder proposals.

COMPENSATION

Glass Lewis carefully reviews executive compensation since we believe that this is an important area in which the board’s priorities and effectiveness are revealed. Executives should be compensated with appropriate base salaries and incentivized with additional awards in cash and equity only when their performance and that of the company warrants such rewards. Compensation, especially when also in line with the compensation paid by the company’s peers, should lead to positive results for shareholders and ensure the use of appropriate incentives that drives those results over time.

However, as a general rule, Glass Lewis does not believe shareholders should be involved in the approval and negotiation of compensation packages. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee, which can be held accountable for its decisions through the election of directors. Therefore, Glass Lewis closely scrutinizes shareholder proposals relating to compensation to determine if the requested action or disclosure has already accomplished or mandated and whether it allows sufficient, appropriate discretion to the board to design and implement reasonable compensation programs.

D ISCLOSURE OF I NDIVIDUAL C OMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes that disclosure of information regarding compensation is critical to allowing shareholders to evaluate the extent to which a company’s pay is based on performance. However, we recognize that the SEC currently mandates significant executive compensation disclosure. In some cases, providing information beyond that which is required by the SEC, such as the details of individual employment agreements of employees below the senior level, could create internal personnel tension or put the company at a competitive disadvantage, prompting employee poaching by competitors. Further, it is difficult to see how this information would be beneficial to shareholders. Given these concerns, Glass Lewis typically does not believe that shareholders would benefit from additional disclosure of

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

38


Table of Contents

individual compensation packages beyond the significant level that is already required; we therefore typically recommend voting against shareholder proposals seeking such detailed disclosure. We will, however, review each proposal on a case by basis, taking into account the company’s history of aligning executive compensation and the creation of shareholder value.

L INKING P AY WITH P ERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis views performance-based compensation as an effective means of motivating executives to act in the best interests of shareholders. In our view, an executive’s compensation should be specific to the company and its performance, as well as tied to the executive’s achievements within the company.

However, when firms have inadequately linked executive compensation and company performance we will consider recommending supporting reasonable proposals seeking that a percentage of equity awards be tied to performance criteria. We will also consider supporting appropriately crafted proposals requesting that the compensation committee include multiple performance metrics when setting executive compensation, provided that the terms of the shareholder proposal are not overly prescriptive. Though boards often argue that these types of restrictions unduly hinder their ability to attract talent we believe boards can develop an effective, consistent and reliable approach to remuneration utilizing a wide range (and an appropriate mix) of fixed and performance-based compensation.

R ETIREMENT B ENEFITS  & S EVERANCE

As a general rule, Glass Lewis believes that shareholders should not be involved in the approval of individual severance plans. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee, which can be held accountable for its decisions through the election of its director members.

However, when proposals are crafted to only require approval if the benefit exceeds 2.99 times the amount of the executive’s base salary plus bonus, Glass Lewis typically supports such requests. Above this threshold, based on the executive’s average annual compensation for the most recent five years, the company can no longer deduct severance payments as an expense, and thus shareholders are deprived of a valuable benefit without an offsetting incentive to the executive. We believe that shareholders should be consulted before relinquishing such a right, and we believe implementing such policies would still leave companies with sufficient freedom to enter into appropriate severance arrangements.

Following the passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), the SEC proposed rules that would require that public companies hold advisory shareholder votes on compensation arrangements and understandings in connection with merger transactions, also known as “golden parachute” transactions. Effective April 4, 2011, the SEC requires that companies seeking shareholder approval of a merger or acquisition transaction must also provide disclosure of certain “golden parachute” compensation arrangements and, in certain circumstances, conduct a separate shareholder advisory vote to approve golden parachute compensation arrangements.

B ONUS R ECOUPMENTS (“C LAWBACKS ”)

We believe it is prudent for boards to adopt detailed and stringent policies whereby, in the event of a restatement of financial results, the board will review all performance related bonuses and awards made to senior executives during the period covered by a restatement and will, to the extent feasible, recoup such bonuses to the extent that performance goals were not achieved. While the Dodd-Frank Act mandates that all companies adopt clawback policies that will require companies to develop a policy to recover compensation paid to current and former executives erroneously paid during the three year prior to a restatement, the SEC has yet to finalize the relevant rules. As a result, we expect to see shareholder proposals regarding clawbacks in the upcoming proxy season.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

39


Table of Contents

When examining proposals requesting that companies adopt recoupment policies, Glass Lewis will first review any relevant policies currently in place. When the board has already committed to a proper course, and the current policy covers the major tenets of the proposal, we see no need for further action. Further, in some instances, shareholder proposals may call for board action that contravenes legal obligations under existing employment agreements. In other cases proposals may excessively limit the board’s ability to exercise judgment and reasonable discretion, which may or may not be warranted, depending on the specific situation of the company in question. We believe it is reasonable that a mandatory recoupment policy should only affect senior executives and those directly responsible for the company’s accounting errors.

We note that where a company is entering into a new executive employment contract that does not include a clawback provision and the company has had a material restatement in the recent past, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against the responsible members of the compensation committee. The compensation committee has an obligation to shareholders to include reasonable controls in executive contracts to prevent payments in the case of inappropriate behavior.

G OLDEN C OFFINS

Glass Lewis does not believe that the payment of substantial, unearned posthumous compensation provides an effective incentive to executives or aligns the interests of executives with those of shareholders. Glass Lewis firmly believes that compensation paid to executives should be clearly linked to the creation of shareholder value. As such, Glass Lewis favors compensation plans centered on the payment of awards contingent upon the satisfaction of sufficiently stretching and appropriate performance metrics. The payment of posthumous unearned and unvested awards should be subject to shareholder approval, if not removed from compensation policies entirely. Shareholders should be skeptical regarding any positive benefit they derive from costly payments made to executives who are no longer in any position to affect company performance.

To that end, we will consider supporting a reasonably crafted shareholder proposal seeking to prohibit, or require shareholder approval of, the making or promising of any survivor benefit payments to senior executives’ estates or beneficiaries. We will not recommend supporting proposals that would, upon passage, violate existing contractual obligations or the terms of compensation plans currently in effect.

R ETENTION OF S HARES UNTIL R ETIREMENT

We strongly support the linking of executive pay to the creation of long-term sustainable shareholder value and therefore believe shareholders should encourage executives to retain some level of shares acquired through equity compensation programs to provide continued alignment with shareholders. However, generally we do not believe that requiring senior executives to retain all or an unduly high percentage of shares acquired through equity compensation programs following the termination of their employment is the most effective or desirable way to accomplish this goal. Rather, we believe that restricting executives’ ability to exercise all or a supermajority of otherwise vested equity awards until they leave the company may hinder the ability of the compensation committee to both attract and retain executive talent. In our view, otherwise qualified and willing candidates could be dissuaded from accepting employment if he/she believes that his/her compensation could be dramatically affected by financial results unrelated to their own personal performance or tenure at the company. Alternatively, an overly strict policy could encourage existing employees to quit in order to realize the value locked in their incentive awards. As such, we will not typically recommend supporting proposals requiring the retention of significant amounts of equity compensation following termination of employment at target firms.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

40


Table of Contents

T AX G ROSS -U PS

Tax gross-ups can act as an anti-takeover measure, as larger payouts to executives result in larger gross-ups, which could artificially inflate the ultimate purchase price under a takeover or merger scenario. Additionally, gross-ups can result in opaque compensation packages where shareholders are unlikely to be aware of the total compensation an executive may receive. Further, we believe that in instances where companies have severance agreements in place for executives, payments made pursuant to such arrangements are often large enough to soften the blow of any additional excise taxes. Finally, such payments are not performance based, providing no incentive to recipients and, if large, can be a significant cost to companies.

Given the above, we will typically recommend supporting proposals requesting that a compensation committee adopt a policy that it will not make or promise to make to its senior executives any tax gross-up payments, except those applicable to management employees of the company generally, such as a relocation or expatriate tax equalization policy.

L INKING E XECUTIVE P AY TO E NVIRONMENTAL AND S OCIAL C RITERIA

We recognize that a company’s involvement in environmentally sensitive and labor-intensive industries influences the degree to which a firm’s overall strategy must weigh environmental and social concerns. However, we also understand that the value generated by incentivizing executives to prioritize environmental and social issues is difficult to quantify and therefore measure, and necessarily varies among industries and companies.

When reviewing such proposals seeking to tie executive compensation to environmental or social practices, we will review the target firm’s compliance with (or contravention of) applicable laws and regulations, and examine any history of environmental and social related concerns including those resulting in material investigations, lawsuits, fines and settlements. We will also review the firm’s current compensation policies and practice. However, with respect to executive compensation, Glass Lewis generally believes that such policies should be left to the compensation committee.

GOVERNANCE

D ECLASSIFICATION OF THE B OARD

Glass Lewis believes that classified boards (or “staggered boards”) do not serve the best interests of shareholders. Empirical studies have shown that: (i) companies with classified boards may show a reduction in firm value; (ii) in the context of hostile takeovers, classified boards operate as a takeover defense, which entrenches management, discourages potential acquirers and delivers less return to shareholders; and (iii) companies with classified boards are less likely to receive takeover bids than those with single class boards. Annual election of directors provides increased accountability and requires directors to focus on the interests of shareholders. When companies have classified boards shareholders are deprived of the right to voice annual opinions on the quality of oversight exercised by their representatives.

Given the above, Glass Lewis believes that classified boards are not in the best interests of shareholders and will continue to recommend shareholders support proposals seeking their repeal.

R IGHT OF S HAREHOLDERS TO C ALL A S PECIAL M EETING

Glass Lewis strongly believes that shareholders should have the ability to call meetings of shareholders between annual meetings to consider matters that require prompt attention. However, in order to

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

41


Table of Contents

prevent abuse and waste of corporate resources by a small minority of shareholders, we believe that shareholders representing at least a sizable minority of shares must support such a meeting prior to its calling. Should the threshold be set too low, companies might frequently be subjected to meetings whose effect could be the disruption of normal business operations in order to focus on the interests of only a small minority of owners. Typically we believe this threshold should not fall below 10-15% of shares, depending on company size.

In our case-by-case evaluations, we consider the following:

 

   

Company size

 

   

Shareholder base in both percentage of ownership and type of shareholder (e.g., hedge fund, activist investor, mutual fund, pension fund, etc.)

 

   

Responsiveness of board and management to shareholders evidenced by progressive shareholder rights policies (e.g., majority voting, declassifying boards, etc.) and reaction to shareholder proposals

 

   

Company performance and steps taken to improve bad performance (e.g., new executives/ directors, spin-offs, etc.)

 

   

Existence of anti-takeover protections or other entrenchment devices

 

   

Opportunities for shareholder action (e.g., ability to act by written consent)

 

   

Existing ability for shareholders to call a special meeting

R IGHT OF S HAREHOLDERS TO A CT BY W RITTEN C ONSENT

Glass Lewis strongly supports shareholders’ right to act by written consent. The right to act by written consent enables shareholders to take action on important issues that arise between annual meetings. However, we believe such rights should be limited to at least the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize the action at a meeting at which all shareholders entitled to vote were present and voting.

In addition to evaluating the threshold for which written consent may be used (e.g. majority of votes cast or outstanding), we will consider the following when evaluating such shareholder proposals:

 

   

Company size

 

   

Shareholder base in both percentage of ownership and type of shareholder (e.g., hedge fund, activist investor, mutual fund, pension fund, etc.)

 

   

Responsiveness of board and management to shareholders evidenced by progressive shareholder rights policies (e.g., majority voting, declassifying boards, etc.) and reaction to shareholder proposals

 

   

Company performance and steps taken to improve bad performance (e.g., new executives/ directors, spin offs, etc.)

 

   

Existence of anti-takeover protections or other entrenchment devices

 

   

Opportunities for shareholder action (e.g., ability and threshold to call a special meeting)

 

   

Existing ability for shareholders to act by written consent

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

42


Table of Contents

B OARD C OMPOSITION

Glass Lewis believes the selection and screening process for identifying suitably qualified candidates for a company’s board of directors is one which requires the judgment of many factors, including the balance of skills and talents, the breadth of experience and diversity of candidates and existing board members. Diversity of skills, abilities and points of view can foster the development of a more creative, effective and dynamic board. In general, however, we do not believe that it is in the best interests of shareholders for firms to be beholden to arbitrary rules regarding its board, or committee, composition. We believe such matters should be left to a board’s nominating committee, which is generally responsible for establishing and implementing policies regarding the composition of the board. Members of this committee may be held accountable through the director election process. However, we will consider supporting reasonable, well-crafted proposals to increase board diversity where there is evidence a board’s lack of diversity lead to a decline in shareholder value.

R EIMBURSEMENT OF S OLICITATION E XPENSES

Where a dissident shareholder is seeking reimbursement for expenses incurred in waging a contest or submitting a shareholder proposal and has received the support of a majority of shareholders, Glass Lewis generally will recommend in favor of reimbursing the dissident for reasonable expenses. In those rare cases where a shareholder has put his or her own time and money into organizing a successful campaign to unseat a poorly performing director (or directors) or sought support for a shareholder proposal, we feel that the shareholder should be entitled to reimbursement of expenses by other shareholders, via the company. We believe that, in such cases, shareholders express their agreement by virtue of their majority vote for the dissident (or the shareholder proposal) and will share in the expected improvement in company performance.

M AJORITY V OTE FOR THE E LECTION OF D IRECTORS

If a majority vote standard were implemented, shareholders could collectively vote to reject a director they believe will not pursue their best interests. We think that this minimal amount of protection for shareholders is reasonable and will not upset the corporate structure nor reduce the willingness of qualified shareholder-focused directors to serve in the future.

We believe that a majority vote standard will likely lead to more attentive directors. Further, occasional use of this power will likely prevent the election of directors with a record of ignoring shareholder interests. Glass Lewis will generally support shareholder proposals calling for the election of directors by a majority vote, except for use in contested director elections.

C UMULATIVE V OTE FOR THE E LECTION OF D IRECTORS

Glass Lewis believes that cumulative voting generally acts as a safeguard for shareholders by ensuring that those who hold a significant minority of shares can elect a candidate of their choosing to the board. This allows the creation of boards that are responsive to the interests of all shareholders rather than just a small group of large holders. However, when a company has both majority voting and cumulative voting in place, there is a higher likelihood of one or more directors not being elected as a result of not receiving a majority vote. This is because shareholders exercising the right to cumulate their votes could unintentionally cause the failed election of one or more directors for whom shareholders do not cumulate votes.

Given the above, where a company (i) has adopted a true majority vote standard; (ii) has simultaneously proposed a management-initiated true majority vote standard; or (iii) is simultaneously the target of a true majority vote standard shareholder proposal, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals due to the potential incompatibility of the two election methods.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

43


Table of Contents

For companies that have not adopted a true majority voting standard but have adopted some form of majority voting, Glass Lewis will also generally recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals if the company has not adopted antitakeover protections and has been responsive to shareholders.

S UPERMAJORITY V OTE R EQUIREMENTS

We believe that a simple majority is appropriate to approve all matters presented to shareholders, and will recommend that shareholders vote accordingly. Glass Lewis believes that supermajority vote requirements impede shareholder action on ballot items critical to shareholder interests. In a takeover context supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit the voice of shareholders in making decisions on crucial matters such as selling the business. These limitations in turn may degrade share value and can reduce the possibility of buyout premiums for shareholders. Moreover, we believe that a supermajority vote requirement can enable a small group of shareholders to overrule the will of the majority of shareholders.

I NDEPENDENT C HAIRMAN

Glass Lewis views an independent chairman as better able to oversee the executives and set a pro-shareholder agenda in the absence of the conflicts that a CEO, executive insider, or close company affiliate may face. Separating the roles of CEO and chairman may lead to a more proactive and effective board of directors. The presence of an independent chairman fosters the creation of a thoughtful and dynamic board, not dominated by the views of senior management. We believe that the separation of these two key roles eliminates the conflict of interest that inevitably occurs when a CEO, or other executive, is responsible for self-oversight. As such, we will typically support reasonably crafted shareholder proposals seeking the installation of an independent chairman at a target company. However, we will not support proposals that include overly prescriptive definitions of “independent.”

P ROXY A CCESS

Shareholders have consistently sought mechanisms through which they could secure a meaningful voice in director elections in recent years. While many of these efforts have centered on regulatory changes at the SEC, the United States Congress and the Obama Administration have placed “Proxy Access” in the spotlight of the U.S. Government’s most recent corporate governance-related financial reforms. Regulations allowing or mandating the reimbursement of solicitation expenses for successful board candidates exist and further regulation is pending. A 2009 amendment to the Delaware Corporate Code allows companies to adopt bylaw provisions providing shareholders proxy access.

Further, in July 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, (the “Dodd-Frank Act”). This Act provides the SEC with the authority to adopt rules permitting shareholders to use issuer proxy solicitation materials to nominate director candidates. The SEC received over 500 comments regarding proposed proxy access, some of which questioned the agency’s authority to adopt such a rule. Nonetheless, in August 2010, the SEC adopted final Rule 14a-11, which under certain circumstances, gives shareholders (and shareholder groups) who have collectively held at least 3% of the voting power of a company’s securities continuously for at least three years, the right to nominate up to 25% of a board’s directors and have such nominees included on a company’s ballot and described in its proxy statement. While final Rule 14a-11 was originally scheduled to take effect on November 15, 2010, on October 4, 2010, the SEC announced that it would delay the rule’s implementation following the filing of a lawsuit by the U.S. Chamber Of Commerce and the Business Roundtable. In July 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled against the SEC based on what it perceived to be the SEC’s failure to fully consider the costs and the benefits of the proxy access rules. On September 6, 2011, the SEC announced that it would not be seeking rehearing

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

44


Table of Contents

of the decision. However, while rule 14a-11 was vacated, the U.S. Court of Appeals issued a stay on the “private ordering” amendments to Rule 14a-8, meaning that companies are no longer able to exclude shareholder proposals requesting that they adopt procedures to allow for shareholder nominees to be included in proxy statements (“Statement by SEC Chairman Mary L. Schapiro on Proxy Access Ligation.” SEC Press Release. September 6, 2011).

Glass Lewis will consider supporting well-crafted and reasonable proposals requesting proxy access, as we believe that in some cases, adoption of this provision allows for improved shareholder rights and ensures that shareholders who maintain a long-term interest in the target company have an ability to nominate candidates for the board. Glass Lewis reviews proposals requesting proxy access on a case-by-case basis, and will consider the following in our analysis:

 

   

Company size;

 

   

The shareholder proponent and their reasoning for putting forth the proposal at the target company;

 

   

The percentage ownership requested and holding period requirement;

 

   

Shareholder base in both percentage of ownership and type of shareholder (e.g., hedge fund, activist investor, mutual fund, pension fund, etc.);

 

   

Responsiveness of board and management to shareholders evidenced by progressive shareholder rights policies (e.g., majority voting, declassifying boards, etc.) and reaction to shareholder proposals;

 

   

Company performance and steps taken to improve bad performance (e.g., new executives/ directors, spin-offs, etc.);

 

   

Existence of anti-takeover protections or other entrenchment devices; and

 

   

Opportunities for shareholder action (e.g., ability to act by written consent or right to call a special meeting).

ENVIRONMENT

There are significant financial, legal and reputational risks to companies resulting from poor environmental practices or negligent oversight thereof. We believe part of the board’s role is to ensure that management conducts a complete risk analysis of company operations, including those that have environmental implications. Directors should monitor management’s performance in mitigating environmental risks attendant with operations in order to eliminate or minimize the risks to the company and shareholders.

When management and the board have displayed disregard for environmental risks, have engaged in egregious or illegal conduct, or have failed to adequately respond to current or imminent environmental risks that threaten shareholder value, we believe shareholders should hold directors accountable. When a substantial environmental risk has been ignored or inadequately addressed, we may recommend voting against responsible members of the governance committee, or members of a committee specifically charged with sustainability oversight.

With respect to environmental risk, Glass Lewis believes companies should actively consider their exposure to:

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

45


Table of Contents

Direct environmental risk: Companies should evaluate financial exposure to direct environmental risks associated with their operations. Examples of direct environmental risks are those associated with spills, contamination, hazardous leakages, explosions, or reduced water or air quality, among others. Further, firms should consider their exposure to environmental risks emanating from systemic change over which they may have only limited control, such as insurance companies affected by increased storm severity and frequency resulting from climate change.

Risk due to legislation/regulation: Companies should evaluate their exposure to shifts or potential shifts in environmental regulation that affect current and planned operations. Regulation should be carefully monitored in all jurisdictions within which the company operates. We look closely at relevant and proposed legislation and evaluate whether the company has responded appropriately.

Legal and reputational risk: Failure to take action on important issues may carry the risk of damaging negative publicity and potentially costly litigation. While the effect of high-profile campaigns on shareholder value may not be directly measurable, in general we believe it is prudent for firms to evaluate social and environmental risk as a necessary part in assessing overall portfolio risk.

If there is a clear showing that a company has inadequately addressed these risks, Glass Lewis may consider supporting appropriately crafted shareholder proposals requesting increased disclosure, board attention or, in limited circumstances, specific actions. In general, however, we believe that boards and management are in the best position to address these important issues, and will only rarely recommend that shareholders supplant their judgment regarding operations.

C LIMATE C HANGE AND G REEN H OUSE G AS E MISSION D ISCLOSURE

Glass Lewis will consider recommending a vote in favor of a reasonably crafted proposal to disclose a company’s climate change and/or greenhouse gas emission strategies when (i) a company has suffered financial impact from reputational damage, lawsuits and/or government investigations, (ii) there is a strong link between climate change and its resultant regulation and shareholder value at the firm, and/ or (iii) the company has inadequately disclosed how it has addressed climate change risks. Further, we will typically recommend supporting proposals seeking disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions at companies operating in carbon- or energy- intensive industries, such basic materials, integrated oil and gas, iron and steel, transportation, utilities, and construction. We are not inclined, however, to support proposals seeking emissions reductions, or proposals seeking the implementation of prescriptive policies relating to climate change.

S USTAINABILITY AND OTHER E NVIRONMENTALLY -R ELATED R EPORTS

When evaluating requests that a firm produce an environmentally-related report, such as a sustainability report or a report on coal combustion waste or hydraulic fracturing, we will consider, among other things:

 

   

The financial risk to the company from the firm’s environmental practices and/or regulation;

 

   

The relevant company’s current level of disclosure;

 

   

The level of sustainability information disclosed by the firm’s peers;

 

   

The industry in which the firm operates;

 

   

The level and type of sustainability concerns/controversies at the relevant firm, if any;

 

   

The time frame within which the relevant report is to be produced; and

 

   

The level of flexibility granted to the board in the implementation of the proposal.

In general, we believe that firms operating in extractive industries should produce reports regarding the risks presented by their environmental activities, and will consider recommending a vote for reasonably crafted proposals requesting that such a report be produced; however, as with all shareholder proposals, we will evaluate these report requests on a case by case basis.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

46


Table of Contents

O IL S ANDS

The procedure required to extract usable crude from oil sands emits significantly more greenhouse gases than do conventional extraction methods. In addition, development of the oil sands has a deleterious effect on the local environment, such as Canada’s boreal forests which sequester significant levels of carbon. We believe firms should strongly consider and evaluate exposure to financial, legal and reputational risks associated with investment in oil sands.

We believe firms should adequately disclose their involvement in the oil sands, including a discussion of exposure to sensitive political and environmental areas. Firms should broadly outline the scope of oil sands operations, describe the commercial methods for producing oil, and discuss the management of greenhouse gas emissions. However, we believe that detailed disclosure of investment assumptions could unintentionally reveal sensitive information regarding operations and business strategy, which would not serve shareholders’ interest. We will review all proposals seeking increased disclosure of oil sands operations in the above context, but will typically not support proposals seeking cessation or curtailment of operations.

S USTAINABLE F ORESTRY

Sustainable forestry provides for the long-term sustainable management and use of trees and other non-timber forest products. Retaining the economic viability of forests is one of the tenets of sustainable forestry, along with encouraging more responsible corporate use of forests. Sustainable land use and the effective management of land are viewed by some shareholders as important in light of the impact of climate change. Forestry certification has emerged as a way that corporations can address prudent forest management. There are currently several primary certification schemes such as the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (“SFI”) and the Forest Stewardship Council (“FSC”).

There are nine main principles that comprise the SFI: (i) sustainable forestry; (ii) responsible practices; (iii) reforestation and productive capacity; (iv) forest health and productivity; (v) long-term forest and soil productivity; (vi) protection of water resources; (vii) protection of special sites and biodiversity; (viii) legal compliance; and (ix) continual improvement.

The FSC adheres to ten basic principles: (i) compliance with laws and FSC principles; (ii) tenure and use rights and responsibilities; (iii) indigenous peoples’ rights; (iv) community relations and workers’ rights; (v) benefits from the forest; (vi) environmental impact; (vii) management plan; (viii) monitoring and assessment; (ix) maintenance of high conservation value forests; and (x) plantations.

Shareholder proposals regarding sustainable forestry have typically requested that the firm comply with the above SFI or FSC principles as well as to assess the feasibility of phasing out the use of uncertified fiber and increasing the use of certified fiber. We will evaluate target firms’ current mix of certified and uncertified paper and the firms’ general approach to sustainable forestry practices, both absolutely and relative to its peers but will only support proposals of this nature when we believe that the proponent has clearly demonstrated that the implementation of this proposal is clearly linked to an increase in shareholder value.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

47


Table of Contents

SOCIAL ISSUES

N ON -D ISCRIMINATION P OLICIES

Companies with records of poor labor relations may face lawsuits, efficiency-draining turnover, poor employee performance, and/or distracting, costly investigations. Moreover, as an increasing number of companies adopt inclusive EEO policies, companies without comprehensive policies may face damaging recruitment, reputational and legal risks. We believe that a pattern of making financial settlements as a result of lawsuits based on discrimination could indicate investor exposure to ongoing financial risk. Where there is clear evidence of employment practices resulting in negative economic exposure, Glass Lewis may support shareholder proposals addressing such risks.

M AC B RIDE P RINCIPLES

To promote peace, justice and equality regarding employment in Northern Ireland, Dr. Sean MacBride, founder of Amnesty International and Nobel Peace laureate, proposed the following equal opportunity employment principles:

 

  1. Increasing the representation of individuals from underrepresented religious groups in the workforce including managerial, supervisory, administrative, clerical and technical jobs;

 

  2. Adequate security for the protection of minority employees both at the workplace and while traveling to and from work;

 

  3. The banning of provocative religious or political emblems from the workplace;

 

  4. All job openings should be publicly advertised and special recruitment efforts should be made to attract applicants from underrepresented religious groups;

 

  5. Layoff, recall, and termination procedures should not, in practice, favor particular religious groupings;

 

  6. The abolition of job reservations, apprenticeship restrictions, and differential employment criteria, which discriminate on the basis of religion or ethnic origin;

 

  7. The development of training programs that will prepare substantial numbers of current minority employees for skilled jobs, including the expansion of existing programs and the creation of new programs to train, upgrade, and improve the skills of minority employees;

 

  8. The establishment of procedures to assess, identify and actively recruit minority employees with potential for further advancement; and

 

  9. The appointment of senior management staff member to oversee the company’s affirmative action efforts and setting up of timetables to carry out affirmative action principles.

 

  10. Proposals requesting the implementation of the above principles are typically proposed at firms that operate, or maintain subsidiaries that operate, in Northern Ireland. In each case, we will examine the company’s current equal employment opportunity policy and the extent to which the company has been subject to protests, fines, or litigation regarding discrimination in the workplace, if any. Further, we will examine any evidence of the firm’s specific record of labor concerns in Northern Ireland.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

48


Table of Contents

H UMAN R IGHTS

Glass Lewis believes explicit policies set out by companies’ boards of directors on human rights provides

shareholders with the means to evaluate whether the company has taken steps to mitigate risks from its human rights practices. As such, we believe that it is prudent for firms to actively evaluate risks to shareholder value stemming from global activities and human rights practices along entire supply chains. Findings and investigations of human rights abuses can inflict, at a minimum, reputational damage on targeted companies and have the potential to dramatically reduce shareholder value. This is particularly true for companies operating in emerging market countries in extractive industries and in politically unstable regions. As such, while we typically rely on the expertise of the board on these important policy issues, we recognize that, in some instances, shareholders could benefit from increased reporting or further codification of human rights policies.

M ILITARY AND US G OVERNMENT B USINESS P OLICIES

Glass Lewis believes that disclosure to shareholders of information on key company endeavors is important. However, we generally do not support resolutions that call for shareholder approval of policy statements for or against government programs, most of which are subject to thorough review by the federal government and elected officials at the national level. We also do not support proposals favoring disclosure of information where similar disclosure is already mandated by law, unless circumstances exist that warrant the additional disclosure.

F OREIGN G OVERNMENT B USINESS P OLICIES

Where a corporation operates in a foreign country, Glass Lewis believes that the company and board should maintain sufficient controls to prevent illegal or egregious conduct with the potential to decrease shareholder value, examples of which include bribery, money laundering, severe environmental violations or proven human rights violations. We believe that shareholders should hold board members, and in particular members of the audit committee and CEO, accountable for these issues when they face reelection, as these concerns may subject the company to financial risk. In some instances, we will support appropriately crafted shareholder proposals specifically addressing concerns with the target firm’s actions outside its home jurisdiction.

H EALTH C ARE R EFORM P RINCIPLES

Health care reform in the United States has long been a contentious political issue and Glass Lewis therefore believes firms must evaluate and mitigate the level of risk to which they may be exposed regarding potential changes in health care legislation. Over the last several years, Glass Lewis has reviewed multiple shareholder proposals requesting that boards adopt principles for comprehensive health reform, such as the following based upon principles reported by the Institute of Medicine:

 

   

Health care coverage should be universal;

 

   

Health care coverage should be continuous;

 

   

Health care coverage should be affordable to individuals and families;

 

   

The health insurance strategy should be affordable and sustainable for society; and

 

   

Health insurance should enhance health and well-being by promoting access to high-quality care that is effective, efficient, safe, timely, patient-centered and equitable.

In general, Glass Lewis believes that individual corporate board rooms are not the appropriate forum in which to address evolving and contentious national policy issues. The adoption of a narrow set of principles could limit the board’s ability to comply with new regulation or to appropriately and flexibly respond to health care issues as they arise. As such, barring a compelling reason to the contrary, we typically do not support the implementation of national health care reform principles at the company level.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

49


Table of Contents

T OBACCO

Glass Lewis recognizes the contentious nature of the production, procurement, marketing and selling of tobacco products. We also recognize that tobacco companies are particularly susceptible to reputational and regulatory risk due to the nature of its operations. As such, we will consider supporting uniquely tailored and appropriately crafted shareholder proposals requesting increased information or the implementation of suitably broad policies at target firms on a case-by-case basis. However, we typically do not support proposals requesting that firms shift away from, or significantly alter, the legal production or marketing of core products.

R EPORTING C ONTRIBUTIONS AND P OLITICAL S PENDING

While corporate contributions to national political parties and committees controlled by federal officeholders are prohibited under federal law, corporations can legally donate to state and local candidates, organizations registered under 26 USC Sec. 527 of the Internal Revenue Code and state-level political committees. There is, however, no standardized manner in which companies must disclose this information. As such, shareholders often must search through numerous campaign finance reports and detailed tax documents to ascertain even limited information. Corporations also frequently use trade associations, which are not required to report funds they receive for or spend on political activity, as a means for corporate political action.

Further, in 2010 the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision by the Supreme Court affirmed that corporations are entitled to the same free speech laws as individuals and that it is legal for a corporation to donate to political causes without monetary limit. While the decision did not remove bans on direct contributions to candidates, companies are now able to contribute indirectly, and substantially, to candidates through political organizations. Therefore, it appears companies will enjoy greater latitude in their political actions by this recent decision.

When evaluating whether a requested report would benefit shareholders, Glass Lewis seeks answers to the following three key questions:

 

   

Is the Company’s disclosure comprehensive and readily accessible?

 

   

How does the Company’s political expenditure policy and disclosure compare to its peers?

 

   

What is the Company’s current level of oversight?

Glass Lewis will consider supporting a proposal seeking increased disclosure of corporate political expenditure and contributions if the firm’s current disclosure is insufficient, or if the firm’s disclosure is significantly lacking compared to its peers. Further, we will typically recommend voting for proposals requesting reports on lobbying or political contributions and expenditures when there is no explicit board oversight or there is evidence of inadequate board oversight. Given that political donations are strategic decisions intended to increase shareholder value and have the potential to negatively affect the company, we believe the board should either implement processes and procedures to ensure the proper use of the funds or closely evaluate the process and procedures used by management. We will also consider supporting such proposals when there is verification, or credible allegations, that the company is mismanaging corporate funds through political donations. If Glass Lewis discovers particularly egregious actions by the company, we will consider recommending voting against the governance committee members or other responsible directors.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

50


Table of Contents

A NIMAL W ELFARE

Glass Lewis believes that it is prudent for management to assess potential exposure to regulatory, legal and reputational risks associated with all business practices, including those related to animal welfare. A high-profile campaign launched against a company could result in shareholder action, a reduced customer base, protests and potentially costly litigation. However, in general, we believe that the board and management are in the best position to determine policies relating to the care and use of animals. As such, we will typically vote against proposals seeking to eliminate or limit board discretion regarding animal welfare unless there is a clear and documented link between the board’s policies and the degradation of shareholder value.

I NTERNET C ENSORSHIP

Legal and ethical questions regarding the use and management of the Internet and the worldwide web have been present since access was first made available to the public almost twenty years ago. Prominent among these debates are the issues of privacy, censorship, freedom of expression and freedom of access. Glass Lewis believes that it is prudent for management to assess its potential exposure to risks relating to the internet management and censorship policies. As has been seen at other firms, perceived violation of user privacy or censorship of Internet access can lead to high-profile campaigns that could potentially result in decreased customer bases or potentially costly litigation. In general, however, we believe that management and boards are best equipped to deal with the evolving nature of this issue in various jurisdictions of operation.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

51


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

San Francisco Headquarters Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC One Sansome Street Suite 3300 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: +1 415-678-4110 Tel: +1 888-800-7001 Fax: +1 415-357-0200 New York Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC 48 Wall Street 15th Floor New York, N.Y. 10005 Tel: +1 212-797-3777 Fax: +1 212-980-4716 Australia CGI Glass Lewis Suite 8.01, Level 8 261 George Street Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Tel: +61 2 9299 9266 Fax: +61 2 9299 1866 Ireland Glass, Lewis & Co., 6th Floor, Riverpoint Bishop’s Quay Limerick, Ireland Tel: +353 61 404700 Fax: +353 61 404711 Please direct general inquiries to info@glasslewis.com


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

PROXY PAPER GUIDELINES 2012 PROXY SEASON AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL PROXY ADVICE International


Table of Contents

C ONTENTS

 

I. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

     3   

Board Composition

     3   

Slate Elections

     4   

Board Committee Composition

     4   

Review of Risk Management Controls

     4   

Classified Boards

     4   

II. FINANCIAL REPORTING

     5   

Accounts and Reports

     5   

Income Allocation (Distribution of Dividend)

     5   

Appointment of Auditors and Authority to Set Fees

     5   

III. COMPENSATION

     6   

Compensation Report/Compensation Policy

     6   

Long Term Incentive Plans

     6   

Director Compensation

     7   

Limits on Executive Compensation

     7   

IV. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

     8   

Amendments to the Articles of Association

     8   

Anti-Takeover Measures

     8   

Increase in Authorized Shares

     8   

Issuance of Shares

     9   

Repurchase of Shares

     9   

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISK

     10   

P LEASE NOTE : G LASS L EWIS CREATES SEPARATE PROXY VOTING POLICIES DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY .

T HE FOLLOWING IS A DISTILLATION OF THE VARIOUS COUNTRY - SPECIFIC POLICIES .

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

2


Table of Contents

I. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

B OARD OF D IRECTORS

Boards are put in place to represent shareholders and protect their interests. Glass Lewis seeks boards with a proven record of protecting shareholders and delivering value over the medium- and long-term. In our view, boards working to protect and enhance the best interests of shareholders typically include some independent directors (the percentage will vary by local market practice and regulations), boast a record of positive performance, have directors with diverse backgrounds, and appoint directors with a breadth and depth of experience.

BOARD COMPOSITION

When companies disclose sufficient relevant information, we look at each individual on the board and examine his or her relationships with the company, the company’s executives and with other board members. The purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether pre-existing personal, familial or financial relationships are likely to impact the decisions of that board member. Where the company does not disclose the names and backgrounds of director nominees with sufficient time in advance of the shareholder meeting to evaluate their independence and performance, we will consider recommending abstaining on the directors’ election.

We vote in favor of governance structures that will drive positive performance and enhance shareholder value. The most crucial test of a board’s commitment to the company and to its shareholders is the performance of the board and its members. The performance of directors in their capacity as board members and as executives of the company, when applicable, and in their roles at other companies where they serve is critical to this evaluation.

We believe a director is independent if he or she has no material financial, familial or other current relationships with the company, its executives or other board members except for service on the board and standard fees paid for that service. Relationships that have existed within the three-five years prior to the inquiry are usually considered to be “current” for purposes of this test.

In our view, a director is affiliated if he or she has a material financial, familial or other relationship with the company or its executives, but is not an employee of the company. This includes directors whose employers have a material financial relationship with the Company. This also includes a director who owns or controls 10-20% or more of the company’s voting stock.

We define an inside director as one who simultaneously serves as a director and as an employee of the company. This category may include a chairman of the board who acts as an employee of the company or is paid as an employee of the company.

Although we typically vote for the election of directors, we will recommend voting against directors for the following reasons:

 

   

A director who attends less than 75% of the board and applicable committee meetings.

 

   

A director who is also the CEO of a company where a serious restatement has occurred after the CEO certified the pre-restatement financial statements.

We also feel that the following conflicts of interest may hinder a director’s performance and will therefore recommend voting against a:

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

3


Table of Contents
   

CFO who presently sits on the board.

 

   

Director who presently sits on an excessive number of boards.

 

   

Director, or a director whose immediate family member, provides material professional services to the company at any time during the past five years.

 

   

Director, or a director whose immediate family member, engages in airplane, real estate or other similar deals, including perquisite type grants from the company.

 

   

Director with an interlocking directorship.

SLATE ELECTIONS

In some countries, companies elect their board members as a slate, whereby shareholders are unable to vote on the election of each individual director, but rather are limited to voting for or against the board as a whole. If significant issues exist concerning one or more of the nominees or in markets where directors are generally elected individually, we will recommend voting against the entire slate of directors.

BOARD COMMITTEE COMPOSITION

We believe that independent directors should serve on a company’s audit, compensation, nominating and governance committees. We will support boards with such a structure and encourage change where this is not the case.

REVIEW OF RISK MANAGEMENT CONTROLS

We believe companies, particularly financial firms, should have a dedicated risk committee, or a committee of the board charged with risk oversight, as well as a chief risk officer who reports directly to that committee, not to the CEO or another executive. In cases where a company has disclosed a sizable loss or writedown, and where a reasonable analysis indicates that the company’s board-level risk committee should be held accountable for poor oversight, we would recommend that shareholders vote against such committee members on that basis. In addition, in cases where a company maintains a significant level of financial risk exposure but fails to disclose any explicit form of board-level risk oversight (committee or otherwise), we will consider recommending to vote against the chairman of the board on that basis.

CLASSIFIED BOARDS

Glass Lewis favors the repeal of staggered boards in favor of the annual election of directors. We believe that staggered boards are less accountable to shareholders than annually elected boards. Furthermore, we feel that the annual election of directors encourages board members to focus on protecting the interests of shareholders.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

4


Table of Contents

II FINANCIAL REPORTING

ACCOUNTS AND REPORTS

Many countries require companies to submit the annual financial statements, director reports and independent auditors’ reports to shareholders at a general meeting. Shareholder approval of such a proposal does not discharge the board or management. We will usually recommend voting in favor of these proposals except when there are concerns about the integrity of the statements/reports. However, should the audited financial statements, auditor’s report and/or annual report not be published at the writing of our report, we will recommend that shareholders abstain from voting on this proposal.

INCOME ALLOCATION (DISTRIBUTION OF DIVIDEND)

In many countries, companies must submit the allocation of income for shareholder approval. We will generally recommend voting for such a proposal. However, we will give particular scrutiny to cases where the company’s dividend payout ratio is exceptionally low or excessively high relative to its peers and the company has not provided a satisfactory explanation.

APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS AND AUTHORITY TO SET FEES

We believe that role of the auditor is crucial in protecting shareholder value. Like directors, auditors should be free from conflicts of interest and should assiduously avoid situations that require them to make choices between their own interests and the interests of the shareholders.

We generally support management’s recommendation regarding the selection of an auditor and support granting the board the authority to fix auditor fees except in cases where we believe the independence of an incumbent auditor or the integrity of the audit has been compromised.

However, we recommend voting against ratification of the auditor and/or authorizing the board to set auditor fees for the following reasons:

 

   

When audit fees added to audit-related fees total less than one-half of total fees.

 

   

When there have been any recent restatements or late filings by the company where the auditor bears some responsibility for the restatement or late filing (e.g., a restatement due to a reporting error).

 

   

When the company has aggressive accounting policies.

 

   

When the company has poor disclosure or lack of transparency in financial statements.

 

   

When there are other relationships or issues of concern with the auditor that might suggest a conflict between the interest of the auditor and the interests of shareholders.

 

   

When the company is changing auditors as a result of a disagreement between the company and the auditor on a matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedures.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

5


Table of Contents

III. COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION REPORT/COMPENSATION POLICY

We closely review companies’ remuneration practices and disclosure as outlined in company filings to evaluate management-submitted advisory compensation report and policy vote proposals. In evaluating these proposals, which can be binding or non-binding depending on the country, we examine how well the company has disclosed information pertinent to its compensation programs, the extent to which overall compensation is tied to performance, the performance metrics selected by the company and the levels of remuneration in comparison to company performance and that of its peers.

We will usually recommend voting against approval of the compensation report or policy when the following occur:

 

   

Gross disconnect between pay and performance;

 

   

Performance goals and metrics are inappropriate or insufficiently challenging;

 

   

Lack of disclosure regarding performance metrics and goals as well as the extent to which the performance metrics, targets and goals are implemented to enhance company performance and encourage prudent risk-taking;

 

   

Excessive discretion afforded to or exercised by management or the compensation committee to deviate from defined performance metrics and goals in making awards;

 

   

Ex gratia or other non-contractual payments have been made and the reasons for making the payments have not been fully explained or the explanation is unconvincing;

 

   

Guaranteed bonuses are established;

 

   

There is no clawback policy; or

 

   

Egregious or excessive bonuses, equity awards or severance payments.

LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLANS

Glass Lewis recognizes the value of equity-based incentive programs. When used appropriately, they can provide a vehicle for linking an employee’s pay to a company’s performance, thereby aligning their interests with those of shareholders. Tying a portion of an employee’s compensation to the performance of the Company provides an incentive to maximize share value. In addition, equity-based compensation is an effective way to attract, retain and motivate key employees.

In order to allow for meaningful shareholder review, we believe that incentive programs should generally include: (i) specific and appropriate performance goals; (ii) a maximum award pool; and (iii) a maximum award amount per employee. In addition, the payments made should be reasonable relative to the performance of the business and total compensation to those covered by the plan should be in line with compensation paid by the Company’s peers.

P ERFORMANCE -B ASED E QUITY C OMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes in performance-based equity compensation plans for senior executives. We feel that executives should be compensated with equity when their performance and that of the company warrants such rewards. While we do not believe that equity-based compensation plans for all employees need to be based on overall company performance, we do support such limitations for grants to senior

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

6


Table of Contents

executives (although even some equity-based compensation of senior executives without performance criteria is acceptable, such as in the case of moderate incentive grants made in an initial offer of employment).

Boards often argue that such a proposal would hinder them in attracting talent. We believe that boards can develop a consistent, reliable approach, as boards of many companies have, that would still attract executives who believe in their ability to guide the company to achieve its targets. We generally recommend that shareholders vote in favor of performance-based option requirements.

There should be no retesting of performance conditions for all share- and option- based incentive schemes. We will generally recommend that shareholders vote against performance-based equity compensation plans that allow for re-testing.

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive appropriate types and levels of compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. Director fees should be reasonable in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. In particular, we support compensation plans that include non performance-based equity awards, which help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders.

Glass Lewis compares the costs of these plans to the plans of peer companies with similar market capitalizations in the same country to help inform its judgment on this issue.

R ETIREMENT B ENEFITS FOR D IRECTORS

We will typically recommend voting against proposals to grant retirement benefits to non-executive directors. Such extended payments can impair the objectivity and independence of these board members. Directors should receive adequate compensation for their board service through initial and annual fees.

LIMITS ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

As a general rule, Glass Lewis believes that shareholders should not be involved in setting executive compensation. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee. We view the election of directors, and specifically those who sit on the compensation committee, as the appropriate mechanism for shareholders to express their disapproval or support of board policy on this issue. Further, we believe that companies whose pay-for-performance is in line with their peers should be granted the flexibility to compensate their executives in a manner that drives growth and profit.

However, Glass Lewis favors performance-based compensation as an effective means of motivating executives to act in the best interests of shareholders. Performance-based compensation may be limited if a chief executive’s pay is capped at a low level rather than flexibly tied to the performance of the company.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

7


Table of Contents

IV. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

AMENDMENTS TO THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION

We will evaluate proposed amendments to a company’s articles of association on a case-by-case basis. We are opposed to the practice of bundling several amendments under a single proposal because it prevents shareholders from evaluating each amendment on its own merits. In such cases, we will analyze each change individually and will recommend voting for the proposal only when we believe that the amendments on balance are in the best interests of shareholders.

ANTI-TAKEOVER MEASURES

P OISON P ILLS (S HAREHOLDER R IGHTS P LANS )

Glass Lewis believes that poison pill plans generally are not in the best interests of shareholders. Specifically, they can reduce management accountability by substantially limiting opportunities for corporate takeovers. Rights plans can thus prevent shareholders from receiving a buy-out premium for their stock.

We believe that boards should be given wide latitude in directing the activities of the company and charting the company’s course. However, on an issue such as this where the link between the financial interests of shareholders and their right to consider and accept buyout offers is so substantial, we believe that shareholders should be allowed to vote on whether or not they support such a plan’s implementation.

In certain limited circumstances, we will support a limited poison pill to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what we believe to be a reasonable ‘qualifying offer’ clause.

S UPERMAJORITY V OTE R EQUIREMENTS

Glass Lewis favors a simple majority voting structure. Supermajority vote requirements act as impediments to shareholder action on ballot items that are critical to our interests. One key example is in the takeover context where supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit shareholders’ input in making decisions on such crucial matters as selling the business.

INCREASE IN AUTHORIZED SHARES

Glass Lewis believes that having adequate capital stock available for issuance is important to the operation of a company. We will generally support proposals when a company could reasonably use the requested shares for financing, stock splits and stock dividends. While we think that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, we prefer that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of large pools of unallocated shares available for any purpose.

In general, we will support proposals to increase authorized shares up to 100% of the number of shares currently authorized unless, after the increase the company would be left with less than 30% of its authorized shares outstanding.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

8


Table of Contents

ISSUANCE OF SHARES

Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in some circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where we find that the company has not disclosed a detailed plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of shares requested are excessive, we typically recommend against the issuance. In the case of a private placement, we will also consider whether the company is offering a discount to its share price.

In general, we will support proposals to issue shares (with pre-emption rights) when the requested increase is the lesser of (i) the unissued ordinary share capital; or (ii) a sum equal to one-third of the issued ordinary share capital. This authority should not exceed five years. In some countries, if the proposal contains a figure greater than one-third, the company should explain the nature of the additional amounts.

We will also generally support proposals to suspend pre-emption rights for a maximum of 5-20% of the issued ordinary share capital of the company, depending on the country in which the company is located. This authority should not exceed five years, or less for some countries.

REPURCHASE OF SHARES

We will recommend voting in favor of a proposal to repurchase shares when the plan includes the following provisions: (i) a maximum number of shares which may be purchased (typically not more than 15% of the issued share capital); and (ii) a maximum price which may be paid for each share (as a percentage of the market price).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

9


Table of Contents

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISK

We believe companies should actively evaluate risks to long-term shareholder value stemming from exposure to environmental and social risks and should incorporate this information into their overall business risk profile. In addition, we believe companies should consider their exposure to changes in environmental or social regulation with respect to their operations as well as related legal and reputational risks. Companies should disclose to shareholders both the nature and magnitude of such risks as well as steps they have taken or will take to mitigate those risks.

When we identify situations where shareholder value is at risk, we may recommend voting in favor of a reasonable and well-targeted shareholder proposal if we believe supporting the proposal will promote disclosure of and/or mitigate significant risk exposure. In limited cases where a company has failed to adequately mitigate risks stemming from environmental or social practices, we will recommend shareholders vote against: (i) ratification of board and/or management acts; (ii) approving a company’s accounts and reports and/or; (iii) directors (in egregious cases).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

10


Table of Contents

T HIS DOCUMENT SETS FORTH THE PROXY VOTING POLICY AND GUIDELINES OF G LASS , L EWIS  & Co., LLC. T HE POLICIES INCLUDED HEREIN HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED BASED ON G LASS L EWIS EXPERIENCE WITH PROXY VOTING AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE ISSUES AND ARE NOT TAILORED TO ANY SPECIFIC PERSON . M OREOVER , THESE GUIDELINES ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE EXHAUSTIVE AND DO NOT INCLUDE ALL POTENTIAL VOTING ISSUES . T HE INFORMATION INCLUDED HEREIN IS REVIEWED PERIODICALLY AND UPDATED OR REVISED AS NECESSARY . G LASS L EWIS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN ON THE BASIS OF THIS INFORMATION . T HIS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF G LASS L EWIS .

C OPYRIGHT © 2011 G LASS , L EWIS  & Co., LLC. A LL R IGHTS R ESERVED .


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

San Francisco Headquarters Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC One Sansome Street Suite 3300 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: +1 415-678-4110 Tel: +1 888-800-7001 Fax: +1 415-357-0200 New York Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC 48 Wall Street 15th Floor New York, N.Y. 10005 Tel: +1 212-797-3777 Fax: +1 212-980-4716 Australia CGI Glass Lewis Pty Limited Suite 8.01, Level 8, 261 George St Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Tel: +61 2 9299 9266 Fax: +61 2 9299 1866 Switzerland Glass Lewis International, Via Pazzalino 25 6962 Lugano Viganello Switzerland Phone: +41 76 346 0673 Fax: +41 91 260 6182 Ireland Glass Lewis Europe, Ltd. 6th Floor, Riverpoint Bishop’s Quay Limerick, Ireland Phone: +353 61 404700 Fax: +353 61 404711 Please direct general inquiries to info@glasslewis.com


Table of Contents

LAUDUS TRUST

STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

LAUDUS GROWTH INVESTORS U.S. LARGE CAP GROWTH FUND—LGILX

July 29, 2012

The Statement of Additional Information (SAI) is not a prospectus. It should be read in conjunction with the fund’s prospectus dated July 29, 2012. To obtain a free copy of the prospectus, please contact Laudus Trust at P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266 or visit the fund’s website at www.laudus.com/prospectus.

The Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund (the “fund”) is a series of the Laudus Trust (the “Trust”). The fund’s audited financial statements from the fund’s annual report for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012 are incorporated by reference into this SAI. A copy of the fund’s 2012 annual report is delivered with this SAI. You also can get a copy of the annual report without charge by contacting the fund at 1.800.447.3332 (Retail Investors) or 1.866.452.8387 (Registered Investment Professionals) or visiting the fund’s website at www.laudus.com/prospectus.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

     Page  

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE, SECURITIES, STRATEGIES, RISKS AND LIMITATIONS

     2   

MANAGEMENT OF THE FUND

     27   

INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES

     35   

DESCRIPTION OF THE TRUST AND OWNERSHIP OF SHARES

     44   

OWNERS OF 5% OR MORE OF THE FUND’S SHARES

     46   

DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE

     48   

PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES

     48   

APPENDIX — RATINGS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES

  

APPENDIX — DESCRIPTION OF PROXY VOTING POLICY AND PROCEDURES

  

REG48077-05


Table of Contents

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE, SECURITIES, STRATEGIES, RISKS AND LIMITATIONS

Notice on Shareholder Approval. Unless otherwise indicated in the Prospectus or this Statement of Additional Information, the investment objective and policies of the fund may be changed without shareholder approval. The following investment policies, securities, strategies, risks and limitations supplement those set forth in the Prospectus and may be changed without shareholder approval unless otherwise noted. Also, except with respect to limitations on borrowing and futures and option contracts, policies and limitations that state a maximum percentage of assets that may be invested in a security or other asset, or that set forth a quality standard, shall be measured immediately after and as a result of the fund’s acquisition of such security or asset unless otherwise noted. Thus, any subsequent change in values, net assets or other circumstances does not require the fund to sell an investment if it could not then make the same investment.

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE

The fund seeks long-term capital appreciation. There is no guarantee the fund will achieve its objective.

FUND INVESTMENT STRATEGIES

Under normal circumstances, the fund will invest at least 80% of its net assets (plus borrowings for investment purposes, if any) in equity securities of U.S. large capitalization companies. The fund defines large capitalization companies as those with a market capitalization of at least $3 billion at the time of investment. In addition, up to 20% of the fund’s net assets may be invested in foreign equity securities. Investments in equity securities include common stock and preferred stock. The fund may, but is not required to, use derivative instruments (“Derivatives”) for risk management purposes or as part of the fund’s investment strategies. Generally, Derivatives are financial contracts whose value depends upon, or is derived from, the value of an underlying asset, reference rate, or index, and may relate to stocks, bonds, interest rates, currencies or currency exchange rates, and related indexes. The principal types of Derivatives used by the fund include options, futures and forward currency agreements. The fund may use Derivatives to earn income and enhance returns, to manage or adjust the risk profile of the fund, to replace more traditional direct investments, or to obtain exposure to certain markets. The fund will notify shareholders at least 60 days prior to any change in its policy of investing at least 80% of its net assets (plus borrowings for investment purposes, if any) in equity securities of U.S. large capitalization companies.

In deciding whether an investment is tied to the U.S., the fund’s subadviser considers a number of factors including whether the investment is issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of its agencies; the investment has its primary trading market in the U.S.; the issuer is organized under the laws of, derives at least 50% of its revenues from, or has at least 50% of its assets in, the U.S.; the investment is included in an index representative of the U.S.; and the investment is exposed to the economic fortunes and risks of the U.S.

INVESTMENT SECURITIES, STRATEGIES AND RISKS

The different types of investments that the fund typically may invest in, the investment techniques it may use and the risks normally associated with these investments are discussed below. The fund will make investments that are intended to help achieve its investment objective.

BANKERS’ ACCEPTANCES or notes are credit instruments evidencing a bank’s obligation to pay a draft drawn on it by a customer. These instruments reflect the obligation both of the bank and of the drawer to pay the full amount of the instrument upon maturity. The fund will invest only in bankers’ acceptances of banks that have capital, surplus and undivided profits in the aggregate in excess of $100 million.

BORROWING. The fund may borrow for temporary or emergency purposes; for example, the fund may borrow at times to meet redemption requests rather than sell portfolio securities to raise the necessary cash. The fund’s borrowings will be

 

2


Table of Contents

subject to interest costs. Borrowing can also involve leveraging when securities are purchased with the borrowed money. Leveraging creates interest expenses that can exceed the income from the assets purchased with the borrowed money. In addition, leveraging may magnify changes in the net asset value of the fund’s shares and in its portfolio yield. The fund will earmark or segregate assets to cover such borrowings in accordance with positions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). If assets used to secure a borrowing decrease in value, the fund may be required to pledge additional collateral to avoid liquidation of those assets.

The fund may establish lines-of-credit (“lines”) with certain banks by which it may borrow funds for temporary or emergency purposes. A borrowing is presumed to be for temporary or emergency purposes if it is repaid by the fund within 60 days and is not extended or renewed. The fund may use the lines to meet large or unexpected redemptions that would otherwise force the fund to liquidate securities under circumstances which are unfavorable to the fund’s remaining shareholders. The fund will pay a fee to the bank for using the lines.

CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT or time deposits are issued against funds deposited in a banking institution for a specified period of time at a specified interest rate. The fund will invest only in certificates of deposit of banks that have capital, surplus and undivided profits in the aggregate in excess of $100 million.

COMMERCIAL PAPER consists of short term, promissory notes issued by banks, corporations and other institutions to finance short term credit needs. These securities generally are discounted but sometimes may be interest bearing. Commercial paper, which also may be unsecured, is subject to credit risk.

CREDIT AND LIQUIDITY supports may be employed by issuers to reduce the credit risk of their securities. Credit supports include letters of credit, insurance, total return and credit swap agreements and guarantees provided by foreign and domestic entities. Liquidity supports include puts and demand features. Most of these arrangements move the credit risk of an investment from the issuer of the security to the support provider. Changes in the credit quality of a support provider could cause losses to the fund, and affect its share price.

DEBT SECURITIES are obligations issued by domestic and foreign entities, including governments and corporations, in order to raise money. They are basically “IOUs,” but are commonly referred to as bonds or money market securities. These securities normally require the issuer to pay a fixed, variable or floating rate of interest on the amount of money borrowed (“principal”) until it is paid back upon maturity.

Debt securities experience price changes when interest rates change. For example, when interest rates fall, the prices of debt securities generally rise. Also, issuers tend to pre-pay their outstanding debts and issue new ones paying lower interest rates. This is especially true for bonds with sinking fund provisions, which commit the issuer to set aside a certain amount of money to cover timely repayment of principal and typically allow the issuer to annually repurchase certain of its outstanding bonds from the open market or at a pre-set call price.

Conversely, in a rising interest rate environment, prepayment on outstanding debt securities generally will not occur. This is known as extension risk and may cause the value of debt securities to depreciate as a result of the higher market interest rates. Typically, longer-maturity securities react to interest rate changes more severely than shorter-term securities (all things being equal), but generally offer greater rates of interest.

Debt securities also are subject to the risk that the issuers will not make timely interest and/or principal payments or fail to make them at all. This is called credit risk. Corporate debt securities (“bonds”) tend to have higher credit risk generally than U.S. government debt securities. Debt instruments also may be subject to price volatility due to market perception of future interest rates, the creditworthiness of the issuer and general market liquidity (market risk). Investment-grade debt securities are considered medium- or/and high-quality securities, although some still possess varying degrees of speculative characteristics and risks. Debt securities rated below investment-grade are riskier, but may offer higher yields. These securities are sometimes referred to as high yield securities or “junk bonds.”

The market for these securities has historically been less liquid than investment grade securities.

 

3


Table of Contents

DELAYED-DELIVERY TRANSACTIONS include purchasing and selling securities on a delayed-delivery or when-issued basis. These transactions involve a commitment to buy or sell specific securities at a predetermined price or yield, with payment and delivery taking place after the customary settlement period for that type of security. When purchasing securities on a delayed-delivery basis, the fund assumes the rights and risks of ownership, including the risk of price and yield fluctuations. Typically, no interest will accrue to the purchaser until the security is delivered. The fund will earmark or segregate appropriate liquid assets to cover its delayed-delivery purchase obligations. When the fund sells a security on a delayed-delivery basis, it does not participate in further gains or losses with respect to that security. If the other party to a delayed-delivery transaction fails to deliver or pay for the securities, the fund could suffer losses.

DEPOSITARY RECEIPTS include American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) as well as other “hybrid” forms of ADRs, including European Depositary Receipts (EDRs) and Global Depositary Receipts (GDRs), and are certificates evidencing ownership of shares of a foreign issuer. Depositary receipts may be sponsored or unsponsored. These certificates are issued by depository banks and generally trade on an established market in the United States or elsewhere. The underlying shares are held in trust by a custodian bank or similar financial institution in the issuer’s home country. The depository bank may not have physical custody of the underlying securities at all times and may charge fees for various services, including forwarding dividends and interest and corporate actions. ADRs are alternatives to directly purchasing the underlying foreign securities in their national markets and currencies. However, ADRs continue to be subject to many of the risks associated with investing directly in foreign securities.

Investments in the securities of foreign issuers may subject the fund to investment risks that differ in some respects from those related to investments in securities of U.S. issuers. Such risks include future adverse political and economic developments, withholding taxes on income or possible imposition of withholding taxes on income, possible seizure, nationalization or expropriation of foreign deposits, possible establishment of exchange controls or taxation at the source or greater fluctuation in value due to changes in exchange rates. Foreign issuers of securities often engage in business practices different from those of domestic issuers of similar securities, and there may be less information publicly available about foreign issuers. In addition, foreign issuers are, generally speaking, subject to less government supervision and regulation and different accounting treatment than are those in the United States.

Although the two types of depositary receipt facilities (unsponsored or sponsored) are similar, there are differences regarding a holder’s rights and obligations and the practices of market participants. A depository may establish an unsponsored facility without participation by (or acquiescence of) the underlying issuer; typically, however, the depository requests a letter of non-objection from the underlying issuer prior to establishing the facility. Holders of unsponsored depositary receipts generally bear all the costs of the facility. The depository usually charges fees upon the deposit and withdrawal of the underlying securities, the conversion of dividends into U.S. dollars or other currency, the disposition of non-cash distributions, and the performance of other services. The depository of an unsponsored facility frequently is under no obligation to distribute shareholder communications received from the underlying issuer or to pass through voting rights to depositary receipt holders with respect to the underlying securities.

Sponsored depositary receipt facilities are created in generally the same manner as unsponsored facilities, except that sponsored depositary receipts are established jointly by a depository and the underlying issuer through a deposit agreement. The deposit agreement sets out the rights and responsibilities of the underlying issuer, the depository, and the depositary receipt holders. With sponsored facilities, the underlying issuer typically bears some of the costs of the depositary receipts (such as dividend payment fees of the depository), although most sponsored depositary receipts holders may bear costs such as deposit and withdrawal fees. Depositories of most sponsored depositary receipts agree to distribute notices of shareholder meetings, voting instructions, and other shareholder communications and information to the depositary receipt holders at the underlying issuer’s request. The fund may invest in ADRs as part of its principal investment strategy.

DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS are commonly defined to include securities or contracts whose values depend on (or “derive” from) the value of one or more other assets such as securities, currencies or commodities. These “other assets” are commonly referred to as “underlying assets.” The fund may use derivative instruments as part of its principal investment strategy.

 

4


Table of Contents

A derivative instrument generally consists of, is based upon, or exhibits characteristics similar to options or forward contracts. Options and forward contracts are considered to be the basic “building blocks” of derivatives. For example, forward-based derivatives include forward contracts, as well as exchange-traded futures. Option-based derivatives include privately negotiated, over-the-counter (OTC) options (including caps, floors, collars, and options on forward and swap contracts) and exchange-traded options on futures. Diverse types of derivatives may be created by combining options or forward contracts in different ways, and applying these structures to a wide range of underlying assets.

Risk management strategies include investment techniques designed to facilitate the sale of portfolio securities, manage the average duration of the portfolio or create or alter exposure to certain asset classes, such as equity, other debt or foreign securities.

In addition to the derivative instruments and strategies described in this SAI, the Investment Adviser (as defined below) or Subadviser expects to discover additional derivative instruments and other hedging or risk management techniques. The Investment Adviser or Subadviser may utilize these new derivative instruments and techniques to the extent that they are consistent with the fund’s investment objective and permitted by the fund’s investment limitations, operating policies, and applicable regulatory authorities.

EXCHANGE TRADED FUNDS (“ETFs”) such as Standard and Poor’s Depositary Receipts (“SPDRs”) Trust, are investment companies that typically are registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”) as open-end funds or unit investment trusts (“UITs”). ETFs are actively traded on national securities exchanges and are generally based on specific domestic and foreign market indices. Shares of an ETF may be bought and sold throughout the day at market prices, which may be higher or lower than the shares’ net asset value. An “index-based ETF” seeks to track the performance of an index holding in its portfolio either the contents of the index or a representative sample of the securities in the index. Because ETFs are based on an underlying basket of stocks or an index, they are subject to the same market fluctuations as these types of securities in volatile market swings. ETFs, like mutual funds, have expenses associated with their operation, including advisory fees. When the fund invests in an ETF, in addition to directly bearing expenses associated with its own operations, it will bear a pro rata portion of the ETF’s expenses. As with any exchange listed security, ETF shares purchased in the secondary market are subject to customary brokerage charges.

Pursuant to an exemptive order issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission to iShares and procedures approved by the fund’s Board of Trustees, the fund may invest in iShares ® beyond the limits set forth in Section 12(d)(1)(A) of the 1940 Act but not to exceed 25% of the fund’s total assets, provided that the fund has described exchange-traded fund investments in its prospectus and otherwise complies with the conditions of the exemptive order and other applicable investment limitations. Neither the iShares ® Funds nor their investment manager make any representations regarding the advisability of investing in the fund.

EQUITY LINKED SECURITIES. The fund may invest a portion of its assets in equity linked securities. Equity linked securities are privately issued derivative securities which have a return component based on the performance of a single security, a basket of securities, or an index. Equity linked securities are primarily used by the fund as an alternative means to more efficiently and effectively access the securities market of what is generally an emerging country. To the extent that the fund invests in equity linked securities whose return corresponds to the performance of a foreign securities index or one or more of foreign stocks, investing in equity linked securities will involve risks similar to the risks of investing in foreign securities. See “Foreign Securities” below.

The fund deposits an amount of cash with its custodian (or broker, if legally permitted) in an amount near or equal to the selling price of the underlying security in exchange for an equity linked security. Upon sale, the fund receives cash from the broker or custodian equal to the value of the underlying security. Aside from the market risk associated with the underlying security, there is the risk of default by the other party to the transaction. In the event of insolvency of the other

 

5


Table of Contents

party, the fund might be unable to obtain its expected benefit. In addition, while the fund will seek to enter into such transactions only with parties which are capable of entering into closing transactions with the fund, there can be no assurance that the fund will be able to close out such a transaction with the other party or obtain an offsetting position with any other party, at any time prior to the end of the term of the underlying agreement. This may impair the fund’s ability to enter into other transactions at a time when doing so might be advantageous.

Equity linked securities are often used for many of the same purposes as, and share many of the same risks with, derivative instruments such as options. See “Options Contracts” below. Equity linked securities may be considered illiquid and thus subject to the fund’s restrictions on investments in illiquid securities. In some instances, investments in equity linked securities may also be subject to the fund’s limitations on investing in investment companies; see “Securities of Other Investment Companies” below.

EQUITY SECURITIES represent ownership interests in a company, and are commonly called “stocks.” The fund invests in equity securities as part of its principal investment strategy. Equity securities historically have outperformed most other securities, although their prices can fluctuate based on changes in a company’s financial condition, market conditions and political, economic or even company-specific news. When a stock’s price declines, its market value is lowered even though the intrinsic value of the company may not have changed. Sometimes factors, such as economic conditions or political events, affect the value of stocks of companies of the same or similar industry or group of industries, and may affect the entire stock market.

Types of equity securities include common stocks, preferred stocks, convertible securities, warrants, ADRs, EDRs, GDRs, and interests in real estate investment trusts (for more information on real estate investment trusts, “REITs”, see the section entitled “Real Estate Investment Trusts”).

Common stocks, which are probably the most recognized type of equity security, represent an equity or ownership interest in an issuer and usually entitle the owner to voting rights in the election of the corporation’s directors and any other matters submitted to the corporation’s shareholders for voting, as well as to receive dividends on such stock. The market value of common stock can fluctuate widely, as it reflects increases and decreases in an issuer’s earnings. In the event an issuer is liquidated or declares bankruptcy, the claims of bond owners, other debt holders and owners of preferred stock take precedence over the claims of common stock owners.

Preferred stocks represent an equity or ownership interest in an issuer but do not ordinarily carry voting rights, though they may carry limited voting rights. Preferred stocks normally have preference over the corporation’s assets and earnings, however. For example, preferred stocks have preference over common stock in the payment of dividends. Preferred stocks normally pay dividends at a specified rate. However, preferred stock may be purchased where the issuer has omitted, or is in danger of omitting, payment of its dividend. Such investments would be made primarily for their capital appreciation potential. In the event an issuer is liquidated or declares bankruptcy, the claims of bond owners take precedence over the claims of preferred and common stock owners. Certain classes of preferred stock are convertible into shares of common stock of the issuer. By holding convertible preferred stock, the fund can receive a steady stream of dividends and still have the option to convert the preferred stock to common stock. Preferred stock is subject to many of the same risks as common stock and debt securities.

Convertible securities are typically preferred stocks or bonds that are exchangeable for a specific number of another form of security (usually the issuer’s common stock) at a specified price or ratio. A convertible security generally entitles the holder to receive interest paid or accrued on bonds or the dividend paid on preferred stock until the convertible security matures or is redeemed, converted or exchanged. A company may issue a convertible security that is subject to redemption after a specified date, and usually under certain circumstances. A holder of a convertible security that is called for redemption would be required to tender it for redemption to the issuer, convert it to the underlying common stock or sell it to a third party. The convertible structure allows the holder of the convertible bond to participate in share price movements in the company’s common stock. The actual return on a convertible bond may exceed its stated yield if the company’s common stock appreciates in value and the option to convert to common stocks becomes more valuable.

 

6


Table of Contents

Convertible securities typically pay a lower interest rate than nonconvertible bonds of the same quality and maturity because of the convertible feature. Convertible securities are also rated below investment grade (“high yield”) or are not rated, and are subject to credit risk.

Prior to conversion, convertible securities have characteristics and risks similar to nonconvertible debt and equity securities. In addition, convertible securities are often concentrated in economic sectors, which, like the stock market in general, may experience unpredictable declines in value, as well as periods of poor performance, which may last for several years. There may be a small trading market for a particular convertible security at any given time, which may adversely impact market price and the fund’s ability to liquidate a particular security or respond to an economic event, including deterioration of an issuer’s creditworthiness.

Convertible preferred stocks are nonvoting equity securities that pay a fixed dividend. These securities have a convertible feature similar to convertible bonds, but do not have a maturity date. Due to their fixed income features, convertible securities provide higher income potential than the issuer’s common stock, but typically are more sensitive to interest rate changes than the underlying common stock. In the event of a company’s liquidation, bondholders have claims on company assets senior to those of shareholders; preferred shareholders have claims senior to those of common shareholders.

Convertible securities typically trade at prices above their conversion value, which is the current market value of the common stock received upon conversion, because of their higher yield potential than the underlying common stock. The difference between the conversion value and the price of a convertible security will vary depending on the value of the underlying common stock and interest rates. When the underlying value of the common stocks declines, the price of the issuer’s convertible securities will tend not to fall as much because the convertible security’s income potential will act as a price support. While the value of a convertible security also tends to rise when the underlying common stock value rises, it will not rise as much because its conversion value is more narrow. The value of convertible securities also is affected by changes in interest rates. For example, when interest rates fall, the value of convertible securities may rise because of their fixed income component.

Warrants are types of securities usually issued with bonds and preferred stock that entitle the holder to purchase a proportionate amount of common stock at a specified price for a specific period of time. The prices of warrants do not necessarily move parallel to the prices of the underlying common stock. Warrants have no voting rights, receive no dividends and have no rights with respect to the assets of the issuer. If a warrant is not exercised within the specified time period, it will become worthless and the fund will lose the purchase price it paid for the warrant and the right to purchase the underlying security.

INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING . The fund may purchase shares issued as part of, or a short period after, a company’s initial public offering (“IPOs”), and may at times dispose of those shares shortly after their acquisition. The fund’s purchase of shares issued in IPOs exposes it to the risks associated with companies that have little operating history as public companies, as well as to the risks inherent in those sectors of the market where these new issuers operate. The market for IPO issuers has been volatile, and share prices of newly-public companies have fluctuated significantly over short periods of time.

MASTER LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS (“MLPS”). MLPs are limited partnerships in which the common units are publicly traded. MLP common units are freely traded on a securities exchange or in the over-the-counter market and are generally registered with the SEC. MLPs often own several properties or businesses (or own interests) that are related to real estate development and oil and gas industries, but they also may finance motion pictures, research and development and other projects. MLPs generally have two classes of owners, the general partner and limited partners. The general partner is typically owned by a major energy company, an investment fund, the direct management of the MLP or is an entity owned by one or more of such parties. The general partner may be structured as a private or publicly traded corporation or other entity. The general partner typically controls the operations and management of the MLP through an

 

7


Table of Contents

up to 2% equity interest in the MLP plus, in many cases, ownership of common units and subordinated units. Limited partners own the remainder of the partnership, through ownership of common units, and have a limited role, if any, in the partnership’s operations and management.

MLPs are typically structured such that common units and general partner interests have first priority to receive quarterly cash distributions up to an established minimum amount (“minimum quarterly distributions”). Common and general partner interests also accrue arrearages in distributions to the extent the minimum quarterly distribution is not paid. Once common and general partner interests have been paid, subordinated units receive distributions of up to the minimum quarterly distribution; however, subordinated units do not accrue arrearages. Distributable cash in excess of the minimum quarterly distribution paid to both common and subordinated units is distributed to both common and subordinated units generally on a pro rata basis. The general partner is also eligible to receive incentive distributions if the general partner operates the business in a manner that results in distributions paid per common unit surpassing specified target levels. As the general partner increases cash distributions to the limited partners, the general partner receives an increasingly higher percentage of the incremental cash distributions. A common arrangement provides that the general partner can reach a tier where it receives 50% of every incremental dollar paid to common and subordinated unit holders. These incentive distributions are intended to encourage the general partner to streamline costs, increase capital expenditures and acquire assets in order to increase the partnership’s cash flow and raise the quarterly cash distribution in order to reach higher tiers. Such results are intended to benefit all security holders of the MLP, however, such incentive distribution payments give rise to potential conflicts of interest between the common unit holders and the general partner.

MLP common units represent a limited partnership interest in the MLP. Common units are listed and traded on U.S. securities exchanges or over-the-counter, with their value fluctuating predominantly based on prevailing market conditions and the success of the MLP. The fund may purchase common units in market transactions as well as directly from the MLP or other parties in private placements. Unlike owners of common stock of a corporation, owners of common units have limited voting rights and have no ability to annually elect directors. MLPs generally distribute all available cash flow (cash flow from operations less maintenance capital expenditures) in the form of quarterly distributions. Common units, along with general partner units, have first priority to receive quarterly cash distributions up to the minimum quarterly distribution and have arrearage rights. In the event of liquidation, common units have preference over subordinated units, but not debt or preferred units, to the remaining assets of the MLP.

MLP subordinated units are typically issued by MLPs to their original sponsors, such as their founders, corporate general partners of MLPs, entities that sell assets to the MLP, and investors. Subordinated units may be purchased directly from these persons as well as newly-issued subordinated units from MLPs themselves. Subordinated units have similar voting rights as common units and are generally not publicly traded. Once the minimum quarterly distribution on the common units, including any arrearages, has been paid, subordinated units receive cash distributions up to the minimum quarterly distribution prior to any incentive payments to the MLP’s general partner. Unlike common units, subordinated units do not have arrearage rights. In the event of liquidation, common units and general partner interests have priority over subordinated units. Subordinated units are typically converted into common units on a one-to-one basis after certain time periods and/or performance targets have been satisfied. The purchase or sale price of subordinated units is generally tied to the common unit price less a discount. The size of the discount varies depending on the likelihood of conversion, the length of time remaining to conversion, the size of the block purchased relative to trading volumes, and other factors, including smaller capitalization partnerships or companies potentially having limited product lines, markets or financial resources, lacking management depth or experience, and being more vulnerable to adverse general market or economic development than larger more established companies.

General partner interests of MLPs are typically retained by an MLP’s original sponsors, such as its founders, corporate partners, entities that sell assets to the MLP and investors. A holder of general partner interests can be liable under certain circumstances for amounts greater than the amount of the holder’s investment in the general partner interest. General partner interests often confer direct board participation rights and in many cases, operating control, over the MLP. These interests themselves are not publicly traded, although they may be owned by publicly traded entities. General partner interests receive cash distributions, typically 2% of the MLP’s aggregate cash distributions, which are contractually

 

8


Table of Contents

defined in the partnership agreement. In addition, holders of general partner interests typically hold incentive distribution rights, which provide them with a larger share of the aggregate MLP cash distributions as the distributions to limited partner unit holders are increased to prescribed levels. General partner interests generally cannot be converted into common units. The general partner interest can be redeemed by the MLP if the MLP unitholders choose to remove the general partner, typically with a supermajority vote by limited partner unitholders.

Additional risks involved with investing in a MLP are risks associated with the specific industry or industries in which the partnership invests, such as the risks of investing in real estate, or oil and gas industries.

Certain MLPs are dependent on their parent companies or sponsors for a majority of their revenues. Any failure by a MLP’s parents or sponsors to satisfy their payments or obligations would impact the MLP’s revenues and cash flows and ability to make distributions.

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. The fund will not invest in fixed time deposits, which (1) are not subject to prepayment or (2) provide for withdrawal penalties upon prepayment (other than overnight deposits) if, in the aggregate, more than 15% of its net assets would be invested in such deposits, repurchase agreements maturing in more than seven days and other illiquid assets.

FOREIGN CURRENCY TRANSACTIONS. As part of its principal investment strategy, the fund may purchase and sell foreign currency options and foreign currency futures contracts and related options and may engage in foreign currency transactions either on a spot (cash) basis at the rate prevailing in the currency exchange market at the time or through forward currency contracts (“forwards”) with terms generally of less than one year. The fund may engage in these transactions in order to protect against uncertainty in the level of future foreign exchange rates in the purchase and sale of securities.

The fund may also use foreign currency options and foreign currency forward contracts to increase exposure to a foreign currency or to shift exposure to foreign currency fluctuations from one country to another (as in cross hedging, see below). The fund will earmark or segregate assets for any open positions in forwards used for non-hedging purposes and mark to market daily as may be required under the federal securities laws.

A forward involves an obligation to purchase or sell a specific currency at a future date, which may be any fixed number of days from the date of the contract agreed upon by the parties, at a price set at the time of the contract. These contracts may be bought or sold to protect the fund against a possible loss resulting from an adverse change in the relationship between foreign currencies and the U.S. dollar or to increase exposure to a particular foreign currency. Many foreign securities markets do not settle trades within a time frame that would be considered customary in the U.S. stock market. Therefore, the fund may engage in forward foreign currency exchange contracts in order to secure exchange rates for fund securities purchased or sold, but awaiting settlement. These transactions do not seek to eliminate any fluctuations in the underlying prices of the securities involved. Instead, the transactions simply establish a rate of exchange that can be expected when the fund settles its securities transactions in the future. Forwards involve certain risks. For example, if the counterparties to the contracts are unable to meet the terms of the contracts or if the value of the foreign currency changes unfavorably, the fund could sustain a loss.

The fund also may engage in forward foreign currency exchange contracts to protect the value of specific portfolio positions, which is called “position hedging.” When engaging in position hedging, the fund may enter into forward foreign currency exchange transactions to protect against a decline in the values of the foreign currencies in which portfolio securities are denominated (or against an increase in the value of currency for securities that the fund expects to purchase).

 

9


Table of Contents

Buying and selling foreign currency exchange contracts involves costs and may result in losses. The ability of the fund to engage in these transactions may be limited by tax considerations. Although these techniques tend to minimize the risk of loss due to declines in the value of the hedged currency, they tend to limit any potential gain that might result from an increase in the value of such currency. Transactions in these contracts involve certain other risks. Unanticipated fluctuations in currency prices may result in a poorer overall performance for the fund than if it had not engaged in any such transactions. Moreover, there may be imperfect correlation between the fund’s holdings of securities denominated in a particular currency and forward contracts into which the fund enters. Such imperfect correlation may cause the fund to sustain losses, which will prevent it from achieving a complete hedge or expose it to risk of foreign exchange loss.

Suitable hedging transactions may not be available in all circumstances and there can be no assurance that the fund will engage in such transactions at any given time or from time to time. Also, such transactions may not be successful and may eliminate any chance for the fund to benefit from favorable fluctuations in relevant foreign currencies.

Forwards will be used primarily to adjust the foreign exchange exposure of the fund with a view to protecting the outlook, and the fund might be expected to enter into such contracts under the following circumstances:

LOCK IN. When the Investment Adviser or Subadviser desires to lock in the U.S. dollar price on the purchase or sale of a security denominated in a foreign currency.

CROSS HEDGE. If a particular currency is expected to decrease against another currency, the fund may sell the currency expected to decrease and purchase a currency which is expected to increase against the currency sold in an amount approximately equal to some or all of the fund’s portfolio holdings denominated in the currency sold.

DIRECT HEDGE. If the Investment Adviser or Subadviser wants to a eliminate substantially all of the risk of owning a particular currency, and/or if the Investment Adviser or Subadviser thinks that the fund can benefit from price appreciation in a given country’s bonds but does not want to hold the currency, it may employ a direct hedge back into the U.S. dollar. In either case, the fund would enter into a forward contract to sell the currency in which a portfolio security is denominated and purchase U.S. dollars at an exchange rate established at the time it initiated the contract. The cost of the direct hedge transaction may offset most, if not all, of the yield advantage offered by the foreign security, but the fund would benefit from an increase in value of the bond.

PROXY HEDGE. The Investment Adviser or Subadviser might choose to use a proxy hedge, which may be less costly than a direct hedge. In this case, the fund, having purchased a security, will sell a currency whose value is believed to be closely linked to the currency in which the security is denominated. Interest rates prevailing in the country whose currency was sold would be expected to be closer to those in the U.S. and lower than those of securities denominated in the currency of the original holding. This type of hedging entails greater risk than a direct hedge because it is dependent on a stable relationship between the two currencies paired as proxies and the relationships can be very unstable at times.

COSTS OF HEDGING. When the fund purchases a foreign bond with a higher interest rate than is available on U.S. bonds of a similar maturity, the additional yield on the foreign bond could be substantially reduced or lost if the fund were to enter into a direct hedge by selling the foreign currency and purchasing the U.S. dollar. This is what is known as the “cost” of hedging. Proxy hedging attempts to reduce this cost through an indirect hedge back to the U.S. dollar. It is important to note that hedging costs are treated as capital transactions and are not, therefore, deducted from the fund’s dividend distribution and are not reflected in its yield. Instead such costs will, over time, be reflected in the fund’s net asset value per share.

TAX CONSEQUENCES OF HEDGING. Under applicable tax law, the fund may be required to limit its gains from hedging in foreign currency forwards, futures, and options. Although the fund is expected to comply with such limits, the extent to which these limits apply is subject to tax regulations as yet unissued. Hedging may also result in the application of the mark-to-market and straddle provisions of the Internal Revenue Code. Those provisions could result in an increase (or decrease) in the amount of taxable dividends paid by the funds and could affect whether dividends paid by the fund are classified as capital gains or ordinary income.

 

10


Table of Contents

FOREIGN SECURITIES involve additional risks, including foreign currency exchange rate risks, because they are issued by foreign entities, including foreign governments, banks and corporations or because they are traded principally overseas. The fund may invest in foreign securities as part of its principal investment strategy. Foreign securities in which the fund may invest include foreign entities that are not subject to uniform accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, practices and requirements comparable to those applicable to U.S. corporations. In addition, there may be less publicly available information about foreign entities. Foreign economic, political and legal developments, as well as fluctuating foreign currency exchange rates and withholding taxes, could have more dramatic effects on the value of foreign securities. For example, conditions within and around foreign countries, such as the possibility of expropriation or confiscatory taxation, political or social instability, diplomatic developments, change of government or war could affect the value of foreign investments. Moreover, individual foreign economies may differ favorably or unfavorably from the U.S. economy in such respects as growth of gross national product, rate of inflation, capital reinvestment, resource self-sufficiency and balance of payments position.

Foreign securities typically have less volume and are generally less liquid and more volatile than securities of U.S. companies. Fixed commissions on foreign securities exchanges are generally higher than negotiated commissions on U.S. exchanges, although the fund will endeavor to achieve the most favorable overall results on portfolio transactions. There is generally less government supervision and regulation of foreign securities exchanges, brokers, dealers and listed companies than in the United States, thus increasing the risk of delayed settlements of portfolio transactions or loss of certificates for portfolio securities. There may be difficulties in obtaining or enforcing judgments against foreign issuers as well. Bankruptcy laws in some foreign countries are sometimes biased to the borrowers and against the creditors. These factors and others may increase the risks with respect to the liquidity of the fund, and its ability to meet a large number of shareholder redemption requests.

Foreign markets also have different clearance and settlement procedures and, in certain markets, there have been times when settlements have been unable to keep pace with the volume of securities transactions, making it difficult to conduct such transactions. Such delays in settlement could result in temporary periods when a portion of the assets of the fund is uninvested and no return is earned thereon. The inability to make intended security purchases due to settlement problems could cause the fund to miss attractive investment opportunities. Losses to the fund arising out of the inability to fulfill a contract to sell such securities also could result in potential liability for the fund.

Investments in the securities of foreign issuers may be made and held in foreign currencies. In addition, the fund may hold cash in foreign currencies. These investments may be affected favorably or unfavorably by changes in currency rates and in exchange control regulations, and may cause the fund to incur costs in connection with conversions between various currencies. The rate of exchange between the U.S. dollar and other currencies is determined by the forces of supply and demand in the foreign exchange market as well as by political and economic factors. Changes in the foreign currency exchange rates also may affect the value of dividends and interest earned, gains and losses realized on the sale of securities, and net investment income and gains, if any, to be distributed to shareholders by the fund.

FORWARD CONTRACTS are sales contracts between a buyer (holding the “long” position), and the seller (holding the “short” position) for an asset with delivery deferred to a future date. The fund may engage in forward contracts as part of its principal investment strategy. The buyer agrees to pay a fixed price at the agreed future date and the seller agrees to deliver the asset. The seller hopes that the market price on the delivery date is less than the agreed upon price, while the buyer hopes for the contrary. The change in value of a forward-based derivative generally is roughly proportional to the change in value of the underlying asset.

FUTURES CONTRACTS are instruments that represent an agreement between two parties that obligates one party to buy, and the other party to sell, specific instruments at an agreed-upon price on a stipulated future date. In the case of futures contracts relating to an index or otherwise not calling for physical delivery at the close of the transaction, the parties usually agree to deliver the final cash settlement price of the contract. As part of its principal investment strategy,

 

11


Table of Contents

the fund may purchase and sell futures contracts based on securities, securities indices and foreign currencies, interest rates, or any other futures contracts traded on U.S. exchanges or boards of trade that the Commodities Future Trading Commission (“CFTC”) licenses and regulates on foreign exchanges. Consistent with CFTC regulations, the trust has claimed an exclusion from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” under the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) and, therefore, is not subject to registration or regulation as a pool operator under the Commodity Exchange Act. However, investors should note that the CFTC has adopted certain rules that significantly affect the exemptions available to a fund. As of the date of this SAI, there is no certainty that a fund, its investment adviser, subadviser and other parties will be able to rely on these exclusions and exemptions in the future. Additional CFTC regulation (or a choice to no longer use strategies that trigger additional regulation) may cause a fund to change its investment strategies or to incur additional expenses. Although positions are usually marked to market on a daily basis with an intermediary (executing broker) there remains a credit risk with the futures exchange.

The fund must maintain a small portion of its assets in cash to process shareholder transactions in and out of the fund and to pay its expenses. In order to reduce the effect this otherwise uninvested cash would have on its performance, the fund may purchase futures contracts. Such transactions allow the fund’s cash balance to produce a return similar to that of the underlying security or index on which the futures contract is based. Also, the fund may purchase or sell futures contracts on a specified foreign currency to “fix” the price in U.S. dollars of the foreign security it has acquired or sold or expects to acquire or sell. The fund may enter into futures contracts for other reasons as well. For example, to efficiently change the duration stance of the fund by buying and/or selling government bond futures.

When buying or selling futures contracts, the fund must place a deposit with its broker equal to a fraction of the contract amount. This amount is known as “initial margin” and must be in the form of liquid debt instruments, including cash, cash-equivalents and U.S. government securities. Subsequent payments to and from the broker, known as “variation margin” may be made daily, if necessary, as the value of the futures contracts fluctuate. This process is known as “marking-to-market.” The margin amount will be returned to the fund upon termination of the futures contracts assuming all contractual obligations are satisfied. Because margin requirements are normally only a fraction of the amount of the futures contracts in a given transaction, futures trading can involve a great deal of leverage. In order to avoid this, the fund will earmark or segregate assets for any outstanding futures contracts as may be required under the federal securities laws.

While the fund intends to purchase and sell futures contracts in order to simulate full investment, there are risks associated with these transactions. Adverse market movements could cause the fund to experience substantial losses when buying and selling futures contracts. Of course, barring significant market distortions, similar results would have been expected if the fund had instead transacted in the underlying securities directly. There also is the risk of losing any margin payments held by a broker in the event of its bankruptcy. Additionally, the fund incurs transaction costs (i.e. brokerage fees) when engaging in futures trading. To the extent the fund also invests in futures in order to simulate full investment, these same risks apply.

When interest rates are rising or securities prices are falling, the fund may seek, through the sale of futures contracts, to offset a decline in the value of its current portfolio securities. When rates are falling or prices are rising, the fund, through the purchase of futures contracts, may attempt to secure better rates or prices than might later be available in the market when it effects anticipated purchases. Similarly, the fund may sell futures contracts on a specified currency to protect against a decline in the value of that currency and their portfolio securities that are denominated in that currency. The fund may purchase futures contracts on a foreign currency to fix the price in U.S. dollars of a security denominated in that currency that the fund has acquired or expects to acquire.

Futures contracts normally require actual delivery or acquisition of an underlying security or cash value of an index on the expiration date of the contract. In most cases, however, the contractual obligation is fulfilled before the date of the contract by buying or selling, as the case may be, identical futures contracts. Such offsetting transactions terminate the original contracts and cancel the obligation to take or make delivery of the underlying securities or cash. There may not always be a liquid secondary market at the time the fund seeks to close out a futures position. If the fund is unable to close out its position and prices move adversely, the fund would have to continue to make daily cash payments to maintain its

 

12


Table of Contents

margin requirements. If the fund had insufficient cash to meet these requirements it may have to sell portfolio securities at a disadvantageous time or incur extra costs by borrowing the cash. Also, the fund may be required to make or take delivery and incur extra transaction costs buying or selling the underlying securities. The fund seeks to reduce the risks associated with futures transactions by buying and selling futures contracts that are traded on national exchanges or for which there appears to be a liquid secondary market.

HYBRID INSTRUMENTS are a type of potentially high-risk derivative that combines a traditional stock, bond, or commodity 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 commodity, 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 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 commodity shortages and 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 net asset value of the fund. The fund will not invest more than 5% of its total assets in hybrid instruments.

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, 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. The fund will only invest in commodity-linked hybrid instruments that qualify under applicable rules of the CFTC for an exemption from the provisions of the CEA.

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, the 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.

ILLIQUID SECURITIES generally are any securities that cannot be disposed of promptly and in the ordinary course of business at approximately the amount at which the fund has valued the instruments. The liquidity of the fund’s investments is monitored under the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees. Investments currently not considered liquid include repurchase agreements not maturing within seven days and certain restricted securities. Any security may become illiquid at times of market dislocation.

MONEY MARKET SECURITIES are high-quality, short term debt securities that may be issued by entities such as the U.S. government, corporations and financial institutions (like banks). Money market securities include commercial paper, certificates of deposit, banker’s acceptances, notes and time deposits. Certificates of deposit and time deposits are issued against funds deposited in a banking institution for a specified period of time at a specified interest rate. Banker’s acceptances are credit instruments evidencing a bank’s obligation to pay a draft drawn on it by a customer. These instruments reflect the obligation both of the bank and of the drawer to pay the full amount of the instrument upon maturity. Commercial paper consists of short term, unsecured promissory notes issued to finance short term credit needs.

 

13


Table of Contents

Money market securities pay fixed, variable or floating rates of interest and are generally subject to credit and interest rate risks. The maturity date or price of and financial assets collateralizing a security may be structured in order to make it qualify as or act like a money market security. These securities may be subject to greater credit and interest rate risks than other money market securities because of their structure. Money market securities may be issued with puts or sold separately, sometimes called demand features or guarantees, which are agreements that allow the buyer to sell a security at a specified price and time to the seller or “put provider.” When the fund buys a put, losses could occur as a result of the costs of the put or if it exercises its rights under the put and the put provider does not perform as agreed. Standby commitments are types of puts.

The fund may keep a portion of its assets in cash for business operations. In order to reduce the effect this otherwise uninvested cash would have on its performance, the fund may invest in money market securities. The fund may also invest in money market securities to the extent it is consistent with its investment objective.

NON-PUBLICLY TRADED SECURITIES AND PRIVATE PLACEMENTS. The fund may invest in securities that are neither listed on a stock exchange nor traded over-the-counter, including privately placed securities. Such unlisted securities may involve a higher degree of business and financial risk that can result in substantial losses. As a result of the absence of a public trading market for these securities, they may be less liquid than publicly traded securities. Although these securities may be resold in privately negotiated transactions, the prices realized from these sales could be less than those originally paid by the fund or less than what may be considered the fair value of such securities. Furthermore, companies whose securities are not publicly traded may not be subject to the disclosure and other investor protection requirements which might be applicable if their securities were publicly traded. If such securities are required to be registered under the securities laws of one or more jurisdictions before being sold, the fund may be required to bear the expenses of registration.

NON-TRADITIONAL EQUITY SECURITIES. The fund may invest in convertible preferred stocks that offer enhanced yield features, such as Preferred Equity Redemption Cumulative Stock (“PERCS”), which provide an investor, such as the fund, with the opportunity to earn higher dividend income than is available on a company’s common stock. A PERCS is a preferred stock which generally features a mandatory conversion date, as well as a capital appreciation limit which is usually expressed in terms of a stated price. Upon the conversion date, most PERCS convert into common stock of the issuer (PERCS are generally not convertible into cash at maturity). Under a typical arrangement, if after a predetermined number of years the issuer’s common stock is trading at a price below that set by the capital appreciation limit, each PERCS would convert to one share of common stock. If, however, the issuer’s common stock is trading at a price above that set by the capital appreciation limit, the holder of the PERCS would receive less than one full share of common stock. The amount of that fractional share of common stock received by the PERCS holder is determined by dividing the price set by the capital appreciation limit of the PERCS by the market price of the issuer’s common stock. PERCS can be called at any time prior to maturity, and hence do not provide call protection. However, if called early, the issuer may pay a call premium over the market price to the investor. This call premium declines at a preset rate daily, up to the maturity date of the PERCS.

The fund may also invest in other enhanced convertible securities. These include but are not limited to ACES (Automatically Convertible Equity Securities), PEPS (Participating Equity Preferred Stock), PRIDES (Preferred Redeemable Increased Dividend Equity Securities), SAILS (Stock Appreciation Income Linked Securities), TECONS (Term Convertible Notes), QICS (Quarterly Income Cumulative Securities), and DECS (Dividend Enhanced Convertible Securities). ACES, PEPS, PRIDES, SAILS, TECONS, QICS, and DECS all have the following features: they are company-issued convertible preferred stock; unlike PERCS, they do not have capital appreciation limits; they seek to provide the investor with high current income, with some prospect of future capital appreciation; they are typically issued with three- to four-year maturities; they typically have some built-in call protection for the first two to three years; investors have the right to convert them into shares of common stock at a preset conversion ratio or hold them until maturity; and upon maturity, they will automatically convert to either cash or a specified number of shares of common stock.

OPTIONS CONTRACTS generally provide the right to buy or sell a security, commodity, futures contract or foreign currency in exchange for an agreed upon price. If the right is not exercised after a specified period, the option expires and the option buyer forfeits the money paid to the option seller. The fund may use options contracts as part of its principal investment strategy.

 

14


Table of Contents

A call option gives the buyer the right to buy a specified number of shares of a security at a fixed price on or before a specified date in the future. For this right, the call option buyer pays the call option seller, commonly called the call option writer, a fee called a premium. Call option buyers are usually anticipating that the price of the underlying security will rise above the price fixed with the call writer, thereby allowing them to profit. If the price of the underlying security does not rise, the call option buyer’s losses are limited to the premium paid to the call option writer. For call option writers, a rise in the price of the underlying security will be offset in part by the premium received from the call option buyer. If the call option writer does not own the underlying security, however, the losses that may ensue if the price rises could be potentially unlimited. If the call option writer owns the underlying security or commodity, this is called writing a covered call. All call and put options written by the fund will be covered, which means that the fund will own the securities subject to the option so long as the option is outstanding or the fund will earmark or segregate assets for any outstanding option contracts.

A put option is the opposite of a call option. It gives the buyer the right to sell a specified number of shares of a security at a fixed price on or before a specified date in the future. Put option buyers are usually anticipating a decline in the price of the underlying security, and wish to offset those losses when selling the security at a later date. All put options the fund writes will be covered, which means that the fund will earmark or segregate cash, U.S. government securities or other liquid securities with a value at least equal to the exercise price of the put option. The purpose of writing such options is to generate additional income for the fund. However, in return for the option premium, the fund accepts the risk that it may be required to purchase the underlying securities at a price in excess of the securities’ market value at the time of purchase.

The fund may purchase and write put and call options on any securities in which it may invest or any securities index or basket of securities based on securities in which it may invest. In addition, the fund may purchase and sell foreign currency options and foreign currency futures contracts and related options. The fund may purchase and write such options on securities that are listed on domestic or foreign securities exchanges or traded in the over-the-counter market. Like futures contracts, option contracts are rarely exercised. Option buyers usually sell the option before it expires. Option writers may terminate their obligations under a written call or put option by purchasing an option identical to the one it has written. Such purchases are referred to as “closing purchase transactions.” The fund may enter into closing sale transactions in order to realize gains or minimize losses on options it has purchased or wrote.

An exchange-traded currency option position may be closed out only on an options exchange that provides a secondary market for an option of the same series. Although the fund generally will purchase or write only those options for which there appears to be an active secondary market, there is no assurance that a liquid secondary market will exist for any particular option or at any particular time. If the fund is unable to effect a closing purchase transaction with respect to options it has written, it will not be able to sell the underlying securities or dispose of assets earmarked or held in a segregated account until the options expire or are exercised. Similarly, if the fund is unable to effect a closing sale transaction with respect to options it has purchased, it would have to exercise the options in order to realize any profit and will incur transaction costs upon the purchase or sale of underlying securities.

Reasons for the absence of a liquid secondary market on an exchange include the following: (1) there may be insufficient trading interest in certain options; (2) an exchange may impose restrictions on opening transactions or closing transactions or both; (3) trading halts, suspensions or other restrictions may be imposed with respect to particular classes or series of options; (4) unusual or unforeseen circumstances may interrupt normal operations on an exchange; (5) the facilities of an exchange or the Options Clearing Corporation (“OCC”) may not at all times be adequate to handle current trading volume; or (6) one or more exchanges could, for economic or other reasons, decide or be compelled at some future date to discontinue the trading of options (or a particular class or series of options), although outstanding options on that exchange that had been issued by the OCC as a result of trades on that exchange would continue to be exercisable in accordance with their terms.

 

15


Table of Contents

The ability to terminate over-the-counter options is more limited than with exchange-traded options and may involve the risk that broker-dealers participating in such transactions will not fulfill their obligations. Until such time as the staff of the SEC changes its position, the fund will treat purchased over-the-counter options and all assets used to cover written over-the-counter options as illiquid securities, except that with respect to options written with primary dealers in U.S. government securities pursuant to an agreement requiring a closing purchase transaction at a formula price, the amount of illiquid securities may be calculated with reference to a formula the staff of the SEC approves.

Additional risks are involved with options trading because of the low margin deposits required and the extremely high degree of leverage that may be involved in options trading. There may be imperfect correlation between the change in market value of the securities held by the fund and the prices of the options, possible lack of a liquid secondary market, and the resulting inability to close such positions prior to their maturity dates.

The fund may write or purchase an option only when the market value of that option, when aggregated with the market value of all other options transactions made on behalf of the fund, does not exceed 5% of its net assets.

An option contract may be implicitly entered into by purchasing certain securities with built in options. An example of such would be a reverse floating rate note where the buyer is also selling one or more caps on short dated interest rates.

PROMISSORY NOTES are written agreements committing the maker or issuer to pay the payee a specified amount either on demand or at a fixed date in the future, with or without interest. These are sometimes called negotiable notes or instruments and are subject to credit risk. Bank notes are notes used to represent obligations issued by banks in large denominations.

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS (REITs) are pooled investment vehicles, which invest primarily in income producing real estate or real estate related loans or interests and, in some cases, manage real estate. REITs are sometimes referred to as equity REITs, mortgage REITs or hybrid REITs. An equity REIT invests primarily in properties and generates income from rental and lease properties and, in some cases, from the management of real estate. Equity REITs also offer the potential for growth as a result of property appreciation and from the sale of appreciated property. Mortgage REITs invest primarily in real estate mortgages, which may secure construction, development or long term loans, and derive income for the collection of interest payments. Hybrid REITs may combine the features of equity REITs and mortgage REITs. REITs are generally organized as corporations or business trusts, but are not taxed as a corporation if they meet certain requirements of Subchapter M of the Code. To qualify, a REIT must, among other things, invest substantially all of its assets in interests in real estate (including other REITs), cash and government securities, distribute at least 95% of its taxable income to its shareholders and receive at least 75% of that income from rents, mortgages and sales of property.

Like any investment in real estate, a REIT’s performance depends on many factors, such as its ability to find tenants for its properties, to renew leases, and to finance property purchases and renovations. In general, REITs may be affected by changes in underlying real estate values, which may have an exaggerated effect to the extent a REIT concentrates its investment in certain regions or property types. For example, rental income could decline because of extended vacancies, increased competition from nearby properties, tenants’ failure to pay rent, or incompetent management. Property values could decrease because of overbuilding, environmental liabilities, uninsured damages caused by natural disasters, a general decline in the neighborhood, losses due to casualty or condemnation, increases in property taxes, or changes in zoning laws. Ultimately, a REIT’s performance depends on the types of properties it owns and how well the REIT manages its properties.

In general, during periods of rising interest rates, REITs may lose some of their appeal for investors who may be able to obtain higher yields from other income-producing investments, such as long term bonds. Higher interest rates also mean that financing for property purchases and improvements is more costly and difficult to obtain. During periods of declining interest rates, certain mortgage REITs may hold mortgages that mortgagors elect to prepay, which can reduce the yield on securities issued by mortgage REITs. Mortgage REITs may be affected by the ability of borrowers to repay debts to the REIT when due and equity REITs may be affected by the ability of tenants to pay rent.

 

16


Table of Contents

Like small-cap stocks in general, certain REITs have relatively small market capitalizations and their securities can be more volatile than—and at times will perform differently from—large-cap stocks. In addition, because small-cap stocks are typically less liquid than large-cap stocks, REIT stocks may sometimes experience greater share-price fluctuations than the stocks of larger companies. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills, have limited diversification, and are therefore subject to risks inherent in operating and financing a limited number of projects. By investing in REITs indirectly through the fund, a shareholder will bear indirectly a proportionate share of the REIT’s expenses in addition to their proportionate share of the fund’s expenses. Finally, REITs could possibly fail to qualify for tax-free pass-through of income under the Code or to maintain their exemptions from registration under the 1940 Act.

REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS are instruments under which a buyer acquires ownership of certain securities (usually U.S. government securities) from a seller who agrees to repurchase the securities at a mutually agreed-upon time and price, thereby determining the yield during the buyer’s holding period. Any repurchase agreements the fund enters into will involve the fund as the buyer and banks or broker-dealers as sellers. The period of repurchase agreements is usually short—from overnight to one week, although the securities collateralizing a repurchase agreement may have longer maturity dates. Default by the seller might cause the fund to experience a loss or delay in the liquidation of the collateral securing the repurchase agreement. The fund also may incur disposition costs in liquidating the collateral. In the event of a bankruptcy or other default of a repurchase agreement’s seller, the fund might incur expenses in enforcing its rights, and could experience losses, including a decline in the value of the underlying securities and loss of income. The fund will make payment under a repurchase agreement only upon physical delivery or evidence of book entry transfer of the collateral to the account of its custodian bank.

RESTRICTED SECURITIES are securities that are subject to legal restrictions on their sale. Restricted securities may be considered to be liquid if an institutional or other market exists for these securities. In making this determination, the fund, under the direction and supervision of the Board of Trustees will take into account various factors, including: (1) the frequency of trades and quotes for the security; (2) the number of dealers willing to purchase or sell the security and the number of potential purchasers; (3) dealer undertakings to make a market in the security; and (4) the nature of the security and marketplace trades (e.g., the time needed to dispose of the security, the method of soliciting offers and the mechanics of transfer). To the extent the fund invests in restricted securities that are deemed liquid, its general level of illiquidity may be increased if qualified institutional buyers become uninterested in purchasing these securities.

REVERSE REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS AND MORTGAGE DOLLAR ROLLS may be used by the fund. The fund may engage in reverse repurchase agreements to facilitate portfolio liquidity, a practice common in the mutual fund industry, or for arbitrage transactions as discussed below. In a reverse repurchase agreement, the fund would sell a security and enter into an agreement to repurchase the security at a specified future date and price. The fund generally retains the right to interest and principal payments on the security. If the fund uses the cash it obtains to invest in other securities, this may be considered a form of leverage and may expose the fund to a greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value on the fund’s portfolio’s securities. Because the fund receives cash upon entering into a reverse repurchase agreement, it may be considered a borrowing. When required by guidelines of the SEC, the fund will set aside permissible liquid assets earmarked or in a segregated account to secure its obligations to repurchase the security.

The fund also may enter into mortgage dollar rolls, in which the fund would sell MBS for delivery in the current month and simultaneously contract to purchase substantially similar securities on a specified future date. While the fund would forego principal and interest paid on the MBS during the roll period, the fund would be compensated by the difference between the current sales price and the lower price for the future purchase as well as by any interest earned on the proceeds of the initial sale. The fund also could be compensated through the receipt of fee income equivalent to a lower forward price. At the time the fund would enter into a mortgage dollar roll, it would set aside permissible liquid assets earmarked or in a segregated account to secure its obligation for the forward commitment to buy MBS. Mortgage dollar roll transactions may be considered a borrowing by the fund.

 

17


Table of Contents

The mortgage dollar rolls and reverse repurchase agreements entered into by the fund may be used as arbitrage transactions in which the fund will maintain an offsetting position in short duration investment-grade debt obligations. Since the fund will receive interest on the securities or repurchase agreements in which it invests the transaction proceeds, such transactions may involve leverage. However, since such securities or repurchase agreements will be high quality and short duration, the Investment Adviser believes that such arbitrage transactions present lower risks to the fund than those associated with other types of leverage. There can be no assurance that the fund’s use of the cash it receives from a mortgage dollar roll will provide a positive return.

SECURITIES LENDING of portfolio securities is a common practice in the securities industry. The fund may engage in security lending arrangements. For example, the fund may receive cash collateral, and it may invest it in short term, interest-bearing obligations, but will do so only to the extent that it will not lose the tax treatment available to regulated investment companies. Lending portfolio securities involves risks that the borrower may fail to return the securities or provide additional collateral. Also, voting rights with respect to the loaned securities may pass with the lending of the securities.

The fund may loan portfolio securities to qualified broker-dealers or other institutional investors provided: (1) the loan is secured continuously by collateral consisting of U.S. government securities, letters of credit, cash or cash equivalents or other appropriate instruments maintained on a daily marked-to-market basis in an amount at least equal to the current market value of the securities loaned; (2) the fund may at any time call the loan and obtain the return of the securities loaned; (3) the fund will receive any interest or dividends paid on the loaned securities; and (4) the aggregate market value of securities loaned will not at any time exceed one-third of the total assets of the fund, including collateral received from the loan (at market value computed at the time of the loan).

By lending its securities, the fund may increase its income by receiving payments from the borrower that reflect the amount of any interest or any dividends payable on the loaned securities as well as by either investing cash collateral received from the borrower in short-term instruments or obtaining a fee from the borrower when U.S. Government securities or letters of credit are used as collateral.

Although voting rights with respect to loaned securities pass to the borrower, the lender retains the right to recall a security (or terminate a loan) for the purpose of exercising the security’s voting rights. Efforts to recall such securities promptly may be unsuccessful, especially for foreign securities or thinly traded securities such as small-cap stocks. In addition, because recalling a security may involve expenses to the fund, it is expected that the fund will do so only where the items being voted upon are, in the judgment of the Investment Adviser, either material to the economic value of the security or threaten to materially impact the issuer’s corporate governance policies or structure.

SECURITIES OF OTHER INVESTMENT COMPANIES may be purchased and sold by the fund and those issued by foreign investment companies. Mutual funds are registered investment companies, which may issue and redeem their shares on a continuous basis (open-end mutual funds) or may offer a fixed number of shares usually listed on an exchange (closed-end mutual funds). Mutual funds generally offer investors the advantages of diversification and professional investment management, by combining shareholders’ money and investing it in various types of securities, such as stocks, bonds and money market securities. Mutual funds also make various investments and use certain techniques in order to enhance their performance. These may include entering into delayed-delivery and when-issued securities transactions or swap agreements; buying and selling futures contracts, illiquid and restricted securities and repurchase agreements and borrowing or lending money and/or portfolio securities. The risks of investing in mutual funds generally reflect the risks of the securities in which the mutual funds invest and the investment techniques they may employ. Also, mutual funds charge fees and incur operating expenses. If the fund decides to purchase securities of other investment companies, the fund intends to purchase shares of mutual funds in compliance with the requirements of federal law or any applicable exemptive relief received from the SEC. Except with respect to the fund’s investments in registered money market funds

 

18


Table of Contents

and unregistered money market funds that comply with certain conditions of the 1940 Act, mutual fund investments for the fund are currently restricted under federal regulations, and therefore, the extent to which the fund may invest in another mutual fund may be limited.

Funds in which the fund also may invest include unregistered or privately-placed funds, such as hedge funds and offshore funds. Hedge funds and offshore funds are not registered with the SEC, and therefore are largely exempt from the regulatory requirements that apply to registered investment companies (mutual funds). As a result, these types of funds have greater ability to make investments or use investment techniques, such as leveraging, that can increase investment return but also may substantially increase the risk of losses. Investments in these funds also may be more difficult to sell, which could cause losses to the fund. For example, hedge funds typically require investors to keep their investment in a hedge fund for some period of time, such as 1 year or more. This means investors would not be able to sell their shares of a hedge fund until such time had past, and the investment may be deemed to be illiquid. In addition, because hedge funds may not value their portfolio holdings on a frequent basis, investments in those hedge funds may be difficult to price.

The fund is prohibited from acquiring any securities of registered open-end investment companies or registered unit investment trusts in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(G) or Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the 1940 Act.

SHORT SALES may be used by the fund as part of its overall portfolio management strategies or to offset (hedge) a potential decline in the value of a security. The fund may engage in short sales that are either “against the box” or “uncovered.” A short sale is “against the box” if at all times during which the short position is open, the fund owns at least an equal amount of the securities or securities convertible into, or has the right to acquire, at no added cost, the securities of the same issue as the securities that are sold short. A short sale against the box is a taxable transaction to the fund with respect to the securities that are sold short. “Uncovered” short sales are transactions under which the fund sells a security it does not own. To complete such transaction, the fund may borrow the security through a broker to make delivery to the buyer and, in doing so, the fund becomes obligated to replace the security borrowed by purchasing the security at the market price at the time of the replacement. The fund also may have to pay a fee to borrow particular securities, which would increase the cost of the security. In addition, the fund is often obligated to pay any accrued interest and dividends on the securities until they are replaced. The proceeds of the short sale position will be retained by the broker until the fund replaces the borrowed securities.

The fund will incur a loss if the price of the security sold short increases between the time of the short sale and the time the fund replaces the borrowed security and, conversely, the fund will realize a gain if the price declines. Any gain will be decreased, and any loss increased, by the transaction costs described above. A short sale creates the risk of an unlimited loss, as the price of the underlying securities could theoretically increase without limit, thus increasing the cost of buying those securities to cover the short position. If the fund sells securities short “against the box,” it may protect unrealized gains, but will lose the opportunity to profit on such securities if the price rises. The successful use of short selling as a hedging strategy may be adversely affected by imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the security sold short and the securities being hedged.

The fund’s obligation to replace the securities borrowed in connection with a short sale will be secured by collateral deposited with the broker that consists of cash or other liquid securities. In addition, the fund will earmark cash or liquid assets or place in a segregated account an amount of cash or other liquid assets equal to the difference, if any, between (1) the market value of the securities sold short, marked-to-market daily, and (2) any cash or other liquid securities deposited as collateral with the broker in connection with the short sale.

SPREAD TRANSACTIONS may be used for hedging or managing risk. The fund may purchase covered spread options from securities dealers. Such covered spread options are not presently exchange-listed or exchange-traded. The purchase of a 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 relation 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 purchase of spread options will be used to protect the fund against adverse changes in prevailing credit quality spreads, i.e., the yield spread between high quality and lower quality securities. Such protection is only provided during the life of the spread option.

 

19


Table of Contents

SWAP AGREEMENTS are privately negotiated over-the-counter derivative products in which two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities (referred to as the “underlying”) and a predetermined amount (referred to as the “notional amount”). The underlying for a swap may be an interest rate (fixed or floating), a currency exchange rate, a commodity price index, a credit derivative contract (single name or multiname or index), a security, group of securities or a securities index, a combination of any of these, or various other rates, assets or indices. Swap agreements generally do not involve the delivery of the underlying or principal, and a party’s obligations generally are equal to only 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 swap agreement. In addition, the fund may invest in swaptions, which are privately-negotiated option-based derivative products. Swaptions give the holder the right to enter into a swap. The fund may use a swaption in addition to or in lieu of a swap involving a similar rate or index.

Swap agreements can be structured to increase or decrease the fund’s exposure to long or short term interest rates, corporate borrowing rates and other conditions, such as changing security prices and inflation rates. They also can be structured to increase or decrease the fund’s exposure to specific issuers or specific sectors of the bond market such as mortgage securities. For example, if the fund agreed to pay a longer-term fixed rate in exchange for a shorter-term floating rate while holding longer-term fixed rate bonds, the swap would tend to decrease the fund’s exposure to longer-term interest rates. Swap agreements tend to increase or decrease the overall volatility of the fund’s investments and its share price and yield. Changes in interest rates, or other factors determining the amount of payments due to and from the fund, can be the most significant factors in the performance of a swap agreement. If a swap agreement calls for payments from the fund, the fund must be prepared to make such payments when they are due. In order to help minimize risks, the fund will earmark or segregate appropriate assets for any accrued but unpaid net amounts owed under the terms of a swap agreement entered into on a net basis. All other swap agreements will require the fund to earmark or segregate assets in the amount of the accrued amounts owed under the swap. The fund could sustain losses if a counterparty does not perform as agreed under the terms of the swap. The fund will enter into swap agreements with counterparties deemed creditworthy by the Investment Adviser.

For purposes of applying the fund’s investment policies and restrictions (as stated in the prospectus and this SAI) swap agreements are generally valued by the fund at market value. In the case of a credit default swap sold by the fund (i.e., where the fund is selling credit default protection), however, the fund will generally value the swap at its notional amount. The manner in which certain securities or other instruments are valued by the 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.

TEMPORARY DEFENSIVE STRATEGIES are strategies the fund may take for temporary or defensive purposes. During unusual economic or market conditions or for temporary defensive or liquidity purposes, the fund may invest up to 100% of its assets in cash, money market instruments, repurchase agreements and other short term obligations that would not ordinarily be consistent with the fund’s objectives. The fund will do so only if the Investment Adviser or Subadviser believes that the risk of loss outweighs the opportunity for capital gains or higher income. When the fund engages in such activities, it may not achieve its investment objective.

U.S. GOVERNMENT SECURITIES are issued by the U.S. Treasury or issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities. Not all U.S. government securities are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some U.S. government securities, such as those issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Student Loan Marketing Association (SLMA or Sallie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB), are supported by a line of credit the issuing entity has with the U.S. Treasury. Others are supported solely by the credit of the issuing agency or instrumentality such as obligations issued by the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation (FFCB). There can be no assurance that the U.S. government will provide financial support to U.S. government securities of its agencies and instrumentalities if it is not obligated to do so under law. U.S. government securities, including U.S. Treasury securities, are among the safest securities, however, not unlike other debt securities, they are still sensitive to interest rate changes, which will cause their yields and prices to fluctuate.

 

20


Table of Contents

On September 7, 2008, the U.S. Treasury announced a federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, placing the two federal instrumentalities in conservatorship. Under the takeover, the U.S. Treasury agreed to acquire $1 billion of senior preferred stock of each instrumentality and obtained warrants for the purchase of common stock of each instrumentality. Under these Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (SPAs), the U.S. Treasury has pledged to provide up to $100 billion per instrumentality as needed, including the contribution of cash capital to the instrumentalities in the event their liabilities exceed their assets. On May 6, 2009, the U.S. Treasury increased its maximum commitment to each instrumentality under the SPAs to $200 billion per instrumentality. On December 24, 2009, the U.S. Treasury further amended the SPAs to allow the cap on Treasury’s funding commitment to increase as necessary to accommodate any cumulative reduction in Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s net worth through the end of 2012. At the conclusion of 2012, the remaining U.S. Treasury commitment will then be fully available to be drawn per the terms of the SPAs. In December 2009, the U.S. Treasury also amended the SPAs to provide Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac with some additional flexibility to meet the requirement to reduce their mortgage portfolios.

The actions of the U.S. Treasury are intended to ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac maintain a positive net worth and meet their financial obligations preventing mandatory triggering of receivership. No assurance can be given that the U.S. Treasury initiatives will be successful.

On August 5, 2011, S&P lowered the long-term sovereign credit rating assigned to the United States to AA+ with a negative outlook. On August 8, 2011, S&P downgraded the long-term senior debt rating of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to AA+ with a negative outlook. The long-term impacts of the downgrades or the impacts of any future downgrade are unknown. However, the downgrades could have a material adverse impact on global financial markets and worldwide economic conditions, and could negatively impact the fund.

INVESTMENT LIMITATIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

The following are fundamental investment limitations and restrictions, and may be changed only by vote of a majority of the fund’s outstanding voting securities.

The fund may not:

 

1) Concentrate investments in a particular industry or group of industries, as concentration is defined under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

2) Purchase or sell commodities or real estate, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

3) Make loans to other persons, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

4) Borrow money, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

5) Issue senior securities, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

21


Table of Contents
6) Underwrite securities issued by other persons, except to the extent permitted (or not prohibited) under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

7) Purchase securities of an issuer, except as consistent with the maintenance of its status as an open-end diversified company under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time

The following descriptions of the 1940 Act may assist investors in understanding the above policies and restrictions.

Diversification. Under the 1940 Act and the rules, regulations and interpretations thereunder, a “diversified company,” as to 75% of its total assets, may not purchase securities of any issuer (other than obligations of, or guaranteed by, the U.S. government or its agencies, or instrumentalities or securities of other investment companies) if, as a result, more than 5% of its total assets would be invested in the securities of such issuer, or more than 10% of the issuer’s voting securities would be held by the fund.

Borrowing. The 1940 Act restricts an investment company from borrowing (including pledging, mortgaging or hypothecating assets) in excess of 33 1/3% of its total assets (not including temporary borrowings not in excess of 5% of its total assets). Transactions that are fully collateralized in a manner that does not involve the prohibited issuance of a “senior security” within the meaning of Section 18(f) of the 1940 Act, shall not be regarded as borrowings for the purposes of the fund’s investment restriction.

Concentration. The SEC has defined concentration as investing 25% or more of an investment company’s total assets in an industry or group of industries, with certain exceptions such as with respect to investments in obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government or its agencies and instrumentalities, or tax-exempt obligations of state or municipal governments and their political subdivisions. For purposes of the fund’s concentration policy, (i) financial service companies will be classified according to the types of services; for example, insurance, commercial banks, mortgages, and diversified finance will each be considered a separate industry; and (ii) energy and natural resources companies will be classified according to the types of products and services; for example, crude oil, petroleum, natural gas, precious metals and mining will each be considered a separate industry.

Lending. Under the 1940 Act, an investment company may only make loans if expressly permitted by its investment policies. The fund’s non-fundamental investment policy on lending is set forth below.

Real Estate. The 1940 Act does not directly restrict an investment company’s ability to invest in real estate, but does require that every investment company have a fundamental investment policy governing such investments. The fund has adopted a fundamental policy that would permit direct investment in real estate. However, the fund has a non-fundamental investment limitation that prohibits it from investing directly in real estate. This non-fundamental policy may be changed only by vote of the fund’s Board of Trustees.

Senior Securities. Senior securities may include any obligation or instrument issued by an investment company evidencing indebtedness. The 1940 Act generally prohibits the fund from issuing senior securities, although it provides allowances for certain borrowings and certain other investments, such as short sales, reverse repurchase agreements, firm commitment agreements and standby commitments, when such investments are “covered” or with appropriate earmarking or segregation of assets to cover such obligations.

Underwriting. Under the 1940 Act, underwriting securities involves an investment company purchasing securities directly from an issuer for the purpose of selling (distributing) them or participating in any such activity either directly or indirectly.

 

22


Table of Contents

The following are non-fundamental investment limitations and restrictions, and may be changed by the board of trustees.

The fund may not:

 

1) Invest more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid securities.

 

2) Purchase securities of other investment companies, except as permitted by the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

 

3) Sell securities short unless it owns the security or the right to obtain the security or equivalent securities, or unless it covers such short sale as required by current SEC rules and interpretations (transactions in futures contracts, options and other derivative instruments are not considered selling securities short).

 

4) Purchase securities on margin, except such short term credits as may be necessary for the clearance of purchases and sales of securities and provided that margin deposits in connection with futures contracts, options on futures or other derivative instruments shall not constitute purchasing securities on margin.

 

5) Borrow money except that the fund may (i) borrow money from banks or through an interfund lending facility, if any, only for temporary or emergency purposes (and not for leveraging) and (ii) engage in reverse repurchase agreements with any party; provided that (i) and (ii) in combination do not exceed 33 1/3% of its total assets (any borrowings that come to exceed this amount will be reduced to the extent necessary to comply with the limitation within three business days).

 

6) Lend any security or make any other loan if, as a result, more than 33 1/3% of its total assets would be lent to other parties (this restriction does not apply to purchases of debt securities or repurchase agreements).

 

7) Purchase or sell commodities, commodity contracts or real estate, including interests in real estate limited partnerships, provided that the fund may (i) purchase securities of companies that deal in real estate or interests therein (including REITs), (ii) purchase or sell futures contracts, options contracts, equity index participations and index participation contracts, and (iii) purchase securities of companies that deal in precious metals or interests therein.

Policies and investment limitations that state a maximum percentage of assets that may be invested in a security or other asset, or that set forth a quality standard shall be measured immediately after and as a result of the fund’s acquisition of such security or asset, unless otherwise noted. Except with respect to limitations on borrowing and futures and option contracts, any subsequent change in net assets or other circumstances does not require the fund to sell an investment if it could not then make the same investment. With respect to the limitation on illiquid securities, in the event that a subsequent change in net assets or other circumstances cause the fund to exceed its limitation, the fund will take steps to bring the aggregate amount of illiquid instruments back within the limitations as soon as reasonably practicable.

The phrase “shareholder approval” as used in the Prospectus and herein, and the phrase “vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities,” as used herein, means the affirmative vote of the lesser of (1) more than 50% of the outstanding shares of a class, the fund or the Trust, as the case may be, or (2) 67% or more of the shares of a class, the fund or the Trust, as the case may be, present at a meeting if more than 50% of the outstanding shares are represented at the meeting in person or by proxy.

PORTFOLIO TURNOVER

A change in securities held by the fund is known as “portfolio turnover” and almost always involves the payment by the fund of brokerage commissions or dealer markup and other transaction costs on the sale of securities as well as on the reinvestment of the proceeds in other securities. Portfolio turnover is not a limiting factor with respect to investment decisions.

 

23


Table of Contents

As disclosed in the Prospectus, high portfolio turnover involves correspondingly greater brokerage commissions and other transaction costs, which will be borne directly by the fund, and could involve realization of capital gains that would be taxable when distributed to shareholders of the fund. To the extent that portfolio turnover results in the realization of net short-term capital gains, such gains are ordinarily taxed to shareholders at ordinary income tax rates.

The portfolio turnover rate for the fund for the past fiscal year and previous fiscal period is as follows.

 

2012

    2011  
  96     98

INCOME, DIVIDENDS, DISTRIBUTIONS AND TAX STATUS

This discussion of federal income tax consequences is based on Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”) and the regulations issued thereunder as in effect on the date of this Statement of Additional Information. New legislation, as well as administrative changes or court decisions, may significantly change the conclusions expressed herein, and may have a retroactive effect with respect to the transaction contemplated herein.

The tax status of the fund and the distributions which it may make are summarized in the Prospectus under the headings “Distributions” and “Taxes.” The fund intends to qualify each year as a regulated investment company (“RIC”) under the Code. In order to qualify as a RIC and to qualify for the special tax treatment accorded RICs and their shareholders, the fund must, among other things: (a) derive at least 90% of its gross income from dividends, interest, payments with respect to certain securities loans, gains from the sale or other disposition of stock, securities or foreign currencies, or other income (including but not limited to gains from options, futures or forward contracts) derived with respect to its business of investing in such stock, securities or currencies and net income derived from an interest in a qualified publicly traded partnership; (b) diversify its holdings so that, at the close of each quarter of its taxable year, (i) at least 50% of the value of its total assets consists of cash, cash items, U.S. Government securities, securities of other RICs or other securities limited generally with respect to any one issuer to a value not more than 5% of the value of the total assets of the fund and not more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer, and (ii) not more than 25% of the value of its total assets is invested in the securities (other than U.S. Government securities or securities of other RICs) of any one issuer, of two or more issuers of which the fund owns at least 20% of the voting power of each issuer and that are engaged in the same, similar, or related businesses, or the securities of one or more qualified publicly traded partnerships; and (c) distribute with respect to each taxable year at least 90% of the sum of its taxable net investment income, its net tax-exempt income (if any), and the excess, if any, of net short-term capital gains over net long-term capital losses for such year. To the extent the fund qualifies for treatment as a RIC, the fund will not be subject to federal income tax on income paid to its shareholders in the form of dividends or capital gain distributions.

If the fund fails to qualify as a RIC accorded special tax treatment in any taxable year, the fund will be subject to tax on its taxable income at corporate rates, and all distributions from earnings and profits, including any distributions of net tax-exempt income and net long-term capital gains, will be taxable to shareholders as ordinary income. Subject to certain limitations, such distributions should qualify for the dividends received deduction for corporate shareholders and for the lower tax rates applicable to qualified dividend income for individual shareholders. In addition, the fund could be required to recognize unrealized gains, pay substantial taxes and interest and make substantial distributions before requalifying as a RIC that is accorded special tax treatment.

In order to avoid an excise tax imposed on certain underdistributed amounts, the fund must distribute prior to each calendar year end without regard to the fund’s fiscal year end (i) 98% of the fund’s ordinary income, (ii) 98.2% of the fund’s capital gain net income, if any, realized in the one-year period ending on October 31 (or later if the fund is permitted and so elects), and (iii) 100% of any undistributed income from prior years. A dividend paid to shareholders by the fund in January of a year is generally deemed to have been paid by the fund on December 31 of the preceding year, if the dividend was declared and payable to shareholders of record on a date in October, November or December of that preceding year.

 

24


Table of Contents

The fund may be subject to foreign withholding taxes on income and gains derived from foreign investments. Such taxes would reduce the yield on the fund’s investments, but, as discussed in the fund’s Prospectus, may in some situations be taken as either a deduction or a credit by U.S. shareholders. Investment by the fund in certain “passive foreign investment companies” could subject the fund to a U.S. federal income tax or other charge on distributions received from, or on the sale of its investment in, such a company. Such a tax cannot be eliminated by making distributions to fund shareholders. The fund may avoid this tax by making an election to mark certain of such securities to the market annually. Alternatively, where it is in a position to do so, the fund may elect to treat a passive foreign investment company as a “qualified electing fund,” in which case different rules will apply, although the fund generally does not expect to be in the position to make such elections.

For federal income tax purposes, distributions of investment income are generally taxable as ordinary income. Taxes on distributions of capital gains are determined by how long the fund owned the investments that generated them, rather than how long a shareholder has owned his or her shares. Distributions of net capital gains from the sale of investments that the fund owned for more than one year and that are properly designated by the fund as capital gain dividends will be taxable as long-term capital gains. Distributions of gains from the sale of investments that the fund owned for one year or less will be taxable as ordinary income. The dividends-received deduction for corporations will generally be available to corporate shareholders with respect to their receipt of the fund’s dividends from investment income to the extent derived from dividends received by the fund from domestic corporations, provided the fund and the shareholder each meet the relevant holding period requirements.

For taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012, distributions of investment income designated by the fund as derived from “qualified dividend income” will be taxed in the hands of individuals at the rates applicable to long-term capital gain. In order for some portion of the dividends received by fund shareholder to be qualified dividend income, the fund must meet holding period and other requirements with respect to some portion of the dividend paying stocks in its portfolio and the shareholder must meet holding period and other requirements with respect to the fund’s shares. A dividend will not be treated as qualified dividend income (1) if the dividend is received with respect to any share of stock held for fewer than 61 days during the 121-day period beginning on the date which is 60 days before the date on which such share becomes ex-dividend with respect to such dividend (or, in the case of certain preferred stock, 91 days during the 181-day period beginning 90 days before such date), (2) to the extent that the recipient is under an obligation (whether pursuant to a short sale or otherwise) to make related payments with respect to positions in substantially similar or related property, (3) if the recipient elects to have the dividend income treated as investment income for purposes of the limitation on deductibility of investment interest, or (4) if the dividend is received from a foreign corporation that is (a) not eligible for the benefits of a comprehensive income tax treaty with the United States (with the exception of dividends paid on stock of such a foreign corporation readily tradable on an established securities market in the United States), or (b) treated as a foreign personal holding company, foreign investment company, or passive foreign investment company.

If the aggregate qualified dividends received by the fund during any taxable year are 95% or more of its gross income, then 100% of the fund’s dividends (other than properly designated capital gain dividends) will be eligible to be treated as qualified dividend income. For this purpose, the only gain included in the term “gross income” is the excess of net short-term capital gain over net long-term capital loss. In general, distributions of investment income designated by the fund as derived from qualified dividend income will be treated as qualified dividend income by a shareholder taxed as an individual provided the shareholder meets the holding period and other requirements described above with respect to the fund’s shares.

Distributions are taxable to shareholders even if they are paid from income or gains earned by the fund before a shareholder’s investment (and thus were included in the price the shareholder paid). Distributions are taxable whether shareholders receive them in cash or in the form of additional shares of the fund to which the distribution relates. Any gain resulting from the sale or exchange of fund shares generally will be taxable as capital gains.

 

25


Table of Contents

Long-term capital gain rates applicable to individuals have been temporarily reduced—in general, to 15% with lower rates applying to taxpayers in the 10% and 15% rate brackets—for taxable years beginning on or before December 31, 2012.

Dividends and distributions on the fund’s shares are generally subject to federal income tax as described herein, even though such dividends and distributions may economically represent a return of a particular shareholder’s investment. Such distributions are likely to occur in respect of shares purchased at a time when the fund’s net asset value reflects gains that are either unrealized, or realized but not distributed.

Certain tax-exempt organizations or entities may not be subject to federal income tax on dividends or distributions from the fund. Each organization or entity should review its own circumstances and the federal tax treatment of its income.

Under current law, the fund is generally required to withhold and remit to the U.S. Treasury a percentage of the taxable dividends and other distributions paid to and proceeds of share sales, exchanges or redemptions made by any individual shareholder who fails to furnish the fund with a correct taxpayer identification number, who has underreported income in the past or fails to provide certain certifications. However, the general backup withholding rules set forth above will not apply to a shareholder so long as the shareholder furnishes the fund with the appropriate certification required by the Internal Revenue Service. The backup withholding tax rate is 28% for amounts paid through 2012. The backup withholding rate reductions will be 31% for amounts paid after December 31, 2012.

In order for a foreign investor to qualify for exemption from (or reduced rates for) withholding tax under income tax treaties, the foreign investor must comply with special certification and filing requirements. Foreign investors in the fund should consult their tax advisers in this regard.

The fund’s transactions in options, futures contracts, hedging transactions, forward contracts, straddles and certain foreign currencies will be subject to special tax rules (including mark-to-market, constructive sale, straddle, wash sale and short sale rules), the effect of which may be to accelerate income to the fund, defer losses to the fund, cause adjustments in the holding periods of the fund’s securities, convert long-term capital gains into short-term capital gains and convert short-term capital losses into long-term capital losses. These rules could therefore affect the amount, timing and character of distributions to shareholders.

Certain transactions effectively insulating the fund from substantially all risk of loss and all opportunity for gain in an appreciated financial position are treated as constructive sales of those positions for federal income tax purposes. Short sales, swap contracts, and forward or futures contracts to sell the appreciated position, or one or more other transactions that have substantially the same effect as those transactions as determined under regulations, are treated as “constructive sales” for this purpose. If the fund owns an appreciated financial position and enters into such a transaction it will generally recognize gain for tax purposes prior to the generation of cash by such activities, which may require the fund to sell assets to meet its distribution requirement.

THE TAX DISCUSSION SET FORTH ABOVE IS A SUMMARY INCLUDED FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY. EACH SHAREHOLDER IS ADVISED TO CONSULT HIS OR HER OWN TAX ADVISER WITH RESPECT TO THE SPECIFIC TAX CONSEQUENCES TO HIM OR HER OF AN INVESTMENT IN THE FUND, INCLUDING THE EFFECT AND APPLICABILITY OF STATE, LOCAL, FOREIGN, AND OTHER TAX LAWS AND THE POSSIBLE EFFECTS OF CHANGES IN FEDERAL OR OTHER TAX LAWS. THIS DISCUSSION IS NOT INTENDED, AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED, TO BE A SUBSTITUTE FOR CAREFUL TAX PLANNING.

 

26


Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT OF THE FUND

The fund is overseen by a Board of Trustees. The trustees are responsible for protecting shareholder interests. The trustees regularly meet to review the investment activities, contractual arrangements and the investment performance of the fund. The trustees met 7 times during the most recent fiscal year.

Certain trustees are “interested persons.” A trustee is considered an interested person of a trust under the 1940 Act if he or she is an officer, director, or an employee of Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM” or the “investment adviser”) or Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (“Schwab”). A trustee also may be considered an interested person of a trust under the 1940 Act if he or she owns stock of The Charles Schwab Corporation, a publicly traded company and the parent company of the funds’ investment adviser and distributor.

As used herein the terms “Fund Complex” and “Family of Investment Companies” each refer collectively to The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Strategic Trust, Laudus Trust, and Laudus Institutional Trust which, as of June 30, 2012, included 92 funds.

Each of the trustees also serves in the same capacity as described for the trust, for Schwab Capital Trust, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, and Laudus Institutional Trust. The tables below provide information about the trustees and officers for the trust, which includes funds in this SAI. The address of each individual listed below is 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

 

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH,

AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE

TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING

THE PAST FIVE YEARS

   NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE
  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE PAST FIVE

YEARS

INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES

Mariann Byerwalter

1960

Trustee

(Trustee since 2004)

   Chairman of JDN Corporate Advisory LLC.    75   

Director, Redwood Trust, Inc. (1998 — present)

 

Director, PMI Group Inc. (2001 — 2009)

John F. Cogan

1947

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

   Senior Fellow: The Hoover Institution at Stanford University (Oct. 1979 — present); Senior Fellow Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research; Professor of Public Policy, Stanford University (Sept. 1994 — present).    75   

Director, Gilead Sciences, Inc. (2005 — present)

 

Director, Monaco Coach Corporation (2005 — 2009)

 

27


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH,

AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE

TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING

THE PAST FIVE YEARS

   NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE
  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE PAST FIVE

YEARS

William A. Hasler

1941

Trustee

(Trustee since 2004)

   Dean Emeritus, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley (July 1998 — present).    75   

Director, TOUSA (1998 — present)

 

Director, Mission West Properties (1998 — present)

 

Director, Globalstar, Inc. (2009 — present)

 

Director, Aviat Networks (2001 — present)

 

Director, Ditech Networks Corporation (1997 — present)

 

Director, Aphton Corp. (1991 — 2007)

 

Director, Solectron Corporation (1998 — 2007)

 

Director, Genitope Corporation (2000 –2009)

David L. Mahoney

1954

Trustee

(Trustee since 2011)

   Private Investor.    75   

Director, Symantec Corporation (2003 — present)

 

Director, Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated (2004 — present)

 

Director, Tercica Inc. (2004 — 2008)

Kiran M. Patel

1948

Trustee

(Trustee since 2011)

   Executive Vice President and General Manager of Small Business Group, Intuit, Inc. (financial software and services for consumers and small businesses) (Dec. 2008 — present); Senior Vice President and General Manager of Consumer Group, Intuit, Inc. (June 2007 — Dec. 2008); Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Intuit, Inc. (Sept. 2005 — Jan. 2008).    75   

Director, KLA-Tencor Corporation (2008 — present)

 

Director, BEA Systems, Inc. (2007 — 2008)

 

Director, Eaton Corp. (2003 — 2006)

 

28


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH,

AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE

TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING

THE PAST FIVE YEARS

   NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE
  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE PAST FIVE

YEARS

Gerald B. Smith

1950

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

   Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Smith Graham & Co. (investment advisor) (1990 — present).    75   

Lead Independent Director, Board of Cooper Industries (2002 — present)

 

Director and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Oneok Partners LP (2003 — present)

 

Director, Oneok, Inc. (2009 — present)

Joseph H. Wender

1944

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

   Senior Consultant, Goldman Sachs & Co., Inc. (Jan. 2008 — present); Partner, Colgin Partners, LLC (vineyards) (February 1998 — present); Senior Director, Chairman of the Finance Committee, GSC Group (July 2005 — Dec. 2007); General Partner, Goldman Sachs & Co., Inc. (Oct. 1982C June 2005).    75    Board Member and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Isis Pharmaceuticals (1994 — present)
INTERESTED TRUSTEES

Charles R. Schwab 2

1937

Chairman and Trustee

(Chairman and Trustee since 2010)

   Chairman and Director, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., Charles Schwab Bank, N. A.; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Schwab (SIS) Holdings Inc. I, Schwab International Holdings, Inc.; Chief Executive Officer, Schwab Holdings, Inc.; Through June 2007, Director, U.S. Trust Company, N. A., U.S. Trust Corporation, United States Trust Company of New York. Until October 2008, Chief Executive Officer, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    75    None.

Walter W. Bettinger II 2

1960

Trustee

(Trustee since 2010)

  

As of October 2008, President and Chief Executive Officer, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation. Since October 2008, Director, The Charles Schwab Corporation. Since May 2008, Director, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and Schwab Holdings, Inc. Since 2006, Director, Charles Schwab Bank.

From 2004 through 2007, Executive Vice President and President, Schwab Investor Services. From 2004 through 2005, Executive

   92    None.

 

29


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH,

AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE

TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING

THE PAST FIVE YEARS

   NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE
  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE PAST FIVE

YEARS

  

Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Individual Investor Enterprise, and from 2002 through 2004, Executive Vice President, Corporate Services.

 

Until October 2008, President and Chief Operating Officer, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation.

     

 

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 3 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS

OFFICERS

Marie Chandoha

1961

President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer

(Officer since 2010)

   Executive Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Sept. 2010 – present); Director, President and Chief Executive Officer (Dec. 2010 — present), Chief Investment Officer (Sept. 2010 — Oct. 2011), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.; President and Chief Executive Officer (Dec. 2010 — present) and Chief Investment Officer (Dec. 2010 — Oct. 2011), Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds and Schwab ETFs; Global Head of Fixed Income Business Division, BlackRock, Inc. (formerly Barclays Global Investors) (March 2007 — August 2010); Co-Head and Senior Portfolio Manager, Wells Capital Management (June 1999 – March 2007).

George Pereira

1964

Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer

(Officer since 2006)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Nov. 2004 — present); Chief Operating Officer (Jan. 2011 — present), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.; Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, Laudus Funds (June 2006 — present); Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer, Schwab Funds (Nov. 2004 — present) and Schwab ETFs (Oct. 2009 — present); Director, Charles Schwab Worldwide Fund, PLC and Charles Schwab Asset Management (Ireland) Limited (April 2005 — present).

Omar Aguilar

1970

Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Equities

(Officer since 2011)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Equities, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (April 2011 — present); Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Equities, Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds (June 2011 — present); Head of the Portfolio Management Group and Vice President of Portfolio Management, Financial Engines, Inc. (May 2009 — April 2011); Head of Quantitative Equity, ING Investment Management (July 2004 — Jan. 2009).

Brett Wander

1961

Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Fixed Income

(Officer since 2011)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Fixed Income, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (April 2011 — present); Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Fixed Income, Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds (June 2011 — present); Senior Managing Director, Global Head of Active Fixed Income Strategies, State Street Global Advisors (Jan. 2008 — Oct. 2010); Director of Alpha Strategies Loomis, Sayles & Company (April 2006 — Jan. 2008); Managing Director, Head of Market-Based Strategies State Street Research (August 2003 — Jan. 2005).

 

30


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 3 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS

Catherine MacGregor

1964

(Chief Legal Officer and Clerk since 2007, Vice President since 2005)

   Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (July 2005 — present); Vice President (Dec. 2005 — present), Chief Legal Officer and Clerk (March 2007 — present), Laudus Funds; Vice President (Nov. 2005 — present) and Assistant Secretary (June 2007 — present), Schwab Funds; Vice President and Assistant Secretary, Schwab ETFs (Oct. 2009 — present).

David Lekich

1964

Secretary

(Officer since 2011)

   Senior Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., (Sept. 2011 — present); Senior Vice President, Chief Counsel, Charles Schwab Investment Management Inc. (Sept. 2011 — present); Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., (March 2004 — Sept. 2011) and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (Jan 2011 — Sept. 2011); Secretary, Schwab Funds (April 2011 — present); Vice President and Assistant Clerk, Laudus Funds (April 2011 — present); Secretary (May 2011 — present) and Chief Legal Officer (Nov. 2011 — present), Schwab ETFs.

 

1

Trustees remain in office until they resign, retire or are removed by shareholder vote. The Laudus Funds retirement policy requires that independent trustees elected after January 1, 2000 retire at age 72 or after 20 years of service as a trustee, whichever comes first, provided that any trustee who serves on both Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds retires from both boards when first required to retire by either board.

2  

Mr. Schwab and Mr. Bettinger are Interested Trustees because they are employees of Schwab and/or the adviser. In addition to their employment, Messrs. Schwab and Bettinger also own stock of The Charles Schwab Corporation.

3  

The President, Treasurer and Clerk hold office until their respective successors are chosen and qualified or until he or she sooner dies, resigns, is removed or becomes disqualified. Each of the other officers serves at the pleasure of the Board.

Board Leadership Structure

The Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Charles R. Schwab, is Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Charles Schwab Corporation and an interested person of the trusts as that term is defined in the 1940 Act. The trusts do not have a single lead independent trustee. The Board is comprised of a super-majority (77 percent) of trustees who are not interested persons of the trusts (i.e., “independent trustees”). There are three primary committees of the Board: the Audit and Compliance Committee; the Governance Committee; and the Investment Oversight Committee. Each of the Committees is chaired by an independent trustee, and each Committee is comprised solely of independent trustees. The Committee chairs preside at Committee meetings, participate in formulating agendas for those meetings, and coordinate with management to serve as a liaison between the independent trustees and management on matters within the scope of the responsibilities of each Committee as set forth in its Board-approved charter. The Board has determined that this leadership structure is appropriate given the specific characteristics and circumstances of the trusts. The Board made this determination in consideration of, among other things, the fact that the independent trustees of the trusts constitute a super-majority of the Board, the fact that Committee chairs are independent trustees, the number of funds (and classes) overseen by the Board, and the total number of trustees on the Board.

 

31


Table of Contents

Board Oversight of Risk Management

Like most mutual funds, fund management and its other service providers have responsibility for day-to-day risk management for the funds. The Board duties, as part of its risk oversight of the trusts, consists of monitoring risks identified during regular and special reports to the Committees of the Board, as well as regular and special reports to the full Board. In addition to monitoring such risks, the Committees and the Board oversee efforts of fund management and service providers to manage risks to which the funds of the trusts may be exposed. For example, the Investment Oversight Committee meets with portfolio managers and receives regular reports regarding investment risk and credit risk of a fund’s portfolio. The Audit and Compliance Committee meets with the funds’ Chief Compliance Officer and Chief Financial Officer and receives regular reports regarding compliance risks , operational risks and risks related to the valuation and liquidity of portfolio securities. From its review of these reports and discussions with management, each Committee receives information about the material risks of the funds of the trusts and about how management and service providers mitigate those risks, enabling the independent Committee chairs and other independent members of the Committees to discuss these risks with the full Board.

The Board recognizes that not all risks that may affect the funds can be identified nor can processes and controls be developed to eliminate or mitigate the occurrence or effects of certain risks; some risks are simply beyond the reasonable control of the funds, their management, and service providers. Although the risk oversight functions of the Board, and the risk management policies of fund management and fund service providers, are designed to be effective, there is no guarantee that they will eliminate or mitigate all risks. In addition, it may be necessary to bear certain risks (such as investment-related risks) to achieve each fund’s investment objective. As a result of the foregoing and other factors, the funds’ ability to manage risk is subject to significant limitations.

Individual Trustee Qualifications

The Board has concluded that each of the trustees should initially and continue to serve on the Board because of (i) his or her ability to review and understand information about the trusts provided to them by management, to identify and request other information they may deem relevant to the performance of their duties, to question management regarding material factors bearing on the management of the trusts, and to exercise their business judgment in a manner that serves the best interests of the trusts’ shareholders and (ii) the trustee’s experience, qualifications, attributes or skills as described below.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Bettinger should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained as president and chief executive officer of The Charles Schwab Corporation, his knowledge of and experience in the financial services industry, and the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008.

The Board has concluded that Ms. Byerwalter should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience she gained as chairman of her own corporate advisory and consulting firm and as former chief financial officer of a university and a bank, the experience she has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000 and the Laudus Funds since 2004, and her service on other public company and mutual insurance company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Cogan should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he has gained serving as a senior fellow and professor of public policy at a university and his former service in government, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Hasler should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained serving as former vice chair of the consulting practice of an accounting firm and as former co-chief executive officer of a public company, his service as former dean of a business school, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000 and the Laudus Funds since 2004, his service on other public company boards, and his experience serving as Chair of the trusts’ Audit and Compliance Committee.

 

32


Table of Contents

The Board has concluded that Mr. Mahoney should serve as a trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained as co-chief executive officer of a healthcare services company, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Patel should serve as a trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained as executive vice president, general manager and chief financial officer of a software company, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Schwab should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he has gained as founder and chairman of the board of Schwab, and subsequently its parent corporation, The Charles Schwab Corporation, his experience in and knowledge of the financial services industry, the experience he has gained serving as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Schwab Funds since their inception, and his former service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Smith should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he has gained as managing partner of his own investment advisory firm, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000, his service on other public company boards, and his experience serving as Chair of the trusts’ Investment Oversight Committee.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Wender should serve as trustee of the trusts because of the experience he gained serving as former partner and chairman of the finance committee of an investment bank, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008, and his service on other public company boards.

Trustee Committees

The Board of Trustees has established certain committees and adopted Committee charters with respect to those committees, each as described below:

 

   

The Audit and Compliance Committee reviews the integrity of the Trust’s financial reporting processes and compliance policies, procedures and processes, and the Trust’s overall system of internal controls. The Audit and Compliance Committee also reviews and evaluates the qualifications, independence and performance of the Trust’s independent auditors. This Committee is comprised of at least three Independent Trustees and currently has the following members: William A. Hasler (Chairman), Mariann Byerwalter and Kiran M. Patel. The charter directs that the Committee must meet four times annually, with additional meetings as the Committee deems appropriate. The Committee met 4 times during the most recent fiscal year.

 

   

The Governance Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding Trust governance-related matters, including but not limited to Board compensation practices, retirement policies and term limits, Board self-evaluations, the effectiveness and allocation of assignments and functions by the Board, the composition of Committees of the Board, and the training of Trustees. The Governance Committee is also responsible for selecting and nominating candidates to serve as Trustees. The Governance Committee does not have a policy with respect to consideration of candidates for Trustee submitted by shareholders. However, if the Governance Committee determined that it would be in the best interests of the Trust to fill a vacancy on the Board of Trustees, and a shareholder submitted a candidate for consideration by the Board of Trustees to fill the vacancy, the Governance Committee would evaluate that candidate in the same manner as it evaluates nominees indentified by the Governance Committee. Nominee recommendations may be submitted to the Secretary of the trust at the trust’s principal business address. This Committee is comprised of at least three Independent Trustees and currently has the following members: Mariann Byerwalter (Chairman), John F. Cogan, William A. Hasler and Joseph H. Wender. The charter directs that the Committee meets at such times and with such frequency as is deemed necessary or appropriate by the Committee. The Committee met 3 times during the most recent fiscal year.

 

33


Table of Contents
   

The Investment Oversight Committee reviews the investment activities of the Trust and the performance of the Funds’ investment adviser. This Committee is comprised of at least three Trustees (at least two-thirds of whom shall be Independent Trustees) and currently has the following members: Gerald B. Smith (Chairman), John F. Cogan, David L. Mahoney and Joseph H. Wender. The charter directs that the Committee meet at such times and with such frequency as is deemed necessary or appropriate by the Committee. The Committee met 4 times during the most recent fiscal year.

Trustee Compensation

The following table provides trustee compensation for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2012.

 

NAME OF PERSON

   AGGREGATE
COMPENSATION
FROM
REGISTRANT
     PENSION OR
RETIREMENT
BENEFITS
ACCRUED AS
PART OF FUND
EXPENSES 1
     ESTIMATED
ANNUAL
BENEFITS UPON
RETIREMENT 1
     TOTAL
COMPENSATION
FROM TRUST
AND FUND
COMPLEX PAID
TO TRUSTEES
 

TRUSTEES:

           

Interested Trustees

           

Charles R. Schwab

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 0   

Walter W. Bettinger

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 0   

Independent Trustees

           

Mariann Byerwalter

   $ 3,005       $ 28,225       $ 28,225       $ 243,500   

John F. Cogan

   $ 2,915       $ 0       $ 0       $ 236,000   

William A. Hasler

   $ 3,005       $ 28,225       $ 28,225       $ 243,500   

David L. Mahoney

   $ 2,915       $ 0       $ 0       $ 236,000   

Kiran M. Patel

   $ 2,915       $ 0       $ 0       $ 234,000   

Gerald B. Smith

   $ 3,005       $ 0       $ 0       $ 243,500   

Donald R. Stephens 2

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 75,000   

Joseph H. Wender

   $ 2,915       $ 0       $ 0       $ 236,000   

Michael W. Wilsey 2

   $ 0       $ 0       $ 0       $ 75,000   

 

1  

Cumulative.

2 Retired from the Board on December 31, 2010. The compensation paid to Mr. Stephens and Mr. Wilsey included consulting fees for the period January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011.

A retirement plan was instituted for all of the Independent Trustees of the Trust and Trustees of the Laudus Institutional Trust (the “Retirement Plan”). Under the terms of the Retirement Plan, upon retirement or other termination from service from the Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust (other than termination for cause), a retiring Independent Trustee who has served as Independent Trustee for at least five years shall be paid a lump sum cash payment (the “Retirement Payment”). The Retirement Payment shall be equal to $10,000 for each year that the Trustee served as an Independent Trustee of the Trust and the Laudus Institutional Trust, including years of service prior to the adoption of the Retirement Plan. Each Independent Trustee was permitted to make a one-time election to have the $10,000 attributable to service for the coming year adjusted up or down at the end of each subsequent year based on the unweighted average performance of the lowest cost share class of each fund of the Trust and the Laudus Institutional Trust that is in operation for all of such year. Each Independent Trustee also was given the opportunity to make a one-time election to have previously accrued benefits fluctuate beginning April 1, 2005 based on performance of the fund as described in the previous sentence. As a result, the amount of the Retirement Payment payable to any Independent Trustee may increase or decrease based upon performance of the funds. The portion of the total Retirement Payment owed to an Independent Trustee upon his or her retirement that is payable by any fund will be determined based on the relative net assets of the funds of the Trust in operation on the date of the Independent Trustee’s retirement.

 

34


Table of Contents

Effective June 28, 2006, the Retirement Plan terminated with respect to new Participants. With respect to Participants prior to June 26, 2006 (a “Current Participant”), the Account Balance of each Current Participant under the Plan was frozen at the value determined as of September 29, 2006, except that each Account Balance was credited with an amount equal to one-half of the amount that would be credited to such Account Balance as of the last day of the Plan Year ending March 31, 2007. The terms of the Plan, including without limitation provisions relating to vesting and payment upon termination of service, remain in full force and effect.

Securities Beneficially Owned by Each Trustee

The following table provides each Trustee’s equity ownership of the fund and ownership of all registered investment companies overseen by each Trustee in the Family of Investment Companies as of December 31, 2011.

 

NAME OF TRUSTEE

   DOLLAR RANGE OF
EQUITY  SECURITIES
IN THE FUND
   AGGREGATE DOLLAR
RANGE OF
EQUITY SECURITIES IN
THE FAMILY
OF INVESTMENT
COMPANIES*

Independent Trustees:

     

Mariann Byerwalter

   $0    $50,001 - $100,000

John F. Cogan

   $0    Over $100,000

William A. Hasler

   $10,001 - 50,000    Over $100,000

David L. Mahoney

   $0    Over $100,000

Kiran M. Patel

   $0    $0

Gerald B. Smith

   $0    Over $100,000

Joseph H. Wender

   $0    $0

Interested Trustees:

     

Charles R. Schwab

   $10,001 - 50,000    Over $100,000

Walter W. Bettinger II

   $1 - $10,000    Over $100,000

 

* As of December 31, 2011, the Family of Investment Companies included 88 funds.

INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES

ADVISORY AGREEMENTS

After their initial two year terms, the continuation of the fund’s advisory agreements must be specifically approved at least annually (1) by the vote of the Trustees or by a vote of the shareholders of the fund and (2) by the vote of a majority of the Trustees who are not parties to the investment advisory agreements or “interested persons” of any party (the “Independent Trustees”), cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval. If the shareholders of the fund fail to approve an advisory agreement, CSIM and the Subadviser, as applicable, may continue to serve under their agreement in the manner and to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act.

After their initial two year terms, each year, the Board of Trustees will call and hold one or more meetings to decide whether to renew the advisory agreement between Laudus Trust (the “Trust”) and CSIM (the “Investment Adviser”), and the sub-advisory agreement between CSIM and UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc. (“UBS Global AM” or the “Subadviser”) with respect to the fund. In preparation for the meetings, the Board requests and reviews a wide variety of materials provided by CSIM and UBS Global AM as well as extensive data provided by third parties and the Independent Trustees receive advice from counsel to the Independent Trustees.

 

35


Table of Contents

CSIM oversees the advisory services provided to the fund. Pursuant to a separate sub-advisory agreement, and under the supervision of the Investment Adviser and the fund’s Board of Trustees, UBS Global AM is responsible for the day-to-day investment management of the fund’s assets. UBS Global AM also is responsible for managing their employees who provide services to the fund.

About CSIM

CSIM is a wholly-owned subsidiary of The Charles Schwab Corporation. Both CSIM and The Charles Schwab Corporation are located at 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105.

Principal Executive Officer and Directors—Listed below are the directors and principal executive officer of CSIM. The principal business address of each director and the principal executive officer, as it relates to their duties at CSIM, is the same as above.

 

NAME

  

POSITION

Marie Chandoha

   Director, President and Chief Executive Officer

Charles R. Schwab

   Chairman and Director

As disclosed in the Prospectus under the heading “Management of the Fund,” under a management contract (the “Management Contract”) between the Trust, on behalf of the fund, and CSIM, subject to the supervision of the Trustees of the Trust and such policies as the Trustees may determine, CSIM furnishes office space and equipment, provides certain bookkeeping and clerical services and pays all salaries, fees and expenses of officers and Trustees of the Trust who are affiliated with CSIM. In addition, pursuant to a sub-advisory agreement between CSIM and UBS Global AM, UBS Global AM will continuously furnish an investment program for the fund and will make investment decisions on behalf of the fund and place all orders for the purchase and sale of portfolio securities.

The fund has agreed to pay CSIM a monthly management fee at an annual percentage rate of the fund’s average daily net assets. The table below shows the advisory fee payable to CSIM by the fund.

 

First $500 million

     0.70

$500 million to $1 billion

     0.65

$1 billion to $1.5 billion

     0.60

$1.5 billion to $2 billion

     0.575

Above $2 billion

     0.55

CSIM has agreed with the Trust that it will waive some or all of its management fees under the Management Contract and, if necessary, will bear certain expenses of the fund until at least July 30, 2014 (unless the waiver is extended, modified or terminated by mutual agreement of the Trust and CSIM; provided that termination by CSIM must be authorized by the Board of Trustees) so that the fund’s total annual operating expenses (exclusive of nonrecurring account fees, fees on securities transactions such as exchange fees, service fees, interest, taxes, brokerage commissions, other expenditures which are capitalized in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and other extraordinary expenses not incurred in the ordinary course of the fund’s business, such as shareholder meeting costs) will not exceed the limit stated in the Prospectus. The expense limitation also does not cover fees and expenses of pooled investment vehicles, such as ETFs, REITs and other investment companies that are held by the fund. In addition, CSIM’s compensation under the Management Contract is subject to reduction to the extent that in any year the expenses of the fund (including investment advisory fees but excluding taxes, portfolio brokerage commissions and any distribution and shareholder service expenses paid by a class of shares of the fund pursuant to a distribution and shareholder service plan or otherwise) exceed the limits on investment company expenses imposed by any statute or regulatory authority of any jurisdiction in which shares of the fund are qualified for offer and sale.

The Management Contract provides that CSIM shall not be subject to any liability to the Trust or to any shareholder of the Trust in connection with the performance of its services thereunder in the absence of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of its obligations and duties thereunder.

 

36


Table of Contents

The Management Contract automatically terminates on assignment and is terminable on not more than 60 days’ notice by the Trust to CSIM or by CSIM to the Trust.

For the fiscal year and period ended March 31, the fund paid to CSIM as management fees, and CSIM, in its capacity as adviser, has waived and reimbursed to the fund the following amounts:

 

Time Period

   Net Management Fee      Amount Waived/Reimbursed  

4/1/11 to 3/31/12

   $ 3,730,894       $ 650,228   

4/1/10 to 3/31/11

   $ 1,782,260       $ 537,214   

7/13/09* to 3/31/10

   $ 553,293       $ 257,160   

 

* Commencement of operations.

SUBADVISORY AGREEMENT

CSIM has entered into an agreement on behalf of the fund with UBS Global AM by which it acts as subadviser to the fund (the “Subadviser Agreement”). Under the Subadviser Agreement, UBS Global AM, at its expense, continuously furnishes an investment management program for the fund and makes investment decisions on behalf of the fund and places all orders for the purchase and sale of portfolio securities and all other investments, subject to the supervision of CSIM and the Trustees.

UBS Global AM, with its principal office located at 1285 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10019, manages the assets of the fund. UBS Global AM is an investment management firm managing approximately $ 144 billion, as of March 31, 2012, primarily for institutional, pension and profit sharing funds. UBS Global AM is an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of UBS AG and a member of the UBS Global Asset Management Division, which had approximately $620 billion in assets under management as of March 31, 2012.

Subadvisory Fee

This section describes the subadvisory fee payable by CSIM to UBS Global AM. Please remember, however, that the following fees described are paid by CSIM to UBS Global AM; they do not affect how much you pay or the fund pays.

 

First $100 million

     0.35

Over $100 million to $250 million

     0.33

Over $250 million to $500 million

     0.30

Over $500 million to $1 billion

     0.25

Over $1 billion to $1.5 billion

     0.23

Over $1.5 billion to $2 billion

     0.21

Over $2 billion

     0.20

On July 13, 2009, the fund acquired all of the assets and liabilities of the UBS U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund (“UBS Fund”) pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization approved by the UBS Fund’s shareholders (the “Reorganization”). In connection with the Reorganization, UBS Global AM and CSIM have entered into an agreement regarding UBS Global AM’s and CSIM’s cooperation in realigning responsibilities for the assets and shareholders of the fund (the “Agreement”). The Agreement commits CSIM to using commercially reasonable efforts to provide UBS Global AM with the same notice and opportunity to defend the Subadviser Agreement to the Laudus Trust’s Board of Trustees as is given to CSIM with respect to the Management Contract, and subject to certain conditions, provides that CSIM will pay compensation to UBS Global AM in the event that UBS Global AM is terminated as investment subadviser to the fund during its first two years of operation, provided, however, CSIM will have no obligation to pay compensation to UBS Global AM in the event UBS Global AM is terminated with cause by CSIM or the Laudus Trust’s Board of Trustees. The amount of compensation owed to UBS Global AM upon its termination, if any, is based on a formula that takes into account when UBS Global AM is terminated, the circumstances surrounding the termination, and the amount of

 

37


Table of Contents

compensation received under the Subadviser Agreement by UBS Global AM in the month prior to the termination. The Agreement further commits CSIM, subject to its fiduciary duty, to using commercially reasonable efforts to promote the continuation of UBS Global AM as the sub-adviser of the fund. As a result of the Agreement, CSIM will have a material economic interest in avoiding the termination of UBS Global AM.

For the fiscal year and period ended March 31, CSIM paid to UBS Global AM as subadvisory fee, and UBS Global AM in its capacity as Subadviser, has waived the following amounts:

 

Time Period

   Net Subadvisory Fee      Amount Waived  

4/1/11 to 3/31/12

   $ 1,942,720       $ 0   

4/1/10 to 3/31/11

   $ 1,090,439       $ 0   

7/13/2009* to 3/31/2010

   $ 389,917       $ 0   

 

* Commencement of operations.

OTHER SERVICE PROVIDERS

Administrative Services . The Trust has entered into a Fund Administration Agreement with State Street Bank and Trust Company (in such capacity, the “Administrator”) pursuant to which the Administrator provides certain management and administrative services necessary for the fund’s operations including: (i) regulatory compliance, including the compilation of information for documents such as reports to, and filings with, the SEC and state securities commissions, and preparation of proxy statements and shareholder reports for the fund; (ii) general supervision relative to the compilation of data required for the preparation of periodic reports distributed to the fund’s officers and Board of Trustees; and (iii) furnishing office space and certain facilities required for conducting the business of the fund. For these services, the Administrator is entitled to receive $1,000 per annum, as well as a fee based on the average daily net assets of the Trust (the “Administrator’s Asset-Based Fee”). In calculating the Administrator’s Asset Based-Fee payable by the Trust, the assets of the Trust are aggregated with the average daily net assets of certain of the other portfolios for which CSIM serves as investment adviser and State Street Bank and Trust Company serves as administrator(1). The Administrator’s Asset-Based Fee will be calculated as follows:

 

AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS

   FEE  

First $100 billion

     0.11 bp   

Next $60 billion

     0.07 bp   

Thereafter

     0.05 bp   

 

(1) In addition to the fund of the Trust, this list includes each of the funds of the Laudus Institutional Trust, Schwab Investments, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, and Schwab Capital Trust.

For the fiscal year and period ended March 31, State Street Bank and Trust Company in its capacity as Administrator was entitled to receive the following amounts:

 

Time Period

   Fees Received      Fees Waived  

4/1/11 to 3/31/12

   $ 6,285       $ 0   

4/1/10 to 3/31/11

   $ 3,905       $ 0   

7/13/2009* to 3/31/2010

   $ 3,604       $ 0   

 

* Commencement of operations.

The Trust also has entered into a Fund Accounting Agreement with State Street Bank and Trust Company (in such capacity, the “Fund Accountant”) pursuant to which the fund Accountant provides certain accounting services necessary for the fund’s operations. For these services, the fund Accountant is entitled to receive a base fee of $29,000 per annum for the fund. The Fund Accountant is also entitled to a fee based on the average daily net assets of the Trust (the “Fund Accountant’s Asset-Based Fee”). In calculating the Fund Accountant’s Asset-Based Fee payable by the Trust, the assets

 

38


Table of Contents

of the Trust are aggregated with the average daily net assets of certain of the portfolios for which CSIM serves as investment adviser and State Street Bank and Trust Company serves as fund accountant (see footnote 1 above). The fund Accountant’s Asset-Based Fee will be calculated as follows:

 

AVERAGE DAILY NET ASSETS

   FEE  

First $100 billion

     0.25 bp   

Next $60 billion

     0.18 bp   

Thereafter

     0.13 bp   

In addition, the Fund Accountant is entitled to a per security pricing fee based on the monthly holdings of the fund equal to $2 for equity securities and $8 for fixed income securities. Lastly, the Fund Accountant is entitled to a fair valuation fee of $4,000 per annum.

For the fiscal year and period ended March 31, State Street Bank and Trust Company in its capacity as Fund Accountant was entitled to receive the following amounts.

 

Time Period

   Fees Received      Fees Waived  

4/1/11 to 3/31/12

   $ 48,334       $ 0   

4/1/10 to 3/31/11

   $ 42,586       $ 0   

7/13/2009* to 3/31/2010

   $ 12,983       $ 0   

 

* Commencement of operations.

Distributor. As stated in the Prospectus, shares of the fund are sold on a continuous basis by the Trust’s distributor, ALPS Distributors, Inc. (the “Distributor”). The Distributor’s principal offices are located at 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado, 80203. Under the contract between the Trust and the Distributor (the “Distributor’s Contract”), the Distributor is not obligated to sell any specific amount of shares of the Trust and will purchase shares for resale only against orders for shares.

The Distributor’s Contract may be terminated with respect to the fund at any time on 60 days’ written notice without penalty either by the Distributor, by the fund, or by the Trust and will terminate automatically in the event of its assignment.

The Distributor’s Contract will continue in effect for two years and thereafter for successive one-year periods, provided that each such continuance is specifically approved (i) by the Trust’s Board of Trustees or (ii) by the vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of the fund, provided that in either event the continuance is also approved by a majority of the Independent Trustees of the Trust by vote cast in person at a meeting called for that purpose.

CSIM may pay certain Intermediaries (as defined below) for performing shareholder, recordkeeping, administrative, transfer agency or other services for their customers. In addition, CSIM may pay certain Intermediaries for providing distribution, marketing or promotional services. The payments described by this paragraph are not paid by the fund or its shareholders and may be substantial.

Shares of the fund may be sold to corporations or other institutions such as trusts, foundations, broker-dealers or other intermediaries purchasing for the accounts of others (collectively, “Intermediaries”). Investors purchasing and redeeming shares of the fund through an Intermediary may be charged a transaction-based fee or other fee for the services provided by the Intermediary. Each such Intermediary is responsible for transmitting to its customers a schedule of any such fees and information regarding any additional or different conditions with respect to purchases and redemptions of fund shares. Customers of Intermediaries should read this SAI in light of the terms governing accounts with their particular organization.

For the fiscal year and period ended March 31, ALPS Distributor, Inc. incurred distribution expenses or paid intermediaries the following amounts.

 

39


Table of Contents

Time Period

   Distribution
Expenses
Incurred by
the Fund
     Distribution
Expenses Paid
to
Intermediaries
 

4/1/11 to 3/31/12

   $ 0       $ 0   

4/1/10 to 3/31/11

   $ 0       $ 0   

7/13/2009* to 3/31/2010

   $ 0       $ 0   

 

* Commencement of operations.

Custodial Arrangements. The Trust’s custodian is State Street Bank and Trust Company (in such capacity, the “Custodian”), One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111. As such, the Custodian holds in safekeeping certificated securities and cash belonging to the Trust and, in such capacity, is the registered owner of securities in book-entry form belonging to the fund. Upon instruction, the Custodian receives and delivers cash and securities of the fund in connection with fund transactions and collects all dividends and other distributions made with respect to fund portfolio securities.

Transfer Agent. Boston Financial Data Services, Inc., located at Two Heritage Drive Quincy, MA 02171, provides transfer agency and dividend disbursing agent services for the fund. As part of these services, the firm maintains records pertaining to the sale, redemption and transfer of the fund’s shares and distributes the fund’s cash distributions to shareholders.

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. The Trust’s independent registered public accounting firm is PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, Three Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, CA 94111. The firm conducts an annual audit of the financial statements, assists in the preparation of the Trust’s federal and state income tax returns and filings with the SEC, and consults with the Trust as to matters of accounting and federal and state income taxation.

Codes of Ethics. Each of the Trust (on behalf of the fund), CSIM, UBS Global AM and the Distributor (as the fund’s principal underwriter) have adopted codes of ethics pursuant to Rule 17j-1 of the 1940 Act. Each permits personnel subject thereto to invest in securities subject to certain conditions or restrictions. CSIM’s Code of Ethics permits personnel to buy or sell, directly or indirectly, securities for their own accounts. This includes securities that may be purchased or held by the funds CSIM manages. Securities transactions by some of these individuals are subject to prior approval of CSIM’s Chief Compliance Officer or designee and are subject to certain restrictions. Covered securities transactions are subject to quarterly and annual reporting and review requirements. UBS Global AM’s Code of Ethics permits personnel to buy or sell securities for their own accounts and accounts for which they are the beneficial owner so long as the investment does not lead to an actual or potential conflict of interest. This includes securities that may be purchased or held by the funds UBS Global AM advises or subadvises. Securities transactions may be subject to prior approval of UBS Global AM’s Chief Compliance Officer or his or her alternate. Most securities transactions are subject to quarterly reporting and review requirements. The Distributor’s Code of Ethics permits personnel subject thereto to invest in securities, including securities that the fund may purchase or hold, so long as the individual, in the ordinary course of fulfilling his or her duties, does not have knowledge of a pending buy or sell order by the fund. In such cases where such knowledge may exist, the individual is prohibited from engaging in such transactions while the buy or sell order is pending.

PORTFOLIO MANAGER

UBS Global AM acts as subadviser to the fund. Presented below is information about the portfolio manager of the fund as identified in the fund’s prospectus.

Other Accounts. The following table provides approximate information relating to other accounts managed by the portfolio manager as of May 31, 2012. The accounts listed below are not subject to a performance-based advisory fee.

 

40


Table of Contents

Portfolio Manager

   Registered Investment Companies      Other Pooled Investment Vehicles      Other Accounts  
     Number     

Assets Managed

(in millions)

     Number     

Assets Managed

(in millions)

     Number     

Assets Managed

(in millions)

 

Lawrence Kemp

     4       $ 2,649         6       $ 4,532         10       $ 4,384   

POTENTIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The portfolio management team’s management of the fund and other accounts could result in potential conflicts of interest if the fund and other accounts have different objectives, benchmarks and fees because the portfolio management team must allocate its time and investment expertise across multiple accounts, including the fund. A portfolio manager and his or her team manage the fund and other accounts utilizing a model portfolio approach that groups similar accounts within a model portfolio. UBS Global AM manages accounts according to the appropriate model portfolio, including where possible, those accounts that have specific investment restrictions. Accordingly, portfolio holdings, position sizes and industry and sector exposures tend to be similar across accounts, which may minimize the potential for conflicts of interest.

If a portfolio manager identifies a limited investment opportunity that may be suitable for more than one account or model portfolio, the fund may not be able to take full advantage of that opportunity due to an allocation of filled purchase or sale orders across all eligible model portfolios and accounts. To deal with these situations, UBS Global AM has adopted procedures for allocating portfolio trades across multiple accounts to provide fair treatment to all accounts.

The management of personal accounts by a portfolio manager may also give rise to potential conflicts of interest. UBS Global AM has adopted a Code of Ethics that governs such personal trading but there is no assurance that the Code will adequately address all such conflicts.

UBS AG is a worldwide full-service investment banking, broker-dealer, asset management and financial services organization. As a result, UBS Global AM and UBS AG (including, for these purposes, their directors, partners, officers and employees) worldwide, including the entities and personnel who may be involved in the investment activities and business operations of the fund, are engaged in businesses and have interests other than that of managing the fund. These activities and interests include potential multiple advisory, transactional, financial, consultative, and other interests in transactions, companies, securities and other instruments that may be engaged in, purchased or sold by the fund.

UBS Global AM may purchase or sell, or recommend for purchase or sale, for the fund or its other accounts securities of companies: (i) with respect to which its affiliates act as an investment banker or financial adviser; (ii) with which its affiliates have other confidential relationships; (iii) in which its affiliates maintain a position or (iv) for which its affiliates make a market; or in which it or its officers, directors or employees or those of its affiliates own securities or otherwise have an interest. Except to the extent prohibited by law or regulation or by client instruction, UBS Global AM may recommend to the fund or its other clients, or purchase for the fund or its other clients, securities of issuers in which UBS AG has an interest as described in this paragraph.

From time to time and subject to client approval, UBS Global AM may rely on certain affiliates to execute trades for the fund or its other accounts. For each security transaction effected by UBS AG, UBS Global AM may compensate and UBS AG may retain such compensation for effecting the transaction, and UBS Global AM may receive affiliated group credit for generating such business.

Transactions undertaken by UBS AG or client accounts managed by UBS AG (“Client Accounts”) may adversely impact the fund. UBS AG and one or more Client Accounts may buy or sell positions while the fund is undertaking the same or a differing, including potentially opposite, strategy, which could disadvantage the fund.

 

41


Table of Contents

DESCRIPTION OF COMPENSATION STRUCTURE

UBS Global Asset Management’s compensation and benefits programs are designed to provide its investment professionals with incentives to excel, and to promote an entrepreneurial, performance-oriented culture with clear accountability. They also align the interests of investment professionals with those of our clients.

The total compensation received by the portfolio managers and analysts at UBS Global Asset Management, including the fund’s portfolio managers, has up to three basic components—a fixed component (base salary and benefits), a variable and discretionary cash component and, for employees whose total compensation exceeds a defined threshold, a variable and discretionary deferred component. These are described in more detail below:

 

 

The fixed component (base salary and benefits) is set with the aim of being competitive in the industry and is monitored and adjusted periodically with reference to the relevant local labor market in order to remain so. The fixed component is used to recognize the experience, skills and knowledge that portfolio managers and analysts bring to their roles.

 

 

Variable compensation is determined annually on a discretionary basis. It is correlated with the individual’s financial and non-financial contribution, as assessed through a rigorous performance assessment process, and on the performance of their respective function, of UBS Global Asset Management and of UBS as a whole. As its name implies, variable compensation is liable to change and is delivered in cash and, when over a defined total compensation threshold, deferred.

 

 

Variable deferred—employees may have a portion of their variable compensation deferred. The main deferral plan is the UBS Global Asset Management Equity Ownership Plan (Global AM EOP) which vests pro rata over a three year period, subject to continued service. Through the Global AM EOP, awards are granted in the form of some combination of vehicles aligned to selected UBS Global Asset Management funds, UBS shares or notional shares. The vehicles aligned to selected UBS Global Asset Management funds are called Alternative Investment Vehicles or AIVs. UBS Global Asset Management believes that not only does this deferral plan reinforce the critical importance of creating long-term business value, it also serves as an effective retention tool.

UBS Global Asset Management strongly believes that aligning portfolio managers’ variable compensation to both the short-term and longer-term performance of their portfolios closely aligns the portfolio managers’ interests with those of the firm’s clients. The total annual variable compensation pool available for distribution is generally dependant upon the overall profitability of UBS Group and UBS Global Asset Management.

The allocation of the variable compensation pool to each portfolio manager is linked to the investment performance of the assets such portfolio manager manages versus the relevant benchmark or index, and, where appropriate, peer strategies, over one and three years.

For analysts, variable compensation is, in general, based on the performance of some combination of model and/or client portfolios, generally evaluated over one and three years and coupled with a qualitative assessment of their contribution. This is coupled with a qualitative assessment of their contribution considering factors such as the quality of their research, stock recommendations and their communication within and between teams and with portfolio managers.

Ownership of Fund Shares. As of June 30, 2012, the portfolio manager beneficially owned shares of the fund as follows:

 

Lawrence Kemp

   $ 500,000 - $1,000,000   

PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS

UBS Global AM is responsible for decisions to buy and sell securities for the fund and for the placement of the fund’s portfolio business and the negotiation of commissions, if any, paid on such transactions. Fixed income securities in which

 

42


Table of Contents

the fund invests are traded in the over-the-counter market. These securities are generally traded on a net basis with dealers acting as principal for their own accounts without a stated commission, although the bid/ask spread quoted on securities includes an implicit profit to the dealers. In over-the-counter transactions, orders are placed directly with a principal market-maker unless a better price and execution can be obtained by using a broker. Brokerage commissions are paid on transactions in listed securities, futures contracts and options thereon. UBS Global AM is responsible for effecting portfolio transactions and will do so in a manner deemed fair and reasonable to the fund. Upon approval of CSIM, UBS Global AM may be authorized to utilize the trading desk of its affiliates to execute securities transactions in accordance with applicable rules and regulations.

The primary consideration in all portfolio transactions will be prompt execution of orders in an efficient manner at the most favorable price. However, subject to policies established by the Board of the Trust, the fund may pay a broker-dealer a commission for effecting a portfolio transaction for the fund in excess of the amount of commission another broker-dealer would have charged if UBS Global AM determines in good faith that the commission paid was reasonable in relation to the brokerage or research services provided by such broker-dealer, viewed in terms of that particular transaction or such firm’s overall responsibilities with respect to the clients, including the fund, as to which UBS Global AM exercises investment discretion. In selecting and monitoring broker-dealers and negotiating commissions, UBS Global AM considers the firm’s reliability, the quality of its execution services on a continuing basis and its financial condition. When more than one firm is believed to meet these criteria, preference may be given to brokers who provide research or statistical material or other services to the fund or UBS Global AM. Such services include advice, both directly and in writing, as to the value of the securities; the advisability of investing in, purchasing or selling securities; and the availability of securities, or purchasers or sellers of securities, as well as analyses and reports concerning issues, industries, securities, economic factors and trends, portfolio strategy and the performance of accounts. This allows UBS Global AM to supplement its own investment research activities and obtain the views and information of others prior to making investment decisions. UBS Global AM is of the opinion that, because this material must be analyzed and reviewed by its staff, the receipt and use of such material does not tend to reduce expenses but may benefit the fund by supplementing UBS Global AM’s research.

UBS Global AM effects portfolio transactions for other investment companies and advisory accounts. Research services furnished by dealers through whom the fund effects its securities transactions may be used by UBS Global AM, or its affiliated investment advisors, in servicing all of their accounts; not all such services may be used in connection with the fund. In the opinion of UBS Global AM, it is not possible to measure separately the benefits from research services to each of the accounts (including the fund). UBS Global AM will attempt to equitably allocate portfolio transactions among the fund and others whenever concurrent decisions are made to purchase or sell securities by the fund and another. In making such allocations between the fund and others, the main factors to be considered are the respective investment objectives, the relative size of portfolio holdings of the same or comparable securities, the availability of cash for investment, the size of investment commitments generally held and the opinions of the persons responsible for recommending investments to the fund and the others. In some cases, this procedure could have an adverse effect on the fund. In the opinion of UBS Global AM, however, the results of such procedures will, on the whole, be in the best interest of each of the clients.

When buying or selling securities, the fund may pay commissions to brokers who are affiliated with UBS Global AM or the fund in accordance with procedures adopted by the Board. The fund may purchase securities in certain underwritten offerings for which an affiliate of the fund or UBS Global AM may act as an underwriter in accordance with procedures adopted by the Board. The fund may effect futures transactions through, and pay commissions to, futures commissions merchants who are affiliated with UBS Global AM or the fund in accordance with procedures adopted by the Board.

For the fiscal year and period ended March 31, the fund paid brokerage commissions in the following amounts:

 

Time Period

   Amount  

4/1/11 to 3/31/12

   $ 800,430   

4/1/10 to 3/31/11

   $ 477,123   

 

43


Table of Contents

REGULAR BROKER-DEALERS

The fund’s regular broker-dealers during its most recent fiscal year would be: (1) the ten broker-dealers that received the greatest dollar amount of brokerage commissions from the fund; (2) the ten broker-dealers that engaged as principal in the largest dollar amount of portfolio transactions; and (3) the ten broker-dealers that sold the largest dollar amount of a fund’s shares. As of March 31, 2012, the fund held no securities issued by the a regular broker-dealer.

DESCRIPTION OF THE TRUST AND OWNERSHIP OF SHARES

The Trust is an open-end series investment company organized as a Massachusetts business trust. A copy of the Third Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust of the Trust (the “Declaration of Trust”), is on file with the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. The fiscal year of the Trust ends on March 31. The Trust changed its name to “Barr Rosenberg Series Trust” from “Rosenberg Series Trust” on August 5, 1996. Effective March 30, 2004, the Trust changed its name to the “Laudus Trust.”

Interests in the Trust’s portfolios are currently represented by shares of 6 series, the Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund, and Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund, issued pursuant to the Declaration of Trust. The rights of shareholders and powers of the Trustees of the Trust with respect to such shares are described in their respective Prospectuses.

The fund has one class of shares. On July 13, 2009, the fund acquired all of the assets and liabilities of the UBS Fund pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization approved by the UBS Fund’s shareholders.

The Declaration of Trust provides for the perpetual existence of the Trust. The Trust may, however, be terminated at any time by vote of at least two-thirds of the outstanding shares of each series of the Trust or by the vote of the Trustees.

VOTING RIGHTS

Shareholders are entitled to one vote for each full share held (with fractional votes for fractional shares held) and will vote (to the extent provided in the Declaration of Trust) in the election of Trustees and the termination of the Trust and on other matters submitted to the vote of shareholders. Shareholders will vote by individual series on all matters except (i) when required by the 1940 Act, shares shall be voted in the aggregate and not by individual series and (ii) when the Trustees have determined that the matter affects only the interests of one or more series, then only shareholders of such series shall be entitled to vote thereon. Shareholders of one series shall not be entitled to vote on matters exclusively affecting another series, such matters including, without limitation, the adoption of or change in any fundamental policies or restrictions of the other series and the approval of the investment advisory contracts of the other series.

Each class of shares of each fund has identical voting rights except that each class has exclusive voting rights on any matter submitted to shareholders that relates solely to that class, and has separate voting rights on any matter submitted to shareholders in which the interests of one class differ from the interests of any other class. Each class of shares has exclusive voting rights with respect to matters pertaining to any distribution and shareholder service plan applicable to that class. All classes of shares of a fund will vote together, except with respect to any distribution and shareholder service plan applicable to a class or when a class vote is required as specified above or otherwise by the 1940 Act.

There will normally be no meetings of shareholders for the purpose of electing Trustees, except that in accordance with the 1940 Act (i) the Trust will hold a shareholders’ meeting for the election of Trustees at such time as less than a majority of the Trustees holding office have been elected by shareholders, and (ii) if, as a result of a vacancy in the Board of Trustees, less than two-thirds of the Independent Trustees holding office have been elected by the shareholders, that vacancy may only be filled by a vote of the shareholders. In addition, Trustees may be removed from office by a written consent signed by the holders of two-thirds of the outstanding shares and filed with the Trust’s custodian or by a vote of

 

44


Table of Contents

the holders of two-thirds of the outstanding shares at a meeting duly called for the purpose, which meeting shall be held upon the written request of the holders of not less than 10% of the outstanding shares. Upon written request by the holders of at least 1% of the outstanding shares stating that such shareholders wish to communicate with the other shareholders for the purpose of obtaining the signatures necessary to demand a meeting to consider removal of a Trustee, the Trust has undertaken to provide a list of shareholders or to disseminate appropriate materials (at the expense of the requesting shareholders). Except as set forth above, the Trustees shall continue to hold office and may appoint successor Trustees. Voting rights are not cumulative.

No amendment may be made to the Declaration of Trust without the affirmative vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of the Trust except (i) to change the Trust’s name or to cure technical problems in the Declaration of Trust and (ii) to establish, liquidate, designate or modify new and existing series, sub-series or classes of shares of any series of Trust shares or other provisions relating to Trust shares in response to applicable laws or regulations. Trustees may, without approval of the relevant shareholders, combine, reorganize or merge one or more series or classes of the Trust into a single series or class on such terms and conditions as the Trustees shall determine.

Shareholders wishing to submit proposals for inclusion in a proxy statement for a future shareholder meeting should send their written submissions to the Trust at P. O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266. Proposals must be received a reasonable time in advance of a proxy solicitation to be included. Submission of a proposal does not guarantee inclusion in a proxy statement because proposals must comply with certain federal securities regulations.

PROXY VOTING

The Trust’s proxy voting policy is attached as “Appendix—Description of Proxy Voting Police and Procedure” to this Statement of Additional Information. Information regarding how the fund voted proxies related to portfolio securities during the most recent 12-month period ended June 30 will be available, without charge, on the fund’s website at www.laudus.com/prospectus. It is also available in the fund’s Form N-PX which can be obtained on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The proxy voting record of the predecessor UBS fund is available on the UBS Funds website.

SHAREHOLDER AND TRUSTEE LIABILITY

Under Massachusetts law, shareholders could, under certain circumstances, be held personally liable for the obligations of the Trust. However, the Declaration of Trust disclaims shareholder liability for acts or obligations of the Trust and requires that notice of such disclaimer be given in each agreement, obligation, or instrument entered into or executed by the Trust or the Trustees. The Declaration of Trust provides for indemnification out of all the property of the relevant series for all loss and expense of any shareholder of that series held personally liable for the obligations of the Trust. Thus, the risk of a shareholder incurring financial loss on account of shareholder liability is considered remote since it is limited to circumstances in which the disclaimer is inoperative and the series of which he is or was a shareholder would be unable to meet its obligations.

The Declaration of Trust further provides that the Trustees will not be liable for errors of judgment or mistakes of fact or law. However, nothing in the Declaration of Trust protects a Trustee against any liability to which the Trustee would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his office. The Declaration of Trust also provides for indemnification by the Trust of the Trustees and the officers of the Trust against liabilities and expenses reasonably incurred in connection with litigation in which they may be involved because of their offices with the Trust, except if it is determined in the manner specified in the Declaration of Trust that such Trustees are liable to the Trust or its shareholders by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of his or her duties.

 

45


Table of Contents

OWNERS OF 5% OR MORE OF THE FUND’S SHARES

As of July 17, 2012, the officers and trustees of the Trust, as a group, owned of record, directly or beneficially less than 1% of any class of outstanding equity securities of the fund.

As of July 11, 2012, the following persons or entities owned, of record or beneficially, more than 5% of the outstanding voting securities of the fund. Those persons who beneficially own more than 25% of the fund may be deemed to control the fund. As a result, it may not be possible for matters subject to a vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the fund to be approved without the affirmative vote of such shareholder, and it may be possible for such matters to be approved by such shareholder without the affirmative vote of any other shareholder.

 

CHARLES SCHWAB & CO INC

     70

211 MAIN STREET

  

SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105-1905

  

NATIONAL FINANCIAL SERVICES CORP

     8

ONE WORLD FINANCIAL CENTER

  

NEW YORK NY 10281-1003

  

MORI & CO

     7

C/O COMMERCE BANK

  

911 MAIN STREET — SUITE 201

  

KANSAS CITY MO 64105-5304

  

SCHWAB TARGET 2040

     5 % 1  

211 MAIN STREET

  

SAN FRANCISCO CA 94105

  

CHARLES SCHWAB BANK

     5 % 1  

101 MONTGOMERY ST

  

SAN FRANCISCO CA 94104

  

 

(1) These shares are held within the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. account listed elsewhere in this table. The shares held by the Charles Schwab Bank are held for the benefit of its customers.

DISCLOSURE OF PORTFOLIO SECURITIES INFORMATION

Information regarding the availability of the fund’s portfolio securities can be obtained by calling 1.800.447.3332.

The disclosure of portfolio securities information to shareholders and other parties, prior to regular public filings, may be authorized only by the Trust’s President upon prior consultation with the fund’s Subadviser and the fund’s Chief Legal Officer. Prior to authorizing the disclosure of portfolio securities, the Trust’s President must determine that: (i) such disclosure is in the best interests of the fund’s shareholders; and (ii) that no conflict exists between the interests of the fund’s shareholders and those of the fund’s Adviser, Subadviser or principal underwriter.

 

46


Table of Contents

Portfolio securities information also may be made available on a selective basis to service providers, ratings agencies, consultants and other qualified financial professionals when the President upon prior consultation with the fund’s Subadviser and the fund’s Chief Legal Officer, determines such disclosure meets the requirements for non-selective disclosure and serves a legitimate business purpose. Agreements entered into with a service provider to whom the fund selectively discloses portfolio securities information will generally include the confidentiality provisions customary in such agreements. Although certain of the service providers are not under formal confidentiality obligations in connection with disclosure of portfolio securities information, the fund would not continue to conduct business with a person who the fund believes was misusing the disclosed information. Any third-party who is not a service provider to the fund to whom the fund selectively discloses portfolio securities information will, prior to that disclosure, be required to sign an agreement describing the permitted use of portfolio securities information and providing that: (i) the portfolio securities information will be kept confidential; (ii) the person will not trade on the basis of any material non-public information; and (iii) the information will be used only for the purpose described in the agreement. As part of its ongoing review of fund operations, the Board of Trustees will periodically review any agreements that the Trust has entered into to selectively disclose portfolio securities information.

The fund’s service providers, including, without limitation, the Adviser, Subadviser, distributor, transfer agent, auditor, proxy voting service provider, pricing information vendors, publisher, printer and mailing agent may receive early disclosure of portfolio securities information as frequently as daily in connection with the services they perform for the fund. The names of those persons to whom the fund selectively discloses portfolio securities information will be disclosed in this Statement of Additional Information. CSIM, UBS Global AM, Glass Lewis and State Street Bank and Trust Company, as service providers to the fund, are currently receiving this information on a daily basis. RR Donnelley, as a service provider to the fund, is currently receiving this information on a quarterly basis. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP and ALPS, as service providers to the fund, receive this information on an as-needed basis. Service providers will be subject to a duty of confidentiality with respect to any portfolio securities information whether imposed by the provisions of the service provider’s contract with the Trust or by the nature of the service provider’s relationship with the Trust. In accordance with the exemptive order issued by the SEC to iShares and procedures approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees, the Trust will promptly notify iShares funds in writing of any purchase or acquisition of shares of an iShares fund that causes the fund to hold (i) 5% or more of such iShares fund’s total outstanding voting securities, and (ii) 10% or more of such iShares fund’s total outstanding voting securities. In addition, the adviser or Subadviser will, upon causing the fund to acquire more than 3% of an open-end iShares fund’s outstanding shares, notify the open-end iShares fund of the investment.

A complete list of the fund’s portfolio holdings is published on the Laudus website at www.laudus.com/prospectus, under “Analysis & Commentary”, approximately 30 days after the end of the fund’s fiscal quarter (which is also a calendar quarter-end). The portfolio holdings information available on the fund’s website is the same that is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form N-Q or Form N-CSR. The fund provides on the website quarterly information regarding certain attributes of the fund’s portfolio, such as the fund’s top ten holdings, sector weightings, composition, credit quality and duration and maturity, as applicable. This information is generally updated within 20-30 days after the end of the fiscal quarter. The information on the website is publicly available to all categories of persons.

The fund’s top ten holdings list is posted on Schwab.com monthly, typically with a 10-day lag. In addition to the top ten holdings information, the fund also provides monthly information regarding certain attributes of the fund’s portfolio, such as sector weightings, composition, credit quality, duration and maturity, as applicable. This information is available publicly to all persons under “Research & Strategies” on Schwab.com.

The fund may disclose non-material information including commentary and aggregate information about the characteristics of the fund in connection with or relating to the fund or its portfolio securities to any person if such disclosure is for a legitimate business purpose, such disclosure does not effectively result in the disclosure of the complete portfolio securities of the fund (which can only be disclosed in accordance with the above requirements), and such information does not constitute material non-public information. Such disclosure does not fall within the portfolio securities disclosure requirements outlined above.

 

47


Table of Contents

Whether the information constitutes material non-public information will be made on a good faith determination, which involves an assessment of the particular facts and circumstances. In most cases commentary or analysis would be immaterial and would not convey any advantage to a recipient in making a decision concerning the fund. Commentary and analysis includes, but is not limited to, the allocation of the fund’s portfolio securities and other investments among various asset classes, sectors, industries, and countries, the characteristics of the stock components and other investments of the fund, the attribution of fund returns by asset class, sector, industry and country, and the volatility characteristics of the fund.

Neither the fund nor the fund’s Investment Adviser or Subadviser may receive compensation or other consideration in connection with the disclosure of information about portfolio securities.

DETERMINATION OF NET ASSET VALUE

Each business day, the fund calculates its share price, or NAV, as of the close of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”). This means that NAVs are calculated using the values of the fund’s portfolio securities as of the close of the NYSE. Such values are required to be determined in one of two ways: securities for which market quotations are readily available are required to be valued at current market value; and securities for which market quotations are not readily available or the adviser deems them to be unreliable are required to be valued at fair value using procedures approved by the Board of Trustees. The fund uses approved pricing services to provide values for its portfolio securities. Current market values are generally determined by the approved pricing services as follows: securities traded on stock exchanges are valued at the last-quoted sales price on the exchange on which such securities are primarily traded (closing values), or, lacking any sales, at the mean between the bid and ask prices; securities traded in the over-the-counter market are valued at the last sales price that day, or, if there are no sales that day, at the mean between the bid and ask prices. In addition, securities that are primarily traded on foreign exchanges are generally valued at the official closing price or last sales price on the exchange where the securities are primarily traded with these values then translated into U.S. dollars at the current exchange rate. Fixed income securities normally are valued based on valuations provided by approved pricing services. Securities may be fair valued pursuant to procedures approved by the fund’s Board of Trustees when approved pricing services do not provide a value for a security, a furnished price appears manifestly incorrect or events occur prior to the close of the NYSE that materially affect the furnished price. The Board of Trustees regularly reviews fair value determinations made by the fund pursuant to the procedures.

PURCHASE AND REDEMPTION OF SHARES

The fund is open each day that the NYSE is open. The NYSE’s trading session is normally conducted from 9:30 a.m. Eastern time until 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday, although some days, such as in advance of and following holidays, the NYSE’s trading session closes early. The following holiday closings are currently scheduled for 2012—2013: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr.’s Birthday, Presidents’ Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day. The procedures for purchasing shares of fund and for determining the offering price of such shares are described in the Prospectus. The Trust has elected to be governed by Rule 18f-1 under the 1940 Act pursuant to which the Trust is obligated to redeem shares solely in cash for any shareholder during any 90-day period up to the lesser of (i) $250,000 or (ii) 1% of the total net asset value of the Trust at the beginning of such period. The procedures for redeeming shares of the fund are described in the Prospectus.

As described in the Prospectus, the Trust reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to reject purchase orders for shares of the fund. As a general matter, the Trust expects that it will not accept purchase orders when the purchase price is to be paid by cash (in the form of actual currency), third party checks, checks payable in foreign currency, credit card convenience checks or traveler’s checks.

 

48


Table of Contents

The fund has authorized one or more brokers to accept on their behalf purchase and redemption orders. Such brokers have also been authorized to designate other intermediaries to accept purchase and redemption orders on the fund’s behalf. The fund will be deemed to have received a purchase or redemption order when an authorized broker or, if applicable, a broker’s authorized designee, receives such order. Such orders will be priced at the fund’s net asset value per share next determined after such orders are received by an authorized broker or the broker’s authorized designee.

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and financial statements of the fund in the Trust’s Annual Report for the period ended March 31, 2012 (the “Annual Report”) are incorporated herein by reference to such Annual Report. Copies of such Annual Report are available without charge upon request by writing to Laudus Trust, P. O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266 or telephoning 1.888.452.8387 or visiting the fund’s website at www.laudus.com/prospectus.

The financial statements incorporated by reference into this Statement of Additional Information for the periods ending March 31, 2012, March 31, 2011, and March 31, 2010 have been audited by PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. The financial statements incorporated by reference into this Statement of Additional Information for the periods ending June 30, 2009, June 30, 2008, and June 30, 2007 were audited by the UBS Fund’s independent registered accounting firm.

 

49


Table of Contents

APPENDIX—RATINGS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES

From time to time, the fund may report the percentage of its assets that fall into the rating categories set forth below.

BONDS

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE

Aaa Bonds which are rated Aaa are judged to be of the best quality. They carry the smallest degree of investment risk and are generally referred to as “gilt edged.” Interest payments are protected by a large or by an exceptionally stable margin and principal is secure. While the various protective elements are likely to change, such changes as can be visualized are most unlikely to impair the fundamentally strong position of such issues.

Aa Bonds which are rated Aa are judged to be of high quality by all standards. Together with the Aaa group they comprise what are generally known as high-grade bonds. They are rated lower than the best bonds because margins of protection may not be as large as in Aaa securities or fluctuation of protective elements may be of greater amplitude or there may be other elements present which make the long term risk appear somewhat larger than the Aaa securities.

A Bonds which are rated A possess many favorable investment attributes and are to be considered as upper-medium grade obligations. Factors giving security to principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements may be present which suggest a susceptibility to impairment some time in the future.

Baa Bonds which are rated Baa are considered as medium-grade obligations (i.e., they are neither highly protected nor poorly secured). Interest payments and principal security appear adequate for the present but certain protective elements may be lacking or may be characteristically unreliable over any great length of time. Such bonds lack outstanding investment characteristics and in fact have speculative characteristics as well.

Ba Bonds which are rated Ba are judged to have speculative elements; their future cannot be considered as well-assured. Often the protection of interest and principal payments may be very moderate and thereby not well safeguarded during both good and bad times over the future. Uncertainty of position characterizes bonds in this class.

B Bonds which are rated B generally lack characteristics of the desirable investment. Assurance of interest and principal payments or of maintenance of other terms of the contract over any long period of time may be small.

STANDARD & POOR’S CORPORATION

INVESTMENT GRADE

AAA Debt rated ‘AAA’ has the highest rating assigned by S&P. Capacity to pay interest and repay principal is extremely strong.

AA Debt rated ‘AA’ has a very strong capacity to pay interest and repay principal and differs from the highest rated debt only in small degree.

A Debt rated ‘A’ has a strong capacity to pay interest and repay principal, although it is somewhat more susceptible to adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than debt in higher-rated categories.

BBB Debt rated ‘BBB’ is regarded as having an adequate capacity to pay interest and repay principal. Whereas it normally exhibits adequate protection parameters, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity to pay interest and repay principal for debt in this category than in higher rated categories.

 

A—1


Table of Contents

SPECULATIVE GRADE

Debt rated ‘BB’ and ‘B’ is regarded as having predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to capacity to pay interest and repay principal. While such debt will likely have some quality and protective characteristics, these are outweighed by large uncertainties or major risk exposures to adverse conditions.

BB Debt rated ‘BB’ has less near-term vulnerability to default than other speculative grade debt. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions that could lead to inadequate capacity to meet timely interest and principal payments. The ‘BB’ rating category is also used for debt subordinated to senior debt that is assigned an actual or implied ‘BBB-’ rating.

B Debt rate ‘B’ has greater vulnerability to default but presently has the capacity to meet interest payments and principal repayments. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions would likely impair capacity or willingness to pay interest and repay principal. The ‘B’ rating category also is used for debt subordinated to senior debt that is assigned an actual or implied ‘BB’ or ‘BB-’ rating.

FITCH, INC.

INVESTMENT GRADE BOND

 

AAA

   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of the highest credit quality. The obligor has an exceptionally strong ability to pay interest and repay principal, which is unlikely to be affected by reasonably foreseeable events.

AA

   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of very high credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is very strong, although not quite as strong as bonds rated ‘AAA’. Because bonds rated in the ‘AAA’ and ‘AA’ categories are not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable future developments, short term debt of these issuers is generally rated ‘F1+’.

A

   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of high credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is considered to be strong, but may be more vulnerable to adverse changes in economic conditions and circumstances than bonds with higher ratings.

BBB

   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of satisfactory credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is considered to be adequate. Adverse changes in economic conditions and circumstances, however, are more likely to have adverse impact on these bonds, and therefore impair timely payment. The likelihood that the ratings of these bonds will fall below investment grade is higher than for bonds with higher ratings.

SPECULATIVE GRADE BOND

BB

   Bonds are considered speculative. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal may be affected over time by adverse economic changes. However, business and financial alternatives can be identified which could assist the obligor in satisfying its debt service requirements.

B

   Bonds are considered highly speculative. While bonds in this class are currently meeting debt service requirements, the probability of continued timely payment of principal and interest reflects the obligor’s limited margin of safety and the need for reasonable business and economic activity throughout the life of the issue.

DOMINION BOND RATING SERVICE

Bond and Long Term Debt Rating Scale

As is the case with all DBRS rating scales, long term debt ratings are meant to give an indication of the risk that the borrower will not fulfill its full obligations in a timely manner with respect to both interest and principal commitments. DBRS ratings do not take factors such as pricing or market risk into consideration and are expected to be used by purchasers as one part of their investment process. Every DBRS rating is based on quantitative and qualitative considerations that are relevant for the borrowing entity.

 

A—2


Table of Contents

AAA: Highest Credit Quality

AA: Superior Credit Quality

A: Satisfactory Credit Quality

BBB: Adequate Credit Quality

BB: Speculative

B: Highly Speculative

CCC: Very Highly Speculative

CC: Very Highly Speculative

C: Very Highly Speculative

“AAA” Bonds rated “AAA” are of the highest credit quality, with exceptionally strong protection for the timely repayment of principal and interest. Earnings are considered stable, the structure of the industry in which the entity operates is strong, and the outlook for future profitability is favorable. There are few qualifying factors present which would detract from the performance of the entity, the strength of liquidity and coverage ratios is unquestioned and the entity has established a creditable track record of superior performance. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has established for this category, few entities are able to achieve a AAA rating.

“AA” Bonds rated “AA” are of superior credit quality, and protection of interest and principal is considered high. In many cases, they differ from bonds rated AAA only to a small degree. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has for the AAA category (which few companies are able to achieve), entities rated AA are also considered to be strong credits which typically exemplify above-average strength in key areas of consideration and are unlikely to be significantly affected by reasonably foreseeable events.

“A” Bonds rated “A” are of satisfactory credit quality. Protection of interest and principal is still substantial, but the degree of strength is less than with AA rated entities. While a respectable rating, entities in the “A” category are considered to be more susceptible to adverse economic conditions and have greater cyclical tendencies than higher rated companies.

“BBB” Bonds rated “BBB” are of adequate credit quality. Protection of interest and principal is considered adequate, but the entity is more susceptible to adverse changes in financial and economic conditions, or there may be other adversities present which reduce the strength of the entity and its rated securities.

“BB” Bonds rated “BB” are defined to be speculative, where the degree of protection afforded interest and principal is uncertain, particularly during periods of economic recession. Entities in the BB area typically have limited access to capital markets and additional liquidity support and, in many cases, small size or lack of competitive strength may be additional negative considerations.

“B” Bonds rated “B” are highly speculative and there is a reasonably high level of uncertainty which exists as to the ability of the entity to pay interest and principal on a continuing basis in the future, especially in periods of economic recession or industry adversity.

“CCC” / “CC” / “C” Bonds rated in any of these categories are very highly speculative and are in danger of default of interest and principal. The degree of adverse elements present is more severe than bonds rated “B”. Bonds rated below “B” often have characteristics which, if not remedied, may lead to default. In practice, there is little difference between the “C” to “CCC” categories, with “CC” and “C” normally used to lower ranking debt of companies where the senior debt is rated in the “CCC” to “B” range.

“D” This category indicates Bonds in default of either interest or principal.

 

A—3


Table of Contents

(“HIGH”, “LOW”) grades are used to indicate the relative standing of a credit within a particular rating category. The lack of one of these designations indicates a rating which is essentially in the middle of the category. Note that “high” and “low” grades are not used for the AAA category.

COMMERCIAL PAPER AND SHORT-TERM DEBT RATING SCALE

Dominion Bond Rating Service

As is the case with all DBRS rating scales, commercial paper ratings are meant to give an indication of the risk that the borrower will not fulfill its obligations in a timely manner. DBRS ratings do not take factors such as pricing or market risk into consideration and are expected to be used by purchasers as one part of their investment process. Every DBRS rating is based on quantitative and qualitative considerations which are relevant for the borrowing entity.

R-1: Prime Credit Quality

R-2: Adequate Credit Quality

R-3: Speculative

All three DBRS rating categories for short term debt use “high”, “middle” or “low” as subset grades to designate the relative standing of the credit within a particular rating category. The following comments provide separate definitions for the three grades in the Prime Credit Quality area, as this is where ratings for active borrowers in Canada continue to be heavily concentrated.

“R-1 (HIGH)” Short term debt rated “R-1 (high)” is of the highest credit quality, and indicates an entity which possesses unquestioned ability to repay current liabilities as they fall due. Entities rated in this category normally maintain strong liquidity positions, conservative debt levels and profitability which is both stable and above average. Companies achieving an “R-1 (high)” rating are normally leaders in structurally sound industry segments with proven track records, sustainable positive future results and no substantial qualifying negative factors. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has established for an “R-1 (high)”, few entities are strong enough to achieve this rating.

“R-1 (MIDDLE)” Short term debt rated “R-1 (middle)” is of superior credit quality and, in most cases, ratings in this category differ from “R-1 (high)” credits to only a small degree. Given the extremely tough definition which DBRS has for the “R-1 (high)” category (which few companies are able to achieve), entities rated “R-1 (middle)” are also considered strong credits which typically exemplify above average strength in key areas of consideration for debt protection.

“R-1 (LOW)” Short term debt rated “R-1 (low)” is of satisfactory credit quality. The overall strength and outlook for key liquidity, debt and profitability ratios is not normally as favorable as with higher rating categories, but these considerations are still respectable. Any qualifying negative factors which exist are considered manageable, and the entity is normally of sufficient size to have some influence in its industry.

“R-2 (HIGH)”, “R-2 (MIDDLE)”, “R-2 (LOW)” Short term debt rated “R-2” is of adequate credit quality and within the three subset grades, debt protection ranges from having reasonable ability for timely repayment to a level which is considered only just adequate. The liquidity and debt ratios of entities in the “R-2” classification are not as strong as those in the “R-1” category, and the past and future trend may suggest some risk of maintaining the strength of key ratios in these areas. Alternative sources of liquidity support are considered satisfactory; however, even the strongest liquidity support will not improve the commercial paper rating of the issuer. The size of the entity may restrict its flexibility, and its relative position in the industry is not typically as strong as an “R-1 credit”. Profitability trends, past and future, may be less favorable, earnings not as stable, and there are often negative qualifying factors present which could also make the entity more vulnerable to adverse changes in financial and economic conditions.

 

A—4


Table of Contents

“R-3 (HIGH)”, “R-3 (MIDDLE)”, “R-3 (LOW)” Short term debt rated “R-3” is speculative, and within the three subset grades, the capacity for timely payment ranges from mildly speculative to doubtful. “R-3” credits tend to have weak liquidity and debt ratios, and the future trend of these ratios is also unclear. Due to its speculative nature, companies with “R-3” ratings would normally have very limited access to alternative sources of liquidity. Earnings would typically be very unstable, and the level of overall profitability of the entity is also likely to be low. The industry environment may be weak, and strong negative qualifying factors are also likely to be present.

SHORT TERM NOTES AND VARIABLE RATE DEMAND OBLIGATIONS

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE

Short term notes/variable rate demand obligations bearing the designations MIG-1/VMIG-1 are considered to be of the best quality, enjoying strong protection from established cash flows, superior liquidity support or demonstrated broad-based access to the market for refinancing. Obligations rated MIG-2/VMIG-3 are of high quality and enjoy ample margins of protection although not as large as those of the top rated securities.

STANDARD & POOR’S CORPORATION

An S&P SP-1 rating indicates that the subject securities’ issuer has a strong capacity to pay principal and interest. Issues determined to possess very strong safety characteristics are given a plus (+) designation. S&P’s determination that an issuer has a satisfactory capacity to pay principal and interest is denoted by an SP-2 rating.

FITCH, INC.

Obligations supported by the highest capacity for timely repayment are rated F1+. An F1 rating indicates that the obligation is supported by a very strong capacity for timely repayment. Obligations rated F2 are supported by a good capacity for timely repayment, although adverse changes in business, economic, or financial conditions may affect this capacity.

COMMERCIAL PAPER

MOODY’S INVESTORS SERVICE

Prime-1 is the highest commercial paper rating assigned by Moody’s. Issuers (or related supporting institutions) of commercial paper with this rating are considered to have a superior ability to repay short term promissory obligations. Issuers (or related supporting institutions) of securities rated Prime-2 are viewed as having a strong capacity to repay short term promissory obligations. This capacity will normally be evidenced by many of the characteristics of issuers whose commercial paper is rated Prime-1 but to a lesser degree.

STANDARD & POOR’S CORPORATION

A Standard & Poor’s Corporation (“S&P”) A-1 commercial paper rating indicates a strong degree of safety regarding timely payment of principal and interest. Issues determined to possess overwhelming safety characteristics are denoted A-1+. Capacity for timely payment on commercial paper rated A-2 is satisfactory, but the relative degree of safety is not as high as for issues designated A-1.

 

A—5


Table of Contents

FITCH, INC.

F1+ is the highest category, and indicates the strongest degree of assurance for timely payment. Issues rated F1 reflect an assurance of timely payment only slightly less than issues rated F1+. Issues assigned an F2 rating have a satisfactory degree of assurance for timely payment, but the margin of safety is not as great as for issues in the first two rating categories.

 

A—6


Table of Contents

 

Page 1 of 5

 

Appendix – Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

The Charles Schwab Family of Funds

Schwab Investments

Schwab Capital Trust

Schwab Annuity Portfolios

Laudus Trust

Laudus Institutional Trust

Schwab Strategic Trust

Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures

As of April 2012

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM”), as an investment adviser, is generally responsible for voting proxies with respect to the securities held in accounts of investment companies and other clients for which it provides discretionary investment management services. CSIM’s Proxy Committee exercises and documents CSIM’s responsibility with regard to voting of client proxies (the “Proxy Committee”). The Proxy Committee is composed of representatives of CSIM’s Fund Administration, Portfolio Management, and Legal Departments, and chaired by CSIM’s Chief Investment Officer, Equities or his/her delegate. The Proxy Committee reviews and, as necessary, may amend periodically these Procedures to address new or revised proxy voting policies or procedures. The policies stated in these Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures (the “CSIM Proxy Procedures”) pertain to all of CSIM’s clients.

The Boards of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, and Schwab Annuity Portfolios (“Schwab Funds”) have delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through their respective Investment Advisory and Administration Agreements. In addition, the Boards of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust (“Laudus Funds”) and the Schwab Strategic Trust (“Schwab ETFs”; collectively, the Schwab Funds, the Laudus Funds and the Schwab ETFs are the “Funds”) have delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through their respective investment advisory and administration agreements. The Trustees have adopted these Proxy Procedures with respect to proxies voted on behalf of the various Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds, and Schwab ETFs portfolios. CSIM will present amendments to the Trustees for approval. However, there may be circumstances where the Proxy Committee deems it advisable to amend the Proxy Procedures between regular Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds and Schwab ETFs Board meetings. In such cases, the Trustees will be asked to ratify any changes at the next regular meeting of the Board.

To assist CSIM in its responsibility for voting proxies and the overall proxy voting process, CSIM has retained Glass Lewis & Co. (“Glass Lewis”) as an expert in the proxy voting and corporate governance area. The services provided by Glass Lewis include in-depth research, global issuer analysis, and voting recommendations as well as vote execution, reporting and record keeping.


Table of Contents

 

Page 2 of 5

 

Proxy Voting Policy

For investment companies and other clients for which CSIM exercises its responsibility for voting proxies, it is CSIM’s policy to vote proxies in the manner that CSIM and the Proxy Committee believes will maximize the economic benefit to CSIM’s clients. In furtherance of this policy, the Proxy Committee has received and reviewed Glass Lewis’ written proxy voting policies and procedures (“Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures”) and has determined that Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures are consistent with the CSIM Proxy Procedures and CSIM’s fiduciary duty with respect to its clients. The Proxy Committee has also implemented custom policies as set forth below. The Proxy Committee will review any material amendments to Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures to determine whether such procedures continue to be consistent with the CSIM Proxy Voting Procedures, and CSIM’s fiduciary duty with respect to its clients.

Except under each of the circumstances described below, the Proxy Committee will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting proxies, including timely submission of votes, on behalf of CSIM’s clients in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

For proxy issues that the Proxy Committee or the applicable portfolio manager or other relevant portfolio management staff believe raise significant concerns with respect to the accounts of CSIM clients, the Proxy Committee will review the analysis and recommendation of Glass Lewis. Examples of factors that could cause a matter to raise significant concerns include, but are not limited to: issues whose outcome has the potential to materially affect the company’s industry, or regional or national economy, and matters which involve broad public policy developments which may similarly materially affect the environment in which the company operates. The Proxy Committee also will solicit input from the assigned portfolio manager and other relevant portfolio management staff for the particular portfolio security. After evaluating all such recommendations, the Proxy Committee will decide how to vote the shares and will instruct Glass Lewis to vote consistent with its decision. The Proxy Committee has the ultimate responsibility for making the determination of how to vote the shares to seek to maximize the value of that particular holding.

With respect to proxies of a Fund, the Proxy Committee will vote such proxies in the same proportion as the vote of all other shareholders of the Fund ( i.e. , “echo vote”), unless otherwise required by law. When required by law or applicable exemptive order, the Proxy Committee will also “echo vote” proxies of an unaffiliated mutual fund or exchange traded fund (“ETF”). For example, certain exemptive orders issued to the Funds by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, require the Funds, under certain circumstances, to “echo vote” proxies of registered investment companies that serve as underlying investments of the Funds. When not required to “echo vote,” the Proxy Committee will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting proxies of an unaffiliated mutual fund or ETF in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures, subject to the custom policies set forth below.


Table of Contents

 

Page 3 of 5

 

In addition, with respect to holdings of The Charles Schwab Corporation (“CSC”) (ticker symbol: SCHW), the Proxy Committee will vote such proxies in the same proportion as the vote of all other shareholders of CSC (i.e., “echo vote”), unless otherwise required by law.

Exceptions from Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures : The Proxy Committee has reviewed the particular policies set forth in Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures and has determined that the implementation of the following custom policies is consistent with CSIM’s fiduciary duty to its clients:

 

   

Independent Chairman : With respect to shareholder proposals requiring that a company chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold, as calculated below. In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote the shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures. In cases where a company is a registered investment company, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals. Additionally, with respect to the election of a director who serves as the governance committee chair (or, in the absence of a governance committee, the chair of the nominating committee), the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote for the director in cases where the company chairman’s position is not filled by an independent director and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed.

 

   

Classified Boards : With respect to shareholder proposals declassifying a staggered board in favor of the annual election of directors, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold, as calculated below. In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote the shareholder proposals declassifying a staggered board in favor of the annual election of directors in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

 

   

Proxy Access : With respect to shareholder proposals requesting proxy access for shareholders, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet one of the following triggers:

 

   

The company did not implement a shareholder proposal that was passed by shareholders at two previous shareholder meetings.

 

   

The company nominated directors for election that did not receive a majority of shareholder support at the previous shareholder meeting.

 

   

The company had material financial statement restatements.

 

   

The company’s board adopted a poison pill during the past year and did not put the adoption up for shareholder approval.

In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote shareholder proposals requesting proxy access in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.


Table of Contents

 

Page 4 of 5

 

In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote shareholder proposals requesting proxy access in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

Glass Lewis uses a three-year total return performance methodology to calculate the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold. For Russell 3000 Index constituents, if a company’s total annual shareholder return is in the bottom 25% of Russell 3000 constituent companies’ total annual shareholder returns for three consecutive years, the company will be deemed not to have met the threshold. For companies not in the Russell 3000 Index, the universe of companies used for the minimum total shareholder return threshold calculation is all Glass Lewis covered companies outside of the Russell 3000 Index.

If Glass Lewis does not provide an analysis or recommendation for voting a particular proxy measure or measures, CSIM will generally abstain, however (1) two members of the Proxy Committee, including at least one representative from Portfolio Management, in consultation with the Chair of the Proxy Committee or his/her designee, may decide how to vote such proxy, or (2) the Proxy Committee may meet to decide how to vote such proxy.

Conflicts of Interest . Except as described above for proxies solicited by the Funds or CSC and the exceptions to Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures, proxy issues that present material conflicts of interest between CSIM, and/or any of its affiliates, and CSIM’s clients, CSIM will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting such proxies in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

Voting Foreign Proxies . CSIM has arrangements with Glass Lewis for voting proxies. However, voting proxies with respect to shares of foreign securities may involve significantly greater effort and corresponding cost than voting proxies with respect to domestic securities, due to the variety of regulatory schemes and corporate practices in foreign countries with respect to proxy voting. Problems voting foreign proxies may include the following:

 

  o proxy statements and ballots written in a foreign language;

 

  o untimely and/or inadequate notice of shareholder meetings;

 

  o restrictions of foreigner’s ability to exercise votes;

 

  o requirements to vote proxies in person;

 

  o requirements to provide local agents with power of attorney to facilitate CSIM’s voting instructions.

In consideration of the foregoing issues, Glass Lewis uses its best-efforts to vote foreign proxies. As part of its ongoing oversight, the Proxy Committee will monitor the voting of foreign proxies to determine whether all reasonable steps are taken to vote foreign proxies. If the Proxy Committee determines that the cost associated with the attempt to vote outweighs the potential benefits clients may derive from voting, the Proxy Committee may decide not to attempt to vote. In addition, certain foreign countries impose restrictions on the sale of securities for a period of time before and/or after the shareholder meeting. To avoid these trading restrictions, the Proxy Committee instructs Glass Lewis not to vote such foreign proxies.


Table of Contents

 

Page 5 of 5

 

Securities Lending Programs . Certain of the Funds enter into securities lending arrangements with lending agents to generate additional revenue for their portfolios. In securities lending arrangements, any voting rights that accompany the loaned securities generally pass to the borrower of the securities, but the lender retains the right to recall a security and may then exercise the security’s voting rights. In order to vote the proxies of securities out on loan, the securities must be recalled prior to the established record date. CSIM will use its best efforts to recall a Fund’s securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies if (a) the proxy relates to a special meeting of shareholders of the issuer (as opposed to the issuer’s annual meeting of shareholders), or (b) the Fund owns more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the issuer. Further, it is CSIM’s policy to use its best efforts to recall securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies if CSIM determines that the proxies involve a material event affecting the loaned securities. CSIM may utilize third-party service providers to assist it in identifying and evaluating whether an event is material. CSIM may also recall securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies in its discretion.

Sub-Advisory Relationships . Where CSIM has delegated day-to-day investment management responsibilities to an investment sub-adviser, CSIM may (but generally does not) delegate proxy voting responsibility to such investment sub-adviser. Each sub-adviser to whom proxy voting responsibility has been delegated will be required to review all proxy solicitation material and to exercise the voting rights associated with the securities it has been allocated in the best interest of each investment company and its shareholders, or other client. Prior to delegating the proxy voting responsibility, CSIM will review each sub-adviser’s proxy voting policy to determine whether it believes that each sub-adviser’s proxy voting policy is generally consistent with the maximization of economic benefits to the investment company or other client.

Reporting and Record Retention

CSIM will maintain, or cause Glass Lewis to maintain, records that identify the manner in which proxies have been voted (or not voted) on behalf of CSIM clients. CSIM will comply with all applicable rules and regulations regarding disclosure of its or its clients’ proxy voting records and procedures.

CSIM will retain all proxy voting materials and supporting documentation as required under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the rules and regulations thereunder.


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

PROXY PAPER GUIDELINES 2012 PROXY SEASON AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO PROXY ADVICE UNITED STATES


Table of Contents

C ONTENTS

 

I. A Board That Serves the Interests of Shareholders

     1   

Election of Directors

     1   

Independence

     1   

Performance

     4   

Experience

     13   

Other Considerations

     13   

Controlled Companies

     15   

Unofficially Controlled Companies and 20-50% Beneficial Owners

     16   

Exceptions for Recent IPOs

     16   

Mutual Fund Boards

     17   

Declassified Boards

     18   

Mandatory Director Term and Age Limits

     19   

Requiring Two or More Nominees per Board Seat

     19   

Shareholder Access

     19   

Majority Vote for the Election of Directors

     19   

The plurality vote standard

     20   

Advantages of a majority vote standard

     20   

II. Transparency and Integrity of Financial Reporting

     21   

Auditor Ratification

     21   

Voting Recommendations on Auditor Ratification

     21   

Pension Accounting Issues

     22   

III. The Link Between Compensation and Performance

     23   

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (“Say-on-Pay”)

     23   

Say-on-Pay Voting Recommendations

     24   

Additional Scrutiny for Companies with Significant Opposition in 2011

     25   

Short-Term Incentives

     25   

Long-Term Incentives

     25   

Pay for Performance

     26   

Recoupment (“Clawback”) Provisions

     27   

Frequency of Say-on-Pay

     27   

Vote on Golden Parachute Arrangements

     27   

Equity-Based Compensation Plan Proposals

     27   

Option Exchanges

     28   

Option Backdating, Spring-Loading, and Bullet-Dodging

     29   

162(m) Plans

     30   

Director Compensation Plans

     31   

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

I


Table of Contents

IV. Governance Structure and the Shareholder Franchise

     32   

Anti-Takeover Measure s

     32   

Poison Pills (Shareholder Rights Plans)

     32   

NOL Poison Pills

     32   

Fair Price Provisions

     33   

Reincorporation

     33   

Exclusive Forum Provisions

     34   

Authorized Shares

     34   

Advance Notice Requirements

     35   

Voting Structure

     36   

Cumulative Voting

     36   

SupermajorityVote Requirements

     36   

Transaction of Other Business

     37   

Anti-Greenmail Proposals

     37   

Mutual Funds: Investment Policies and Advisory Agreements

     37   

V. Compensation, Environmental, Social and Governance Shareholder Initiatives

     38   

Compensation

     38   

Disclosure of Individual Compensation

     38   

Linking Pay with Performance

     39   

Retirement Benefits & Severance

     39   

Bonus Recoupments (“Clawbacks”)

     39   

Golden Coffins

     40   

Retention of Shares until Retirement

     40   

Tax Gross-Ups

     41   

Linking Executive Pay to Environmental and Social Criteria

     41   

Governance

     41   

Declassification of the Board

     41   

Right of Shareholders to Call a Special Meeting

     41   

Right of Shareholders to Act by Written Consent

     42   

Board Composition

     43   

Reimbursement of Solicitation Expenses

     43   

Majority Vote for the Election of Directors

     43   

Cumulative Vote for the Election of Directors

     43   

SupermajorityVote Requirements

     44   

Independent Chairman

     44   

Proxy Access

     44   

Environment

     45   

Climate Change and Green House Gas Emission Disclosure

     46   

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

II


Table of Contents

Sustainability and other Environmentally-Related Reports

     46   

Oil Sands

     47   

Sustainable Forestry

     47   

Social Issues

     48   

Non-Discrimination Policies

     48   

MacBride Principles

     48   

Human Rights

     49   

Military and US Government Business Policies

     49   

Foreign Government Business Policies

     49   

Health Care Reform Principles

     49   

Tobacco

     50   

Reporting Contributions and Political Spending

     50   

Animal Welfare

     51   

Internet Censorship

     51   

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

III


Table of Contents

I. A B OARD T HAT S ERVES THE I NTERESTS OF S HAREHOLDERS

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The purpose of Glass Lewis’ proxy research and advice is to facilitate shareholder voting in favor of governance structures that will drive performance, create shareholder value and maintain a proper tone at the top. Glass Lewis looks for talented boards with a record of protecting shareholders and delivering value over the medium- and long-term. We believe that boards working to protect and enhance the best interests of shareholders are independent, have directors with diverse backgrounds, have a record of positive performance, and have members with a breadth and depth of relevant experience.

I NDEPENDENCE

The independence of directors, or lack thereof, is ultimately demonstrated through the decisions they make. In assessing the independence of directors, we will take into consideration, when appropriate, whether a director has a track record indicative of making objective decisions. Likewise, when assessing the independence of directors we will also examine when a director’s service track record on multiple boards indicates a lack of objective decision-making. Ultimately, we believe the determination of whether a director is independent or not must take into consideration both compliance with the applicable independence listing requirements as well as judgments made by the director.

We look at each director nominee to examine the director’s relationships with the company, the company’s executives, and other directors. We do this to evaluate whether personal, familial, or financial relationships (not including director compensation) may impact the director’s decisions. We believe that such relationships make it difficult for a director to put shareholders’ interests above the director’s or the related party’s interests. We also believe that a director who owns more than 20% of a company can exert disproportionate influence on the board and, in particular, the audit committee.

Thus, we put directors into three categories based on an examination of the type of relationship they have with the company:

Independent Director—An independent director has no material financial, familial or other current relationships with the company, its executives, or other board members, except for board service and standard fees paid for that service. Relationships that existed within three to five years 1 before the inquiry are usually considered “current” for purposes of this test.

In our view, a director who is currently serving in an interim management position should be considered an insider, while a director who previously served in an interim management position for less than one year and is no longer serving in such capacity is considered independent. Moreover, a director who previously served in an interim management position for over one year and is no longer serving in such capacity is considered an affiliate for five years following the date of his/her resignation or departure from the interim management position. Glass Lewis applies a three-year look-back period to all directors who have an affiliation with the company other than former employment, for which we apply a five-year look-back.

 

1 NASDAQ originally proposed a five-year look-back period but both it and the NYSE ultimately settled on a three-year look-back prior to finalizing their rules. A five-year standard is more appropriate, in our view, because we believe that the unwinding of conflicting relationships between former management and board members is more likely to be complete and final after five years. However, Glass Lewis does not apply the five-year look-back period to directors who have previously served as executives of the company on an interim basis for less than one year.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

1


Table of Contents

Affiliated Director—An affiliated director has a material financial, familial or other relationship with the company or its executives, but is not an employee of the company. 2 This includes directors whose employers have a material financial relationship with the company. 3 In addition, we view a director who owns or controls 20% or more of the company’s voting stock as an affiliate. 4

We view 20% shareholders as affiliates because they typically have access to and involvement with the management of a company that is fundamentally different from that of ordinary shareholders. More importantly, 20% holders may have interests that diverge from those of ordinary holders, for reasons such as the liquidity (or lack thereof) of their holdings, personal tax issues, etc.

Definition of “Material”: A material relationship is one in which the dollar value exceeds:

 

   

$50,000 (or where no amount is disclosed) for directors who are paid for a service they have agreed to perform for the company, outside of their service as a director, including professional or other services; or

 

   

$120,000 (or where no amount is disclosed) for those directors employed by a professional services firm such as a law firm, investment bank, or consulting firm where the company pays the firm, not the individual, for services. This dollar limit would also apply to charitable contributions to schools where a board member is a professor; or charities where a director serves on the board or is an executive; 5 and any aircraft and real estate dealings between the company and the director’s firm; or

 

   

1% of either company’s consolidated gross revenue for other business relationships (e.g., where the director is an executive officer of a company that provides services or products to or receives services or products from the company).

Definition of “Familial”: Familial relationships include a person’s spouse, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, nieces, nephews, in-laws, and anyone (other than domestic employees) who shares such person’s home. A director is an affiliate if the director has a family member who is employed by the company and who receives compensation of $120,000 or more per year or the compensation is not disclosed.

Definition of “Company”: A company includes any parent or subsidiary in a group with the company or any entity that merged with, was acquired by, or acquired the company.

Inside Director—An inside director simultaneously serves as a director and as an employee of the company. This category may include a chairman of the board who acts as an employee of the company or is paid as an employee of the company. In our view, an inside director who derives

 

2 If a company classifies one of its non-employee directors as non-independent, Glass Lewis will classify that director as an affiliate.
3 We allow a five-year grace period for former executives of the company or merged companies who have consulting agreements with the surviving company. (We do not automatically recommend voting against directors in such cases for the first five years.) If the consulting agreement persists after this five-year grace period, we apply the materiality thresholds outlined in the definition of “material.”
4 This includes a director who serves on a board as a representative (as part of his or her basic responsibilities) of an investment firm with greater than 20% ownership. However, while we will generally consider him/her to be affiliated, we will not recommend voting against unless (i) the investment firm has disproportionate board representation or (ii) the director serves on the audit committee.
5 We will generally take into consideration the size and nature of such charitable entities in relation to the company’s size and industry along with any other relevant factors such as the director’s role at the charity. However, unlike for other types of related party transactions, Glass Lewis generally does not apply a look-back period to affiliated relationships involving charitable contributions; if the relationship ceases, we will consider the director to be independent.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

2


Table of Contents

a greater amount of income as a result of affiliated transactions with the company rather than through compensation paid by the company (i.e., salary, bonus, etc. as a company employee) faces a conflict between making decisions that are in the best interests of the company versus those in the director’s own best interests. Therefore, we will recommend voting against such a director.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Board Independence

Glass Lewis believes a board will be most effective in protecting shareholders’ interests if it is at least two-thirds independent. We note that each of the Business Roundtable, the Conference Board, and the Council of Institutional Investors advocates that two-thirds of the board be independent. Where more than one-third of the members are affiliated or inside directors, we typically 6 recommend voting against some of the inside and/or affiliated directors in order to satisfy the two-thirds threshold.

In the case of a less than two-thirds independent board, Glass Lewis strongly supports the existence of a presiding or lead director with authority to set the meeting agendas and to lead sessions outside the insider chairman’s presence.

In addition, we scrutinize avowedly “independent” chairmen and lead directors. We believe that they should be unquestionably independent or the company should not tout them as such.

Committee Independence

We believe that only independent directors should serve on a company’s audit, compensation, nominating, and governance committees. 7 We typically recommend that shareholders vote against any affiliated or inside director seeking appointment to an audit, compensation, nominating, or governance committee, or who has served in that capacity in the past year.

Independent Chairman

Glass Lewis believes that separating the roles of CEO (or, more rarely, another executive position) and chairman creates a better governance structure than a combined CEO/chairman position. An executive manages the business according to a course the board charts. Executives should report to the board regarding their performance in achieving goals the board set. This is needlessly complicated when a CEO chairs the board, since a CEO/chairman presumably will have a significant influence over the board.

It can become difficult for a board to fulfill its role of overseer and policy setter when a CEO/ chairman controls the agenda and the boardroom discussion. Such control can allow a CEO to have an entrenched position, leading to longer-than-optimal terms, fewer checks on management, less scrutiny of the business operation, and limitations on independent, shareholder-focused goal-setting by the board.

A CEO should set the strategic course for the company, with the board’s approval, and the board should enable the CEO to carry out the CEO’s vision for accomplishing the board’s objectives.

 

6 With a staggered board, if the affiliates or insiders that we believe should not be on the board are not up for election, we will express our concern regarding those directors, but we will not recommend voting against the other affiliates or insiders who are up for election just to achieve two-thirds independence. However, we will consider recommending voting against the directors subject to our concern at their next election if the concerning issue is not resolved.
7 We will recommend voting against an audit committee member who owns 20% or more of the company’s stock, and we believe that there should be a maximum of one director (or no directors if the committee is comprised of less than three directors) who owns 20% or more of the company’s stock on the compensation, nominating, and governance committees.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

3


Table of Contents

Failure to achieve the board’s objectives should lead the board to replace that CEO with someone in whom the board has confidence.

Likewise, an independent chairman can better oversee executives and set a pro-shareholder agenda without the management conflicts that a CEO and other executive insiders often face. Such oversight and concern for shareholders allows for a more proactive and effective board of directors that is better able to look out for the interests of shareholders.

Further, it is the board’s responsibility to select a chief executive who can best serve a company and its shareholders and to replace this person when his or her duties have not been appropriately fulfilled. Such a replacement becomes more difficult and happens less frequently when the chief executive is also in the position of overseeing the board.

Glass Lewis believes that the installation of an independent chairman is almost always a positive step from a corporate governance perspective and promotes the best interests of shareholders. Further, the presence of an independent chairman fosters the creation of a thoughtful and dynamic board, not dominated by the views of senior management. Encouragingly, many companies appear to be moving in this direction—one study even indicates that less than 12 percent of incoming CEOs in 2009 were awarded the chairman title, versus 48 percent as recently as 2002. 8 Another study finds that 41 percent of S&P 500 boards now separate the CEO and chairman roles, up from 26 percent in 2001, although the same study found that of those companies, only 21 percent have truly independent chairs. 9

We do not recommend that shareholders vote against CEOs who chair the board. However, we typically encourage our clients to support separating the roles of chairman and CEO whenever that question is posed in a proxy (typically in the form of a shareholder proposal), as we believe that it is in the long-term best interests of the company and its shareholders.

P ERFORMANCE

The most crucial test of a board’s commitment to the company and its shareholders lies in the actions of the board and its members. We look at the performance of these individuals as directors and executives of the company and of other companies where they have served.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Performance

We disfavor directors who have a record of not fulfilling their responsibilities to shareholders at any company where they have held a board or executive position. We typically recommend voting against:

 

  1.

A director who fails to attend a minimum of 75% of board and applicable committee meetings, calculated in the aggregate. 10

 

  2. A director who belatedly filed a significant form(s) 4 or 5, or who has a pattern of late filings if the late filing was the director’s fault (we look at these late filing situations on a case-by-case basis).

 

8 Ken Favaro, Per-Ola Karlsson and Gary Neilson. “CEO Succession 2000-2009: A Decade of Convergence and Compression.” Booz & Company (from Strategy+Business, Issue 59, Summer 2010).
9 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 6.
10 However, where a director has served for less than one full year, we will typically not recommend voting against for failure to attend 75% of meetings. Rather, we will note the poor attendance with a recommendation to track this issue going forward. We will also refrain from recommending to vote against directors when the proxy discloses that the director missed the meetings due to serious illness or other extenuating circumstances.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

4


Table of Contents
  3. A director who is also the CEO of a company where a serious and material restatement has occurred after the CEO had previously certified the pre-restatement financial statements.

 

  4. A director who has received two against recommendations from Glass Lewis for identical reasons within the prior year at different companies (the same situation must also apply at the company being analyzed).

 

  5. All directors who served on the board if, for the last three years, the company’s performance has been in the bottom quartile of the sector and the directors have not taken reasonable steps to address the poor performance.

Audit Committees and Performance

Audit committees play an integral role in overseeing the financial reporting process because “[v]ibrant and stable capital markets depend on, among other things, reliable, transparent, and objective financial information to support an efficient and effective capital market process. The vital oversight role audit committees play in the process of producing financial information has never been more important.” 11

When assessing an audit committee’s performance, we are aware that an audit committee does not prepare financial statements, is not responsible for making the key judgments and assumptions that affect the financial statements, and does not audit the numbers or the disclosures provided to investors. Rather, an audit committee member monitors and oversees the process and procedures that management and auditors perform. The 1999 Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees stated it best:

A proper and well-functioning system exists, therefore, when the three main groups responsible for financial reporting—the full board including the audit committee, financial management including the internal auditors, and the outside auditors—form a ‘three legged stool’ that supports responsible financial disclosure and active participatory oversight. However, in the view of the Committee, the audit committee must be ‘first among equals’ in this process, since the audit committee is an extension of the full board and hence the ultimate monitor of the process.

Standards For Assessing The Audit Committee

For an audit committee to function effectively on investors’ behalf, it must include members with sufficient knowledge to diligently carry out their responsibilities. In its audit and accounting recommendations, the Conference Board Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise said “members of the audit committee must be independent and have both knowledge and experience in auditing financial matters.” 12

We are skeptical of audit committees where there are members that lack expertise as a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or corporate controller or similar experience. While we will not necessarily vote against members of an audit committee when such expertise is lacking, we are more likely to vote against committee members when a problem such as a restatement occurs and such expertise is lacking.

 

11 “Audit Committee Effectiveness—What Works Best.” PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Institute of Internal Auditors Research Foundation. 2005.
12 Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise. The Conference Board. 2003.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

5


Table of Contents

Glass Lewis generally assesses audit committees against the decisions they make with respect to their oversight and monitoring role. The quality and integrity of the financial statements and earnings reports, the completeness of disclosures necessary for investors to make informed decisions, and the effectiveness of the internal controls should provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are materially free from errors. The independence of the external auditors and the results of their work all provide useful information by which to assess the audit committee.

When assessing the decisions and actions of the audit committee, we typically defer to its judgment and would vote in favor of its members, but we would recommend voting against the following members under the following circumstances: 13

 

  1. All members of the audit committee when options were backdated, there is a lack of adequate controls in place, there was a resulting restatement, and disclosures indicate there was a lack of documentation with respect to the option grants.

 

  2. The audit committee chair, if the audit committee does not have a financial expert or the committee’s financial expert does not have a demonstrable financial background sufficient to understand the financial issues unique to public companies.

 

  3. The audit committee chair, if the audit committee did not meet at least four times during the year.

 

  4. The audit committee chair, if the committee has less than three members.

 

  5.

Any audit committee member who sits on more than three public company audit committees, unless the audit committee member is a retired CPA, CFO, controller or has similar experience, in which case the limit shall be four committees, taking time and availability into consideration including a review of the audit committee member’s attendance at all board and committee meetings. 14

 

  6. All members of an audit committee who are up for election and who served on the committee at the time of the audit, if audit and audit-related fees total one-third or less of the total fees billed by the auditor.

 

  7. The audit committee chair when tax and/or other fees are greater than audit and audit-related fees paid to the auditor for more than one year in a row (in which case we also recommend against ratification of the auditor).

 

  8. All members of an audit committee where non-audit fees include fees for tax services (including, but not limited to, such things as tax avoidance or shelter schemes) for senior executives of the company. Such services are now prohibited by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”).

 

13 Where the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against the members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.
14 Glass Lewis may exempt certain audit committee members from the above threshold if, upon further analysis of relevant factors such as the director’s experience, the size, industry-mix and location of the companies involved and the director’s attendance at all the companies, we can reasonably determine that the audit committee member is likely not hindered by multiple audit committee commitments.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

6


Table of Contents
  9. All members of an audit committee that reappointed an auditor that we no longer consider to be independent for reasons unrelated to fee proportions.

 

  10. All members of an audit committee when audit fees are excessively low, especially when compared with other companies in the same industry.

 

  11.

The audit committee chair 15 if the committee failed to put auditor ratification on the ballot for shareholder approval. However, if the non-audit fees or tax fees exceed audit plus audit-related fees in either the current or the prior year, then Glass Lewis will recommend voting against the entire audit committee.

 

  12.

All members of an audit committee where the auditor has resigned and reported that a section 10A 16 letter has been issued.

 

  13.

All members of an audit committee at a time when material accounting fraud occurred at the company. 17

 

  14. All members of an audit committee at a time when annual and/or multiple quarterly financial statements had to be restated, and any of the following factors apply:

 

   

The restatement involves fraud or manipulation by insiders;

 

   

The restatement is accompanied by an SEC inquiry or investigation;

 

   

The restatement involves revenue recognition;

 

   

The restatement results in a greater than 5% adjustment to costs of goods sold, operating expense, or operating cash flows; or

 

   

The restatement results in a greater than 5% adjustment to net income, 10% adjustment to assets or shareholders equity, or cash flows from financing or investing activities.

 

  15. All members of an audit committee if the company repeatedly fails to file its financial reports in a timely fashion. For example, the company has filed two or more quarterly or annual financial statements late within the last five quarters.

 

  16. All members of an audit committee when it has been disclosed that a law enforcement agency has charged the company and/or its employees with a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

 

  17. All members of an audit committee when the company has aggressive accounting policies and/or poor disclosure or lack of sufficient transparency in its financial statements.

 

  18. All members of the audit committee when there is a disagreement with the auditor and the auditor resigns or is dismissed.

 

15 In all cases, if the chair of the committee is not specified, we recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest.
16 Auditors are required to report all potential illegal acts to management and the audit committee unless they are clearly inconsequential in nature. If the audit committee or the board fails to take appropriate action on an act that has been determined to be a violation of the law, the independent auditor is required to send a section 10A letter to the SEC. Such letters are rare and therefore we believe should be taken seriously.
17 Recent research indicates that revenue fraud now accounts for over 60% of SEC fraud cases, and that companies that engage in fraud experience significant negative abnormal stock price declines—facing bankruptcy, delisting, and material asset sales at much higher rates than do non-fraud firms (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. “Fraudulent Financial Reporting: 1998-2007.” May 2010).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

7


Table of Contents
  19.

All members of the audit committee if the contract with the auditor specifically limits the auditor’s liability to the company for damages. 18

 

  20. All members of the audit committee who served since the date of the company’s last annual meeting, and when, since the last annual meeting, the company has reported a material weakness that has not yet been corrected, or, when the company has an ongoing material weakness from a prior year that has not yet been corrected.

We also take a dim view of audit committee reports that are boilerplate, and which provide little or no information or transparency to investors. When a problem such as a material weakness, restatement or late filings occurs, we take into consideration, in forming our judgment with respect to the audit committee, the transparency of the audit committee report.

Compensation Committee Performance

Compensation committees have the final say in determining the compensation of executives. This includes deciding the basis on which compensation is determined, as well as the amounts and types of compensation to be paid. This process begins with the hiring and initial establishment of employment agreements, including the terms for such items as pay, pensions and severance arrangements. It is important in establishing compensation arrangements that compensation be consistent with, and based on the long-term economic performance of, the business’s long-term shareholders returns.

Compensation committees are also responsible for the oversight of the transparency of compensation. This oversight includes disclosure of compensation arrangements, the matrix used in assessing pay for performance, and the use of compensation consultants. In order to ensure the independence of the compensation consultant, we believe the compensation committee should only engage a compensation consultant that is not also providing any services to the company or management apart from their contract with the compensation committee. It is important to investors that they have clear and complete disclosure of all the significant terms of compensation arrangements in order to make informed decisions with respect to the oversight and decisions of the compensation committee.

Finally, compensation committees are responsible for oversight of internal controls over the executive compensation process. This includes controls over gathering information used to determine compensation, establishment of equity award plans, and granting of equity awards. Lax controls can and have contributed to conflicting information being obtained, for example through the use of nonobjective consultants. Lax controls can also contribute to improper awards of compensation such as through granting of backdated or spring-loaded options, or granting of bonuses when triggers for bonus payments have not been met.

Central to understanding the actions of a compensation committee is a careful review of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) report included in each company’s proxy. We review the CD&A in our evaluation of the overall compensation practices of a company, as overseen by the compensation committee. The CD&A is also integral to the evaluation of compensation proposals at companies, such as advisory votes on executive compensation, which allow shareholders to vote on the compensation paid to a company’s top executives.

 

18 The Council of Institutional Investors. “Corporate Governance Policies,” p. 4, April 5, 2006; and “Letter from Council of Institutional Investors to the AICPA,” November 8, 2006.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

8


Table of Contents

When assessing the performance of compensation committees, we will recommend voting against for the following: 19

 

  1.

All members of the compensation committee who are up for election and served at the time of poor pay-for-performance (e.g., a company receives an F grade in our pay-for-performance analysis) when shareholders are not provided with an advisory vote on executive compensation at the annual meeting. 20

 

  2. Any member of the compensation committee who has served on the compensation committee of at least two other public companies that received F grades in our pay-for-performance model and who is also suspect at the company in question.

 

  3.

The compensation committee chair if the company received two D grades in consecutive years in our pay-for-performance analysis, and if during the past year the Company performed the same as or worse than its peers. 21

 

  4. All members of the compensation committee (during the relevant time period) if the company entered into excessive employment agreements and/or severance agreements.

 

  5. All members of the compensation committee when performance goals were changed (i.e., lowered) when employees failed or were unlikely to meet original goals, or performance-based compensation was paid despite goals not being attained.

 

  6. All members of the compensation committee if excessive employee perquisites and benefits were allowed.

 

  7. The compensation committee chair if the compensation committee did not meet during the year, but should have (e.g., because executive compensation was restructured or a new executive was hired).

 

  8. All members of the compensation committee when the company repriced options or completed a “self tender offer” without shareholder approval within the past two years.

 

  9. All members of the compensation committee when vesting of in-the-money options is accelerated or when fully vested options are granted.

 

  10. All members of the compensation committee when option exercise prices were backdated. Glass Lewis will recommend voting against an executive director who played a role in and participated in option backdating.

 

  11. All members of the compensation committee when option exercise prices were spring-loaded or otherwise timed around the release of material information.

 

19 Where the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair and the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.
20 Where there are multiple CEOs in one year, we will consider not recommending against the compensation committee but will defer judgment on compensation policies and practices until the next year or a full year after arrival of the new CEO. In addition, if a company provides shareholders with a say-on-pay proposal and receives an F grade in our pay-for-performance model, we will recommend that shareholders only vote against the say-on-pay proposal rather than the members of the compensation committee, unless the company exhibits egregious practices. However, if the company receives successive F grades, we will then recommend against the members of the compensation committee in addition to recommending voting against the say-on-pay proposal.
21 In cases where the company received two D grades in consecutive years, but during the past year the company performed better than its peers or improved from an F to a D grade year over year, we refrain from recommending to vote against the compensation chair. In addition, if a company provides shareholders with a say-on-pay proposal in this instance, we will consider voting against the advisory vote rather than the compensation committee chair unless the company exhibits unquestionably egregious practices.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

9


Table of Contents
  12. All members of the compensation committee when a new employment contract is given to an executive that does not include a clawback provision and the company had a material restatement, especially if the restatement was due to fraud.

 

  13. The chair of the compensation committee where the CD&A provides insufficient or unclear information about performance metrics and goals, where the CD&A indicates that pay is not tied to performance, or where the compensation committee or management has excessive discretion to alter performance terms or increase amounts of awards in contravention of previously defined targets.

 

  14.

All members of the compensation committee during whose tenure the committee failed to implement a shareholder proposal regarding a compensation-related issue, where the proposal received the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting shares at a shareholder meeting, and when a reasonable analysis suggests that the compensation committee (rather than the governance committee) should have taken steps to implement the request. 22

 

  15. All members of a compensation committee during whose tenure the committee failed to address shareholder concerns following majority shareholder rejection of the say-on-pay proposal in the previous year. Where the proposal was approved but there was a significant shareholder vote (i.e., greater than 25% of votes cast) against the say-on-pay proposal in the prior year, if there is no evidence that the board responded accordingly to the vote including actively engaging shareholders on this issue, we will also consider recommending voting against the chairman of the compensation committee or all members of the compensation committee, depending on the severity and history of the compensation problems and the level of vote against.

Nominating and Governance Committee Performance

The nominating and governance committee, as an agency for the shareholders, is responsible for the governance by the board of the company and its executives. In performing this role, the board is responsible and accountable for selection of objective and competent board members. It is also responsible for providing leadership on governance policies adopted by the company, such as decisions to implement shareholder proposals that have received a majority vote.

Consistent with Glass Lewis’ philosophy that boards should have diverse backgrounds and members with a breadth and depth of relevant experience, we believe that nominating and governance committees should consider diversity when making director nominations within the context of each specific company and its industry. In our view, shareholders are best served when boards make an effort to ensure a constituency that is not only reasonably diverse on the basis of age, race, gender and ethnicity, but also on the basis of geographic knowledge, industry experience and culture.

Regarding the nominating and or governance committee, we will recommend voting against the following: 23

 

22 In all other instances (i.e. a non-compensation-related shareholder proposal should have been implemented) we recommend that shareholders vote against the members of the governance committee.
23 Where we would recommend to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern regarding the committee chair

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

10


Table of Contents
  1.

All members of the governance committee 24 during whose tenure the board failed to implement a shareholder proposal with a direct and substantial impact on shareholders and their rights—i.e., where the proposal received enough shareholder votes (at least a majority) to allow the board to implement or begin to implement that proposal. 25 Examples of these types of shareholder proposals are majority vote to elect directors and to declassify the board.

 

  2.

The governance committee chair, 26 when the chairman is not independent and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed. 27

 

  3. In the absence of a nominating committee, the governance committee chair when there are less than five or the whole nominating committee when there are more than 20 members on the board.

 

  4. The governance committee chair, when the committee fails to meet at all during the year.

 

  5. The governance committee chair, when for two consecutive years the company provides what we consider to be “inadequate” related party transaction disclosure (i.e. the nature of such transactions and/or the monetary amounts involved are unclear or excessively vague, thereby preventing an average shareholder from being able to reasonably interpret the independence status of multiple directors above and beyond what the company maintains is compliant with SEC or applicable stock-exchange listing requirements).

 

  6.

The governance committee chair, when during the past year the board adopted a forum selection clause (i.e. an exclusive forum provision) 28 without shareholder approval, or, if the board is currently seeking shareholder approval of a forum selection clause pursuant to a bundled bylaw amendment rather than as a separate proposal.

Regarding the nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the following: 29

 

  1. All members of the nominating committee, when the committee nominated or renominated an individual who had a significant conflict of interest or whose past actions demonstrated a lack of integrity or inability to represent shareholder interests.

 

24 If the board does not have a governance committee (or a committee that serves such a purpose), we recommend voting against the entire board on this basis.
25 Where a compensation-related shareholder proposal should have been implemented, and when a reasonable analysis suggests that the members of the compensation committee (rather than the governance committee) bear the responsibility for failing to implement the request, we recommend that shareholders only vote against members of the compensation committee.
26 If the committee chair is not specified, we recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest. If the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, we will recommend voting against the longest-serving board member serving on the committee.
27 We believe that one independent individual should be appointed to serve as the lead or presiding director. When such a position is rotated among directors from meeting to meeting, we will recommend voting against as if there were no lead or presiding director.
28 A forum selection clause is a bylaw provision stipulating that a certain state, typically Delaware, shall be the exclusive forum for all intra-corporate disputes (e.g. shareholder derivative actions, assertions of claims of a breach of fiduciary duty, etc.). Such a clause effectively limits a shareholder’s legal remedy regarding appropriate choice of venue and related relief offered under that state’s laws and rulings.
29 Where we would recommend to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern regarding the committee chair.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

11


Table of Contents
  2. The nominating committee chair, if the nominating committee did not meet during the year, but should have (i.e., because new directors were nominated or appointed since the time of the last annual meeting).

 

  3.

In the absence of a governance committee, the nominating committee chair 30 when the chairman is not independent, and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed. 31

 

  4.

The nominating committee chair, when there are less than five or the whole nominating committee when there are more than 20 members on the board. 32

 

  5.

The nominating committee chair, when a director received a greater than 50% against vote the prior year and not only was the director not removed, but the issues that raised shareholder concern were not corrected. 33

Board-level Risk Management Oversight

Glass Lewis evaluates the risk management function of a public company board on a strictly case-by-case basis. Sound risk management, while necessary at all companies, is particularly important at financial firms which inherently maintain significant exposure to financial risk. We believe such financial firms should have a chief risk officer reporting directly to the board and a dedicated risk committee or a committee of the board charged with risk oversight. Moreover, many non-financial firms maintain strategies which involve a high level of exposure to financial risk. Similarly, since many non-financial firms have significant hedging or trading strategies, including financial and non-financial derivatives, those firms should also have a chief risk officer and a risk committee.

Our views on risk oversight are consistent with those expressed by various regulatory bodies. In its December 2009 Final Rule release on Proxy Disclosure Enhancements, the SEC noted that risk oversight is a key competence of the board and that additional disclosures would improve investor and shareholder understanding of the role of the board in the organization’s risk management practices. The final rules, which became effective on February 28, 2010, now explicitly require companies and mutual funds to describe (while allowing for some degree of flexibility) the board’s role in the oversight of risk.

When analyzing the risk management practices of public companies, we take note of any significant losses or writedowns on financial assets and/or structured transactions. In cases where a company has disclosed a sizable loss or writedown, and where we find that the company’s board-level risk committee contributed to the loss through poor oversight, we would recommend that shareholders vote against such committee members on that basis. In addition, in cases where a

 

30 If the committee chair is not specified, we will recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest. If the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, we will recommend voting against the longest-serving board member on the committee.
31 In the absence of both a governance and a nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the board on this basis.
32 In the absence of both a governance and a nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the board on this basis.
33 Considering that shareholder discontent clearly relates to the director who received a greater than 50% against vote rather than the nominating chair, we review the validity of the issue(s) that initially raised shareholder concern, follow-up on such matters, and only recommend voting against the nominating chair if a reasonable analysis suggests that it would be most appropriate. In rare cases, we will consider recommending against the nominating chair when a director receives a substantial (i.e., 25% or more) vote against based on the same analysis.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

12


Table of Contents

company maintains a significant level of financial risk exposure but fails to disclose any explicit form of board-level risk oversight (committee or otherwise) 34 , we will consider recommending to vote against the chairman of the board on that basis. However, we generally would not recommend voting against a combined chairman/CEO except in egregious cases.

E XPERIENCE

We find that a director’s past conduct is often indicative of future conduct and performance. We often find directors with a history of overpaying executives or of serving on boards where avoidable disasters have occurred appearing at companies that follow these same patterns. Glass Lewis has a proprietary database of directors serving at over 8,000 of the most widely held U.S. companies. We use this database to track the performance of directors across companies.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Director Experience

We typically recommend that shareholders vote against directors who have served on boards or as executives of companies with records of poor performance, inadequate risk oversight, overcompensation, audit-or accounting-related issues, and/or other indicators of mismanagement or actions against the interests of shareholders. 35

Likewise, we examine the backgrounds of those who serve on key board committees to ensure that they have the required skills and diverse backgrounds to make informed judgments about the subject matter for which the committee is responsible.

O THER C ONSIDERATIONS

In addition to the three key characteristics—independence, performance, experience—that we use to evaluate board members, we consider conflict-of-interest issues as well as the size of the board of directors when making voting recommendations.

Conflicts of Interest

We believe board members should be wholly free of identifiable and substantial conflicts of interest, regardless of the overall level of independent directors on the board. Accordingly, we recommend that shareholders vote against the following types of affiliated or inside directors:

 

  1. A CFO who is on the board: In our view, the CFO holds a unique position relative to financial reporting and disclosure to shareholders. Because of the critical importance of financial disclosure and reporting, we believe the CFO should report to the board and not be a member of it.

 

  2. A director who is on an excessive number of boards: We will typically recommend voting against a director who serves as an executive officer of any public company while serving on more than two other public company boards and any other director who serves on more than six public company boards typically receives an against recommendation from Glass Lewis. Academic literature suggests that one board takes up approximately

 

34 A committee responsible for risk management could be a dedicated risk committee, or another board committee, usually the audit committee but occasionally the finance committee, depending on a given company’s board structure and method of disclosure. At some companies, the entire board is charged with risk management.
35 We typically apply a three-year look-back to such issues and also research to see whether the responsible directors have been up for election since the time of the failure, and if so, we take into account the percentage of support they received from shareholders.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

13


Table of Contents
  200 hours per year of each member’s time. We believe this limits the number of boards on which directors can effectively serve, especially executives at other companies. 36 Further, we note a recent study has shown that the average number of outside board seats held by CEOs of S&P 500 companies is 0.6, down from 0.8 in 2006 and 1.2 in 2001. 37

 

  3. A director, or a director who has an immediate family member, providing material consulting or other material professional services to the company: These services may include legal, consulting, or financial services. We question the need for the company to have consulting relationships with its directors. We view such relationships as creating conflicts for directors, since they may be forced to weigh their own interests against shareholder interests when making board decisions. In addition, a company’s decisions regarding where to turn for the best professional services may be compromised when doing business with the professional services firm of one of the company’s directors.

 

  4. A director, or a director who has an immediate family member, engaging in airplane, real estate, or similar deals, including perquisite-type grants from the company, amounting to more than $50,000: Directors who receive these sorts of payments from the company will have to make unnecessarily complicated decisions that may pit their interests against shareholder interests.

 

  5.

Interlocking directorships: CEOs or other top executives who serve on each other’s boards create an interlock that poses conflicts that should be avoided to ensure the promotion of shareholder interests above all else. 38

 

  6.

All board members who served at a time when a poison pill was adopted without shareholder approval within the prior twelve months. 39 In the event a board is classified and shareholders are therefore unable to vote against all directors, we will recommend voting against the remaining directors the next year they are up for a shareholder vote.

Size of the Board of Directors

While we do not believe there is a universally applicable optimum board size, we do believe boards should have at least five directors to ensure sufficient diversity in decision-making and to enable the formation of key board committees with independent directors. Conversely, we believe that boards with more than 20 members will typically suffer under the weight of “too many cooks in the kitchen” and have difficulty reaching consensus and making timely decisions. Sometimes the presence of too many voices can make it difficult to draw on the wisdom and experience in the room by virtue of the need to limit the discussion so that each voice may be heard.

 

36 Our guidelines are similar to the standards set forth by the NACD in its “Report of the NACD Blue Ribbon Commission on Director Professionalism,” 2001 Edition, pp. 14-15 (also cited approvingly by the Conference Board in its “Corporate Governance Best Practices: A Blueprint for the Post-Enron Era,” 2002, p. 17), which suggested that CEOs should not serve on more than 2 additional boards, persons with full-time work should not serve on more than 4 additional boards, and others should not serve on more than six boards.
37 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 8.
38 We do not apply a look-back period for this situation. The interlock policy applies to both public and private companies. We will also evaluate multiple board interlocks among non-insiders (i.e. multiple directors serving on the same boards at other companies), for evidence of a pattern of poor oversight.
39 Refer to Section IV. Governance Structure and the Shareholder Franchise for further discussion of our policies regarding anti-takeover measures, including poison pills.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

14


Table of Contents

To that end, we typically recommend voting against the chairman of the nominating committee at a board with fewer than five directors. With boards consisting of more than 20 directors, we typically recommend voting against all members of the nominating committee (or the governance committee, in the absence of a nominating committee). 40

C ONTROLLED C OMPANIES

Controlled companies present an exception to our independence recommendations. The board’s function is to protect shareholder interests; however, when an individual or entity owns more than 50% of the voting shares, the interests of the majority of shareholders are the interests of that entity or individual. Consequently, Glass Lewis does not apply our usual two-thirds independence rule and therefore we will not recommend voting against boards whose composition reflects the makeup of the shareholder population.

Independence Exceptions

The independence exceptions that we make for controlled companies are as follows:

 

  1. We do not require that controlled companies have boards that are at least two-thirds independent. So long as the insiders and/or affiliates are connected with the controlling entity, we accept the presence of non-independent board members.

 

  2. The compensation committee and nominating and governance committees do not need to consist solely of independent directors.

 

  a. We believe that standing nominating and corporate governance committees at controlled companies are unnecessary. Although having a committee charged with the duties of searching for, selecting, and nominating independent directors can be beneficial, the unique composition of a controlled company’s shareholder base makes such committees weak and irrelevant.

 

  b. Likewise, we believe that independent compensation committees at controlled companies are unnecessary. Although independent directors are the best choice for approving and monitoring senior executives’ pay, controlled companies serve a unique shareholder population whose voting power ensures the protection of its interests. As such, we believe that having affiliated directors on a controlled company’s compensation committee is acceptable. However, given that a controlled company has certain obligations to minority shareholders we feel that an insider should not serve on the compensation committee. Therefore, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against any insider (the CEO or otherwise) serving on the compensation committee.

 

  3. Controlled companies do not need an independent chairman or an independent lead or presiding director. Although an independent director in a position of authority on the board—such as chairman or presiding director—can best carry out the board’s duties, controlled companies serve a unique shareholder population whose voting power ensures the protection of its interests.

 

40 The Conference Board, at p. 23 in its May 2003 report “Corporate Governance Best Practices, Id.,” quotes one of its roundtable participants as stating, “[w]hen you’ve got a 20 or 30 person corporate board, it’s one way of assuring that nothing is ever going to happen that the CEO doesn’t want to happen.”

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

15


Table of Contents

Size of the Board of Directors

We have no board size requirements for controlled companies.

Audit Committee Independence

We believe that audit committees should consist solely of independent directors. Regardless of a company’s controlled status, the interests of all shareholders must be protected by ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the company’s financial statements. Allowing affiliated directors to oversee the preparation of financial reports could create an insurmountable conflict of interest.

U NOFFICIALLY C ONTROLLED C OMPANIES AND 20-50% B ENEFICIAL O WNERS

Where an individual or entity owns more than 50% of a company’s voting power but the company is not a “controlled” company as defined by relevant listing standards, we apply a lower independence requirement of a majority of the board but believe the company should otherwise be treated like another public company; we will therefore apply all other standards as outlined above.

Similarly, where an individual or entity holds between 20-50% of a company’s voting power, but the company is not “controlled” and there is not a “majority” owner, we believe it is reasonable to allow proportional representation on the board and committees (excluding the audit committee) based on the individual or entity’s percentage of ownership.

E XCEPTIONS FOR R ECENT IPO S

We believe companies that have recently completed an initial public offering (“IPO”) should be allowed adequate time to fully comply with marketplace listing requirements as well as to meet basic corporate governance standards. We believe a one-year grace period immediately following the date of a company’s IPO is sufficient time for most companies to comply with all relevant regulatory re-quirements and to meet such corporate governance standards. Except in egregious cases, Glass Lewis refrains from issuing voting recommendations on the basis of corporate governance best practices (eg. board independence, committee membership and structure, meeting attendance, etc.) during the one-year period following an IPO.

However, two specific cases warrant strong shareholder action against the board of a company that completed an IPO within the past year:

 

  1. Adoption of a poison pill: in cases where a board implements a poison pill preceding an IPO, we will consider voting against the members of the board who served during the period of the poison pill’s adoption if the board (i) did not also commit to submit the poison pill to a shareholder vote within 12 months of the IPO or (ii) did not provide a sound rationale for adopting the pill and the pill does not expire in three years or less. In our view, adopting such an anti-takeover device unfairly penalizes future shareholders who (except for electing to buy or sell the stock) are unable to weigh in on a matter that could potentially negatively impact their ownership interest. This notion is strengthened when a board adopts a poison pill with a 5-10 year life immediately prior to having a public shareholder base so as to insulate management for a substantial amount of time while postponing and/or avoiding allowing public shareholders the ability to vote on the pill’s adoption. Such instances are indicative of boards that may subvert shareholders’ best interests following their IPO.

 

  2. Adoption of an exclusive forum provision: consistent with our general approach to boards that adopt exclusive forum provisions without shareholder approval (refer to our discussion of nominating and governance committee performance in Section I of the guidelines), in cases

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

16


Table of Contents
  where a board adopts such a provision for inclusion in a company’s charter or bylaws before the company’s IPO, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the governance committee, or, in the absence of such a committee, the chairman of the board, who served during the period of time when the provision was adopted.

Further, shareholders should also be wary of companies in this category that adopt supermajority voting requirements before their IPO. Absent explicit provisions in the articles or bylaws stipulating that certain policies will be phased out over a certain period of time (e.g. a predetermined declassification of the board, a planned separation of the chairman and CEO, etc.) long-term shareholders could find themselves in the predicament of having to attain a supermajority vote to approve future proposals seeking to eliminate such policies.

M UTUAL F UND B OARDS

Mutual funds, or investment companies, are structured differently from regular public companies (i.e., operating companies). Typically, members of a fund’s adviser are on the board and management takes on a different role from that of regular public companies. Thus, we focus on a short list of requirements, although many of our guidelines remain the same.

The following mutual fund policies are similar to the policies for regular public companies:

 

  1. Size of the board of directors: The board should be made up of between five and twenty directors.

 

  2. The CFO on the board: Neither the CFO of the fund nor the CFO of the fund’s registered investment adviser should serve on the board.

 

  3. Independence of the audit committee: The audit committee should consist solely of independent directors.

 

  4. Audit committee financial expert: At least one member of the audit committee should be designated as the audit committee financial expert.

The following differences from regular public companies apply at mutual funds:

 

  1. Independence of the board: We believe that three-fourths of an investment company’s board should be made up of independent directors. This is consistent with a proposed SEC rule on investment company boards. The Investment Company Act requires 40% of the board to be independent, but in 2001, the SEC amended the Exemptive Rules to require that a majority of a mutual fund board be independent. In 2005, the SEC proposed increasing the independence threshold to 75%. In 2006, a federal appeals court ordered that this rule amendment be put back out for public comment, putting it back into “proposed rule” status. Since mutual fund boards play a vital role in overseeing the relationship between the fund and its investment manager, there is greater need for independent oversight than there is for an operating company board.

 

  2. When the auditor is not up for ratification: We do not recommend voting against the audit committee if the auditor is not up for ratification because, due to the different legal structure of an investment company compared to an operating company, the auditor for the investment company (i.e., mutual fund) does not conduct the same level of financial review for each investment company as for an operating company.

 

  3. Non-independent chairman: The SEC has proposed that the chairman of the fund board be independent. We agree that the roles of a mutual fund’s chairman and CEO should be separate.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

17


Table of Contents

Although we believe this would be best at all companies, we recommend voting against the chairman of an investment company’s nominating committee as well as the chairman of the board if the chairman and CEO of a mutual fund are the same person and the fund does not have an independent lead or presiding director. Seven former SEC commissioners support the appointment of an independent chairman and we agree with them that “an independent board chairman would be better able to create conditions favoring the long-term interests of fund shareholders than would a chairman who is an executive of the adviser.” (See the comment letter sent to the SEC in support of the proposed rule at http://sec.gov/rules/proposed/s70304/s70304-179.pdf)

DECLASSIFIED BOARDS

Glass Lewis favors the repeal of staggered boards and the annual election of directors. We believe staggered boards are less accountable to shareholders than boards that are elected annually. Furthermore, we feel the annual election of directors encourages board members to focus on shareholder interests.

Empirical studies have shown: (i) companies with staggered boards reduce a firm’s value; and (ii) in the context of hostile takeovers, staggered boards operate as a takeover defense, which entrenches management, discourages potential acquirers, and delivers a lower return to target shareholders.

In our view, there is no evidence to demonstrate that staggered boards improve shareholder returns in a takeover context. Research shows that shareholders are worse off when a staggered board blocks a transaction. A study by a group of Harvard Law professors concluded that companies whose staggered boards prevented a takeover “reduced shareholder returns for targets . on the order of eight to ten percent in the nine months after a hostile bid was announced.” 41 When a staggered board negotiates a friendly transaction, no statistically significant difference in premiums occurs. 42 Further, one of those same professors found that charter-based staggered boards “reduce the market value of a firm by 4% to 6% of its market capitalization” and that “staggered boards bring about and not merely reflect this reduction in market value.” 43 A subsequent study reaffirmed that classified boards reduce shareholder value, finding “that the ongoing process of dismantling staggered boards, encouraged by institutional investors, could well contribute to increasing shareholder wealth.” 44

Shareholders have increasingly come to agree with this view. In 2011 more than 75% of S&P 500 companies had declassified boards, up from approximately 41% a decade ago. 45 Clearly, more shareholders have supported the repeal of classified boards. Resolutions relating to the repeal of staggered boards garnered on average over 70% support among shareholders in 2008, whereas in 1987, only 16.4% of votes cast favored board declassification. 46

Given the empirical evidence suggesting staggered boards reduce a company’s value and the increasing shareholder opposition to such a structure, Glass Lewis supports the declassification of boards and the annual election of directors.

 

41 Lucian Bebchuk, John Coates IV, Guhan Subramanian, “The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Further Findings and a Reply to Symposium Participants,” 55 Stanford Law Review 885-917 (2002), page 1.
42 Id. at 2 (“Examining a sample of seventy-three negotiated transactions from 2000 to 2002, we find no systematic benefits in terms of higher premia to boards that have [staggered structures].”).
43 Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen, “The Costs of Entrenched Boards” (2004).
44 Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen and Charles C.Y. Wang, “Staggered Boards and the Wealth of Shareholders: Evidence from a Natural Experiment,” SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1706806 (2010), p. 26.
45 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 14
46 Lucian Bebchuk, John Coates IV and Guhan Subramanian, “The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence, and Policy,” 54 Stanford Law Review 887-951 (2002).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

18


Table of Contents

MANDATORY DIRECTOR TERM AND AGE LIMITS

Glass Lewis believes that director age and term limits typically are not in shareholders’ best interests. Too often age and term limits are used by boards as a crutch to remove board members who have served for an extended period of time. When used in that fashion, they are indicative of a board that has a difficult time making “tough decisions.”

Academic literature suggests that there is no evidence of a correlation between either length of tenure or age and director performance. On occasion, term limits can be used as a means to remove a director for boards that are unwilling to police their membership and to enforce turnover. Some shareholders support term limits as a way to force change when boards are unwilling to do so.

While we understand that age limits can be a way to force change where boards are unwilling to make changes on their own, the long-term impact of age limits restricts experienced and potentially valuable board members from service through an arbitrary means. Further, age limits unfairly imply that older (or, in rare cases, younger) directors cannot contribute to company oversight.

In our view, a director’s experience can be a valuable asset to shareholders because of the complex, critical issues that boards face. However, we support periodic director rotation to ensure a fresh perspective in the boardroom and the generation of new ideas and business strategies. We believe the board should implement such rotation instead of relying on arbitrary limits. When necessary, shareholders can address the issue of director rotation through director elections.

We believe that shareholders are better off monitoring the board’s approach to corporate governance and the board’s stewardship of company performance rather than imposing inflexible rules that don’t necessarily correlate with returns or benefits for shareholders.

However, if a board adopts term/age limits, it should follow through and not waive such limits. If the board waives its term/age limits, Glass Lewis will consider recommending shareholders vote against the nominating and/or governance committees, unless the rule was waived with sufficient explanation, such as consummation of a corporate transaction like a merger.

REQUIRING TWO OR MORE NOMINEES PER BOARD SEAT

In an attempt to address lack of access to the ballot, shareholders sometimes propose that the board give shareholders a choice of directors for each open board seat in every election. However, we feel that policies requiring a selection of multiple nominees for each board seat would discourage prospective directors from accepting nominations. A prospective director could not be confident either that he or she is the board’s clear choice or that he or she would be elected. Therefore, Glass Lewis generally will vote against such proposals.

SHAREHOLDER ACCESS

We expect to see a number of shareholder proposals regarding this topic in 2012. For a discussion of recent regulatory events in this area, along with a detailed overview of the Glass Lewis approach to Shareholder Proposals regarding Proxy Access, refer to Section V. Compensation, Environmental, Social and Governance Shareholder Initiatives.

MAJORITY VOTE FOR THE ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

In stark contrast to the failure of shareholder access to gain acceptance, majority voting for the election of directors is fast becoming the de facto standard in corporate board elections. In our view, the majority voting proposals are an effort to make the case for shareholder impact on director elections on a company-specific basis.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

19


Table of Contents

While this proposal would not give shareholders the opportunity to nominate directors or lead to elections where shareholders have a choice among director candidates, if implemented, the proposal would allow shareholders to have a voice in determining whether the nominees proposed by the board should actually serve as the overseer-representatives of shareholders in the boardroom. We believe this would be a favorable outcome for shareholders.

During 2011, Glass Lewis tracked over 40 proposals seeking to require a majority vote to elect directors at annual meetings in the U.S., a slight increase over 2010 when we tracked just under 35 proposals, but a sharp contrast to the 147 proposals tracked during 2006. The large drop in the number of proposals being submitted in recent years compared to 2006 is a result of many companies having already adopted some form of majority voting, including approximately 79% of companies in the S&P 500 index, up from 56% in 2008. 47 During 2009 these proposals received on average 59% shareholder support (based on for and against votes), up from 54% in 2008.

T HE PLURALITY VOTE STANDARD

Today, most US companies still elect directors by a plurality vote standard. Under that standard, if one shareholder holding only one share votes in favor of a nominee (including himself, if the director is a shareholder), that nominee “wins” the election and assumes a seat on the board. The common concern among companies with a plurality voting standard was the possibility that one or more directors would not receive a majority of votes, resulting in “failed elections.” This was of particular concern during the 1980s, an era of frequent takeovers and contests for control of companies.

A DVANTAGES OF A MAJORITY VOTE STANDARD

If a majority vote standard were implemented, a nominee would have to receive the support of a majority of the shares voted in order to be elected. Thus, shareholders could collectively vote to reject a director they believe will not pursue their best interests. We think that this minimal amount of protection for shareholders is reasonable and will not upset the corporate structure nor reduce the willingness of qualified shareholder-focused directors to serve in the future.

We believe that a majority vote standard will likely lead to more attentive directors. Occasional use of this power will likely prevent the election of directors with a record of ignoring shareholder interests in favor of other interests that conflict with those of investors. Glass Lewis will generally support proposals calling for the election of directors by a majority vote except for use in contested director elections.

In response to the high level of support majority voting has garnered, many companies have voluntarily taken steps to implement majority voting or modified approaches to majority voting. These steps range from a modified approach requiring directors that receive a majority of withheld votes to resign (e.g., Ashland Inc.) to actually requiring a majority vote of outstanding shares to elect directors (e.g., Intel).

We feel that the modified approach does not go far enough because requiring a director to resign is not the same as requiring a majority vote to elect a director and does not allow shareholders a definitive voice in the election process. Further, under the modified approach, the corporate governance committee could reject a resignation and, even if it accepts the resignation, the corporate governance committee decides on the director’s replacement. And since the modified approach is usually adopted as a policy by the board or a board committee, it could be altered by the same board or committee at any time.

 

47 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 14

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

20


Table of Contents

II. T RANSPARENCY AND I NTEGRITY OF F INANCIAL R EPORTING

AUDITOR RATIFICATION

The auditor’s role as gatekeeper is crucial in ensuring the integrity and transparency of the financial information necessary for protecting shareholder value. Shareholders rely on the auditor to ask tough questions and to do a thorough analysis of a company’s books to ensure that the information provided to shareholders is complete, accurate, fair, and that it is a reasonable representation of a company’s financial position. The only way shareholders can make rational investment decisions is if the market is equipped with accurate information about a company’s fiscal health. As stated in the October 6, 2008 Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury:

“The auditor is expected to offer critical and objective judgment on the financial matters under consideration, and actual and perceived absence of conflicts is critical to that expectation. The Committee believes that auditors, investors, public companies, and other market participants must understand the independence requirements and their objectives, and that auditors must adopt a mindset of skepticism when facing situations that may compromise their independence.”

As such, shareholders should demand an objective, competent and diligent auditor who performs at or above professional standards at every company in which the investors hold an interest. Like directors, auditors should be free from conflicts of interest and should avoid situations requiring a choice between the auditor’s interests and the public’s interests. Almost without exception, shareholders should be able to annually review an auditor’s performance and to annually ratify a board’s auditor selection. Moreover, in October 2008, the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession went even further, and recommended that “to further enhance audit committee oversight and auditor accountability . disclosure in the company proxy statement regarding shareholder ratification [should] include the name(s) of the senior auditing partner(s) staffed on the engagement.” 48

Most recently on August 16, 2011, the PCAOB issued a Concept Release seeking public comment on ways that auditor independence, objectivity and professional skepticism could be enhanced, with a specific emphasis on mandatory audit firm rotation. The PCAOB will convene a public roundtable meeting in March 2012 to further discuss such matters. Glass Lewis believes auditor rotation can en-sure both the independence of the auditor and the integrity of the audit; we will typically recommend supporting proposals to require auditor rotation when the proposal uses a reasonable period of time (usually not less than 5-7 years) particularly at companies with a history of accounting problems.

V OTING R ECOMMENDATIONS ON A UDITOR R ATIFICATION

We generally support management’s choice of auditor except when we believe the auditor’s independence or audit integrity has been compromised. Where a board has not allowed shareholders to review and ratify an auditor, we typically recommend voting against the audit committee chairman. When there have been material restatements of annual financial statements or material weakness in internal controls, we usually recommend voting against the entire audit committee.

Reasons why we may not recommend ratification of an auditor include:

 

48 “Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury.” p. Vlll:20, October 6, 2008.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

21


Table of Contents
  1. When audit fees plus audit-related fees total less than the tax fees and/or other non-audit fees.

 

  2.

Recent material restatements of annual financial statements, including those resulting in the reporting of material weaknesses in internal controls and including late filings by the company where the auditor bears some responsibility for the restatement or late filing. 49

 

  3. When the auditor performs prohibited services such as tax-shelter work, tax services for the CEO or CFO, or contingent-fee work, such as a fee based on a percentage of economic benefit to the company.

 

  4. When audit fees are excessively low, especially when compared with other companies in the same industry.

 

  5. When the company has aggressive accounting policies.

 

  6. When the company has poor disclosure or lack of transparency in its financial statements.

 

  7. Where the auditor limited its liability through its contract with the company or the audit contract requires the corporation to use alternative dispute resolution procedures without adequate justification.

 

  8. We also look for other relationships or concerns with the auditor that might suggest a conflict between the auditor’s interests and shareholder interests.

PENSION ACCOUNTING ISSUES

A pension accounting question often raised in proxy proposals is what effect, if any, projected returns on employee pension assets should have on a company’s net income. This issue often arises in the executive-compensation context in a discussion of the extent to which pension accounting should be reflected in business performance for purposes of calculating payments to executives.

Glass Lewis believes that pension credits should not be included in measuring income that is used to award performance-based compensation. Because many of the assumptions used in accounting for retirement plans are subject to the company’s discretion, management would have an obvious conflict of interest if pay were tied to pension income. In our view, projected income from pensions does not truly reflect a company’s performance.

 

49 An auditor does not audit interim financial statements. Thus, we generally do not believe that an auditor should be opposed due to a restatement of interim financial statements unless the nature of the misstatement is clear from a reading of the incorrect financial statements.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

22


Table of Contents

III. T HE L INK B ETWEEN C OMPENSATION AND P ERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis carefully reviews the compensation awarded to senior executives, as we believe that this is an important area in which the board’s priorities are revealed. Glass Lewis strongly believes executive compensation should be linked directly with the performance of the business the executive is charged with managing. We believe the most effective compensation arrangements provide for an appropriate mix of performance-based short- and long-term incentives in addition to base salary.

Glass Lewis believes that comprehensive, timely and transparent disclosure of executive pay is critical to allowing shareholders to evaluate the extent to which the pay is keeping pace with company performance. When reviewing proxy materials, Glass Lewis examines whether the company discloses the performance metrics used to determine executive compensation. We recognize performance metrics must necessarily vary depending on the company and industry, among other factors, and may include items such as total shareholder return, earning per share growth, return on equity, return on assets and revenue growth. However, we believe companies should disclose why the specific performance metrics were selected and how the actions they are designed to incentivize will lead to better corporate performance.

Moreover, it is rarely in shareholders’ interests to disclose competitive data about individual salaries below the senior executive level. Such disclosure could create internal personnel discord that would be counterproductive for the company and its shareholders. While we favor full disclosure for senior executives and we view pay disclosure at the aggregate level (e.g., the number of employees being paid over a certain amount or in certain categories) as potentially useful, we do not believe shareholders need or will benefit from detailed reports about individual management employees other than the most senior executives.

ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (“SAY-ON-PAY”)

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) required most companies 50 to hold an advisory vote on executive compensation at the first shareholder meeting that occurs six months after enactment of the bill (January 21, 2011).

This practice of allowing shareholders a non-binding vote on a company’s compensation report is standard practice in many non-US countries, and has been a requirement for most companies in the United Kingdom since 2003 and in Australia since 2005. Although say-on-pay proposals are non-binding, a high level of “against” or “abstain” votes indicate substantial shareholder concern about a company’s compensation policies and procedures.

Given the complexity of most companies’ compensation programs, Glass Lewis applies a highly nuanced approach when analyzing advisory votes on executive compensation. We review each company’s compensation on a case-by-case basis, recognizing that each company must be examined in the context of industry, size, maturity, performance, financial condition, its historic pay for performance practices, and any other relevant internal or external factors.

We believe that each company should design and apply specific compensation policies and practices that are appropriate to the circumstances of the company and, in particular, will attract and retain competent executives and other staff, while motivating them to grow the company’s long-term shareholder value.

 

50 Small reporting companies (as defined by the SEC as below $75,000,000 in market capitalization) received a two-year reprieve and will only be subject to say-on-pay requirements beginning at meetings held on or after January 21, 2013.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

23


Table of Contents

Where we find those specific policies and practices serve to reasonably align compensation with performance, and such practices are adequately disclosed, Glass Lewis will recommend supporting the company’s approach. If, however, those specific policies and practices fail to demonstrably link compensation with performance, Glass Lewis will generally recommend voting against the say-on-pay proposal.

Glass Lewis focuses on four main areas when reviewing Say-on-Pay proposals:

 

   

The overall design and structure of the Company’s executive compensation program including performance metrics;

 

   

The quality and content of the Company’s disclosure;

 

   

The quantum paid to executives; and

 

   

The link between compensation and performance as indicated by the Company’s current and past pay-for-performance grades

We also review any significant changes or modifications, and rationale for such changes, made to the Company’s compensation structure or award amounts, including base salaries.

S AY - ON -P AY V OTING R ECOMMENDATIONS

In cases where we find deficiencies in a company’s compensation program’s design, implementation or management, we will recommend that shareholders vote against the say-on-pay proposal. Generally such instances include evidence of a pattern of poor pay-for-performance practices (i.e., deficient or failing pay for performance grades), unclear or questionable disclosure regarding the overall compensation structure (e.g., limited information regarding benchmarking processes, limited rationale for bonus performance metrics and targets, etc.), questionable adjustments to certain aspects of the overall compensation structure (e.g., limited rationale for significant changes to performance targets or metrics, the payout of guaranteed bonuses or sizable retention grants, etc.), and/or other egregious compensation practices.

Although not an exhaustive list, the following issues when weighed together may cause Glass Lewis to recommend voting against a say-on-pay vote:

 

   

Inappropriate peer group and/or benchmarking issues

 

   

Inadequate or no rationale for changes to peer groups

 

   

Egregious or excessive bonuses, equity awards or severance payments, including golden handshakes and golden parachutes

 

   

Guaranteed bonuses

 

   

Targeting overall levels of compensation at higher than median without adequate justification

 

   

Bonus or long-term plan targets set at less than mean or negative performance levels

 

   

Performance targets not sufficiently challenging, and/or providing for high potential payouts

 

   

Performance targets lowered, without justification

 

   

Discretionary bonuses paid when short- or long-term incentive plan targets were not met

 

   

Executive pay high relative to peers not justified by outstanding company performance

 

   

The terms of the long-term incentive plans are inappropriate (please see “Long-Term Incentives” below)

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

24


Table of Contents

In the instance that a company has simply failed to provide sufficient disclosure of its policies, we may recommend shareholders vote against this proposal solely on this basis, regardless of the appropriateness of compensation levels.

A DDITIONAL S CRUTINY FOR C OMPANIES WITH S IGNIFICANT O PPOSITION IN 2011

At companies that received a significant shareholder vote (anything greater than 25%) against their say on pay proposal in 2011, we believe the board should demonstrate some level of engagement and responsiveness to the shareholder concerns behind the discontent. While we recognize that sweeping changes cannot be made to a compensation program without due consideration and that a majority of shareholders voted in favor of the proposal, we will look for disclosure in the proxy statement and other publicly-disclosed filings that indicates the compensation committee is responding to the prior year’s vote results including engaging with large shareholders to identify the concerns causing the substantial vote against. In the absence of any evidence that the board is actively engaging shareholders on this issue and responding accordingly, we will recommend holding compensation committee members accountable for a failure to respond in consideration of the level of the vote against and the severity and history of the compensation problems.

Where we identify egregious compensation practices, we may also recommend voting against the compensation committee based on the practices or actions of its members during the year, such as approving large one-off payments, the inappropriate, unjustified use of discretion, or sustained poor pay for performance practices.

S HORT -T ERM I NCENTIVES

A short-term bonus or incentive (“STI”) should be demonstrably tied to performance. Whenever possible, we believe a mix of corporate and individual performance measures is appropriate. We would normally expect performance measures for STIs to be based on internal financial measures such as net profit after tax, EPS growth and divisional profitability as well as non-financial factors such as those related to safety, environmental issues, and customer satisfaction. However, we accept variations from these metrics if they are tied to the Company’s business drivers.

Further, the target and potential maximum awards that can be achieved under STI awards should be disclosed. Shareholders should expect stretching performance targets for the maximum award to be achieved. Any increase in the potential maximum award should be clearly justified to shareholders.

Glass Lewis recognizes that disclosure of some measures may include commercially confidential information. Therefore, we believe it may be reasonable to exclude such information in some cases as long as the company provides sufficient justification for non-disclosure. However, where a short-term bonus has been paid, companies should disclose the extent to which performance has been achieved against relevant targets, including disclosure of the actual target achieved.

Where management has received significant STIs but short-term performance as measured by such indicators as increase in profit and/or EPS growth over the previous year prima facie appears to be poor or negative, we believe the company should provide a clear explanation why these significant short-term payments were made.

L ONG - TERM I NCENTIVES

Glass Lewis recognizes the value of equity-based incentive programs. When used appropriately, they can provide a vehicle for linking an executive’s pay to company performance, thereby aligning their interests with those of shareholders. In addition, equity-based compensation can be an effective way to attract, retain and motivate key employees.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

25


Table of Contents

There are certain elements that Glass Lewis believes are common to most well-structured long-term incentive (“LTI”) plans. These include:

 

   

No re-testing or lowering of performance conditions

 

   

Performance metrics that cannot be easily manipulated by management

 

   

Two or more performance metrics

 

   

At least one relative performance metric that compares the company’s performance to a relevant peer group or index

 

   

Performance periods of at least three years

 

   

Stretching metrics that incentivize executives to strive for outstanding performance

 

   

Individual limits expressed as a percentage of base salary

Performance measures should be carefully selected and should relate to the specific business/industry in which the company operates and, especially, the key value drivers of the company’s business.

Glass Lewis believes that measuring a company’s performance with multiple metrics serves to provide a more complete picture of the company’s performance than a single metric, which may focus too much management attention on a single target and is therefore more susceptible to manipulation. External benchmarks should be disclosed and transparent, such as total shareholder return (“TSR”) against a well-selected sector index, peer group or other performance hurdle. The rationale behind the selection of a specific index or peer group should be disclosed. Internal benchmarks (e.g. earnings per share growth) should also be disclosed and transparent, unless a cogent case for confidentiality is made and fully explained.

We also believe shareholders should evaluate the relative success of a company’s compensation programs, particularly existing equity-based incentive plans, in linking pay and performance in evaluating new LTI plans to determine the impact of additional stock awards. We will therefore review the company’s pay-for-performance grade, see below for more information, and specifically the proportion of total compensation that is stock-based.

P AY FOR P ERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis believes an integral part of a well-structured compensation package is a successful link between pay and performance. Therefore, Glass Lewis developed a proprietary pay-for-performance model to evaluate the link between pay and performance of the top five executives at US companies. Our model benchmarks these executives’ pay and company performance against four peer groups and across seven performance metrics. Using a forced curve and a school letter-grade system, we grade companies from A-F according to their pay-for-performance linkage. The grades guide our evaluation of compensation committee effectiveness and we generally recommend voting against compensation committee of companies with a pattern of failing our pay-for-performance analysis.

We also use this analysis to inform our voting decisions on say-on-pay proposals. As such, if a company receives a failing grade from our proprietary model, we are likely to recommend shareholders to vote against the say-on-pay proposal. However, there may be exceptions to this rule such as when a company makes significant enhancements to its compensation programs.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

26


Table of Contents

R ECOUPMENT (“C LAWBACK ”) P ROVISIONS

Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC to create a rule requiring listed companies to adopt policies for recouping certain compensation during a three-year look-back period. The rule applies to incentive-based compensation paid to current or former executives if the company is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to erroneous data resulting from material non-compliance with any financial reporting requirements under the securities laws.

These recoupment provisions are more stringent than under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in three respects: (i) the provisions extend to current or former executive officers rather than only to the CEO and CFO; (ii) it has a three-year look-back period (rather than a twelve-month look-back period); and (iii) it allows for recovery of compensation based upon a financial restatement due to erroneous data, and therefore does not require misconduct on the part of the executive or other employees.

F REQUENCY OF S AY - ON -P AY

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires companies to allow shareholders a non-binding vote on the frequency of say-on-pay votes, i.e. every one, two or three years. Additionally, Dodd-Frank requires companies to hold such votes on the frequency of say-on-pay votes at least once every six years.

We believe companies should submit say-on-pay votes to shareholders every year. We believe that the time and financial burdens to a company with regard to an annual vote are relatively small and incremental and are outweighed by the benefits to shareholders through more frequent accountability. Implementing biannual or triennial votes on executive compensation limits shareholders’ ability to hold the board accountable for its compensation practices through means other than voting against the compensation committee. Unless a company provides a compelling rationale or unique circumstances for say-on-pay votes less frequent than annually, we will generally recommend that shareholders support annual votes on compensation.

V OTE ON G OLDEN P ARACHUTE A RRANGEMENTS

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires companies to provide shareholders with a separate non-binding vote on approval of golden parachute compensation arrangements in connection with certain change-in-control transactions. However, if the golden parachute arrangements have previously been subject to a say-on-pay vote which shareholders approved, then this required vote is waived.

Glass Lewis believes the narrative and tabular disclosure of golden parachute arrangements will benefit all shareholders. Glass Lewis will analyze each golden parachute arrangement on a case-by-case basis, taking into account, among other items: the ultimate value of the payments particularly compared to the value of the transaction, the tenure and position of the executives in question, and the type of triggers involved (single vs double).

EQUITY-BASED COMPENSATION PLAN PROPOSALS

We believe that equity compensation awards are useful, when not abused, for retaining employees and providing an incentive for them to act in a way that will improve company performance. Glass Lewis evaluates equity-based compensation plans using a detailed model and analytical review.

Equity-based compensation programs have important differences from cash compensation plans and bonus programs. Accordingly, our model and analysis takes into account factors such as plan administration, the method and terms of exercise, repricing history, express or implied rights to reprice, and the presence of evergreen provisions.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

27


Table of Contents

Our analysis is primarily quantitative and focused on the plan’s cost as compared with the business’s operating metrics. We run twenty different analyses, comparing the program with absolute limits we believe are key to equity value creation and with a carefully chosen peer group. In general, our model seeks to determine whether the proposed plan is either absolutely excessive or is more than one standard deviation away from the average plan for the peer group on a range of criteria, including dilution to shareholders and the projected annual cost relative to the company’s financial performance. Each of the twenty analyses (and their constituent parts) is weighted and the plan is scored in accordance with that weight.

In our analysis, we compare the program’s expected annual expense with the business’s operating metrics to help determine whether the plan is excessive in light of company performance. We also compare the option plan’s expected annual cost to the enterprise value of the firm rather than to market capitalization because the employees, managers and directors of the firm contribute to the creation of enterprise value but not necessarily market capitalization (the biggest difference is seen where cash represents the vast majority of market capitalization). Finally, we do not rely exclusively on relative comparisons with averages because, in addition to creeping averages serving to inflate compensation, we believe that some absolute limits are warranted.

We evaluate equity plans based on certain overarching principles:

 

  1. Companies should seek more shares only when needed.

 

  2. Requested share amounts should be small enough that companies seek shareholder approval every three to four years (or more frequently).

 

  3. If a plan is relatively expensive, it should not grant options solely to senior executives and board members.

 

  4. Annual net share count and voting power dilution should be limited.

 

  5. Annual cost of the plan (especially if not shown on the income statement) should be reasonable as a percentage of financial results and should be in line with the peer group.

 

  6. The expected annual cost of the plan should be proportional to the business’s value.

 

  7. The intrinsic value that option grantees received in the past should be reasonable compared with the business’s financial results.

 

  8. Plans should deliver value on a per-employee basis when compared with programs at peer companies.

 

  9. Plans should not permit re-pricing of stock options.

 

  10. Plans should not contain excessively liberal administrative or payment terms.

 

  11. Selected performance metrics should be challenging and appropriate, and should be subject to relative performance measurements.

 

  12. Stock grants should be subject to minimum vesting and/or holding periods sufficient to ensure sustainable performance and promote retention.

O PTION E XCHANGES

Glass Lewis views option repricing plans and option exchange programs with great skepticism. Shareholders have substantial risk in owning stock and we believe that the employees, officers, and directors who receive stock options should be similarly situated to align their interests with shareholder interests.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

28


Table of Contents

We are concerned that option grantees who believe they will be “rescued” from underwater options will be more inclined to take unjustifiable risks. Moreover, a predictable pattern of repricing or exchanges substantially alters a stock option’s value because options that will practically never expire deeply out of the money are worth far more than options that carry a risk of expiration.

In short, repricings and option exchange programs change the bargain between shareholders and employees after the bargain has been struck.

There is one circumstance in which a repricing or option exchange program is acceptable: if macroeconomic or industry trends, rather than specific company issues, cause a stock’s value to decline dramatically and the repricing is necessary to motivate and retain employees. In this circumstance, we think it fair to conclude that option grantees may be suffering from a risk that was not foreseeable when the original “bargain” was struck. In such a circumstance, we will recommend supporting a repricing only if the following conditions are true:

 

  1. Officers and board members cannot participate in the program;

 

  2. The stock decline mirrors the market or industry price decline in terms of timing and approximates the decline in magnitude;

 

  3. The exchange is value-neutral or value-creative to shareholders using very conservative assumptions and with a recognition of the adverse selection problems inherent in voluntary programs; and

 

  4. Management and the board make a cogent case for needing to motivate and retain existing employees, such as being in a competitive employment market.

O PTION B ACKDATING , S PRING -L OADING , AND B ULLET -D ODGING

Glass Lewis views option backdating, and the related practices of spring-loading and bullet-dodging, as egregious actions that warrant holding the appropriate management and board members responsible. These practices are similar to re-pricing options and eliminate much of the downside risk inherent in an option grant that is designed to induce recipients to maximize shareholder return.

Backdating an option is the act of changing an option’s grant date from the actual grant date to an earlier date when the market price of the underlying stock was lower, resulting in a lower exercise price for the option. Since 2006, Glass Lewis has identified over 270 companies that have disclosed internal or government investigations into their past stock-option grants.

Spring-loading is granting stock options while in possession of material, positive information that has not been disclosed publicly. Bullet-dodging is delaying the grants of stock options until after the release of material, negative information. This can allow option grants to be made at a lower price either before the release of positive news or following the release of negative news, assuming the stock’s price will move up or down in response to the information. This raises a concern similar to that of insider trading, or the trading on material non-public information.

The exercise price for an option is determined on the day of grant, providing the recipient with the same market risk as an investor who bought shares on that date. However, where options were backdated, the executive or the board (or the compensation committee) changed the grant date retroactively. The new date may be at or near the lowest price for the year or period. This would be like allowing an investor to look back and select the lowest price of the year at which to buy shares.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

29


Table of Contents

A 2006 study of option grants made between 1996 and 2005 at 8,000 companies found that option backdating can be an indication of poor internal controls. The study found that option backdating was more likely to occur at companies without a majority independent board and with a long-serving CEO; both factors, the study concluded, were associated with greater CEO influence on the company’s compensation and governance practices. 51

Where a company granted backdated options to an executive who is also a director, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against that executive/director, regardless of who decided to make the award. In addition, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against those directors who either approved or allowed the backdating. Glass Lewis feels that executives and directors who either benefited from backdated options or authorized the practice have breached their fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

Given the severe tax and legal liabilities to the company from backdating, Glass Lewis will consider recommending voting against members of the audit committee who served when options were backdated, a restatement occurs, material weaknesses in internal controls exist and disclosures indicate there was a lack of documentation. These committee members failed in their responsibility to ensure the integrity of the company’s financial reports.

When a company has engaged in spring-loading or bullet-dodging, Glass Lewis will consider recommending voting against the compensation committee members where there has been a pattern of granting options at or near historic lows. Glass Lewis will also recommend voting against executives serving on the board who benefited from the spring-loading or bullet-dodging.

162( M ) P LANS

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code allows companies to deduct compensation in excess of $1 million for the CEO and the next three most highly compensated executive officers, excluding the CFO, upon shareholder approval of the excess compensation. Glass Lewis recognizes the value of executive incentive programs and the tax benefit of shareholder-approved incentive plans.

We believe the best practice for companies is to provide robust disclosure to shareholders so that they can make fully-informed judgments about the reasonableness of the proposed compensation plan. To allow for meaningful shareholder review, we prefer that disclosure should include specific performance metrics, a maximum award pool, and a maximum award amount per employee. We also believe it is important to analyze the estimated grants to see if they are reasonable and in line with the company’s peers.

We typically recommend voting against a 162(m) plan where: a company fails to provide at least a list of performance targets; a company fails to provide one of either a total pool or an individual maximum; or the proposed plan is excessive when compared with the plans of the company’s peers.

The company’s record of aligning pay with performance (as evaluated using our proprietary pay-for-performance model) also plays a role in our recommendation. Where a company has a record of setting reasonable pay relative to business performance, we generally recommend voting in favor of a plan even if the plan caps seem large relative to peers because we recognize the value in special pay arrangements for continued exceptional performance.

As with all other issues we review, our goal is to provide consistent but contextual advice given the specifics of the company and ongoing performance. Overall, we recognize that it is generally not in shareholders’ best interests to vote against such a plan and forgo the potential tax benefit since shareholder rejection of such plans will not curtail the awards; it will only prevent the tax deduction associated with them.

 

51 Lucian Bebchuk, Yaniv Grinstein and Urs Peyer. “LUCKY CEOs.” November, 2006.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

30


Table of Contents

D IRECTOR C OMPENSATION P LANS

Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive reasonable and appropriate compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. Director fees should be competitive in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. But excessive fees represent a financial cost to the company and threaten to compromise the objectivity and independence of non-employee directors. Therefore, a balance is required. We will consider recommending supporting compensation plans that include option grants or other equity-based awards that help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders. However, equity grants to directors should not be performance-based to ensure directors are not incentivized in the same manner as executives but rather serve as a check on imprudent risk-taking in executive compensation plan design.

Glass Lewis uses a proprietary model and analyst review to evaluate the costs of equity plans compared to the plans of peer companies with similar market capitalizations. We use the results of this model to guide our voting recommendations on stock-based director compensation plans.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

31


Table of Contents

IV. G OVERNANCE S TRUCTURE AND THE S HAREHOLDER F RANCHISE

ANTI-TAKEOVER MEASURES

P OISON P ILLS (S HAREHOLDER R IGHTS P LANS )

Glass Lewis believes that poison pill plans are not generally in shareholders’ best interests. They can reduce management accountability by substantially limiting opportunities for corporate takeovers. Rights plans can thus prevent shareholders from receiving a buy-out premium for their stock. Typically we recommend that shareholders vote against these plans to protect their financial interests and ensure that they have an opportunity to consider any offer for their shares, especially those at a premium.

We believe boards should be given wide latitude in directing company activities and in charting the company’s course. However, on an issue such as this, where the link between the shareholders’ financial interests and their right to consider and accept buyout offers is substantial, we believe that shareholders should be allowed to vote on whether they support such a plan’s implementation. This issue is different from other matters that are typically left to board discretion. Its potential impact on and relation to shareholders is direct and substantial. It is also an issue in which management interests may be different from those of shareholders; thus, ensuring that shareholders have a voice is the only way to safeguard their interests.

In certain circumstances, we will support a poison pill that is limited in scope to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what we believe to be a reasonable qualifying offer clause. We will consider supporting a poison pill plan if the qualifying offer clause includes each of the following attributes:

 

  1. The form of offer is not required to be an all-cash transaction;

 

  2. The offer is not required to remain open for more than 90 business days;

 

  3. The offeror is permitted to amend the offer, reduce the offer, or otherwise change the terms;

 

  4. There is no fairness opinion requirement; and

 

  5. There is a low to no premium requirement.

Where these requirements are met, we typically feel comfortable that shareholders will have the opportunity to voice their opinion on any legitimate offer.

NOL P OISON P ILLS

Similarly, Glass Lewis may consider supporting a limited poison pill in the unique event that a company seeks shareholder approval of a rights plan for the express purpose of preserving Net Operating Losses (NOLs). While companies with NOLs can generally carry these losses forward to offset future taxable income, Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code limits companies’ ability to use NOLs in the event of a “change of ownership.” 52 In this case, a company may adopt or amend a poison pill (“NOL pill”) in order to prevent an inadvertent change of ownership by multiple investors purchasing small chunks of stock at the same time, and thereby preserve the ability to carry the NOLs forward. Often such NOL pills have trigger thresholds much lower than the common 15% or 20% thresholds, with some NOL pill triggers as low as 5%.

 

52 Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code refers to a “change of ownership” of more than 50 percentage points by one or more 5% shareholders within a three-year period. The statute is intended to deter the “trafficking” of net operating losses.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

32


Table of Contents

Glass Lewis evaluates NOL pills on a strictly case-by-case basis taking into consideration, among other factors, the value of the NOLs to the company, the likelihood of a change of ownership based on the size of the holding and the nature of the larger shareholders, the trigger threshold and whether the term of the plan is limited in duration (i.e., whether it contains a reasonable “sunset” provision) or is subject to periodic board review and/or shareholder ratification. However, we will recommend that shareholders vote against a proposal to adopt or amend a pill to include NOL protective provisions if the company has adopted a more narrowly tailored means of preventing a change in control to preserve its NOLs. For example, a company may limit share transfers in its charter to prevent a change of ownership from occurring.

Furthermore, we believe that shareholders should be offered the opportunity to vote on any adoption or renewal of a NOL pill regardless of any potential tax benefit that it offers a company. As such, we will consider recommending voting against those members of the board who served at the time when an NOL pill was adopted without shareholder approval within the prior twelve months and where the NOL pill is not subject to shareholder ratification.

F AIR P RICE P ROVISIONS

Fair price provisions, which are rare, require that certain minimum price and procedural requirements be observed by any party that acquires more than a specified percentage of a corporation’s common stock. The provision is intended to protect minority shareholder value when an acquirer seeks to accomplish a merger or other transaction which would eliminate or change the interests of the minority stockholders. The provision is generally applied against the acquirer unless the takeover is approved by a majority of “continuing directors” and holders of a majority, in some cases a supermajority as high as 80%, of the combined voting power of all stock entitled to vote to alter, amend, or repeal the above provisions.

The effect of a fair price provision is to require approval of any merger or business combination with an “interested stockholder” by 51% of the voting stock of the company, excluding the shares held by the interested stockholder. An interested stockholder is generally considered to be a holder of 10% or more of the company’s outstanding stock, but the trigger can vary.

Generally, provisions are put in place for the ostensible purpose of preventing a back-end merger where the interested stockholder would be able to pay a lower price for the remaining shares of the company than he or she paid to gain control. The effect of a fair price provision on shareholders, however, is to limit their ability to gain a premium for their shares through a partial tender offer or open market acquisition which typically raise the share price, often significantly. A fair price provision discourages such transactions because of the potential costs of seeking shareholder approval and because of the restrictions on purchase price for completing a merger or other transaction at a later time.

Glass Lewis believes that fair price provisions, while sometimes protecting shareholders from abuse in a takeover situation, more often act as an impediment to takeovers, potentially limiting gains to shareholders from a variety of transactions that could significantly increase share price. In some cases, even the independent directors of the board cannot make exceptions when such exceptions may be in the best interests of shareholders. Given the existence of state law protections for minority shareholders such as Section 203 of the Delaware Corporations Code, we believe it is in the best interests of shareholders to remove fair price provisions.

REINCORPORATION

In general, Glass Lewis believes that the board is in the best position to determine the appropriate jurisdiction of incorporation for the company. When examining a management proposal to reincorporate

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

33


Table of Contents

to a different state or country, we review the relevant financial benefits, generally related to improved corporate tax treatment, as well as changes in corporate governance provisions, especially those relating to shareholder rights, resulting from the change in domicile. Where the financial benefits are de minimis and there is a decrease in shareholder rights, we will recommend voting against the transaction.

However, costly, shareholder-initiated reincorporations are typically not the best route to achieve the furtherance of shareholder rights. We believe shareholders are generally better served by proposing specific shareholder resolutions addressing pertinent issues which may be implemented at a lower cost, and perhaps even with board approval. However, when shareholders propose a shift into a jurisdiction with enhanced shareholder rights, Glass Lewis examines the significant ways would the Company benefit from shifting jurisdictions including the following:

 

  1. Is the board sufficiently independent?

 

  2. Does the Company have anti-takeover protections such as a poison pill or classified board in place?

 

  3. Has the board been previously unresponsive to shareholders (such as failing to implement a shareholder proposal that received majority shareholder support)?

 

  4. Do shareholders have the right to call special meetings of shareholders?

 

  5. Are there other material governance issues at the Company?

 

  6. Has the Company’s performance matched or exceeded its peers in the past one and three years?

 

  7. How has the Company ranked in Glass Lewis’ pay-for-performance analysis during the last three years?

 

  8. Does the company have an independent chairman?

 

  9. We note, however, that we will only support shareholder proposals to change a company’s place of incorporation in exceptional circumstances.

EXCLUSIVE FORUM PROVISIONS

Glass Lewis believes that charter or bylaw provisions limiting a shareholder’s choice of legal venue are not in the best interests of shareholders. Such clauses may effectively discourage the use of shareholder derivative claims by increasing their associated costs and making them more difficult to pursue. As such, shareholders should be wary about approving any limitation on their legal recourse including limiting themselves to a single jurisdiction (e.g. Delaware) without compelling evidence that it will benefit shareholders.

For this reason, we recommend that shareholders vote against any bylaw or charter amendment seeking to adopt an exclusive forum provision. Moreover, in the event a board seeks shareholder approval of a forum selection clause pursuant to a bundled bylaw amendment rather than as a separate proposal, we will weigh the importance of the other bundled provisions when determining the vote recommendation on the proposal. We will nonetheless recommend voting against the chairman of the governance committee for bundling disparate proposals into a single proposal (refer to our discussion of nominating and governance committee performance in Section I of the guidelines).

AUTHORIZED SHARES

Glass Lewis believes that adequate capital stock is important to a company’s operation. When analyzing a request for additional shares, we typically review four common reasons why a company might need additional capital stock:

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

34


Table of Contents
  1. Stock Split—We typically consider three metrics when evaluating whether we think a stock split is likely or necessary: The historical stock pre-split price, if any; the current price relative to the company’s most common trading price over the past 52 weeks; and some absolute limits on stock price that, in our view, either always make a stock split appropriate if desired by management or would almost never be a reasonable price at which to split a stock.

 

  2. Shareholder Defenses—Additional authorized shares could be used to bolster takeover defenses such as a poison pill. Proxy filings often discuss the usefulness of additional shares in defending against or discouraging a hostile takeover as a reason for a requested increase. Glass Lewis is typically against such defenses and will oppose actions intended to bolster such defenses.

 

  3. Financing for Acquisitions—We look at whether the company has a history of using stock for acquisitions and attempt to determine what levels of stock have typically been required to accomplish such transactions. Likewise, we look to see whether this is discussed as a reason for additional shares in the proxy.

 

  4. Financing for Operations—We review the company’s cash position and its ability to secure financing through borrowing or other means. We look at the company’s history of capitalization and whether the company has had to use stock in the recent past as a means of raising capital.

Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in limited circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where we find that the company has not detailed a plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of shares far exceeds those needed to accomplish a detailed plan, we typically recommend against the authorization of additional shares.

While we think that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, we prefer that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of a large pool of unallocated shares available for any purpose.

ADVANCE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS

We typically recommend that shareholders vote against proposals that would require advance notice of shareholder proposals or of director nominees.

These proposals typically attempt to require a certain amount of notice before shareholders are allowed to place proposals on the ballot. Notice requirements typically range between three to six months prior to the annual meeting. Advance notice requirements typically make it impossible for a shareholder who misses the deadline to present a shareholder proposal or a director nominee that might be in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

We believe shareholders should be able to review and vote on all proposals and director nominees. Shareholders can always vote against proposals that appear with little prior notice. Shareholders, as owners of a business, are capable of identifying issues on which they have sufficient information and ignoring issues on which they have insufficient information. Setting arbitrary notice restrictions limits the opportunity for shareholders to raise issues that may come up after the window closes.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

35


Table of Contents

VOTING STRUCTURE

C UMULATIVE V OTING

Cumulative voting increases the ability of minority shareholders to elect a director by allowing shareholders to cast as many shares of the stock they own multiplied by the number of directors to be elected. As companies generally have multiple nominees up for election, cumulative voting allows shareholders to cast all of their votes for a single nominee, or a smaller number of nominees than up for election, thereby raising the likelihood of electing one or more of their preferred nominees to the board. It can be important when a board is controlled by insiders or affiliates and where the company’s ownership structure includes one or more shareholders who control a majority-voting block of company stock.

Glass Lewis believes that cumulative voting generally acts as a safeguard for shareholders by ensuring that those who hold a significant minority of shares can elect a candidate of their choosing to the board. This allows the creation of boards that are responsive to the interests of all shareholders rather than just a small group of large holders.

However, academic literature indicates that where a highly independent board is in place and the company has a shareholder-friendly governance structure, shareholders may be better off without cumulative voting. The analysis underlying this literature indicates that shareholder returns at firms with good governance structures are lower and that boards can become factionalized and prone to evaluating the needs of special interests over the general interests of shareholders collectively.

We review cumulative voting proposals on a case-by-case basis, factoring in the independence of the board and the status of the company’s governance structure. But we typically find these proposals on ballots at companies where independence is lacking and where the appropriate checks and balances favoring shareholders are not in place. In those instances we typically recommend in favor of cumulative voting.

Where a company has adopted a true majority vote standard (i.e., where a director must receive a majority of votes cast to be elected, as opposed to a modified policy indicated by a resignation policy only), Glass Lewis will recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals due to the incompatibility of the two election methods. For companies that have not adopted a true majority voting standard but have adopted some form of majority voting, Glass Lewis will also generally recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals if the company has not adopted antitakeover protections and has been responsive to shareholders.

Where a company has not adopted a majority voting standard and is facing both a shareholder proposal to adopt majority voting and a shareholder proposal to adopt cumulative voting, Glass Lewis will support only the majority voting proposal. When a company has both majority voting and cumulative voting in place, there is a higher likelihood of one or more directors not being elected as a result of not receiving a majority vote. This is because shareholders exercising the right to cumulate their votes could unintentionally cause the failed election of one or more directors for whom shareholders do not cumulate votes.

S UPERMAJORITY V OTE R EQUIREMENTS

Glass Lewis believes that supermajority vote requirements impede shareholder action on ballot items critical to shareholder interests. An example is in the takeover context, where supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit the voice of shareholders in making decisions on such crucial matters as selling the business. This in turn degrades share value and can limit the possibility of buyout premiums

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

36


Table of Contents

to shareholders. Moreover, we believe that a supermajority vote requirement can enable a small group of shareholders to overrule the will of the majority shareholders. We believe that a simple majority is appropriate to approve all matters presented to shareholders.

TRANSACTION OF OTHER BUSINESS

We typically recommend that shareholders not give their proxy to management to vote on any other business items that may properly come before an annual or special meeting. In our opinion, granting unfettered discretion is unwise.

ANTI-GREENMAIL PROPOSALS

Glass Lewis will support proposals to adopt a provision preventing the payment of greenmail, which would serve to prevent companies from buying back company stock at significant premiums from a certain shareholder. Since a large or majority shareholder could attempt to compel a board into purchasing its shares at a large premium, the anti-greenmail provision would generally require that a majority of shareholders other than the majority shareholder approve the buyback.

MUTUAL FUNDS: INVESTMENT POLICIES AND ADVISORY AGREEMENTS

Glass Lewis believes that decisions about a fund’s structure and/or a fund’s relationship with its investment advisor or sub-advisors are generally best left to management and the members of the board, absent a showing of egregious or illegal conduct that might threaten shareholder value. As such, we focus our analyses of such proposals on the following main areas:

 

   

The terms of any amended advisory or sub-advisory agreement;

 

   

Any changes in the fee structure paid to the investment advisor; and

 

   

Any material changes to the fund’s investment objective or strategy.

We generally support amendments to a fund’s investment advisory agreement absent a material change that is not in the best interests of shareholders. A significant increase in the fees paid to an investment advisor would be reason for us to consider recommending voting against a proposed amendment to an investment advisory agreement. However, in certain cases, we are more inclined to support an increase in advisory fees if such increases result from being performance-based rather than asset-based. Furthermore, we generally support sub-advisory agreements between a fund’s advisor and sub-advisor, primarily because the fees received by the sub-advisor are paid by the advisor, and not by the fund.

In matters pertaining to a fund’s investment objective or strategy, we believe shareholders are best served when a fund’s objective or strategy closely resembles the investment discipline shareholders understood and selected when they initially bought into the fund. As such, we generally recommend voting against amendments to a fund’s investment objective or strategy when the proposed changes would leave shareholders with stakes in a fund that is noticeably different than when originally contemplated, and which could therefore potentially negatively impact some investors’ diversification strategies.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

37


Table of Contents

V. C OMPENSATION , E NVIRONMENTAL , S OCIAL AND G OVERNANCE S HAREHOLDER I NITIATIVES

Glass Lewis typically prefers to leave decisions regarding day-to-day management and policy decisions, including those related to social, environmental or political issues, to management and the board, except when there is a clear link between the proposal and value enhancement or risk mitigation. We feel strongly that shareholders should not attempt to micromanage the company, its businesses or its executives through the shareholder initiative process. Rather, we believe shareholders should use their influence to push for governance structures that protect shareholders and promote director accountability. Shareholders should then put in place a board they can trust to make informed decisions that are in the best interests of the business and its owners, and then hold directors accountable for management and policy decisions through board elections. However, we recognize that support of appropriately crafted shareholder initiatives may at times serve to promote or protect shareholder value.

To this end, Glass Lewis evaluates shareholder proposals on a case-by-case basis. We generally recommend supporting shareholder proposals calling for the elimination of, as well as to require shareholder approval of, antitakeover devices such as poison pills and classified boards. We generally recommend supporting proposals likely to increase and/or protect shareholder value and also those that promote the furtherance of shareholder rights. In addition, we also generally recommend supporting proposals that promote director accountability and those that seek to improve compensation practices, especially those promoting a closer link between compensation and performance.

The following is a discussion of Glass Lewis’ approach to certain common shareholder resolutions. We note that the following is not an exhaustive list of all shareholder proposals.

COMPENSATION

Glass Lewis carefully reviews executive compensation since we believe that this is an important area in which the board’s priorities and effectiveness are revealed. Executives should be compensated with appropriate base salaries and incentivized with additional awards in cash and equity only when their performance and that of the company warrants such rewards. Compensation, especially when also in line with the compensation paid by the company’s peers, should lead to positive results for shareholders and ensure the use of appropriate incentives that drives those results over time.

However, as a general rule, Glass Lewis does not believe shareholders should be involved in the approval and negotiation of compensation packages. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee, which can be held accountable for its decisions through the election of directors. Therefore, Glass Lewis closely scrutinizes shareholder proposals relating to compensation to determine if the requested action or disclosure has already accomplished or mandated and whether it allows sufficient, appropriate discretion to the board to design and implement reasonable compensation programs.

D ISCLOSURE OF I NDIVIDUAL C OMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes that disclosure of information regarding compensation is critical to allowing shareholders to evaluate the extent to which a company’s pay is based on performance. However, we recognize that the SEC currently mandates significant executive compensation disclosure. In some cases, providing information beyond that which is required by the SEC, such as the details of individual employment agreements of employees below the senior level, could create internal personnel tension or put the company at a competitive disadvantage, prompting employee poaching by competitors. Further, it is difficult to see how this information would be beneficial to shareholders. Given these concerns, Glass Lewis typically does not believe that shareholders would benefit from additional disclosure of

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

38


Table of Contents

individual compensation packages beyond the significant level that is already required; we therefore typically recommend voting against shareholder proposals seeking such detailed disclosure. We will, however, review each proposal on a case by basis, taking into account the company’s history of aligning executive compensation and the creation of shareholder value.

L INKING P AY WITH P ERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis views performance-based compensation as an effective means of motivating executives to act in the best interests of shareholders. In our view, an executive’s compensation should be specific to the company and its performance, as well as tied to the executive’s achievements within the company.

However, when firms have inadequately linked executive compensation and company performance we will consider recommending supporting reasonable proposals seeking that a percentage of equity awards be tied to performance criteria. We will also consider supporting appropriately crafted proposals requesting that the compensation committee include multiple performance metrics when setting executive compensation, provided that the terms of the shareholder proposal are not overly prescriptive. Though boards often argue that these types of restrictions unduly hinder their ability to attract talent we believe boards can develop an effective, consistent and reliable approach to remuneration utilizing a wide range (and an appropriate mix) of fixed and performance-based compensation.

R ETIREMENT B ENEFITS  & S EVERANCE

As a general rule, Glass Lewis believes that shareholders should not be involved in the approval of individual severance plans. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee, which can be held accountable for its decisions through the election of its director members.

However, when proposals are crafted to only require approval if the benefit exceeds 2.99 times the amount of the executive’s base salary plus bonus, Glass Lewis typically supports such requests. Above this threshold, based on the executive’s average annual compensation for the most recent five years, the company can no longer deduct severance payments as an expense, and thus shareholders are deprived of a valuable benefit without an offsetting incentive to the executive. We believe that shareholders should be consulted before relinquishing such a right, and we believe implementing such policies would still leave companies with sufficient freedom to enter into appropriate severance arrangements.

Following the passage of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), the SEC proposed rules that would require that public companies hold advisory shareholder votes on compensation arrangements and understandings in connection with merger transactions, also known as “golden parachute” transactions. Effective April 4, 2011, the SEC requires that companies seeking shareholder approval of a merger or acquisition transaction must also provide disclosure of certain “golden parachute” compensation arrangements and, in certain circumstances, conduct a separate shareholder advisory vote to approve golden parachute compensation arrangements.

B ONUS R ECOUPMENTS (“C LAWBACKS ”)

We believe it is prudent for boards to adopt detailed and stringent policies whereby, in the event of a restatement of financial results, the board will review all performance related bonuses and awards made to senior executives during the period covered by a restatement and will, to the extent feasible, recoup such bonuses to the extent that performance goals were not achieved. While the Dodd-Frank Act mandates that all companies adopt clawback policies that will require companies to develop a policy to recover compensation paid to current and former executives erroneously paid during the three year prior to a restatement, the SEC has yet to finalize the relevant rules. As a result, we expect to see shareholder proposals regarding clawbacks in the upcoming proxy season.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

39


Table of Contents

When examining proposals requesting that companies adopt recoupment policies, Glass Lewis will first review any relevant policies currently in place. When the board has already committed to a proper course, and the current policy covers the major tenets of the proposal, we see no need for further action. Further, in some instances, shareholder proposals may call for board action that contravenes legal obligations under existing employment agreements. In other cases proposals may excessively limit the board’s ability to exercise judgment and reasonable discretion, which may or may not be warranted, depending on the specific situation of the company in question. We believe it is reasonable that a mandatory recoupment policy should only affect senior executives and those directly responsible for the company’s accounting errors.

We note that where a company is entering into a new executive employment contract that does not include a clawback provision and the company has had a material restatement in the recent past, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against the responsible members of the compensation committee. The compensation committee has an obligation to shareholders to include reasonable controls in executive contracts to prevent payments in the case of inappropriate behavior.

G OLDEN C OFFINS

Glass Lewis does not believe that the payment of substantial, unearned posthumous compensation provides an effective incentive to executives or aligns the interests of executives with those of shareholders. Glass Lewis firmly believes that compensation paid to executives should be clearly linked to the creation of shareholder value. As such, Glass Lewis favors compensation plans centered on the payment of awards contingent upon the satisfaction of sufficiently stretching and appropriate performance metrics. The payment of posthumous unearned and unvested awards should be subject to shareholder approval, if not removed from compensation policies entirely. Shareholders should be skeptical regarding any positive benefit they derive from costly payments made to executives who are no longer in any position to affect company performance.

To that end, we will consider supporting a reasonably crafted shareholder proposal seeking to prohibit, or require shareholder approval of, the making or promising of any survivor benefit payments to senior executives’ estates or beneficiaries. We will not recommend supporting proposals that would, upon passage, violate existing contractual obligations or the terms of compensation plans currently in effect.

R ETENTION OF S HARES UNTIL R ETIREMENT

We strongly support the linking of executive pay to the creation of long-term sustainable shareholder value and therefore believe shareholders should encourage executives to retain some level of shares acquired through equity compensation programs to provide continued alignment with shareholders. However, generally we do not believe that requiring senior executives to retain all or an unduly high percentage of shares acquired through equity compensation programs following the termination of their employment is the most effective or desirable way to accomplish this goal. Rather, we believe that restricting executives’ ability to exercise all or a supermajority of otherwise vested equity awards until they leave the company may hinder the ability of the compensation committee to both attract and retain executive talent. In our view, otherwise qualified and willing candidates could be dissuaded from accepting employment if he/she believes that his/her compensation could be dramatically affected by financial results unrelated to their own personal performance or tenure at the company. Alternatively, an overly strict policy could encourage existing employees to quit in order to realize the value locked in their incentive awards. As such, we will not typically recommend supporting proposals requiring the retention of significant amounts of equity compensation following termination of employment at target firms.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

40


Table of Contents

T AX G ROSS -U PS

Tax gross-ups can act as an anti-takeover measure, as larger payouts to executives result in larger gross-ups, which could artificially inflate the ultimate purchase price under a takeover or merger scenario. Additionally, gross-ups can result in opaque compensation packages where shareholders are unlikely to be aware of the total compensation an executive may receive. Further, we believe that in instances where companies have severance agreements in place for executives, payments made pursuant to such arrangements are often large enough to soften the blow of any additional excise taxes. Finally, such payments are not performance based, providing no incentive to recipients and, if large, can be a significant cost to companies.

Given the above, we will typically recommend supporting proposals requesting that a compensation committee adopt a policy that it will not make or promise to make to its senior executives any tax gross-up payments, except those applicable to management employees of the company generally, such as a relocation or expatriate tax equalization policy.

L INKING E XECUTIVE P AY TO E NVIRONMENTAL AND S OCIAL C RITERIA

We recognize that a company’s involvement in environmentally sensitive and labor-intensive industries influences the degree to which a firm’s overall strategy must weigh environmental and social concerns. However, we also understand that the value generated by incentivizing executives to prioritize environmental and social issues is difficult to quantify and therefore measure, and necessarily varies among industries and companies.

When reviewing such proposals seeking to tie executive compensation to environmental or social practices, we will review the target firm’s compliance with (or contravention of) applicable laws and regulations, and examine any history of environmental and social related concerns including those resulting in material investigations, lawsuits, fines and settlements. We will also review the firm’s current compensation policies and practice. However, with respect to executive compensation, Glass Lewis generally believes that such policies should be left to the compensation committee.

GOVERNANCE

D ECLASSIFICATION OF THE B OARD

Glass Lewis believes that classified boards (or “staggered boards”) do not serve the best interests of shareholders. Empirical studies have shown that: (i) companies with classified boards may show a reduction in firm value; (ii) in the context of hostile takeovers, classified boards operate as a takeover defense, which entrenches management, discourages potential acquirers and delivers less return to shareholders; and (iii) companies with classified boards are less likely to receive takeover bids than those with single class boards. Annual election of directors provides increased accountability and requires directors to focus on the interests of shareholders. When companies have classified boards shareholders are deprived of the right to voice annual opinions on the quality of oversight exercised by their representatives.

Given the above, Glass Lewis believes that classified boards are not in the best interests of shareholders and will continue to recommend shareholders support proposals seeking their repeal.

R IGHT OF S HAREHOLDERS TO C ALL A S PECIAL M EETING

Glass Lewis strongly believes that shareholders should have the ability to call meetings of shareholders between annual meetings to consider matters that require prompt attention. However, in order to

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

41


Table of Contents

prevent abuse and waste of corporate resources by a small minority of shareholders, we believe that shareholders representing at least a sizable minority of shares must support such a meeting prior to its calling. Should the threshold be set too low, companies might frequently be subjected to meetings whose effect could be the disruption of normal business operations in order to focus on the interests of only a small minority of owners. Typically we believe this threshold should not fall below 10-15% of shares, depending on company size.

In our case-by-case evaluations, we consider the following:

 

   

Company size

 

   

Shareholder base in both percentage of ownership and type of shareholder (e.g., hedge fund, activist investor, mutual fund, pension fund, etc.)

 

   

Responsiveness of board and management to shareholders evidenced by progressive shareholder rights policies (e.g., majority voting, declassifying boards, etc.) and reaction to shareholder proposals

 

   

Company performance and steps taken to improve bad performance (e.g., new executives/ directors, spin-offs, etc.)

 

   

Existence of anti-takeover protections or other entrenchment devices

 

   

Opportunities for shareholder action (e.g., ability to act by written consent)

 

   

Existing ability for shareholders to call a special meeting

R IGHT OF S HAREHOLDERS TO A CT BY W RITTEN C ONSENT

Glass Lewis strongly supports shareholders’ right to act by written consent. The right to act by written consent enables shareholders to take action on important issues that arise between annual meetings. However, we believe such rights should be limited to at least the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize the action at a meeting at which all shareholders entitled to vote were present and voting.

In addition to evaluating the threshold for which written consent may be used (e.g. majority of votes cast or outstanding), we will consider the following when evaluating such shareholder proposals:

 

   

Company size

 

   

Shareholder base in both percentage of ownership and type of shareholder (e.g., hedge fund, activist investor, mutual fund, pension fund, etc.)

 

   

Responsiveness of board and management to shareholders evidenced by progressive shareholder rights policies (e.g., majority voting, declassifying boards, etc.) and reaction to shareholder proposals

 

   

Company performance and steps taken to improve bad performance (e.g., new executives/ directors, spin offs, etc.)

 

   

Existence of anti-takeover protections or other entrenchment devices

 

   

Opportunities for shareholder action (e.g., ability and threshold to call a special meeting)

 

   

Existing ability for shareholders to act by written consent

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

42


Table of Contents

B OARD C OMPOSITION

Glass Lewis believes the selection and screening process for identifying suitably qualified candidates for a company’s board of directors is one which requires the judgment of many factors, including the balance of skills and talents, the breadth of experience and diversity of candidates and existing board members. Diversity of skills, abilities and points of view can foster the development of a more creative, effective and dynamic board. In general, however, we do not believe that it is in the best interests of shareholders for firms to be beholden to arbitrary rules regarding its board, or committee, composition. We believe such matters should be left to a board’s nominating committee, which is generally responsible for establishing and implementing policies regarding the composition of the board. Members of this committee may be held accountable through the director election process. However, we will consider supporting reasonable, well-crafted proposals to increase board diversity where there is evidence a board’s lack of diversity lead to a decline in shareholder value.

R EIMBURSEMENT OF S OLICITATION E XPENSES

Where a dissident shareholder is seeking reimbursement for expenses incurred in waging a contest or submitting a shareholder proposal and has received the support of a majority of shareholders, Glass Lewis generally will recommend in favor of reimbursing the dissident for reasonable expenses. In those rare cases where a shareholder has put his or her own time and money into organizing a successful campaign to unseat a poorly performing director (or directors) or sought support for a shareholder proposal, we feel that the shareholder should be entitled to reimbursement of expenses by other shareholders, via the company. We believe that, in such cases, shareholders express their agreement by virtue of their majority vote for the dissident (or the shareholder proposal) and will share in the expected improvement in company performance.

M AJORITY V OTE FOR THE E LECTION OF D IRECTORS

If a majority vote standard were implemented, shareholders could collectively vote to reject a director they believe will not pursue their best interests. We think that this minimal amount of protection for shareholders is reasonable and will not upset the corporate structure nor reduce the willingness of qualified shareholder-focused directors to serve in the future.

We believe that a majority vote standard will likely lead to more attentive directors. Further, occasional use of this power will likely prevent the election of directors with a record of ignoring shareholder interests. Glass Lewis will generally support shareholder proposals calling for the election of directors by a majority vote, except for use in contested director elections.

C UMULATIVE V OTE FOR THE E LECTION OF D IRECTORS

Glass Lewis believes that cumulative voting generally acts as a safeguard for shareholders by ensuring that those who hold a significant minority of shares can elect a candidate of their choosing to the board. This allows the creation of boards that are responsive to the interests of all shareholders rather than just a small group of large holders. However, when a company has both majority voting and cumulative voting in place, there is a higher likelihood of one or more directors not being elected as a result of not receiving a majority vote. This is because shareholders exercising the right to cumulate their votes could unintentionally cause the failed election of one or more directors for whom shareholders do not cumulate votes.

Given the above, where a company (i) has adopted a true majority vote standard; (ii) has simultaneously proposed a management-initiated true majority vote standard; or (iii) is simultaneously the target of a true majority vote standard shareholder proposal, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals due to the potential incompatibility of the two election methods.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

43


Table of Contents

For companies that have not adopted a true majority voting standard but have adopted some form of majority voting, Glass Lewis will also generally recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals if the company has not adopted antitakeover protections and has been responsive to shareholders.

S UPERMAJORITY V OTE R EQUIREMENTS

We believe that a simple majority is appropriate to approve all matters presented to shareholders, and will recommend that shareholders vote accordingly. Glass Lewis believes that supermajority vote requirements impede shareholder action on ballot items critical to shareholder interests. In a takeover context supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit the voice of shareholders in making decisions on crucial matters such as selling the business. These limitations in turn may degrade share value and can reduce the possibility of buyout premiums for shareholders. Moreover, we believe that a supermajority vote requirement can enable a small group of shareholders to overrule the will of the majority of shareholders.

I NDEPENDENT C HAIRMAN

Glass Lewis views an independent chairman as better able to oversee the executives and set a pro-shareholder agenda in the absence of the conflicts that a CEO, executive insider, or close company affiliate may face. Separating the roles of CEO and chairman may lead to a more proactive and effective board of directors. The presence of an independent chairman fosters the creation of a thoughtful and dynamic board, not dominated by the views of senior management. We believe that the separation of these two key roles eliminates the conflict of interest that inevitably occurs when a CEO, or other executive, is responsible for self-oversight. As such, we will typically support reasonably crafted shareholder proposals seeking the installation of an independent chairman at a target company. However, we will not support proposals that include overly prescriptive definitions of “independent.”

P ROXY A CCESS

Shareholders have consistently sought mechanisms through which they could secure a meaningful voice in director elections in recent years. While many of these efforts have centered on regulatory changes at the SEC, the United States Congress and the Obama Administration have placed “Proxy Access” in the spotlight of the U.S. Government’s most recent corporate governance-related financial reforms. Regulations allowing or mandating the reimbursement of solicitation expenses for successful board candidates exist and further regulation is pending. A 2009 amendment to the Delaware Corporate Code allows companies to adopt bylaw provisions providing shareholders proxy access.

Further, in July 2010, President Obama signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, (the “Dodd-Frank Act”). This Act provides the SEC with the authority to adopt rules permitting shareholders to use issuer proxy solicitation materials to nominate director candidates. The SEC received over 500 comments regarding proposed proxy access, some of which questioned the agency’s authority to adopt such a rule. Nonetheless, in August 2010, the SEC adopted final Rule 14a-11, which under certain circumstances, gives shareholders (and shareholder groups) who have collectively held at least 3% of the voting power of a company’s securities continuously for at least three years, the right to nominate up to 25% of a board’s directors and have such nominees included on a company’s ballot and described in its proxy statement. While final Rule 14a-11 was originally scheduled to take effect on November 15, 2010, on October 4, 2010, the SEC announced that it would delay the rule’s implementation following the filing of a lawsuit by the U.S. Chamber Of Commerce and the Business Roundtable. In July 2011, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled against the SEC based on what it perceived to be the SEC’s failure to fully consider the costs and the benefits of the proxy access rules. On September 6, 2011, the SEC announced that it would not be seeking rehearing

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

44


Table of Contents

of the decision. However, while rule 14a-11 was vacated, the U.S. Court of Appeals issued a stay on the “private ordering” amendments to Rule 14a-8, meaning that companies are no longer able to exclude shareholder proposals requesting that they adopt procedures to allow for shareholder nominees to be included in proxy statements (“Statement by SEC Chairman Mary L. Schapiro on Proxy Access Ligation.” SEC Press Release. September 6, 2011).

Glass Lewis will consider supporting well-crafted and reasonable proposals requesting proxy access, as we believe that in some cases, adoption of this provision allows for improved shareholder rights and ensures that shareholders who maintain a long-term interest in the target company have an ability to nominate candidates for the board. Glass Lewis reviews proposals requesting proxy access on a case-by-case basis, and will consider the following in our analysis:

 

   

Company size;

 

   

The shareholder proponent and their reasoning for putting forth the proposal at the target company;

 

   

The percentage ownership requested and holding period requirement;

 

   

Shareholder base in both percentage of ownership and type of shareholder (e.g., hedge fund, activist investor, mutual fund, pension fund, etc.);

 

   

Responsiveness of board and management to shareholders evidenced by progressive shareholder rights policies (e.g., majority voting, declassifying boards, etc.) and reaction to shareholder proposals;

 

   

Company performance and steps taken to improve bad performance (e.g., new executives/ directors, spin-offs, etc.);

 

   

Existence of anti-takeover protections or other entrenchment devices; and

 

   

Opportunities for shareholder action (e.g., ability to act by written consent or right to call a special meeting).

ENVIRONMENT

There are significant financial, legal and reputational risks to companies resulting from poor environmental practices or negligent oversight thereof. We believe part of the board’s role is to ensure that management conducts a complete risk analysis of company operations, including those that have environmental implications. Directors should monitor management’s performance in mitigating environmental risks attendant with operations in order to eliminate or minimize the risks to the company and shareholders.

When management and the board have displayed disregard for environmental risks, have engaged in egregious or illegal conduct, or have failed to adequately respond to current or imminent environmental risks that threaten shareholder value, we believe shareholders should hold directors accountable. When a substantial environmental risk has been ignored or inadequately addressed, we may recommend voting against responsible members of the governance committee, or members of a committee specifically charged with sustainability oversight.

With respect to environmental risk, Glass Lewis believes companies should actively consider their exposure to:

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

45


Table of Contents

Direct environmental risk: Companies should evaluate financial exposure to direct environmental risks associated with their operations. Examples of direct environmental risks are those associated with spills, contamination, hazardous leakages, explosions, or reduced water or air quality, among others. Further, firms should consider their exposure to environmental risks emanating from systemic change over which they may have only limited control, such as insurance companies affected by increased storm severity and frequency resulting from climate change.

Risk due to legislation/regulation: Companies should evaluate their exposure to shifts or potential shifts in environmental regulation that affect current and planned operations. Regulation should be carefully monitored in all jurisdictions within which the company operates. We look closely at relevant and proposed legislation and evaluate whether the company has responded appropriately.

Legal and reputational risk: Failure to take action on important issues may carry the risk of damaging negative publicity and potentially costly litigation. While the effect of high-profile campaigns on shareholder value may not be directly measurable, in general we believe it is prudent for firms to evaluate social and environmental risk as a necessary part in assessing overall portfolio risk.

If there is a clear showing that a company has inadequately addressed these risks, Glass Lewis may consider supporting appropriately crafted shareholder proposals requesting increased disclosure, board attention or, in limited circumstances, specific actions. In general, however, we believe that boards and management are in the best position to address these important issues, and will only rarely recommend that shareholders supplant their judgment regarding operations.

C LIMATE C HANGE AND G REEN H OUSE G AS E MISSION D ISCLOSURE

Glass Lewis will consider recommending a vote in favor of a reasonably crafted proposal to disclose a company’s climate change and/or greenhouse gas emission strategies when (i) a company has suffered financial impact from reputational damage, lawsuits and/or government investigations, (ii) there is a strong link between climate change and its resultant regulation and shareholder value at the firm, and/ or (iii) the company has inadequately disclosed how it has addressed climate change risks. Further, we will typically recommend supporting proposals seeking disclosure of greenhouse gas emissions at companies operating in carbon- or energy- intensive industries, such basic materials, integrated oil and gas, iron and steel, transportation, utilities, and construction. We are not inclined, however, to support proposals seeking emissions reductions, or proposals seeking the implementation of prescriptive policies relating to climate change.

S USTAINABILITY AND OTHER E NVIRONMENTALLY -R ELATED R EPORTS

When evaluating requests that a firm produce an environmentally-related report, such as a sustainability report or a report on coal combustion waste or hydraulic fracturing, we will consider, among other things:

 

   

The financial risk to the company from the firm’s environmental practices and/or regulation;

 

   

The relevant company’s current level of disclosure;

 

   

The level of sustainability information disclosed by the firm’s peers;

 

   

The industry in which the firm operates;

 

   

The level and type of sustainability concerns/controversies at the relevant firm, if any;

 

   

The time frame within which the relevant report is to be produced; and

 

   

The level of flexibility granted to the board in the implementation of the proposal.

In general, we believe that firms operating in extractive industries should produce reports regarding the risks presented by their environmental activities, and will consider recommending a vote for reasonably crafted proposals requesting that such a report be produced; however, as with all shareholder proposals, we will evaluate these report requests on a case by case basis.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

46


Table of Contents

O IL S ANDS

The procedure required to extract usable crude from oil sands emits significantly more greenhouse gases than do conventional extraction methods. In addition, development of the oil sands has a deleterious effect on the local environment, such as Canada’s boreal forests which sequester significant levels of carbon. We believe firms should strongly consider and evaluate exposure to financial, legal and reputational risks associated with investment in oil sands.

We believe firms should adequately disclose their involvement in the oil sands, including a discussion of exposure to sensitive political and environmental areas. Firms should broadly outline the scope of oil sands operations, describe the commercial methods for producing oil, and discuss the management of greenhouse gas emissions. However, we believe that detailed disclosure of investment assumptions could unintentionally reveal sensitive information regarding operations and business strategy, which would not serve shareholders’ interest. We will review all proposals seeking increased disclosure of oil sands operations in the above context, but will typically not support proposals seeking cessation or curtailment of operations.

S USTAINABLE F ORESTRY

Sustainable forestry provides for the long-term sustainable management and use of trees and other non-timber forest products. Retaining the economic viability of forests is one of the tenets of sustainable forestry, along with encouraging more responsible corporate use of forests. Sustainable land use and the effective management of land are viewed by some shareholders as important in light of the impact of climate change. Forestry certification has emerged as a way that corporations can address prudent forest management. There are currently several primary certification schemes such as the Sustainable Forestry Initiative (“SFI”) and the Forest Stewardship Council (“FSC”).

There are nine main principles that comprise the SFI: (i) sustainable forestry; (ii) responsible practices; (iii) reforestation and productive capacity; (iv) forest health and productivity; (v) long-term forest and soil productivity; (vi) protection of water resources; (vii) protection of special sites and biodiversity; (viii) legal compliance; and (ix) continual improvement.

The FSC adheres to ten basic principles: (i) compliance with laws and FSC principles; (ii) tenure and use rights and responsibilities; (iii) indigenous peoples’ rights; (iv) community relations and workers’ rights; (v) benefits from the forest; (vi) environmental impact; (vii) management plan; (viii) monitoring and assessment; (ix) maintenance of high conservation value forests; and (x) plantations.

Shareholder proposals regarding sustainable forestry have typically requested that the firm comply with the above SFI or FSC principles as well as to assess the feasibility of phasing out the use of uncertified fiber and increasing the use of certified fiber. We will evaluate target firms’ current mix of certified and uncertified paper and the firms’ general approach to sustainable forestry practices, both absolutely and relative to its peers but will only support proposals of this nature when we believe that the proponent has clearly demonstrated that the implementation of this proposal is clearly linked to an increase in shareholder value.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

47


Table of Contents

SOCIAL ISSUES

N ON -D ISCRIMINATION P OLICIES

Companies with records of poor labor relations may face lawsuits, efficiency-draining turnover, poor employee performance, and/or distracting, costly investigations. Moreover, as an increasing number of companies adopt inclusive EEO policies, companies without comprehensive policies may face damaging recruitment, reputational and legal risks. We believe that a pattern of making financial settlements as a result of lawsuits based on discrimination could indicate investor exposure to ongoing financial risk. Where there is clear evidence of employment practices resulting in negative economic exposure, Glass Lewis may support shareholder proposals addressing such risks.

M AC B RIDE P RINCIPLES

To promote peace, justice and equality regarding employment in Northern Ireland, Dr. Sean MacBride, founder of Amnesty International and Nobel Peace laureate, proposed the following equal opportunity employment principles:

 

  1. Increasing the representation of individuals from underrepresented religious groups in the workforce including managerial, supervisory, administrative, clerical and technical jobs;

 

  2. Adequate security for the protection of minority employees both at the workplace and while traveling to and from work;

 

  3. The banning of provocative religious or political emblems from the workplace;

 

  4. All job openings should be publicly advertised and special recruitment efforts should be made to attract applicants from underrepresented religious groups;

 

  5. Layoff, recall, and termination procedures should not, in practice, favor particular religious groupings;

 

  6. The abolition of job reservations, apprenticeship restrictions, and differential employment criteria, which discriminate on the basis of religion or ethnic origin;

 

  7. The development of training programs that will prepare substantial numbers of current minority employees for skilled jobs, including the expansion of existing programs and the creation of new programs to train, upgrade, and improve the skills of minority employees;

 

  8. The establishment of procedures to assess, identify and actively recruit minority employees with potential for further advancement; and

 

  9. The appointment of senior management staff member to oversee the company’s affirmative action efforts and setting up of timetables to carry out affirmative action principles.

 

  10. Proposals requesting the implementation of the above principles are typically proposed at firms that operate, or maintain subsidiaries that operate, in Northern Ireland. In each case, we will examine the company’s current equal employment opportunity policy and the extent to which the company has been subject to protests, fines, or litigation regarding discrimination in the workplace, if any. Further, we will examine any evidence of the firm’s specific record of labor concerns in Northern Ireland.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

48


Table of Contents

H UMAN R IGHTS

Glass Lewis believes explicit policies set out by companies’ boards of directors on human rights provides

shareholders with the means to evaluate whether the company has taken steps to mitigate risks from its human rights practices. As such, we believe that it is prudent for firms to actively evaluate risks to shareholder value stemming from global activities and human rights practices along entire supply chains. Findings and investigations of human rights abuses can inflict, at a minimum, reputational damage on targeted companies and have the potential to dramatically reduce shareholder value. This is particularly true for companies operating in emerging market countries in extractive industries and in politically unstable regions. As such, while we typically rely on the expertise of the board on these important policy issues, we recognize that, in some instances, shareholders could benefit from increased reporting or further codification of human rights policies.

M ILITARY AND US G OVERNMENT B USINESS P OLICIES

Glass Lewis believes that disclosure to shareholders of information on key company endeavors is important. However, we generally do not support resolutions that call for shareholder approval of policy statements for or against government programs, most of which are subject to thorough review by the federal government and elected officials at the national level. We also do not support proposals favoring disclosure of information where similar disclosure is already mandated by law, unless circumstances exist that warrant the additional disclosure.

F OREIGN G OVERNMENT B USINESS P OLICIES

Where a corporation operates in a foreign country, Glass Lewis believes that the company and board should maintain sufficient controls to prevent illegal or egregious conduct with the potential to decrease shareholder value, examples of which include bribery, money laundering, severe environmental violations or proven human rights violations. We believe that shareholders should hold board members, and in particular members of the audit committee and CEO, accountable for these issues when they face reelection, as these concerns may subject the company to financial risk. In some instances, we will support appropriately crafted shareholder proposals specifically addressing concerns with the target firm’s actions outside its home jurisdiction.

H EALTH C ARE R EFORM P RINCIPLES

Health care reform in the United States has long been a contentious political issue and Glass Lewis therefore believes firms must evaluate and mitigate the level of risk to which they may be exposed regarding potential changes in health care legislation. Over the last several years, Glass Lewis has reviewed multiple shareholder proposals requesting that boards adopt principles for comprehensive health reform, such as the following based upon principles reported by the Institute of Medicine:

 

   

Health care coverage should be universal;

 

   

Health care coverage should be continuous;

 

   

Health care coverage should be affordable to individuals and families;

 

   

The health insurance strategy should be affordable and sustainable for society; and

 

   

Health insurance should enhance health and well-being by promoting access to high-quality care that is effective, efficient, safe, timely, patient-centered and equitable.

In general, Glass Lewis believes that individual corporate board rooms are not the appropriate forum in which to address evolving and contentious national policy issues. The adoption of a narrow set of principles could limit the board’s ability to comply with new regulation or to appropriately and flexibly respond to health care issues as they arise. As such, barring a compelling reason to the contrary, we typically do not support the implementation of national health care reform principles at the company level.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

49


Table of Contents

T OBACCO

Glass Lewis recognizes the contentious nature of the production, procurement, marketing and selling of tobacco products. We also recognize that tobacco companies are particularly susceptible to reputational and regulatory risk due to the nature of its operations. As such, we will consider supporting uniquely tailored and appropriately crafted shareholder proposals requesting increased information or the implementation of suitably broad policies at target firms on a case-by-case basis. However, we typically do not support proposals requesting that firms shift away from, or significantly alter, the legal production or marketing of core products.

R EPORTING C ONTRIBUTIONS AND P OLITICAL S PENDING

While corporate contributions to national political parties and committees controlled by federal officeholders are prohibited under federal law, corporations can legally donate to state and local candidates, organizations registered under 26 USC Sec. 527 of the Internal Revenue Code and state-level political committees. There is, however, no standardized manner in which companies must disclose this information. As such, shareholders often must search through numerous campaign finance reports and detailed tax documents to ascertain even limited information. Corporations also frequently use trade associations, which are not required to report funds they receive for or spend on political activity, as a means for corporate political action.

Further, in 2010 the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision by the Supreme Court affirmed that corporations are entitled to the same free speech laws as individuals and that it is legal for a corporation to donate to political causes without monetary limit. While the decision did not remove bans on direct contributions to candidates, companies are now able to contribute indirectly, and substantially, to candidates through political organizations. Therefore, it appears companies will enjoy greater latitude in their political actions by this recent decision.

When evaluating whether a requested report would benefit shareholders, Glass Lewis seeks answers to the following three key questions:

 

   

Is the Company’s disclosure comprehensive and readily accessible?

 

   

How does the Company’s political expenditure policy and disclosure compare to its peers?

 

   

What is the Company’s current level of oversight?

Glass Lewis will consider supporting a proposal seeking increased disclosure of corporate political expenditure and contributions if the firm’s current disclosure is insufficient, or if the firm’s disclosure is significantly lacking compared to its peers. Further, we will typically recommend voting for proposals requesting reports on lobbying or political contributions and expenditures when there is no explicit board oversight or there is evidence of inadequate board oversight. Given that political donations are strategic decisions intended to increase shareholder value and have the potential to negatively affect the company, we believe the board should either implement processes and procedures to ensure the proper use of the funds or closely evaluate the process and procedures used by management. We will also consider supporting such proposals when there is verification, or credible allegations, that the company is mismanaging corporate funds through political donations. If Glass Lewis discovers particularly egregious actions by the company, we will consider recommending voting against the governance committee members or other responsible directors.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

50


Table of Contents

A NIMAL W ELFARE

Glass Lewis believes that it is prudent for management to assess potential exposure to regulatory, legal and reputational risks associated with all business practices, including those related to animal welfare. A high-profile campaign launched against a company could result in shareholder action, a reduced customer base, protests and potentially costly litigation. However, in general, we believe that the board and management are in the best position to determine policies relating to the care and use of animals. As such, we will typically vote against proposals seeking to eliminate or limit board discretion regarding animal welfare unless there is a clear and documented link between the board’s policies and the degradation of shareholder value.

I NTERNET C ENSORSHIP

Legal and ethical questions regarding the use and management of the Internet and the worldwide web have been present since access was first made available to the public almost twenty years ago. Prominent among these debates are the issues of privacy, censorship, freedom of expression and freedom of access. Glass Lewis believes that it is prudent for management to assess its potential exposure to risks relating to the internet management and censorship policies. As has been seen at other firms, perceived violation of user privacy or censorship of Internet access can lead to high-profile campaigns that could potentially result in decreased customer bases or potentially costly litigation. In general, however, we believe that management and boards are best equipped to deal with the evolving nature of this issue in various jurisdictions of operation.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2011 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

51


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

San Francisco Headquarters Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC One Sansome Street Suite 3300 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: +1 415-678-4110 Tel: +1 888-800-7001 Fax: +1 415-357-0200 New York Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC 48 Wall Street 15th Floor New York, N.Y. 10005 Tel: +1 212-797-3777 Fax: +1 212-980-4716 Australia CGI Glass Lewis Suite 8.01, Level 8 261 George Street Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Tel: +61 2 9299 9266 Fax: +61 2 9299 1866 Ireland Glass, Lewis & Co., 6th Floor, Riverpoint Bishop’s Quay Limerick, Ireland Tel: +353 61 404700 Fax: +353 61 404711 Please direct general inquiries to info@glasslewis.com


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

PROXY PAPER GUIDELINES 2012 PROXY SEASON AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO INTERNATIONAL PROXY ADVICE International


Table of Contents

C ONTENTS

 

I. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

     3   

Board Composition

     3   

Slate Elections

     4   

Board Committee Composition

     4   

Review of Risk Management Controls

     4   

Classified Boards

     4   

II. FINANCIAL REPORTING

     5   

Accounts and Reports

     5   

Income Allocation (Distribution of Dividend)

     5   

Appointment of Auditors and Authority to Set Fees

     5   

III. COMPENSATION

     6   

Compensation Report/Compensation Policy

     6   

Long Term Incentive Plans

     6   

Director Compensation

     7   

Limits on Executive Compensation

     7   

IV. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

     8   

Amendments to the Articles of Association

     8   

Anti-Takeover Measures

     8   

Increase in Authorized Shares

     8   

Issuance of Shares

     9   

Repurchase of Shares

     9   

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISK

     10   

P LEASE NOTE : G LASS L EWIS CREATES SEPARATE PROXY VOTING POLICIES DESIGNED SPECIFICALLY FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL COUNTRY .

T HE FOLLOWING IS A DISTILLATION OF THE VARIOUS COUNTRY - SPECIFIC POLICIES .

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

2


Table of Contents

I. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

B OARD OF D IRECTORS

Boards are put in place to represent shareholders and protect their interests. Glass Lewis seeks boards with a proven record of protecting shareholders and delivering value over the medium- and long-term. In our view, boards working to protect and enhance the best interests of shareholders typically include some independent directors (the percentage will vary by local market practice and regulations), boast a record of positive performance, have directors with diverse backgrounds, and appoint directors with a breadth and depth of experience.

BOARD COMPOSITION

When companies disclose sufficient relevant information, we look at each individual on the board and examine his or her relationships with the company, the company’s executives and with other board members. The purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether pre-existing personal, familial or financial relationships are likely to impact the decisions of that board member. Where the company does not disclose the names and backgrounds of director nominees with sufficient time in advance of the shareholder meeting to evaluate their independence and performance, we will consider recommending abstaining on the directors’ election.

We vote in favor of governance structures that will drive positive performance and enhance shareholder value. The most crucial test of a board’s commitment to the company and to its shareholders is the performance of the board and its members. The performance of directors in their capacity as board members and as executives of the company, when applicable, and in their roles at other companies where they serve is critical to this evaluation.

We believe a director is independent if he or she has no material financial, familial or other current relationships with the company, its executives or other board members except for service on the board and standard fees paid for that service. Relationships that have existed within the three-five years prior to the inquiry are usually considered to be “current” for purposes of this test.

In our view, a director is affiliated if he or she has a material financial, familial or other relationship with the company or its executives, but is not an employee of the company. This includes directors whose employers have a material financial relationship with the Company. This also includes a director who owns or controls 10-20% or more of the company’s voting stock.

We define an inside director as one who simultaneously serves as a director and as an employee of the company. This category may include a chairman of the board who acts as an employee of the company or is paid as an employee of the company.

Although we typically vote for the election of directors, we will recommend voting against directors for the following reasons:

 

   

A director who attends less than 75% of the board and applicable committee meetings.

 

   

A director who is also the CEO of a company where a serious restatement has occurred after the CEO certified the pre-restatement financial statements.

We also feel that the following conflicts of interest may hinder a director’s performance and will therefore recommend voting against a:

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

3


Table of Contents
   

CFO who presently sits on the board.

 

   

Director who presently sits on an excessive number of boards.

 

   

Director, or a director whose immediate family member, provides material professional services to the company at any time during the past five years.

 

   

Director, or a director whose immediate family member, engages in airplane, real estate or other similar deals, including perquisite type grants from the company.

 

   

Director with an interlocking directorship.

SLATE ELECTIONS

In some countries, companies elect their board members as a slate, whereby shareholders are unable to vote on the election of each individual director, but rather are limited to voting for or against the board as a whole. If significant issues exist concerning one or more of the nominees or in markets where directors are generally elected individually, we will recommend voting against the entire slate of directors.

BOARD COMMITTEE COMPOSITION

We believe that independent directors should serve on a company’s audit, compensation, nominating and governance committees. We will support boards with such a structure and encourage change where this is not the case.

REVIEW OF RISK MANAGEMENT CONTROLS

We believe companies, particularly financial firms, should have a dedicated risk committee, or a committee of the board charged with risk oversight, as well as a chief risk officer who reports directly to that committee, not to the CEO or another executive. In cases where a company has disclosed a sizable loss or writedown, and where a reasonable analysis indicates that the company’s board-level risk committee should be held accountable for poor oversight, we would recommend that shareholders vote against such committee members on that basis. In addition, in cases where a company maintains a significant level of financial risk exposure but fails to disclose any explicit form of board-level risk oversight (committee or otherwise), we will consider recommending to vote against the chairman of the board on that basis.

CLASSIFIED BOARDS

Glass Lewis favors the repeal of staggered boards in favor of the annual election of directors. We believe that staggered boards are less accountable to shareholders than annually elected boards. Furthermore, we feel that the annual election of directors encourages board members to focus on protecting the interests of shareholders.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

4


Table of Contents

II FINANCIAL REPORTING

ACCOUNTS AND REPORTS

Many countries require companies to submit the annual financial statements, director reports and independent auditors’ reports to shareholders at a general meeting. Shareholder approval of such a proposal does not discharge the board or management. We will usually recommend voting in favor of these proposals except when there are concerns about the integrity of the statements/reports. However, should the audited financial statements, auditor’s report and/or annual report not be published at the writing of our report, we will recommend that shareholders abstain from voting on this proposal.

INCOME ALLOCATION (DISTRIBUTION OF DIVIDEND)

In many countries, companies must submit the allocation of income for shareholder approval. We will generally recommend voting for such a proposal. However, we will give particular scrutiny to cases where the company’s dividend payout ratio is exceptionally low or excessively high relative to its peers and the company has not provided a satisfactory explanation.

APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS AND AUTHORITY TO SET FEES

We believe that role of the auditor is crucial in protecting shareholder value. Like directors, auditors should be free from conflicts of interest and should assiduously avoid situations that require them to make choices between their own interests and the interests of the shareholders.

We generally support management’s recommendation regarding the selection of an auditor and support granting the board the authority to fix auditor fees except in cases where we believe the independence of an incumbent auditor or the integrity of the audit has been compromised.

However, we recommend voting against ratification of the auditor and/or authorizing the board to set auditor fees for the following reasons:

 

   

When audit fees added to audit-related fees total less than one-half of total fees.

 

   

When there have been any recent restatements or late filings by the company where the auditor bears some responsibility for the restatement or late filing (e.g., a restatement due to a reporting error).

 

   

When the company has aggressive accounting policies.

 

   

When the company has poor disclosure or lack of transparency in financial statements.

 

   

When there are other relationships or issues of concern with the auditor that might suggest a conflict between the interest of the auditor and the interests of shareholders.

 

   

When the company is changing auditors as a result of a disagreement between the company and the auditor on a matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedures.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

5


Table of Contents

III. COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION REPORT/COMPENSATION POLICY

We closely review companies’ remuneration practices and disclosure as outlined in company filings to evaluate management-submitted advisory compensation report and policy vote proposals. In evaluating these proposals, which can be binding or non-binding depending on the country, we examine how well the company has disclosed information pertinent to its compensation programs, the extent to which overall compensation is tied to performance, the performance metrics selected by the company and the levels of remuneration in comparison to company performance and that of its peers.

We will usually recommend voting against approval of the compensation report or policy when the following occur:

 

   

Gross disconnect between pay and performance;

 

   

Performance goals and metrics are inappropriate or insufficiently challenging;

 

   

Lack of disclosure regarding performance metrics and goals as well as the extent to which the performance metrics, targets and goals are implemented to enhance company performance and encourage prudent risk-taking;

 

   

Excessive discretion afforded to or exercised by management or the compensation committee to deviate from defined performance metrics and goals in making awards;

 

   

Ex gratia or other non-contractual payments have been made and the reasons for making the payments have not been fully explained or the explanation is unconvincing;

 

   

Guaranteed bonuses are established;

 

   

There is no clawback policy; or

 

   

Egregious or excessive bonuses, equity awards or severance payments.

LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLANS

Glass Lewis recognizes the value of equity-based incentive programs. When used appropriately, they can provide a vehicle for linking an employee’s pay to a company’s performance, thereby aligning their interests with those of shareholders. Tying a portion of an employee’s compensation to the performance of the Company provides an incentive to maximize share value. In addition, equity-based compensation is an effective way to attract, retain and motivate key employees.

In order to allow for meaningful shareholder review, we believe that incentive programs should generally include: (i) specific and appropriate performance goals; (ii) a maximum award pool; and (iii) a maximum award amount per employee. In addition, the payments made should be reasonable relative to the performance of the business and total compensation to those covered by the plan should be in line with compensation paid by the Company’s peers.

P ERFORMANCE -B ASED E QUITY C OMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes in performance-based equity compensation plans for senior executives. We feel that executives should be compensated with equity when their performance and that of the company warrants such rewards. While we do not believe that equity-based compensation plans for all employees need to be based on overall company performance, we do support such limitations for grants to senior

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

6


Table of Contents

executives (although even some equity-based compensation of senior executives without performance criteria is acceptable, such as in the case of moderate incentive grants made in an initial offer of employment).

Boards often argue that such a proposal would hinder them in attracting talent. We believe that boards can develop a consistent, reliable approach, as boards of many companies have, that would still attract executives who believe in their ability to guide the company to achieve its targets. We generally recommend that shareholders vote in favor of performance-based option requirements.

There should be no retesting of performance conditions for all share- and option- based incentive schemes. We will generally recommend that shareholders vote against performance-based equity compensation plans that allow for re-testing.

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive appropriate types and levels of compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. Director fees should be reasonable in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. In particular, we support compensation plans that include non performance-based equity awards, which help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders.

Glass Lewis compares the costs of these plans to the plans of peer companies with similar market capitalizations in the same country to help inform its judgment on this issue.

R ETIREMENT B ENEFITS FOR D IRECTORS

We will typically recommend voting against proposals to grant retirement benefits to non-executive directors. Such extended payments can impair the objectivity and independence of these board members. Directors should receive adequate compensation for their board service through initial and annual fees.

LIMITS ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

As a general rule, Glass Lewis believes that shareholders should not be involved in setting executive compensation. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee. We view the election of directors, and specifically those who sit on the compensation committee, as the appropriate mechanism for shareholders to express their disapproval or support of board policy on this issue. Further, we believe that companies whose pay-for-performance is in line with their peers should be granted the flexibility to compensate their executives in a manner that drives growth and profit.

However, Glass Lewis favors performance-based compensation as an effective means of motivating executives to act in the best interests of shareholders. Performance-based compensation may be limited if a chief executive’s pay is capped at a low level rather than flexibly tied to the performance of the company.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

7


Table of Contents

IV. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

AMENDMENTS TO THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION

We will evaluate proposed amendments to a company’s articles of association on a case-by-case basis. We are opposed to the practice of bundling several amendments under a single proposal because it prevents shareholders from evaluating each amendment on its own merits. In such cases, we will analyze each change individually and will recommend voting for the proposal only when we believe that the amendments on balance are in the best interests of shareholders.

ANTI-TAKEOVER MEASURES

P OISON P ILLS (S HAREHOLDER R IGHTS P LANS )

Glass Lewis believes that poison pill plans generally are not in the best interests of shareholders. Specifically, they can reduce management accountability by substantially limiting opportunities for corporate takeovers. Rights plans can thus prevent shareholders from receiving a buy-out premium for their stock.

We believe that boards should be given wide latitude in directing the activities of the company and charting the company’s course. However, on an issue such as this where the link between the financial interests of shareholders and their right to consider and accept buyout offers is so substantial, we believe that shareholders should be allowed to vote on whether or not they support such a plan’s implementation.

In certain limited circumstances, we will support a limited poison pill to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what we believe to be a reasonable ‘qualifying offer’ clause.

S UPERMAJORITY V OTE R EQUIREMENTS

Glass Lewis favors a simple majority voting structure. Supermajority vote requirements act as impediments to shareholder action on ballot items that are critical to our interests. One key example is in the takeover context where supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit shareholders’ input in making decisions on such crucial matters as selling the business.

INCREASE IN AUTHORIZED SHARES

Glass Lewis believes that having adequate capital stock available for issuance is important to the operation of a company. We will generally support proposals when a company could reasonably use the requested shares for financing, stock splits and stock dividends. While we think that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, we prefer that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of large pools of unallocated shares available for any purpose.

In general, we will support proposals to increase authorized shares up to 100% of the number of shares currently authorized unless, after the increase the company would be left with less than 30% of its authorized shares outstanding.

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

8


Table of Contents

ISSUANCE OF SHARES

Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in some circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where we find that the company has not disclosed a detailed plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of shares requested are excessive, we typically recommend against the issuance. In the case of a private placement, we will also consider whether the company is offering a discount to its share price.

In general, we will support proposals to issue shares (with pre-emption rights) when the requested increase is the lesser of (i) the unissued ordinary share capital; or (ii) a sum equal to one-third of the issued ordinary share capital. This authority should not exceed five years. In some countries, if the proposal contains a figure greater than one-third, the company should explain the nature of the additional amounts.

We will also generally support proposals to suspend pre-emption rights for a maximum of 5-20% of the issued ordinary share capital of the company, depending on the country in which the company is located. This authority should not exceed five years, or less for some countries.

REPURCHASE OF SHARES

We will recommend voting in favor of a proposal to repurchase shares when the plan includes the following provisions: (i) a maximum number of shares which may be purchased (typically not more than 15% of the issued share capital); and (ii) a maximum price which may be paid for each share (as a percentage of the market price).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

9


Table of Contents

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISK

We believe companies should actively evaluate risks to long-term shareholder value stemming from exposure to environmental and social risks and should incorporate this information into their overall business risk profile. In addition, we believe companies should consider their exposure to changes in environmental or social regulation with respect to their operations as well as related legal and reputational risks. Companies should disclose to shareholders both the nature and magnitude of such risks as well as steps they have taken or will take to mitigate those risks.

When we identify situations where shareholder value is at risk, we may recommend voting in favor of a reasonable and well-targeted shareholder proposal if we believe supporting the proposal will promote disclosure of and/or mitigate significant risk exposure. In limited cases where a company has failed to adequately mitigate risks stemming from environmental or social practices, we will recommend shareholders vote against: (i) ratification of board and/or management acts; (ii) approving a company’s accounts and reports and/or; (iii) directors (in egregious cases).

 

C OPYRIGHT 2012 G LASS , L EWIS & C O ., LLC

10


Table of Contents

T HIS DOCUMENT SETS FORTH THE PROXY VOTING POLICY AND GUIDELINES OF G LASS , L EWIS  & Co., LLC. T HE POLICIES INCLUDED HEREIN HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED BASED ON G LASS L EWIS EXPERIENCE WITH PROXY VOTING AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE ISSUES AND ARE NOT TAILORED TO ANY SPECIFIC PERSON . M OREOVER , THESE GUIDELINES ARE NOT INTENDED TO BE EXHAUSTIVE AND DO NOT INCLUDE ALL POTENTIAL VOTING ISSUES . T HE INFORMATION INCLUDED HEREIN IS REVIEWED PERIODICALLY AND UPDATED OR REVISED AS NECESSARY . G LASS L EWIS IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY ACTIONS TAKEN OR NOT TAKEN ON THE BASIS OF THIS INFORMATION . T HIS DOCUMENT MAY NOT BE REPRODUCED OR DISTRIBUTED IN ANY MANNER WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF G LASS L EWIS .

C OPYRIGHT © 2011 G LASS , L EWIS  & Co., LLC. A LL R IGHTS R ESERVED .


Table of Contents

 

LOGO

San Francisco Headquarters Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC One Sansome Street Suite 3300 San Francisco, CA 94104 Tel: +1 415-678-4110 Tel: +1 888-800-7001 Fax: +1 415-357-0200 New York Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC 48 Wall Street 15th Floor New York, N.Y. 10005 Tel: +1 212-797-3777 Fax: +1 212-980-4716 Australia CGI Glass Lewis Pty Limited Suite 8.01, Level 8, 261 George St Sydney NSW 2000 Australia Tel: +61 2 9299 9266 Fax: +61 2 9299 1866 Switzerland Glass Lewis International, Via Pazzalino 25 6962 Lugano Viganello Switzerland Phone: +41 76 346 0673 Fax: +41 91 260 6182 Ireland Glass Lewis Europe, Ltd. 6th Floor, Riverpoint Bishop’s Quay Limerick, Ireland Phone: +353 61 404700 Fax: +353 61 404711 Please direct general inquiries to info@glasslewis.com


Table of Contents

ITEM 28. EXHIBITS.

 

(a) Third Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust of the Registrant dated September 28, 2007 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (a)(14) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 60 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on October 23, 2007 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 60”);

 

(b) Amended and Restated By-Laws of the Registrant dated September 28, 2007 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (b)(2) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 61 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on December 17, 2007.

 

(c) Reference is made to Article 5 of the Third Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust of the Registrant;

 

(d)(1) Management Contract dated September 28, 2007 between the Registrant on behalf of its Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(13) of PEA No. 60;

 

(d)(2) Management Contract dated September 28, 2007 between the Registrant on behalf of its Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(14) of PEA No. 60;

 

(d)(3) Management Contract dated March 31, 2008 between the Registrant on behalf of its Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(12) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 65 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on July 30, 2008 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 65”);

 

(d)(4) Management Contract dated March 31, 2008 between the Registrant on behalf of its Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(13) of PEA No. 65;

 

(d)(5) Management Contract dated March 26, 2009 between the Registrant on behalf of its Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(13) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 69 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on October 26, 2009 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 69”);

 

(d)(6) Management Contract dated September 14, 2011 between the Registrant on behalf of its Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(6) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 76 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on September 19, 2011 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 76”);

 

(d)(7) Subadviser Agreement dated October 1, 2011 between Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and Mondrian Investment Partners Limited — filed herein as Exhibit (d)(7);

 

(d)(8) Subadviser Agreement dated March 29, 2009 between Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc. with regard to Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund — incorporated by reference to Exhibit (d)(24) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 67 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on May 21, 2009 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 67);

 

(d)(9) Subadviser Agreement dated September 14, 2011 between Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and Mondrian Investment Partners Limited with regard to Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(9) of PEA No. 76;

 

(e)(1) Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 between the Registrant, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and ALPS Distributors, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 56 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on April 14, 2007 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 56”);


Table of Contents
(e)(2) Amendment dated March 21, 2008 to Schedule B of the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e)(2) of PEA No. 65;

 

(e)(3) Amendment dated October 1, 2006 to the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e)(3) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 72 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on July 29, 2010 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 72”);

 

(e)(4) Amendment dated April 9, 2007 to the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e)(4) of PEA No 72;

 

(e)(5) Amendment dated December 9, 2009 to Schedule A of the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e)(5) of PEA No 72;

 

(e)(6) Amendment dated September 21, 2010 to Schedule A of the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 – incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e)(6) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 73 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on July 7, 2011 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 73”);

 

(e)(7) Amendment dated April 1, 2012 to Schedule A of the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — filed herein as Exhibit (e)(7);

 

(f)(1) Amended and Restated Laudus Funds Retirement Plan for Trustees — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (f)(1) of PEA No. 65;

 

(g)(1) Amended and Restated Master Custodian Agreement dated December 9, 2005 by and between the Registrant and State Street Bank and Trust Company — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (g) of PEA No. 56;

 

(g)(2) Amendment dated April 2, 2008 to the Amended and Restated Master Custodian Agreement dated December 9, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (g)(2) of PEA No. 65;

 

(g)(3) Amendment dated March 15, 2012 to Appendix A of the Amended and Restated Master Custodian Agreement dated December 9, 2005 — filed herein as Exhibit (g)(3);

 

(h)(1) Transfer Agency and Service Agreement dated October 3, 2005 between the Registrant and Boston Financial Data Services, Inc. — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(1) of PEA No. 56;

 

(h)(2) Amendment dated April 3, 2008 to the Transfer Agency and Service Agreement — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(2) of PEA No. 65;

 

(h)(3) Amended and Restated Expense Limitation Agreement dated September 14, 2011 between Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and the Registrant — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(3) of PEA No. 76;

 

(h)(4) Administration Agreement dated October 1, 2005 by and between State Street Bank and Trust Company and the Registrant — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(3) of PEA No. 56;

 

(h)(5) Amendment dated April 16, 2008 to the Administration Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(5) of PEA No. 65;

 

(h)(6) Amendment dated March 15, 2012 to the Administration Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — filed herein as Exhibit (h)(6);

 

(h)(7) Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement dated October 1, 2005 between the Registrant and State Street Bank and Trust Company — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(4) of PEA No. 56;

 

(h)(8) Amendment dated April 2, 2008 to the Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(7) of PEA No. 65;

 

(h)(9) Amendment dated March 15, 2012 to Appendix A of the Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement dated October 1, 2005 — filed herein as Exhibit (h)(9);


Table of Contents
(i) Opinion and Consent of Counsel — filed herein as Exhibit (i);

 

(j)(1) Consent of PricewaterhouseCooppers LLP — filed herein as Exhibit (j)(1);

 

(j)(2) Trustee power of Attorney of Mariann Byerwalter, dated September 13, 2010 incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(2) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 73 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on July 7, 2011 (referred to herein as “PEA No. 73”);

 

(j)(3) Trustee power of Attorney of John F. Cogan, dated September 13, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(3) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(4) Trustee power of Attorney of William A. Hasler, dated September 13, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(4) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(5) Trustee power of Attorney of Charles R. Schwab, dated September 15, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(5) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(6) Trustee power of Attorney of Gerald B. Smith, dated September 13, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(6) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(7) Trustee power of Attorney of David L. Mahoney, dated February 16, 2011 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(7) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(8) Trustee power of Attorney of Joseph H. Wender, dated September 13, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(8) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(9) Trustee power of Attorney of Kiran M. Patel, dated February 16, 2011 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(9) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(10) Trustee power of Attorney of Walter W. Bettinger, II, dated September 13, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(10) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(11) Officer power of Attorney of George Pereira, dated September 13, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(11) of PEA No. 73;

 

(j)(12) Officer power of Attorney of Marie Chandoha, dated December 3, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (j)(12) of PEA No. 73;

 

(k) None;

 

(l) Investment letter regarding initial capital — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 45 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on July 31, 2003;

 

(m) Amended and Restated Distribution and Shareholder Service Plan for Investor Shares — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (m) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 24 to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A electronically filed with the SEC on May 28, 1999;

 

(n) Amended and Restated Rule 18f-3 Multi-Class Plan — incorporated herein by reference to PEA No. 67;

 

(o) Reserved;

 

(p)(1) Joint Code of Ethics for the Registrant and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. dated October 1, 2011 — filed herein as Exhibit (p)(1);

 

(p)(2) Code of Ethics of ALPS Distributors, Inc., principal underwriter to the Registrant, dated November 30, 2010 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (p)(2) of PEA No. 74;


Table of Contents
(p)(3) Code of Ethics of Mondrian Investment Partners Limited, investment subadviser to certain of the Funds, dated January 31, 2012 — filed herein as Exhibit (p)(3);

 

(p)(4) Code of Ethics of UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc., investment subadviser to the Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund, dated June 30, 2011 — incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (p)(4) of PEA No. 74.

ITEM 29. PERSONS CONTROLLED BY OR UNDER COMMON CONTROL WITH REGISTRANT.

The Board of Trustees of the Registrant is identical to that of the Laudus Institutional Trust and to the Board of Trustees of other Funds advised by Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. except for Schwab Strategic Trust. The officers of the Registrant are identical with the exception of the Chief Legal Officer. That fact, together with the fact that the power residing in the respective boards and officers arises as the result of an official position with the Fund, leads the Registrant to take the position that it is not under common control with these other Funds.

ITEM 30. INDEMNIFICATION.

(a) Indemnification

Article VIII of the Registrant’s Third Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust reads as follows (referring to the Registrant as the “Trust”):

ARTICLE VIII

Indemnification

SECTION 1. TRUSTEES, OFFICERS, ETC. The Trust shall indemnify each of its Trustees and officers (including persons who serve at the Trust’s request as directors, officers or trustees of another organization in which the Trust has any interest as a shareholder, creditor or otherwise) (hereinafter referred to as a “Covered Person”) against all liabilities and expenses, including but not limited to amounts paid in satisfaction of judgments, in compromise or as fines and penalties, and counsel fees reasonably incurred by any Covered Person in connection with the defense or disposition of any action, suit or other proceeding, whether civil or criminal, before any court or administrative or legislative body, in which such Covered Person may be or may have been involved as a party or otherwise or with which such Covered Person may be or may have been threatened, while in office or thereafter, by reason of being or having been such a Covered Person except with respect to any matter as to which such Covered Person shall have been finally adjudicated in any such action, suit or other proceeding to be liable to the Trust or its Shareholders by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of such Covered Person’s office. Expenses, including counsel fees so incurred by any such Covered Person (but excluding amounts paid in satisfaction of judgments, in compromise or as fines or penalties), shall be paid from time to time by the Trust in advance of the final disposition of any such action, suit or proceeding upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of such Covered Person to repay amounts so paid to the Trust if it is ultimately determined that indemnification of such expenses is not authorized under this Article, provided, however, that either (a) such Covered Person shall have provided appropriate security for such undertaking, (b) the Trust shall be insured against losses arising from any such advance payments or (c) either a majority of the disinterested Trustees acting on the matter (provided that a majority of the disinterested Trustees then in office act on the matter), or independent legal counsel in a written opinion, shall have determined, based upon a review of readily available facts (as opposed to a full trial type inquiry) that there is reason to believe that such Covered Person will be found entitled to indemnification under this Article.

SECTION 2. COMPROMISE PAYMENT. As to any matter disposed of (whether by a compromise payment, pursuant to a consent decree or otherwise) without an adjudication by a court, or by any other body before which the proceeding was brought, that such Covered Person is liable to the Trust or its Shareholders by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office, indemnification shall be provided if (a) approved, after notice that it involves such indemnification, by at least a majority of the disinterested Trustees acting on the matter (provided that a majority of the disinterested Trustees then in office act on the matter) upon a determination, based upon a review of readily available facts (as opposed to a full trial type inquiry) that such Covered Person is not liable to the Trust or its Shareholders by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office, or (b) there has been obtained an opinion in writing of independent legal counsel, based upon a review of readily available facts (as opposed to a full trial type inquiry) to the effect that such indemnification would not protect such Person against any liability to the Trust to which he would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his office. Any approval pursuant to this Section shall not prevent the recovery from any Covered Person of any


Table of Contents

amount paid to such Covered Person in accordance with this Section as indemnification if such Covered Person is subsequently adjudicated by a court of competent jurisdiction to have been liable to the Trust or its Shareholders by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of such Covered Person’s office.

SECTION 3. INDEMNIFICATION NOT EXCLUSIVE. The right of indemnification hereby provided shall not be exclusive of or affect any other rights to which such Covered Person may be entitled. As used in this Article VIII, the term “Covered Person” shall include such person’s heirs, executors and administrators and a “disinterested Trustee” is a Trustee who is not an “interested person” of the Trust as defined in Section 2(a)(19) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, (or who has been exempted from being an “interested person” by any rule, regulation or order of the Commission) and against whom none of such actions, suits or other proceedings or another action, suit or other proceeding on the same or similar grounds is then or has been pending. Nothing contained in this Article shall affect any rights to indemnification to which personnel of the Trust, other than Trustees or officers, and other persons may be entitled by contract or otherwise under law, nor the power of the Trust to purchase and maintain liability insurance on behalf of any such person; provided, however, that the Trust shall not purchase or maintain any such liability insurance in contravention of applicable law, including without limitation the 1940 Act.

SECTION 4. SHAREHOLDERS. In case any Shareholder or former Shareholder shall be held to be personally liable solely by reason of his or her being or having been a Shareholder and not because of his or her acts or omissions or for some other reason, the Shareholder or former Shareholder (or his or her heirs, executors, administrators or other legal representatives or in the case of a corporation or other entity, its corporate or other general successor) shall be entitled to be held harmless from and indemnified against all loss and expense arising from such liability, but only out of the assets of the particular series of Shares of which he or she is or was a Shareholder.”

(b) Summary of Indemnification Provisions

The Trust shall indemnify each of its Trustees and officers against all liabilities, expenses and counsel fees reasonably incurred in the defense or disposition of any action, suit or proceeding in which the Trustee or officer is involved because of his or her role as a Trustee or officer unless, in the final adjudication of that action, suit or proceeding, the Trustee or officer was found to have acted with willful malfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence, or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office. This right of indemnification is not exclusive.

(c) Insurance

The Registrant maintains comprehensive Errors and Omissions/Directors and Officers insurance policies for each of its trustees and officers. The policy provides coverage for the trustees and officers with respect to the Registrant, Laudus Institutional Trust, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios (“Schwab and Laudus Funds”). The Registrant’s policies insure each trustee and officer against professional liability for decisions made in connection with the Trust, to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act. In addition, the Independent Trustees have additional coverage through independent directors’ liability policies with respect to the Schwab and Laudus Funds. The premiums for such policies are allocated among the insureds in accordance with Rule 17d-1 of the 1940 Act.

ITEM 31. BUSINESS AND OTHER CONNECTIONS OF INVESTMENT ADVISER.

The Registrant's investment adviser, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation, organized in October 1989, also serves as the investment manager to the Laudus Institutional Trust, Schwab Capital Trust, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Strategic Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios, each an open-end, management investment company. The principal place of business of the investment adviser is 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105. The only business in which the investment adviser engages is that of investment adviser and administrator to the Schwab Capital Trust, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Schwab Strategic Trust and any other investment companies that Schwab may sponsor in the future, investment adviser to the Registrant and the Laudus Institutional Trust and an investment adviser to certain non-investment company clients.

The business, profession, vocation or employment of a substantial nature in which each director and/or senior or executive officer of the investment adviser (CSIM) is or has been engaged during the past two fiscal years is listed below. The name of any company for which any director and/or senior or executive officer of the investment adviser serves as director, officer, employee, partner or trustee is also listed below.


Table of Contents
Name and Position with Adviser    Name of Other Company    Capacity

Charles R. Schwab, Chairman and Director

   Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    Chairman and Director
   The Charles Schwab Bank, N.A.    Chairman and Director
   The Charles Schwab Corporation    Chairman and Director
   Schwab Holdings, Inc.    Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director
   Schwab International Holdings, Inc.    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
   Schwab (SIS) Holdings, Inc. I    Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
   Schwab Charitable Fund    Director
   Charles Schwab Foundation    Chairman and Director
   JustAnswer Corp.    Director
   Museum of American Finance    Advisory Board
   San Francisco Museum of Modern Art    Board of Trustees
   University of California San Francisco    Chancellor’s Executive Board
   Charles and Helen Schwab Foundation    Director

Marie Chandoha, Director, President and Chief Executive Officer

   Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    Executive Vice President and President, Investment Management Services
   Schwab Funds    President, Chief Executive Officer
   Laudus Funds    President, Chief Executive Officer
   Schwab ETFs    President, Chief Executive Officer
   Charles Schwab Worldwide Funds, PLC    Director
   Charles Schwab Asset Management    Director
   (Ireland) Limited   

Omar Aguilar, Senior Vice President, Chief Investment Officer — Equities

   Schwab Funds    Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Equities
   Laudus Funds    Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Equities

Brett Wander, Senior Vice President, Chief Investment Officer — Fixed Income

   Schwab Funds    Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Fixed Income
   Laudus Funds    Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer — Fixed Income

David Lekich, Chief Counsel and Senior Vice President

   Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    Vice President and Associate General Counsel
   Schwab Funds    Secretary
   Laudus Funds    Vice President and Assistant Clerk
   Schwab ETFs    Secretary

Michael Hogan, Chief Compliance Officer

   Schwab Funds    Chief Compliance Officer
   Schwab ETFs    Chief Compliance Officer
   Laudus Funds    Chief Compliance Officer
   Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    Senior Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer

George Pereira, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer

   Schwab Funds    Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
   Laudus Funds    Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
   Schwab ETFs    Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
     
   Charles Schwab Worldwide Funds, PLC    Director
   Charles Schwab Asset Management    Director
   (Ireland) Limited   


Table of Contents

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited (“Mondrian”) was established as a limited company organized under the laws of England and Wales in 1990 under the name Delaware International Advisers Limited, an indirect, wholly owned subsidiary of Delaware Holdings, Inc. In 2004, a senior management team, together with private equity funds sponsored by Hellman & Friedman LLC, acquired Delaware International Advisers Limited and changed its name to Mondrian Investment Partners Limited. In 2011, Mondrian’s senior management team acquired the private equity funds’ stake in Mondrian. Mondrian is currently 100% owned by its senior employees, including the majority of investment professionals, senior client service officers, and senior operations personnel. Mondrian’s principal office is located at Fifth Floor 10 Gresham Street London EC2V 7JD. Mondrian is registered as an investment adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Mondrian provides investment advisory services to a substantial number of institutional and high net worth investors, as well as to several funds in the Laudus Trust and this Trust. With respect to Mondrian, the response to this Item will be incorporated by reference to the Subadviser’s Uniform Application for Investment Adviser Registration (“Form ADV”) on file with the SEC. Mondrian’s Form ADV may be obtained, free of charge, at the SEC’s website at www.adviserinfo.sec.gov .

UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc. (“UBS Global AM”) provides investment advisory services consisting of portfolio management for a variety of individuals and institutions, as well as to Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund. With respect to UBS Global AM, the response to this Item will be incorporated by reference to the UBS Global AM’s Uniform Application for Investment Adviser Registration (“Form ADV”) on file with the SEC. UBS Global AM’s Form ADV may be obtained, free of charge, at the SEC’s website at www.adviserinfo.sec.gov .

ITEM 32. PRINCIPAL UNDERWRITERS.

(a) ALPS Distributors, Inc. acts as the distributor for the Registrant and the following investment companies: ALPS ETF Trust, Ameristock Mutual Fund, Inc., Arbitrage Funds, AQR Funds, BBH Trust, BLDRS Index Funds Trust, BPV Family of Funds, Brown Management Funds, Caldwell & Orkin Funds, Inc., Campbell Multi-Strategy Trust, Columbia ETF Trust, Cook & Bynum Funds Trust, CornerCap Group of Funds, The Cortina Funds, Inc., CRM Mutual Fund Trust, Cullen Funds, Drexel Hamilton Investment Partners LLC, EGA Global Shares Trust, Financial Investors Trust, Financial Investors Variable Insurance Trust, Firsthand Funds, GLG Investment Series Trust, Heartland Group, Inc., Henssler Funds, Inc., Holland Balanced Fund, IndexIQ Trust, Index IQ ETF Trust, James Advantage Funds, Laudus Trust, Laudus Institutional Trust, Oak Associates Funds, Pax World Series Trust I, Pax World Funds Trust II, PowerShares QQQ 100 Trust Series 1, RiverNorth Funds, Russell Exchange Traded Funds Trust, SPDR Dow Jones Industrial Average ETF Trust, SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust, SPDR S&P MidCap 400 ETF Trust, Select Sector SPDR Trust, Stonebridge Funds Trust, Stone Harbor Investment Funds, Tilson Investment Trust, Transparent Value Trust, db-X Exchange-Traded Funds Inc., Trust for Professional Managers, Wasatch Funds, WesMark Funds, Westcore Trust, Whitebox Mutual Funds, Williams Capital Liquid Assets Fund, Wilmington Funds and WisdomTree Trust.

(b) To the best of Registrant’s knowledge, the directors and executive officers of ALPS Distributors, Inc., are as follows:

 

Name*

  

Position with Underwriter

  

Positions with Fund

Edmund J. Burke    Director    None
Thomas A. Carter    President, Director    None
Jeremy O. May    Executive Vice President, Director    None
Kevin J. Ireland    Senior Vice President, Director of Institutional Sales    None
Mark R. Kiniry    Senior Vice President, National Sales Director-Investments    None
Bradley J. Swenson    Senior Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer    None
Robert J. Szydlowski    Senior Vice President, Chief Technology Officer    None


Table of Contents
Tané T. Tyler    Senior Vice President, Secretary, General Counsel    None
Erin Douglas    Vice President, Senior Associate Counsel    None
JoEllen Legg    Vice President, Senior Associate Counsel    None
Paul F. Leone    Vice President, Assistant General Counsel    None
David T. Buhler    Vice President, Associate Counsel    None
Steven Price    Vice President, Deputy Chief Compliance Officer    None
James Stegall    Vice President, Institutional Sales Manager    None

 

* The principal business address for each of the above directors and executive officers is 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, Colorado 80203.

ITEM 33. LOCATION OF ACCOUNTS AND RECORDS.

All accounts, books and other documents required to be maintained by Section 31(a) of the 1940 Act, as amended, and the Rules thereunder will be maintained at the offices of:

 

1) Laudus Trust, 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105

 

2) Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105

 

3) Mondrian Investment Partners Limited, 10 Gresham Street, London EC2V 7JD

 

4) State Street Bank and Trust Company, One Lincoln Street Boston, MA 02111

 

5) Boston Financial Data Services, P.O. Box 8032, Boston, Massachusetts 02266

 

6) ALPS Distributors, Inc., 1290 Broadway, Suite 1100, Denver, CO 80203

 

7) UBS Global Asset Management (Americas) Inc., One North Wacker Drive, Chicago, IL 60606

ITEM 34. MANAGEMENT SERVICES.

None.

ITEM 35. UNDERTAKINGS.

Not applicable.


Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), and the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, Registrant certifies that it meets all of the requirements for the effectiveness of this Post Effective Amendment No. 78 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A pursuant to Rule 485(b) under the 1933 Act and has duly caused this Post Effective Amendment No. 78 to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereto duly authorized, in the City of Washington in the District of Columbia, on this 25th day of July, 2012.

 

LAUDUS TRUST
Registrant

Charles R. Schwab*

Charles R. Schwab, Chairman and Trustee

Pursuant to the requirements of the 1933 Act, this Post-Effective Amendment No. 78 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A has been signed below by the following persons in the capacities indicated this 25th day of July, 2012.

 

Signature

     

Title

Charles R. Schwab*

    Chairman and Trustee
Charles R. Schwab    

Walter W. Bettinger, II*

    Trustee
Walter W. Bettinger, II    

Mariann Byerwalter*

    Trustee
Mariann Byerwalter    

John F. Cogan*

    Trustee
John F. Cogan    

William A. Hasler*

    Trustee
William A. Hasler    

David L. Mahoney*

    Trustee
David L. Mahoney    

Kiran M. Patel*

    Trustee
Kiran M. Patel    

Gerald B. Smith*

    Trustee
Gerald B. Smith    

Joseph H. Wender*

    Trustee
Joseph H. Wender    

Marie Chandoha*

    President and Chief Executive Officer
Marie Chandoha    

George Pereira*

    Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
George Pereira    

 

*By:  

/s/ Douglas P. Dick

  Douglas P. Dick, Attorney-in-Fact
  Pursuant to Power of Attorney


Table of Contents

EXHIBIT INDEX

 

(d)(7) Subadviser Agreement dated October 1, 2011

 

(e)(7) Amendment dated April 1, 2012 to Schedule A of the Distribution Agreement

 

(g)(3) Amendment dated March 15, 2012 to Appendix A of the Amended and Restated Master Custodian Agreement

 

(h)(6) Amendment dated March 15, 2012 to the Administration Agreement

 

(h)(9) Amendment dated March 15, 2012 to Appendix A of the Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement

 

(i) Opinion and Consent of Counsel

 

(j)(1) Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

 

(p)(1) Joint Code of Ethics for the Registrant and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. dated October 1, 2011

 

(p)(3) Code of Ethics of Mondrian Investment Partners Limited, dated January 31, 2012

Exhibit (d)(7)

INVESTMENT SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENT

AGREEMENT made this 1 st day of October, 2011, by and between, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM”), and Mondrian Investment Partners Limited (“Sub-Adviser”).

WHEREAS, Laudus Trust, a Massachusetts business trust (“Company”), is an open-end, management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (“1940 Act”), consisting of several series, each having its own investment objective and policies; and

WHEREAS, Company has entered into an Investment Advisory and Administration Agreement with CSIM pursuant to which CSIM acts as investment manager to Company (“Management Agreement”); and

WHEREAS, CSIM, acting with the approval of Company, wishes to retain Sub-Adviser to provide discretionary investment advisory services (“Services”) with respect to each series identified on Schedule A hereto, as may be amended from time to time, (each a “Fund”), together with all income earned on those assets and all realized and unrealized capital appreciation related to those assets (for each Fund, the “Managed Assets”), and Sub-Adviser is willing to render the Services.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of mutual covenants herein contained, the parties agree as follows:

1. APPOINTMENT. CSIM appoints Sub-Adviser to provide the Services for the period and term set forth in this Investment Sub-Advisory Agreement (“Agreement”). Sub-Adviser accepts such appointment and agrees to render the Services as provided herein.

2. DUTIES OF SUB-ADVISER.

(a) Subject to supervision of the Company, the Board of Trustees (“Trustees”) and CSIM (collectively “Fund Parties”), Sub-Adviser shall be responsible for managing the investment and reinvestment of the Managed Assets and determine in its discretion, the securities and other property to be purchased or sold and the portion of the Managed Assets to be retained in cash. Sub-Adviser will use same skill and care in providing the Services to each Fund as it utilizes in providing investment advisory services to other fiduciary accounts for which it has investment responsibilities. Sub-Adviser will provide Fund Parties with records concerning Sub-Adviser’s activities that Fund Parties are required to maintain, and regular reports concerning Sub-Adviser’s performance of the Services.

(b) Unless CSIM provides written instructions to the contrary, CSIM will review all proxy solicitation materials and will exercise any voting rights associated with securities comprising the Managed Assets pursuant to its proxy voting policy and guidelines.

(c) Sub-Adviser will provide assistance to Company, ALPS Distributors, Inc. and any successor distributor (“Distributor”) and CSIM (collectively “Schwab Parties”), as may be reasonably requested by such parties, in connection with the general offering, sale and marketing of Fund shares. Such assistance will include, without limitation: (i) periodic review of general offering, marketing and sales materials; and (ii) quarterly conference calls by Sub-Advisor portfolio management staff with CSIM fund management professionals; (iii) annual participation by Sub-Advisor portfolio management staff in educational activities regarding Sub-Advisor’s investment style, market views and performance results including, but not limited to, web casts or other technology-based communication media; (iv) periodic provision of discussion, analysis and commentary and market and performance data for filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”); and (v) such other assistance as mutually agreed to by CSIM


and Sub-Adviser. Schwab parties may use the names, trade names, trademarks, service marks, artwork, designs, or other copyrighted materials of Sub-Adviser in connection with the offering, sale and marketing of Fund shares, subject to the written approval of Sub-Adviser, which will not be unreasonably withheld.

(d) Unless CSIM provides written instructions to the contrary, Sub-Adviser will provide assistance in determining, in good faith, the fair value of any securities of the Managed Assets for which market quotations are not readily available in accordance with guidelines and procedures adopted by the Trustees. In addition, Sub-Adviser will assist the Company’s pricing agent with arranging for the provision of market values from at least two parties independent of Sub-Adviser with respect to any securities of the Managed Assets for which the Company’s pricing agent does not obtain prices in the ordinary course of business from an automated pricing service.

(e) Sub-Adviser will discharge the foregoing responsibilities subject to the supervision of Fund Parties, and in compliance with the following: (i) such policies as Fund Parties may from time to time establish; (ii) Company’s Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“Prospectus and SAI”); (iii) Company’s Declaration of Trust and By-Laws; (iv) 1940 Act; (v) the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (“Advisers Act”); (vi) any exemptive or other relief granted by the SEC; (vii) the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (“Code”); (viii) the Commodities and Exchange Act (“CEA”); and (ix) any other applicable laws. If a conflict in policies referenced herein occurs, the Prospectus and SAI will control.

(f) Sub-Adviser agrees to perform such duties at its own expense and to provide the office space, furnishings and equipment and the personnel required by it to perform the Services on the terms and for the compensation provided herein. Sub-Adviser will not, however, pay for the cost of securities, commodities, and other investments (including brokerage commissions and other transaction charges, if any) purchased or sold for a Fund.

3. DUTIES OF CSIM. CSIM will continue to have responsibility for all services to be provided to a Fund pursuant to the Management Agreement and will oversee and review Sub-Adviser’s performance of the Services. CSIM will furnish to Sub-Adviser current and complete copies of the Declaration of Trust and By-laws of Company, and the current Prospectus and SAI as those documents may be amended from time to time.

4. CUSTODY. Company will designate one or more custodians to hold the Managed Assets (“Custodian”) in the name of each Fund. Each custodian will be responsible for the custody, receipt and delivery of securities and other assets of a Fund including the Managed Assets, and Sub-Adviser will have no authority, responsibility or obligation with respect to the custody, receipt or delivery of securities or other assets of a Fund. In the event that any cash or securities of a Fund are delivered to Sub-Adviser, Sub-Adviser will promptly deliver the same to the Custodian for the benefit of and in the name of Fund. Sub-Adviser will provide to the Custodian and Fund Accountant on each business day, information relating to all transactions in the Managed Assets and will provide such information to Fund Parties upon request. Sub-Adviser will make all reasonable efforts to notify Custodian and Fund Accountant of all orders to brokers for the Managed Assets by 9:00 am EST on the day following the trade date and will affirm the trade to the Custodian and Fund Accountant before the close of business one business day after the trade date.

5. PORTFOLIO TRANSACTIONS.

(a) Sub-Adviser is authorized to select brokers or dealers that will execute the purchases and sales of portfolio securities and other property for a Fund in a manner that implements the policy with respect to brokerage set forth in the Prospectus and SAI, or as Fund Parties may direct from time to time, and in conformity with the federal securities laws.

 

2


(b) In effecting transactions for a Fund and selecting brokers or dealers, Sub-Adviser will use its best efforts to seek best execution on behalf of the Fund. In assessing best execution for any transaction, Sub-Adviser will consider any factors that it deems relevant, including price paid for the security, commission paid for the transaction, clearance, settlement, reputation, financial strength and stability, efficiency of execution and error resolution, block trading and block positioning capabilities, willingness to execute related or unrelated difficult transactions and order of call.

(c) Consistent with any policies established by Fund Parties and in compliance with the Prospectus and SAI and 1940 Act, Sub-Adviser is authorized, in its discretion, to utilize the services of a broker or dealer that provides brokerage or research services (as those terms are defined in Section 28(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934).

(d) In no instance will Sub-Adviser cause Managed Assets to be purchased from or sold to Distributor, CSIM, Sub-Adviser or any affiliated person of either Company, Distributor, CSIM, or Sub-Adviser (collectively “Related Parties”), except to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act or any exemptive or other relief granted by the SEC. Sub-adviser will not execute any transactions with brokers or dealers that are Related Parties without the prior written approval of CSIM. CSIM shall periodically provide Sub-Adviser with a list of all Related Parties in writing (other than parties that are affiliates of Sub-Adviser). Sub-Adviser shall have no obligation to independently determine whether a party may be a Related Party (other than parties that are Related Parties by being an affiliate of Sub-Adviser). Sub-Adviser shall have no liability whatsoever in the event that it engages in a transaction with a party that is actually a Related Party (other than a Related Party that is an affiliate of Sub-Adviser) but did not appear on the list of Related Parties most recently provided by CSIM to Sub-Adviser.

(e) Provided that Fund Parties have not prohibited the aggregation of orders for purchase or sale of Managed Assets with similar orders being made concurrently for other accounts managed by Sub-Adviser and notified Sub-Adviser in writing of such prohibition, consistent with any policies established by Sub-Adviser, Sub-Adviser may aggregate such orders, if, in Sub-Adviser’s reasonable judgment, such aggregation will result in an overall economic benefit to Fund, taking into consideration the transaction price, brokerage commission and other expenses.

6. COMPENSATION OF SUB-ADVISER. For the Services provided and expenses assumed by Sub-Adviser under this Agreement, CSIM will pay to Sub-Adviser compensation at the rate specified in Schedule B, as may be amended from time to time. Such compensation will be paid at the times and on the terms set forth in Schedule B. All rights of compensation under this Agreement for Services performed as of the termination date will survive the termination of this Agreement. Except as otherwise prohibited by law or regulation, Sub-Adviser may, in its discretion, from time to time, waive a portion of its compensation.

7. REPORTS.

(a) Sub-Adviser will provide written quarterly reports to Fund Parties regarding the Managed Assets. CSIM will reasonably specify the information to be included in such quarterly reports. Although Sub-Adviser does not currently provide any economic, statistical or investment services to clients other than asset management services, in the event that Sub-Adviser does provide such services to its other institutional clients, it shall make such services available to the Fund Parties.

(b) Sub-Adviser will promptly communicate to Fund Parties any information relating to transactions in the Managed Assets, as Fund Parties may reasonably request.

(c) Sub-Adviser will promptly notify Fund Parties of any financial or regulatory condition that is likely to impair the ability of Sub-Adviser to perform the Services. In addition, Sub-Adviser will promptly notify Fund Parties of any intended change in control of Sub-Adviser and of any intended change in portfolio or senior management, as far in advance of such change as possible.

 

3


(d) Sub-Adviser will make its officers and employees available to meet with Fund Parties at such times and places, as Fund Parties may reasonably request, including at quarterly and special meetings of the Trustees in San Francisco, California.

8. STATUS OF SUB-ADVISER. Sub-Adviser is and will continue to be registered under the Advisers Act. Sub-Adviser is and will continue to be an independent contractor and, unless otherwise expressly provided or authorized, has no authority to act for or represent Company in any way or otherwise act as agent of Company.

9. CODE OF ETHICS. Sub-Adviser will furnish to Fund Parties a current copy of its code of ethics that complies with the requirements of Rule 17j-1 under the 1940 Act. Upon written request of CSIM, Sub-Adviser will permit Fund Parties to examine the reports made by Sub-Adviser pursuant to Rule 17j-1 and other records relevant to Sub-Adviser’s code of ethics. Sub-Adviser will provide an annual certification to Fund Parties certifying that there have been no material violations of Sub-Adviser’s code of ethics or, if such violations have occurred, that appropriate actions have been taken in response to such violations.

10. CERTAIN RECORDS.

(a) Sub-Adviser will maintain all books and records with respect to transactions involving the Managed Assets required by subparagraphs (b)(5), (6), (7), (9), (10) and (11) and paragraph (f) of Rule 31a-1 under the 1940 Act. Sub-Adviser will provide to Fund Parties periodic and special reports, balance sheets, profitability analyses, financial information, and such other information with regard to Sub-Adviser’s affairs, as Fund Parties may reasonably request, including any information requested by Fund Parties to assist the Trustees in evaluating the terms of this Agreement and any renewal thereof under Section 15(c) of the 1940 Act.

(b) Sub-Adviser will keep the books and records relating to the Managed Assets required to be maintained by Sub-Adviser under this Agreement and will timely furnish to Fund Parties all information relating to Sub-Adviser’s Services under this Agreement needed by Fund Parties to keep the other books and records of the Company required by Rule 31a-1 under the 1940 Act. Sub-Adviser will also furnish to Fund Parties any other information relating to the Managed Assets that must be filed by Company with the SEC or sent to shareholders under the 1940 Act, and any exemptive or other relief granted by the SEC. Fund Parties shall obtain the prior written consent of Sub-Adviser before including information regarding the Sub-Adviser in any document that is required to be filed with the SEC or required to be sent to shareholders, which approval will not be unreasonably withheld. Sub-Adviser agrees that all records that it maintains on behalf of Company are property of Company and Sub-Adviser will surrender promptly to Company any of such records upon Fund Parties’ request; provided, however, Sub-Adviser may retain a copy of such records. In addition, Sub-Adviser will preserve for the periods prescribed by Rule 31a-2 under 1940 Act any such records as are required to be maintained by it pursuant to this Agreement, and will transfer said records to CSIM.

11. LIMITATION OF LIABILITY OF SUB-ADVISER. Sub-Adviser will not be liable for any claims, liabilities, damages, costs or losses (“collectively” claims) arising out of this Agreement, except to the extent such claims arise out of: (a) Sub-Adviser’s negligence, bad faith or willful misfeasance; or (b) Sub-Adviser’s material breach of this Agreement. Nothing in this Section 11 will be deemed a waiver or limitation of any obligation or duty that may not by law be waived or limited.

 

4


12. INDEMNIFICATION.

(a) Sub-Adviser will indemnify and hold harmless Fund Parties, their affiliates and their respective employees, officers and directors from and against all claims arising out of this Agreement to the extent such claims arise out of: (i) Sub-Adviser’s negligence, bad faith or willful misfeasance; or (ii) Sub-Adviser’s material breach of this Agreement.

(b) CSIM will indemnify and hold harmless Sub-Adviser, its affiliates, and their respective employees, officers and directors from and against all claims arising out of this Agreement, except to the extent such claims arise out of: (i) Sub-Adviser’s negligence, bad faith or willful misfeasance; or (ii) Sub-Adviser’s breach of this Agreement.

13. CONFIDENTIALITY. The Mutual Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement (“Confidentiality Agreement”) previously entered into between the parties is attached hereto as Schedule C and incorporated herein by reference. The Confidentiality Agreement will remain in effect throughout the term of this Agreement, and each party will abide by all of the provisions set forth therein. Upon termination of this Agreement, each party will continue to hold any Confidential Information (as that term is defined in the Confidentiality Agreement) in strict confidence for ten years from the date of termination, except with regard to: (a) trade secrets of either party which will be held in confidence for as long as such information remains a trade secret; and (b) Schwab Customer Information (as that term is defined in the Confidentiality Agreement) which will be held by Sub-Adviser in strict confidence in perpetuity and which will be used by Sub-Adviser only to perform the Services and for no other purpose. In addition, Sub-Adviser will not use any information concerning each Fund’s portfolio holdings, including, without limitation, the names of the portfolio holdings and the values thereof or other Schwab Confidential Information, for purposes of making any decision about whether to purchase or redeem shares of each Fund or to execute any other securities transaction. In the event any of the provisions of the Confidentiality Agreement conflict with any of the provisions of this Agreement, the latter will control.

14. PUBLICITY. During and after the term of this Agreement, neither the Schwab Parties nor Sub-Adviser will make any media release or other public announcement relating to this Agreement without the other party’s prior written consent. Sub-Adviser will acquire no right to use, and will not use, without Schwab Parties’ prior written consent, with respect to each use, the terms or existence of this Agreement, the names, trade names, trademarks, service marks, artwork, designs, or copyrighted materials of Schwab Parties or their affiliates in any sales or advertising materials, press releases, client lists, presentations, promotions or other publicity related materials or media.

15. DURATION AND TERMINATION.

(a) This Agreement will become effective for each Fund upon its approval by a vote of the majority of the outstanding voting securities of the respective Fund. This Agreement will remain in effect until two years from date of each effectiveness, and thereafter, for periods of one year so long as such continuance thereafter is specifically approved at least annually (i) by the vote of a majority of those Trustees who are not parties to this Agreement or interested persons of any such party, cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval, and (ii) by the Trustees, or by the vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of the Fund; provided, however, that if the shareholders of a Fund fail to approve the Agreement as provided herein, Sub-Adviser may continue to serve hereunder in the manner and to the extent permitted by the 1940 Act. The foregoing requirement that continuance of this Agreement be “specifically approved at least annually” will be construed in a manner consistent with the 1940 Act.

 

5


(b) This Agreement may be terminated at any time, without cause and without payment of any penalty by Fund Parties, by vote of a majority of the Trustees or by vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities of a Fund on not more than 60 days’ written notice to the Sub-Adviser, or by CSIM upon 90 days’ written notice to Sub-Adviser. In addition, this Agreement may be terminated, with cause, by CSIM at any time, without payment of any penalty by Fund Parties, upon written notice to Sub-Adviser. As used herein, “with cause” means: (i) any material breach of the Agreement by Sub-Adviser; (ii) any federal or state regulatory violation by Sub-Adviser; and (iii) any material financial or other impairment that in the reasonable judgment of CSIM impairs Sub-Adviser’s ability to perform the Services.

(c) This Agreement may be terminated by the Sub-Adviser at any time, without cause and without payment of any penalty, upon 90 days’ written notice to CSIM.

(d) This Agreement will automatically and immediately terminate in the event of its assignment or in the event of the termination of the Management Agreement.

(e) Any termination of this Agreement in accordance with the terms hereof will not affect the obligations or liabilities accrued prior to termination. As used in this Section 15, the terms “assignment”, “interested persons,” and a “vote of a majority of the outstanding voting securities” will have the respective meanings set forth in the 1940 Act; subject to such exceptions and other relief as may be granted by the SEC.

16. NOTICE. All notices required or permitted hereunder will be deemed sufficient upon receipt if sent by: (a) hand; (b) registered or certified mail, postage prepaid; (c) overnight courier; or (d) facsimile transmission to the last address furnished by the other party to the party giving notice. At the outset, such notices will be delivered to the following addresses:

 

CSIM:    Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.
   211 Main Street
   San Francisco, CA 94105
   Attention: Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
   Telephone:   (415) 667-7400
   Facsimile:   (415) 667-7644
Sub-Adviser:    Mondrian Investment Partners Limited
   Street Address: 10 Gresham St., 5 th Floor
   City and Zip Code: London, EC2V 7JD, United Kingdom
   Attention: Managing Director
   Telephone:   +44-20-7477-7000
   Facsimile:   +44-20-7776-8500

17. NONCOMPETE PROVISIONS. Sub-Adviser is not and will not become a party to any noncompete agreement or other agreement or arrangement that would restrict, limit or otherwise interfere with the ability of Schwab Parties and their affiliates to employ or engage any person or entity, now or in the future, to provide investment advisory or other services.

18. SEVERABILITY. If any provision of this Agreement will be held or made invalid by a court decision, statute, rule or otherwise, the remainder of this Agreement will not be affected thereby.

19. GOVERNING LAW. This Agreement will be construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California and the applicable provisions of the 1940 Act. To the extent that the applicable laws of the State of California, or any of the provisions herein, conflict with the applicable provisions of the 1940

 

6


Act, the latter will control. Any legal action or proceeding arising out of this Agreement will be brought only in the courts of the State of California located in the City and County of San Francisco or in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Each party will submit to the jurisdiction of such courts and venue in such courts and will waive any claims that such courts lack jurisdiction or are inconvenient forums.

20. MISCELLANEOUS.

(a) This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the Services. Any prior agreements, promises or representations not expressly set forth in this Agreement are of no force and effect. No waiver or modification of this Agreement will be effective unless reduced to writing and signed by the party to be charged. No failure to exercise and no delay in exercising on the part of any party hereto of any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder will operate as a waiver thereof.

(b) This Agreement is entered into on behalf of each Fund severally, and not jointly, with the express intention that the provisions contained herein will apply separately with respect to each Fund, as if contained in separate agreements.

(c) Except as set forth in Section 15, this Agreement binds and inures to the benefit of parties, their successors and assigns. This Agreement may be executed in more than one counterpart each of which will be deemed an original and both of which, taken together, will be deemed to constitute one and the same instrument.

(d) Company refers to Laudus Trust and its Trustees, as Trustees but not individually or personally, acting under a Third Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust dated September 28, 2007. A copy of the Certificate of Trust of Company is on file with the Secretary of State of the State of Massachusetts. Notice is hereby given that the obligations of Company entered into in the name of or on behalf of Company by any of its Trustees, representatives or agents are made not individually, but in such Company capacities. Such obligations are not binding upon any of the Trustees, shareholders or representatives of Company personally, but bind only the assets of Company belonging to such Fund for the enforcement of any claims against Company.

(e) As used in this Agreement, any references to any laws (including, without limitation, the 1940 Act, Advisers Act, Code and CEA) incorporate the effects of: (i) any amendments to such laws; (ii) any rules or regulations promulgated under such laws; and (iii) any interpretations of such laws, rules or regulations by the applicable regulatory authorities.

 

7


NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the day and year first written above.

 

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.
By:  

/s/ George Pereira

Name:   George Pereira
Title:   Chief Operating Officer
MONDRIAN INVESTMENT PARTNERS LIMITED
By:  

/s/ Clive Gillmore

Name:   Clive Gillmore
Title:   Chief Executive Officer

List of Schedules

Schedule A – Funds

Schedule B – Fees

Schedule C – Mutual Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement

Schedule D – Intentionally Deleted

 

8


SCHEDULE A

TO THE

INVESTMENT SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

CHARLES SCHWAB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC.

AND

MONDRIAN INVESTMENT PARTNERS LIMITED

FUND(S)

 

1. Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund
2. Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund
3. Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund
4. Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Effective Date of this Schedule A: October 1, 2011

 

9


SCHEDULE B

TO THE

INVESTMENT SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

CHARLES SCHWAB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC.

AND

MONDRIAN INVESTMENT PARTNERS LIMITED

FEES

Fees will be accrued each day by applying to the Net Asset Value of the Managed Assets at the end of that day, the daily rate, using a 365-day year, equivalent to the applicable fee percentage set forth below (“Company Percentage”). Sub-Adviser represents and warrants that the Company Percentage now is and in the future will be equal to or less than the applicable fee percentage payable to Sub-Adviser under any other advisory or sub-advisory agreement for comparable investment advisory services (each a “Third Party Percentage”). If at any time, the Company Percentage is greater than any Third Party Percentage, the Company Percentage will be reduced to the lowest Third Party Percentage, including with respect to any advisory or sub-advisory agreement amended or entered into by Sub-Adviser after the effective date of this Schedule. Fees will be paid within 30 days following the end of each calendar quarter.

COMPANY PERCENTAGE

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

65 Basis Points on the first $250 Million

60 Basis Points on amounts over $250 Million

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

30 Basis Points on the first $250 Million

26.5 Basis Points on amounts over $250 Million

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

40 Basis Points on the first $250 Million

32.5 Basis Points on the amounts over $250 Million

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

40 Basis Points on the first $250 Million

32.5 Basis Points on the amounts over $250 Million

Effective Date of this Schedule B: October 1, 2011

 

10


SCHEDULE C

TO THE

INVESTMENT SUB-ADVISORY AGREEMENT

BETWEEN

CHARLES SCHWAB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC.

AND

MONDRIAN INVESTMENT PARTNERS LIMITED

MUTUAL CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT

A true and correct copy of the MUTUAL CONFIDENTIALITY AND NON-DISCLOSURE AGREEMENT is attached hereto.

Effective Date of this Schedule C: October 1, 2011

 

11

Exhibit (e)(7)

April 1, 2012

ALPS Distributors, Inc.

Attn: General Counsel

1290 Broadway, Suite 1100

Denver, CO 80202

Re:         Amendment to Schedule A

Dear Sir or Madam:

This letter agreement serves to amend our distribution agreement, between Laudus Trust, Laudus Institutional Trust, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and ALPS Distributors, Inc. dated November 1, 2011, which incorporates by reference the Distribution Agreement dated October 1, 2005, as amended (the “Agreement”).

The parties wish to amend Schedule A to the Agreement, which has been amended to add the Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund. The Agreement otherwise remains unchanged and shall continue in full force and effect.

In the space provided below, please acknowledge your agreement to the foregoing.

 

Sincerely,

By:

 

/s/ George M. Pereira

Name:   George M. Pereira
Title:   Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
  Laudus Trust
  Laudus Institutional Trust

ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED TO:

ALPS Distributors, Inc.   

Charles Schwab Investment Management,

Inc. ( with respect to Section 4 hereof only )

By:

 

/s/ Thomas A. Carter

     By:   

/s/ Marie Chandoha

  

Name:

 

Thomas A. Carter

     Name:    Marie Chandoha   

Title:

 

President

     Title:    President and CEO   


AMENDED SCHEDULE A

TO THE

DISTRIBUTION AGREEMENT

April 1, 2012

LAUDUS TRUST

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund

LAUDUS INSTITUTIONAL TRUST

Laudus Mondrian Institutional International Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian Institutional Emerging Markets Fund

Exhibit (g)(3)

 

LOGO

March 15, 2012

State Street Bank and Trust Company

1776 Heritage Drive

North Quincy, Massachusetts 02171

Attention: James M. Keenan, Vice President, JAB/2N

Re: Laudus Trust (the “ Trust ”)

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Please be advised that the undersigned Trust has established a new series of shares to be known as Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund (the “ New Series ”).

In accordance with Section 18.6, the Additional Portfolios provision, of the Amended and Restated Master Custodian Agreement dated as of December 9, 2005 by and among each registered management investment company party thereto and State Street Bank and Trust Company, the undersigned Trust hereby requests that State Street Bank and Trust Company act as custodian for the New Series under the terms of the aforementioned contract. In connection with such request, the undersigned Trust hereby confirms to you, as of the date hereof, its representations and warranties set forth in Section 18.7 of the aforementioned contract. A current Appendix A to the agreement is attached hereto.

Kindly indicate your acceptance of the foregoing by executing two copies of this letter agreement, returning one to the Trust and retaining one for your records.

Very truly yours,

 

Laudus Trust      Accepted:
By:  

/s/ George Pereira

     State Street Bank and Trust Company
Name:   George Pereira       
Title:   Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer      By:  

/s/ Michael F. Rogers

       Name:   Michael F. Rogers
       Title:   Executive Vice President


MASTER CUSTODIAN AGREEMENT

March 15, 2012

APPENDIX A

MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES REGISTERED WITH THE SEC AND PORTFOLIOS THEREOF, IF ANY

Laudus Trust

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Institutional Trust (formerly Laudus Variable Insurance Trust)

Laudus Mondrian Institutional International Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian Institutional Emerging Markets Fund

Exhibit (h)(6)

Laudus Trust

211 Main Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

March 15, 2012

State Street Bank and Trust Company

1776 Heritage Drive

North Quincy, Massachusetts 02171

Attention: James M. Keenan, Senior Vice President, JAB 2N

RE: Laudus Trust (the “Trust”)

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Reference is made to the Administration Agreement between us dated as of October 1, 2005 (the “Agreement”). Pursuant to the Agreement, this letter is to provide notice of the creation of the following additional investment funds:

Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income

In accordance with the Additional Funds provision of Section 1 of the Agreement, we request that you act as Administrator with respect to each additional fund. A current Schedule A to the agreement is attached hereto.

Please indicate your acceptance of the foregoing by executing two copies of this Agreement, returning one to Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. and retaining one copy for your records.

Very truly yours,

 

Laudus Trust      Accepted:
By:  

/s/ George Pereira

     State Street Bank and Trust Company
Name:   George Pereira       
Title:   Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer      By:  

/s/ Michael F. Rogers

       Name:   Michael F. Rogers
       Title:   Executive Vice President


Schedule A

to

Master Fund Administration Agreement

March 15, 2012

MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES AND PORTFOLIOS THEREOF, IF ANY

Laudus Trust

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Institutional Trust (formerly Laudus Variable Insurance Trust)

Laudus Mondrian Institutional International Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian Institutional Emerging Markets Fund

Exhibit (h)(9)

Laudus Trust

211 Main Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

March 15, 2012

State Street Bank and Trust Company

1776 Heritage Drive

North Quincy, Massachusetts 02171

Attention: James M. Keenan, Senior Vice President, JAB 2N

RE: Laudus Trust (the “Trust”)

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Reference is made to the Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement between us dated as of October 1, 2005 (the “Agreement”). Pursuant to the Agreement, this letter is to provide notice of the creation of the following additional investment fund:

Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund

In accordance with Section 11.5, the Additional Funds provision, of the Agreement, we request that you act as Accounting Agent with respect to each additional fund. In connection with such request, the undersigned funds hereby confirms to you, as of the date hereof, its representations and warranties set forth in Section 4(b) of the aforementioned contract. In connection with such request, the undersigned Trusts hereby confirm to you, as of the date hereof, its representations and warranties set forth in Section 4(b) of the aforementioned contract; except that Section 4(b)(i), is hereby deleted and replaced with the following:

It is either a business trust, duly organized, existing and in good standing under the laws of Massachusetts, or a statutory trust, duly organized, existing and in good standing under the laws of Delaware;

A current Appendix A to the agreement is attached hereto.

Please indicate your acceptance of the foregoing by executing two copies of this Agreement, returning one to the Trust and retaining a copy for your records.

Sincerely,

Laudus Trust      Accepted:
By:  

/s/ George Pereira

     State Street Bank and Trust Company
Name:   George Pereira       
Title:   Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer      By:  

/s/ Michael F. Rogers

       Name:   Michael F. Rogers
       Title:   Executive Vice President


Appendix A

to

Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement

March 15, 2012

MANAGEMENT INVESTMENT COMPANIES AND PORTFOLIOS THEREOF, IF ANY

Laudus Trust

Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund

Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund

Laudus Mondrian Global Fixed Income Fund

Laudus Institutional Trust (formerly Laudus Variable Insurance Trust)

Laudus Mondrian Institutional International Equity Fund

Laudus Mondrian Institutional Emerging Markets Fund

Exhibit (i)

 

LOGO

  

1775 I Street, N.W.

   Washington, DC 20006-2401
   +1 202 261 3300 Main
   +1 202 261 3333 Fax
   www.dechert.com
  

 

July 25, 2012

Laudus Trust

211 Main Street

San Francisco, CA 94105

Dear Ladies and Gentlemen:

We have acted as counsel for Laudus Trust (the “Trust”), a business trust duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, in connection with Post-Effective Amendment No. 78 to the Trust’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (the “Registration Statement”) relating to the issuance and sale by the Trust of an indefinite number of shares of beneficial interest of the Trust, under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Amendment No. 81 to the Registration Statement under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. We have examined such governmental and corporate certificates and records as we deemed necessary to render this opinion and we are familiar with the Trust’s Third Amended and Restated Agreement and Declaration of Trust and its Amended and Restated Bylaws, each as amended to date.

Based upon the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the shares proposed to be sold pursuant to the Registration Statement, when paid for as contemplated in the Registration Statement, will be legally and validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable.

We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the Registration Statement, to be filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, and to the use of our name in the Trust’s Registration Statement to be dated on or about July 29, 2012 and in any revised or amended versions thereof. In giving such consent, however, we do not admit that we are within the category of persons whose consent is required by Section 7 of the Securities Act and the rules and regulations thereunder.

Very truly yours,

 

/s/ Dechert LLP

Dechert LLP

US  Austin  Boston  Charlotte  Hartford  Los  Angeles  New York  Orange County  Philadelphia  Princeton  San  Francisco  Silicon  Valley

Washington DC    EUROPE  Brussels  Dublin  Frankfurt  London  Luxembourg  Moscow  Munich  Paris    ASIA  Beijing  Hong Kong

Exhibit (j)(1)

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement on Form N-1A of our report dated May 15, 2012, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights which appear in the March 31, 2012 Annual Reports to Laudus Mondrian Emerging Markets Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Fixed Income Fund, Laudus Mondrian International Equity Fund, Laudus Mondrian Global Equity Fund, and Laudus Growth Investors U.S. Large Cap Growth Fund, which are also incorporated by reference into the Registration Statement. We also consent to the references to us under the headings “Financial highlights,” “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm,” “Disclosure of Portfolio Securities Information” and “Financial Statements” in such Registration Statement.

 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Francisco, CA

July 24, 2012

Exhibit (p)(1)

THE CHARLES SCHWAB FAMILY OF FUNDS

SCHWAB INVESTMENTS

SCHWAB CAPITAL TRUST

SCHWAB ANNUITY PORTFOLIOS

SCHWAB STRATEGIC TRUST

LAUDUS TRUST

LAUDUS INSTITUTIONAL TRUST

CHARLES SCHWAB INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, INC.

CHARLES SCHWAB & CO., INC.

JOINT CODE OF ETHICS

PERSONAL TRADING POLICY

Effective October 1, 2011

 

 

 

 

 

Capitalized terms used in the Code are defined, when practicable, within the related text. Otherwise such terms are defined in the attached Appendix A.

 

 

 

1


INTRODUCTION

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM”), Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (“CS&Co.”) (in its capacity as principal underwriter for certain funds), the Schwab and Laudus Funds and the Schwab ETFs (the “Funds”) have a fiduciary duty to Fund shareholders and advisory clients (“Clients”) which requires all officers, directors and CSIM employees to conduct themselves with the highest ethical standards, always placing the interests of Clients ahead of their own.

To this end, CSIM, CS&Co. and the Funds have adopted this Joint Code of Ethics (“Code”) which sets the minimum standards of business conduct applicable to all persons who work for CSIM full-time, part-time or on a contractual basis, as well as Officers and Trustees of the Funds and certain CS&Co. persons as described in this Code (“Access Persons”). Access Persons who are employees of CSIM or CS&Co. are also responsible for knowing and complying with The Charles Schwab Corporation Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, relevant provisions of the Charles Schwab Compliance Manual, and the laws, rules, regulations, and policies and procedures applicable to their role and responsibilities, including all applicable Federal Securities Laws. You may be subject to disciplinary action, up to and including termination, if you fail to comply with this Code and applicable policies and procedures.

The Code does not and cannot identify all possible conflicts of interest that you might encounter. Rather, you have an on-going responsibility to identify any areas where personal activities may conflict with Clients’ interests and to operate in a manner that mitigates both actual and perceived conflicts. You must at all times act in accordance with both the letter and the spirit of applicable laws, rules and regulations.

If you have any questions concerning a proposed course of action that may present a conflict of interest, you should contact your supervisor for guidance. Supervisors who have questions about how to proceed should contact the Chief Compliance Officer (“CCO”) or his or her designee for guidance.

 

 

2


MATERIAL NON-PUBLIC INFORMATION

You have an obligation to safeguard material non-public information regarding CSIM and its Clients, including the Funds. The Charles Schwab Compliance Manual has policies and procedures that establish minimum requirements that all employees are required to follow when in possession of material non-public information about any issuer. In addition, when you are in possession of confidential information about CSIM and/or its Clients, you are prohibited from sharing such information with anyone, other than those who have a business need to know, and from using such information for personal gain.

Specifically, you are prohibited from:

 

   

Disclosing current portfolio transactions that Portfolio Managers and Traders have made or potential portfolio transactions that are being contemplated on behalf of Clients or any other non-public information to anyone outside of CSIM, except as required to effect securities transactions on behalf of a Client.

 

   

Trading on the basis of the Funds’ material non-public information: the following types of information have, under certain circumstances, been determined to be material non-public information in the mutual fund context (if not yet publicly disclosed):

 

  i. Holdings and transaction information.

 

  ii. The portfolio manager’s investment decisions.

 

  iii. Performance analysis.

 

  iv. Subscription and redemption activity.

 

  v. Dividend activity.

 

  vi. Decisions to hire or fire an adviser/subadviser or invest or divest in a proprietary or third-party mutual fund or ETF.

 

  vii. Material subadviser due diligence information.

 

  viii. Change of portfolio manager.

 

   

Using knowledge of portfolio transactions that portfolio managers and traders have made or potential portfolio transactions that are being contemplated on behalf of Clients to personally profit, or cause others to profit, by the market effect of such transactions.

 

 

3


   

Engaging in deceptive conduct in connection with the purchase or sale of portfolio transactions for Client accounts, including without limitation:

 

  i. Employing any device, scheme or artifice to defraud any Client.

 

  ii. Making any untrue statement of a material fact to any Client or misleading any Client by omitting to state a material fact.

 

  iii. Engaging in any act, practice or course of business that would defraud or deceive any Client.

 

  iv. Engaging in any manipulative practice with respect to any Client.

 

  v. Investing in derivatives or similar instruments to evade the restrictions of this Code.

These requirements may be supplemented from time to time by additional policies and procedures. It is your responsibility to be familiar with and to comply with all such policies and procedures.

 

 

4


PERSONAL TRADING

 

I. Introduction

This section of the Code contains rules applicable to Access Persons and certain of their household members (“Covered Persons”) regarding owning and trading “Covered Securities” in certain “Personal Accounts”.

An Access Person is any

 

   

Officer, director or trustee of CSIM or the Funds

 

   

CSIM employee or contractor

 

   

Any person who is determined to have access to nonpublic information regarding any Client or Fund, including portfolio holdings and any transactions in a portfolio, as determined by CSIM Compliance, is subject to the terms of this Code

If you are an Access Person, your Covered Persons include

 

   

Your spouse

 

   

Your minor children

 

   

Individuals living in your home who are supported, directly or indirectly, to a material extent by you

Personal Accounts are securities accounts over which you or any of your Covered Persons exercise direct or indirect control or discretion or in which you or any of your Covered Persons have a direct or indirect beneficial ownership or financial interest.

Covered Securities include:

 

   

All publicly and privately traded securities except as noted below

 

   

Any option, future, forward contract or other obligation involving securities or indices thereof, including an instrument whose value is derived or based on any of the above

 

   

Any separate security which is convertible into or exchangeable for, or which confers a right to purchase, a Covered Security

 

   

Shares of a closed-end investment company

 

   

Shares of any exchange-traded fund (ETFs)

 

   

Shares of the Schwab and Laudus Funds (other than money market funds)

The following securities are excluded from the definition of Covered Securities:

 

   

Shares of registered non-affiliated open-end investment companies (e.g., mutual funds), except for shares of ETFs

 

 

5


   

Shares of non-affiliated unit investment trusts that invest exclusively in non-affiliated registered open-end investment companies

 

   

Direct obligations of the U.S. government (e.g., Treasury securities)

 

   

High-Quality Short-Term Debt Instruments, as defined in Appendix A, such as bank certificates of deposit, banker’s acceptances, repurchase agreements, and commercial paper

 

   

Affiliated money market funds

 

II. Reporting Requirements

The following reporting requirements apply to all Access Persons and their Covered Persons (excluding Independent Trustees, unless otherwise noted).

 

  A. Initial Accounts and Holdings Reports and Certifications

Within 10 days of hire or of being notified by CSIM Compliance that you have been deemed an Access Person, you must submit to the CCO or his or her designee an Accounts and Holdings Report showing all of your Personal Accounts and holdings in Covered Securities (including those of your Covered Persons). Your report must include the name of security, type of security, the exchange ticker symbol or CUSIP number, number of shares and principal amount of each security held, as well as the name of any broker, dealer or bank with whom the account is maintained, the name on the account and the account number. You must submit an Accounts and Holdings Report even if you do not have any securities accounts or applicable holdings. Initial reports are submitted in hard-copy and the information contained in the report must be current as of a date no more than 45 days prior to the date of your hire or of being notified by CSIM Compliance that you have been deemed an Access Person. The report must indicate the date you submit the report.

In addition, as a newly designated Access Person, you must certify in writing within ten (10) calendar days of designation that you have received a current copy of the Code of Ethics.

 

  B. Quarterly Transaction Reports

On a quarterly basis, you must report all transactions in Covered Securities in all Personal Accounts. These quarterly transaction reports must be made no later than thirty days after the end of each calendar quarter and include trading activity at Schwab and any other broker, dealer or bank where Personal Accounts are maintained. You are required to submit a quarterly report to the CCO or his or her designee, even if there were no reportable transactions during the quarter. The report must indicate the date you submit the report, as well as the following:

 

 

6


  1. The transaction date, name and identifier of the security (such as exchange ticker symbol or CUSIP number), interest rate and maturity date, number of shares, and cost of each reportable security involved;

 

  2. The name of the broker, dealer or bank with or through which the transaction was effected

 

  3. The type of transaction, such as purchase, sale or any other type of acquisition or disposition; and

 

  4. The price of the security at which the transaction was effected.

Transaction information is automatically updated in an on-line personal trading monitoring system utilized by CSIM (“Personal Trading Monitoring System”) throughout the quarter to reflect transactions made in Schwab accounts you have disclosed. This may not include all of the transactions you must report, and it is your responsibility to review the information and update it to ensure it is accurate and complete. This includes providing information on any new Personal Account established during the quarter including the name of the broker, dealer or bank and the date the account was established.

 

  C. Annual Holdings Reports

Annually, you must report all holdings in Covered Securities in Personal Accounts as of December 31 of each year. This report must be submitted to the CCO or his or her designee no later than 45 calendar days following the year end. Similar to quarterly transaction reporting, holdings information is displayed on the Access Persons reporting screen in the Personal Trading Monitoring System. The position may not reflect all activities in a security (e.g. corporate actions) and you must review and correct the holdings report, as needed, to ensure its accuracy. Your report must indicate the date you submit the report and must include the title, type of security, the exchange ticker symbol or CUSIP number, number of shares and principal amount of each security held, as well as the name of any broker, dealer or bank with whom the account is maintained.

 

  D. Other Compliance Certifications

On a quarterly basis, you are required to confirm your compliance with the provisions of this Code. In addition, you must acknowledge, in writing, which may be made electronically, receipt of any revisions to this Code whenever amendments to the Code are made and delivered.

 

 

7


  E. Independent Trustee Reporting Requirements

Independent Trustees are required to submit a Quarterly Transactions Report containing the information as described above to the Funds’ Chief Compliance Officer. Such report must include:

 

   

all transactions in any Funds, excluding money market funds, on whose Board the Trustee serves

 

   

all transactions made in a Covered Security if, at the time of that transaction, they knew or, in the ordinary course of fulfilling their official duties as a Trustee of the Funds, should have known that, during the 15-day period immediately before or after the date of their transaction, the same Covered Security was purchased or sold by the Fund or was being considered by the Fund or its investment adviser(s) for purchase or sale by the Fund

 

III. Preclearance Requirements

 

  A. General Requirements

Each Access Person, except Trustees of the Funds, must receive clearance prior to the execution of any transaction in Covered Securities in their Personal Accounts (including the accounts of their Covered Persons).

Access Persons who are Trustees, including Independent Trustees of the Funds, must receive clearance prior to the execution of transactions in the Funds, excluding money market funds, for which they are a Trustee.

 

  B. How to request preclearance

Generally, you must submit requests for pre-clearance of personal transactions through the Personal Trading Monitoring System unless otherwise noted in this Code. Pre-clearance requests will be reviewed by CSIM Compliance in relation to information available from the trading system(s) or other relevant information sources (consulting with Portfolio Management as needed) to determine whether your request should be approved. CSIM Compliance may require Supervisor approval of a pre-clearance request before considering such request. You will be notified via email of approval or denial. Pre-clearance requests made by the Chief Compliance Officer will be forwarded to the Senior Vice President and head of Global Compliance or his or her designee for approval.

You should only submit a pre-clearance request when you intend to execute a trade, not to secure your right to execute a transaction on the

 

 

8


basis of favorable intraday price movements. Excessive pre-clearance requests and/or trading in personal accounts are strongly discouraged. CSIM Compliance monitors trading activity, reports this activity periodically to CSIM management and may impose additional trading restrictions or prohibitions as appropriate.

Access Persons who are Trustees, including Independent Trustees of the Funds, should direct any preclearance request to the Chief Compliance Officer or his or her designee by telephone or email.

 

  C. Two Day Effective Period

Pre-clearance of personal securities transactions for publicly traded securities will be effective for (2) trading days as follows:

 

   

If clearance is granted during New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) market hours, the clearance is effective for the remainder of that trading day and through the close of the NYSE market on the following trading day.

 

   

If clearance is granted after trading on the NYSE has closed for the day, the clearance is effective for the next two trading days of the NYSE.

Limit Orders, including stop loss orders, will generally not be allowed unless you expect the order to be completed within the two day effective period. If your order is not executed within the two day effective period, your initial pre-clearance will no longer be valid and you will need to cancel the open order(s) and obtain pre-clearance again.

You are prohibited from trading in a security if, after you’ve received pre-clearance approval, you come into possession of material nonpublic information.

 

IV. Blackout Periods

All Access Persons are prohibited from engaging in any transaction in a Covered Security when they know or should have known at the time that there is a pending “buy” or “sell” order in that same security for any Client Account.

Certain additional trading restrictions apply to portfolio managers and credit analysts, as such terms may be defined from time to time by CSIM Compliance, as follows:

 

   

If you are a portfolio manager , you are prohibited from trading in a Covered Security if the same security has been traded in any Fund or

 

 

9


 

Client Account for which you are a primary or backup portfolio manager during the past seven (7) calendar days, or is expected to be traded within the next seven (7) calendar days.

 

   

If you are a credit analyst , you may not trade in a fixed income Covered Security for any issuer for which you are responsible for reviewing or approving if a fixed income security related to that same issuer has been traded in any Fund or Client Account during the past seven (7) calendar days, or is expected to be traded within the next seven (7) calendar days.

 

   

If you receive pre-clearance for a transaction in a Covered Security and a transaction in the same security takes place for a Fund or Client Account subject to the Blackout Period as discussed above within seven (7) calendar days following the execution of your transaction, your transaction will be reviewed further by the CCO or his or her designee and you may be required to reverse the transaction.

 

V. Prohibition on Short Term Profits (60-DAY RULE)

All Access Persons, other than trustees, are prohibited from realizing a profit from the purchase and sale, or sale and purchase, of the same (or related) Covered Securities within 60 calendar days. If an Access Person is found to have violated this prohibition, any profit realized will be required to be disgorged. This restriction applies without regard to tax lot considerations. Generally speaking, profit determinations will be made on the basis of a “Last-In-First-Out” (LIFO) accounting methodology, unless the fundamentals of the trade warrant a different consideration as determined by the CCO or his or her designee.

 

VI. IPO’s and Private Placements

The Employee Securities Accounts and Investments & Inside Information chapter of the Charles Schwab Compliance Manual addresses certain prohibited practices. Among them is the participation in an IPO. This applies to all Access Persons, except Independent Trustees.

Access Persons, excluding Independent Trustees, must first receive clearance from the CCO or his or her designee and the Schwab Compliance Department prior to participating in a private securities transaction. A request for approval should first be submitted to the Schwab Compliance Department through Employee Disclosure Online, jumpword: EDO. If approval is granted, you must then pre-clear the transaction with CSIM Compliance.

 

 

10


VII. Exceptions

 

  A. Personal Account Exemptions

After a Personal Account has been reported as discussed in Section II above, you may request that the Personal Account be exempt from personal trading requirements and restrictions by submitting a written request to CSIM Compliance. Such exemptions will be considered on a case-by-case basis considering individual facts and circumstances. Accounts that may be considered for exemption from personal trading requirements and restrictions include accounts that are managed on a fully discretionary basis by an investment advisor, manager or other third party in which all trading activity is directed by the investment manager without prior knowledge or consent of the employee. In such cases, a copy of the executed investment management or advisory agreement must be submitted to CSIM Compliance. If CSIM Compliance grants an exception, you are responsible for ensuring that copies of trade confirmations and account statements are mailed directly to CSIM Compliance. Provided you do so, you will not be required to further certify to the holdings or transactions in such Personal Account once the exception is granted.

 

  B. Transactional Exemptions

The following transactional exemptions apply:

 

   

All transactions in The Charles Schwab Corporation securities (equities, fixed income, options) are exempt from preclearance, blackout periods and the short-term profit prohibition , provided that you comply with the requirements outlined in the Charles Schwab Compliance Manual .

 

   

Non-Volitional Transactions are exempt from preclearance, blackout periods and the short-term profit prohibition . Please refer to Appendix A for more information on what qualifies as a Non-Volitional Transaction.

 

   

When establishing an automatic investment plan, direct stock purchase plan or other similar plans involving a Covered Security, enrollment in the plan must be approved by CSIM Compliance and the initial purchase of that Covered Security in the plan must be pre-cleared. Subsequent investments of the applicable Covered Security subject to the plan are exempt from pre-clearance and blackout periods provided no changes to the plan have been made (i.e. cancellation) since originally approved by CSIM Compliance.

 

   

Profits received from a sale of securities which were acquired as a result of exercising options received through a Stock Option Program are exempt from the short-term profits prohibition .

 

 

11


Exceptions to Reporting Requirements

You do not need to include in your quarterly transaction reports any transactions made in any account over which you have no direct or indirect influence or control regarding specific security selection (i.e. investment discretion) or any Non-Volitional Transactions, provided you have ensured that copies of trade confirmations and account statements are mailed directly to CSIM Compliance.

If you have any questions concerning whether or not an account or transaction is exempt from personal trading requirement or restrictions, you should contact your Supervisor or the CCO or his or her designee.

 

  C. Other Exemptions

The CCO may approve other exemptions to certain restrictions and prohibitions of the Code after consideration of relevant facts and circumstances. Such exemptions are not automatic but rather granted on an exception basis and require either preclearance through the channels discussed above or other advance written approval from the CCO.

 

 

12


OTHER POTENTIAL CONFLICTS

GIFTS AND BUSINESS ENTERTAINMENT

The following applies to all Access Persons with the exception of the Independent Trustees of the Funds:

The giving and acceptance of gifts and/or business entertainment that influences or appears to influence the behavior of the recipient may compromise the reputation and integrity of CSIM, Schwab or the Funds. You should never accept or provide any gift or business entertainment that would violate the law, embarrass, or reflect poorly on CSIM, Schwab or the Funds. CSIM follows the Charles Schwab corporate Gifts, Business Entertainment, Loans & Charitable Contributions Policy and has adopted more restrictive limits for the acceptance of gifts and business entertainment, which are detailed in the CSIM Gifts and Business Entertainment Policy and Procedures . You are responsible for understanding these policies and procedures and ensuring that your conduct with respect to the acceptance and provision of gifts and business entertainment is consistent with these procedures, including obtaining the appropriate approvals and reporting your gifts and business entertainment activity.

SERVICE AS DIRECTOR OR PUBLIC OFFICIAL

All employees are prohibited from serving on the board of directors of any publicly traded company or in an official capacity for any federal, state, or local government (or governmental agency or instrumentality) without prior approval from the Compliance Review Officer and the Schwab Control Group (jumpword: EDO).

 

 

13


COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE

Adherence to the Code is a basic condition of employment or service with CS&Co. and CSIM. CSIM Compliance monitors compliance with the Code, including reviewing Access Persons personal securities transactions and holdings reports, and reviews violations of the Code to determine what action or sanctions are appropriate. You are required to report any violations of the Code promptly to your supervisor or the CCO. Reports of all violations must be provided to the CCO. Violations may be reported to CSIM management as well as to the Fund Boards.

Violations of the Code are taken seriously and may result in disciplinary action up to and including termination. Violations of the Code may also adversely affect your career with Schwab with respect to such matters as compensation and advancement. Since many provisions of the Code also reflect provisions of the US securities laws, you should be aware that violations could also lead to enforcement action resulting in suspension or expulsion from the securities business, fines and penalties, and imprisonment. Questions regarding interpretation of the Code or questions related to specific situations should be directed to your Supervisor or CSIM Compliance.

 

 

14


ADMINISTRATION, RECORDKEEPING AND REPORTING

CSIM Compliance is responsible for the administration of this Code. This includes identifying all Access Persons and notifying them of this classification and their obligations under this Code. CSIM Compliance will also maintain procedures for periodic reviews of Access Persons’ personal securities transactions. Such reviews are undertaken with regard to both the prohibitions and reporting requirements contained in the Code.

All records associated with this Code that are required to be retained by Federal Securities Laws will be maintained by CSIM Compliance in an easily accessible place for at least five years. In addition, any record of any decision, and the reasons supporting the decision, to approve a hardship exemption or the acquisition by Access Persons of securities acquired in a Private Placement, will be maintained by CSIM Compliance for at least five years after the end of the fiscal year in which the approval is granted.

At least annually, the president of each Trust, the President of CSIM and an executive of Schwab as principal underwriter to the Schwab Funds (or their designees) will provide each Trust’s Board of Trustees:

 

   

a written report of any issues arising under this Code, including any material violations and any sanctions imposed in response to these violations and

 

   

a certification that each has adopted procedures reasonably necessary to prevent its Access Persons from violating the provisions of this Code.

 

 

15


A PPENDIX A: D EFINITIONS

An Automatic Investment Plan is a program in which regular periodic purchases (or withdrawals) are made automatically in (or from) investment accounts in accordance with a predetermined schedule and allocation. An “Automatic Investment Plan” includes a dividend reinvestment plan.

Control has the same meaning as in Section (2)(a)(9) of the 1940 Act. Section 2(a)(9) provides that “control” means the power to exercise a controlling influence over the management or policies of a company, unless such power is solely the result of an official position with such company.

Ownership of more than 25% of a company’s outstanding voting securities is presumed to give the holder of such securities control over the company. The SEC may determine, however, that the facts and circumstances of a given situation that may counter this presumption.

Federal Securities Laws refers to the Securities Act of 1933, the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, Title V of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, any rules adopted by the Securities and Exchange Commission under any of these statutes, the Bank Secrecy Act as it applies to investment companies and investment advisers, and any rules adopted thereunder by the Commission or the Department of the Treasury.

A High Quality Short-Term Debt Instrument is any instrument having a maturity at issuance of less than 366 days and which is rated in one of the highest two rating categories by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization, or which is unrated but is of comparable quality.

An Initial Public Offering is an offering of securities registered under the 1933 Act, the issuer of which, immediately before the registration, was not subject to the reporting requirements of Sections 13 or 15(d) of the 1934 Act.

An Independent Trustee is any Trustee of a Trust who is not an interested person of such Trust as defined in section 2(a)(19) of the 1940 Act.

A Non-Volitional Transaction is one is which the Access Persons does not determine price or time of the transaction. Such transactions include:

 

   

acquisition of securities through stock dividends, automatic dividend reinvestment plans, stock splits, reverse stock splits, mergers, consolidations, spin-offs or other similar corporate reorganizations or distributions generally applicable to all holders of the same class of such securities; and

 

   

acquisition of securities through the exercise of rights issued by an issuer pro rata to all holders of a class of securities, to the extent the rights were acquired in the issue.

 

 

16


Transactions in a managed account or those made by an independent third party or adviser will not be considered non-volitional unless an Access Person requests and is granted an account level exemption.

A Private Placement is an offering that is exempt from registration under the 1933 Act pursuant to Section 4(2) or Section 4(6) or pursuant to Rule 504, Rule 505 or Rule 506 adopted thereunder.

A Stock Option Program allows an employee to buy a set number of shares of a company’s stock at a future date at a set price.

 

 

17

Exhibit (p)(3)

LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

Mondrian Investment Partners

Code of Ethics

January 2012


LOGO

 

    

CODE
OF
ETHICS

CONTENTS: INTRODUCTION

  

3

SECTION I Summary of Restrictions and Requirements

  

4

SECTION II Mondrian Investment Partners Employee Code of Ethics

  

7

SECTION III Exemptions

  

20

SECTION IV Insider Trading Policies and Procedures

  

22

SECTION V Rumours Policy

  

29

Date

  

Version

September 27, 2004

  

Initial Code of Ethics

February 01, 2005

  

First Amendments to Code of Ethics

September 01, 2005

  

Second Amendment to Code of Ethics

January 01, 2007

  

Third Amendment to Code of Ethics

January 31, 2012

  

Fourth Amendment to Code of Ethics

2012 Code of Ethics

2


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

INTRODUCTION

This Code of Ethics “Code” covers all employees of Mondrian Investment Partners Limited and Mondrian Investment Partners

(U.S.), Inc. (collectively “Mondrian”). The Code includes standards of business conduct that are expected of Mondrian employees, and that reflect Mondrian’s fiduciary duties. The Code requires compliance with applicable UK regulations and U.S. federal securities laws, and incorporates procedures to implement such compliance. The responsibility for maintenance and enforcement of the Code lies substantially with the Chief Compliance Officer. Any violations of the Code must be reported promptly to the Chief Compliance Officer.

2012 Code of Ethics

3


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

SECTION I

SUMMARY OF

RESTRICTIONS

AND

REQUIREMENTS

4


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

CODE OF ETHICS SUMMARY

ACTIVITY INVESTMENT PROFESSIONALS* ACCESS PERSONS* A. BLACKOUT PERIODS 1. Trading is prohibited until the third trading day following the execution of a Mondrian trade in that same Security. (see Section III for certain exemptions) X X

2. Trading by the named Portfolio Manager of a U.S. Registered Investment Company (“RIC”) is prohibited for seven calendar days before or after the execution of a trade in that same Security for that RIC. X

B. PRECLEARANCE 1. All transactions in Securities, including IPO’s, must be precleared (see Section III for certain exemptions). Preclearance requests should be submitted using the automated personal account dealing system PTA Connect. Staff will be notified of approved or denied transactions via email. Preclearance is generally only valid for twenty-four hours. Pre-clearance requests for IPO’s should be made to Compliance Team by e-mail (they are not handled through the PTA pre-clearance process). X X

C. TRANSACTIONS 1. No more than twenty (20) Security transactions are permitted per calendar month. This limit is applicable in aggregate to all Security transactions in which the covered person has a beneficial interest. X X

D. INITIAL PUBLIC OFFERING 1. Purchasing any initial public offering without PRIOR written consent from the Compliance Department is prohibited. X X

E. PRIVATE PLACEMENT 1. Purchasing any private placement without PRIOR written consent from the Compliance Team is prohibited. X X

2. You must notify the Compliance Team if you hold a private placement of which the issuer is subject to investment consideration by Mondrian. X

F. BAN ON SHORT-TERM TRADING PROFITS 1. All positions must be held for a period of 60 days, in aggregate, before they can be closed at a profit. Any short term trading profits are subject to disgorgement procedures (see Section III for certain exemptions). X X

G. GIFTS & ENTERTAINMENT; CHARITABLE AND POLITICAL GIVING; PLACEMENT AGENTS; BRIBERY 1. Prior to accepting gifts or an offer of entertainment valued in excess of £10 ($15), where practical, you must obtain approval from the Chief Compliance Officer. Where this is not practical the receipt of a gift or offer of entertainment must be reported to the Chief Compliance Officer forthwith. X X

2. All gifts and entertainment provided, regardless of value must be disclosed. Prior to providing gifts or entertainment in excess of £200 ($300) you must obtain approval from the Chief Compliance Officer (where practical). X X

3. Staff are prohibited from using their personal charitable giving to influence decision makers in a way that could reasonably be seen to benefit Mondrian directly or indirectly. X X

4. Unless approved in advance by the Chief Compliance Officer, staff are prohibited from making any contribution to any political campaign or political organisation, in the United States. X X

5. Unless approved in advance by the Chief Compliance Officer, staff are prohibited from making any payment to any placement agent. X X

6. Staff are prohibited from offering or paying a bribe, requesting a bribe, or bribing a foreign public official. X X

H. SERVICE AS A DIRECTOR 1. You must receive PRIOR written approval from the Compliance Team before you may serve on the board of directors, board of trustees or similar governing or oversight body of any company (public or private), charity, endowment, foundation or similar organisation. X X

*Applies not only to the employee but, but also to members of the same household. Refer to the full Code for complete details 2012 Code of Ethics 5


LOGO

 

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. DISCLOSURE OF ALL PERSONAL HOLDINGS CODE OF ETHICS INVESTMENT ACCESS PROFESSIONALS * PERSONS

1. All personal holdings must be loaded onto PTA Connect within 10 days of employment and reported annually thereafter. A member of the Compliance team will initiate the process by creating an account on the system and providing training. Reminders for submission of annual holdings reports will be sent to all staff. X X

B. RECORDS OF SECURITIES TRANSACTIONS 1. Employees must direct their broker(s) to forward confirmations of personal transactions and monthly account statements to the Compliance Team. X X

2. Employees are required to complete a Personal Securities Transaction declaration within 10 days of each quarter end using PTA Connect. Reminders for submission of these declarations will be sent to all staff. X X

C. PERIODIC CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CODE OF ETHICS 1. Employees must certify that they have read and understand the Code of Ethics and have complied with all requirements of the Code. The certification will be completed on PTA Connect. The frequency of these certifications will be determined by the Compliance Team. X X

D. QUARTERLY GIFTS, ENTERTAINMENT, CHARITABLE AND POLITICAL GIVING; PLACEMENT AGENTS AND BRIBERY CERTIFICATION

1. Employees must certify that:

• they have reported all relevant gifts, entertainment and hospitality • they have not used personal charitable giving to influence a decision in a way that could reasonably be seen to benefit Mondrian, directly or indirectly X X • they have not made any contribution to any political campaign or political organisation in the United States • they have not made any payment to any placement agent • they have not offered or paid a bribe (in any jurisdiction), requested or received a bribe (in any jurisdiction), or bribed a foreign public official.

E. VIOLATIONS 1. Employees must report any violations of the Code promptly to the Chief Compliance Officer. X X

*Applies not only to the employee but, but also to members of the same household. Refer to the full Code for complete details 2012 Code of Ethics 6


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

SECTION II

CODE OF ETHICS

7


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

A. CREDO

It is the duty of all Mondrian employees, officers and directors to conduct themselves with integrity, and at all times to place the interests of clients first. In the interest of this credo, all personal securities transactions will be conducted consistent with the Code of Ethics and in such a manner as to avoid any actual or potential conflict of interest or any abuse of an individual’s position of trust and responsibility. The fundamental standard of this Code is that personnel should not take any inappropriate advantage of their positions.

Mondrian is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority in the UK and the Securities and Exchange Commission in the US. Both regulators set standards of ethical conduct which this Code is designed to adhere to. Furthermore, Rule 17j-1 under the US Investment Company Act of 1940 and Rule 204A-1 of the US Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Rules”) make it unlawful for certain persons, including any employee, officer or director of an investment adviser, in connection with the purchase or sale by such person of a security held or to be acquired by a client account:

(1) To employ any device, scheme or artifice to defraud;

(2) To make any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary in order to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances in which they are made, not misleading;

(3) To engage in any act, practice or course of business that operates or would operate as a fraud or deceit; or

(4) To engage in any manipulative practice.

The Rules also require investment adviser firms to adopt a written code of ethics containing provisions reasonably necessary to prevent certain persons from engaging in acts in violation of the above standard. Investment adviser firms should also use reasonable diligence and institute procedures reasonably necessary to prevent violations of that code. Employees must report any violations of the Code promptly to the Chief Compliance Officer.

This Code of Ethics is being adopted by Mondrian in compliance with the requirements of the Rules and to effect the purpose of the Credo set forth above.

2012 Code of Ethics

8


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

B. DEFINITIONS:

“Access Person”

means any Mondrian employee who has access to non-public information regarding clients’ securities transactions or who has access to non-public information regarding a client’s portfolio holdings. This definition includes all staff who are not Investment Professionals e.g. client services and administrative staff. Those persons deemed to be Access Persons will be notified of this designation.

“Beneficial ownership”

shall be as defined in Section 16 of the US Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the rules and regulations thereunder. Generally speaking, a person who, directly or indirectly, through any contract, arrangement, understanding, relationship or otherwise, has or shares a direct or indirect pecuniary interest in a Security, is a “beneficial owner” of the Security. For example, a person is normally regarded as the beneficial owner of Securities held by members of his or her immediate family sharing the same household. Additionally, ownership of a Derivative constitutes beneficial ownership of the underlying Security itself.

“Broker”

means any entity with which an employee can establish a trading arrangement to facilitate the execution of a Security transaction including banks, dealers, internet trading facilities and spread betting service providers.

Chief Compliance Officer”

means the person named as Chief Compliance Officer of Mondrian Investment Partners Limited.

“Control”

shall mean investment discretion in whole or in part of an account regardless of beneficial ownership, such as an account for which a person has power of attorney or authority to effect transactions.

“De minimis transaction”

shall mean a transaction in an investment that is too small from a Conflict of Interest perspective to materially impact Mondrian Clients. A de minimis transaction is one where the trade has a nominal value of less than £1000/$1500 (NB: this does not cover derivative exposure)

“Derivative”

shall include futures, options, contracts for differences, spread betting or any other device that provides exposure to profits or losses from any financial instrument or index (NB: this is intended to cover a wide range of financial exposures e.g. it includes interest rates and currencies).

“Entertainment”

Attendance at an event (widely defined) given to/by a Mondrian staff member (whether or not including spouse or other guest) by/to a business related contact (whether or not including spouse or other guest) where the host would attend the event with the guest(s). Examples might include:

• Meals or other forms of food & drink provided by a business contact (see definition of Meals below)

• After a conference the host may invite a Mondrian staff member to attend a sports even or show

• Mondrian client services staff entertain a group of client representatives and their spouses to an evening meal and the theatre

NB: The following would not be classified as Entertainment 1) receipt of food and drink during a business meeting provided that the receipt of such is incidental to the purpose of the meeting or 2) meals as part of a business trip where the recipient and giver pay for a relatively equal share of such costs over the period of the trip.

“Exchange Traded Fund (“ETF”)” means a security that tracks an index, a commodity or a basket of assets like an index fund, but trades like a stock on an exchange.

ETF’s are considered to be a Security for the purposes of this Code.

2012 Code of Ethics

9


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

“G7”

The G7 is a group of seven industrialised nations. The group includes Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States of America.

“Gift”

An item of value given to/by a Mondrian staff member (whether or not including spouse or other guest) by/to a business related contact (whether or not including spouse or other guest). Examples might include:

• A company that Mondrian is researching gives a product sample to an Investment Professional for their personal use which they keep

• A broker gives a Trader a case of wine at Christmas

• A Mondrian Client Services Officer gives a client Trustee or a consultant tickets to a sporting event

“High Quality Short-Term Debt Instruments”

shall mean any instrument that has a maturity at issuance of less than 366 days and that is rated in one of the two highest rating categories by an internationally recognised statistical rating organisation.

“Investment Professional”

means any employee who, in connection with his/her regular functions or duties, makes or participates in, the making of investment decisions affecting a client. Investment Professional includes portfolio managers, research analysts and anyone that assists them directly in the execution of their duties e.g. implementation staff and assistant portfolio managers. Secretarial support staff working within the investment teams are not included in this definition.

“Managed Accounts”

means an account that is professionally managed by a third party. Managed Accounts require pre-approval through the Compliance Team prior to starting up the account. The Compliance Team will consider the facts and circumstances of the account, including the functions and duties of the employees, when approving or denying such accounts. Trading in Managed Accounts is exempt from preclearance requirements. However, all trades still require reporting and duplicate statements and confirmations must be sent to the Compliance Team. Preclearance is only exempt for trades initiated by the third party. All trades initiated by the employee require preclearance.

“Meals”

means:

• evening restaurant meals offered by brokers and other service providers

• Invitations of hospitality at the homes of brokers and other service providers

“Mondrian”

means Mondrian Investment Partners Limited and Mondrian Investment Partners (U.S.), Inc.

“Physical Commodity”

means the actual commodity that is delivered to a futures contract buyer when the expiration of the commodity contract occurs. Metals such as copper, gold, and silver and agricultural products such as cattle, wheat, and soybeans are examples of physical commodities.

“PTA Connect”

means the web-based system used by Mondrian to manage the approval, reporting and record keeping processes associated with personal account trading and Gifts and Entertainment.

2012 Code of Ethics

10


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

“Security”

(Important Note: If you are uncertain as to whether a holding or position falls within the definition of a Security you should assume it is included unless advised otherwise by the Compliance Team.)

shall have the meaning as set forth in Section 2(a)(36) of the US Investment Company Act of 1940 which provides a very broad ranging definition of a security. In addition, the purchase, sale or exercise of a Derivative shall constitute the purchase or sale of the underlying Security or exposure.

The following instruments are excluded:

• securities issued or guaranteed by Supranationals and their agencies:

• securities issued by a G7 government, and in the case of the government of the United States or any of its federal agencies, bankers’ acceptances, bank certificates of deposit, commercial paper, High Quality Short-term Debt Instruments including repurchase agreements

• securities issued by governmental agencies or government guaranteed entities of a G7 country

• unit investment trusts (“UIT”) (but see below)

• shares of open-end registered investment companies (but see below)

• municipal fund securities

• US 529 Plans

To help clarify the above exclusions the following instruments are not excluded (and therefore are subject to the restrictions of this Code)

• mutual funds and unit investment trusts of which Mondrian is the adviser and/or sub-adviser, see Appendix A for a list of these Funds

• UK registered Investment Trusts

• Exchange Traded Funds (“ETF”)

• UIT exchange traded funds

“Security being ‘considered for purchase or sale’ or ‘being purchased or sold’”

means when a recommendation to purchase or sell the Security has been made and communicated to the Trading Desk and with respect to the person making the recommendation, when such person seriously considers making, or when such person knows or should know that another person is seriously considering making, such a recommendation.

2012 Code of Ethics

11


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

C. PROHIBITED ACTIVITIES

I. The following restrictions apply to all Access Persons and Investment Professionals.

(a) No Access Person or Investment Professional shall engage in any act, practice or course of conduct, which would violate the provisions of the Rules set forth above.

(b) No Access Person or Investment Professional shall purchase or sell, directly or indirectly, any Security which to his/her knowledge is being actively considered for purchase or sale by Mondrian; except that this prohibition shall not apply to:

(1) purchases or sales that are non-volitional on the part of either the person or the account;

(2) purchases which are part of an automatic dividend reinvestment plan;

(3) purchases effected upon the exercise of rights issued by an issuer pro rata to all holders of a class of its Securities, to the extent such rights were acquired from such issuer, and sales of such rights so acquired;

(4) other purchases and sales specifically approved by the Chief Executive Officer, with the advice of the General Counsel and/or the Chief Compliance Officer, and deemed appropriate because of unusual or unforeseen circumstances. A list of any securities excepted will be maintained by the Compliance Team; and

(5) purchases or sales made by a third party in a Managed Account, provided that such purchases or sales do not reflect a pattern of conflict.

(c) No Access Person or Investment Professional may execute a buy or sell order for an account in which he or she has beneficial ownership or control until the third trading day following the execution of a Mondrian buy or sell order in that same Security.

(d) Despite any fault or impropriety, any Access Person or Investment Professional who executes a buy or sell for an account in which he/she has beneficial ownership or control either (i) before the third trading day following the execution of a Mondrian order in the same Security, or (ii) when there are pending orders for a Mondrian transaction as reflected on the open order blotter, shall forfeit any profits made (in the event of purchases) or loss avoided (in the event of sales), whether realised or unrealised, in the period from the date of the personal transaction to the end of the proscribed trading period. Payment of the amount forfeited shall be made by cheque or in cash to a charity of Mondrian’s choice and the payment will be overseen by the Compliance Team.

(e) Except for Managed Accounts meeting the provisions of Section I(b)(5) above, each Access Person’s and each Investment Professional’s personal transactions or transactions for an account in which he/she has beneficial ownership or control must be precleared using the PTA Connect system. The request for preclearance must be submitted prior to entering any orders for personal transactions. Preclearance is generally only valid for 24 hours after the request is authorised and if the order is not executed within the 24 hour period, the preclearance request must be resubmitted. In certain circumstances, where the timing of the trade execution is outside of the control of the Access Person or Investment Professional, the Compliance Team may allow an extension to this period. Regardless of preclearance, all transactions remain subject to the provisions of (b), (c) and (d) above.

(f) Short term trading in Securities resulting in a profit is prohibited. All opening positions must be held for a period of 60 days, in the aggregate, before they can be closed at a profit (see Section III for certain exemptions). Any short term trading profits are subject to the disgorgement procedures outlined above and at the maximum level of profit obtained.

The closing of positions at a loss within 60 days is not prohibited.

(g) Access Persons and Investment Professionals are prohibited from purchasing any initial public offering without the PRIOR written consent of the Compliance Team. A separate approval form will need to be completed.

(h) No Access Person or Investment Professional shall purchase any private placement without express PRIOR written consent by the Compliance Team. All private placement holdings are subject to disclosure to the Compliance Team.

2012 Code of Ethics

12


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

(i) No Access Person or Investment Professional shall operate a brokerage or other trading account(s) with an individual or combined net loss in any Derivative position of more than £25,000 ($40,000). Brokerage or other trading accounts with an individual or combined net loss of more that £20,000 ($30,000) should be reported to the Compliance Team immediately. In relation to positions covered by assets held separately (i.e. not in the brokerage account which has a net loss position), the Chief Compliance Officer may permit an exemption from this requirement.

(j) No Access Person or Investment Professional shall participate in online discussions related to Securities (e.g. internet discussion boards or chat rooms) by posting or encouraging others to post. This prohibition includes all Securities whether or not held by Mondrian clients. Access Persons and Investment Professionals are not prohibited from passively reading such online discussions.

(k) Access Persons and Investment Professionals require PRIOR written approval from the Compliance Team before they may serve on the board of directors, board of trustees or similar governing or oversight body of any company (public or private), charity, endowment, foundation or similar organisation.

II. In addition to the requirements noted in Section I, the following additional restrictions apply to all Investment Professionals.

(a) Investment Professionals that hold a private placement must receive permission from the Compliance Team prior to any participation by such person in Mondrian’s consideration of an investment in the same issuer.

(b) No named Portfolio Manager of a U.S. Registered Investment Company (“RIC”) may execute a buy or sell order for an account for which he/she has beneficial ownership within seven calendar days before or after that RIC account, trades in that Security.

(c) Despite any fault or impropriety, any Investment Professional who executes a personal transaction within seven calendar days before or after a RIC account, for which they are a named Portfolio Manager, trades in that Security, shall forfeit any profits made (in the event of purchases) or loss avoided (in the event of sales), whether realised or unrealised, in the period from the date of the personal transaction to the end of the prescribed trading period. Payment of the amount forfeited shall be made by cheque or in cash to a charity of Mondrian’s choice and the payment will be overseen by the Compliance Team.

2012 Code of Ethics

13


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

D. GIFTS AND ENTERTAINMENT;

CHARITABLE AND POLITICAL GIVING;

PLACEMENT AGENTS; BRIBERY

I. The following restrictions apply to all Access Persons and Investment Professionals.

(a) Gift and Entertainment Receipt:

(i) Staff should not retain Gifts or accept offers of Entertainment valued at over £10 ($15) without obtaining the PRIOR consent of the Chief Compliance Officer.

(ii) Where it is not practical to obtain consent (e.g. a client presents a portfolio manager with a Gift during a meeting) it must be reported to the Chief Compliance Officer as soon as possible after receipt. The Chief Compliance Officer will determine whether or not the recipient can retain the Gift. Items of material value must be surrendered to the Chief Compliance Officer and they will be included in a Christmas Charity raffle.

(iii) Invitations to attend events (e.g. a broker Christmas party or a sports event) cannot be accepted without obtaining the PRIOR consent of the Chief Compliance Officer. Any applications for approval must be in writing and include a justification for attending the event and a valuation of the Entertainment event provided by the person offering the invite (please use the form on the Compliance & Risk page of the intranet)

(iv) Please see additional guidance in Section H below and the guidance notes in the Compliance & Risk page of the intranet for further details.

(b) Gift and Entertainment Giving:

(i) All Gifts and Entertainment to clients, consultants or other business related contacts must be reported (regardless of whether the staff member seeks reimbursement from Mondrian) using the relevant expense reimbursement forms/system.

(ii) Staff may not give Gifts or Entertainment valued in excess of £200 ($300) to clients, consultants or other business related contacts without the prior consent of the Chief Compliance Officer or Chief Executive Officer (where practical).

(iii) Mondrian may from time to time impose limits on the value of gifts or entertainment that individuals can give and that Mondrian staff, in total, can give to a particular party over a set period of time. These will be separately notified to staff as and when necessary.

(c) Charitable Giving.

Staff are prohibited from using their personal charitable giving to influence decision makers in a way that could reasonably be seen to benefit Mondrian directly or indirectly (e.g. a Client Services Officer making a large donation to a charity supported by a consultant who may be influential in Mondrian’s appointment or retention by a client would not be permitted). Note that the restrictions with respect to political giving supersede the restrictions with respect to charitable giving (e.g. a nominal gift to a charity at the suggestion of a person running for state political office in the United States would not be permitted). This prohibition also applies to staff member’s spouse or life partner and immediate family members.

2012 Code of Ethics

14


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

(d) Political Giving

Staff are prohibited from using their personal political giving to influence decision makers in a way that could reasonably be seen to benefit Mondrian directly or indirectly (e.g. a Client Services Officer making a political contribution to a candidate for state elected office who may be influential in Mondrian’s appointment or retention by a client would not be permitted). Laws have been implemented at the US federal, state and local level, which are not always consistent and a violation can result in termination of Mondrian by the client. For example, some jurisdictions have restrictions on the amount that a business may contribute and still be eligible to be a vendor to that jurisdiction. Since donations from staff members can be attributable to Mondrian’s limit, it is important that there be transparency in personal political giving. In addition, a contribution to the campaign of a person that holds state level office but is running for federal level office may violate a state prohibition on contributions.

Specifically, unless approved in advance by the Chief Compliance Officer, staff are prohibited from making any contribution to any political campaign or political organisation, in the United States, except as set out below. This prohibition also applies to staff member’s spouse or life partner and immediate family members. Contributions include both directly or indirectly, including for example cash, volunteering, in-kind contribution, soliciting, providing a loan, serving as an intermediary, aggregating contributions or contributing to a political action committee. Covered political campaigns include for example, governor, controller, treasurer and trustee of a pension fund.

If approved in advance by the Chief Compliance Officer, staff members are generally permitted to make contributions to a political campaign for an elected office that the staff member may vote for and with respect to United States national or federal level political activities (i.e. House of Representatives, Senate, President, Democratic National Committee and Republican National Committee) Information regarding personal political giving will be kept confidential by Mondrian and only revealed when required by applicable law, rule or policy.

(e) Placement Agents and Pay-to-Play

Unless approved in advance by the Chief Compliance Officer, staff are prohibited from, or causing Mondrian to, directly or indirectly, engage hire, retain, pay, engage or otherwise compensate any third party to act as a placement agent, solicitor, finder, marketer, consultant or broker or other intermediary for the purpose, explicitly or implicitly, of selling or facilitating the sale of any Mondrian service (such as investment advisory services) or security (such as an interest in a Mondrian limited partnership). This prohibition also applies to staff member’s spouse or life partner and immediate family members.

(f) UK Bribery Act

The UK Bribery Act 2010 defines four criminal offences for which penalties include imprisonment and fines:

(i). offering or paying a bribe;

(ii). requesting or receiving a bribe;

(iii). bribing a foreign public official;

(iv). a corporate offence of failing to prevent bribery being undertaken on the corporation’s behalf.

Any suspicions of bribery being undertaken or received should always be reported immediately to the Chief Compliance Officer. Any failure to comply with this requirement may constitute a serious disciplinary offence and could result in dismissal.

For clarification, Mondrian prohibits all forms of bribery, regardless of whether of a “foreign public official” or any other individual or organisation.

2012 Code of Ethics

15


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

E. PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

The following restrictions apply to all Access Persons and Investment Professionals.

Staff members are required to disclose to the Chief Compliance Officer if, to their knowledge, they or their family members (including spouse or life partner and immediate family members) currently or previously have been associated with any client, prospective client, vendor, prospective vendor, trading partner, governmental agency, regulator or other party which may create the appearance of a conflict of interest. Examples where disclosure would be required include:

• Staff member’s spouse holds elective office

• Staff member’s brother is a lobbyist

• Staff member’s adult child is a broker

• Staff member’s sister is employed by a client

• Staff member was previously employed by a governmental body

F. REQUIRED REPORTS

I. The following reports are required to be made by all Access Persons and Investment Professionals.

(a) Disclose brokerage or other trading relationships at employment and at the time of opening any new account. All brokerage accounts should be set-up on PTA Connect by the staff member.

(b) Direct their brokers to supply to the Compliance Team, on a timely basis, duplicate copies of all confirmations and statements for all brokerage or other trading accounts and Managed Accounts. (In the U.K., all contract notes and periodic statements). In the case of a brokerage relationship where a margin account is available (NB: this includes a spread betting account), the broker must supply the Compliance Team with a monthly statement.

(c) Each quarter, no later than the tenth day after the end of the calendar quarter, complete a Personal Security Transaction declaration using PTA Connect.

(d) All personal holdings must be loaded onto PTA Connect no later than 10 days following commencement of employment. A member of the Compliance team will provide instructions on system usage.

(e) Provide Annual Holdings reports containing information regarding all personal Securities holdings. This report must be current as of a date no more than 30 days before the report is submitted. The report should be submitted using PTA

Connect.

(f) Quarterly Gift and Entertainment, Charitable, Political and Other Giving; Placement Agent and Bribery certifications must be submitted by the end of the month following each calendar quarter end. Certifications are to be submitted using PTA Connect.

(g) Immediately notify the Compliance Team upon obtaining a 1% interest in a company which Mondrian holds for clients.

2012 Code of Ethics

16


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

G. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

I. The following administrative procedures shall apply.

(a) The Compliance Team will identify all Access Persons and Investment Professionals and will notify them of this classification and their obligations under this Code. The Compliance Team will also maintain procedures regarding the review of all reports required to be made under the Rules.

(b) The Compliance Team shall keep records of Access Persons’ and Investment Professionals’ holdings and transaction reports, the names of all Access Persons and Investment Professionals for the past five years, and records of decisions approving Access Persons’ and Investment Professionals’ acquisitions of IPO’s and private placements. The Compliance Team shall maintain copies of the Code of Ethics, records of Code violations and action taken as a result of Code violations, and copies of employees’ acknowledgements of receipt of the Code. Such records shall be kept by the Compliance Team for five years in an easily accessible place and for the first two years in Mondrian’s office premises.

(c) The Compliance Team shall perform periodic reviews of notifications and reports required to be made under the Rules, as part of its annual Compliance Monitoring Programme.

(d) The Compliance Team shall report to the Chief Compliance Officer any apparent violations of the prohibitions or reporting requirements contained in this Code of Ethics. The Chief Compliance Officer will review the reports made and determine whether or not the Code of Ethics has been violated and shall determine what sanctions, if any, should be imposed in addition to any that may already have been imposed. Breaches of this Code of Ethics are considered to be a serious matter and can lead to disciplinary action, up to and including, dismissal.

(e) Failure to pre-clear a Gift or Entertainment event may result in the recipient being required to refund the provider the full value of the Gift or Entertainment. This is very likely if the Gift or Entertainment would not have been approved if preclearance had been sought.

(f) On a quarterly basis, a summary report of material violations of the Code and the sanctions imposed will be made to the Compliance Committee (a committee of the Board of Directors of Mondrian Investment Partners Limited). In reviewing this report, the Compliance Committee will consider whether the appropriate sanctions were imposed. When the Compliance Team finds that a transaction otherwise reportable above could not reasonably be found to have resulted in a fraud, deceit or manipulative practice in violation of the Rules, it may, in its discretion, lodge a written memorandum of such finding in lieu of reporting the transaction.

2012 Code of Ethics

17


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

H. GENERAL GUIDANCE

I. The following general guidance shall apply.

(a) The value of Gifts and Entertainment should be determined using the following guidelines:

• The full value of any entertainment package should be disclosed i.e. if an event includes food and beverages, they must be taken into account. Often the package will be provided by a corporate hospitality provider and there will be a total cost price available from the provider.

• Where the value of a Gift or Entertainment is not easily determined, the provider of the Gift or Entertainment will be asked to confirm the cost in writing.

• If no independent value is available, a best estimate which errs on the high side should be given. The market value of a gift should be taken into account in making that determination.

• The value of any gift received by or given to a spouse or other guest must also be reported (for example if a broker provides an entertainment package and the Mondrian staff members brings their spouse, the value provided to the spouse must also be reported).

(b) Stop loss arrangements may be put in place to limit exposure to loss in fast moving markets provided that:

• details of the stop loss limit are noted in the comments section of the PTA Connect preclearance request

• the stop loss limit is not adjusted during the life of the derivative position without a new preclearance being sought and approved

2012 Code of Ethics

18


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

APPENDIX A – LIST OF MUTUAL FUNDS SUBJECT TO THE CODE OF ETHICS

(as at January 2012)

Please refer to the separate link on the intranet, for the most up-to-date listing of Appendix A

• BBH International Equity Fund

• Columbia Multi-Advisor International Value Fund

• Delaware Pooled Trust – The Emerging Markets Portfolio

• Delaware Pooled Trust – The Global Fixed Income Portfolio

• Delaware Pooled Trust – The International Equity Portfolio

• Delaware Pooled Trust – The Labor Select International Equity Portfolio

• Guidestone Funds Trust – The International Equity Fund

• Laudus International MarketMasters Fund

• Laudus Mondrian – Family of Funds

• Lincoln Variable Insurance Products Trust – Global Income Fund

• Lincoln Variable Insurance Products Trust – International Fund

• Mondrian Investment Group—Range of Limited Partnerships

• Old Westbury Funds, Inc – Old Westbury Global Small and Mid Cap Fund

• Optimum Fund Trust—Optimum International Fund

• PACE Select Advisors Trust – PACE International Emerging Markets Equity Investments

• PACE Select Advisors Trust – PACE International Equity Investments

• RiverSource Variable Portfolio—Mondrian International Small Cap Fund

• Russell Investment Company – International Fund

• Russell Investments Canada – Overseas Equity Fund

• Russell Investments Canada – Sovereign Overseas Equity Pool

• Threadneedle (Lux) – Focused Emerging Markets Equity

• TIFF Investment Program, Inc—TIFF Multi-Asset Fund

• Vantagepoint International Fund

An up to date version of this list is maintained on the Legal and Compliance page of the Mondrian Intranet.

2012 Code of Ethics

19


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

SECTION III

EXEMPTION LIST

20


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

A. Exemptions To Code Rules

The following requirements of this Code do not apply to investments in the Exempted Securities described in B below:

1. Trade Preclearance

2. The three day blackout period rule

3. The 60-day minimum hold rule

B. Exempted Securities

The following instruments are defined as Exempted Securities when used to track or provide exposure to the investments and exposures listed in C below:

• Derivatives as defined in Section II B.

“Derivative” shall include futures, options, contracts for differences, spread betting or any other device that provides exposure to profits or losses from any financial instrument or index (NB: this is intended to cover a wide range of financial exposures e.g. it includes interest rates and currencies).

C. Exempted Investments And Exposures

The following forms of investment and obtaining exposure to underlying assets are exempted from the requirements of the Code listed in A above:

1. Exempted Securities which track or provide exposure to the following indices:

• MSCI EAFE

• MSCI Emerging Markets

• Dow Jones Industrial Average

• S&P 500 Index

• S&P 100 Index

• NASDAQ 100 Index

• Russell 2000 Index

• EUROTOP 100 Index

• Financial Times Stock Exchange (FT-SE) 100 Index

2. Exempted Security positions that pair any of the following currencies:

• Sterling

• US Dollar

• Euro

• Japanese Yen

3. Exempted Security positions on interest rates.

4. Exempted Security positions which track indices or provide exposure to bonds issued by G7 governments.

5. Exempted Securities which track a physical commodity index or provide exposure to physical commodities e.g. foods, grains, metals & oil

D. De Minimis Transaction Exemption

De minimis transaction (as defined in section II) in any security can be exempted from the Code requirements listed in A above where specifically agreed in advance with the Chief Compliance Officer.

Please remember that:

• All other requirements of the Code of Ethics may still apply including the need to report transactions in these instruments and the maximum loss restriction.

•Staff are responsible for ensuring that their PTA Connect accounts reflect all holdings in Securities covered by this Code i.e. you need to update your account to show transactions in the exempted securities

2012 Code of Ethics

21


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

SECTION IV

INSIDER TRADING

POLICIES AND PROCEDURES

22


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

A. INTRODUCTION

Mondrian Investment Partners Limited and Mondrian Investment Partners (U.S.), Inc. (collectively “Mondrian”) and you, as a Mondrian employee, are regulated by certain laws governing insider trading. To protect both you and Mondrian from legal liability, Mondrian has prepared this Policy Statement on Insider Trading and Securities Fraud, which establishes specific standards that will facilitate your compliance with applicable legal requirements. The Policy Statement describes limitations, restrictions and procedures for transactions in securities and other instruments by Mondrian employees for themselves or for accounts over which they may have discretion or influence.

All employees are expected to be familiar with and to abide by this Policy Statement. From time to time, you may be asked to certify that you understand and have complied with this Policy Statement. Supervisory officers should periodically reinforce the importance of this Policy Statement to employees under their supervision and point out provisions of particular relevance.

There may be limited circumstances that warrant a waiver to certain rules of this Policy Statement. Requests for any such waivers must be fully documented and approved in advance by the Chief Executive Officer with the advice of the General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer. All waivers and violations of this Policy Statement must be reported promptly to the Insider Trading Committee.

If you have any questions about the Policy Statement, ask your supervisor or consult with the Compliance Team. If you suspect that there has been a violation of this Policy Statement, you should contact the Compliance Team. All such communications will be handled in a confidential manner.

B. DEFINITIONS

Terms used in this Policy Statement are defined as follows:

Material Information:

Information is material if there is a substantial likelihood that a reasonable investor would consider it important in deciding whether to buy, sell, or hold securities. Obviously, information that would affect the market price of a security would be material. A few examples of information that might be considered material:

• dividend increases or decreases;

• extraordinary borrowings or liquidity problems;

• a proposal or agreement for merger, acquisition, or divestiture;

• pending discoveries or developments such as new products or patents;

• a proposal to redeem securities;

• developments regarding a company’s senior management;

• information about major contracts or orders.

The above list is not intended to be exhaustive. All relevant circumstances must be considered in making a determination. If in doubt, you should treat the information as material and consult with Legal or Compliance.

Non-public information:

Information about a company is non-public if it is not generally available to the investing public. Information received under circumstances indicating that it is not yet in general circulation and may be attributable, directly or indirectly, to the company or its insiders may be deemed non-public information. Information appearing in widely accessible sources—such as newspapers and the Dow Jones News Wire—becomes public relatively soon after publication but you should not assume that the information is immediately in the public domain; information appearing in less accessible sources—such as regulatory filings or analysts’ reports—may take 48 hours or more before it is deemed public. If you have any doubt about whether information meets the legal requirements for being public, consult with Legal or Compliance before taking any action.

2012 Code of Ethics

23


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

Securities Fraud:

Securities fraud can occur in various ways and generally includes any act or practice which employs material non-public information to defraud another. For instance, engaging in personal transactions in securities with knowledge that they are being purchased or sold by a Mondrian Fund or managed separate account where an advantage might be gained as a result of these transactions is prohibited. This type of information is both confidential and proprietary and its use for personal gain through personal securities transactions is a violation of U.K. and U.S. federal securities laws.

Insider:

The concept of “insider” is broad. It includes officers, directors and employees of the company, which issued the securities in question. In addition, a person can be a “temporary insider” if he or she enters into a special confidential relationship in the conduct of a company’s affairs and, in that capacity, is given access to information which is intended solely for the company’s purposes. A temporary insider can include, among others, a company’s attorneys, accountants, consultants, bank lending officers, and the employees of such organisations. In addition, Mondrian may become a temporary insider of a company it advises or for which it performs other services. The U.S. Supreme Court has held that a company must expect the outsider to keep the disclosed non-public information confidential and the relationship must at least imply such a duty before the outsider will be considered an insider.

Insider Trading:

Although not specifically defined in the federal securities laws, the term insider trading is generally used to refer to the use of material non-public information to trade in securities (in certain instances, whether or not one is an “insider”) or the communication of material non-public information to others. While the law concerning insider trading is not static, it is generally understood that the law prohibits:

a. Trading by an insider while in possession of material non-public information, or

b. Trading by a non-insider while in possession of material non-public information, where the information either was disclosed to the non-insider in violation of an insider’s duty to keep it confidential or was misappropriated, or

c. Communicating material non-public inside information to others for personal profit or for the profit of another person.

2012 Code of Ethics

24


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

C. POLICY STATEMENT AND PENALTIES

Policy Statement

No officer, director or employee of Mondrian shall trade securities, either personally or on behalf of others, including client accounts managed by Mondrian, while in the possession of material non-public information directly or indirectly acquired:

• from sources within the corporation whose securities are involved;

• in violation of law or breach of duty to such corporation; or

• otherwise in connection with any scheme, practice or device to commit a fraud involving the purchase or sale of securities.

In addition, no officer, director, or employee of Mondrian shall communicate such material non-public information to others.

This Policy Statement applies to every officer, director and employee and extends to activities within and outside their duties at Mondrian.

Every officer, director and employee must read and retain this Policy Statement. Any questions regarding this Policy Statement or the procedures described herein should be referred to Legal or Compliance.

This Policy Statement is designed to prevent the misuse of material non-public information in violation of the UK laws, FSA rules, US federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, including so-called “insider trading” and other unlawful and fraudulent practices. This Policy Statement is in addition to the policies under Mondrian’s Code of Ethics.

Penalties for Insider Trading and Securities Fraud

Penalties for violating the relevant UK and US federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder by trading on or communicating material non-public information are severe, both for individuals involved in such unlawful conduct and for their employers. A person can be subject to some or all of the penalties below even if he or she does not personally benefit from the violation. Penalties may include:

• civil injunction

• significant damages

• disgorgement of profit made or loss avoided

• jail sentences

• unlimited fines for the person who committed the violation whether or not the person actually benefited, and

• unlimited fines for the employer or other controlling person.

Any violation of this Policy Statement can be expected to result in serious sanctions by Mondrian including dismissal of the person involved. In addition, all violations of criminal laws applicable to Mondrian are reported to the appropriate authorities for possible prosecution.

2012 Code of Ethics

25


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

D. PROCEDURES

The following procedures have been established to aid the officers, directors and employees of Mondrian in avoiding insider trading, and to aid Mondrian in preventing, detecting and imposing sanctions with respect to insider trading. Every officer, director and employee of Mondrian must follow these procedures or risk serious sanctions, including dismissal by Mondrian and the imposition of substantial personal liability and criminal penalties.

1. Identifying Prohibited Transactions

Before trading for yourself or others, including investment companies or private accounts managed or advised by Mondrian, in the securities of a company about which you may have what may be confidential or potential inside information, ask yourself the following questions:

a. Is the information “inside” information? Has the information been acquired, directly or indirectly (i) from sources within the corporation whose securities are involved or (ii) in violation of the law or the breach of any duty to such corporation?

b. Even if the information is not “inside” information, is it confidential and would its use in the transaction be a violation of trust, a breach of a duty owed to a third party, or operate as a fraud?

c. Is the information material? Is this information that an investor would consider important in making his or her investment decision? Is this information that would materially effect the market price of the securities if generally disclosed?

d. Is the information non-public? To whom has this information been provided? Has the information been effectively communicated to the marketplace by being published in Reuters, The Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal or other publications of general circulation?

If after consideration of the above, you are not certain about whether the information is “inside” information, is material, and/or is non-public, or if you have questions as to whether the proposed transaction may involve the use of material non-public information (whether or not “insider” information) in a fashion which may operate as a fraud, unfairly disadvantage another or otherwise violate the securities laws, you should take the following steps:

a. Bring the matter immediately to the attention of the Chief Compliance Officer and do not communicate the information to anyone else inside or outside Mondrian other than the Chief Compliance Officer (or, in his absence, his alternate).

b. Do not purchase or sell the securities on behalf of yourself or others, including client accounts managed by Mondrian.

The Chief Compliance Officer will promptly advise you as to what, if anything, you need to do. If deemed necessary, the Chief Compliance Officer may refer the matter to the Insider Trading Committee. After the Insider Trading Committee has reviewed the issue, you may be given further instructions. The members of the Committee are as follows:

Chief Compliance Officer

Chief Operating Officer

Chief Investment Officer (or equivalent head of the relevant product area)

Investment Director (independent of the relevant product area)

General Counsel

Committee decisions require approval by at least three of the above officers with at least one member from Legal/Compliance and one senior member from the Investment team.

2012 Code of Ethics

26


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

2. Restricting Access to Material Non-Public Information

Material, non-public information in your possession that you identify as “inside” or confidential information may not be communicated to anyone, including persons within Mondrian except the Chief Compliance Officer as described above and except that confidential information as to proposed transactions in the portfolios of the funds or advised accounts and proprietary research information properly acquired by Mondrian, its officers, directors and employees, may be communicated within Mondrian as required for the proper conduct of its business. In addition, care should be taken so that such information is secure. For example, files containing material non-public “inside” or confidential information should be sealed and access to computer files containing such information should be restricted.

3. Resolving Issues Concerning Insider Trading

If, after consideration of the items set forth above, doubt remains as to whether information is “inside” information, confidential, material or non-public, or if there is any unresolved question as to the applicability or interpretation of the foregoing procedures, or as to the propriety of any action, it must be discussed with the Chief Compliance Officer before trading or communicating the information to anyone.

4. Restricted List

In order to facilitate compliance with this Policy Statement, Mondrian maintains a Restricted List. The Restricted List identifies companies whose securities have tight restrictions on their trading and recommendation to others by Mondrian employees. This list is also used to monitor trading by Mondrian employees when Mondrian is in possession of certain information.

The Restricted List contains the names of companies whose securities are restricted from trading by ALL Mondrian accounts and/or employees. These securities cannot be purchased, sold, or recommended by any employee and are usually on the list for a specified time period.

Although the reasons for including a company on the Restricted List may vary, a company with publicly traded securities should be considered for inclusion in situations that present a conflict of interest (real or perceived) or where certain personnel are expected to have non-public information about a company. Examples of situations when a company should be put on the Restricted List are:

• A company is permanently on the Restricted List when an Investment Professional is a member of the company’s board.

• Companies about which Mondrian possesses material non-public inside information.

The Compliance Team is responsible for maintaining the Restricted List

Employees should notify the Chief Compliance Officer of all companies that should be added to the list. If you are not sure about whether a situation warrants a company being put on the list, please consult with the Chief Compliance Officer.

The Compliance Team will check preclearance requests for issuers on the Restricted List.

2012 Code of Ethics

27


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

E. SUPERVISORY PROCEDURES, PREVENTION AND DETECTION

Supervisory Procedures

The role of Legal and Compliance is critical to the implementation and maintenance of Mondrian’s policies and procedures against insider and other fraudulent trading practices. Supervisory Procedures can be divided into two classifications –prevention and detection.

Prevention of Improper Trading

Prevention of improper trading in securities requires that Mondrian establish, maintain and enforce appropriate policies, and that all personnel be aware of and understand these policies, the seriousness with which they are viewed and enforced and the potential sanctions for their violation.

To that end, the Chief Compliance Officer, or where necessary, the Insider Trading Committee, will:

a. familiarise officers, directors and employees with Mondrian’s policies and procedures.

b. answer questions regarding Mondrian’s policy and procedures described in this Policy Statement.

c. resolve issues as to whether information received “inside” or in confidence is material and/or non-public.

d. review on a regular basis and update as necessary Mondrian’s policy and procedures.

e. when it has been determined that an officer, director or employee of Mondrian has material non-public “inside” or confidential information,

(1) implement measures to prevent dissemination or misuse of such information, and

(2) if necessary, restrict officers, directors and employees from trading the securities.

Detection of Improper Trading

To prevent the misuse in violation of the relevant UK and US federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder, of material non-public information by Mondrian or persons associated with Mondrian, the Compliance Team reviews and compares the securities transactions of advised accounts (both fund and separate accounts) with transactions of employees to detect instances where an employee may have taken advantage of confidential information relating to current or proposed transactions by the funds and accounts, for the employee’s own personal gain.

It should be noted that it is not a violation of Mondrian’s policy or a breach of an employee’s fiduciary duty to Mondrian to purchase or sell securities for the employee’s own account while in possession of proprietary research information properly acquired by Mondrian, its officers, directors or employees, provided that the purchase or sale does not otherwise violate Mondrian’s Policy Statement on Insider Trading and Securities Fraud or any other part of Mondrian’s Code of Ethics.

2012 Code of Ethics

28


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

SECTION V

RUMOURS POLICY

29


LOGO

 

CODE OF ETHICS

FALSE OR MISLEADING RUMOURS POLICY

Background

The FSA, SEC and other market regulators require investment advisors to have adequate controls to prevent the intentional creation or spreading of false information intended to affect securities prices.

Mondrian’s False or Misleading Rumours Policy

A false or misleading rumour means any information that an employee knows or has reasonable grounds for believing is false or misleading. A false or misleading rumour would also be defined as information that would improperly influence the price of a security whether by affecting the entire market, an industry sector or a particular issuer.

No officer or employee of Mondrian shall originate or, except as permitted below, circulate in any manner a false or misleading rumour about a security or its issuer for the purpose of influencing the market price of the security. Where a legitimate business reason exists for discussing such a rumour (for example where a client is seeking an explanation for an erratic share price movement which could be explained by such a rumour), care should be taken to ensure that such a rumour is communicated in a manner that:

• sources the origin of the information (where possible);

• gives it no additional credibility or embellishment;

• makes clear that the information is a rumour; and

• makes clear that the information has not been verified.

Staff are required to report promptly to the Chief Compliance Officer when they believe a false or misleading rumour might have been circulated in the company.

As it may not always be clear if information received is a rumour or if it is false or misleading, staff are encouraged to consult with the Chief Compliance officer where there are doubts so that a determination can be made as to the best course of action.

Exceptions to Mondrian’s False or Misleading Rumours Policy

The following communications are permitted under Mondrian’s False or Misleading Rumours Policy to discuss the veracity of the rumour:

• discussions of false or misleading rumours among investment personnel and others within the firm who have a business need to know of such rumours;

• a discussion of information that is widely circulated in the public media, with the caveat that the source of the information and its unsubstantiated nature must be disclosed.

Compliance with Mondrian’s False or Misleading Rumours Policy

Compliance with Mondrian’s False or Misleading Rumours Policy is required by all staff. The policy is available to all staff on the Mondrian Intranet and Mondrian provides awareness training to staff on a periodic basis.

2012 Code of Ethics

30