As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 28, 2017
1933 Act Registration No. 333-176976
1940 Act Registration No. 811-22245
United States
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. 62 | [X] |
and/or | |
Registration Statement Under the Investment Company Act of 1940 | [ ] |
Amendment No. 63 | [X] |
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III
(Exact name of registrant as specified in charter)
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code: (800) 621-1675
W. Scott Jardine, Esq., Secretary
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III
First Trust Advisors L.P.
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
(Name and Address of Agent for Service)
Copy to:
Eric F. Fess, Esq.
Chapman and Cutler LLP
111 West Monroe Street
Chicago, Illinois 60603
It is proposed that this filing will become effective (check appropriate box):
[ ] immediately upon filing pursuant to paragraph (b)
[X] on March 1, 2017 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.
Contents of Post-Effective Amendment No. 62
This Registration Statement comprises the following papers and contents:
The Facing Sheet
Part A—Prospectus for First Trust Preferred Securities and Income ETF, First Trust Managed Municipal ETF, First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF, First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF and First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF
Part B—Statement of Additional Information for First Trust Preferred Securities and Income ETF, First Trust Managed Municipal ETF, First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF, First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF and First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF
Part C—Other Information
Signatures
Index to Exhibits
Exhibits
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
Ticker Symbol: | FPE |
Exchange: | NYSE Arca, Inc. |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.85% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.85% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$87 | $325 | $582 | $1,318 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
5.70% | March 31, 2014 | -1.34% | December 31, 2016 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 6.46% | 4.34% | 2/11/2013 |
Return After Taxes On Distributions | 3.75% | 1.83% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 3.62% | 2.13% | |
BofA Merrill Lynch Fixed Rate Preferred Securities Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 2.32% | 4.94% | |
BofA Merrill Lynch U.S. Capital Securities Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 5.20% | 4.91% | |
Blended Index (1) (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 3.76% | 4.94% |
(1) | The Blended Index consists of a 50/50 blend of the BofA Merrill Lynch Fixed Rate Preferred Securities Index and the BofA Merrill Lynch U.S. Capital Securities Index. The Blended Index was added to reflect the diverse allocation of institutional preferred and hybrid securities in the Fund’s portfolio. The indexes do not charge management fees or brokerage expenses, and no such fees or expenses were deducted from the performance shown. Indexes are unmanaged and an investor cannot invest directly in an index. |
• | Scott T. Fleming, President, Chief Investment Officer, Stonebridge Advisors LLC |
• | Robert Wolf, Senior Vice President and Senior Portfolio Manager, Stonebridge Advisors LLC |
• | Danielle Salters, CFA, Portfolio Manager and Credit Analyst, Stonebridge Advisors LLC |
• | The securities have long-term maturities (a minimum of 30 years) or are perpetual. They typically rank senior to common shares and perpetual preferred shares, and junior to senior debt and Trust Preferred Securities. |
• | In most cases, the issuer is allowed to defer the coupon payments for up to 10 years, provided certain conditions are met. The investor would still face tax liability on the skipped payments. In perpetual structures issued by foreign corporations, the issuer can generally skip a payment for an unlimited period without being in default, and the investor faces no tax liability on the skipped payments. |
• | Some $25 par securities have mandatory payment deferral provisions that list objective financial criteria that would require the issuer to skip a coupon payment. Such provisions remove some of management’s discretion in deciding to skip a payment. |
• | Most cumulative issues have an Alternative Payment Mechanism ( “APM” ) in the event that the issuer cannot meet its coupon payments. At certain times, the issuer may issue new common stock to finance the deferred payment. In many cases, the APM becomes mandatory after five years of payment deferment. |
• | Most hybrid securities have a replacement capital covenant, which only permits an issuer to redeem a security if a new security with equal or greater equity content is issued. If the issuer is unable to do so, the security remains outstanding. |
• | Limited Voting Rights. Generally, holders of preferred securities (such as the Fund) have no voting rights with respect to the issuing company unless preferred dividends have been in arrears for a specified number of periods, at which time the preferred security holders may elect a number of directors to the issuer’s board. Generally, once the issuer pays all the arrearages, the Preferred Security holders no longer have voting rights. |
• | Special Redemptions Rights. In certain circumstances, an issuer of preferred securities may redeem the securities prior to a specified date. For instance, for certain types of preferred securities, a redemption may be triggered by a change in federal income tax or securities laws. As with call provisions, a special redemption by the issuer may negatively impact the return of the security held by the Fund. |
• | Deferral. Preferred Securities may include provisions that permit the issuer, at its discretion, to defer distributions for a stated period without any adverse consequences to the issuer. If the Fund owns a Preferred Security that is deferring its distributions, the Fund may be required to report income for federal income tax purposes although it has not yet received such income in cash. |
• | Subordination. Preferred Securities are subordinated to bonds and other debt instruments in a company’s capital structure in terms of priority to corporate income and liquidation payments and therefore will be subject to greater credit risk than those debt instruments. |
• | Liquidity. Preferred Securities may be substantially less liquid than many other securities, such as common stocks or U.S. government securities. |
• | Scott Fleming serves as President and CIO of Stonebridge setting the strategic direction of Stonebridge including operations, business and product development, and marketing strategies. Mr. Fleming leads the Investment Committee and oversees investment policies and strategies for all of the company’s portfolio management activities. Additionally, Mr. Fleming directs the daily management of preferred stock portfolios. Prior to founding Stonebridge in 2004, Mr. Fleming co-founded Spectrum Asset Management, Inc., an investment advisor that specializes in preferred securities asset management for institutional clients and mutual funds. During his 13-year tenure there, he served as Chairman of the Board of Directors, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Investment Officer. Under his leadership, Spectrum grew to be the largest preferred securities manager in the country. Mr. Fleming previously served as Vice President, Portfolio Manager for DBL Preferred Management, Inc. in New York City. Mr. Fleming received a B.S. in Accounting from Bentley College in Waltham, MA and his MBA in Finance from Babson College in Wellesley, MA. |
• | Robert Wolf serves as Senior Vice President and Senior Portfolio Manager at Stonebridge. Mr. Wolf is a senior member of Stonebridge Advisors’ Investment Committee and oversees investment strategies and portfolio management activities across fund products and separately managed accounts. Mr. Wolf directs the daily management of preferred securities portfolios and performs both credit research and trading functions. Mr. Wolf has over sixteen years of fixed-income experience in both portfolio management and credit research. Prior to joining Stonebridge in 2006, Mr. Wolf was a high-yield fixed-income research analyst at Lehman Brothers. In this role, his responsibilities included detailed credit analysis across multiple sectors, relative value |
analysis, and developing trade recommendations. Mr. Wolf previously worked for Lehman Brothers’ commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) trading desk as a credit analyst. Mr. Wolf received his B.S. degree in Chemistry from Villanova University and his MBA in Finance from the New York University Stern School of Business. | |
• | Danielle Salters serves as Portfolio Manager and Credit Analyst at Stonebridge. Ms. Salters is a member of Stonebridge Advisors’ Investment Committee and manages investment strategies across fund products and separately managed accounts. Ms. Salters directs the daily management of preferred securities portfolios in addition to performing both credit research and trading functions. Ms. Salters has ten years of investment management experience that has included investment strategy, portfolio construction, credit research, and trading. Prior to beginning at Stonebridge in 2012, Ms. Salters was a portfolio analyst at a boutique asset manager where she focused on high-yield credit analysis, and portfolio strategy and analytics for a hedge fund and institutional client. Previously, Ms. Salters was employed by UBS Financial Services, Inc. where she worked in taxable fixed-income sales and, later, served as the fixed-income specialist to a portfolio manager. Ms. Salters received an A.B. in economics from Duke University and is a CFA Charterholder. |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 214 | 9 | 0 | 0 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 28 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||
1 Year |
Inception
(2/11/2013) |
Inception
(2/11/2013) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||
Net Asset Value | 8.97% | 5.01% | 19.93% | |
Market Price | 8.89% | 5.06% | 20.16% | |
Index Performance | ||||
Bank of America Merrill Lynch Fixed Rate Preferred Securities Index | 7.23% | 6.18% | 24.95% | |
Bank of America Merrill Lynch U.S. Capital Securities Index | 7.31% | 5.93% | 23.88% | |
Blended Benchmark (1) | 7.28% | 6.07% | 24.49% |
(1) | The Blended Index consists of a 50/50 blend of the BofA Merrill Lynch Fixed Rate Preferred Securities Index and the BofA Merrill Lynch U.S. Capital Securities Index. The Blended Index was added to reflect the diverse allocation of institutional preferred and hybrid securities in the Fund’s portfolio. The indexes do not charge management fees or brokerage expenses, and no such fees or expenses were deducted from the performance shown. Indexes are unmanaged and an investor cannot invest directly in an index. |
Year Ended October 31, |
For the Period
2/11/2013 (a) through 10/31/2013 |
|||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $ 18.97 | $ 19.04 | $ 18.21 | $ 19.99 |
Income from investment operations: | ||||
Net investment income (loss) | 1.12 | 1.16 (b) | 1.10 | 0.65 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.52 | (0.10) | 0.76 | (1.78) |
Total from investment operations | 1.64 | 1.06 | 1.86 | (1.13) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||||
Net investment income | (1.13) | (1.13) | (1.03) | (0.62) |
Return of capital | (0.01) | — | — | (0.03) |
Total distributions | (1.14) | (1.13) | (1.03) | (0.65) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 19.47 | $ 18.97 | $ 19.04 | $ 18.21 |
Total Return (c) | 8.97% | 5.75% | 10.42% | (5.74)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | ||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $1,375,398 | $413,705 | $86,718 | $64,722 |
Ratios to average net assets: | ||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.85% | 0.85% | 0.85% | 0.85%(d) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 5.97% | 6.15% | 6.06% | 5.44%(d) |
Portfolio turnover rate (e) | 32% | 50% | 91% | 45% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. First Trust Portfolios L.P. seeded the First Trust Preferred Securities and Income ETF on January 29, 2013 in order to provide initial capital required by SEC rules. |
(b) | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(c) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The returns presented do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(d) | Annualized. |
(e) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
Ticker Symbol: | FMB |
Exchange: | The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.65% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.65% |
Fee Waiver (2) (3) | 0.15% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses After Fee Waiver | 0.50% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
(2) | Expenses have been restated to reflect the current fiscal year. |
(3) | Pursuant to a contractual agreement, First Trust Advisors L.P., the Fund’s investment advisor, has agreed to waive management fees of 0.15% of average daily net assets until March 1, 2018. The waiver agreement may be terminated by action of the Trust’s Board of Trustees at any time upon 60 days’ written notice by the Trust on behalf of the Fund or by the Fund’s investment advisor only after March 1, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$51 | $247 | $459 | $1,071 |
1. | Total return scenario analysis: Evaluate individual bonds and portfolios of securities that are exposed to interest rate, yield curve and credit spread movements or shifts. |
2. | Sector analysis: Perform top-down review of core sectors based on bottom-up analysis of individual credits to determine the sectors in which the Fund will be overweight, neutral weight and underweight. |
3. | New issue credit analysis: Evaluate new bond offerings to determine portfolio suitability based on fundamental credit research on each borrower and individual bond security features. |
4. | Trading: Analyze how a bond might trade in the secondary market by reviewing total bond issuance size, underwriter willingness to make secondary markets and bond structural features, such as coupon, maturity, call dates and sinking fund payments. |
5. | Surveillance: Analyze holdings on a systematic basis to monitor any changes in credit trend. The Fund’s advisor monitors the credit rating momentum of each bond. |
6. | Performance attribution: Perform granular total return analysis by reviewing key portfolio attributes such as duration, credit rating, sector and state. The portfolio’s performance is also compared to various benchmarks. |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
3.28% | June 30, 2016 | -4.59% | December 31, 2016 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 1.46% | 3.75% | 5/13/2014 |
Return After Taxes On Distributions | 0.21% | 2.46% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 0.84% | 2.29% | |
Barclays Municipal 10-Year Revenue Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 0.03% | 2.84% |
• | Tom Futrell, Senior Vice President, Portfolio Manager of First Trust |
• | Johnathan N. Wilhelm, Senior Vice President, Portfolio Manager of First Trust |
• | Municipal Lease Obligations . The Fund may purchase municipal lease obligations, primarily through certificates of participation. Certificates of participation in municipal leases are undivided interests in a lease, installment purchase contract or conditional sale contract entered into by a state or local governmental unit to acquire equipment or facilities. |
• | Private Activity Bonds . A private activity bond is a type of revenue bond that is issued by or on behalf of a state or local government for the purpose of financing the project of a private user. Revenue bonds are usually payable only out of a specific revenue source rather than from general revenues. Revenue bonds ordinarily are not backed by the faith, credit or general taxing power of the issuing governmental entity. The principal and interest on revenue bonds for private facilities are typically paid out of rents or other specified payments made to the issuing governmental entity by a private company which uses or operates the facilities. Industrial revenue bonds are an example of these types of obligations. Industrial revenue bonds are issued by govern- mental entities to provide financing aid to community facilities such as hospitals, hotels, business or residential complexes, convention halls and sport complexes. |
• | Pre-Refunded and Escrowed to Maturity Bonds . There are two types of refunded bonds: pre-refunded bonds and escrowed-to-maturity (“ETM”) bonds. Refunded bonds may have originally been issued as general obligation or revenue bonds, but become refunded when they are secured by an escrow fund, usually consisting entirely of direct U.S. government obligations and/or U.S. government agency obligations sufficient for paying the bondholders. The escrow fund for a pre-refunded municipal bond may be structured so that the refunded bonds are to be called at the first possible date or a subsequent call date established in the original bond debenture. This type of structure usually is used for those refundings that either reduce the issuer’s interest payment expenses or change the debt maturity schedule. In escrow funds for ETM refunded municipal bonds, the maturity schedules of the securities in the escrow funds match the regular debt-service requirements on the bonds as originally stated in the bond indentures. |
• | Tender Option Bonds . In a TOB transaction, one or more highly-rated municipal bonds are deposited into a special purpose trust that issues two types of securities: floating rate securities (or “floaters”) and inverse floating rate securities. The Fund may acquire the inverse floating rate securities or “inverse floaters” from a |
TOB trust. The interest rates on inverse floaters issued by a TOB trust vary inversely to the interest rates paid on the floaters. Holders of the floaters have the right to tender their securities to the TOB trust at par plus accrued interest. As a result, holders of the inverse floaters are exposed to all of the gains or losses on the underlying municipal bonds, despite the fact that their net cash investment is significantly less than the value of the bonds. This multiplies the positive or negative impact of the underlying bonds’ price movements on the value of the inverse floaters, thereby creating effective leverage. Because changes in short-term interest rates inversely affect the rate of interest received on an inverse floater, and because inverse floaters essentially represent a leveraged investment, the value of an inverse floater is generally more volatile than that of a conventional fixed-rate bond having similar credit quality, redemption provisions and maturity. | |
• | Custodial Receipt Trusts . Custodial receipts are financial instruments similar to TOBs that are underwritten by securities dealers or banks and evidence ownership of future interest payments, principal payments or both on certain municipal securities. The underwriter of these certificates or receipts typically purchases municipal securities and deposits them in an irrevocable trust or custodial account with a custodian bank, which then issues receipts or certificates that evidence ownership of the periodic unmatured coupon payments and the final principal payment on the obligation. The principal and interest payments on the municipal securities underlying custodial receipts may be allocated in a number of ways. For example, payments may be allocated such that certain custodial receipts may have variable or floating interest rates and others may be stripped securities which pay only the principal or interest due on the underlying municipal securities. The Fund may invest in custodial receipts which have inverse floating interest rates. |
• | Tom Futrell, CFA, joined First Trust in September 2013 as Senior Vice President and Senior Portfolio Manager and has over 25 years of experience in municipal bond portfolio management. Prior to joining First Trust, Mr. Futrell was a Senior Portfolio Manager for Municipal Bonds at Performance Trust Investment Advisors for two and one-half years and the Chief Investment Officer for Claymore Securities, Inc. for three years. Mr. Futrell |
also worked as a credit analyst with Nuveen Investments and worked in investment management at Nuveen Asset Management for 25 years. Mr. Futrell has a BA from Wheaton College and an MBA from Northern Illinois University. He also holds the FINRA Series 7, Series 24 and Series 66 licenses and the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. | |
• | Johnathan N. Wilhelm joined First Trust in September 2013 as Senior Vice President and Senior Portfolio Manager for the First Trust Advisors Municipal Securities Team and has over 27 years of credit research and portfolio management experience in corporate and municipal securities. Prior to joining First Trust, Mr. Wilhelm was a Portfolio Manager for Municipal Bonds at Performance Trust Investment Advisors for two and one-half years and Senior Vice President and Portfolio Manager at Nuveen Investments for 11 years. Mr. Wilhelm has a BS in Business from Miami University of Ohio and his JD from DePaul University College of Law. |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 168 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 83 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Year Ended October 31, |
For the Period
5/13/2014 (a) through 10/31/2014 |
||
2016 | 2015 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $ 51.58 | $ 51.11 | $ 50.00 |
Income from investment operations | |||
Net investment income (loss) | 1.32 | 1.35 | 0.56 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 1.99 | 0.50 | 1.20 |
Total from investment operations | 3.31 | 1.85 | 1.76 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||
Net investment income | (1.35) | (1.38) | (0.55) |
Net realized gain | (0.22) | — | — |
Return of capital | — | — | (0.10) |
Total distributions | (1.57) | (1.38) | (0.65) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 53.32 | $ 51.58 | $ 51.11 |
Total Return (b) | 6.47% | 3.66% | 3.53% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $82,650 | $33,529 | $20,445 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.65% | 0.65% | 0.65%(c) |
Ratio of net expenses to average net assets | 0.52% | 0.65% | 0.65%(c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 2.52% | 2.63% | 2.40%(c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 85% | 109% | 69% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. |
(b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The returns presented do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. For some periods, the total returns would have been lower if certain fees had not been waived by the advisor. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
Ticker Symbol: | FTLS |
Exchange: | NYSE Arca, Inc. |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.95% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses | 0.01% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Dividend Expense on Investments Sold Short | 0.45% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 1.41% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$144 | $499 | $879 | $1,944 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
4.91% | December 31, 2016 | -2.49% | September 30, 2015 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 6.84% | 7.25% | 9/8/2014 |
Return After Taxes On Distributions | 6.34% | 6.83% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 3.86% | 5.38% | |
S&P 500 ® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 11.96% | 7.22% |
• | John Gambla, CFA, FRM, PRM, Senior Portfolio Manager of First Trust |
• | Rob A. Guttschow, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager of First Trust |
• | Mr. Gambla, CFA, FRM, PRM, is a senior portfolio manager for the Alternatives Investment Team at First Trust. Prior to joining First Trust in July 2011, Mr. Gambla was co-Chief Investment Officer at the Nuveen HydePark Group LLC where he started in 2007. While at Nuveen HydePark Group LLC, Mr. Gambla co-directed investment activities including research, product development, trading, portfolio management and performance attribution. Mr. Gambla also led the research systems and infrastructure development for Nuveen HydePark Group LLC. Previously, Mr. Gambla was a Senior Trader and Quantitative specialist at Nuveen Asset Management. While there, he was responsible for trading all derivatives for the 120+ municipal mutual funds with Nuveen Asset Management. Mr. Gambla, has served in a variety of roles throughout his career including: portfolio management, research, business development and strategy development. |
• | Mr. Guttschow, CFA, is a senior portfolio manager for the Alternatives Investment Team at First Trust. Prior to joining First Trust in July 2011, Mr. Guttschow was co-Chief Investment Officer at the Nuveen HydePark Group LLC where he started in 2007. While at Nuveen HydePark Group LLC, Mr. Guttschow co-directed investment activities including research, product development, trading, portfolio management and performance attribution. Previously, Mr. Guttschow was an Overlay Manager and Senior Portfolio Manager at Nuveen Asset Management. While there, he developed Nuveen’s buy-side derivative desk for fixed income and equity portfolio hedging. |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 166 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 86 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||
1 Year |
Inception
(9/8/2014) |
Inception
(9/8/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||
Net Asset Value | 0.45% | 4.59% | 10.10% | |
Market Price | 0.39% | 4.62% | 10.16% | |
Index Performance | ||||
S&P 500 ® Index | 4.51% | 5.03% | 11.10% |
Year Ended October 31, |
For the Period
9/8/2014 (a) through 10/31/2014 |
||
2016 | 2015 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $ 32.61 | $ 30.54 | $30.00 |
Income from investment operations: | |||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.32 | 0.19 | 0.05 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.17) | 2.12 | 0.51 |
Total from investment operations | 0.15 | 2.31 | 0.56 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||
Net investment income | (0.27) | (0.22) | (0.02) |
Net realized gain | — | (0.02) | — |
Total distributions | (0.27) | (0.24) | (0.02) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 32.49 | $ 32.61 | $30.54 |
Total Return (b) | 0.45% | 7.60% | 1.86% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $120,231 | $32,608 | $3,054 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||
Ratios of total expenses to average net assets | 1.40% | 1.47% | 1.17%(c) |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets excluding dividend expense | 0.95% | 0.95% | 0.95%(c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.00% | 0.39% | 1.08%(c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 201% | 267% | 1% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the intial creation units were established. |
(b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The returns presented do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
Ticker Symbol: | FEMB |
Exchange: | The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.85% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.85% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$87 | $325 | $582 | $1,318 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
8.83% | March 31, 2016 | -7.13% | September 30, 2015 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 7.72% | -5.32% | 11/4/2014 |
Return After Taxes On Distributions | 5.12% | -7.34% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 4.38% | -4.90% | |
Barclays Emerging Markets Local Currency Government - 10% Country Capped Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 6.85% | -4.98% |
• | Derek Fulton, Chief Executive Officer, First Trust Global Portfolios Ltd. |
• | Leonardo Da Costa, Portfolio Manager, First Trust Global Portfolios Ltd. |
• | Derek Fulton has been a director, chief executive officer and chief investment officer of First Trust Global since January 2012. Mr. Fulton has been managing global portfolios with a focus on fixed income for 15 years. Prior to joining First Trust Global, he co-founded ISIS Asset Management ( “ISIS AM” ) in May 2009 and led the investment team. Prior to his time at ISIS AM he was Head of Global & Closed-End Fixed Income Portfolios at Aberdeen Asset Management ( “Aberdeen” ) in London and had also served as the head of Asian Fixed Income based in Singapore. At Aberdeen, Mr. Fulton oversaw in excess of $10 billion of assets including institutional global government and global aggregate accounts. He was also a member of the currency team running active currency overlays on over $20 billion of institutional mandates. |
• | Leonardo Da Costa, CFA, has been a portfolio manager at First Trust Global where he focuses on fixed income and is a specialist in emerging markets since May 2013. Mr. Da Costa joined ISIS AM in October 2012 where he was a portfolio manager on the fixed income team. Prior to his time at ISIS AM, he worked for Hydra Capital Management from March 2007 to September 2009, on the firm’s long/short and long only emerging market fixed income products. He started his career as a member of the Global Emerging Market Debt team at Aberdeen where he also worked with Mr. Fulton. The team was responsible for managing $2.5 billion of emerging market fixed income assets across total return, income, and closed end products. Mr. Da Costa has a B.Comm (Honours) in Investment and Financial Management from the University of Pretoria (South Africa) and is a CFA charterholder. |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 92 | 62 | 20 | 4 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2016 | 64 | 10 | 0 | 0 |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||
1 Year |
Inception
(11/4/2014) |
Inception
(11/4/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||
Net Asset Value | 9.66% | -3.37% | -6.60% | |
Market Price | 8.84% | -3.52% | -6.88% | |
Index Performance | ||||
Barclays Emerging Markets Local Currency Government - 10% Country Capped Index | 10.04% | -2.54% | -4.99% |
Year Ended |
For the Period
11/4/2014 (a) through 10/31/2015 |
|
10/31/2016 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $ 40.77 | $ 50.00 |
Income from investment operations: | ||
Net investment income (loss) | 1.74 | 1.94 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 2.09 | (9.23) |
Total from investment operations | 3.83 | (7.29) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||
Net investment income | (1.56) | — |
Return of capital | (0.72) | (1.94) |
Total distributions | (2.28) | (1.94) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 42.32 | $ 40.77 |
Total Return (b) | 9.66% | (14.83)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | ||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $14,812 | $ 4,077 |
Ratios to average net assets: | ||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.85% | 0.85%(c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 4.70% | 4.36%(c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 23% | 49% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. |
b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The returns presented do not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | RFAP | Nasdaq |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | RFDI | Nasdaq |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | RFEM | Nasdaq |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | RFEU | Nasdaq |
Summary Information | |
|
3 |
|
10 |
|
17 |
|
24 |
|
31 |
|
31 |
|
33 |
|
36 |
|
36 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
|
39 |
|
42 |
|
42 |
|
43 |
|
43 |
|
45 |
|
47 |
|
51 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.83% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.83% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$85 | $319 | $571 | $1,295 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.83% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.83% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$85 | $319 | $571 | $1,295 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.95% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees (1) | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.95% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$97 | $356 | $636 | $1,432 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.83% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses (1) | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.83% |
(1) | Although the Fund has adopted a 12b-1 plan that permits it to pay up to 0.25% per annum, it will not pay 12b-1 fees at any time before February 28, 2018. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$85 | $319 | $571 | $1,295 |
• | Limited Voting Rights. Generally, holders of preferred stocks (such as the Fund) have no voting rights with respect to the issuing company unless preferred dividends have been in arrears for a specified number of periods, at which time the preferred stock holders may elect a number of directors to the issuer’s board. Generally, once the issuer pays all the arrearages, the preferred stock holders no longer have voting rights. |
• | Special Redemptions Rights. In certain circumstances, an issuer of preferred stocks may redeem the securities prior to a specified date. For instance, for certain types of preferred stocks, a redemption may be triggered by a change in federal income tax or securities laws. As with call provisions, a special redemption by the issuer may negatively impact the return of the security held by the Fund. |
• | Deferral. Preferred stocks may include provisions that permit the issuer, at its discretion, to defer distributions for a stated period without any adverse consequences to the issuer. If the Fund owns a preferred stock that is deferring its distributions, the Fund may be required to report income for federal income tax purposes although it has not yet received such income in cash. |
• | Subordination. Preferred stocks are subordinated to bonds and other debt instruments in a company’s capital structure in terms of priority to corporate income and liquidation payments and therefore will be subject to greater credit risk than those debt instruments. |
• | Liquidity. Preferred stocks may be substantially less liquid than many other securities, such as common stocks or U.S. government securities. |
• | Mr. Sandler, CFA, serves as Chief US Equity Officer, bringing more than 20 years of investment experience to the equity team. In addition, he serves on the firm’s Operating Committees. Prior to launching RIG, Mr. Sandler served as Managing Director and Chief Equity Strategist at Wachovia Securities, where he was responsible for all equity advice of the firm. He led a team of talented and experienced portfolio managers and strategists, whose goal was to provide independent and sound equity recommendations. The work of his team included actively managed portfolios, weekly investment pieces and the regular monitoring of widely held positions of the firm’s clients. Mr. Sandler earned a BS in Accounting and an MBA from the University of Richmond, graduating with honors. He received his CFA designation in 1997. |
• | Mr. Jones, CFA, serves as Chairman and Chief Investment Officer, bringing close to 30 years of global investment experience to his role in leading the organization. Mr. Jones’ primary investment responsibility is setting the firm’s overall asset allocation strategy and ensuring appropriate investment and risk management processes are applied to all of the firm’s portfolio decisions. In addition, he serves on the firm’s Executive and Operating Committees. Prior to launching RIG in 2008, Mr. Jones was the Chief Investment Officer at Wachovia Securities from 2002. In this capacity, he was responsible for all aspects of financial advice, including asset allocation, tactical strategy and portfolio implementation and managed over $75 billion in discretionary portfolio assets. Mr. Jones began his career in fixed income portfolio management, serving in a variety of roles cumulating in his promotion to Chief Fixed Income Officer for Mentor Investment Group. While at Mentor and its successor firm, Evergreen Investment Management, Michael managed over $12 billion in high grade and high yield fixed income assets and was responsible for the design and implementation of advanced fixed income and risk management analytics. Mr. Jones earned a BA in Economics from the College of William and Mary and an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He received his CFA designation in 1990. |
• | Mr. Grossman, CFA, serves as the Chief Global Equity Officer, responsible for the investments of the US Equity and International Equity teams. He brings over a decade’s worth of industry experience in quantitative risk management and portfolio analytics. Mr. Grossman is responsible for the tactical decisions made in the various strategies and the development of equity investment processes at RIG. Prior to joining RIG, Mr. Grossman worked at the Virginia Retirement System (VRS), where he managed International Equity and REIT Portfolios and developed research on equity selection and portfolio construction. He began his investment career as a fixed income analyst at VRS. Mr. Grossman earned a BS from Baldwin-Wallace College with a double major in Mathematical Economics and Finance, and an MA in Financial Economics from Virginia Commonwealth University. He received his CFA designation in 2009. |
• | Mr. Konstantinos, CFA, serves as Director of International Portfolio Management with more than 14 years’ experience as an equity sector analyst, portfolio manager, and portfolio risk manager across domestic and international markets. In addition, he serves on the firm’s Operating Committee. Mr. Konstantinos has been with RIG since the company’s founding in 2008. He began his career in 2000 as a corporate finance analyst in the Technology sector at a predecessor to Wachovia Securities. He joined Wachovia’s Advisory Services Group in 2002 as an equity strategist, and worked in various capacities within equity strategy and portfolio management until his departure in 2008. Mr. Konstantinos earned his BS in Business Administration from the Kenan-Flagler School of Business at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Mr. Konstantinos received his CFA designation in 2013 and is a member of CFA Virginia Society. He has successfully completed the FINRA Series 7, 66, 86 and 87 licensing exams. Mr. Konstantinos is also a regular guest on the financial news channels (CNBC, Bloomberg) and is frequently quoted in the financial press. |
• | Mr. Hays serves as Quantitative Portfolio Manager. As a Quantitative Portfolio manager, he is responsible for developing and implementing analytical investment approaches in the US Equity and International Equity markets. Prior to joining RIG, Mr. Hays co-founded and served as Chief Investment Officer of an alternative asset management company that employed a quantitative market-neutral equity approach. Mr. Hays also |
worked for 6 years at Analysis Group, a financial and economic consulting firm, where he managed a team dedicated to valuing illiquid assets such as mortgage-backed securities, real estate, and oil and gas properties. Mr. Hays received a BBA from Millsaps College, Summa Cum Laude, with a double major in Economics and Business Administration. He also earned an MBA with High Honors from the University of Chicago in Analytic Finance, Econometrics/Statistics and Economics. Additionally, Mr. Hays has successfully completed the FINRA Series 65 licensing exam. |
Fund | Management Fee |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | 0.83% |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | 0.83% |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | 0.95% |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | 0.83% |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
4/14/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 76 | 47 | 20 | 2 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
4/14/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 26 | 8 | 2 | 1 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
4/14/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 57 | 96 | 23 | 2 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
4/14/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
6/15/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 49 | 56 | 19 | 1 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
6/15/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 11 | 2 | 1 | 0 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
4/14/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 45 | 67 | 6 | 0 |
0.00% – 0.49% | 0.50% – 0.99% | 1.00% – 1.99% | >=2.00% | |
4/14/2016 - 12/31/2016 | 56 | 8 | 0 | 0 |
Cumulative | |
Inception
(4/13/2016) |
|
Fund Performance | |
Net Asset Value | 2.26% |
Market Price | 2.48% |
Index Performance | |
MSCI Pacific Index | 8.38% |
Cumulative | |
Inception
(4/13/2016) |
|
Fund Performance | |
Net Asset Value | 2.68% |
Market Price | 2.73% |
Index Performance | |
MSCI EAFE Index | 1.67% |
Cumulative | |
Inception
(6/14/2016) |
|
Fund Performance | |
Net Asset Value | 14.52% |
Market Price | 15.11% |
Index Performance | |
MSCI Emerging Markets Index | 14.09% |
Cumulative | |
Inception
(4/13/2016) |
|
Fund Performance | |
Net Asset Value | 2.66% |
Market Price | 3.43% |
Index Performance | |
MSCI Europe Index | -1.77% |
For the Period
4/13/2016 (a) through 10/31/2016 |
|
Net asset value, beginning of period | $ 51.31 |
Income from investment operations: | |
Net investment income (loss) | 0.55 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.60 |
Total from investment operations | 1.15 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |
Net investment income | (0.32) |
Total distributions | (0.32) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 52.14 |
TOTAL RETURN (b ) | 2.26% |
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA : | |
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $26,071 |
Ratios to average net assets | |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.83%(c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.96%(c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 49% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. |
(b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The return presented does not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
For the Period
4/13/2016 (a) through 10/31/2016 |
|
Net asset value, beginning of period | $ 50.73 |
Income from investment operations: | |
Net investment income (loss) | 0.83 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.50 |
Total from investment operations | 1.33 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |
Net Investment income | (0.70) |
Total distributions | (0.70) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 51.36 |
TOTAL RETURN (b) | 2.68% |
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA: | |
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $25,679 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.83% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 2.97% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 44% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. |
(b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The return presented does not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
For the Period
4/13/2016 (a) through 10/31/2016 |
|
Net asset value, beginning of period: | $ 50.67 |
Income from investment operations: | |
Net investment income (loss) | 0.91 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.41 |
Total from investment operations | 1.32 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |
Net investment income | (0.82) |
Total distributions | (0.82) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 51.17 |
TOTAL RETURN (b) | 2.66% |
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA: | |
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $25,585 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.83% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 3.23% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 41% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. |
(b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The return presented does not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
For the Period
6/14/2016 (a) through 10/31/2016 |
|
Net asset value, beginning of period: | 49.61 |
Income from investment operations | |
Net investment income (loss) | 0.55 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 6.66 |
Total from investment operations | 7.21 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |
Net investment income | (0.55) |
Total distributions | (0.55) |
Net asset value, end of period | $ 56.27 |
TOTAL RETURN (b) | 14.52% |
RATIOS/SUPPLEMENTAL DATA: | |
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | 5,628 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.95% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 2.66% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 81% |
(a) | Inception date is consistent with the commencement of investment operations and is the date the initial creation units were established. |
(b) | Total return is calculated assuming an initial investment made at the net asset value at the beginning of the period, reinvestment of all distributions at net asset value during the period, and redemption at net asset value on the last day of the period. The return presented does not reflect the deduction of taxes that a shareholder would pay on Fund distributions or the redemption or sale of Fund shares. Total return is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year. |
(c) | Annualized. |
(d) | Portfolio turnover is calculated for the time period presented and is not annualized for periods of less than a year and does not include securities received or delivered from processing creations or redemptions and in-kind transactions. |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund III |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust Preferred Securities and Income ETF | FPE | NYSE Arca |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
14 |
|
17 |
|
24 |
|
27 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
|
33 |
|
38 |
|
40 |
|
44 |
|
46 |
|
46 |
|
46 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
|
C-1 |
(1) | The Fund may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | The Fund may not borrow money, except that the Fund may (i) borrow money from banks for temporary or emergency purposes (but not for leverage or the purchase of investments) and (ii) engage in other transactions permissible under the 1940 Act that may involve a borrowing (such as obtaining short-term credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions, engaging in delayed-delivery transactions, or purchasing certain futures, forward contracts and options), provided that the combination of (i) and (ii) shall not exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets (including the amount borrowed), less the Fund's liabilities (other than borrowings). |
(3) | The Fund will not underwrite the securities of other issuers except to the extent the Fund may be considered an underwriter under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act” ), in connection with the purchase and sale of portfolio securities. |
(4) | The Fund will not purchase or sell real estate or interests therein, unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prohibit the Fund from purchasing or selling securities or other instruments backed by real estate or of issuers engaged in real estate activities). |
(5) | The Fund may not make loans to other persons, except through (i) the purchase of debt securities permissible under the Fund's investment policies, (ii) repurchase agreements, or (iii) the lending of portfolio securities, provided that no such loan of portfolio securities may be made by the Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets. |
(6) | The Fund may not purchase or sell physical commodities unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Fund from purchasing or selling options, futures contracts, forward contracts or other derivative instruments, or from investing in securities or other instruments backed by physical commodities). |
(7) | The Fund may not invest 25% or more of the value of its total assets in securities of issuers in any one industry or group of industries, except that the Fund will concentrate its assets in any of the group of industries constituting the financial sector. This restriction does not apply to obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities. |
(1) | The Fund may invest in U.S. government securities, including bills, notes and bonds differing as to maturity and rates of interest, which are either issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury or by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities. U.S. government securities include securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury, by various agencies of the U.S. government, or by various instrumentalities that have been established or sponsored by the U.S. government. U.S. Treasury securities are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Securities issued or guaranteed by federal agencies and U.S. government-sponsored instrumentalities may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some of the U.S. government agencies that issue or guarantee securities include the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Farmers Home Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, the Maritime Administration, the Small Business Administration and The Tennessee Valley Authority. An instrumentality of the U.S. government is a government agency organized under federal charter with government supervision. Instrumentalities issuing or guaranteeing securities include, among others, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and the Federal National Mortgage Association ( “Fannie Mae” ). In the case of those U.S. government securities not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, the investor must look principally to the agency or instrumentality issuing or guaranteeing the security for ultimate repayment and may not be able to assert a claim against the United States itself in the event that the agency or instrumentality does not meet its commitment. The U.S. government, its agencies and instrumentalities do not guarantee the market value of their securities; consequently, the value of such securities may fluctuate. In addition, the Fund may invest in sovereign debt obligations of non-U.S. countries. A sovereign debtor’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest in a timely manner may be affected by a number of factors, including its cash flow situation, the extent of its non-U.S. reserves, the availability of sufficient non-U.S. exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the sovereign debtor’s policy toward principal international lenders and the political constraints to which it may be subject. |
(2) | The Fund may invest in certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings and loan association. Such certificates are for a definite period of time, earn a specified rate of return and are normally negotiable. If such certificates of deposit are non-negotiable, they will be considered illiquid securities and be subject to the Fund's 15% restriction on investments in illiquid securities. Pursuant to the certificate of deposit, the issuer agrees to pay the amount deposited plus interest to the bearer of the certificate on the date specified thereon. Under current FDIC regulations, the maximum insurance payable as to any one certificate of deposit is $250,000; therefore, certificates of deposit purchased by the Fund may not be fully insured. The Fund may only invest in certificates of deposit issued by U.S. banks with at least $1 billion in assets. |
(3) | The Fund may invest in bankers’ acceptances, which are short-term credit instruments used to finance commercial transactions. Generally, an acceptance is a time draft drawn on a bank by an exporter or an importer to obtain a stated amount of funds to pay for specific merchandise. The draft is then “accepted” by a bank that, in effect, unconditionally guarantees to pay the face value of the instrument on its maturity date. The acceptance may then be held by the accepting bank as an asset or it may be sold in the secondary market at the going rate of interest for a specific maturity. |
(4) | The Fund may invest in repurchase agreements, which involve purchases of debt securities with counterparties that are deemed by the Sub-Advisor to present acceptable credit risks. In such an action, at the time the Fund purchases the security, it simultaneously agrees to resell and redeliver the security to the seller, who also simultaneously agrees to buy back the security at a fixed price and time. This assures a predetermined yield for the Fund during its holding period since the resale price is always greater than the purchase price and reflects an agreed-upon market rate. Such actions afford an opportunity for the Fund to invest temporarily available cash. The Fund may enter into repurchase agreements only with respect to obligations of the U.S. government, |
its agencies or instrumentalities, certificates of deposit or bankers’ acceptances in which the Fund may invest. Repurchase agreements may be considered loans to the seller, collateralized by the underlying securities. The risk to the Fund is limited to the ability of the seller to pay the agreed-upon sum on the repurchase date; in the event of default, the repurchase agreement provides that the Fund is entitled to sell the underlying collateral. If the value of the collateral declines after the agreement is entered into, however, and if the seller defaults under a repurchase agreement when the value of the underlying collateral is less than the repurchase price, the Fund could incur a loss of both principal and interest. The portfolio managers monitor the value of the collateral at the time the action is entered into and at all times during the term of the repurchase agreement. The portfolio managers do so in an effort to determine that the value of the collateral always equals or exceeds the agreed-upon repurchase price to be paid to the Fund. If the seller were to be subject to a federal bankruptcy proceeding, the ability of the Fund to liquidate the collateral could be delayed or impaired because of certain provisions of the bankruptcy laws. | |
(5) | The Fund may invest in bank time deposits, which are monies kept on deposit with banks or savings and loan associations for a stated period of time at a fixed rate of interest. There may be penalties for the early withdrawal of such time deposits, in which case the yields of these investments will be reduced. |
(6) | The Fund may invest in commercial paper, which are short-term unsecured promissory notes, including variable rate master demand notes issued by corporations to finance their current operations. Master demand notes are direct lending arrangements between the Fund and a corporation. There is no secondary market for the notes. However, they are redeemable by the Fund at any time. The Fund's portfolio managers will consider the financial condition of the corporation ( e.g. , earning power, cash flow and other liquidity ratios) and will continuously monitor the corporation’s ability to meet all of its financial obligations, because the Fund's liquidity might be impaired if the corporation were unable to pay principal and interest on demand. The Fund may invest in commercial paper only if it has received the highest rating from at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, if unrated, judged by the Sub-Advisor to be of comparable quality. |
(7) | The Fund may invest in shares of money market funds, as consistent with its investment objective and policies. Shares of money market funds are subject to management fees and other expenses of those funds. Therefore, investments in money market funds will cause the Fund to bear proportionately the costs incurred by the money market funds’ operations. At the same time, the Fund will continue to pay its own management fees and expenses with respect to all of its assets, including any portion invested in the shares of other investment companies. It is possible for the Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended October 31, | |
2016 | 2015 |
32% | 50% |
(1) | Market Risk. Market risk is the risk that the value of the underlying assets may go up or down. Adverse movements in the value of an underlying asset can expose the Fund to losses. Derivative instruments may include elements of leverage and, accordingly, fluctuations in the value of the derivative instrument in relation to the underlying asset may be magnified. The successful use of derivative instruments depends upon a variety of factors, particularly the portfolio managers’ ability to predict movements of the securities, currencies and commodities markets, which may require different skills than predicting changes in the prices of individual securities. There can be no assurance that any particular strategy adopted will succeed. A decision to engage in a derivative transaction will reflect the portfolio managers’ judgment that the derivative transaction will provide value to the Fund and its shareholders and is consistent with the Fund's objective, investment limitations and operating policies. In making such a judgment, the portfolio managers will analyze the benefits and risks of the derivative transactions and weigh them in the context of the Fund's overall investments and investment objective. |
(2) | Credit Risk. Credit risk is the risk that a loss may be sustained as a result of the failure of a counterparty to comply with the terms of a derivative instrument. The counterparty risk for exchange-traded derivatives is generally less than for privately negotiated or OTC derivatives, since generally a clearing agency, which is the issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded instrument, provides a guarantee of performance. For privately negotiated instruments, there is no similar clearing agency guarantee. In all transactions, the Fund will bear the risk that the counterparty will default, and this could result in a loss of the expected benefit of the derivative transactions and possibly other losses to the Fund. The Fund will enter into transactions in derivative instruments only with counterparties that First Trust reasonably believes are capable of performing under the contract. |
(3) | Correlation Risk. Correlation risk is the risk that there might be an imperfect correlation, or even no correlation, between price movements of a derivative instrument and price movements of investments being hedged. When a derivative transaction is used to completely hedge another position, changes in the market value of the combined position (the derivative instrument plus the position being hedged) result from an imperfect correlation between the price movements of the two instruments. With a perfect hedge, the value of the combined position remains unchanged with any change in the price of the underlying asset. With an imperfect hedge, the value of the derivative instrument and its hedge are not perfectly correlated. For example, if the value of a derivative instrument used in a short hedge (such as writing a call option, buying a put option or selling a futures contract) increased by less than the decline in value of the hedged investments, the hedge would not be perfectly correlated. This might occur due to factors unrelated to the value of the investments being hedged, such as speculative or other pressures on the markets in which these instruments are traded. The effectiveness of hedges using instruments on indices will depend, in part, on the degree of correlation between price movements in the index and the price movements in the investments being hedged. |
(4) | Liquidity Risk. Liquidity risk is the risk that a derivative instrument cannot be sold, closed out or replaced quickly at or very close to its fundamental value. Generally, exchange contracts are very liquid because the exchange clearinghouse is the counterparty of every contract. OTC transactions are less liquid than exchange-traded derivatives since they often can only be closed out with the other party to the transaction. The Fund might be required by applicable regulatory requirements to maintain assets as “cover,” maintain segregated accounts and/or make margin payments when taking positions in derivative instruments involving obligations to third parties ( i.e. , instruments other than purchase options). If the Fund is unable to close out its positions in such instruments, it might be required to continue to maintain such assets or accounts or make such payments |
until the position expires, matures or is closed out. These requirements might impair the Fund's ability to sell a security or make an investment at a time when it would otherwise be favorable to do so, or require that the Fund sell a portfolio security at a disadvantageous time. The Fund's ability to sell or close out a position in an instrument prior to expiration or maturity depends upon the existence of a liquid secondary market or, in the absence of such a market, the ability and willingness of the counterparty to enter into a transaction closing out the position. Due to liquidity risk, there is no assurance that any derivatives position can be sold or closed out at a time and price that is favorable to the Fund. | |
(5) | Legal Risk. Legal risk is the risk of loss caused by the unenforceability of a party’s obligations under the derivative. While a party seeking price certainty agrees to surrender the potential upside in exchange for downside protection, the party taking the risk is looking for a positive payoff. Despite this voluntary assumption of risk, a counterparty that has lost money in a derivative transaction may try to avoid payment by exploiting various legal uncertainties about certain derivative products. |
(6) | Systemic or “Interconnection” Risk. Systemic or “interconnection” risk is the risk that a disruption in the financial markets will cause difficulties for all market participants. In other words, a disruption in one market will spill over into other markets, perhaps creating a chain reaction. Much of the OTC derivatives market takes place among the OTC dealers themselves, thus creating a large interconnected web of financial obligations. This interconnectedness raises the possibility that a default by one large dealer could create losses for other dealers and destabilize the entire market for OTC derivative instruments. |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
TRUSTEE WHO IS AN INTERESTED PERSON OF THE TRUST | |||||
James A. Bowen
(1)
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 09/55 |
Chairman of the Board and Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Chief Executive Officer, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Chairman of the Board of Directors, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) | 141 Portfolios | None |
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES | |||||
Richard E. Erickson
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 04/51 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Physician and Officer, Wheaton Orthopedics; Limited Partner, Gundersen Real Estate Limited Partnership (June 1992 to December 2016); Member, Sportsmed LLC (April 2007 to November 2015) | 141 Portfolios | None |
Thomas R. Kadlec
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/57 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, ADM Investor Services, Inc. (Futures Commission Merchant) | 141 Portfolios | Director of ADM Investor Services, Inc., ADM Investor Services International, and Futures Industry Association |
Robert F. Keith
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/56 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, Hibs Enterprises (Financial and Management Consulting) | 141 Portfolios | Director of Trust Company of Illinois |
Niel B. Nielson
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 03/54 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer (January 2015 to present), Pelita Harapan Educational Foundation (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Servant Interactive LLC (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Dew Learning LLC (Educational Products and Services); President (June 2002 to June 2012), Covenant College | 141 Portfolios |
Director of Covenant Transport Inc.
(May 2003 to May 2014) |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
James M. Dykas
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 01/66 |
President and Chief Executive Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer (January 2016 to present), Controller (January 2011 to January 2016), Senior Vice President (April 2007 to January 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Chief Financial Officer, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) (January 2016 to present) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) (January 2016 to present) | N/A | N/A |
W. Scott Jardine
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 05/60 |
Secretary and Chief Legal Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Secretary and General Counsel, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) | N/A | N/A |
Daniel J. Lindquist
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 02/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director (July 2012 to present), Senior Vice President (September 2005 to July 2012), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
Kristi A. Maher
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 12/66 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• CCO since January 2011, Assistant Secretary since Inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Donald P. Swade
120 E. Liberty Drive Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 08/72 |
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Senior Vice President (July 2016 to Present), Vice President (April 2012 to July 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P., Vice President (September 2006 to April 2012), Guggenheim Funds Investment Advisors, LLC/Claymore Securities, Inc. | N/A | N/A |
Roger F. Testin
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 06/66 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Stan Ueland
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President (September 2012 to present), Vice President (August 2005 to September 2012) First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
(1) | Mr. Bowen is deemed an “interested person” of the Trust due to his position as Chief Executive Officer of First Trust, investment advisor of the Fund. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Fund (1) |
Total Compensation from the
First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $4,769 | $370,744 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $5,098 | $391,203 |
Robert F. Keith | $4,937 | $381,412 |
Niel B. Nielson | $4,930 | $381,482 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Fund to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2016 for services to the Fund. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2016 for services to the 137 portfolios existing in 2016, which consisted of 7 open-end mutual funds, 16 closed-end funds and 114 exchange-traded funds. |
Trustee |
Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in the Fund (Number of Shares Held) |
Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen by Trustee in the First Trust Fund Complex |
Interested Trustee | ||
James A. Bowen | None | Over $100,000 |
Independent Trustees | ||
Richard E. Erickson | None | Over $100,000 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | None | Over $100,000 |
Robert F. Keith | None | Over $100,000 |
Niel B. Nielson | None | Over $100,000 |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
||
Fiscal Year Ended October 31, | ||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
$7,161,290 | $1,840,347 | $546,589 |
• | Scott Fleming serves as President and CIO of Stonebridge setting the strategic direction of Stonebridge including operations, business and product development, and marketing strategies. Mr. Fleming leads the Investment Committee and oversees investment policies and strategies for all of the company’s portfolio management activities. Additionally, Mr. Fleming directs the daily management of preferred stock portfolios. Prior to founding Stonebridge in 2004, Mr. Fleming co-founded Spectrum Asset Management, Inc., an investment advisor that specializes in preferred securities asset management for institutional clients and mutual funds. During his 13-year tenure there, he served as Chairman of the Board of Directors, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Investment Officer. Under his leadership, Spectrum grew to be the largest preferred securities manager in the country. Mr. Fleming previously served as Vice President, Portfolio Manager for DBL Preferred Management, Inc. in New York City. Mr. Fleming received a B.S. in Accounting from Bentley College in Waltham, MA and his MBA in Finance from Babson College in Wellesley, MA. |
• | Robert Wolf serves as Senior Vice President and Senior Portfolio Manager at Stonebridge. Mr. Wolf is a senior member of Stonebridge Advisors’ Investment Committee and oversees investment strategies and portfolio management activities across fund products and separately managed accounts. Mr. Wolf directs the daily management of preferred securities portfolios and performs both credit research and trading functions. Mr. Wolf has over sixteen years of fixed-income experience in both portfolio management and credit research. Prior to joining Stonebridge in 2006, Mr. Wolf was a high-yield fixed-income research analyst at Lehman Brothers. In this role, his responsibilities included detailed credit analysis across multiple sectors, relative value analysis, and developing trade recommendations. Mr. Wolf previously worked for Lehman Brothers’ commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) trading desk as a credit analyst. Mr. Wolf received his B.S. degree in Chemistry from Villanova University and his MBA in Finance from the New York University Stern School of Business. |
• | Danielle Salters serves as Portfolio Manager and Credit Analyst at Stonebridge. Ms. Salters is a member of Stonebridge Advisors’ Investment Committee and manages investment strategies across fund products and separately managed accounts. Ms. Salters directs the daily management of preferred securities portfolios in addition to performing both credit research and trading functions. Ms. Salters has ten years of investment management experience that has included investment strategy, portfolio construction, credit research, and trading. Prior to beginning at Stonebridge in 2012, Ms. Salters was a portfolio analyst at a boutique asset manager where she focused on high-yield credit analysis, and portfolio strategy and analytics for a hedge fund and institutional client. Previously, Ms. Salters was employed by UBS Financial Services, Inc. where she worked in taxable fixed-income sales and, later, served as the fixed-income specialist to a portfolio manager. Ms. Salters received a B.A. in economics from Duke University and is a CFA Charterholder. |
Portfolio Manager | Type of Account Managed |
Number of
Accounts |
($ Assets
In millions) |
Number of
Accounts with Performance Based Fees |
Assets of
Accounts with Performance Based Fees |
Scott T. Fleming | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 4 | 2,297.24 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 3,746 | 1,461.48 | N/A | N/A | |
Robert Wolf | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 4 | 2,297.24 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 3,746 | 1,461.48 | N/A | N/A | |
Danielle Salters | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 4 | 2,297.24 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 3,746 | 1,461.48 | N/A | N/A |
Amount of Sub-Advisory Fees
|
||
Fiscal Year Ended October 31, | ||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
$3,239,564 | $717,175 | $105,113 |
Aggregate Amount of Brokerage Commissions
|
||
Fiscal Year Ended October 31, | ||
2016 | 2015 | 2014 |
$43,704 | $16,311 | $14,007 |
Argentina | Australia | Austria | Belgium | Brazil | Canada | Chile |
March 24
April 13 April 14 May 1 May 25 June 20 August 21 October 9 November 6 November 27 December 8 December 25 December 29 January 1 February 12 February 13 |
April 14
April 17 April 25 June 12 December 25 December 26 January 1 January 15 |
April 17
May 1 May 25 June 5 June 15 August 15 October 26 November 1 December 8 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 21 May 1 June 15 September 7 October 12 November 2 November 15 November 20 December 25 December 29 January 1 February 12 February 13 |
April 14
May 22 July 3 August 7 September 4 October 9 December 25 December 26 January 1 February 19 |
April 14
May 1 June 26 August 15 September 18 September 19 October 9 October 27 November 1 December 8 December 25 |
China | Denmark | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Hong Kong |
April 3
April 4 May 1 May 29 May 30 October 2 October 3 October 4 October 5 October 6 January 1 January 2 February 15 February 16 |
April 13
April 14 April 17 May 12 May 25 May 26 June 5 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 May 25 June 23 December 6 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 October 3 October 31 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 August 15 December 25 December 26 January 1 February 19 |
April 4
April 14 April 17 May 1 May 3 May 30 October 2 October 5 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
India | Ireland | Israel | Italy | Japan | Malaysia | Mexico |
March 13
April 4 April 14 May 1 June 26 August 15 August 25 October 2 October 19 October 30 December 25 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
March 12
April 10 April 11 April 16 April 17 May 1 May 2 May 30 May 31 August 1 September 20 September 21 September 22 September 29 October 4 October 5 October 11 October 12 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 August 15 December 25 December 26 |
March 20
May 3 May 4 May 5 July 17 August 11 September 18 October 9 November 3 November 23 January 1 January 2 January 3 January 8 |
May 1
May 10 June 12 June 26 August 31 September 1 September 21 October 18 December 1 December 25 January 1 January 30 February 16 |
March 20
April 13 April 14 May 1 November 2 November 20 December 12 December 25 January 1 February 5 |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
$7,166,493 |
(1) | Common stocks and other equity securities listed on any national or foreign exchange other than Nasdaq Stock Market LLC (“Nasdaq”) and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market (“AIM”) will be valued at the last sale price on the exchange on which they are principally traded, or the official closing price for Nasdaq and AIM securities. Portfolio securities traded on more than one securities exchange are valued at the last sale price or official closing price, as applicable, on the Business Day as of which such value is being determined at the close of the exchange representing the principal market for such securities. |
(2) | Shares of open-end funds are valued at fair value which is based on NAV per share. |
(3) | Securities traded in the OTC market are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(4) | Exchange traded options and futures contracts are valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts are principally traded. If no closing price is available, they will be fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. OTC options and futures contracts are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(5) | Forward foreign currency contracts are fair valued at the current day’s interpolated foreign exchange rate, as calculated using the current day’s spot rate, and the 30, 60, 90 and 180-day forward rates provided by a pricing service or by certain independent dealers in such contracts. |
(1) | Fixed-income securities, preferred and hybrid securities, convertible securities, interest rate swaps, credit default swaps, total return swaps, currency swaps, currency-linked notes, credit-linked notes and other similar instruments will be fair valued using a pricing service. |
(2) | Fixed income and other debt securities having a remaining maturity of 60 days or less when purchased are fair valued at cost adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts (amortized cost), provided the Advisor’s Pricing Committee has determined that the use of amortized cost is an appropriate reflection of fair value given market and issuer-specific conditions existing at the time of the determination. Factors that may be considered in determining the appropriateness of the use of amortized cost include, but are not limited to, the following: |
(i) | the credit conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(ii) | the liquidity conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(iii) | the interest rate conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto (such as significant changes in interest rates); |
(iv) | issuer-specific conditions (such as significant credit deterioration); and |
(v) | any other market-based data the Advisor’s Pricing Committee considers relevant. In this regard, the Advisor’s Pricing Committee may use last-obtained market-based data to assist it when valuing portfolio securities using amortized cost. |
(3) | Repurchase agreements will be fair valued as follows. Overnight repurchase agreements will be fair valued at amortized cost when it represents the best estimate of fair value. Term repurchase agreements (i.e., those whose maturity exceeds seven days) will be fair valued by the Advisor’s Pricing Committee at the average of the bid quotations obtained daily from at least two recognized dealers. |
• | We will consider the proposal’s expected impact on shareholder value and will not consider any benefit to us, our employees or affiliates. |
• | We consider the reputation, experience and competence of a company’s management when we evaluate the merits of investing in a particular company, and we invest in companies in which we believe management goals and shareholder goals are aligned. Therefore, on most issues, we cast our votes in accordance with management’s recommendations. However, when we believe management’s position on a particular issue is not in the best interests our clients, we will vote contrary to management’s recommendation. |
• | With respect to a company’s board of directors, we believe there should be a majority of independent directors on company boards, and that audit, compensation and nominating committees should consist solely of independent directors. Therefore, we will normally vote in favor of proposals that insure such independence. |
• | With respect to auditors, we believe that the relationship between a public company and its auditors should be limited primarily to the audit engagement, and we will normally vote in favor of proposals to prohibit or limit fees paid to auditors for any services other than auditing or closely-related activities that do not raise any appearance of impaired independence. |
• | With respect to equity-based compensation plans, we believe that appropriately designed plans approved by a company’s shareholders can be an effective way to align the interests of long-term shareholders and the interests of management, employees and directors. However, we will normally vote against plans that substantially dilute our ownership interest in the company or provide participants with excessive awards. We will also normally vote in favor of proposals to require the expensing of options. |
• | With respect to shareholder rights, we believe that all shareholders of a company should have an equal voice and that barriers that limit the ability of shareholders to effect corporate change and to realize the full value of their investment are not desirable. Therefore, we will normally vote against proposals for supermajority voting rights, against the adoption of poison pill plans, and against proposals for different classes of stock with different voting rights. |
• | With respect to “social responsibility” issues, we believe that matters related to a company’s day-to-day business operations are primarily the responsibility of management. We are focused on maximizing long-term shareholder value and will normally vote against shareholder proposals requesting that a company disclose or change certain business practices, unless we believe the proposal would have a substantial, positive economic impact on the company. |
• | Sometimes a client will fund a new account with in-kind securities. When this happens, we review the in-kind portfolio, retain those securities that fit Stonebridge’s strategies, and quickly sell the rest in order to produce cash which can then be invested in the strategies. It may occur that a proxy vote solicitation is received on a security that was received in-kind and slated for immediate sale. It is our policy to vote “Abstain” on such securities, as we claim no knowledge or expertise concerning securities that are outside of our strategies, and have only transitory possession of them. |
• | In other circumstances, we may also decide to refrain from voting a particular proxy. In these instances, we will document the reasons for our decision. |
• | A description of the Proxy Voting Policy is disclosed in Form ADV Part 2A, along with contact information for clients interested in requesting a copy of the policy. |
• | An offer is made to all existing clients on an annual basis to allow them to request, at no charge, a copy of the Proxy Voting Policy. |
• | When a proxy vote is required, the Chief Investment Officer or his designee will maintain documentation of all proxies/corporate action information that was received, records of how and when the proxies were voted. |
• | Client requests for information regarding proxy votes or policies and procedures will be forwarded to the CCO for a written response. |
• | The CCO periodically reviews documentation maintained by the Chief Investment Officer to provide reasonable assurance that procedures are followed and proxies are being voted in the best interest of the clients. |
1. | Likelihood of payment: capacity and willingness of the obligor to meet its financial commitment on an obligation in accordance with the terms of the obligation; |
2. | Nature of and provisions of the obligation and the promise S&P imputes; |
3. | Protection afforded by, and relative position of, the obligation in the event of bankruptcy, reorganization, or other arrangement under the laws of bankruptcy and other laws affecting creditors’ rights. |
AAA | An obligation rated “AAA” has the highest rating assigned by Standard & Poor’s. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is extremely strong. |
AA | An obligation rated “AA” differs from the highest rated obligations only in small degree. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is very strong. |
A | An obligation rated “A” is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher rated categories. However, the obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is still strong. |
BBB | An obligation rated “BBB” exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
BB | An obligation rated “BB” is less vulnerable to nonpayment than other speculative issues. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions which could lead to the obligor’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
B | An obligation rated “B” is more vulnerable to nonpayment than obligations rated “BB,” but the obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the obligor’s capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
CCC | An obligation rated “CCC” is currently vulnerable to nonpayment, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. In the event of adverse business, financial, or economic conditions, the obligor is not likely to have the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
CC | An obligation rated “CC” is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment. The “CC” rating is used when a default has not yet occurred but S&P expects default to be a virtual certainty regardless of the anticipated time to default. |
C | An obligation rated “C” is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment and the obligation is expected to have lower relative seniority or lower ultimate recovery compared to obligations that are rated higher. |
D | An obligation rated “D” is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the “D” rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due unless S&P believes that such payments will be made within five business days in the absence of a stated grace period or within the earlier of the stated grace period or 30 calendar days. The “D” rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. An obligation’s rating is lowered to ‘D’ if it is subject to a distressed exchange offer. |
Aaa | Obligations rated Aaa are judged to be of the highest quality, subject to the lowest level of credit risk. |
Aa | Obligations rated Aa are judged to be of high quality and are subject to very low credit risk. |
A | Obligations rated A are judged to be upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk. |
Baa | Obligations rated Baa are judged to be medium-grade and subject to moderate credit risk and as such may possess certain speculative characteristics. |
Ba | Obligations rated Ba are judged to be speculative and are subject to substantial credit risk. |
B | Obligations rated B are considered speculative and are subject to high credit risk. |
Caa | Obligations rated Caa are judged to be speculative of poor standing and are subject to very high credit risk. |
Ca | Obligations rated Ca are highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default, with some prospect of recovery of principal and interest. |
C | Obligations rated C are the lowest rated and are typically in default, with little prospect for recovery of principal or interest. |
AAA | Highest credit quality. ‘AAA’ ratings denote the lowest expectation of default risk. They are assigned only in cases of exceptionally strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is highly unlikely to be adversely affected by foreseeable events. |
AA | Very high credit quality. ‘AA’ ratings denote expectations of very low default risk. They indicate very strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable events. |
A | High credit quality. ‘A’ ratings denote expectations of low default risk. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered strong. This capacity may, nevertheless, be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic conditions than is the case for higher ratings. |
BBB | Good credit quality. ‘BBB’ ratings indicate that expectations of default risk are currently low. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered adequate but adverse business or economic conditions are more likely to impair this capacity. |
BB | Speculative. ‘BB’ ratings indicate an elevated vulnerability to default risk, particularly in the event of adverse changes in business or economic conditions over time; however, business or financial flexibility exists which supports the servicing of financial commitments. |
B | Highly speculative. ‘B’ ratings indicate that material default risk is present, but a limited margin of safety remains. Financial commitments are currently being met; however, capacity for continued payment is vulnerable to deterioration in the business and economic environment. |
CCC | Substantial credit risk. Default is a real possibility. |
CC | Very high levels of credit risk. Default of some kind appears probable. |
C |
Exceptionally high levels of credit risk. Default is imminent or inevitable, or the issuer is in standstill. Conditions that
are indicative of a ‘C’ category rating for an issuer include:
• the issuer has entered into a grace or cure period following non-payment of a material financial obligation; • the issuer has entered into a temporary negotiated waiver or standstill agreement following a payment default on a material financial obligation; or • Fitch otherwise believes a condition of ‘RD’ or ‘D’ to be imminent or inevitable, including through the formal announcement of a distressed debt exchange. |
RD |
Restricted default. ‘RD’ ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch’s opinion has experienced an uncured
payment default on a bond, loan or other material financial obligation but which has not entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure, and which has
not otherwise ceased operating. This would include:
• the selective payment default on a specific class or currency of debt; • the uncured expiry of any applicable grace period, cure period or default forbearance period following a payment default on a bank loan, capital markets security or other material financial obligation; • the extension of multiple waivers or forbearance periods upon a payment default on one or more material financial obligations, either in series or in parallel; or • execution of a distressed debt exchange on one or more material financial obligations. |
D | Default. ‘D’ ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch’s opinion has entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure, or which has otherwise ceased business. |
NAME OF BENEFICIAL OWNER |
% OF
OUTSTANDING SHARES OWNED |
FIRST TRUST PREFERRED SECURITIES AND INCOME ETF | |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 28.15% |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 9.98% |
UBS Financial Services Inc. | 8.44% |
Schwab (Charles) & Co. Inc. | 7.58% |
National Financial Services, LLC | 7.11% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping | 6.00% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc. | 5.92% |
Pershing, LLC | 5.69% |
(1) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping: 4804 Dear Lake Dr. E., Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(2) | Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC: 1300 Thames St. 6th Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21231 |
(3) | National Financial Services: 499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(4) | Pershing LLC: 1 Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(5) | RBC Capital Markets, LLC.: 60 S. 6 th St., Minneapolis, MN 55402 |
(6) | Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.: 2423 East Lincoln Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85016 |
(7) | TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc.: 1005 Ameritrade Place, Bellevue, Nebraska 68005 |
(8) | UBS Financial Services Inc.: 1000 Harbor Blvd., Weehawken, New Jersey 07086 |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust Managed Municipal ETF | FMB | Nasdaq |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
13 |
|
15 |
|
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
|
27 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
|
33 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
|
39 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
|
C-1 |
(1) | The Fund may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | The Fund may not borrow money, except that the Fund may (i) borrow money from banks for temporary or emergency purposes (but not for leverage or the purchase of investments) and (ii) engage in other transactions permissible under the 1940 Act that may involve a borrowing (such as obtaining short-term credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions, engaging in delayed-delivery transactions, or purchasing certain futures, forward contracts and options), provided that the combination of (i) and (ii) shall not exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets (including the amount borrowed), less the Fund's liabilities (other than borrowings). |
(3) | The Fund will not underwrite the securities of other issuers except to the extent the Fund may be considered an underwriter under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act” ), in connection with the purchase and sale of portfolio securities. |
(4) | The Fund will not purchase or sell real estate or interests therein, unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prohibit the Fund from purchasing or selling securities or other instruments backed by real estate or of issuers engaged in real estate activities). |
(5) | The Fund may not make loans to other persons, except through (i) the purchase of debt securities permissible under the Fund's investment policies, (ii) repurchase agreements, or (iii) the lending of portfolio securities, provided that no such loan of portfolio securities may be made by the Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets. |
(6) | The Fund may not purchase or sell physical commodities unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Fund from purchasing or selling options, futures contracts, forward contracts or other derivative instruments, or from investing in securities or other instruments backed by physical commodities). |
(7) | The Fund may not invest 25% or more of the value of its total assets in securities of issuers in any one industry. This restriction does not apply to obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities. |
(1) | The Fund may invest in U.S. government securities, including bills, notes and bonds differing as to maturity and rates of interest, which are either issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury or by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities. U.S. government securities include securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury, by various agencies of the U.S. government, or by various instrumentalities that have been established or sponsored by the U.S. government. U.S. Treasury securities are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Securities issued or guaranteed by federal agencies and U.S. government-sponsored instrumentalities may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some of the U.S. government agencies that issue or guarantee securities include the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Farmers Home Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, the Maritime Administration, the Small Business Administration and The Tennessee Valley Authority. An instrumentality of the U.S. government is a government agency organized under federal charter with government supervision. Instrumentalities issuing or guaranteeing securities include, among others, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and the Federal National Mortgage Association ( “Fannie Mae” ). In the case of those U.S. government securities not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, the investor must look principally to the agency or instrumentality issuing or guaranteeing the security for ultimate repayment and may not be able to assert a claim against the United States itself in the event that the agency or instrumentality |
does not meet its commitment. The U.S. government, its agencies and instrumentalities do not guarantee the market value of their securities; consequently, the value of such securities may fluctuate. In addition, the Fund may invest in sovereign debt obligations of non-U.S. countries. A sovereign debtor’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest in a timely manner may be affected by a number of factors, including its cash flow situation, the extent of its non-U.S. reserves, the availability of sufficient non-U.S. exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the sovereign debtor’s policy toward principal international lenders and the political constraints to which it may be subject. | |
(2) | The Fund may invest in certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings and loan association. Such certificates are for a definite period of time, earn a specified rate of return and are normally negotiable. If such certificates of deposit are non-negotiable, they will be considered illiquid securities and be subject to the Fund's 15% restriction on investments in illiquid securities. Pursuant to the certificate of deposit, the issuer agrees to pay the amount deposited plus interest to the bearer of the certificate on the date specified thereon. Under current FDIC regulations, the maximum insurance payable as to any one certificate of deposit is $250,000; therefore, certificates of deposit purchased by the Fund may not be fully insured. The Fund may only invest in certificates of deposit issued by U.S. banks with at least $1 billion in assets. |
(3) | The Fund may invest in bankers’ acceptances, which are short-term credit instruments used to finance commercial transactions. Generally, an acceptance is a time draft drawn on a bank by an exporter or an importer to obtain a stated amount of funds to pay for specific merchandise. The draft is then “accepted” by a bank that, in effect, unconditionally guarantees to pay the face value of the instrument on its maturity date. The acceptance may then be held by the accepting bank as an asset or it may be sold in the secondary market at the going rate of interest for a specific maturity. |
(4) | The Fund may invest in repurchase agreements, which involve purchases of debt securities with counterparties that are deemed by the Advisor to present acceptable credit risks. In such an action, at the time the Fund purchases the security, it simultaneously agrees to resell and redeliver the security to the seller, who also simultaneously agrees to buy back the security at a fixed price and time. This assures a predetermined yield for the Fund during its holding period since the resale price is always greater than the purchase price and reflects an agreed-upon market rate. Such actions afford an opportunity for the Fund to invest temporarily available cash. The Fund may enter into repurchase agreements only with respect to obligations of the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, certificates of deposit or bankers’ acceptances in which the Fund may invest. Repurchase agreements may be considered loans to the seller, collateralized by the underlying securities. The risk to the Fund is limited to the ability of the seller to pay the agreed-upon sum on the repurchase date; in the event of default, the repurchase agreement provides that the Fund is entitled to sell the underlying collateral. If the value of the collateral declines after the agreement is entered into, however, and if the seller defaults under a repurchase agreement when the value of the underlying collateral is less than the repurchase price, the Fund could incur a loss of both principal and interest. The portfolio managers monitor the value of the collateral at the time the action is entered into and at all times during the term of the repurchase agreement. The portfolio managers do so in an effort to determine that the value of the collateral always equals or exceeds the agreed-upon repurchase price to be paid to the Fund. If the seller were to be subject to a federal bankruptcy proceeding, the ability of the Fund to liquidate the collateral could be delayed or impaired because of certain provisions of the bankruptcy laws. |
(5) | The Fund may invest in bank time deposits, which are monies kept on deposit with banks or savings and loan associations for a stated period of time at a fixed rate of interest. There may be penalties for the early withdrawal of such time deposits, in which case the yields of these investments will be reduced. |
(6) | The Fund may invest in commercial paper, which are short-term unsecured promissory notes, including variable rate master demand notes issued by corporations to finance their current operations. Master demand notes are direct lending arrangements between the Fund and a corporation. There is no secondary market for the notes. However, they are redeemable by the Fund at any time. The Fund's portfolio managers will consider the financial condition of the corporation ( e.g. , earning power, cash flow and other liquidity ratios) and will continuously monitor the corporation’s ability to meet all of its financial obligations, because the Fund's liquidity might be impaired if the corporation were unable to pay principal and interest on demand. The Fund may invest in commercial paper only if it has received the highest rating from at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, if unrated, judged by First Trust to be of comparable quality. |
(7) | The Fund may invest in shares of money market funds, as consistent with its investment objectives and policies. Shares of money market funds are subject to management fees and other expenses of those funds. Therefore, investments in money market funds will cause the Fund to bear proportionately the costs incurred by the money market funds’ operations. At the same time, the Fund will continue to pay its own management fees and expenses with respect to all of its assets, including any portion invested in the shares of other investment companies. It is possible for the Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended October 31, | |
2016 | 2015 |
85% | 109% |
(1) | Market Risk. Market risk is the risk that the value of the underlying assets may go up or down. Adverse movements in the value of an underlying asset can expose the Fund to losses. Derivative instruments may include elements of leverage and, accordingly, fluctuations in the value of the derivative instrument in relation to the underlying asset may be magnified. The successful use of derivative instruments depends upon a variety of factors, particularly the portfolio managers’ ability to predict movements of the securities, currencies and commodities markets, which may require different skills than predicting changes in the prices of individual securities. There can be no assurance that any particular strategy adopted will succeed. A decision to engage in a derivative transaction will reflect the portfolio managers’ judgment that the derivative transaction will provide value to the Fund and its shareholders and is consistent with the Fund's objectives, investment limitations and operating policies. In making such a judgment, the portfolio managers will analyze the benefits and risks of the derivative transactions and weigh them in the context of the Fund's overall investments and investment objectives. |
(2) | Correlation Risk. Correlation risk is the risk that there might be an imperfect correlation, or even no correlation, between price movements of a derivative instrument and price movements of investments being hedged. When a derivative transaction is used to completely hedge another position, changes in the market value of the combined position (the derivative instrument plus the position being hedged) result from an imperfect correlation between the price movements of the two instruments. With a perfect hedge, the value of the combined position remains unchanged with any change in the price of the underlying asset. With an imperfect hedge, the value of the derivative instrument and its hedge are not perfectly correlated. For example, if the value of a derivative instrument used in a short hedge (such as writing a call option, buying a put option or selling a futures contract) increased by less than the decline in value of the hedged investments, the hedge would not be perfectly correlated. This might occur due to factors unrelated to the value of the investments being hedged, such as speculative or |
other pressures on the markets in which these instruments are traded. The effectiveness of hedges using instruments on indices will depend, in part, on the degree of correlation between price movements in the index and the price movements in the investments being hedged. | |
(3) | Liquidity Risk. Liquidity risk is the risk that a derivative instrument cannot be sold, closed out or replaced quickly at or very close to its fundamental value. Generally, exchange contracts are very liquid because the exchange clearinghouse is the counterparty of every contract. Over-the counter (“OTC”) transactions are less liquid than exchange-traded derivatives since they often can only be closed out with the other party to the transaction. The Fund might be required by applicable regulatory requirements to maintain assets as “cover,” maintain segregated accounts and/or make margin payments when taking positions in derivative instruments involving obligations to third parties ( i.e. , instruments other than purchase options). If the Fund is unable to close out its positions in such instruments, it might be required to continue to maintain such assets or accounts or make such payments until the position expires, matures or is closed out. These requirements might impair the Fund's ability to sell a security or make an investment at a time when it would otherwise be favorable to do so, or require that the Fund sell a portfolio security at a disadvantageous time. The Fund's ability to sell or close out a position in an instrument prior to expiration or maturity depends upon the existence of a liquid secondary market or, in the absence of such a market, the ability and willingness of the counterparty to enter into a transaction closing out the position. Due to liquidity risk, there is no assurance that any derivatives position can be sold or closed out at a time and price that is favorable to the Fund. |
(4) | Legal Risk. Legal risk is the risk of loss caused by the unenforceability of a party’s obligations under the derivative. While a party seeking price certainty agrees to surrender the potential upside in exchange for downside protection, the party taking the risk is looking for a positive payoff. Despite this voluntary assumption of risk, a counterparty that has lost money in a derivative transaction may try to avoid payment by exploiting various legal uncertainties about certain derivative products. |
(5) | Systemic or “Interconnection” Risk. Systemic or “interconnection” risk is the risk that a disruption in the financial markets will cause difficulties for all market participants. In other words, a disruption in one market will spill over into other markets, perhaps creating a chain reaction. Much of the OTC derivatives market takes place among the OTC dealers themselves, thus creating a large interconnected web of financial obligations. This interconnectedness raises the possibility that a default by one large dealer could create losses for other dealers and destabilize the entire market for OTC derivative instruments. |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES | |||||
Niel B. Nielson
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 03/54 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer (January 2015 to present), Pelita Harapan Educational Foundation (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Servant Interactive LLC (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Dew Learning LLC (Educational Products and Services); President (June 2002 to June 2012), Covenant College | 141 Portfolios |
Director of Covenant Transport Inc.
(May 2003 to May 2014) |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
James M. Dykas
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 01/66 |
President and Chief Executive Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer (January 2016 to present), Controller (January 2011 to January 2016), Senior Vice President (April 2007 to January 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Chief Financial Officer, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) (January 2016 to present) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) (January 2016 to present) | N/A | N/A |
W. Scott Jardine
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 05/60 |
Secretary and Chief Legal Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Secretary and General Counsel, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) | N/A | N/A |
Daniel J. Lindquist
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 02/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director (July 2012 to present), Senior Vice President (September 2005 to July 2012), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Kristi A. Maher
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 12/66 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• CCO since January 2011, Assistant Secretary since Inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Donald P. Swade
120 E. Liberty Drive Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 08/72 |
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Senior Vice President (July 2016 to Present), Vice President (April 2012 to July 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P., Vice President (September 2006 to April 2012), Guggenheim Funds Investment Advisors, LLC/Claymore Securities, Inc. | N/A | N/A |
Roger F. Testin
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 06/66 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Stan Ueland
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President (September 2012 to present), Vice President (August 2005 to September 2012) First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
(1) | Mr. Bowen is deemed an “interested person” of the Trust due to his position as Chief Executive Officer of First Trust, investment advisor of the Fund. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Fund (1) |
Total Compensation from the
First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $4,302 | $370,744 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $4,328 | $391,203 |
Robert F. Keith | $4,315 | $381,412 |
Niel B. Nielson | $4,315 | $381,482 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Fund to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2016 for services to the Fund. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2016 for services to the 137 portfolios existing in 2016, which consisted of 7 open-end mutual funds, 16 closed-end funds and 114 exchange-traded funds. |
Trustee |
Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in the Fund (Number of Shares Held) |
Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen by Trustee in the First Trust Fund Complex |
Interested Trustee | ||
James A. Bowen | None | Over $100,000 |
Independent Trustees | ||
Richard E. Erickson | None | Over $100,000 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | None | Over $100,000 |
Robert F. Keith | None | Over $100,000 |
Niel B. Nielson | None | Over $100,000 |
Name |
Position with
First Trust |
Length of Service
with First Trust |
Principal Occupation During Past
Five Years |
Tom Futrell |
Senior Vice
President and Senior Portfolio Manager |
Since 2013 |
Senior Vice President and Senior
Portfolio Manager (September 2013 to Present), First Trust Advisors L.P.; Senior Portfolio Manager, Performance Trust Investment Advisors; (January 2011 to September 2013) |
Johnathan N. Wilhelm |
Senior Vice President and Senior Portfolio
Manager |
Since 2013 |
Senior Portfolio Manager (September 2013 to Present,
First Trust Advisors L.P.; Portfolio Manager, Performance Trust Investment Advisors; (January 2011 to September 2013) |
Portfolio Manager |
Registered
Investment Companies Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Accounts
Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Mr. Futrell | N/A | N/A | 17($19,227,206) |
Mr. Wilhelm | N/A | N/A | 17($19,227,206) |
Aggregate Amount of Brokerage Commissions
|
|||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
October 31, |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2014 |
|
2016 | 2015 | ||
5/13/2014 | $0 | $0 | $0 |
(1) | Common stocks and other equity securities listed on any national or foreign exchange other than Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market (“ AIM ”) will be valued at the last sale price on the exchange on which they are principally traded, or the official closing price for Nasdaq and AIM securities. Portfolio securities traded on more than one securities exchange are valued at the last sale price or official closing price, as applicable, on the Business Day as of which such value is being determined at the close of the exchange representing the principal market for such securities. |
(2) | Shares of open-end funds are valued at fair value which is based on NAV per share. |
(3) | Securities traded in the OTC market are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(4) | Exchange traded options and futures contracts are valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts are principally traded. If no closing price is available, they will be fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. OTC options and futures contracts are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(5) | Forward foreign currency contracts are fair valued at the current day’s interpolated foreign exchange rate, as calculated using the current day’s spot rate, and the 30, 60, 90 and 180-day forward rates provided by a pricing service or by certain independent dealers in such contracts. |
(1) | Fixed-income securities, convertible securities, interest rate swaps, credit default swaps, total return swaps, currency swaps, currency-linked notes, credit-linked notes and other similar instruments will be fair valued using a pricing service. |
(2) | Fixed income and other debt securities having a remaining maturity of 60 days or less when purchased are fair valued at cost adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts (amortized cost), provided the Advisor’s Pricing Committee has determined that the use of amortized cost is an appropriate reflection of fair value given market and issuer-specific conditions existing at the time of the determination. Factors that may be considered in determining the appropriateness of the use of amortized cost include, but are not limited to, the following: |
(i) | the credit conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(ii) | the liquidity conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(iii) | the interest rate conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto (such as significant changes in interest rates); |
(iv) | issuer-specific conditions (such as significant credit deterioration); and |
(v) | any other market-based data the Advisor’s Pricing Committee considers relevant. In this regard, the Advisor’s Pricing Committee may use last-obtained market-based data to assist it when valuing portfolio securities using amortized cost. |
(3) | Repurchase agreements will be fair valued as follows. Overnight repurchase agreements will be fair valued at amortized cost when it represents the best estimate of fair value. Term repurchase agreements (i.e., those whose maturity exceeds seven days) will be fair valued by the Advisor’s Pricing Committee at the average of the bid quotations obtained daily from at least two recognized dealers. |
NAME OF BENEFICIAL OWNER |
% OF
OUTSTANDING SHARES OWNED |
FIRST TRUST MANAGED MUNICIPAL ETF | |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 15.34% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping | 13.61% |
LPL Financial Corp. | 12.31% |
National Financial Services, LLC | 12.04% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 9.16% |
Schwab (Charles) & Co., Inc. | 7.12% |
Pershing, LLC | 6.75% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc. | 5.14% |
(1) | LPL Financial Corp.: 9785 Towne Center Drive, San Diego, California 92121 |
(2) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping: 4804 Dear Lake Dr. E., Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(3) | Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC: 1300 Thames St. 6th Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21231 |
(4) | National Financial Services: 499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(5) | Pershing LLC: 1 Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(6) | Raymond James and Associates, Inc.: 880 Carilion Parkway, St. Petersburg, FL 33716 |
(7) | Schwab (Charles) & Co., Inc.: 2423 East Lincoln Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85016 |
(8) | TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc.: 1005 Ameritrade Place, Bellevue, Nebraska 68005 |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances: |
1.1. | The board is classified, and a continuing director responsible for a problematic governance issue at the board/committee level that would warrant a withhold/against vote recommendation is not up for election. All appropriate nominees (except new) may be held accountable. |
1.2. | The board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers. Sustained poor performance is measured by one- and three-year total shareholder returns in the bottom half of a company’s four-digit GICS industry group (Russell 3000 companies only). Take into consideration the company’s five-year total shareholder return and operational metrics. Problematic provisions include but are not limited to: |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections or a majority vote standard with no plurality carve-out for contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A dual-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
(1) | In general, companies with a plurality vote standard use “Withhold” as the contrary vote option in director elections; companies with a majority vote standard use “Against”. However, it will vary by company and the proxy must be checked to determine the valid contrary vote option for the particular company. |
(2) | A “new nominee” is any current nominee who has not already been elected by shareholders and who joined the board after the problematic action in question transpired. If ISS cannot determine whether the nominee joined the board before or after the problematic action transpired, the nominee will be considered a “new nominee” if he or she joined the board within the 12 months prior to the upcoming shareholder meeting. |
1.3. | The company’s poison pill has a “dead-hand” or “modified dead-hand” feature. Vote against or withhold from nominees every year until this feature is removed; |
1.4. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of more than 12 months (“long-term pill”), or renews any existing pill, including any “short-term pill” (12 months or less), without shareholder approval. A commitment or policy that puts a newly adopted pill to a binding shareholder vote may potentially offset an adverse vote recommendation. Review such companies with classified boards every year, and such companies with annually elected boards at least once every three years, and vote against or withhold votes from all nominees if the company still maintains a non-shareholder-approved poison pill; or |
1.5. | The board makes a material adverse change to an existing poison pill without shareholder approval. |
1.6. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of 12 months or less (“short-term pill”) without shareholder approval, taking into account the following factors: |
➤ | The date of the pill‘s adoption relative to the date of the next meeting of shareholders — i.e. whether the company had time to put the pill on the ballot for shareholder ratification given the circumstances; |
➤ | The issuer’s rationale; |
➤ | The issuer’s governance structure and practices; and |
➤ | The issuer’s track record of accountability to shareholders. Restricting Binding Shareholder Proposals |
1.7. | The company’s charter imposes undue restrictions on shareholders’ ability to amend the bylaws. Such restrictions include, but are not limited to: outright prohibition on the submission of binding shareholder proposals, or share ownership requirements or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against on an ongoing basis. |
1.8. | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive (see discussion under “Auditor Ratification”); |
1.9. | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
1.10. | There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm. |
1.11. | Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a level of serious concern, such as: fraud; misapplication of GAAP; and material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures. Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence, and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether withhold/against votes are warranted. |
1.12. | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
1.13. | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
1.14. | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders; |
1.15. | The company fails to submit one-time transfers of stock options to a shareholder vote; or |
1.16. | The company fails to fulfill the terms of a burn rate commitment made to shareholders. |
1.17. | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
1.18. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if the board amends the company's bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders' rights or that could adversely impact shareholders, considering the following factors: |
➤ | The board's rationale for adopting the bylaw/charter amendment without shareholder ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure by the company of any significant engagement with shareholders regarding the amendment; |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights caused by the board's unilateral amendment to the bylaws/charter; |
➤ | The board's track record with regard to unilateral board action on bylaw/charter amendments or other entrenchment provisions; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; |
➤ | The company's existing governance provisions; |
➤ | The timing of the board's amendment to the bylaws/charter in connection with a significant business development; and, |
➤ | Other factors, as deemed appropriate, that may be relevant to determine the impact of the amendment on shareholders. |
➤ | Classified the board; |
➤ | Adopted supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; or |
➤ | Eliminated shareholders' ability to amend bylaws. |
1.19. | For newly public companies, generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if, prior to or in connection with the company's public offering, the company or its board adopted bylaw or charter provisions materially adverse to shareholder rights, or implemented a multi-class capital structure in which the classes have unequal voting rights considering the following factors: |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights; |
➤ | The disclosed rationale; |
➤ | The ability to change the governance structure (e.g., limitations on shareholders’ right to amend the bylaws or charter, or supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter); |
➤ | The ability of shareholders to hold directors accountable through annual director elections, or whether the company has a classified board structure; |
➤ | Any reasonable sunset provision; and |
➤ | Other relevant factors. |
1.20. | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight (3) , or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
1.21. | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
1.22. | Egregious actions related to a director’s service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company. |
2.1. | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | Disclosed outreach efforts by the board to shareholders in the wake of the vote; |
➤ | Rationale provided in the proxy statement for the level of implementation; |
➤ | The subject matter of the proposal; |
➤ | The level of support for and opposition to the resolution in past meetings; |
➤ | Actions taken by the board in response to the majority vote and its engagement with shareholders; |
(3) | Examples of failure of risk oversight include, but are not limited to: bribery; large or serial fines or sanctions from regulatory bodies; significant adverse legal judgments or settlements; hedging of company stock; or significant pledging of company stock. |
➤ | The continuation of the underlying issue as a voting item on the ballot (as either shareholder or management proposals); and |
➤ | Other factors as appropriate. |
2.2. | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
2.3. | At the previous board election, any director received more than 50 percent withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote; |
2.4. | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the majority of votes cast at the most recent shareholder meeting at which shareholders voted on the say-on-pay frequency; or |
➤ | The board's rationale for selecting a frequency that is different from the frequency that received a plurality; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure and vote results; |
➤ | ISS' analysis of whether there are compensation concerns or a history of problematic compensation practices; and |
➤ | The previous year's support level on the company's say-on-pay proposal. |
3.1. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case (4) who attend less than 75 percent of the aggregate of their board and committee meetings for the period for which they served, unless an acceptable reason for absences is disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. Acceptable reasons for director absences are generally limited to the following: |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
3.2. | If the proxy disclosure is unclear and insufficient to determine whether a director attended at least 75 percent of the aggregate of his/her board and committee meetings during his/her period of service, vote against or withhold from the director(s) in question. |
3.4. | CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own — withhold only at their outside boards (5) . |
(4) | For new nominees only, schedule conflicts due to commitments made prior to their appointment to the board are considered if disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. |
(5) | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote from the CEO of a parent company board or any of the controlled (>50 percent ownership) subsidiaries of that parent, but may do so at subsidiaries that are less than 50 percent controlled and boards outside the parent/subsidiary relationships. |
4.1. | The inside or affiliated outside director serves on any of the three key committees: audit, compensation, or nominating; |
4.2. | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; |
4.3. | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee; or |
4.4. | Independent directors make up less than a majority of the directors. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
➤ | The scope of the proposal; |
➤ | The company's current board leadership structure; |
➤ | The company's governance structure and practices; |
➤ | Company performance; and |
➤ | Any other relevant factors that may be applicable. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for management and shareholder proposals for proxy access with the following provisions: |
➤ | Ownership threshold: maximum requirement not more than three percent (3%) of the voting power; |
➤ | Ownership duration: maximum requirement not longer than three (3) years of continuous ownership for each member of the nominating group; |
➤ | Aggregation: minimal or no limits on the number of shareholders permitted to form a nominating group; |
➤ | Cap: cap on nominees of generally twenty-five percent (25%) of the board. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the election of directors in contested elections, considering the following factors: |
➤ | Long-term financial performance of the company relative to its industry; |
➤ | Management’s track record; |
➤ | Background to the contested election; |
➤ | Nominee qualifications and any compensatory arrangements; |
➤ | Strategic plan of dissident slate and quality of the critique against management; |
➤ | Likelihood that the proposed goals and objectives can be achieved (both slates); and |
➤ | Stock ownership positions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to increase the number of authorized common shares where the primary purpose of the increase is to issue shares in connection with a transaction on the same ballot that warrants support. |
➤ | Past Board Performance: |
➤ | The company's use of authorized shares during the last three years |
➤ | The Current Request: |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of the specific purposes of the proposed increase; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of specific and severe risks to shareholders of not approving the request; and |
➤ | The dilutive impact of the request as determined relative to an allowable increase calculated by ISS (typically 100 percent of existing authorized shares) that reflects the company's need for shares and total shareholder returns. |
A. | Most companies: 100 percent of existing authorized shares. |
B. | Companies with less than 50 percent of existing authorized shares either outstanding or reserved for issuance: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
C. | Companies with one- and three-year total shareholder returns (TSRs) in the bottom 10 percent of the U.S. market as of the end of the calendar quarter that is closest to their most recent fiscal year end: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
D. | Companies at which both conditions (B and C) above are both present: 25 percent of existing authorized shares. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on mergers and acquisitions. Review and evaluate the merits and drawbacks of the proposed transaction, balancing various and sometimes countervailing factors including: |
➤ | Valuation - Is the value to be received by the target shareholders (or paid by the acquirer) reasonable? While the fairness opinion may provide an initial starting point for assessing valuation reasonableness, emphasis is placed on the offer premium, market reaction, and strategic rationale. |
➤ | Market reaction - How has the market responded to the proposed deal? A negative market reaction should cause closer scrutiny of a deal. |
➤ | Strategic rationale - Does the deal make sense strategically? From where is the value derived? Cost and revenue synergies should not be overly aggressive or optimistic, but reasonably achievable. Management should also have a favorable track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions. |
➤ | Negotiations and process - Were the terms of the transaction negotiated at arm's-length? Was the process fair and equitable? A fair process helps to ensure the best price for shareholders. Significant negotiation "wins" can also signify the deal makers' competency. The comprehensiveness of the sales process (e.g., full auction, partial auction, no auction) can also affect shareholder value. |
➤ | Conflicts of interest - Are insiders benefiting from the transaction disproportionately and inappropriately as compared to non-insider shareholders? As the result of potential conflicts, the directors and officers of the company may be more likely to vote to approve a merger than if they did not hold these interests. Consider whether these interests |
may have influenced these directors and officers to support or recommend the merger. The CIC figure presented in the "ISS Transaction Summary" section of this report is an aggregate figure that can in certain cases be a misleading indicator of the true value transfer from shareholders to insiders. Where such figure appears to be excessive, analyze the underlying assumptions to determine whether a potential conflict exists. | |
➤ | Governance - Will the combined company have a better or worse governance profile than the current governance profiles of the respective parties to the transaction? If the governance profile is to change for the worse, the burden is on the company to prove that other issues (such as valuation) outweigh any deterioration in governance. |
1. | Maintain appropriate pay-for-performance alignment, with emphasis on long-term shareholder value: This principle encompasses overall executive pay practices, which must be designed to attract, retain, and appropriately motivate the key employees who drive shareholder value creation over the long term. It will take into consideration, among other factors, the link between pay and performance; the mix between fixed and variable pay; performance goals; and equity-based plan costs; |
2. | Avoid arrangements that risk “pay for failure”: This principle addresses the appropriateness of long or indefinite contracts, excessive severance packages, and guaranteed compensation; |
3. | Maintain an independent and effective compensation committee: This principle promotes oversight of executive pay programs by directors with appropriate skills, knowledge, experience, and a sound process for compensation decision-making (e.g., including access to independent expertise and advice when needed); |
4. | Provide shareholders with clear, comprehensive compensation disclosures: This principle underscores the importance of informative and timely disclosures that enable shareholders to evaluate executive pay practices fully and fairly; |
5. | Avoid inappropriate pay to non-executive directors: This principle recognizes the interests of shareholders in ensuring that compensation to outside directors does not compromise their independence and ability to make appropriate judgments in overseeing managers’ pay and performance. At the market level, it may incorporate a variety of generally accepted best practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on ballot items related to executive pay and practices, as well as certain aspects of outside director compensation. |
Vote against Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation (Management Say-on-Pay or “MSOP”) if: |
➤ | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
➤ | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
➤ | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
➤ | There is no MSOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an MSOP is warranted due to pay-for-performance misalignment, problematic pay practices, or the lack of adequate responsiveness on compensation issues raised previously, or a combination thereof; |
➤ | The board fails to respond adequately to a previous MSOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
➤ | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, including option repricing or option backdating; or |
➤ | The situation is egregious. |
➤ | Primary Evaluation Factors for Executive Pay |
1. | Peer Group (7) Alignment: |
➤ | The degree of alignment between the company's annualized TSR rank and the CEO's annualized total pay rank within a peer group, each measured over a three-year period. |
➤ | The multiple of the CEO's total pay relative to the peer group median. |
2. | Absolute Alignment (8) – the absolute alignment between the trend in CEO pay and company TSR over the prior five fiscal years – i.e. , the difference between the trend in annual pay changes and the trend in annualized TSR during the period. |
(6) | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
(7) | The revised peer group is generally comprised of 14-24 companies that are selected using market cap, revenue (or assets for certain financial firms), GICS industry group, and company's selected peers' GICS industry group, with size constraints, via a process designed to select peers that are comparable to the subject company in terms of revenue/assets and industry, and also within a market-cap bucket that is reflective of the company's. For Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels companies, market cap is the only size determinant. |
(8) | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
➤ | The ratio of performance- to time-based equity awards; |
➤ | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation; |
➤ | The completeness of disclosure and rigor of performance goals; |
➤ | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
➤ | Actual results of financial/operational metrics, such as growth in revenue, profit, cash flow, etc., both absolute and relative to peers; |
➤ | Special circumstances related to, for example, a new CEO in the prior FY or anomalous equity grant practices (e.g., bi-annual awards); |
➤ | Realizable pay compared to grant pay; and |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
(9) | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
➤ | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
➤ | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking; and |
➤ | Options Backdating. |
➤ | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
➤ | Excessive perquisites or tax gross-ups, including any gross-up related to a secular trust or restricted stock vesting; |
➤ | New or extended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | CIC payments exceeding 3 times base salary and average/target/most recent bonus; |
➤ | CIC severance payments without involuntary job loss or substantial diminution of duties ("single" or "modified single" triggers); |
➤ | CIC payments with excise tax gross-ups (including "modified" gross-ups); |
➤ | Insufficient executive compensation disclosure by externally-managed issuers (EMIs) such that a reasonable assessment of pay programs and practices applicable to the EMI's executives is not possible. |
➤ | Multi-year guaranteed bonuses; |
➤ | A single or common performance metric used for short- and long-term plans; |
➤ | Lucrative severance packages; |
➤ | High pay opportunities relative to industry peers; |
➤ | Disproportionate supplemental pensions; or |
➤ | Mega annual equity grants that provide unlimited upside with no downside risk. |
➤ | Factors that potentially mitigate the impact of risky incentives include rigorous claw-back provisions and robust stock ownership/holding guidelines. |
➤ | Reason and motive for the options backdating issue, such as inadvertent vs. deliberate grant date changes; |
➤ | Duration of options backdating; |
➤ | Size of restatement due to options backdating; |
➤ | Corrective actions taken by the board or compensation committee, such as canceling or re-pricing backdated options, the recouping of option gains on backdated grants; and |
➤ | Adoption of a grant policy that prohibits backdating, and creates a fixed grant schedule or window period for equity grants in the future. |
➤ | Failure to respond to majority-supported shareholder proposals on executive pay topics; or |
➤ | Failure to adequately respond to the company's previous say-on-pay proposal that received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on certain equity-based compensation plans (11) depending on a combination of certain plan features and equity grant practices, where positive factors may counterbalance negative factors, and vice versa, as evaluated using an "equity plan scorecard" (EPSC) approach with three pillars: |
➤ | Plan Cost: The total estimated cost of the company’s equity plans relative to industry/market cap peers, measured by the company's estimated Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) in relation to peers and considering both: |
➤ | SVT based on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants, plus outstanding unvested/unexercised grants; and |
➤ | SVT based only on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants. |
➤ | Plan Features: |
➤ | Automatic single-triggered award vesting upon a change in control (CIC); |
➤ | Discretionary vesting authority; |
➤ | Liberal share recycling on various award types; |
➤ | Lack of minimum vesting period for grants made under the plan. |
➤ | Grant Practices: |
(11) | Proposals evaluated under the EPSC policy generally include those to approve or amend (1) stock option plans for employees and/or employees and directors, (2) restricted stock plans for employees and/or employees and directors, and (3) omnibus stock incentive plans for employees and/or employees and directors. |
➤ | The company’s three year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in most recent CEO equity grants (3-year look-back); |
➤ | The estimated duration of the plan (based on the sum of shares remaining available and the new shares requested, divided by the average annual shares granted in the prior three years); |
➤ | The proportion of the CEO's most recent equity grants/awards subject to performance conditions; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains a claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company has established post exercise/vesting share-holding requirements. |
➤ | Awards may vest in connection with a liberal change-of-control definition; |
➤ | The plan would permit repricing or cash buyout of underwater options without shareholder approval (either by expressly permitting it — for NYSE and Nasdaq listed companies — or by not prohibiting it when the company has a history of repricing — for non-listed companies); |
➤ | The plan is a vehicle for problematic pay practices or a significant pay-for-performance disconnect under certain circumstances; or |
➤ | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, taking into consideration whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value, and in addition the following will also be considered: |
➤ | If the issues presented in the proposal are more appropriately or effectively dealt with through legislation or government regulation; |
➤ | If the company has already responded in an appropriate and sufficient manner to the issue(s) raised in the proposal; |
➤ | Whether the proposal's request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive; |
➤ | The company's approach compared with any industry standard practices for addressing the issue(s) raised by the proposal; |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not reasonable and sufficient information is currently available to shareholders from the company or from other publicly available sources; and |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not implementation would reveal proprietary or confidential information that could place the company at a competitive disadvantage. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for resolutions requesting that a company disclose information on the risks related to climate change on its operations and investments, such as financial, physical, or regulatory risks, considering: |
➤ | Whether the company already provides current, publicly-available information on the impact that climate change may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
➤ | The company’s level of disclosure is at least comparable to that of industry peers; and |
➤ | There are no significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance. |
➤ | The company already discloses current, publicly-available information on the impacts that GHG emissions may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
➤ | The company's level of disclosure is comparable to that of industry peers; and |
➤ | There are no significant, controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's GHG emissions. |
➤ | Whether the company provides disclosure of year-over-year GHG emissions performance data; |
➤ | Whether company disclosure lags behind industry peers; |
➤ | The company's actual GHG emissions performance; |
➤ | The company's current GHG emission policies, oversight mechanisms, and related initiatives; and |
➤ | Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to GHG emissions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on a company's efforts to diversify the board, unless: |
➤ | The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and |
➤ | The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board and within the company. |
➤ | The degree of existing gender and racial minority diversity on the company’s board and among its executive officers; |
➤ | The level of gender and racial minority representation that exists at the company’s industry peers; |
➤ | The company’s established process for addressing gender and racial minority board representation; |
➤ | Whether the proposal includes an overly prescriptive request to amend nominating committee charter language; |
➤ | The independence of the company’s nominating committee; |
➤ | Whether the company uses an outside search firm to identify potential director nominees; and |
➤ | Whether the company has had recent controversies, fines, or litigation regarding equal employment practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms related to social, economic, and environmental sustainability, unless: |
➤ | The company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies such as an environment, health, and safety (EHS) report; a comprehensive code of corporate conduct; and/or a diversity report; or |
➤ | The company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines or a similar standard within a specified time frame. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to link, or report on linking, executive compensation to sustainability (environmental and social) criteria, considering: |
➤ | Whether the company has significant and/or persistent controversies or regulatory violations regarding social and/or environmental issues; |
➤ | Whether the company has management systems and oversight mechanisms in place regarding its social and environmental performance; |
➤ | The degree to which industry peers have incorporated similar non-financial performance criteria in their executive compensation practices; and |
➤ | The company's current level of disclosure regarding its environmental and social performance. |
1. | Likelihood of payment: capacity and willingness of the obligor to meet its financial commitment on an obligation in accordance with the terms of the obligation; |
2. | Nature of and provisions of the obligation and the promise S&P imputes; |
3. | Protection afforded by, and relative position of, the obligation in the event of bankruptcy, reorganization, or other arrangement under the laws of bankruptcy and other laws affecting creditors’ rights. |
AAA | An obligation rated “AAA” has the highest rating assigned by Standard & Poor’s. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is extremely strong. |
AA | An obligation rated “AA” differs from the highest rated obligations only in small degree. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is very strong. |
A | An obligation rated “A” is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher rated categories. However, the obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is still strong. |
BBB | An obligation rated “BBB” exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
BB | An obligation rated “BB” is less vulnerable to nonpayment than other speculative issues. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions which could lead to the obligor’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
B | An obligation rated “B” is more vulnerable to nonpayment than obligations rated “BB,” but the obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the obligor’s capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
CCC | An obligation rated “CCC” is currently vulnerable to nonpayment, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. In the event of adverse business, financial, or economic conditions, the obligor is not likely to have the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
CC | An obligation rated “CC” is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment. The “CC” rating is used when a default has not yet occurred but S&P expects default to be a virtual certainty regardless of the anticipated time to default. |
C | An obligation rated “C” is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment and the obligation is expected to have lower relative seniority or lower ultimate recovery compared to obligations that are rated higher. |
D | An obligation rated “D” is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the “D” rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due unless S&P believes that such payments will be made within five business days in the absence of a stated grace period or within the earlier of the stated grace period or 30 calendar days. The “D” rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. An obligation’s rating is lowered to ‘D’ if it is subject to a distressed exchange offer. |
Aaa | Obligations rated Aaa are judged to be of the highest quality, subject to the lowest level of credit risk. |
Aa | Obligations rated Aa are judged to be of high quality and are subject to very low credit risk. |
A | Obligations rated A are judged to be upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk. |
Baa | Obligations rated Baa are judged to be medium-grade and subject to moderate credit risk and as such may possess certain speculative characteristics. |
Ba | Obligations rated Ba are judged to be speculative and are subject to substantial credit risk. |
B | Obligations rated B are considered speculative and are subject to high credit risk. |
Caa | Obligations rated Caa are judged to be speculative of poor standing and are subject to very high credit risk. |
Ca | Obligations rated Ca are highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default, with some prospect of recovery of principal and interest. |
C | Obligations rated C are the lowest rated and are typically in default, with little prospect for recovery of principal or interest. |
AAA | Highest credit quality. ‘AAA’ ratings denote the lowest expectation of default risk. They are assigned only in cases of exceptionally strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is highly unlikely to be adversely affected by foreseeable events. |
AA | Very high credit quality. ‘AA’ ratings denote expectations of very low default risk. They indicate very strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable events. |
A | High credit quality. ‘A’ ratings denote expectations of low default risk. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered strong. This capacity may, nevertheless, be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic conditions than is the case for higher ratings. |
BBB | Good credit quality. ‘BBB’ ratings indicate that expectations of default risk are currently low. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered adequate but adverse business or economic conditions are more likely to impair this capacity. |
BB | Speculative. ‘BB’ ratings indicate an elevated vulnerability to default risk, particularly in the event of adverse changes in business or economic conditions over time; however, business or financial flexibility exists which supports the servicing of financial commitments. |
B | Highly speculative. ‘B’ ratings indicate that material default risk is present, but a limited margin of safety remains. Financial commitments are currently being met; however, capacity for continued payment is vulnerable to deterioration in the business and economic environment. |
CCC | Substantial credit risk. Default is a real possibility. |
CC | Very high levels of credit risk. Default of some kind appears probable. |
C |
Exceptionally high levels of credit risk. Default is imminent or inevitable, or the issuer is in standstill. Conditions that
are indicative of a ‘C’ category rating for an issuer include:
• the issuer has entered into a grace or cure period following non-payment of a material financial obligation; • the issuer has entered into a temporary negotiated waiver or standstill agreement following a payment default on a material financial obligation; or • Fitch otherwise believes a condition of ‘RD’ or ‘D’ to be imminent or inevitable, including through the formal announcement of a distressed debt exchange. |
RD |
Restricted default. ‘RD’ ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch’s opinion has experienced an uncured
payment default on a bond, loan or other material financial obligation but which has not entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure, and which has
not otherwise ceased operating. This would include:
• the selective payment default on a specific class or currency of debt; • the uncured expiry of any applicable grace period, cure period or default forbearance period following a payment default on a bank loan, capital markets security or other material financial obligation; • the extension of multiple waivers or forbearance periods upon a payment default on one or more material financial obligations, either in series or in parallel; or • execution of a distressed debt exchange on one or more material financial obligations. |
D | Default. ‘D’ ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch’s opinion has entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure, or which has otherwise ceased business. |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF | FTLS | NYSE Arca |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
11 |
|
14 |
|
21 |
|
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
|
32 |
|
36 |
|
38 |
|
38 |
|
38 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
(1) | The Fund may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | The Fund may not borrow money, except that the Fund may (i) borrow money from banks for temporary or emergency purposes (but not for leverage or the purchase of investments) and (ii) engage in other transactions permissible under the 1940 Act that may involve a borrowing (such as obtaining short-term credits as are necessary for the clearance of transactions, engaging in delayed-delivery transactions, or purchasing certain futures, forward contracts and options), provided that the combination of (i) and (ii) shall not exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets (including the amount borrowed), less the Fund's liabilities (other than borrowings). |
(3) | The Fund will not underwrite the securities of other issuers except to the extent the Fund may be considered an underwriter under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act” ), in connection with the purchase and sale of portfolio securities. |
(4) | The Fund will not purchase or sell real estate or interests therein, unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prohibit the Fund from purchasing or selling securities or other instruments backed by real estate or of issuers engaged in real estate activities). |
(5) | The Fund may not make loans to other persons, except through (i) the purchase of debt securities permissible under the Fund's investment policies, (ii) repurchase agreements, or (iii) the lending of portfolio securities, provided that no such loan of portfolio securities may be made by the Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets. |
(6) | The Fund may not purchase or sell physical commodities unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Fund from purchasing or selling options, futures contracts, forward contracts or other derivative instruments, or from investing in securities or other instruments backed by physical commodities). |
(7) | The Fund may not invest 25% or more of the value of its total assets in securities of issuers in any one industry. This restriction does not apply to obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities. |
(1) | The Fund may invest in U.S. government securities, including bills, notes and bonds differing as to maturity and rates of interest, which are either issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury or by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities. U.S. government securities include securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury, by various agencies of the U.S. government, or by various instrumentalities that have been established or sponsored by the U.S. government. U.S. Treasury securities are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Securities issued or guaranteed by federal agencies and U.S. government-sponsored instrumentalities may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some of the U.S. government agencies that issue or guarantee securities include the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Farmers Home |
Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, the Maritime Administration, the Small Business Administration and The Tennessee Valley Authority. An instrumentality of the U.S. government is a government agency organized under federal charter with government supervision. Instrumentalities issuing or guaranteeing securities include, among others, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and the Federal National Mortgage Association ( “Fannie Mae” ). In the case of those U.S. government securities not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, the investor must look principally to the agency or instrumentality issuing or guaranteeing the security for ultimate repayment and may not be able to assert a claim against the United States itself in the event that the agency or instrumentality does not meet its commitment. The U.S. government, its agencies and instrumentalities do not guarantee the market value of their securities; consequently, the value of such securities may fluctuate. | |
(2) | The Fund may invest in certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings and loan association. Such certificates are for a definite period of time, earn a specified rate of return and are normally negotiable. If such certificates of deposit are non-negotiable, they will be considered illiquid securities and be subject to the Fund's 15% restriction on investments in illiquid securities. Pursuant to the certificate of deposit, the issuer agrees to pay the amount deposited plus interest to the bearer of the certificate on the date specified thereon. Under current FDIC regulations, the maximum insurance payable as to any one certificate of deposit is $250,000; therefore, certificates of deposit purchased by the Fund may not be fully insured. The Fund may only invest in certificates of deposit issued by U.S. banks with at least $1 billion in assets. |
(3) | The Fund may invest in bankers’ acceptances, which are short-term credit instruments used to finance commercial transactions. Generally, an acceptance is a time draft drawn on a bank by an exporter or an importer to obtain a stated amount of funds to pay for specific merchandise. The draft is then “accepted” by a bank that, in effect, unconditionally guarantees to pay the face value of the instrument on its maturity date. The acceptance may then be held by the accepting bank as an asset or it may be sold in the secondary market at the going rate of interest for a specific maturity. |
(4) | The Fund may invest in repurchase agreements, which involve purchases of debt securities with counterparties that are deemed by the Advisor to present acceptable credit risks. In such an action, at the time the Fund purchases the security, it simultaneously agrees to resell and redeliver the security to the seller, who also simultaneously agrees to buy back the security at a fixed price and time. This assures a predetermined yield for the Fund during its holding period since the resale price is always greater than the purchase price and reflects an agreed-upon market rate. Such actions afford an opportunity for the Fund to invest temporarily available cash. The Fund may enter into repurchase agreements only with respect to obligations of the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, certificates of deposit or bankers’ acceptances in which the Fund may invest. Repurchase agreements may be considered loans to the seller, collateralized by the underlying securities. The risk to the Fund is limited to the ability of the seller to pay the agreed-upon sum on the repurchase date; in the event of default, the repurchase agreement provides that the Fund is entitled to sell the underlying collateral. If the value of the collateral declines after the agreement is entered into, however, and if the seller defaults under a repurchase agreement when the value of the underlying collateral is less than the repurchase price, the Fund could incur a loss of both principal and interest. The portfolio managers monitor the value of the collateral at the time the action is entered into and at all times during the term of the repurchase agreement. The portfolio managers do so in an effort to determine that the value of the collateral always equals or exceeds the agreed-upon repurchase price to be paid to the Fund. If the seller were to be subject to a federal bankruptcy proceeding, the ability of the Fund to liquidate the collateral could be delayed or impaired because of certain provisions of the bankruptcy laws. |
(5) | The Fund may invest in bank time deposits, which are monies kept on deposit with banks or savings and loan associations for a stated period of time at a fixed rate of interest. There may be penalties for the early withdrawal of such time deposits, in which case the yields of these investments will be reduced. |
(6) | The Fund may invest in commercial paper, which are short-term unsecured promissory notes, including variable rate master demand notes issued by corporations to finance their current operations. Master demand notes are direct lending arrangements between the Fund and a corporation. There is no secondary market for the notes. However, they are redeemable by the Fund at any time. The Fund's portfolio managers will consider the financial condition of the corporation ( e.g. , earning power, cash flow and other liquidity ratios) and will continuously monitor the corporation’s ability to meet all of its financial obligations, because the Fund's liquidity |
might be impaired if the corporation were unable to pay principal and interest on demand. The Fund may invest in commercial paper only if it has received the highest rating from at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, if unrated, judged by First Trust to be of comparable quality. | |
(7) | The Fund may invest in shares of money market funds, as consistent with its investment objective and policies. Shares of money market funds are subject to management fees and other expenses of those funds. Therefore, investments in money market funds will cause the Fund to bear proportionately the costs incurred by the money market funds’ operations. At the same time, the Fund will continue to pay its own management fees and expenses with respect to all of its assets, including any portion invested in the shares of other investment companies. It is possible for the Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
|
Fiscal Year Ended October 31, | |
2016 | 2015 |
201% | 267% |
(1) | Market Risk. Market risk is the risk that the value of the underlying assets may go up or down. Adverse movements in the value of an underlying asset can expose the Fund to losses. Derivative instruments may include elements of leverage and, accordingly, fluctuations in the value of the derivative instrument in relation to the underlying asset may be magnified. The successful use of derivative instruments depends upon a variety of factors, particularly the portfolio managers’ ability to predict movements of the securities, currencies and commodities markets, which may require different skills than predicting changes in the prices of individual securities. There can be no assurance that any particular strategy adopted will succeed. A decision to engage in a derivative transaction will reflect the portfolio managers’ judgment that the derivative transaction will provide value to the Fund and its shareholders and is consistent with the Fund's objective, investment limitations and operating policies. In making such a judgment, the portfolio managers will analyze the benefits and risks of the derivative transactions and weigh them in the context of the Fund's overall investments and investment objective. |
(2) | Credit Risk/Counterparty Risk. Credit risk is the risk that a loss may be sustained as a result of the failure of a counterparty to comply with the terms of a derivative instrument. The counterparty risk for exchange-traded derivatives is generally less than for privately negotiated or over-the-counter ( “OTC” ) derivatives, since generally a clearing agency, which is the issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded instrument, provides a guarantee of performance. For privately negotiated instruments, there is no similar clearing agency guarantee. In all |
transactions, the Fund will bear the risk that the counterparty will default, and this could result in a loss of the expected benefit of the derivative transactions and possibly other losses to the Fund. The Fund will enter into transactions in derivative instruments only with counterparties that First Trust reasonably believes are capable of performing under the contract. | |
(3) | Correlation Risk. Correlation risk is the risk that there might be an imperfect correlation, or even no correlation, between price movements of a derivative instrument and price movements of investments being hedged. When a derivative transaction is used to completely hedge another position, changes in the market value of the combined position (the derivative instrument plus the position being hedged) result from an imperfect correlation between the price movements of the two instruments. With a perfect hedge, the value of the combined position remains unchanged with any change in the price of the underlying asset. With an imperfect hedge, the value of the derivative instrument and its hedge are not perfectly correlated. For example, if the value of a derivative instrument used in a short hedge (such as writing a call option, buying a put option or selling a futures contract) increased by less than the decline in value of the hedged investments, the hedge would not be perfectly correlated. This might occur due to factors unrelated to the value of the investments being hedged, such as speculative or other pressures on the markets in which these instruments are traded. The effectiveness of hedges using instruments on indices will depend, in part, on the degree of correlation between price movements in the index and the price movements in the investments being hedged. |
(4) | Liquidity Risk. Liquidity risk is the risk that a derivative instrument cannot be sold, closed out or replaced quickly at or very close to its fundamental value. Generally, exchange contracts are very liquid because the exchange clearinghouse is the counterparty of every contract. OTC transactions are less liquid than exchange-traded derivatives since they often can only be closed out with the other party to the transaction. The Fund might be required by applicable regulatory requirements to maintain assets as “cover,” maintain segregated accounts and/or make margin payments when taking positions in derivative instruments involving obligations to third parties ( i.e. , instruments other than purchase options). If the Fund is unable to close out its positions in such instruments, it might be required to continue to maintain such assets or accounts or make such payments until the position expires, matures or is closed out. These requirements might impair the Fund's ability to sell a security or make an investment at a time when it would otherwise be favorable to do so, or require that the Fund sell a portfolio security at a disadvantageous time. The Fund's ability to sell or close out a position in an instrument prior to expiration or maturity depends upon the existence of a liquid secondary market or, in the absence of such a market, the ability and willingness of the counterparty to enter into a transaction closing out the position. Due to liquidity risk, there is no assurance that any derivatives position can be sold or closed out at a time and price that is favorable to the Fund. |
(5) | Legal Risk. Legal risk is the risk of loss caused by the unenforceability of a party’s obligations under the derivative. While a party seeking price certainty agrees to surrender the potential upside in exchange for downside protection, the party taking the risk is looking for a positive payoff. Despite this voluntary assumption of risk, a counterparty that has lost money in a derivative transaction may try to avoid payment by exploiting various legal uncertainties about certain derivative products. |
(6) | Systemic or “Interconnection” Risk. Systemic or “interconnection” risk is the risk that a disruption in the financial markets will cause difficulties for all market participants. In other words, a disruption in one market will spill over into other markets, perhaps creating a chain reaction. Much of the OTC derivatives market takes place among the OTC dealers themselves, thus creating a large interconnected web of financial obligations. This interconnectedness raises the possibility that a default by one large dealer could create losses for other dealers and destabilize the entire market for OTC derivative instruments. |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
TRUSTEE WHO IS AN INTERESTED PERSON OF THE TRUST | |||||
James A. Bowen
(1)
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 09/55 |
Chairman of the Board and Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Chief Executive Officer, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Chairman of the Board of Directors, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) | 141 Portfolios | None |
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES | |||||
Richard E. Erickson
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 04/51 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Physician and Officer, Wheaton Orthopedics; Limited Partner, Gundersen Real Estate Limited Partnership (June 1992 to December 2016); Member, Sportsmed LLC (April 2007 to November 2015) | 141 Portfolios | None |
Thomas R. Kadlec
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/57 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, ADM Investor Services, Inc. (Futures Commission Merchant) | 141 Portfolios | Director of ADM Investor Services, Inc., ADM Investor Services International, and Futures Industry Association |
Robert F. Keith
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/56 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, Hibs Enterprises (Financial and Management Consulting) | 141 Portfolios | Director of Trust Company of Illinois |
Niel B. Nielson
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 03/54 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer (January 2015 to present), Pelita Harapan Educational Foundation (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Servant Interactive LLC (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Dew Learning LLC (Educational Products and Services); President (June 2002 to June 2012), Covenant College | 141 Portfolios |
Director of Covenant Transport Inc.
(May 2003 to May 2014) |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
James M. Dykas
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 01/66 |
President and Chief Executive Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer (January 2016 to present), Controller (January 2011 to January 2016), Senior Vice President (April 2007 to January 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Chief Financial Officer, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) (January 2016 to present) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) (January 2016 to present) | N/A | N/A |
W. Scott Jardine
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 05/60 |
Secretary and Chief Legal Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Secretary and General Counsel, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) | N/A | N/A |
Daniel J. Lindquist
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 02/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director (July 2012 to present), Senior Vice President (September 2005 to July 2012), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Kristi A. Maher
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 12/66 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• CCO since January 2011, Assistant Secretary since Inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Donald P. Swade
120 E. Liberty Drive Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 08/72 |
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Senior Vice President (July 2016 to Present), Vice President (April 2012 to July 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P., Vice President (September 2006 to April 2012), Guggenheim Funds Investment Advisors, LLC/Claymore Securities, Inc. | N/A | N/A |
Roger F. Testin
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 06/66 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Stan Ueland
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President (September 2012 to present), Vice President (August 2005 to September 2012) First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
(1) | Mr. Bowen is deemed an “interested person” of the Trust due to his position as Chief Executive Officer of First Trust, investment advisor of the Fund. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Fund (1) |
Total Compensation from the
First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $4,316 | $370,744 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $4,358 | $391,203 |
Robert F. Keith | $4,336 | $381,412 |
Niel B. Nielson | $4,336 | $381,482 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Fund to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2016 for services to the Fund. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2016 for services to the 137 portfolios existing in 2016, which consisted of 7 open-end mutual funds, 16 closed-end funds and 114 exchange-traded funds. |
Trustee |
Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in the Fund (Number of Shares Held) |
Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen by Trustee in the First Trust Fund Complex |
Interested Trustee | ||
James A. Bowen | None | Over $100,000 |
Trustee |
Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in the Fund (Number of Shares Held) |
Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen by Trustee in the First Trust Fund Complex |
Independent Trustees | ||
Richard E. Erickson | None | Over $100,000 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | None | Over $100,000 |
Robert F. Keith | None | Over $100,000 |
Niel B. Nielson | None | Over $100,000 |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
|||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
October 31, |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2014 |
|
2016 | 2015 | ||
9/8/2014 | $975,929 | $130,017 | $4,065 |
Name |
Position with
First Trust |
Length of Service
with First Trust |
Principal Occupation During Past Five Years |
John Gambla | Senior Portfolio Manager | Since 2011 | Senior Portfolio Manager, First Trust Advisors L.P. |
Rob A. Guttschow | Senior Portfolio Manager | Since 2011 | Senior Portfolio Manager, First Trust Advisors L.P. |
Portfolio Manager |
Registered
Investment Companies Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Accounts
Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
John Gambla | 8 ($337,996,727) | N/A | N/A |
Rob A. Guttschow | 8 ($337,996,727) | N/A | N/A |
Aggregate Amount of Brokerage Commissions
|
|||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
October 31, |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2014 |
|
2016 | 2015 | ||
9/8/2014 | $128,184 | $20,674 | $150 |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
$10,075,389 |
(1) | Common stocks and other equity securities listed on any national or foreign exchange other than The Nasdaq Stock Market (“Nasdaq”) and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market (“AIM”) will be valued at the last sale price on the exchange on which they are principally traded, or the official closing price for Nasdaq and AIM securities. Portfolio securities traded on more than one securities exchange are valued at the last sale price or official closing price, as applicable, on the Business Day as of which such value is being determined at the close of the exchange representing the principal market for such securities. |
(2) | Shares of open-end funds are valued at fair value which is based on NAV per share. |
(3) | Securities traded in the OTC market are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(4) | Exchange traded options and futures contracts are valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts are principally traded. If no closing price is available, they will be fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. OTC options and futures contracts are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(5) | Forward foreign currency contracts are fair valued at the current day’s interpolated foreign exchange rate, as calculated using the current day’s spot rate, and the 30, 60, 90 and 180-day forward rates provided by a pricing service or by certain independent dealers in such contracts. |
(1) | Fixed-income securities, convertible securities, interest rate swaps, credit default swaps, total return swaps, currency swaps, currency-linked notes, credit-linked notes and other similar instruments will be fair valued using a pricing service. |
(2) | Fixed income and other debt securities having a remaining maturity of 60 days or less when purchased are fair valued at cost adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts (amortized cost), provided the Advisor’s Pricing Committee has determined that the use of amortized cost is an appropriate reflection of fair value given market and issuer-specific conditions existing at the time of the determination. Factors that may be considered in determining the appropriateness of the use of amortized cost include, but are not limited to, the following: |
(i) | the credit conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(ii) | the liquidity conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(iii) | the interest rate conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto (such as significant changes in interest rates); |
(iv) | issuer-specific conditions (such as significant credit deterioration); and |
(v) | any other market-based data the Advisor’s Pricing Committee considers relevant. In this regard, the Advisor’s Pricing Committee may use last-obtained market-based data to assist it when valuing portfolio securities using amortized cost. |
(3) | Repurchase agreements will be fair valued as follows. Overnight repurchase agreements will be fair valued at amortized cost when it represents the best estimate of fair value. Term repurchase agreements (i.e., those whose maturity exceeds seven days) will be fair valued by the Advisor’s Pricing Committee at the average of the bid quotations obtained daily from at least two recognized dealers. |
NAME OF BENEFICIAL OWNER |
% OF
OUTSTANDING SHARES OWNED |
FIRST TRUST LONG/SHORT EQUITY ETF | |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 21.75% |
National Financial Services, LLC | 17.24% |
LPL Financial Corp | 15.38% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 11.75% |
Pershing, LLC | 7.41% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc. | 7.26% |
(1) | LPL Financial Corp.: 9785 Towne Center Drive, San Diego, California 92121 |
(2) | Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC: 1300 Thames St. 6th Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21231 |
(3) | National Financial Services: 499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(4) | Pershing LLC: 1 Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(5) | Raymond James and Associates, Inc.: 880 Carilion Parkway, St. Petersburg, FL 33716 |
(6) | TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc.: 1005 Ameritrade Place, Bellevue, Nebraska 68005 |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances: |
1.1. | The board is classified, and a continuing director responsible for a problematic governance issue at the board/committee level that would warrant a withhold/against vote recommendation is not up for election. All appropriate nominees (except new) may be held accountable. |
1.2. | The board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers. Sustained poor performance is measured by one- and three-year total shareholder returns in the bottom half of a company’s four-digit GICS industry group (Russell 3000 companies only). Take into consideration the company’s five-year total shareholder return and operational metrics. Problematic provisions include but are not limited to: |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections or a majority vote standard with no plurality carve-out for contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A dual-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
(1) | In general, companies with a plurality vote standard use “Withhold” as the contrary vote option in director elections; companies with a majority vote standard use “Against”. However, it will vary by company and the proxy must be checked to determine the valid contrary vote option for the particular company. |
(2) | A “new nominee” is any current nominee who has not already been elected by shareholders and who joined the board after the problematic action in question transpired. If ISS cannot determine whether the nominee joined the board before or after the problematic action transpired, the nominee will be considered a “new nominee” if he or she joined the board within the 12 months prior to the upcoming shareholder meeting. |
1.3. | The company’s poison pill has a “dead-hand” or “modified dead-hand” feature. Vote against or withhold from nominees every year until this feature is removed; |
1.4. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of more than 12 months (“long-term pill”), or renews any existing pill, including any “short-term pill” (12 months or less), without shareholder approval. A commitment or policy that puts a newly adopted pill to a binding shareholder vote may potentially offset an adverse vote recommendation. Review such companies with classified boards every year, and such companies with annually elected boards at least once every three years, and vote against or withhold votes from all nominees if the company still maintains a non-shareholder-approved poison pill; or |
1.5. | The board makes a material adverse change to an existing poison pill without shareholder approval. |
1.6. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of 12 months or less (“short-term pill”) without shareholder approval, taking into account the following factors: |
➤ | The date of the pill‘s adoption relative to the date of the next meeting of shareholders — i.e. whether the company had time to put the pill on the ballot for shareholder ratification given the circumstances; |
➤ | The issuer’s rationale; |
➤ | The issuer’s governance structure and practices; and |
➤ | The issuer’s track record of accountability to shareholders. Restricting Binding Shareholder Proposals |
1.7. | The company’s charter imposes undue restrictions on shareholders’ ability to amend the bylaws. Such restrictions include, but are not limited to: outright prohibition on the submission of binding shareholder proposals, or share ownership requirements or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against on an ongoing basis. |
1.8. | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive (see discussion under “Auditor Ratification”); |
1.9. | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
1.10. | There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm. |
1.11. | Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a level of serious concern, such as: fraud; misapplication of GAAP; and material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures. Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence, and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether withhold/against votes are warranted. |
1.12. | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
1.13. | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
1.14. | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders; |
1.15. | The company fails to submit one-time transfers of stock options to a shareholder vote; or |
1.16. | The company fails to fulfill the terms of a burn rate commitment made to shareholders. |
1.17. | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
1.18. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if the board amends the company's bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders' rights or that could adversely impact shareholders, considering the following factors: |
➤ | The board's rationale for adopting the bylaw/charter amendment without shareholder ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure by the company of any significant engagement with shareholders regarding the amendment; |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights caused by the board's unilateral amendment to the bylaws/charter; |
➤ | The board's track record with regard to unilateral board action on bylaw/charter amendments or other entrenchment provisions; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; |
➤ | The company's existing governance provisions; |
➤ | The timing of the board's amendment to the bylaws/charter in connection with a significant business development; and, |
➤ | Other factors, as deemed appropriate, that may be relevant to determine the impact of the amendment on shareholders. |
➤ | Classified the board; |
➤ | Adopted supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; or |
➤ | Eliminated shareholders' ability to amend bylaws. |
1.19. | For newly public companies, generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if, prior to or in connection with the company's public offering, the company or its board adopted bylaw or charter provisions materially adverse to shareholder rights, or implemented a multi-class capital structure in which the classes have unequal voting rights considering the following factors: |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights; |
➤ | The disclosed rationale; |
➤ | The ability to change the governance structure (e.g., limitations on shareholders’ right to amend the bylaws or charter, or supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter); |
➤ | The ability of shareholders to hold directors accountable through annual director elections, or whether the company has a classified board structure; |
➤ | Any reasonable sunset provision; and |
➤ | Other relevant factors. |
1.20. | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight (3) , or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
1.21. | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
1.22. | Egregious actions related to a director’s service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company. |
2.1. | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | Disclosed outreach efforts by the board to shareholders in the wake of the vote; |
➤ | Rationale provided in the proxy statement for the level of implementation; |
➤ | The subject matter of the proposal; |
➤ | The level of support for and opposition to the resolution in past meetings; |
➤ | Actions taken by the board in response to the majority vote and its engagement with shareholders; |
(3) | Examples of failure of risk oversight include, but are not limited to: bribery; large or serial fines or sanctions from regulatory bodies; significant adverse legal judgments or settlements; hedging of company stock; or significant pledging of company stock. |
➤ | The continuation of the underlying issue as a voting item on the ballot (as either shareholder or management proposals); and |
➤ | Other factors as appropriate. |
2.2. | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
2.3. | At the previous board election, any director received more than 50 percent withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote; |
2.4. | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the majority of votes cast at the most recent shareholder meeting at which shareholders voted on the say-on-pay frequency; or |
➤ | The board's rationale for selecting a frequency that is different from the frequency that received a plurality; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure and vote results; |
➤ | ISS' analysis of whether there are compensation concerns or a history of problematic compensation practices; and |
➤ | The previous year's support level on the company's say-on-pay proposal. |
3.1. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case (4) who attend less than 75 percent of the aggregate of their board and committee meetings for the period for which they served, unless an acceptable reason for absences is disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. Acceptable reasons for director absences are generally limited to the following: |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
3.2. | If the proxy disclosure is unclear and insufficient to determine whether a director attended at least 75 percent of the aggregate of his/her board and committee meetings during his/her period of service, vote against or withhold from the director(s) in question. |
3.4. | CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own — withhold only at their outside boards (5) . |
(4) | For new nominees only, schedule conflicts due to commitments made prior to their appointment to the board are considered if disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. |
(5) | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote from the CEO of a parent company board or any of the controlled (>50 percent ownership) subsidiaries of that parent, but may do so at subsidiaries that are less than 50 percent controlled and boards outside the parent/subsidiary relationships. |
4.1. | The inside or affiliated outside director serves on any of the three key committees: audit, compensation, or nominating; |
4.2. | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; |
4.3. | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee; or |
4.4. | Independent directors make up less than a majority of the directors. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
➤ | The scope of the proposal; |
➤ | The company's current board leadership structure; |
➤ | The company's governance structure and practices; |
➤ | Company performance; and |
➤ | Any other relevant factors that may be applicable. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for management and shareholder proposals for proxy access with the following provisions: |
➤ | Ownership threshold: maximum requirement not more than three percent (3%) of the voting power; |
➤ | Ownership duration: maximum requirement not longer than three (3) years of continuous ownership for each member of the nominating group; |
➤ | Aggregation: minimal or no limits on the number of shareholders permitted to form a nominating group; |
➤ | Cap: cap on nominees of generally twenty-five percent (25%) of the board. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the election of directors in contested elections, considering the following factors: |
➤ | Long-term financial performance of the company relative to its industry; |
➤ | Management’s track record; |
➤ | Background to the contested election; |
➤ | Nominee qualifications and any compensatory arrangements; |
➤ | Strategic plan of dissident slate and quality of the critique against management; |
➤ | Likelihood that the proposed goals and objectives can be achieved (both slates); and |
➤ | Stock ownership positions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to increase the number of authorized common shares where the primary purpose of the increase is to issue shares in connection with a transaction on the same ballot that warrants support. |
➤ | Past Board Performance: |
➤ | The company's use of authorized shares during the last three years |
➤ | The Current Request: |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of the specific purposes of the proposed increase; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of specific and severe risks to shareholders of not approving the request; and |
➤ | The dilutive impact of the request as determined relative to an allowable increase calculated by ISS (typically 100 percent of existing authorized shares) that reflects the company's need for shares and total shareholder returns. |
A. | Most companies: 100 percent of existing authorized shares. |
B. | Companies with less than 50 percent of existing authorized shares either outstanding or reserved for issuance: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
C. | Companies with one- and three-year total shareholder returns (TSRs) in the bottom 10 percent of the U.S. market as of the end of the calendar quarter that is closest to their most recent fiscal year end: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
D. | Companies at which both conditions (B and C) above are both present: 25 percent of existing authorized shares. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on mergers and acquisitions. Review and evaluate the merits and drawbacks of the proposed transaction, balancing various and sometimes countervailing factors including: |
➤ | Valuation - Is the value to be received by the target shareholders (or paid by the acquirer) reasonable? While the fairness opinion may provide an initial starting point for assessing valuation reasonableness, emphasis is placed on the offer premium, market reaction, and strategic rationale. |
➤ | Market reaction - How has the market responded to the proposed deal? A negative market reaction should cause closer scrutiny of a deal. |
➤ | Strategic rationale - Does the deal make sense strategically? From where is the value derived? Cost and revenue synergies should not be overly aggressive or optimistic, but reasonably achievable. Management should also have a favorable track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions. |
➤ | Negotiations and process - Were the terms of the transaction negotiated at arm's-length? Was the process fair and equitable? A fair process helps to ensure the best price for shareholders. Significant negotiation "wins" can also signify the deal makers' competency. The comprehensiveness of the sales process (e.g., full auction, partial auction, no auction) can also affect shareholder value. |
➤ | Conflicts of interest - Are insiders benefiting from the transaction disproportionately and inappropriately as compared to non-insider shareholders? As the result of potential conflicts, the directors and officers of the company may be more likely to vote to approve a merger than if they did not hold these interests. Consider whether these interests |
may have influenced these directors and officers to support or recommend the merger. The CIC figure presented in the "ISS Transaction Summary" section of this report is an aggregate figure that can in certain cases be a misleading indicator of the true value transfer from shareholders to insiders. Where such figure appears to be excessive, analyze the underlying assumptions to determine whether a potential conflict exists. | |
➤ | Governance - Will the combined company have a better or worse governance profile than the current governance profiles of the respective parties to the transaction? If the governance profile is to change for the worse, the burden is on the company to prove that other issues (such as valuation) outweigh any deterioration in governance. |
1. | Maintain appropriate pay-for-performance alignment, with emphasis on long-term shareholder value: This principle encompasses overall executive pay practices, which must be designed to attract, retain, and appropriately motivate the key employees who drive shareholder value creation over the long term. It will take into consideration, among other factors, the link between pay and performance; the mix between fixed and variable pay; performance goals; and equity-based plan costs; |
2. | Avoid arrangements that risk “pay for failure”: This principle addresses the appropriateness of long or indefinite contracts, excessive severance packages, and guaranteed compensation; |
3. | Maintain an independent and effective compensation committee: This principle promotes oversight of executive pay programs by directors with appropriate skills, knowledge, experience, and a sound process for compensation decision-making (e.g., including access to independent expertise and advice when needed); |
4. | Provide shareholders with clear, comprehensive compensation disclosures: This principle underscores the importance of informative and timely disclosures that enable shareholders to evaluate executive pay practices fully and fairly; |
5. | Avoid inappropriate pay to non-executive directors: This principle recognizes the interests of shareholders in ensuring that compensation to outside directors does not compromise their independence and ability to make appropriate judgments in overseeing managers’ pay and performance. At the market level, it may incorporate a variety of generally accepted best practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on ballot items related to executive pay and practices, as well as certain aspects of outside director compensation. |
Vote against Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation (Management Say-on-Pay or “MSOP”) if: |
➤ | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
➤ | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
➤ | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
➤ | There is no MSOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an MSOP is warranted due to pay-for-performance misalignment, problematic pay practices, or the lack of adequate responsiveness on compensation issues raised previously, or a combination thereof; |
➤ | The board fails to respond adequately to a previous MSOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
➤ | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, including option repricing or option backdating; or |
➤ | The situation is egregious. |
➤ | Primary Evaluation Factors for Executive Pay |
1. | Peer Group (7) Alignment: |
➤ | The degree of alignment between the company's annualized TSR rank and the CEO's annualized total pay rank within a peer group, each measured over a three-year period. |
➤ | The multiple of the CEO's total pay relative to the peer group median. |
2. | Absolute Alignment (8) – the absolute alignment between the trend in CEO pay and company TSR over the prior five fiscal years – i.e. , the difference between the trend in annual pay changes and the trend in annualized TSR during the period. |
(6) | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
(7) | The revised peer group is generally comprised of 14-24 companies that are selected using market cap, revenue (or assets for certain financial firms), GICS industry group, and company's selected peers' GICS industry group, with size constraints, via a process designed to select peers that are comparable to the subject company in terms of revenue/assets and industry, and also within a market-cap bucket that is reflective of the company's. For Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels companies, market cap is the only size determinant. |
(8) | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
➤ | The ratio of performance- to time-based equity awards; |
➤ | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation; |
➤ | The completeness of disclosure and rigor of performance goals; |
➤ | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
➤ | Actual results of financial/operational metrics, such as growth in revenue, profit, cash flow, etc., both absolute and relative to peers; |
➤ | Special circumstances related to, for example, a new CEO in the prior FY or anomalous equity grant practices (e.g., bi-annual awards); |
➤ | Realizable pay compared to grant pay; and |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
(9) | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
➤ | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
➤ | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking; and |
➤ | Options Backdating. |
➤ | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
➤ | Excessive perquisites or tax gross-ups, including any gross-up related to a secular trust or restricted stock vesting; |
➤ | New or extended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | CIC payments exceeding 3 times base salary and average/target/most recent bonus; |
➤ | CIC severance payments without involuntary job loss or substantial diminution of duties ("single" or "modified single" triggers); |
➤ | CIC payments with excise tax gross-ups (including "modified" gross-ups); |
➤ | Insufficient executive compensation disclosure by externally-managed issuers (EMIs) such that a reasonable assessment of pay programs and practices applicable to the EMI's executives is not possible. |
➤ | Multi-year guaranteed bonuses; |
➤ | A single or common performance metric used for short- and long-term plans; |
➤ | Lucrative severance packages; |
➤ | High pay opportunities relative to industry peers; |
➤ | Disproportionate supplemental pensions; or |
➤ | Mega annual equity grants that provide unlimited upside with no downside risk. |
➤ | Factors that potentially mitigate the impact of risky incentives include rigorous claw-back provisions and robust stock ownership/holding guidelines. |
➤ | Reason and motive for the options backdating issue, such as inadvertent vs. deliberate grant date changes; |
➤ | Duration of options backdating; |
➤ | Size of restatement due to options backdating; |
➤ | Corrective actions taken by the board or compensation committee, such as canceling or re-pricing backdated options, the recouping of option gains on backdated grants; and |
➤ | Adoption of a grant policy that prohibits backdating, and creates a fixed grant schedule or window period for equity grants in the future. |
➤ | Failure to respond to majority-supported shareholder proposals on executive pay topics; or |
➤ | Failure to adequately respond to the company's previous say-on-pay proposal that received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on certain equity-based compensation plans (11) depending on a combination of certain plan features and equity grant practices, where positive factors may counterbalance negative factors, and vice versa, as evaluated using an "equity plan scorecard" (EPSC) approach with three pillars: |
➤ | Plan Cost: The total estimated cost of the company’s equity plans relative to industry/market cap peers, measured by the company's estimated Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) in relation to peers and considering both: |
➤ | SVT based on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants, plus outstanding unvested/unexercised grants; and |
➤ | SVT based only on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants. |
➤ | Plan Features: |
➤ | Automatic single-triggered award vesting upon a change in control (CIC); |
➤ | Discretionary vesting authority; |
➤ | Liberal share recycling on various award types; |
➤ | Lack of minimum vesting period for grants made under the plan. |
➤ | Grant Practices: |
(11) | Proposals evaluated under the EPSC policy generally include those to approve or amend (1) stock option plans for employees and/or employees and directors, (2) restricted stock plans for employees and/or employees and directors, and (3) omnibus stock incentive plans for employees and/or employees and directors. |
➤ | The company’s three year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in most recent CEO equity grants (3-year look-back); |
➤ | The estimated duration of the plan (based on the sum of shares remaining available and the new shares requested, divided by the average annual shares granted in the prior three years); |
➤ | The proportion of the CEO's most recent equity grants/awards subject to performance conditions; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains a claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company has established post exercise/vesting share-holding requirements. |
➤ | Awards may vest in connection with a liberal change-of-control definition; |
➤ | The plan would permit repricing or cash buyout of underwater options without shareholder approval (either by expressly permitting it — for NYSE and Nasdaq listed companies — or by not prohibiting it when the company has a history of repricing — for non-listed companies); |
➤ | The plan is a vehicle for problematic pay practices or a significant pay-for-performance disconnect under certain circumstances; or |
➤ | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, taking into consideration whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value, and in addition the following will also be considered: |
➤ | If the issues presented in the proposal are more appropriately or effectively dealt with through legislation or government regulation; |
➤ | If the company has already responded in an appropriate and sufficient manner to the issue(s) raised in the proposal; |
➤ | Whether the proposal's request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive; |
➤ | The company's approach compared with any industry standard practices for addressing the issue(s) raised by the proposal; |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not reasonable and sufficient information is currently available to shareholders from the company or from other publicly available sources; and |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not implementation would reveal proprietary or confidential information that could place the company at a competitive disadvantage. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for resolutions requesting that a company disclose information on the risks related to climate change on its operations and investments, such as financial, physical, or regulatory risks, considering: |
➤ | Whether the company already provides current, publicly-available information on the impact that climate change may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
➤ | The company’s level of disclosure is at least comparable to that of industry peers; and |
➤ | There are no significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance. |
➤ | The company already discloses current, publicly-available information on the impacts that GHG emissions may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
➤ | The company's level of disclosure is comparable to that of industry peers; and |
➤ | There are no significant, controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's GHG emissions. |
➤ | Whether the company provides disclosure of year-over-year GHG emissions performance data; |
➤ | Whether company disclosure lags behind industry peers; |
➤ | The company's actual GHG emissions performance; |
➤ | The company's current GHG emission policies, oversight mechanisms, and related initiatives; and |
➤ | Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to GHG emissions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on a company's efforts to diversify the board, unless: |
➤ | The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and |
➤ | The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board and within the company. |
➤ | The degree of existing gender and racial minority diversity on the company’s board and among its executive officers; |
➤ | The level of gender and racial minority representation that exists at the company’s industry peers; |
➤ | The company’s established process for addressing gender and racial minority board representation; |
➤ | Whether the proposal includes an overly prescriptive request to amend nominating committee charter language; |
➤ | The independence of the company’s nominating committee; |
➤ | Whether the company uses an outside search firm to identify potential director nominees; and |
➤ | Whether the company has had recent controversies, fines, or litigation regarding equal employment practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms related to social, economic, and environmental sustainability, unless: |
➤ | The company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies such as an environment, health, and safety (EHS) report; a comprehensive code of corporate conduct; and/or a diversity report; or |
➤ | The company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines or a similar standard within a specified time frame. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to link, or report on linking, executive compensation to sustainability (environmental and social) criteria, considering: |
➤ | Whether the company has significant and/or persistent controversies or regulatory violations regarding social and/or environmental issues; |
➤ | Whether the company has management systems and oversight mechanisms in place regarding its social and environmental performance; |
➤ | The degree to which industry peers have incorporated similar non-financial performance criteria in their executive compensation practices; and |
➤ | The company's current level of disclosure regarding its environmental and social performance. |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust Emerging Market Local Currency Bond ETF | FEMB | Nasdaq |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
12 |
|
15 |
|
22 |
|
24 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
|
35 |
|
37 |
|
41 |
|
43 |
|
43 |
|
43 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
|
C-1 |
(1) | The Fund may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | The Fund may not borrow money, except that the Fund may (i) borrow money from banks for temporary or emergency purposes (but not for leverage or the purchase of investments) and (ii) engage in other transactions permissible under the 1940 Act that may involve a borrowing, provided that the combination of (i) and (ii) shall not exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets (including the amount borrowed), less the Fund's liabilities (other than borrowings). |
(3) | The Fund will not underwrite the securities of other issuers except to the extent the Fund may be considered an underwriter under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act” ), in connection with the purchase and sale of portfolio securities. |
(4) | The Fund will not purchase or sell real estate or interests therein, unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prohibit the Fund from purchasing or selling securities or other instruments backed by real estate or of issuers engaged in real estate activities). |
(5) | The Fund may not make loans to other persons, except through (i) the purchase of debt securities permissible under the Fund's investment policies, (ii) repurchase agreements, or (iii) the lending of portfolio securities, provided that no such loan of portfolio securities may be made by the Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of the Fund's total assets. |
(6) | The Fund may not purchase or sell physical commodities unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Fund from purchasing or selling options, futures contracts, forward contracts or other derivative instruments, or from investing in securities or other instruments backed by physical commodities). |
(7) | The Fund may not invest 25% or more of the value of its total assets in securities of issuers in any one industry. This restriction does not apply to obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities. |
(1) | The Fund may invest in U.S. government securities, including bills, notes and bonds differing as to maturity and rates of interest, which are either issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury or by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities. U.S. government securities include securities that are issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury, by various agencies of the U.S. government, or by various instrumentalities that have been established or sponsored by the U.S. government. U.S. Treasury securities are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Securities issued or guaranteed by federal agencies and U.S. government-sponsored instrumentalities may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some of the U.S. government agencies that issue or guarantee securities include the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Farmers Home Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, the Maritime Administration, the Small Business Administration and The Tennessee Valley Authority. An instrumentality of the U.S. government is a government agency organized under federal charter with government supervision. Instrumentalities issuing or guaranteeing securities include, among others, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and the Federal National Mortgage Association ( “Fannie Mae” ). In the case of those U.S. government securities not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, the investor must look principally to the agency or instrumentality issuing or guaranteeing the security for ultimate repayment and may not be able to assert a claim against the United States itself in the event that the agency or instrumentality does not meet its commitment. The U.S. government, its agencies and instrumentalities do not guarantee the market value of their securities; consequently, the value of such securities may fluctuate. In addition, the Fund may invest in sovereign debt obligations of non-U.S. countries. A sovereign debtor’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest in a timely manner may be affected by a number of factors, including its cash flow situation, the extent of its non-U.S. reserves, the availability of sufficient non-U.S. exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the sovereign debtor’s policy toward principal international lenders and the political constraints to which it may be subject. |
(2) | The Fund may invest in certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings and loan association. Such certificates are for a definite period of time, earn a specified rate of return and are normally negotiable. If such certificates of deposit are non-negotiable, they will be considered illiquid securities and be subject to the Fund's 15% restriction on investments in illiquid securities. Pursuant to the certificate of deposit, the issuer agrees to pay the amount deposited plus interest to the bearer of the certificate on the date specified thereon. Under current FDIC regulations, the maximum insurance payable as to any one certificate of deposit is $250,000; therefore, certificates of deposit purchased by the Fund may not be fully insured. The Fund may only invest in certificates of deposit issued by U.S. banks with at least $1 billion in assets. |
(3) | The Fund may invest in bankers’ acceptances, which are short-term credit instruments used to finance commercial transactions. Generally, an acceptance is a time draft drawn on a bank by an exporter or an importer to obtain a stated amount of funds to pay for specific merchandise. The draft is then “accepted” by a bank that, in effect, |
unconditionally guarantees to pay the face value of the instrument on its maturity date. The acceptance may then be held by the accepting bank as an asset or it may be sold in the secondary market at the going rate of interest for a specific maturity. | |
(4) | The Fund may invest in repurchase agreements, which involve purchases of debt securities with counterparties that are deemed by the Advisor to present acceptable credit risks. In such an action, at the time the Fund purchases the security, it simultaneously agrees to resell and redeliver the security to the seller, who also simultaneously agrees to buy back the security at a fixed price and time. This assures a predetermined yield for the Fund during its holding period since the resale price is always greater than the purchase price and reflects an agreed-upon market rate. Such actions afford an opportunity for the Fund to invest temporarily available cash. The Fund may enter into repurchase agreements only with respect to obligations of the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, certificates of deposit or bankers’ acceptances in which the Fund may invest. Repurchase agreements may be considered loans to the seller, collateralized by the underlying securities. The risk to the Fund is limited to the ability of the seller to pay the agreed-upon sum on the repurchase date; in the event of default, the repurchase agreement provides that the Fund is entitled to sell the underlying collateral. If the value of the collateral declines after the agreement is entered into, however, and if the seller defaults under a repurchase agreement when the value of the underlying collateral is less than the repurchase price, the Fund could incur a loss of both principal and interest. The portfolio managers monitor the value of the collateral at the time the action is entered into and at all times during the term of the repurchase agreement. The portfolio managers do so in an effort to determine that the value of the collateral always equals or exceeds the agreed-upon repurchase price to be paid to the Fund. If the seller were to be subject to a federal bankruptcy proceeding, the ability of the Fund to liquidate the collateral could be delayed or impaired because of certain provisions of the bankruptcy laws. |
(5) | The Fund may invest in bank time deposits, which are monies kept on deposit with banks or savings and loan associations for a stated period of time at a fixed rate of interest. There may be penalties for the early withdrawal of such time deposits, in which case the yields of these investments will be reduced. |
(6) | The Fund may invest in commercial paper, which are short-term unsecured promissory notes, including variable rate master demand notes issued by corporations to finance their current operations. Master demand notes are direct lending arrangements between the Fund and a corporation. There is no secondary market for the notes. However, they are redeemable by the Fund at any time. The Fund's portfolio managers will consider the financial condition of the corporation ( e.g. , earning power, cash flow and other liquidity ratios) and will continuously monitor the corporation’s ability to meet all of its financial obligations, because the Fund's liquidity might be impaired if the corporation were unable to pay principal and interest on demand. The Fund may invest in commercial paper only if it has received the highest rating from at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, if unrated, judged by First Trust to be of comparable quality. |
(7) | The Fund may invest in shares of money market funds, as consistent with its investment objective and policies. Shares of money market funds are subject to management fees and other expenses of those funds. Therefore, investments in money market funds will cause the Fund to bear proportionately the costs incurred by the money market funds’ operations. At the same time, the Fund will continue to pay its own management fees and expenses with respect to all of its assets, including any portion invested in the shares of other investment companies. It is possible for the Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
2016 |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2015 |
11/4/2014 | 23% | 49% |
(1) | Market Risk. Market risk is the risk that the value of the underlying assets may go up or down. Adverse movements in the value of an underlying asset can expose the Fund to losses. Derivative instruments may include elements of leverage and, accordingly, fluctuations in the value of the derivative instrument in relation to the underlying asset may be magnified. The successful use of derivative instruments depends upon a variety of factors, particularly the portfolio managers’ ability to predict movements of the securities, currencies and commodities markets, which may require different skills than predicting changes in the prices of individual securities. There can be no assurance that any particular strategy adopted will succeed. A decision to engage in a derivative transaction will reflect the portfolio managers’ judgment that the derivative transaction will provide value to the Fund and its shareholders and is consistent with the Fund's objective, investment limitations and operating policies. In making such a judgment, the portfolio managers will analyze the benefits and risks of the derivative transactions and weigh them in the context of the Fund's overall investments and investment objective. |
(2) | Credit Risk. Credit risk is the risk that a loss may be sustained as a result of the failure of a counterparty to comply with the terms of a derivative instrument. The counterparty risk for exchange-traded derivatives is generally less than for privately negotiated or OTC derivatives, since generally a clearing agency, which is the |
issuer or counterparty to each exchange-traded instrument, provides a guarantee of performance. For privately negotiated instruments, there is no similar clearing agency guarantee. In all transactions, the Fund will bear the risk that the counterparty will default, and this could result in a loss of the expected benefit of the derivative transactions and possibly other losses to the Fund. The Fund will enter into transactions in derivative instruments only with counterparties that First Trust reasonably believes are capable of performing under the contract. | |
(3) | Correlation Risk. Correlation risk is the risk that there might be an imperfect correlation, or even no correlation, between price movements of a derivative instrument and price movements of investments being hedged. When a derivative transaction is used to completely hedge another position, changes in the market value of the combined position (the derivative instrument plus the position being hedged) result from an imperfect correlation between the price movements of the two instruments. With a perfect hedge, the value of the combined position remains unchanged with any change in the price of the underlying asset. With an imperfect hedge, the value of the derivative instrument and its hedge are not perfectly correlated. For example, if the value of a derivative instrument used in a short hedge (such as writing a call option, buying a put option or selling a futures contract) increased by less than the decline in value of the hedged investments, the hedge would not be perfectly correlated. This might occur due to factors unrelated to the value of the investments being hedged, such as speculative or other pressures on the markets in which these instruments are traded. The effectiveness of hedges using instruments on indices will depend, in part, on the degree of correlation between price movements in the index and the price movements in the investments being hedged. |
(4) | Liquidity Risk. Liquidity risk is the risk that a derivative instrument cannot be sold, closed out or replaced quickly at or very close to its fundamental value. Generally, exchange contracts are very liquid because the exchange clearinghouse is the counterparty of every contract. OTC transactions are less liquid than exchange-traded derivatives since they often can only be closed out with the other party to the transaction. The Fund might be required by applicable regulatory requirements to maintain assets as “cover,” maintain segregated accounts and/or make margin payments when taking positions in derivative instruments involving obligations to third parties ( i.e. , instruments other than purchase options). If the Fund is unable to close out its positions in such instruments, it might be required to continue to maintain such assets or accounts or make such payments until the position expires, matures or is closed out. These requirements might impair the Fund's ability to sell a security or make an investment at a time when it would otherwise be favorable to do so, or require that the Fund sell a portfolio security at a disadvantageous time. The Fund's ability to sell or close out a position in an instrument prior to expiration or maturity depends upon the existence of a liquid secondary market or, in the absence of such a market, the ability and willingness of the counterparty to enter into a transaction closing out the position. Due to liquidity risk, there is no assurance that any derivatives position can be sold or closed out at a time and price that is favorable to the Fund. |
(5) | Legal Risk. Legal risk is the risk of loss caused by the unenforceability of a party’s obligations under the derivative. While a party seeking price certainty agrees to surrender the potential upside in exchange for downside protection, the party taking the risk is looking for a positive payoff. Despite this voluntary assumption of risk, a counterparty that has lost money in a derivative transaction may try to avoid payment by exploiting various legal uncertainties about certain derivative products. |
(6) | Systemic or “Interconnection” Risk. Systemic or “interconnection” risk is the risk that a disruption in the financial markets will cause difficulties for all market participants. In other words, a disruption in one market will spill over into other markets, perhaps creating a chain reaction. Much of the OTC derivatives market takes place among the OTC dealers themselves, thus creating a large interconnected web of financial obligations. This interconnectedness raises the possibility that a default by one large dealer could create losses for other dealers and destabilize the entire market for OTC derivative instruments. |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
Stan Ueland
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President (September 2012 to present), Vice President (August 2005 to September 2012) First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
(1) | Mr. Bowen is deemed an “interested person” of the Trust due to his position as Chief Executive Officer of First Trust, investment advisor of the Fund. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation
from the Fund (1) |
Total Compensation from the
First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $4,267 | $370,744 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $4,268 | $391,203 |
Robert F. Keith | $4,268 | $381,412 |
Niel B. Nielson | $4,268 | $381,482 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Fund to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2016 for services to the Fund. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2016 for services to the 137 portfolios existing in 2016, which consisted of 7 open-end mutual funds, 16 closed-end funds and 114 exchange-traded funds. |
Trustee |
Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in the Fund (Number of Shares Held) |
Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen by Trustee in the First Trust Fund Complex |
Interested Trustee | ||
James A. Bowen | None | Over $100,000 |
Independent Trustees | ||
Richard E. Erickson | None | Over $100,000 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | None | Over $100,000 |
Robert F. Keith | None | Over $100,000 |
Niel B. Nielson | None | Over $100,000 |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
2016 |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2015 |
11/4/2014 | $47,023 | $37,778 |
• | Derek Fulton: Mr. Fulton has been a director, chief executive officer and chief investment officer of First Trust Global since January 2012. Prior to joining First Trust Global, he co-founded ISIS Asset Management ( “ISIS AM” ) in May 2009 and led its investment team. Prior to his time at ISIS AM he was Head of Global & Closed-End Fixed Income Portfolios at Aberdeen Asset Management ( “Aberdeen” ) in London and had also served as the head of Asian Fixed Income based in Singapore. At Aberdeen, Mr. Fulton oversaw in excess of $10 billion of assets including institutional global government and global aggregate accounts. He was also a member of the currency team running active currency overlays on over $20 billion of institutional mandates. |
• | Leonardo Da Costa, CFA, Portfolio Manager of First Trust Global Portfolios Ltd: Mr. Da Costa has been a portfolio manager at First Trust Global where he focuses on fixed income and is a specialist in emerging markets since May 2013. Mr. Da Costa joined ISIS AM in October 2012 where he was a portfolio manager on the fixed income team. Prior to his time at ISIS AM, he worked for Hydra Capital Management from March 2007 to September 2009 on the firm’s long/short and long only emerging market fixed income products. He started his career as a member of the Global Emerging Market Debt team at Aberdeen where he also worked with Mr. Fulton. The team was responsible for managing $2.5 billion of emerging market fixed income assets across total return, income and closed-end products. Mr. Da Costa has a B.Comm (Honours) in Investment and Financial Management from the University of Pretoria (South Africa) and is a CFA charterholder. |
Sub-Advisor |
Registered
Investment Companies Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Accounts
Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Derek Fulton | 1 ($2,753,482) | N/A | N/A |
Leonardo Da Costa | 1 ($2,753,482) | N/A | N/A |
Amount of Sub-Advisory Fees
|
||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
2016 |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2015 |
11/4/2014 | $0 | $0 |
Aggregate Amount of Brokerage Commissions
|
||
Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
October 31, 2016 |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2015 |
11/4/2014 | $0 | $0 |
Argentina | Australia | Austria | Belgium | Brazil | Canada | Chile |
March 24
April 13 April 14 May 1 May 25 June 20 August 21 October 9 November 6 November 27 December 8 December 25 December 29 January 1 February 12 February 13 |
April 14
April 17 April 25 June 12 December 25 December 26 January 1 January 15 |
April 17
May 1 May 25 June 5 June 15 August 15 October 26 November 1 December 8 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 21 May 1 June 15 September 7 October 12 November 2 November 15 November 20 December 25 December 29 January 1 February 12 February 13 |
April 14
May 22 July 3 August 7 September 4 October 9 December 25 December 26 January 1 February 19 |
April 14
May 1 June 26 August 15 September 18 September 19 October 9 October 27 November 1 December 8 December 25 |
China | Denmark | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Hong Kong |
April 3
April 4 May 1 May 29 May 30 October 2 October 3 October 4 October 5 October 6 January 1 January 2 February 15 February 16 |
April 13
April 14 April 17 May 12 May 25 May 26 June 5 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 May 25 June 23 December 6 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 October 3 October 31 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 August 15 December 25 December 26 January 1 February 19 |
April 4
April 14 April 17 May 1 May 3 May 30 October 2 October 5 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
India | Ireland | Israel | Italy | Japan | Malaysia | Mexico |
March 13
April 4 April 14 May 1 June 26 August 15 August 25 October 2 October 19 October 30 December 25 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
March 12
April 10 April 11 April 16 April 17 May 1 May 2 May 30 May 31 August 1 September 20 September 21 September 22 September 29 October 4 October 5 October 11 October 12 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 August 15 December 25 December 26 |
March 20
May 3 May 4 May 5 July 17 August 11 September 18 October 9 November 3 November 23 January 1 January 2 January 3 January 8 |
May 1
May 10 June 12 June 26 August 31 September 1 September 21 October 18 December 1 December 25 January 1 January 30 February 16 |
March 20
April 13 April 14 May 1 November 2 November 20 December 12 December 25 January 1 February 5 |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
$88,751 |
(1) | Common stocks and other equity securities listed on any national or foreign exchange other than Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market (“ AIM ”) will be valued at the last sale price on the exchange on which they are principally traded, or the official closing price for Nasdaq and AIM securities. Portfolio securities traded on more than one securities exchange are valued at the last sale price or official closing price, as applicable, on the Business Day as of which such value is being determined at the close of the exchange representing the principal market for such securities. |
(2) | Shares of open-end funds are valued at fair value which is based on NAV per share. |
(3) | Securities traded in the OTC market are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(4) | Exchange traded options and futures contracts are valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts are principally traded. If no closing price is available, they will be fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. OTC options and futures contracts are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(5) | Forward foreign currency contracts are fair valued at the current day’s interpolated foreign exchange rate, as calculated using the current day’s spot rate, and the 30, 60, 90 and 180-day forward rates provided by a pricing service or by certain independent dealers in such contracts. |
(1) | Fixed-income securities, convertible securities, interest rate swaps, credit default swaps, total return swaps, currency swaps, currency-linked notes, credit-linked notes and other similar instruments will be fair valued using a pricing service. |
(2) | Fixed income and other debt securities having a remaining maturity of 60 days or less when purchased are fair valued at cost adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts (amortized cost), provided the Advisor’s Pricing Committee has determined that the use of amortized cost is an appropriate reflection of fair value given market and issuer-specific conditions existing at the time of the determination. Factors that may be considered in determining the appropriateness of the use of amortized cost include, but are not limited to, the following: |
(i) | the credit conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(ii) | the liquidity conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(iii) | the interest rate conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto (such as significant changes in interest rates); |
(iv) | issuer-specific conditions (such as significant credit deterioration); and |
(v) | any other market-based data the Advisor’s Pricing Committee considers relevant. In this regard, the Advisor’s Pricing Committee may use last-obtained market-based data to assist it when valuing portfolio securities using amortized cost. |
(3) | Repurchase agreements will be fair valued as follows. Overnight repurchase agreements will be fair valued at amortized cost when it represents the best estimate of fair value. Term repurchase agreements (i.e., those whose maturity exceeds seven days) will be fair valued by the Advisor’s Pricing Committee at the average of the bid quotations obtained daily from at least two recognized dealers. |
NAME OF BENEFICIAL OWNER |
% OF
OUTSTANDING SHARES OWNED |
FIRST TRUST EMERGING MARKETS LOCAL CURRENCY BOND ETF | |
National Financial Services, LLC | 40.08% |
The Bank of New York | 19.97% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping | 12.97% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc. | 6.44% |
Pershing, LLC | 5.49% |
(1) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping: 4804 Dear Lake Dr. E., Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(2) | National Financial Services: 499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(3) | Pershing LLC: 1 Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(4) | TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc.: 1005 Ameritrade Place, Bellevue, Nebraska 68005 |
(5) | The Bank of New York: 525 William Penn Place, Pittsburgh, PA 15259 |
1. | Likelihood of payment: capacity and willingness of the obligor to meet its financial commitment on an obligation in accordance with the terms of the obligation; |
2. | Nature of and provisions of the obligation and the promise S&P imputes; |
3. | Protection afforded by, and relative position of, the obligation in the event of bankruptcy, reorganization, or other arrangement under the laws of bankruptcy and other laws affecting creditors’ rights. |
AAA | An obligation rated “AAA” has the highest rating assigned by Standard & Poor’s. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is extremely strong. |
AA | An obligation rated “AA” differs from the highest rated obligations only in small degree. The obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is very strong. |
A | An obligation rated “A” is somewhat more susceptible to the adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than obligations in higher rated categories. However, the obligor’s capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation is still strong. |
BBB | An obligation rated “BBB” exhibits adequate protection parameters. However, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity of the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
BB | An obligation rated “BB” is less vulnerable to nonpayment than other speculative issues. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions which could lead to the obligor’s inadequate capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
B | An obligation rated “B” is more vulnerable to nonpayment than obligations rated “BB,” but the obligor currently has the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions will likely impair the obligor’s capacity or willingness to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
CCC | An obligation rated “CCC” is currently vulnerable to nonpayment, and is dependent upon favorable business, financial, and economic conditions for the obligor to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. In the event of adverse business, financial, or economic conditions, the obligor is not likely to have the capacity to meet its financial commitment on the obligation. |
CC | An obligation rated “CC” is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment. The “CC” rating is used when a default has not yet occurred but S&P expects default to be a virtual certainty regardless of the anticipated time to default. |
C | An obligation rated “C” is currently highly vulnerable to nonpayment and the obligation is expected to have lower relative seniority or lower ultimate recovery compared to obligations that are rated higher. |
D | An obligation rated “D” is in default or in breach of an imputed promise. For non-hybrid capital instruments, the “D” rating category is used when payments on an obligation are not made on the date due unless S&P believes that such payments will be made within five business days in the absence of a stated grace period or within the earlier of the stated grace period or 30 calendar days. The “D” rating also will be used upon the filing of a bankruptcy petition or the taking of similar action and where default on an obligation is a virtual certainty, for example due to automatic stay provisions. An obligation’s rating is lowered to ‘D’ if it is subject to a distressed exchange offer. |
Aaa | Obligations rated Aaa are judged to be of the highest quality, subject to the lowest level of credit risk. |
Aa | Obligations rated Aa are judged to be of high quality and are subject to very low credit risk. |
A | Obligations rated A are judged to be upper-medium grade and are subject to low credit risk. |
Baa | Obligations rated Baa are judged to be medium-grade and subject to moderate credit risk and as such may possess certain speculative characteristics. |
Ba | Obligations rated Ba are judged to be speculative and are subject to substantial credit risk. |
B | Obligations rated B are considered speculative and are subject to high credit risk. |
Caa | Obligations rated Caa are judged to be speculative of poor standing and are subject to very high credit risk. |
Ca | Obligations rated Ca are highly speculative and are likely in, or very near, default, with some prospect of recovery of principal and interest. |
C | Obligations rated C are the lowest rated and are typically in default, with little prospect for recovery of principal or interest. |
AAA | Highest credit quality. ‘AAA’ ratings denote the lowest expectation of default risk. They are assigned only in cases of exceptionally strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is highly unlikely to be adversely affected by foreseeable events. |
AA | Very high credit quality. ‘AA’ ratings denote expectations of very low default risk. They indicate very strong capacity for payment of financial commitments. This capacity is not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable events. |
A | High credit quality. ‘A’ ratings denote expectations of low default risk. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered strong. This capacity may, nevertheless, be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic conditions than is the case for higher ratings. |
BBB | Good credit quality. ‘BBB’ ratings indicate that expectations of default risk are currently low. The capacity for payment of financial commitments is considered adequate but adverse business or economic conditions are more likely to impair this capacity. |
BB | Speculative. ‘BB’ ratings indicate an elevated vulnerability to default risk, particularly in the event of adverse changes in business or economic conditions over time; however, business or financial flexibility exists which supports the servicing of financial commitments. |
B | Highly speculative. ‘B’ ratings indicate that material default risk is present, but a limited margin of safety remains. Financial commitments are currently being met; however, capacity for continued payment is vulnerable to deterioration in the business and economic environment. |
CCC | Substantial credit risk. Default is a real possibility. |
CC | Very high levels of credit risk. Default of some kind appears probable. |
C |
Exceptionally high levels of credit risk. Default is imminent or inevitable, or the issuer is in standstill. Conditions that
are indicative of a ‘C’ category rating for an issuer include:
• the issuer has entered into a grace or cure period following non-payment of a material financial obligation; • the issuer has entered into a temporary negotiated waiver or standstill agreement following a payment default on a material financial obligation; or • Fitch otherwise believes a condition of ‘RD’ or ‘D’ to be imminent or inevitable, including through the formal announcement of a distressed debt exchange. |
RD |
Restricted default. ‘RD’ ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch’s opinion has experienced an uncured
payment default on a bond, loan or other material financial obligation but which has not entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure, and which has
not otherwise ceased operating. This would include:
• the selective payment default on a specific class or currency of debt; • the uncured expiry of any applicable grace period, cure period or default forbearance period following a payment default on a bank loan, capital markets security or other material financial obligation; • the extension of multiple waivers or forbearance periods upon a payment default on one or more material financial obligations, either in series or in parallel; or • execution of a distressed debt exchange on one or more material financial obligations. |
D | Default. ‘D’ ratings indicate an issuer that in Fitch’s opinion has entered into bankruptcy filings, administration, receivership, liquidation or other formal winding-up procedure, or which has otherwise ceased business. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances: |
1. Accountability |
1.1. | The board is classified, and a continuing director responsible for a problematic governance issue at the board/committee level that would warrant a withhold/against vote recommendation is not up for election. All appropriate nominees (except new) may be held accountable. |
1.2. | The board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers. Sustained poor performance is measured by one- and three-year total shareholder returns in the bottom half of a company’s four-digit GICS industry group (Russell 3000 companies only). Take into consideration the company’s five-year total shareholder return and operational metrics. Problematic provisions include but are not limited to: |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections or a majority vote standard with no plurality carve-out for contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A dual-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
1.3. | The company’s poison pill has a “dead-hand” or “modified dead-hand” feature. Vote against or withhold from nominees every year until this feature is removed; |
1.4. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of more than 12 months (“long-term pill”), or renews any existing pill, including any “short-term pill” (12 months or less), without shareholder approval. A commitment or policy that puts a newly adopted pill to a binding shareholder vote may potentially offset an adverse vote recommendation. Review such companies with classified boards every year, and such companies with annually elected boards at least once every three years, and vote against or withhold votes from all nominees if the company still maintains a non-shareholder-approved poison pill; or |
(1) | In general, companies with a plurality vote standard use “Withhold” as the contrary vote option in director elections; companies with a majority vote standard use “Against”. However, it will vary by company and the proxy must be checked to determine the valid contrary vote option for the particular company. |
(2) | A “new nominee” is any current nominee who has not already been elected by shareholders and who joined the board after the problematic action in question transpired. If ISS cannot determine whether the nominee joined the board before or after the problematic action transpired, the nominee will be considered a “new nominee” if he or she joined the board within the 12 months prior to the upcoming shareholder meeting. |
1.5. | The board makes a material adverse change to an existing poison pill without shareholder approval. |
1.6. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of 12 months or less (“short-term pill”) without shareholder approval, taking into account the following factors: |
➤ | The date of the pill‘s adoption relative to the date of the next meeting of shareholders — i.e. whether the company had time to put the pill on the ballot for shareholder ratification given the circumstances; |
➤ | The issuer’s rationale; |
➤ | The issuer’s governance structure and practices; and |
➤ | The issuer’s track record of accountability to shareholders. Restricting Binding Shareholder Proposals |
1.7. | The company’s charter imposes undue restrictions on shareholders’ ability to amend the bylaws. Such restrictions include, but are not limited to: outright prohibition on the submission of binding shareholder proposals, or share ownership requirements or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against on an ongoing basis. |
1.8. | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive (see discussion under “Auditor Ratification”); |
1.9. | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
1.10. | There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm. |
1.11. | Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a level of serious concern, such as: fraud; misapplication of GAAP; and material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures. Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence, and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether withhold/against votes are warranted. |
1.12. | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
1.13. | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
1.14. | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders; |
1.15. | The company fails to submit one-time transfers of stock options to a shareholder vote; or |
1.16. | The company fails to fulfill the terms of a burn rate commitment made to shareholders. |
1.17. | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
1.18. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if the board amends the company's bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders' rights or that could adversely impact shareholders, considering the following factors: |
➤ | The board's rationale for adopting the bylaw/charter amendment without shareholder ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure by the company of any significant engagement with shareholders regarding the amendment; |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights caused by the board's unilateral amendment to the bylaws/charter; |
➤ | The board's track record with regard to unilateral board action on bylaw/charter amendments or other entrenchment provisions; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; |
➤ | The company's existing governance provisions; |
➤ | The timing of the board's amendment to the bylaws/charter in connection with a significant business development; and, |
➤ | Other factors, as deemed appropriate, that may be relevant to determine the impact of the amendment on shareholders. |
➤ | Classified the board; |
➤ | Adopted supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; or |
➤ | Eliminated shareholders' ability to amend bylaws. |
1.19. | For newly public companies, generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if, prior to or in connection with the company's public offering, the company or its board adopted bylaw or charter provisions materially adverse to shareholder rights, or implemented a multi-class capital structure in which the classes have unequal voting rights considering the following factors: |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights; |
➤ | The disclosed rationale; |
➤ | The ability to change the governance structure (e.g., limitations on shareholders’ right to amend the bylaws or charter, or supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter); |
➤ | The ability of shareholders to hold directors accountable through annual director elections, or whether the company has a classified board structure; |
➤ | Any reasonable sunset provision; and |
➤ | Other relevant factors. |
1.20. | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight (3) , or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
1.21. | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
1.22. | Egregious actions related to a director’s service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company. |
2.1. | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | Disclosed outreach efforts by the board to shareholders in the wake of the vote; |
➤ | Rationale provided in the proxy statement for the level of implementation; |
➤ | The subject matter of the proposal; |
➤ | The level of support for and opposition to the resolution in past meetings; |
➤ | Actions taken by the board in response to the majority vote and its engagement with shareholders; |
➤ | The continuation of the underlying issue as a voting item on the ballot (as either shareholder or management proposals); and |
➤ | Other factors as appropriate. |
2.2. | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
2.3. | At the previous board election, any director received more than 50 percent withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote; |
2.4. | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the majority of votes cast at the most recent shareholder meeting at which shareholders voted on the say-on-pay frequency; or |
➤ | The board's rationale for selecting a frequency that is different from the frequency that received a plurality; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure and vote results; |
➤ | ISS' analysis of whether there are compensation concerns or a history of problematic compensation practices; and |
➤ | The previous year's support level on the company's say-on-pay proposal. |
3.1. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case (4) who attend less than 75 percent of the aggregate of their board and committee meetings for the period for which they served, unless an acceptable reason for absences is disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. Acceptable reasons for director absences are generally limited to the following: |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
3.2. | If the proxy disclosure is unclear and insufficient to determine whether a director attended at least 75 percent of the aggregate of his/her board and committee meetings during his/her period of service, vote against or withhold from the director(s) in question. |
(3) | Examples of failure of risk oversight include, but are not limited to: bribery; large or serial fines or sanctions from regulatory bodies; significant adverse legal judgments or settlements; hedging of company stock; or significant pledging of company stock. |
(4) | For new nominees only, schedule conflicts due to commitments made prior to their appointment to the board are considered if disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. |
3.4. | CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own — withhold only at their outside boards (5) . |
4.1. | The inside or affiliated outside director serves on any of the three key committees: audit, compensation, or nominating; |
4.2. | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; |
4.3. | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee; or |
4.4. | Independent directors make up less than a majority of the directors. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
• | The scope of the proposal; |
• | The company's current board leadership structure; |
• | The company's governance structure and practices; |
• | Company performance; and |
• | Any other relevant factors that may be applicable. |
(5) | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote from the CEO of a parent company board or any of the controlled (>50 percent ownership) subsidiaries of that parent, but may do so at subsidiaries that are less than 50 percent controlled and boards outside the parent/subsidiary relationships. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for management and shareholder proposals for proxy access with the following provisions: |
• | Ownership threshold: maximum requirement not more than three percent (3%) of the voting power; |
• | Ownership duration: maximum requirement not longer than three (3) years of continuous ownership for each member of the nominating group; |
• | Aggregation: minimal or no limits on the number of shareholders permitted to form a nominating group; |
• | Cap: cap on nominees of generally twenty-five percent (25%) of the board. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the election of directors in contested elections, considering the following factors: |
• | Long-term financial performance of the company relative to its industry; |
• | Management’s track record; |
• | Background to the contested election; |
• | Nominee qualifications and any compensatory arrangements; |
• | Strategic plan of dissident slate and quality of the critique against management; |
• | Likelihood that the proposed goals and objectives can be achieved (both slates); and |
• | Stock ownership positions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to increase the number of authorized common shares where the primary purpose of the increase is to issue shares in connection with a transaction on the same ballot that warrants support. |
• | Past Board Performance: |
➤ | The company's use of authorized shares during the last three years |
• | The Current Request: |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of the specific purposes of the proposed increase; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of specific and severe risks to shareholders of not approving the request; and |
➤ | The dilutive impact of the request as determined relative to an allowable increase calculated by ISS (typically 100 percent of existing authorized shares) that reflects the company's need for shares and total shareholder returns. |
A. | Most companies: 100 percent of existing authorized shares. |
B. | Companies with less than 50 percent of existing authorized shares either outstanding or reserved for issuance: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
C. | Companies with one- and three-year total shareholder returns (TSRs) in the bottom 10 percent of the U.S. market as of the end of the calendar quarter that is closest to their most recent fiscal year end: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
D. | Companies at which both conditions (B and C) above are both present: 25 percent of existing authorized shares. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on mergers and acquisitions. Review and evaluate the merits and drawbacks of the proposed transaction, balancing various and sometimes countervailing factors including: |
• | Valuation - Is the value to be received by the target shareholders (or paid by the acquirer) reasonable? While the fairness opinion may provide an initial starting point for assessing valuation reasonableness, emphasis is placed on the offer premium, market reaction, and strategic rationale. |
• | Market reaction - How has the market responded to the proposed deal? A negative market reaction should cause closer scrutiny of a deal. |
• | Strategic rationale - Does the deal make sense strategically? From where is the value derived? Cost and revenue synergies should not be overly aggressive or optimistic, but reasonably achievable. Management should also have a favorable track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions. |
• | Negotiations and process - Were the terms of the transaction negotiated at arm's-length? Was the process fair and equitable? A fair process helps to ensure the best price for shareholders. Significant negotiation "wins" can also signify the deal makers' competency. The comprehensiveness of the sales process (e.g., full auction, partial auction, no auction) can also affect shareholder value. |
• | Conflicts of interest - Are insiders benefiting from the transaction disproportionately and inappropriately as compared to non-insider shareholders? As the result of potential conflicts, the directors and officers of the company may be more likely to vote to approve a merger than if they did not hold these interests. Consider whether these interests may have influenced these directors and officers to support or recommend the merger. The CIC figure presented in the "ISS Transaction Summary" section of this report is an aggregate figure that can in certain cases be a misleading indicator of the true value transfer from shareholders to insiders. Where such figure appears to be excessive, analyze the underlying assumptions to determine whether a potential conflict exists. |
• | Governance - Will the combined company have a better or worse governance profile than the current governance profiles of the respective parties to the transaction? If the governance profile is to change for the worse, the burden is on the company to prove that other issues (such as valuation) outweigh any deterioration in governance. |
1. | Maintain appropriate pay-for-performance alignment, with emphasis on long-term shareholder value: This principle encompasses overall executive pay practices, which must be designed to attract, retain, and appropriately motivate the key employees who drive shareholder value creation over the long term. It will take into consideration, among other factors, the link between pay and performance; the mix between fixed and variable pay; performance goals; and equity-based plan costs; |
2. | Avoid arrangements that risk “pay for failure”: This principle addresses the appropriateness of long or indefinite contracts, excessive severance packages, and guaranteed compensation; |
3. | Maintain an independent and effective compensation committee: This principle promotes oversight of executive pay programs by directors with appropriate skills, knowledge, experience, and a sound process for compensation decision-making (e.g., including access to independent expertise and advice when needed); |
4. | Provide shareholders with clear, comprehensive compensation disclosures: This principle underscores the importance of informative and timely disclosures that enable shareholders to evaluate executive pay practices fully and fairly; |
5. | Avoid inappropriate pay to non-executive directors: This principle recognizes the interests of shareholders in ensuring that compensation to outside directors does not compromise their independence and ability to make appropriate judgments in overseeing managers’ pay and performance. At the market level, it may incorporate a variety of generally accepted best practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on ballot items related to executive pay and practices, as well as certain aspects of outside director compensation. |
Vote against Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation (Management Say-on-Pay or “MSOP”) if: |
• | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
• | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
• | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
• | There is no MSOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an MSOP is warranted due to pay-for-performance misalignment, problematic pay practices, or the lack of adequate responsiveness on compensation issues raised previously, or a combination thereof; |
• | The board fails to respond adequately to a previous MSOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
• | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, including option repricing or option backdating; or |
• | The situation is egregious. |
• | Primary Evaluation Factors for Executive Pay |
1. | Peer Group (7) Alignment: |
➤ | The degree of alignment between the company's annualized TSR rank and the CEO's annualized total pay rank within a peer group, each measured over a three-year period. |
➤ | The multiple of the CEO's total pay relative to the peer group median. |
2. | Absolute Alignment (8) – the absolute alignment between the trend in CEO pay and company TSR over the prior five fiscal years – i.e. , the difference between the trend in annual pay changes and the trend in annualized TSR during the period. |
• | The ratio of performance- to time-based equity awards; |
• | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation; |
• | The completeness of disclosure and rigor of performance goals; |
• | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
• | Actual results of financial/operational metrics, such as growth in revenue, profit, cash flow, etc., both absolute and relative to peers; |
(6) | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
(7) | The revised peer group is generally comprised of 14-24 companies that are selected using market cap, revenue (or assets for certain financial firms), GICS industry group, and company's selected peers' GICS industry group, with size constraints, via a process designed to select peers that are comparable to the subject company in terms of revenue/assets and industry, and also within a market-cap bucket that is reflective of the company's. For Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels companies, market cap is the only size determinant. |
(8) | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
• | Special circumstances related to, for example, a new CEO in the prior FY or anomalous equity grant practices (e.g., bi-annual awards); |
• | Realizable pay compared to grant pay; and |
• | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
(9) | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
• | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
• | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking; and |
• | Options Backdating. |
• | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
• | Excessive perquisites or tax gross-ups, including any gross-up related to a secular trust or restricted stock vesting; |
• | New or extended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | CIC payments exceeding 3 times base salary and average/target/most recent bonus; |
➤ | CIC severance payments without involuntary job loss or substantial diminution of duties ("single" or "modified single" triggers); |
➤ | CIC payments with excise tax gross-ups (including "modified" gross-ups); |
• | Insufficient executive compensation disclosure by externally-managed issuers (EMIs) such that a reasonable assessment of pay programs and practices applicable to the EMI's executives is not possible. |
• | Multi-year guaranteed bonuses; |
• | A single or common performance metric used for short- and long-term plans; |
• | Lucrative severance packages; |
• | High pay opportunities relative to industry peers; |
• | Disproportionate supplemental pensions; or |
• | Mega annual equity grants that provide unlimited upside with no downside risk. |
• | Factors that potentially mitigate the impact of risky incentives include rigorous claw-back provisions and robust stock ownership/holding guidelines. |
• | Reason and motive for the options backdating issue, such as inadvertent vs. deliberate grant date changes; |
• | Duration of options backdating; |
• | Size of restatement due to options backdating; |
• | Corrective actions taken by the board or compensation committee, such as canceling or re-pricing backdated options, the recouping of option gains on backdated grants; and |
• | Adoption of a grant policy that prohibits backdating, and creates a fixed grant schedule or window period for equity grants in the future. |
• | Failure to respond to majority-supported shareholder proposals on executive pay topics; or |
• | Failure to adequately respond to the company's previous say-on-pay proposal that received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on certain equity-based compensation plans (11) depending on a combination of certain plan features and equity grant practices, where positive factors may counterbalance negative factors, and vice versa, as evaluated using an "equity plan scorecard" (EPSC) approach with three pillars: |
• | Plan Cost: The total estimated cost of the company’s equity plans relative to industry/market cap peers, measured by the company's estimated Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) in relation to peers and considering both: |
➤ | SVT based on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants, plus outstanding unvested/unexercised grants; and |
➤ | SVT based only on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants. |
• | Plan Features: |
➤ | Automatic single-triggered award vesting upon a change in control (CIC); |
➤ | Discretionary vesting authority; |
➤ | Liberal share recycling on various award types; |
➤ | Lack of minimum vesting period for grants made under the plan. |
• | Grant Practices: |
➤ | The company’s three year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in most recent CEO equity grants (3-year look-back); |
➤ | The estimated duration of the plan (based on the sum of shares remaining available and the new shares requested, divided by the average annual shares granted in the prior three years); |
➤ | The proportion of the CEO's most recent equity grants/awards subject to performance conditions; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains a claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company has established post exercise/vesting share-holding requirements. |
• | Awards may vest in connection with a liberal change-of-control definition; |
• | The plan would permit repricing or cash buyout of underwater options without shareholder approval (either by expressly permitting it — for NYSE and Nasdaq listed companies — or by not prohibiting it when the company has a history of repricing — for non-listed companies); |
• | The plan is a vehicle for problematic pay practices or a significant pay-for-performance disconnect under certain circumstances; or |
• | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
(11) | Proposals evaluated under the EPSC policy generally include those to approve or amend (1) stock option plans for employees and/or employees and directors, (2) restricted stock plans for employees and/or employees and directors, and (3) omnibus stock incentive plans for employees and/or employees and directors. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, taking into consideration whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value, and in addition the following will also be considered: |
• | If the issues presented in the proposal are more appropriately or effectively dealt with through legislation or government regulation; |
• | If the company has already responded in an appropriate and sufficient manner to the issue(s) raised in the proposal; |
• | Whether the proposal's request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive; |
• | The company's approach compared with any industry standard practices for addressing the issue(s) raised by the proposal; |
• | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not reasonable and sufficient information is currently available to shareholders from the company or from other publicly available sources; and |
• | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not implementation would reveal proprietary or confidential information that could place the company at a competitive disadvantage. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for resolutions requesting that a company disclose information on the risks related to climate change on its operations and investments, such as financial, physical, or regulatory risks, considering: |
• | Whether the company already provides current, publicly-available information on the impact that climate change may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
• | The company’s level of disclosure is at least comparable to that of industry peers; and |
• | There are no significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance. |
• | The company already discloses current, publicly-available information on the impacts that GHG emissions may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
• | The company's level of disclosure is comparable to that of industry peers; and |
• | There are no significant, controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's GHG emissions. |
• | Whether the company provides disclosure of year-over-year GHG emissions performance data; |
• | Whether company disclosure lags behind industry peers; |
• | The company's actual GHG emissions performance; |
• | The company's current GHG emission policies, oversight mechanisms, and related initiatives; and |
• | Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to GHG emissions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on a company's efforts to diversify the board, unless: |
• | The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and |
• | The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board and within the company. |
• | The degree of existing gender and racial minority diversity on the company’s board and among its executive officers; |
• | The level of gender and racial minority representation that exists at the company’s industry peers; |
• | The company’s established process for addressing gender and racial minority board representation; |
• | Whether the proposal includes an overly prescriptive request to amend nominating committee charter language; |
• | The independence of the company’s nominating committee; |
• | Whether the company uses an outside search firm to identify potential director nominees; and |
• | Whether the company has had recent controversies, fines, or litigation regarding equal employment practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms related to social, economic, and environmental sustainability, unless: |
• | The company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies such as an environment, health, and safety (EHS) report; a comprehensive code of corporate conduct; and/or a diversity report; or |
• | The company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines or a similar standard within a specified time frame. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to link, or report on linking, executive compensation to sustainability (environmental and social) criteria, considering: |
• | Whether the company has significant and/or persistent controversies or regulatory violations regarding social and/or environmental issues; |
• | Whether the company has management systems and oversight mechanisms in place regarding its social and environmental performance; |
• | The degree to which industry peers have incorporated similar non-financial performance criteria in their executive compensation practices; and |
• | The company's current level of disclosure regarding its environmental and social performance. |
FUND NAME |
TICKER
SYMBOL |
EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | RFAP | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | RFDI | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | RFEM | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | RFEU | Nasdaq |
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
10 |
|
15 |
|
23 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
|
31 |
|
32 |
|
37 |
|
39 |
|
43 |
|
45 |
|
45 |
|
45 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
|
C-1 |
(1) | A Fund may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | A Fund may not borrow money, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(3) | A Fund will not underwrite the securities of other issuers except to the extent a Fund may be considered an underwriter under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), in connection with the purchase and sale of portfolio securities. |
(4) | A Fund will not purchase or sell real estate or interests therein, unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prohibit a Fund from purchasing or selling securities or other instruments backed by real estate or of issuers engaged in real estate activities). |
(5) | A Fund may not make loans to other persons, except through (i) the purchase of debt securities permissible under the Fund’s investment policies, (ii) repurchase agreements, or (iii) the lending of portfolio securities, provided that no such loan of portfolio securities may be made by the Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33-1/3% of the value of the Fund’s total assets. |
(6) | A Fund may not purchase or sell physical commodities unless acquired as a result of ownership of securities or other instruments (but this shall not prevent the Fund from purchasing or selling options, futures contracts, forward contracts or other derivative instruments, or from investing in securities or other instruments backed by physical commodities). |
(7) | A Fund may not invest 25% or more of the value of its total assets in securities of issuers in any one industry or group of industries. This restriction does not apply to obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities, or securities of other investment companies. |
(1) | A Fund may invest in U.S. government securities, including bills, notes and bonds differing as to maturity and rates of interest, which are either issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury or by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities. U.S. government securities include securities that are issued or guaranteed by the United States Treasury, by various agencies of the U.S. government, or by various instrumentalities that have been established or sponsored by the U.S. government. U.S. Treasury securities are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the United States. Securities issued or guaranteed by federal agencies and U.S. government-sponsored instrumentalities may or may not be backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some of the U.S. government agencies that issue or guarantee securities include the Export-Import Bank of the United States, the Farmers Home Administration, the Federal Housing Administration, the Maritime Administration, the Small Business Administration and the Tennessee Valley Authority. An instrumentality of the U.S. government is a government agency organized under federal charter with government supervision. Instrumentalities issuing or guaranteeing securities include, among others, the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and Federal National Mortgage Association ( “FNMA” ). In the case of those U.S. government securities not backed by the full faith and credit of the United States, the investor must look principally to the agency or instrumentality issuing or guaranteeing the security for ultimate repayment, and may not be able to assert a claim against the United States itself in the event that the agency or instrumentality does not meet its commitment. The U.S. government, its agencies and instrumentalities do not guarantee the market value of their securities; consequently, the value of such securities may fluctuate. In addition, each Fund may invest in sovereign debt obligations of non-U.S. countries. A sovereign debtor’s willingness or ability to repay principal and interest in a timely manner may be affected by a number of factors, including its cash flow situation, the extent of its non-U.S. reserves, the availability of sufficient non-U.S. exchange on the date a payment is due, the relative size of the debt service burden to the economy as a whole, the sovereign debtor’s policy toward principal international lenders and the political constraints to which it may be subject. |
(2) | A Fund may invest in certificates of deposit issued against funds deposited in a bank or savings and loan association. Such certificates are for a definite period of time, earn a specified rate of return, and are normally negotiable. If such certificates of deposit are non-negotiable, they will be considered illiquid securities and be subject to a Fund’s 15% restriction on investments in illiquid securities. Pursuant to the certificate of deposit, the issuer agrees to pay the amount deposited plus interest to the bearer of the certificate on the date specified thereon. Under current FDIC regulations, the maximum insurance payable as to any one certificate of deposit is $250,000; therefore, certificates of deposit purchased by a Fund may not be fully insured. A Fund may only invest in certificates of deposit issued by U.S. banks with at least $1 billion in assets. |
(3) | A Fund may invest in bankers’ acceptances, which are short-term credit instruments used to finance commercial transactions. Generally, an acceptance is a time draft drawn on a bank by an exporter or an importer to obtain a stated amount of funds to pay for specific merchandise. The draft is then “accepted” by a bank that, in effect, unconditionally guarantees to pay the face value of the instrument on its maturity date. The acceptance may then be held by the accepting bank as an asset or it may be sold in the secondary market at the going rate of interest for a specific maturity. |
(4) | A Fund may invest in repurchase agreements, which involve purchases of debt securities with counterparties that are deemed by the Advisor to present acceptable credit risks. In such an action, at the time a Fund purchases the security, it simultaneously agrees to resell and redeliver the security to the seller, who also simultaneously agrees to buy back the security at a fixed price and time. This assures a predetermined yield for a Fund during its holding period since the resale price is always greater than the purchase price and reflects an agreed-upon market rate. Such actions afford an opportunity for a Fund to invest temporarily available cash. A Fund may enter into repurchase agreements only with respect to obligations of the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities; certificates of deposit; or bankers’ acceptances in which a Fund may invest. Repurchase agreements may be considered loans to the seller, collateralized by the underlying securities. The risk to a |
Fund is limited to the ability of the seller to pay the agreed-upon sum on the repurchase date; in the event of default, the repurchase agreement provides that the affected Fund is entitled to sell the underlying collateral. If the value of the collateral declines after the agreement is entered into, however, and if the seller defaults under a repurchase agreement when the value of the underlying collateral is less than the repurchase price, a Fund could incur a loss of both principal and interest. The portfolio managers monitor the value of the collateral at the time the action is entered into and at all times during the term of the repurchase agreement. The portfolio managers do so in an effort to determine that the value of the collateral always equals or exceeds the agreed-upon repurchase price to be paid to a Fund. If the seller were to be subject to a federal bankruptcy proceeding, the ability of a Fund to liquidate the collateral could be delayed or impaired because of certain provisions of the bankruptcy laws. | |
(5) | A Fund may invest in bank time deposits, which are monies kept on deposit with banks or savings and loan associations for a stated period of time at a fixed rate of interest. There may be penalties for the early withdrawal of such time deposits, in which case the yields of these investments will be reduced. |
(6) | A Fund may invest in commercial paper, which are short-term unsecured promissory notes, including variable rate master demand notes issued by corporations to finance their current operations. Master demand notes are direct lending arrangements between the Fund and a corporation. There is no secondary market for the notes. However, they are redeemable by a Fund at any time. A Fund’s portfolio managers will consider the financial condition of the corporation (e.g., earning power, cash flow and other liquidity ratios) and will continuously monitor the corporation’s ability to meet all of its financial obligations, because a Fund’s liquidity might be impaired if the corporation were unable to pay principal and interest on demand. A Fund may invest in commercial paper only if its has received the highest rating from at least one nationally recognized statistical rating organization or, if unrated, judged by First Trust to be of comparable quality. |
(7) | A Fund may invest in shares of money market funds, as consistent with its investment objective and policies. Shares of money market funds are subject to management fees and other expenses of those funds. Therefore, investments in money market funds will cause the Fund to bear proportionately the costs incurred by the money market funds’ operations. At the same time, a Fund will continue to pay its own management fees and expenses with respect to all of its assets, including any portion invested in the shares of other investment companies. It is possible for the Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
||
Fund | Inception Date |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2016 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | 4/13/2016 | 49% |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | 4/13/2016 | 44% |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | 6/14/2016 | 81% |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | 4/13/2016 | 41% |
(1) | Market Risk. Market risk is the risk that the value of the underlying assets may go up or down. Adverse movements in the value of an underlying asset can expose the Funds to losses. Derivative instruments may include elements of leverage and, accordingly, fluctuations in the value of the derivative instrument in relation to the underlying asset may be magnified. The successful use of derivative instruments depends upon a variety of factors, particularly the ability of the portfolio managers to predict correctly market movements or changes in the relationships of such instruments to a Fund’s portfolio holdings, and there can be no assurance the judgment of the portfolio managers in this respect will be accurate. Consequently, the use of derivatives for investment or hedging purposes might result in a poorer overall performance for the Funds, whether or not adjusted for risk, than if the Funds had not used derivatives. |
(2) | Credit/Counterparty Risk. Credit risk is the risk that a loss is sustained as a result of the failure of a counterparty to comply with the terms of a derivative instrument. The counterparty risk for exchange-traded derivatives is generally lower than for over-the-counter derivatives not cleared through a central counterparty, since generally a clearing organization provides a guarantee of performance and cleared derivative transactions benefit from daily mark-to-market and settlement as well as from segregation and minimum capital requirements applicable to intermediaries. For privately-negotiated instruments not cleared through a central counterparty, there are no similar protections. In all transactions, a Fund will bear the risk that the counterparty will default, and this could result in a loss of the expected benefit of the derivative transactions and possibly other losses to the Fund. Such counterparty risk is accentuated in the case of contracts with longer maturities where there is a greater risk that a specific event may prevent or delay settlement, or where the Fund has concentrated its transactions with a single or small group of counterparties. The Funds are not restricted from dealing with any particular counterparty or from concentrating any or all of its transactions with one counterparty. The Funds will enter into transactions in derivative instruments only with counterparties that the portfolio managers reasonably believe are capable of performing under the contract. |
(3) | Correlation Risk. Correlation risk is the risk that there might be an imperfect correlation, or even no correlation, between price movements of a derivative instrument and price movements of investments being hedged. When a derivative transaction is used to completely hedge another position, changes in the market value of the combined position (the derivative instrument plus the position being hedged) result from an imperfect correlation between the price movements of the two instruments. With a perfect hedge, the value of the combined position remains unchanged with any change in the price of the underlying asset. With an imperfect hedge, the value of the |
derivative instrument and its hedge are not perfectly correlated. For example, if the value of a derivative instrument used in a short hedge (such as selling a futures contract) increased by less than the decline in value of the hedged investments, the hedge would not be perfectly correlated. This might occur due to factors unrelated to the value of the investments being hedged, such as speculative or other pressures on the markets in which these instruments are traded. In addition, a Fund’s success in using hedging instruments is subject to the ability of the portfolio managers to correctly predict changes in relationships of such hedge instruments to the Fund’s portfolio holdings, and there can be no assurance that the judgment of the portfolio managers in this respect will be accurate. An imperfect correlation may prevent a Fund from achieving the intended hedge or expose the Fund to a risk of loss. | |
(4) | Liquidity Risk. Liquidity risk is the risk that a derivative instrument cannot be sold, closed out, or replaced quickly at or very close to its fundamental value. Generally, exchange contracts are more liquid than over-the-counter transactions. The illiquidity of the derivatives markets may be due to various factors, including congestion, disorderly markets, limitations on deliverable supplies, the participation of speculators, government regulation and intervention, and technical and operational or system failures. In addition, daily limits on price fluctuations and speculative position limits on exchanges on which the Funds may conduct their transactions in derivative instruments may prevent prompt liquidation of positions, subjecting the Funds to the potential of greater losses. The Funds might be required by applicable regulatory requirements to maintain assets as “cover,” maintain segregated accounts and/or make margin payments when they take positions in derivative instruments involving obligations to third parties ( i.e., instruments other than purchase options). If a Fund is unable to close out its positions in such instruments, it might be required to continue to maintain such accounts or make such payments until the position expires, matures, or is closed out. These requirements might impair the Fund’s ability to sell a security or make an investment at a time when it would otherwise be favorable to do so, or require that the Fund sell a portfolio security at a disadvantageous time. The Funds’ ability to sell or close out a position in an instrument prior to expiration or maturity depends upon the existence of a liquid secondary market or, in the absence of such a market, the ability and willingness of a counterparty to enter into a transaction closing out the position. Due to liquidity risk, there is no assurance that any derivatives position can be sold or closed out at a time and price that is favorable to the Funds. |
(5) | Legal Risk. Legal risk is the risk of loss caused by the unenforceability of a party’s obligations under the derivative. While a party seeking price certainty agrees to surrender the potential upside in exchange for downside protection, the party taking the risk is looking for a positive payoff. Despite this voluntary assumption of risk, a counterparty that has lost money in a derivative transaction may try to avoid payment by exploiting various legal uncertainties about certain derivative products. |
(6) | Volatility. The prices of many derivative instruments are highly volatile. Price movements of such instruments may be influenced by, among other things, interest rates, changing supply and demand relationships, trade, fiscal, monetary and exchange control programs and policies of governments, and national and international political and economic events and policies. The value of such instruments also may depend upon the price of the securities or currencies underlying them. |
(7) | Systemic or “Interconnection” Risk. Systemic or interconnection risk is the risk that a disruption in the financial markets will cause difficulties for all market participants. In other words, a disruption in one market will spill over into other markets, perhaps creating a chain reaction. Much of the over-the-counter derivatives market takes place among the over-the-counter dealers themselves, thus creating a large interconnected web of financial obligations. This interconnectedness raises the possibility that a default by one large dealer could create losses for other dealers and destabilize the entire market for over-the-counter derivative instruments. |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES | |||||
Thomas R. Kadlec
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/57 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, ADM Investor Services, Inc. (Futures Commission Merchant) | 141 Portfolios | Director of ADM Investor Services, Inc., ADM Investor Services International, and Futures Industry Association |
Robert F. Keith
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/56 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, Hibs Enterprises (Financial and Management Consulting) | 141 Portfolios | Director of Trust Company of Illinois |
Niel B. Nielson
c/o First Trust Advisors L.P. 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 03/54 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer (January 2015 to present), Pelita Harapan Educational Foundation (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Servant Interactive LLC (Educational Products and Services); President and Chief Executive Officer (June 2012 to September 2014), Dew Learning LLC (Educational Products and Services); President (June 2002 to June 2012), Covenant College | 141 Portfolios |
Director of Covenant Transport Inc.
(May 2003 to May 2014) |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
James M. Dykas
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 01/66 |
President and Chief Executive Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Managing Director and Chief Financial Officer (January 2016 to present), Controller (January 2011 to January 2016), Senior Vice President (April 2007 to January 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Chief Financial Officer, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) (January 2016 to present) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) (January 2016 to present) | N/A | N/A |
W. Scott Jardine
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 05/60 |
Secretary and Chief Legal Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P.; Secretary and General Counsel, BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) | N/A | N/A |
Daniel J. Lindquist
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 02/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director (July 2012 to present), Senior Vice President (September 2005 to July 2012), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Kristi A. Maher
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 12/66 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• CCO since January 2011, Assistant Secretary since Inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Donald P. Swade
120 E. Liberty Drive Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 08/72 |
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer |
• Indefinite term
• Since January 2016 |
Senior Vice President (July 2016 to Present), Vice President (April 2012 to July 2016), First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P., Vice President (September 2006 to April 2012), Guggenheim Funds Investment Advisors, LLC/Claymore Securities, Inc. | N/A | N/A |
Name, Address
and Date of Birth |
Position
and Offices with Trust |
Term of
Office and Year First Elected or Appointed |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Number of
Portfolios in the First Trust Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee |
Other
Trusteeships or Directorships Held by Trustee During the Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||||
Roger F. Testin
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 06/66 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
Stan Ueland
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, IL 60187 D.O.B.: 11/70 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President (September 2012 to present), Vice President (August 2005 to September 2012) First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. | N/A | N/A |
(1) | Mr. Bowen is deemed an “interested person” of the Trust due to his position as Chief Executive Officer of First Trust, investment advisor of the Fund. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Funds (1) |
Total Compensation from
the First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $7,561 | $370,744 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $7,578 | $391,203 |
Robert F. Keith | $7,570 | $381,412 |
Niel B. Nielson | $7,570 | $381,482 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Funds to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal period ended October 31, 2016 for services to the Funds. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2016 for services to the 137 portfolios existing in 2016, which consisted of 7 open-end mutual funds, 16 closed-end funds and 114 exchange-traded funds. |
Trustee |
Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in the Funds (Number of Shares Held) |
Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity
Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen by Trustee in the First Trust Fund Complex |
Interested Trustee | ||
James A. Bowen | None | Over $100,000 |
Independent Trustees | ||
Richard E. Erickson | None | Over $100,000 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | None | Over $100,000 |
Robert F. Keith | None | Over $100,000 |
Niel B. Nielson | None | Over $100,000 |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
||
Fund | Inception Date |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2016 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | 4/13/2016 | $116,415 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | 4/13/2016 | $116,073 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | 6/14/2016 | $ 19,851 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | 4/13/2016 | $116,276 |
• | Mr. Sandler, CFA, serves as Chief US Equity Officer, bringing more than 20 years of investment experience to the equity team. In addition, he serves on the firm’s Operating Committees. Prior to launching RIG, Mr. Sandler served as Managing Director and Chief Equity Strategist at Wachovia Securities, where he was responsible for all equity advice of the firm. He led a team of talented and experienced portfolio managers and strategists, whose goal was to provide independent and sound equity recommendations. The work of his team included actively managed portfolios, weekly investment pieces and the regular monitoring of widely held positions of the firm's clients. Mr. Sandler earned a BS in Accounting and an MBA from the University of Richmond, graduating with honors. He received his CFA designation in 1997. |
• | Mr. Jones, CFA, serves as Chairman and Chief Investment Officer, bringing close to 30 years of global investment experience to his role in leading the organization. Mr. Jones’ primary investment responsibility is setting the firm’s overall asset allocation strategy and ensuring appropriate investment and risk management processes are applied to all of the firm’s portfolio decisions. In addition, he serves on the firm’s Executive and Operating Committees. Prior to launching RIG in 2008, Mr. Jones was the Chief Investment Officer at Wachovia Securities from 2002. In this capacity, he was responsible for all aspects of financial advice, including asset allocation, tactical strategy and portfolio implementation and managed over $75 billion in discretionary portfolio assets. Mr. Jones began his career in fixed income portfolio management, serving in a variety of roles cumulating in his promotion to Chief Fixed Income Officer for Mentor Investment Group. While at Mentor and its successor firm, Evergreen Investment Management, Michael managed over $12 billion in high grade and high yield fixed income assets and was responsible for the design and implementation of advanced fixed income and risk management analytics. Mr. Jones earned a BA in Economics from the College of William and Mary and an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. He received his CFA designation in 1990. |
• | Mr. Grossman, CFA, serves as the Chief Global Equity Officer, responsible for the investments of the US Equity and International Equity teams. He brings over a decade’s worth of industry experience in quantitative risk management and portfolio analytics. Mr. Grossman is responsible for the tactical decisions made in the various strategies and the development of equity investment processes at Riverfront. Prior to joining RIG, Mr. Grossman worked at the Virginia Retirement System (VRS), where he managed International Equity and REIT Portfolios and developed research |
on equity selection and portfolio construction. He began his investment career as a fixed income analyst at VRS. Mr. Grossman earned a BS from Baldwin-Wallace College with a double major in Mathematical Economics and Finance, and an MA in Financial Economics from Virginia Commonwealth University. He received his CFA designation in 2009. | |
• | Mr. Konstantinos, CFA, serves as Director of International Portfolio Management with more than 14 years’ experience as an equity sector analyst, portfolio manager, and portfolio risk manager across domestic and international markets. In addition, he serves on the firm’s Operating Committee. Mr. Konstantinos has been with RIG since the company’s founding in 2008. He began his career in 2000 as a corporate finance analyst in the Technology sector at a predecessor to Wachovia Securities. He joined Wachovia’s Advisory Services Group in 2002 as an equity strategist, and worked in various capacities within equity strategy and portfolio management until his departure in 2008. Mr. Konstantinos earned his BS in Business Administration from the Kenan-Flagler School of Business at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Mr. Konstantinos received his CFA designation in 2013 and is a member of CFA Virginia Society. He has successfully completed the FINRA Series 7, 66, 86 and 87 licensing exams. Mr. Konstantinos is also a regular guest on the financial news channels (CNBC, Bloomberg) and is frequently quoted in the financial press. |
• | Mr. Hays, serves as Quantitative Portfolio Manager. As a Quantitative Portfolio manager, he is responsible for developing and implementing analytical investment approaches in the US Equity and International Equity markets. Prior to joining RIG, Mr. Hays co-founded and served as Chief Investment Officer of an alternative asset management company that employed a quantitative market-neutral equity approach. Mr. Hays also worked for 6 years at Analysis Group, a financial and economic consulting firm, where he managed a team dedicated to valuing illiquid assets such as mortgage-backed securities, real estate, and oil and gas properties. Mr. Hays received a BBA from Millsaps College, Summa Cum Laude, with a double major in Economics and Business Administration. He also earned an MBA with High Honors from the University of Chicago in Analytic Finance, Econometrics/Statistics and Economics. Additionally, Mr. Hays has successfully completed the FINRA Series 65 licensing exam. |
Portfolio Manager | Type of Account Managed |
Number of
Accounts |
($ Assets
In millions) |
Number of
Accounts with Performance Based Fees |
Assets of
Accounts with Performance Based Fees |
Doug Sandler | |||||
Registered Investment Companies (Other than the Funds) | 7 | $335.0 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 15,043 | $5,183.8 | N/A | N/A | |
Michael Jones | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 10 | $397.1 | N/A | N/A |
Portfolio Manager | Type of Account Managed |
Number of
Accounts |
($ Assets
In millions) |
Number of
Accounts with Performance Based Fees |
Assets of
Accounts with Performance Based Fees |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 15,043 | $5,183.8 | N/A | N/A | |
Adam Grossman | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 7 | $335.0 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 15,043 | $5,183.8 | N/A | N/A | |
Chris Konstantinos | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 7 | $335.0 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 15,043 | $5,183.8 | N/A | N/A | |
Scott Hays | |||||
Registered Investment Companies | 7 | $335.0 | N/A | N/A | |
Other Pooled Investment Vehicles | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Other Accounts | 15,043 | $5,183.8 | N/A | N/A |
Amount of Sub-Advisory Fees
|
||
Fund | Inception Date |
Fiscal Period Ended
October 31, 2016 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | 4/13/2016 | $49,091 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | 4/13/2016 | $48,946 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | 6/14/2016 | $ 7,341 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | 4/13/2016 | $49,032 |
Argentina | Australia | Austria | Belgium | Brazil | Canada | Chile |
March 24
April 13 April 14 May 1 May 25 June 20 August 21 October 9 November 6 November 27 December 8 December 25 December 29 January 1 February 12 February 13 |
April 14
April 17 April 25 June 12 December 25 December 26 January 1 January 15 |
April 17
May 1 May 25 June 5 June 15 August 15 October 26 November 1 December 8 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 21 May 1 June 15 September 7 October 12 November 2 November 15 November 20 December 25 December 29 January 1 February 12 February 13 |
April 14
May 22 July 3 August 7 September 4 October 9 December 25 December 26 January 1 February 19 |
April 14
May 1 June 26 August 15 September 18 September 19 October 9 October 27 November 1 December 8 December 25 |
China | Denmark | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Hong Kong |
April 3
April 4 May 1 May 29 May 30 October 2 October 3 October 4 October 5 October 6 January 1 January 2 February 15 February 16 |
April 13
April 14 April 17 May 12 May 25 May 26 June 5 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 May 25 June 23 December 6 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 October 3 October 31 December 25 December 26 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 August 15 December 25 December 26 January 1 February 19 |
April 4
April 14 April 17 May 1 May 3 May 30 October 2 October 5 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
India | Ireland | Israel | Italy | Japan | Malaysia | Mexico |
March 13
April 4 April 14 May 1 June 26 August 15 August 25 October 2 October 19 October 30 December 25 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 June 5 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
March 12
April 10 April 11 April 16 April 17 May 1 May 2 May 30 May 31 August 1 September 20 September 21 September 22 September 29 October 4 October 5 October 11 October 12 |
April 14
April 17 May 1 August 15 December 25 December 26 |
March 20
May 3 May 4 May 5 July 17 August 11 September 18 October 9 November 3 November 23 January 1 January 2 January 3 January 8 |
May 1
May 10 June 12 June 26 August 31 September 1 September 21 October 18 December 1 December 25 January 1 January 30 February 16 |
March 20
April 13 April 14 May 1 November 2 November 20 December 12 December 25 January 1 February 5 |
Fund |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF | $210,419 |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF | — |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF | — |
First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF | — |
(1) | Common stocks and other equity securities listed on any national or foreign exchange other than Nasdaq and the London Stock Exchange Alternative Investment Market ( “AIM” ) will be valued at the last sale price on the exchange on which they are principally traded, or the official closing price for Nasdaq and AIM securities. Portfolio securities traded on more than one securities exchange are valued at the last sale price or official closing price, as applicable, on the Business Day as of which such value is being determined at the close of the exchange representing the principal market for such securities. Shares of open-end mutual funds are valued at fair value which is based on NAV per share. |
(2) | Shares of open-end mutual funds are valued at fair value which is based on NAV per share. |
(3) | Securities traded in the OTC market are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(4) | Exchange traded options and futures contracts are valued at the closing price in the market where such contracts are principally traded. If no closing price is available, they will be fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. OTC options and futures contracts are fair valued at the mean of their most recent bid and asked price, if available, and otherwise at their closing bid price. |
(5) | Forward foreign currency contracts are fair valued at the current day’s interpolated foreign exchange rate, as calculated using the current day’s spot rate, and the 30, 60, 90 and 180-day forward rates provided by a pricing service or by certain independent dealers in such contracts. |
(1) | Fixed-income securities, convertible securities, interest rate swaps, credit default swaps, total return swaps, currency swaps, currency-linked notes, credit-linked notes and other similar instruments will be fair valued using a pricing service. |
(2) | Fixed income and other debt securities having a remaining maturity of 60 days or less when purchased are fair valued at cost adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts (amortized cost), provided the Advisor’s Pricing Committee has determined that the use of amortized cost is an appropriate reflection of fair value given market and issuer-specific conditions existing at the time of the determination. Factors that may be considered in determining the appropriateness of the use of amortized cost include, but are not limited to, the following: |
(i) | the credit conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(ii) | the liquidity conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto; |
(iii) | the interest rate conditions in the relevant market and changes thereto (such as significant changes in interest rates); |
(iv) | issuer-specific conditions (such as significant credit deterioration); and |
(v) | any other market-based data the Advisor’s Pricing Committee considers relevant. In this regard, the Advisor’s Pricing Committee may use last-obtained market-based data to assist it when valuing portfolio securities using amortized cost. |
(3) | Repurchase agreements will be valued as follows. Overnight repurchase agreements will be fair valued at amortized cost when it represents the best estimate of fair value. Term repurchase agreements ( i.e. , those whose maturity exceeds seven days) will be fair valued by the Advisor’s Pricing Committee at the average of the bid quotations obtained daily from at least two recognized dealers. |
NAME OF BENEFICIAL OWNER |
% OF
OUTSTANDING SHARES OWNED |
FIRST TRUST RIVERFRONT DYNAMIC ASIA PACIFIC ETF | |
BB&T Securities, LLC | 17.98% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping | 15.27% |
Janney Montgomery Scott LLC | 13.74% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 11.70% |
Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated | 11.46% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc. | 11.21% |
J.P. Morgan Clearing Corp. | 9.37% |
FIRST TRUST RIVERFRONT DYNAMIC DEVELOPED INTERNATIONAL ETF | |
LPL Financial Corp | 23.36% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 19.67% |
Pershing, L.L.C. | 16.01% |
National Financial Services, LLC | 10.95% |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 6.73% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc. | 5.32% |
FIRST TRUST RIVERFRONT DYNAMIC EMERGING MARKETS ETF | |
LPL Financial Corp | 25.66% |
Charles Schwab & Co. Inc. | 12.77% |
KCG Americas LLC | 10.09% |
BB&T Securities, LLC | 9.46% |
Pershing, L.L.C. | 9.34% |
Timber Hill LLC | 6.00% |
National Financial Services, LLC | 5.69% |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 5.43% |
FIRST TRUST RIVERFRONT DYNAMIC EUROPE ETF | |
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. | 29.85% |
BB&T Securities, LLC | 13.82% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 13.26% |
Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated | 10.24% |
Janney Montgomery Scott LLC | 8.89% |
LPL Financial Corp | 5.19% |
(1) | BB&T Securities, LLC: 8006 Discovery Drive, Suite 200, Richmond, VA 23229 |
(2) | Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.: 2423 East Lincoln Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85016 |
(3) | Deutsche Bank Securities Inc.: 5022 Gate Parkway, Suite 100, Jacksonville, FL 32256 |
(4) | J.P. Morgan Clearing Corp.: 14201 Dallas Parkway, 12 th FL, Dallas, TX 75254 |
(5) | Janney Montgomery Scott LLC: 200 Regency Forest Drive, Cary, NC 27518 |
(6) | KCG Americas LLC: 545 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, NJ 07310 |
(7) | LPL Financial Corp.: 9785 Towne Center Drive, San Diego, California 92121 |
(8) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce Fenner & Smith Safekeeping: 4804 Dear Lake Dr. E., Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(9) | National Financial Services: 499 Washington Blvd., Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(10) | Pershing LLC: 1 Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(11) | Raymond James and Associates, Inc.: 880 Carilion Parkway, St. Petersburg, FL 33716 |
(12) | RBC Capital Markets, LLC.: 60 S. 6 th St., Minneapolis, MN 55402 |
(13) | Robert W. Baird & Co. Incorporated: 777 E. Wisconsin Avenue, 19 th Floor, Milwaukee, WI 53202 |
(14) | TD Ameritrade Clearing Inc.: 1005 Ameritrade Place, Bellevue, Nebraska 68005 |
(15) | Timber Hill LLC: 1 Pickwick Plaza, Greenwich, CT 06830 |
(1) | It is the Adviser’s policy to seek and to ensure that proxies are voted on securities in a Client’s account consistently and solely in the best economic interests of the Client. |
(2) | The Adviser shall be responsible for the oversight of Client proxy voting processes and shall assign a senior member of its staff to be responsible for this oversight. |
(3) | The Adviser has engaged the services of Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. ( “ISS” ) to make recommendations to the Adviser on the voting of proxies related to securities held by Clients. ISS provides voting recommendations based on established guidelines and practices. The Adviser has adopted these ISS Proxy Voting Guidelines. |
(4) | The Adviser shall review the ISS recommendations and generally will vote proxies in accordance with such recommendations. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Adviser may not vote in accordance with the ISS recommendations if the Adviser believes that the specific ISS recommendation is not in the best interests of the Client. In addition, whenever a conflict of interest arises between ISS and a company subject to a proxy vote, the Adviser will vote the proxy without using the analyses of ISS and will consider the recommendation of the company and what the Adviser believes to be in the best interests of the Client. In addition, if the Adviser has actual knowledge of any other type of material conflict of interest between itself and the respective Client with respect to the voting of a proxy, the Adviser shall vote the applicable proxy in accordance with the ISS recommendations to avoid such conflict of interest. With respect to open- and closed-end funds and variable annuity sub-accounts, if there is a conflict of interest between fund shareholders and FTA, the fund’s principal underwriter, or sub-adviser, if applicable, FTA will vote the proxy based on the recommendations of ISS to avoid such conflict of interest. |
(5) | If the Adviser manages the assets or pension fund of a company and any of the Adviser’s Clients hold any securities in that company, the Adviser will vote proxies relating to such company’s securities in accordance with the ISS recommendations to avoid any conflict of interest. |
(6) | If a Client requests the Adviser to follow specific voting guidelines or additional guidelines, the Adviser shall review the request and follow such guidelines, unless the Adviser determines that it is unable to follow such guidelines. In such case, the Adviser shall inform the Client that it is not able to follow the Client’s request. |
(7) | FTA will monitor changes to the ISS guidelines to determine that such guidelines continue to result in a voting policy that is in the best interests of Clients. |
(8) | In certain circumstances, where FTA has determined that it is consistent with the Client’s best interest, FTA will not take steps to ensure that proxies are voted on securities in the Client’s accounts. The following are circumstances where this may occur: |
(b) | Securities Lending Program. When securities are out on loan, they are transferred into the borrower’s name and are voted by the borrower, in its discretion. In most cases, FTA will not take steps to see that loaned securities are voted. However, where FTA determines that a proxy vote, or other shareholder action, is materially important to the Client’s account, FTA will make a good faith effort to recall the security for purposes of voting, understanding that in certain cases, the attempt to recall the security may not be effective in time for voting deadlines to be met. |
(c) | Unjustifiable Costs. In certain circumstances, after doing a cost-benefit analysis, FTA may choose not to vote where the cost of voting a Client’s proxy would exceed any anticipated benefits to the Client of the proxy proposal (e.g. foreign securities). |
(9) | For certain open- or closed-end funds relying on Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the 1940 Act or applicable exemptive relief, FTA will vote on proxies of securities of investment companies held by such funds in the same proportion as all other holders of such securities ( i.e. mirror or echo voting) to the extent possible. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances: |
1. Accountability |
1.1. | The board is classified, and a continuing director responsible for a problematic governance issue at the board/committee level that would warrant a withhold/against vote recommendation is not up for election. All appropriate nominees (except new) may be held accountable. |
1.2. | The board lacks accountability and oversight, coupled with sustained poor performance relative to peers. Sustained poor performance is measured by one- and three-year total shareholder returns in the bottom half of a company’s four-digit GICS industry group (Russell 3000 companies only). Take into consideration the company’s five-year total shareholder return and operational metrics. Problematic provisions include but are not limited to: |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections or a majority vote standard with no plurality carve-out for contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A dual-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
1.3. | The company’s poison pill has a “dead-hand” or “modified dead-hand” feature. Vote against or withhold from nominees every year until this feature is removed; |
1.4. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of more than 12 months (“long-term pill”), or renews any existing pill, including any “short-term pill” (12 months or less), without shareholder approval. A commitment or policy that puts a newly adopted pill to a binding shareholder vote may potentially offset an adverse vote recommendation. Review such companies with classified boards every year, and such companies with annually elected boards at least once every three years, and vote against or withhold votes from all nominees if the company still maintains a non-shareholder-approved poison pill; or |
(1) | In general, companies with a plurality vote standard use “Withhold” as the contrary vote option in director elections; companies with a majority vote standard use “Against”. However, it will vary by company and the proxy must be checked to determine the valid contrary vote option for the particular company. |
(2) | A “new nominee” is any current nominee who has not already been elected by shareholders and who joined the board after the problematic action in question transpired. If ISS cannot determine whether the nominee joined the board before or after the problematic action transpired, the nominee will be considered a “new nominee” if he or she joined the board within the 12 months prior to the upcoming shareholder meeting. |
1.5. | The board makes a material adverse change to an existing poison pill without shareholder approval. |
1.6. | The board adopts a poison pill with a term of 12 months or less (“short-term pill”) without shareholder approval, taking into account the following factors: |
➤ | The date of the pill‘s adoption relative to the date of the next meeting of shareholders — i.e. whether the company had time to put the pill on the ballot for shareholder ratification given the circumstances; |
➤ | The issuer’s rationale; |
➤ | The issuer’s governance structure and practices; and |
➤ | The issuer’s track record of accountability to shareholders. Restricting Binding Shareholder Proposals |
1.7. | The company’s charter imposes undue restrictions on shareholders’ ability to amend the bylaws. Such restrictions include, but are not limited to: outright prohibition on the submission of binding shareholder proposals, or share ownership requirements or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against on an ongoing basis. |
1.8. | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive (see discussion under “Auditor Ratification”); |
1.9. | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
1.10. | There is persuasive evidence that the Audit Committee entered into an inappropriate indemnification agreement with its auditor that limits the ability of the company, or its shareholders, to pursue legitimate legal recourse against the audit firm. |
1.11. | Poor accounting practices are identified that rise to a level of serious concern, such as: fraud; misapplication of GAAP; and material weaknesses identified in Section 404 disclosures. Examine the severity, breadth, chronological sequence, and duration, as well as the company’s efforts at remediation or corrective actions, in determining whether withhold/against votes are warranted. |
1.12. | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
1.13. | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
1.14. | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders; |
1.15. | The company fails to submit one-time transfers of stock options to a shareholder vote; or |
1.16. | The company fails to fulfill the terms of a burn rate commitment made to shareholders. |
1.17. | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
1.18. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if the board amends the company's bylaws or charter without shareholder approval in a manner that materially diminishes shareholders' rights or that could adversely impact shareholders, considering the following factors: |
➤ | The board's rationale for adopting the bylaw/charter amendment without shareholder ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure by the company of any significant engagement with shareholders regarding the amendment; |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights caused by the board's unilateral amendment to the bylaws/charter; |
➤ | The board's track record with regard to unilateral board action on bylaw/charter amendments or other entrenchment provisions; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; |
➤ | The company's existing governance provisions; |
➤ | The timing of the board's amendment to the bylaws/charter in connection with a significant business development; and, |
➤ | Other factors, as deemed appropriate, that may be relevant to determine the impact of the amendment on shareholders. |
➤ | Classified the board; |
➤ | Adopted supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; or |
➤ | Eliminated shareholders' ability to amend bylaws. |
1.19. | For newly public companies, generally vote against or withhold from directors individually, committee members, or the entire board (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case) if, prior to or in connection with the company's public offering, the company or its board adopted bylaw or charter provisions materially adverse to shareholder rights, or implemented a multi-class capital structure in which the classes have unequal voting rights considering the following factors: |
➤ | The level of impairment of shareholders' rights; |
➤ | The disclosed rationale; |
➤ | The ability to change the governance structure (e.g., limitations on shareholders’ right to amend the bylaws or charter, or supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter); |
➤ | The ability of shareholders to hold directors accountable through annual director elections, or whether the company has a classified board structure; |
➤ | Any reasonable sunset provision; and |
➤ | Other relevant factors. |
1.20. | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight (3) , or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
1.21. | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
1.22. | Egregious actions related to a director’s service on other boards that raise substantial doubt about his or her ability to effectively oversee management and serve the best interests of shareholders at any company. |
2.1. | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | Disclosed outreach efforts by the board to shareholders in the wake of the vote; |
➤ | Rationale provided in the proxy statement for the level of implementation; |
➤ | The subject matter of the proposal; |
➤ | The level of support for and opposition to the resolution in past meetings; |
➤ | Actions taken by the board in response to the majority vote and its engagement with shareholders; |
➤ | The continuation of the underlying issue as a voting item on the ballot (as either shareholder or management proposals); and |
➤ | Other factors as appropriate. |
2.2. | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
2.3. | At the previous board election, any director received more than 50 percent withhold/against votes of the shares cast and the company has failed to address the issue(s) that caused the high withhold/against vote; |
2.4. | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the majority of votes cast at the most recent shareholder meeting at which shareholders voted on the say-on-pay frequency; or |
➤ | The board's rationale for selecting a frequency that is different from the frequency that received a plurality; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure and vote results; |
➤ | ISS' analysis of whether there are compensation concerns or a history of problematic compensation practices; and |
➤ | The previous year's support level on the company's say-on-pay proposal. |
3.1. | Generally vote against or withhold from directors (except new nominees, who should be considered case-by-case (4) who attend less than 75 percent of the aggregate of their board and committee meetings for the period for which they served, unless an acceptable reason for absences is disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. Acceptable reasons for director absences are generally limited to the following: |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
3.2. | If the proxy disclosure is unclear and insufficient to determine whether a director attended at least 75 percent of the aggregate of his/her board and committee meetings during his/her period of service, vote against or withhold from the director(s) in question. |
(3) | Examples of failure of risk oversight include, but are not limited to: bribery; large or serial fines or sanctions from regulatory bodies; significant adverse legal judgments or settlements; hedging of company stock; or significant pledging of company stock. |
(4) | For new nominees only, schedule conflicts due to commitments made prior to their appointment to the board are considered if disclosed in the proxy or another SEC filing. |
3.4. | CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own — withhold only at their outside boards (5) . |
4.1. | The inside or affiliated outside director serves on any of the three key committees: audit, compensation, or nominating; |
4.2. | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; |
4.3. | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee; or |
4.4. | Independent directors make up less than a majority of the directors. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
• | The scope of the proposal; |
• | The company's current board leadership structure; |
• | The company's governance structure and practices; |
• | Company performance; and |
• | Any other relevant factors that may be applicable. |
(5) | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote from the CEO of a parent company board or any of the controlled (>50 percent ownership) subsidiaries of that parent, but may do so at subsidiaries that are less than 50 percent controlled and boards outside the parent/subsidiary relationships. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for management and shareholder proposals for proxy access with the following provisions: |
• | Ownership threshold: maximum requirement not more than three percent (3%) of the voting power; |
• | Ownership duration: maximum requirement not longer than three (3) years of continuous ownership for each member of the nominating group; |
• | Aggregation: minimal or no limits on the number of shareholders permitted to form a nominating group; |
• | Cap: cap on nominees of generally twenty-five percent (25%) of the board. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on the election of directors in contested elections, considering the following factors: |
• | Long-term financial performance of the company relative to its industry; |
• | Management’s track record; |
• | Background to the contested election; |
• | Nominee qualifications and any compensatory arrangements; |
• | Strategic plan of dissident slate and quality of the critique against management; |
• | Likelihood that the proposed goals and objectives can be achieved (both slates); and |
• | Stock ownership positions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote for proposals to increase the number of authorized common shares where the primary purpose of the increase is to issue shares in connection with a transaction on the same ballot that warrants support. |
• | Past Board Performance: |
➤ | The company's use of authorized shares during the last three years |
• | The Current Request: |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of the specific purposes of the proposed increase; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement of specific and severe risks to shareholders of not approving the request; and |
➤ | The dilutive impact of the request as determined relative to an allowable increase calculated by ISS (typically 100 percent of existing authorized shares) that reflects the company's need for shares and total shareholder returns. |
A. | Most companies: 100 percent of existing authorized shares. |
B. | Companies with less than 50 percent of existing authorized shares either outstanding or reserved for issuance: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
C. | Companies with one- and three-year total shareholder returns (TSRs) in the bottom 10 percent of the U.S. market as of the end of the calendar quarter that is closest to their most recent fiscal year end: 50 percent of existing authorized shares. |
D. | Companies at which both conditions (B and C) above are both present: 25 percent of existing authorized shares. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on mergers and acquisitions. Review and evaluate the merits and drawbacks of the proposed transaction, balancing various and sometimes countervailing factors including: |
• | Valuation - Is the value to be received by the target shareholders (or paid by the acquirer) reasonable? While the fairness opinion may provide an initial starting point for assessing valuation reasonableness, emphasis is placed on the offer premium, market reaction, and strategic rationale. |
• | Market reaction - How has the market responded to the proposed deal? A negative market reaction should cause closer scrutiny of a deal. |
• | Strategic rationale - Does the deal make sense strategically? From where is the value derived? Cost and revenue synergies should not be overly aggressive or optimistic, but reasonably achievable. Management should also have a favorable track record of successful integration of historical acquisitions. |
• | Negotiations and process - Were the terms of the transaction negotiated at arm's-length? Was the process fair and equitable? A fair process helps to ensure the best price for shareholders. Significant negotiation "wins" can also signify the deal makers' competency. The comprehensiveness of the sales process (e.g., full auction, partial auction, no auction) can also affect shareholder value. |
• | Conflicts of interest - Are insiders benefiting from the transaction disproportionately and inappropriately as compared to non-insider shareholders? As the result of potential conflicts, the directors and officers of the company may be more likely to vote to approve a merger than if they did not hold these interests. Consider whether these interests may have influenced these directors and officers to support or recommend the merger. The CIC figure presented in the "ISS Transaction Summary" section of this report is an aggregate figure that can in certain cases be a misleading indicator of the true value transfer from shareholders to insiders. Where such figure appears to be excessive, analyze the underlying assumptions to determine whether a potential conflict exists. |
• | Governance - Will the combined company have a better or worse governance profile than the current governance profiles of the respective parties to the transaction? If the governance profile is to change for the worse, the burden is on the company to prove that other issues (such as valuation) outweigh any deterioration in governance. |
1. | Maintain appropriate pay-for-performance alignment, with emphasis on long-term shareholder value: This principle encompasses overall executive pay practices, which must be designed to attract, retain, and appropriately motivate the key employees who drive shareholder value creation over the long term. It will take into consideration, among other factors, the link between pay and performance; the mix between fixed and variable pay; performance goals; and equity-based plan costs; |
2. | Avoid arrangements that risk “pay for failure”: This principle addresses the appropriateness of long or indefinite contracts, excessive severance packages, and guaranteed compensation; |
3. | Maintain an independent and effective compensation committee: This principle promotes oversight of executive pay programs by directors with appropriate skills, knowledge, experience, and a sound process for compensation decision-making (e.g., including access to independent expertise and advice when needed); |
4. | Provide shareholders with clear, comprehensive compensation disclosures: This principle underscores the importance of informative and timely disclosures that enable shareholders to evaluate executive pay practices fully and fairly; |
5. | Avoid inappropriate pay to non-executive directors: This principle recognizes the interests of shareholders in ensuring that compensation to outside directors does not compromise their independence and ability to make appropriate judgments in overseeing managers’ pay and performance. At the market level, it may incorporate a variety of generally accepted best practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on ballot items related to executive pay and practices, as well as certain aspects of outside director compensation. |
Vote against Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation (Management Say-on-Pay or “MSOP”) if: |
• | There is a significant misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
• | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; |
• | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
• | There is no MSOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an MSOP is warranted due to pay-for-performance misalignment, problematic pay practices, or the lack of adequate responsiveness on compensation issues raised previously, or a combination thereof; |
• | The board fails to respond adequately to a previous MSOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
• | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, including option repricing or option backdating; or |
• | The situation is egregious. |
• | Primary Evaluation Factors for Executive Pay |
1. | Peer Group (7) Alignment: |
➤ | The degree of alignment between the company's annualized TSR rank and the CEO's annualized total pay rank within a peer group, each measured over a three-year period. |
➤ | The multiple of the CEO's total pay relative to the peer group median. |
2. | Absolute Alignment (8) – the absolute alignment between the trend in CEO pay and company TSR over the prior five fiscal years – i.e. , the difference between the trend in annual pay changes and the trend in annualized TSR during the period. |
• | The ratio of performance- to time-based equity awards; |
• | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation; |
• | The completeness of disclosure and rigor of performance goals; |
• | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
• | Actual results of financial/operational metrics, such as growth in revenue, profit, cash flow, etc., both absolute and relative to peers; |
(6) | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
(7) | The revised peer group is generally comprised of 14-24 companies that are selected using market cap, revenue (or assets for certain financial firms), GICS industry group, and company's selected peers' GICS industry group, with size constraints, via a process designed to select peers that are comparable to the subject company in terms of revenue/assets and industry, and also within a market-cap bucket that is reflective of the company's. For Oil, Gas & Consumable Fuels companies, market cap is the only size determinant. |
(8) | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
• | Special circumstances related to, for example, a new CEO in the prior FY or anomalous equity grant practices (e.g., bi-annual awards); |
• | Realizable pay compared to grant pay; and |
• | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
(9) | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
• | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
• | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking; and |
• | Options Backdating. |
• | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
• | Excessive perquisites or tax gross-ups, including any gross-up related to a secular trust or restricted stock vesting; |
• | New or extended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | CIC payments exceeding 3 times base salary and average/target/most recent bonus; |
➤ | CIC severance payments without involuntary job loss or substantial diminution of duties ("single" or "modified single" triggers); |
➤ | CIC payments with excise tax gross-ups (including "modified" gross-ups); |
• | Insufficient executive compensation disclosure by externally-managed issuers (EMIs) such that a reasonable assessment of pay programs and practices applicable to the EMI's executives is not possible. |
• | Multi-year guaranteed bonuses; |
• | A single or common performance metric used for short- and long-term plans; |
• | Lucrative severance packages; |
• | High pay opportunities relative to industry peers; |
• | Disproportionate supplemental pensions; or |
• | Mega annual equity grants that provide unlimited upside with no downside risk. |
• | Factors that potentially mitigate the impact of risky incentives include rigorous claw-back provisions and robust stock ownership/holding guidelines. |
• | Reason and motive for the options backdating issue, such as inadvertent vs. deliberate grant date changes; |
• | Duration of options backdating; |
• | Size of restatement due to options backdating; |
• | Corrective actions taken by the board or compensation committee, such as canceling or re-pricing backdated options, the recouping of option gains on backdated grants; and |
• | Adoption of a grant policy that prohibits backdating, and creates a fixed grant schedule or window period for equity grants in the future. |
• | Failure to respond to majority-supported shareholder proposals on executive pay topics; or |
• | Failure to adequately respond to the company's previous say-on-pay proposal that received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors regarding the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Specific actions taken to address the issues that contributed to the low level of support; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on certain equity-based compensation plans (11) depending on a combination of certain plan features and equity grant practices, where positive factors may counterbalance negative factors, and vice versa, as evaluated using an "equity plan scorecard" (EPSC) approach with three pillars: |
• | Plan Cost: The total estimated cost of the company’s equity plans relative to industry/market cap peers, measured by the company's estimated Shareholder Value Transfer (SVT) in relation to peers and considering both: |
➤ | SVT based on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants, plus outstanding unvested/unexercised grants; and |
➤ | SVT based only on new shares requested plus shares remaining for future grants. |
• | Plan Features: |
➤ | Automatic single-triggered award vesting upon a change in control (CIC); |
➤ | Discretionary vesting authority; |
➤ | Liberal share recycling on various award types; |
➤ | Lack of minimum vesting period for grants made under the plan. |
• | Grant Practices: |
➤ | The company’s three year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in most recent CEO equity grants (3-year look-back); |
➤ | The estimated duration of the plan (based on the sum of shares remaining available and the new shares requested, divided by the average annual shares granted in the prior three years); |
➤ | The proportion of the CEO's most recent equity grants/awards subject to performance conditions; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains a claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company has established post exercise/vesting share-holding requirements. |
• | Awards may vest in connection with a liberal change-of-control definition; |
• | The plan would permit repricing or cash buyout of underwater options without shareholder approval (either by expressly permitting it — for NYSE and Nasdaq listed companies — or by not prohibiting it when the company has a history of repricing — for non-listed companies); |
• | The plan is a vehicle for problematic pay practices or a significant pay-for-performance disconnect under certain circumstances; or |
• | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
(11) | Proposals evaluated under the EPSC policy generally include those to approve or amend (1) stock option plans for employees and/or employees and directors, (2) restricted stock plans for employees and/or employees and directors, and (3) omnibus stock incentive plans for employees and/or employees and directors. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, taking into consideration whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value, and in addition the following will also be considered: |
• | If the issues presented in the proposal are more appropriately or effectively dealt with through legislation or government regulation; |
• | If the company has already responded in an appropriate and sufficient manner to the issue(s) raised in the proposal; |
• | Whether the proposal's request is unduly burdensome (scope or timeframe) or overly prescriptive; |
• | The company's approach compared with any industry standard practices for addressing the issue(s) raised by the proposal; |
• | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not reasonable and sufficient information is currently available to shareholders from the company or from other publicly available sources; and |
• | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether or not implementation would reveal proprietary or confidential information that could place the company at a competitive disadvantage. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for resolutions requesting that a company disclose information on the risks related to climate change on its operations and investments, such as financial, physical, or regulatory risks, considering: |
• | Whether the company already provides current, publicly-available information on the impact that climate change may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
• | The company’s level of disclosure is at least comparable to that of industry peers; and |
• | There are no significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s environmental performance. |
• | The company already discloses current, publicly-available information on the impacts that GHG emissions may have on the company as well as associated company policies and procedures to address related risks and/or opportunities; |
• | The company's level of disclosure is comparable to that of industry peers; and |
• | There are no significant, controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's GHG emissions. |
• | Whether the company provides disclosure of year-over-year GHG emissions performance data; |
• | Whether company disclosure lags behind industry peers; |
• | The company's actual GHG emissions performance; |
• | The company's current GHG emission policies, oversight mechanisms, and related initiatives; and |
• | Whether the company has been the subject of recent, significant violations, fines, litigation, or controversy related to GHG emissions. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for requests for reports on a company's efforts to diversify the board, unless: |
• | The gender and racial minority representation of the company’s board is reasonably inclusive in relation to companies of similar size and business; and |
• | The board already reports on its nominating procedures and gender and racial minority initiatives on the board and within the company. |
• | The degree of existing gender and racial minority diversity on the company’s board and among its executive officers; |
• | The level of gender and racial minority representation that exists at the company’s industry peers; |
• | The company’s established process for addressing gender and racial minority board representation; |
• | Whether the proposal includes an overly prescriptive request to amend nominating committee charter language; |
• | The independence of the company’s nominating committee; |
• | Whether the company uses an outside search firm to identify potential director nominees; and |
• | Whether the company has had recent controversies, fines, or litigation regarding equal employment practices. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting that a company report on its policies, initiatives, and oversight mechanisms related to social, economic, and environmental sustainability, unless: |
• | The company already discloses similar information through existing reports or policies such as an environment, health, and safety (EHS) report; a comprehensive code of corporate conduct; and/or a diversity report; or |
• | The company has formally committed to the implementation of a reporting program based on Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) guidelines or a similar standard within a specified time frame. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Vote case-by-case on proposals to link, or report on linking, executive compensation to sustainability (environmental and social) criteria, considering: |
• | Whether the company has significant and/or persistent controversies or regulatory violations regarding social and/or environmental issues; |
• | Whether the company has management systems and oversight mechanisms in place regarding its social and environmental performance; |
• | The degree to which industry peers have incorporated similar non-financial performance criteria in their executive compensation practices; and |
• | The company's current level of disclosure regarding its environmental and social performance. |
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III
Part C – Other Information
Item 28. Exhibits
Exhibit No. Description
(a) |
(1) Declaration of Trust of the Registrant and Establishment and Designation of Series Attached Thereto as Schedule A. (1) |
(2) Amendment to the Declaration of Trust, dated December 11, 2009. (1)
(3) Amended and Restated Establishment and Designation of Series, dated May 3, 2016. (11)
(b) | By-Laws of the Registrant. (2) |
(c) | Not Applicable. |
(d) | (1) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated February 1, 2013. (4) |
(2) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated April 3, 2014. (6)
(3) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated August 26, 2014. (7)
(4) Investment Sub-Advisory Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P. and Stonebridge Advisors LLC, dated February 12, 2013. (8)
(5) Investment Sub-Advisory Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Global Portfolios Ltd., dated November 4, 2014. (8)
(6) Fee Waiver Agreement, dated February 2, 2016. (9)
(7) Letter Agreement regarding Fee Waivers, dated February 21, 2017. (12)
(8) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P, dated February 4, 2016. (10)
(9) Amended Schedule A to Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P, as of August 22, 2016. (11)
(10) Investment Sub-Advisory Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P. and Horizon Investments, LLC, dated August 22, 2016. (11)
(e) | (1) Distribution Agreement by and between the Registrant and First Trust Portfolios L.P. dated February 1, 2013. (3) |
(2) Exhibit A to Distribution Agreement by and between the Registrant and First Trust Portfolios L.P., effective as of August 22, 2016. (11)
(f) | Not Applicable. |
(g) | (1) Custodian Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., dated January 25, 2013. (3) |
(2) Schedule A to the Custodian Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., dated August 22, 2016. (11)
(h) | (1) Form of Subscription Agreement. (2) |
(2) Form of Participant Agreement. (12)
(3) Administrative Agency Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., dated January 23, 2013. (3)
(4) Appendix A to Administrative Agency Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., dated August 22, 2016. (11)
(i) | Not applicable. |
(j) | Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, dated February 28, 2017. (12) |
(k) | Not Applicable. |
(l) | Not Applicable. |
(m) | (1) 12b-1 Service Plan. (3) |
(2) Exhibit A to 12b-1 Service Plan, dated August 22, 2016. (11)
(3) 12b-1 Plan Extension Letter, dated February 21, 2017. (12)
(n) | Not Applicable. |
(o) | Not Applicable. |
(p) | (1) First Trust Advisors L.P., First Trust Portfolios L.P. Code of Ethics, amended on July 1, 2013. ( 4) |
(2) First Trust Funds Code of Ethics, amended on October 30, 2013. (4)
(q) | Powers of Attorney for Messrs. Bowen, Erickson, Kadlec, Keith and Nielson authorizing W. Scott Jardine, James M. Dykas, Kristi A. Maher and Eric F. Fess to execute the Registration Statement. (5) |
__________________ |
(1) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on September 23, 2011. |
(2) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on January 30, 2013. |
(3) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on December 20, 2013. |
(4) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on February 28, 2014. |
(5) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on April 1, 2014. |
(6) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on April 3, 2014. |
(7) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on October 10, 2014. |
(8) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on February 20, 2015. |
(9) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on February 26, 2016. |
(10) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on April 14, 2016. |
(11) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-176976) filed on August 22, 2016. |
(12) | Filed herewith. |
Item 29. Persons Controlled by or under Common Control with Registrant
Not Applicable.
Item 30. Indemnification
Section 5.3 of the Registrant’s Declaration of Trust provides as follows:
Section 5.3. Mandatory Indemnification. (a) Subject to the exceptions and limitations contained in paragraph (b) below:
(i) every person who is or has been a Trustee or officer of the Trust (hereinafter referred to as a “Covered Person”) shall be indemnified by the Trust against all liability and against all expenses reasonably incurred or paid by him or her in connection with any claim, action, suit or proceeding in which that individual becomes involved as a party or otherwise by virtue of being or having been a Trustee or officer and against amounts paid or incurred by that individual in the settlement thereof;
(ii) the words “claim,” “action,” “suit” or “proceeding” shall apply to all claims, actions, suits or proceedings (civil, criminal, administrative or other, including appeals), actual or threatened; and the words “liability” and “expenses” shall include, without limitation, attorneys’ fees, costs, judgments, amounts paid in settlement or compromise, fines, penalties and other liabilities.
(b) No indemnification shall be provided hereunder to a Covered Person:
(i) against any liability to the Trust or the Shareholders by reason of a final adjudication by the court or other body before which the proceeding was brought that the Covered Person engaged in willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of that individual’s office;
(ii) with respect to any matter as to which the Covered Person shall have been finally adjudicated not to have acted in good faith in the reasonable belief that that individual’s action was in the best interest of the Trust; or
(iii) in the event of a settlement involving a payment by a Trustee or officer or other disposition not involving a final adjudication as provided in paragraph (b)(i) or (b)(ii) above resulting in a payment by a Covered Person, unless there has been either a determination that such Covered Person did not engage in willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of that individual’s office by the court or other body approving the settlement or other disposition or by a reasonable determination, based upon a review of readily available facts (as opposed to a full trial-type inquiry) that that individual did not engage in such conduct:
(A) by vote of a majority of the Disinterested Trustees (as defined below) acting on the matter (provided that a majority of the Disinterested Trustees then in office act on the matter); or
(B) by written opinion of (i) the then-current legal counsel to the Trustees who are not Interested Persons of the Trust or (ii) other legal counsel chosen by a majority of the Disinterested Trustees (or if there are no Disinterested Trustees with respect to the matter in question, by a majority of the Trustees who are not Interested Persons of the Trust) and determined by them in their reasonable judgment to be independent.
(c) The rights of indemnification herein provided may be insured against by policies maintained by the Trust, shall be severable, shall not affect any other rights to which any Covered Person may now or hereafter be entitled, shall continue as to a person who has ceased to be a Covered Person and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors and administrators of such person. Nothing contained herein shall limit the Trust from entering into other insurance arrangements or affect any rights to indemnification to which Trust personnel, including Covered Persons, may be entitled by contract or otherwise under law.
(d) Expenses of preparation and presentation of a defense to any claim, action, suit, or proceeding of the character described in paragraph (a) of this Section 5.3 shall be advanced by the Trust prior to final disposition thereof upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of the Covered Person to repay such amount if it is ultimately determined that the Covered Person is not entitled to indemnification under this Section 5.3, provided that either:
(i) such undertaking is secured by a surety bond or some other appropriate security or the Trust shall be insured against losses arising out of any such advances; or
(ii) 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 legal counsel meeting the requirement in Section 5.3(b)(iii)(B) above in a written opinion, shall determine, based upon a review of readily available facts (as opposed to a full trial-type inquiry), that there is reason to believe that the Covered Person ultimately will be found entitled to indemnification.
As used in this Section 5.3 a “Disinterested Trustee” is one (i) who is not an “Interested Person” of the Trust (including anyone who has been exempted from being an “Interested Person” by any rule, regulation or order of the Commission), and (ii) 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 had been pending.
(e) With respect to any such determination or opinion referred to in clause (b)(iii) above or clause (d)(ii) above, a rebuttable presumption shall be afforded that the Covered Person has not engaged in willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of such Covered Person’s office in accordance with pronouncements of the Commission.
Item 31. Business and Other Connections of the Investment Adviser
First Trust Advisors L.P. (“First Trust”), investment adviser to the Registrant, serves as adviser or sub-adviser to various other open-end and closed-end management investment companies and is the portfolio supervisor of certain unit investment trusts. The principal business of certain of First Trust’s principal executive officers involves various activities in connection with the family of unit investment trusts sponsored by First Trust Portfolios L.P. (“FTP”). The principal address for all these investment companies, First Trust, FTP and the persons below is 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400, Wheaton, Illinois 60187 .
A description of any business, profession, vocation or employment of a substantial nature in which the officers of First Trust who serve as officers or trustees of the Registrant have engaged during the last two years for his or her account or in the capacity of director, officer, employee, partner or trustee appears under “Management of the Fund” in the Statement of Additional Information. Such information for the remaining senior officers of First Trust appears below:
Name and Position with First Trust | Employment During Past Two Years |
Andrew S. Roggensack, President | Managing Director and President, First Trust |
R. Scott Hall, Managing Director | Managing Director, First Trust |
Ronald D. McAlister, Managing Director | Managing Director, First Trust |
David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director | Managing Director; Senior Vice President, First Trust |
Kathleen Brown, Chief Compliance Officer and Senior Vice President | Chief Compliance Officer and Senior Vice President, First Trust |
Brian Wesbury, Chief Economist and Senior Vice President | Chief Economist and Senior Vice President, First Trust |
Item 32. Principal Underwriter
(a) FTP serves as principal underwriter of the shares of the Registrant, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund II, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund IV, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund V, First Trust Exchange Traded Fund VI, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VII, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VIII, First Trust Exchange-Traded AlphaDEX ® Fund, First Trust Exchange-Traded AlphaDEX ® Fund II, First Trust Variable Insurance Trust and First Trust Series Fund. FTP serves as principal underwriter and depositor of the following investment companies registered as unit investment trusts: the First Trust Combined Series, FT Series (formerly known as the First Trust Special Situations Trust), the First Trust Insured Corporate Trust, the First Trust of Insured Municipal Bonds and the First Trust GNMA.
(b) Positions and Offices with Underwriter.
(c) Not Applicable.
Item 33. Location of Accounts and Records
First Trust, 120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400, Wheaton, Illinois 60187, maintains the Registrant’s organizational documents, minutes of meetings, contracts of the Registrant and all advisory material of the investment adviser .
Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., 50 Post Office Square, Boston, Massachusetts 02110 ( “BBH” ) maintains all general and subsidiary ledgers, journals, trial balances, records of all portfolio purchases and sales, and all other requirement records not maintained by First Trust .
BBH also maintains all the required records in its capacity as transfer, accounting, dividend payment and interest holder service agent for the Registrant.
Item 34. Management Services
Not Applicable.
Item 35. Undertakings
Not Applicable.
Signatures
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933 and the Investment Company Act of 1940, the Registrant certifies that it meets all of the requirements for effectiveness of this Registration Statement under rule 485(b) under the Securities Act and has duly caused this Registration Statement to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, duly authorized, in the City of Wheaton, and State of Illinois, on the 28th day of February, 2017.
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III | ||
By: | /s/ James M. Dykas | |
James M. Dykas, President and
Chief Executive Officer |
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, this Registration Statement has been signed below by the following persons in the capacities and on the date indicated:
Signature | Title | Date | |
/s/ James M. Dykas |
President and Chief Executive
Officer |
February 28, 2017 | |
James M. Dykas | |||
/s/ Donald P. Swade |
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer
and Chief Accounting Officer |
February 28, 2017 | |
Donald P. Swade | |||
James A. Bowen* |
)
Trustee ) |
||
) | |||
Richard E. Erickson* |
)
Trustee ) |
||
) | |||
Thomas R. Kadlec* |
)
Trustee ) |
||
) | By: | /s/ W. Scott Jardine | |
Robert F. Keith* |
)
Trustee ) |
W. Scott Jardine
Attorney-In-Fact |
|
) | February 28, 2017 | ||
Niel B. Nielson* |
)
Trustee ) |
||
) |
* | Original powers of attorney authorizing W. Scott Jardine, James M. Dykas, Eric F. Fess and Kristi A. Maher to execute Registrant’s Registration Statement, and Amendments thereto, for each of the trustees of the Registrant on whose behalf this Registration Statement is filed, are incorporated by reference herein. |
Index to Exhibits
(d)(7) | Letter Agreement regarding Fee Waivers, dated February 21, 2017. |
(h)(2) | Form of Participant Agreement. |
(j) | Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, dated February 28, 2017. |
(m)(3) | 12b-1 Plan Extension Letter, dated February 21, 2017. |
February 21, 2017
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III
120 East Liberty Drive
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
Ladies and Gentlemen:
It is hereby acknowledged that First Trust Advisors L.P. ("First Trust") serves as the investment advisor of each series of First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III (the "Trust"). The Trust is an open-end management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the "1940 Act"), comprised of various exchange-traded funds (each, a "Fund," and, collectively, the "Funds") set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto, which may be amended from time to time.
It is further acknowledged that on February 2, 2016, First Trust and the Trust, on behalf of the Funds, have entered into the Expense Reimbursement, Fee Waiver and Recovery Agreement (the "Agreement") whereby First Trust has agreed to waive management fees payable to it by a Fund and reimburse a Fund for other expenses borne by such Fund in order to prevent a Fund's Expense Ratio from exceeding a particular Expense Cap for the Expense Cap Term; provided, however, that First Trust has the right to seek restitution of any fees waived and expenses reimbursed within three years to the extent that such restitution would not cause a Fund to exceed the current Expense Cap. Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Agreement.
The purpose of this letter agreement is to agree and acknowledge that the expense cap term shall be extended to the date set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto for each Fund, subject to approval by the Trust's Board of Trustees.
Very Truly Yours,
FIRST TRUST ADVISORS L.P.
/s/ James M. Dykas ----------------------------------------- James M. Dykas, Chief Financial Officer |
AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED:
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND III
/s/ Donald P. Swade ------------------------------------- Donald P. Swade, Treasurer |
EXHIBIT A
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND III FUNDS DATE First Trust Managed Municipal ETF March 1, 2018 |
PARTICIPANT AGREEMENT
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND III
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND IV
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND V
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND VI
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND VII
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED ALPHADEX(R) FUND II
This Participant Agreement (this "Agreement") is entered into between First Trust Portfolios, L.P. (the "Distributor"), and ______________________________ (the "Participant") and subject to acceptance by Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., a limited partnership organized under the laws of the State of New York as transfer agent (the "Transfer Agent"). The Transfer Agent serves as the Transfer Agent of the First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund IV, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund V, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VII and First Trust Exchange-Traded AlphaDEX(R) Fund II (each, a "Trust" and, collectively, the "Trusts") and is an Index Receipt Agent as that term is defined in the rules of the National Securities Clearing Corporation ("NSCC"). The Distributor has been retained to provide certain services with respect to acting as principal underwriter of each Trust in connection with the sale and distribution of shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.01 per share ("Shares"), of the Series of each Trust (each a "Fund") on Schedule I attached hereto and incorporated herein, as the same may be amended from time to time. Certain Funds (each, an "International Fund") may include securities of issuers that are domiciled outside the United States and listed on the foreign equivalent of a U.S. national securities exchange (a "U.S. Exchange"). The Distributor and the Participant acknowledge and agree that each Trust and Fund shall be a third-party beneficiary of this Agreement as to the benefits contemplated by this Agreement to the extent specified herein. The prospectus and statement of additional information for each Fund (collectively, the "Prospectus") are incorporated herein and included as part of the respective Trust's Registration Statement as amended on Form N-1A. Shares may be created or redeemed only in aggregations of 50,000 (or such other aggregation as is specified in the relevant Fund's Prospectus), referred to therein and herein as a "Creation Unit." Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein are used herein as defined in the relevant Fund's Prospectus. All references to "cash" shall refer to U.S. dollars.
This Agreement is intended to set forth certain premises and the procedures by which the Participant may create and/or redeem Creation Units (i) through the Continuous Net Settlement ("CNS") clearing processes of NSCC as such processes have been enhanced to effect creations and redemptions of Creation Units, such processes being referred to herein as the "Trusts' Clearing Process," or (ii) outside the Trusts' Clearing Process (e.g., through the facilities of the Depository Trust Company ("DTC")).
This Agreement supersedes any prior Participant Agreement entered into by the parties with respect to the Trusts and any Fund from and after the date hereof. Any and all prior Participant Agreements entered into by the parties are deemed terminated upon execution of this Agreement.
The parties hereto in consideration of the premises and of the agreements contained herein agree as follows:
SECTION 1. STATUS OF PARTICIPANT.
The Participant hereby represents, covenants and warrants that (i) with
respect to orders for the creation or redemption of Creation Units by means of
the Trusts' Clearing Process, it is a member of NSCC and a participant in the
CNS System of NSCC (as defined in the Prospectus, a "Participating Party"); and
(ii) with respect to orders for the creation or redemption of Creation Units
outside the Trusts' Clearing Process, it is a DTC Participant (as defined in the
Prospectus, a "DTC Participant"). The Participant may place orders for the
creation or redemption of Creation Units (a "Creation Order" and "Redemption
Order," respectively) either through the Trusts' Clearing Process or outside the
Trusts' Clearing Process, subject to the procedures for creation and redemption
referred to in Section 2 of this Agreement ("Execution of Orders") and the
procedures described in Attachment A attached hereto and incorporated herein and
made a part hereof, as the same may be amended from time to time ("Attachment
A"). Any change in the foregoing status of the Participant shall terminate this
Agreement, and the Participant shall give immediate notice to the Distributor
and the Transfer Agent of such change.
The Participant further represents that it is a broker-dealer registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission and a member of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA") or is exempt from or otherwise not required to be licensed as a broker-dealer or a member of FINRA. The Participant is qualified as a broker or dealer, or otherwise, under all applicable state laws where it is required to do so in order that Shares may be sold in such states where the Participant intends to sell such Shares. The Participant agrees to conform to the rules of FINRA (if it is a member of FINRA) and the securities laws of any jurisdiction in which it sells, directly or indirectly, Shares, to the extent such laws, rules and regulations relate to the Participant's transactions in, and activities with respect to, the Shares.
The Participant understands and acknowledges that the proposed method by which Creation Units of Shares will be purchased and traded may raise certain issues under applicable securities laws. For example, because new Creation Units of Shares may be issued and sold by the Trusts and their respective Funds on an ongoing basis, the offer and sale of Shares to investors may involve a "distribution," as such term is used in the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act"). The Participant understands and acknowledges that its offer and sale of Shares to investors, depending on the circumstances, may result in its being deemed a participant in a distribution in a manner which could render it a statutory underwriter and subject it to the prospectus delivery and liability provisions of the Securities Act. The Participant also understands and acknowledges that dealers who are not "underwriters" but are effecting transactions in Shares, whether or not participating in the distribution of Shares, may be required to deliver a prospectus.
SECTION 2. EXECUTION OF ORDERS.
All orders for the creation or redemption of Creation Units shall be handled in accordance with the terms of the respective Fund's Prospectus, and the procedures described in Attachment A to this Agreement. In the event the procedures include the use of recorded telephone lines, the Participant hereby consents to such use. Each Trust reserves the right to issue additional or other procedures relating to the manner of creating or redeeming Creation Units (and the procedures for the Trusts may, but need not be, identical), and the Participant, the Distributor and the Transfer Agent agree to comply with such procedures as may be issued from time to time, upon reasonable notice thereof.
The Participant understands and agrees that Creations Orders and Redemption Orders may be submitted only on days that the U.S. exchange where the Shares are principally listed (as specified in the Prospectus) is open for trading or business.
SECTION 3. NSCC.
Solely with respect to orders for the creation or redemption of Creation Units through the Trusts' Clearing Process, the Participant as a Participating Party hereby authorizes the Distributor or the Transfer Agent, as the case may be, to transmit to NSCC on behalf of the Participant such instructions, including share and cash amounts as are necessary with respect to the creation and redemption of Creation Units consistent with the instructions issued by the Participant to the Trust telephone representative identified in Attachment A hereto (the "Trust Telephone Representative"). The Participant agrees to be bound by the terms of such instructions issued by the Distributor or the Transfer Agent, as the case may be, and reported to NSCC as though such instructions were issued by the Participant directly to NSCC.
With respect to any Redemption Order, the Participant also acknowledges and agrees to use its best efforts to return to the applicable Fund any dividend, distribution or other corporate action paid to it or to the party for which it is acting in respect of any Deposit Securities that are transferred to the Participant or any party for which it is acting that, based on the valuation of such Deposit Securities at the time of transfer, should have been paid to the Fund. With respect to any Redemption Order, the Participant also acknowledges and agrees that the applicable Fund is entitled to reduce the amount of money or other proceeds due to the Participant or any party for which it is acting that, based on the valuation of such Deposit Securities at the time of transfer, should be paid to the Fund. With respect to any Creation Order, the Distributor shall cause the applicable Fund's Custodian to return to the Participant or any party for which it is acting any dividend, distribution or other corporate action paid to the Fund in respect of any Deposit Securities that are transferred to a Fund that, based on the valuation of such Deposit Securities at the time of transfer, should have been paid to the Participant or any party for which it is acting.
SECTION 4. DEPOSIT SECURITIES.
The Participant understands that the number and names of the designated portfolio of securities (each, a "Deposit Security" and, collectively, the "Deposit Securities") and relevant cash amounts (the "Cash Component") to be deposited in connection with the purchase of a Creation Unit (the current "Fund Deposit") for each Fund will be made available each day that the New York Stock Exchange (the "NYSE") is open for trading through the facilities of the NSCC. The Participant will not be responsible for errors in the information relating to the Deposit Securities to be included in the current Fund Deposit to be transmitted through the facilities of the NSCC in connection with Redemption Orders and Creation Orders that are caused by the applicable Trust or Fund, the Distributor or the Transfer Agent.
Under certain circumstances, a Trust may, in its discretion, permit or require, with respect to one or more Funds, a Participant to substitute cash in lieu of depositing some or all of the requisite Deposit Securities. A Trust may additionally permit, in its discretion, with respect to one or more International Funds under certain circumstances, a Participant to substitute a different security in lieu of depositing some or all of the Deposit Securities. Substitution of cash or a different security may be permitted or required, for example, because one or more Deposit Securities may be unavailable, may not be available in the quantity needed, or may not be eligible for trading by the Participant (or any party on whose behalf the Participant is acting) due to local trading restrictions (including, for example, requirements that securities be traded only for cash in local currency) or other circumstances.
SECTION 5. ROLE OF PARTICIPANT.
The Participant shall have no authority in any transaction to act as agent of the Distributor, the Transfer Agent, any Trust or any Fund.
(a) The Participant agrees (i) subject to any privacy obligations or other obligations arising under the federal or state securities laws it may have to it customers, to assist the Distributor in ascertaining certain information regarding sales of Shares made by or through Participant upon the request of a Trust or Fund or the Distributor necessary for the applicable Trust or Fund to comply with its obligation to distribute information to its shareholders as may be required from time to time under applicable state or federal securities laws, or (ii) in lieu thereof, and at the option of the Participant, the Participant may undertake to deliver Prospectuses, as may be amended or supplemented from time to time, proxy material, annual and other reports of a Fund or other similar information that the applicable Trust or Fund is obligated to deliver to its shareholders to the Participant's customers that custody Fund Shares with the Participant, after receipt from the applicable Trust or Fund or the Distributor of sufficient quantities to allow mailing thereof to such customers. The expenses associated with such transmissions shall be borne by the Distributor or the applicable Trust or Fund in accordance with usual custom and practice in respect of such communications. None of the Distributor, the applicable Trust or Fund or any of their respective affiliates shall use the names and addresses and other information concerning Participant's customers for any purpose except in connection with the performance of their duties and responsibilities hereunder and except for servicing and informational mailings
described in this clause (a) of Section 5, or as may otherwise be required by applicable law.
(b) The Participant certifies that it has policies, procedures and internal controls in place that are reasonably designed to comply with all applicable anti-money laundering laws and regulations, including applicable provisions of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and the regulations administered by the U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control as the same may in effect from time to time.
SECTION 6. PARTICIPANT REPRESENTATIONS.
(a) The Participant represents, warrants and agrees that it will not make any representations concerning any Fund, the applicable Trust, the Creation Units or the Shares other than those consistent with the Fund's then current Prospectus or any promotional or sales literature furnished to the Participant by the Distributor or the applicable Trust or Fund, or any such materials permitted by clause (b) of this Section 6.
(b) The Participant agrees not to furnish or cause to be furnished by Participant or its employees to any person or to display or publish any information or materials relating to a Trust or any Fund (including, without limitation, promotional materials and sales literature, advertisements, press releases, announcements, statements, posters, signs or other similar materials, but not including any materials prepared and used for Participant's internal use only, any brokerage communications between employees of Participant and customers or any communications prepared and directed to registered broker-dealers) ("Marketing Materials"), except (i) such Marketing Materials as may be furnished to the Participant by the Distributor or the applicable Trust or Fund and (ii) such other Marketing Materials as are consistent with the applicable Fund's then current Prospectus or otherwise approved by the Distributor or the Trust; provided that such Marketing Materials clearly indicate that such Marketing Materials are prepared and distributed by Participant and, upon request, a copy is forwarded to the Distributor as soon as practicable.
(c) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, Participant and its affiliates may prepare and circulate in the regular course of their businesses (i) research reports that include information, opinions or recommendations relating to Shares; and (ii) without reference to a Fund or its Prospectus, data and information relating to the various indices to which the Funds are benchmarked.
SECTION 7. SUBCUSTODIAN ACCOUNTS.
The Participant understands and agrees that in the case of an International Fund, the relevant Trust has caused Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., acting in its capacity as the Trust's custodian ("Custodian") to maintain with one or more applicable subcustodians (each, a "Subcustodian") for such International Fund an account in the relevant foreign jurisdiction(s) to which the Participant shall deliver or cause to be delivered in connection with the purchase of a Creation Unit the securities and any other cash amounts (or the
cash value of all or a part of such securities, in the case of a permitted or required cash purchase or "cash in lieu" amount) on behalf of itself or any party for which it is acting (whether or not a customer), with any appropriate adjustments as advised by the Trust or such International Fund, in accordance with the terms and conditions applicable to such account in such foreign jurisdiction.
SECTION 8. TITLE TO SECURITIES: RESTRICTED SHARES.
The Participant represents that upon delivery of a portfolio of Deposit Securities to a Fund's custodian, the Fund will acquire good and unencumbered title to such securities, free and clear of all liens, restrictions, charges and encumbrances and not subject to any adverse claims, including, without limitation, any special restriction upon the sale or transfer of such securities imposed by (i) any agreement or arrangement entered into by the Participant or any party for which it is acting in connection with a Creation Order or (ii) any provision of the Securities Act, and any regulations thereunder (except that portfolio securities of issuers other than U.S. issuers shall not be required to have been registered under the Securities Act if exempt from such registration), or of the applicable laws or regulations of any other applicable jurisdiction.
SECTION 9. FEES.
In connection with the creation or redemption of Creation Units, the Transfer Agent shall charge, and the Participant agrees to pay to the Transfer Agent, (i) the Creation Transaction Fee or Redemption Transaction Fee (each also sometimes referred to individually herein as the "Transaction Fee") prescribed in the relevant Fund's Prospectus applicable to creations or redemptions through the Trusts' Clearing Process, or (ii) the applicable Creation Transaction Fee or Redemption Transaction Fee plus, in each case, such additional variable amounts as may be prescribed in the relevant Fund's Prospectus for (a) creations or redemptions outside the Trusts' Clearing Process and (b) creations through the Trusts' Clearing Process where the cash equivalent value of one or more Deposit Securities is being deposited in lieu of the inclusion of such Deposit Securities in the securities portion of the Fund Deposit. The Transaction Fee may be waived or otherwise adjusted from time to time subject to the provisions relating thereto and any limitations as prescribed in the relevant Fund's Prospectus. With respect to International Funds (for which creations and redemptions are processed outside the Trusts' Clearing Process), such additional variable amounts may include any expenses incurred by a Fund in the transfer of Deposit Securities to the Fund in connection with a creation of Creation Units, and in the transfer of Deposit Securities to the Participant in connection with a redemption of Creation Units; such expenses may include operational processing and brokerage costs, transfer fees, stamp taxes and the like. When an International Fund permits a Participant to substitute cash or a different security in lieu of depositing one or more of the requisite Deposit Securities, the Participant may be assessed a higher Transaction Fee on the substitute security portion of its investment to cover the cost of purchasing the Deposit Securities and/or disposing of the substituted securities, including operational processing and brokerage costs, transfer fees, stamp taxes, and part or all of the spread between the expected bid and offer side of the market related to such Deposit Securities and/or substitute securities.
SECTION 10. AUTHORIZED PERSONS.
Concurrently with the execution of this Agreement and from time to time thereafter, the Participant shall deliver to the Distributor and the Transfer Agent, duly certified as appropriate by its secretary or other duly authorized person, a certificate setting forth the names and signatures of all persons authorized to give instructions relating to activity contemplated hereby or any other notice, request or instruction on behalf of the Participant (each, an "Authorized Person"). Such certificate may be accepted and relied upon by the Distributor and the Transfer Agent as conclusive evidence of the facts set forth therein and shall be considered to be in full force and effect until delivery to the Distributor and the Transfer Agent of a superseding certificate bearing a subsequent date. The Transfer Agent shall issue to each Authorized Person a unique personal identification number ("PIN Number") by which such Authorized Person and the Participant shall be identified and instructions issued by the Participant hereunder shall be authenticated. Upon the termination or revocation of authority of such Authorized Person by the Participant, the Participant shall give prompt written notice of such fact to the Distributor and the Transfer Agent and such notice shall be effective upon receipt by both the Distributor and the Transfer Agent.
SECTION 11. REDEMPTION.
The Participant represents and warrants that it will not obtain a Submission Number (as defined in Attachment A) from the Transfer Agent for the purpose of redeeming a Creation Unit unless it first ascertains that (a) it or its customer, as the case may be, owns outright or has full legal authority and legal beneficial right to tender for redemption the requisite number of Shares of any Fund to be redeemed, and the entire proceeds of the redemption, (b) the delivery of such Shares to the Transfer Agent in accordance with the Prospectus or as otherwise required by the Trust or Fund would not be precluded as the result of their being subject to or the subject of a loan, repurchase agreement, securities lending agreement or other arrangement and (c) upon delivery to the Fund's custodian, the Shares will be free and clear of all liens.
A Trust may make redemptions in cash in lieu of transferring one or more Deposit Securities if the Trust or Fund determines, in its discretion, that such method is warranted because a Participant who has placed the Redemption Order is restrained by regulation or policy from transacting in the Deposit Securities, delivery of the Deposit Securities is not permissible under applicable law or foreign stock exchange regulations, or for other reasons.
In connection with an International Fund, a Participant must maintain appropriate securities broker-dealer, bank or other custody arrangements to which account Deposit Securities will be delivered in connection with a redemption. If a redeeming Participant, or any party on whose behalf the Participant is acting, does not have appropriate arrangements to take delivery of the Deposit Securities in the relevant foreign jurisdiction(s) and it is not possible to make other such arrangements, or if it is not possible to effect deliveries of the Deposit Securities in such foreign jurisdiction(s) and in certain other circumstances, the Trust or Fund may in its discretion redeem Shares for cash, and the redeeming Participant, on behalf of itself or any part for which it is acting, will be required to receive redemption proceeds in cash. In such case, the Participant will receive a cash payment equal to the net asset value (next determined after receipt of the Redemption Order) times the number
of Shares in a Creation Unit of the relevant International Fund, minus the Transaction Fee and other costs specified in Section 9.
In the case of a beneficial owner of an International Fund who is a resident of Australia or New Zealand, the Participant understands and agrees that such beneficial owner is only entitled to receive cash upon its redemption of Creation Units. In a Redemption Order, the Participant will be required to confirm that an in-kind redemption request has not been submitted on behalf of a beneficial owner who is an Australian or New Zealand resident.
SECTION 12. FUND'S TAX BASIS.
The Participant represents and warrants to the Distributor and each Trust and Fund that with respect to any Creation Units it shall only deliver or transfer, or cause to be delivered or transferred, Deposit Securities (or contracts therefor) that, should Section 351 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, apply to such delivery or transfer, will have a tax basis in the hands of the Fund receiving the Deposit Securities equal to the closing market price of such Deposit Securities on the date the Creation Order with respect thereto is Deemed Received (as such term is defined in Attachment A hereto). Such representation and warranty shall be deemed repeated with respect to each Creation Order.
SECTION 13. INDEMNIFICATION.
(a) The Participant hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the
Distributor in its capacity as principal underwriter, each Trust, each Fund, the
Transfer Agent, their respective affiliates, directors, officers, employees and
agents, and each person, if any, who controls such persons within the meaning of
Section 15 of the Securities Act (each, for purposes of this paragraph, an
"Indemnified Party") from and against any loss, liability, cost and expense
(including reasonable attorneys' fees) incurred by such Indemnified Party as a
result of (i) any breach by the Participant of any provision of this Agreement
that relates to the Participant; (ii) any failure on the part of the Participant
to perform any of its obligations set forth in this Agreement; (iii) any failure
by the Participant to comply with applicable laws, including rules and
regulations of self-regulatory organizations in relation to the sales, trading
or marketing of Shares and the creation or redemption of or investment in a Fund
or Funds, except that the Participant shall not be required to indemnify an
Indemnified Party to the extent that such failure was caused by Participant's
adherence to instructions given or representations made by the Distributor, the
Transfer Agent or any Indemnified Party, as applicable; or (iv) actions of such
Indemnified Party in reliance upon any instructions issued or representations
made in accordance with Attachment A (as it may be amended from time to time)
reasonably believed by the Distributor or the Transfer Agent, as applicable, to
be genuine and to have been given by the Participant except to the extent that
the Participant had previously revoked a PIN Number used in giving such
instructions or representations (where applicable) and such revocation was given
by the Participant and received by the Distributor and the Transfer Agent in
accordance with the terms of Section 10 hereto. The Participant and the
Distributor understand and agree that each Trust and Fund as a third party
beneficiary of this Agreement is entitled and intends to proceed directly
against the Participant in the event that the Participant fails to honor any of its obligations pursuant to this Agreement that benefit each such Trust and Fund.
(b) The Distributor hereby agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the Participant, its respective subsidiaries, affiliates, directors, officers, employees and agents, and each person, if any, who controls such persons within the meaning of Section 15 of the Securities Act (each, for purposes of this paragraph, an "Indemnified Party") from and against any loss, liability, cost and expense (including reasonable attorneys' fees) incurred by such Indemnified Party as a result of (i) any breach by the Distributor of any provision of this Agreement that relates to the Distributor; (ii) any failure on the part of the Distributor to perform any of its obligations set forth in this Agreement; (iii) any failure by the Distributor to comply with applicable laws, including rules and regulations of self-regulatory organizations in relation to its role as Distributor of the Funds; (iv) actions of such Indemnified Party in reliance upon any instructions issued or representations made in accordance with Attachment A (as it may be amended from time to time) reasonably believed by the Participant to be genuine and to have been given by the Distributor or the Transfer Agent; or (v) any untrue statement or alleged untrue statement of a material fact contained in the Registration Statement of the Fund as originally filed with the SEC or in any amendment thereof, or in any prospectus or any statement of additional information, or any amendment thereof or supplement thereto, or arise out of or are based upon the omission or alleged omission to state therein a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein not misleading.
(c) Each of the Distributor and Participant each agree to indemnify Transfer Agent and hold Transfer Agent harmless from and against any and all losses sustained or incurred by or asserted against Transfer Agent by reason of or as a result of any action or inaction, or arising out of Transfer Agent's performance hereunder, including reasonable fees and expenses of counsel incurred by Transfer Agent in a successful defense of claims by the Distributor and/or Participant; provided however, Distributor and/or Participant shall not indemnify Transfer Agent for those losses arising out of Transfer Agent's own negligence or willful misconduct or that of its employees. This indemnity shall be a continuing obligation of the Distributor and/or Participant, and their respective successors and assigns, notwithstanding the termination of this Agreement.
(d) Except to the extent that the Transfer Agent is to be indemnified as provided in this Section 13, no party to this Agreement shall be liable to the other party or to any other person for any damages arising out of mistakes or errors in data provided to such Indemnified Party by a third party, or out of interruptions or delays of electronic means of communications with the Indemnified Parties.
SECTION 14. ACKNOWLEDGMENT.
The Participant acknowledges receipt of each relevant Fund's Prospectus and represents it has reviewed such document and understands the terms thereof.
SECTION 15. NOTICES.
Except as otherwise specifically provided in this Agreement, all notices required or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement shall be given in writing and delivered by personal delivery or by postage prepaid registered or certified United States first class mail, return receipt requested, by telegram or facsimile or similar means of same day delivery (with a confirming copy by mail as provided herein). Unless otherwise notified in writing, all notices to the Transfer Agent shall be given or sent as follows: Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., 50 Post Office Square, Boston, MA 02110, Attention: Manager, ETF Transfer Agency. All notices to the Participant and the Distributor shall be directed to the address or telephone, facsimile numbers indicated below the signature line of such party.
SECTION 16. TERMINATION.
This Agreement shall become effective in this form as of the date accepted
by the Transfer Agent and may be terminated at any time by any party upon thirty
(30) days prior notice to the other parties (i) unless earlier terminated by the
Transfer Agent in the event of a breach of this Agreement or the procedures
described herein by the Participant or (ii) in the event that a Trust is
terminated pursuant to its Declaration of Trust. This Agreement supersedes any
prior Participant Agreement entered into by the parties. Any and all prior
Participant Agreements entered into by the parties are deemed terminated upon
execution of this Agreement.
SECTION 17. PROSPECTUS.
(a) The Distributor will provide to the Participant copies of the then current Prospectus for each Fund and any printed supplemental information in reasonable quantities upon request. The Distributor represents, warrants and agrees that it will notify the Participant when a revised, supplemented or amended Prospectus for any Shares is available and deliver or otherwise make available to the Participant copies of such revised, supplemented or amended Prospectus at such time and in such numbers as to enable the Participant to comply with any obligation it may have to deliver such Prospectus to customers. As a general matter, the Distributor will make such revised, supplemented or amended Prospectus available to the Participant no later than its effective date. The Distributor shall be deemed to have complied with this Section 17 when the Participant has received such revised, supplemented or amended Prospectus by email at _____________________, in printable form, with such number of hard copies as may be agreed from time to time by the parties promptly thereafter.
(b) Distributor represents and warrants that (i) the registration statement(s) for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III on Form N-1A (No. 333-164607) and the Prospectus(es) contained therein, for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund IV on Form N-1A (No. 333-174332) and the Prospectus(es) contained therein, for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund V on Form N-1A (No. 333-181507) and the Prospectus(es) contained therein, for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI on Form N-1A (No. 333-182308) and the Prospectus(es) contained therein, for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VII on Form N-1A (No. 333-184918) and the Prospectus(es) contained therein and for First Trust Exchange-Traded AlphaDEX Fund II on Form N-1A (No. 333-171759) and the
Prospectus(es) contained therein, conform in all material respects to the requirements of the Securities Act, and the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission thereunder and do not and will not, as of the applicable effective date as to the registration statement and any amendment thereto and as of the applicable filing date as to the Prospectus and any amendment or supplement thereto, contain an untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the statements therein not misleading; (ii) the sale and distribution of the Shares as contemplated herein will not conflict with or result in a breach or violation of any statute or any order, rule or regulation of any court or governmental agency or body having jurisdiction over the Trusts, any Fund or the Distributor; and (iii) no consent, approval, authorization, order, registration or qualification of or with any such court or governmental agency or body is required for the issue and sale of the Shares, except the registration under the Securities Act of the Shares.
SECTION 18. COUNTERPARTS.
This Agreement may be simultaneously executed in several counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all shall constitute but one and the same instrument.
SECTION 19. NO WAIVER.
Each and every right granted to any party hereunder or under any other document delivered hereunder or in connection herewith, or allowed it by law or equity, shall be cumulative and may be exercised from time to time. No failure on the part of any party hereto to exercise, and no delay in exercising, any right will operate as a waiver thereof, nor will any single or partial exercise by any party hereto of any right preclude any other or future exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right.
SECTION 20. ENFORCEABILITY; AMENDMENT.
In case any provision in or obligation under this Agreement shall be
invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, the validity, legality
and enforceability of the remaining provisions shall not in any way be affected
thereby. This Agreement may not be amended or modified in any manner except by a
written agreement executed by the parties hereto, except that any amendment to
Schedule I approved in writing by the Distributor (upon which written approval
the Transfer Agent may conclusively rely) and any amendment to Attachment A
hereto need be signed only by the Transfer Agent. The Transfer Agent shall
provide the Participant a copy of any such amendment in the manner provided in
Section 15. This Agreement shall extend to and shall be binding upon the parties
hereto, and their respective successors and assigns; provided, however, that
this Agreement shall not be assignable by any party without the written consent
of the others.
SECTION 21. GOVERNING LAW; CONSENT TO JURISDICTION.
This Agreement shall be construed in accordance with the substantive laws of the State of New York, without regard to conflicts of laws principles thereof. The parties hereby consent to the jurisdiction of a state or federal
court situated in New York City, New York in connection with any dispute arising hereunder. Each party hereby irrevocably waives, to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any objection which it may now or hereafter have to the laying of venue of any such proceeding brought in such a court and any claim that such proceeding brought in such a court has been brought in an inconvenient forum. Each party hereby irrevocably waives any and all rights to trial by jury in any legal proceeding arising out of or relating to this Agreement.
FIRST TRUST PORTFOLIOS, L.P.
By _______________________________________________ Name:__________________________________________ Title:_________________________________________ Address: 120 E. Liberty Drive, Suite 400 Wheaton, Illinois 60187 Telephone: (630) 765-8798 Facsimile: (630) 517-7437 |
[PARTICIPANT]
By _______________________________________________
Name:__________________________________________
Title:_________________________________________
Address: _______________________________
ACCEPTED BY: BROWN BROTHERS HARRIMAN & CO., as
Transfer Agent
By _______________________________________________
Name:__________________________________________
Title:_________________________________________
Address: 50 Post Office Square
Boston, MA 02110
Telephone: (617) 772-2011
Facsimile: (201) 418-4105
Dated: _____________________
SCHEDULE I
TO PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
SERIES OF FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND III (ALL SERIES)
SERIES OF FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND IV
First Trust Heitman Global Prime Real Estate ETF
First Trust SSI Strategic Convertible Securities ETF
SERIES OF FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND V (ALL SERIES)
SERIES OF FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND VI (ALL SERIES)
SERIES OF FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND VII (ALL SERIES)
SERIES OF FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED ALPHADEX(R) FUND II (ALL SERIES)
Sch. I
ATTACHMENT A
Subject to the terms and conditions of the attached Participant Agreement, this document supplements the Prospectuses for each Trust listed on Schedule I and is an attachment to, and incorporated into and made a part of, the Participant Agreement with respect to the procedures to be used by (i) the Transfer Agent in processing an order for the creation of Shares, and (ii) the Transfer Agent in processing a request for the redemption of Shares, and (iii) the Participants and the Transfer Agent in delivering or arranging for the delivery of requisite cash payments, Fund Deposit or Shares, as the case may be, in connection with the submission of orders for creation or requests for redemption. Capitalized terms not otherwise defined have the meaning assigned to them in the Participant Agreement.
A Participant is first required to have signed the Participant Agreement. Upon acceptance of the Participant Agreement by the Distributor, the Transfer Agent will assign a unique personal identification number ("PIN Number") to each Authorized Person authorized to act for the Participant. This will allow a Participant through its Authorized Person(s) to place orders for either creation or redemption of Shares.
SECTION I. TO PLACE AN ORDER FOR CREATION OR REDEMPTION OF SHARES
1. Call to Receive a Submission Number. An Authorized Person for the Participant will call the Trust Telephone Representative at (617) 772-2011 not later than the closing time of the regular trading session on The New York Stock Exchange (the "NYSE Closing Time") (ordinarily 4:00 p.m. New York time) to receive a submission number ("Submission Number"). In the case of custom orders, the order must be received by the Transfer Agent no later than 3:00 p.m. Eastern time on the trade date. Upon verifying the authenticity of the caller (as determined by the use of the appropriate PIN Number) and the terms of the order for creation or request for redemption, the Trust Telephone Representative will issue a unique Submission Number. All orders with respect to the creation or redemption of Shares are required to be in writing and accompanied by the designated Submission Number. Incoming telephone calls are queued and will be handled in the sequence received. Calls placed before the NYSE Closing Time will be processed even if the call is taken after this cut-off time. ACCORDINGLY, DO NOT HANG UP AND REDIAL. INCOMING CALLS THAT ARE ATTEMPTED LATER THAN THE NYSE CLOSING TIME WILL NOT BE ACCEPTED.
2. Assemble the Submission. The Authorized Person submitting an order to create or a request to redeem shall assemble (a) written instructions regarding such creation order or redemption request and (b) the designated Submission Number in one document and transmit such document by facsimile to the Trust Telephone Representative and the Distributor, as applicable, according to the procedures set forth below in subsection 3. The document so transmitted is hereinafter referred to as the "Submission," and the Business Day on which a Submission is made is hereinafter referred to as the "Transmittal Date." As used herein, a Business Day ("Business Day") is any day on which The New York Stock Exchange is open. NOTE THAT THE TELEPHONE CALL IN WHICH THE SUBMISSION NUMBER IS ISSUED INITIATES THE ORDER PROCESS BUT DOES NOT ALONE CONSTITUTE THE ORDER. AN ORDER OR REQUEST IS ONLY COMPLETED AND PROCESSED UPON RECEIPT OF THE SUBMISSION.
3. Transmit the Submission. A Submission Number is only valid for a limited time. The Submission for either creations or redemptions of Shares must be sent by facsimile to the Trust Telephone Representative, as applicable, within fifteen (15) minutes of the issuance of the Submission Number. In the event that the Submission is not received within such time period, the Trust Telephone Representative will attempt to contact the Participant to request immediate transmission of the Submission.
(a) In the case of a Submission for creation, unless the Submission is received by the Trust Telephone Representative upon the earlier of within (i) fifteen (15) minutes of contact with the Participant or (ii) forty-five (45) minutes after the NYSE Closing Time, the Submission will be deemed invalid.
(b) In the case of a Submission for redemption, unless such
Submission is received by the Trust Telephone Representative within (i)
fifteen (15) minutes of contact with the Participant or (ii) forty-five
(45) minutes after the NYSE Closing Time, whichever is earlier, such order
for redemption contained therein shall be deemed invalid.
4. Await Receipt of Confirmation.
(a) Trusts' Clearing Process-Creation Orders. The Transfer Agent shall issue to the Participant a confirmation of acceptance of an order to create Shares in Creation Unit size aggregations ("Creation Order") through the Trusts' Clearing Process within fifteen (15) minutes of its receipt of a Submission received in good form. In the event the Participant does not receive a timely confirmation from the Transfer Agent, it should contact the Distributor and the Trust Telephone Representative at the business numbers indicated.
(b) Trusts' Clearing Process-Requests for Redemptions. The Transfer
Agent shall issue to the Participating Party a confirmation of acceptance
of a request to redeem Shares in Creation Unit size aggregations
("Redemption Order") through the Trusts' Clearing Process within fifteen
(15) minutes of its receipt of a Submission received in good form. In the
event the Participating Party does not receive a timely confirmation from
the Transfer Agent, it should contact the Transfer Agent directly at the
business number indicated.
(c) Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. The Transfer Agent shall issue to the DTC Participant an acknowledgment of receipt of a Creation Order outside the Trusts' Clearing Process within fifteen (15) minutes of its receipt of a Submission received in good form. In the event the DTC Participant does not receive a timely acknowledgment from the Transfer Agent, it should contact the Transfer Agent at the business numbers indicated.
(d) Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. The Transfer Agent shall issue to the DTC Participant an acknowledgment of receipt of a Redemption Order outside the Trusts' Clearing Process within fifteen (15) minutes of its receipt of a Submission received in good form.
In the event the DTC Participant does not receive a timely acknowledgment from the Transfer Agent, it should contact the Transfer Agent directly at the business number indicated.
SECTION II. PARTICIPANTS' RESPONSIBILITY FOR DELIVERING OR EFFECTING THE DELIVERY OF REQUISITE FUND DEPOSIT OR SHARES AND CASH PAYMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH CREATION ORDERS OR REDEMPTION ORDERS
1. Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. The Participant notified
of confirmation of a Creation Order to create Shares through the Trusts'
Clearing Process shall be required to transfer or arrange for the transfer of
(a) the requisite Deposit Securities (or contracts to purchase such Deposit
Securities expected to be delivered through NSCC by the "regular way" settlement
date) and (b) the Cash Component, if any, to the Transfer Agent by means of the
Trusts' Clearing Process so as to be received no later than on the "regular way"
settlement date following the Business Day on which such order is Deemed
Received by the Transfer Agent as set forth below in Section IV.
2. Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. The Participant notified
of confirmation of a Redemption Order to redeem Shares through the Trusts'
Clearing Process shall be required to transfer or arrange for the transfer of
the requisite Shares and the Cash Redemption Amount, as defined in the
applicable Fund's Prospectus ("Cash Redemption Amount"), if any, to the Transfer
Agent by means of the Trusts' Clearing Process so as to be received no later
than on the "regular way" settlement date following the Business Day on which
such order is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent as set forth below in
Section IV.
3. Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. The DTC Participant notified of acknowledgment of a Creation Order to create Shares outside the Trusts' Clearing Process shall be required to effect a transfer to the Transfer Agent of (a) the requisite Deposit Securities through DTC so as to be received by the Transfer Agent no later than 11:00 a.m., Eastern Time, on the next Business Day immediately following the Business Day on which such order is Deemed Received by the Distributor as set forth below in Section IV, in such a way as to replicate the Fund Deposit established on the Transmittal Date by the Transfer Agent and (b) the Cash Component, if there is a positive Cash Component, through the Federal Reserve Bank wire system so as to be received by the Transfer Agent by 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on the next Business Day immediately following the day such order is Deemed Received. If the Transfer Agent does not confirm receipt of the Deposit Securities by 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time and the Cash Component, if any, by 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on the Business Day immediately following the day such order is Deemed Received, the Creation Order contained in such Submission shall be canceled. Upon written notice to the Transfer Agent, the DTC Participant may resubmit such canceled order on the following Business Day using a Fund Deposit as newly constituted.
4. Purchase of Creation Unit Aggregations Prior to Receipt of Deposit Securities. Creation Unit Aggregations may be created in advance of receipt by a Fund of all or a portion of the applicable Deposit Securities as described below. In these circumstances, the initial deposit will have a value greater than the NAV of the applicable Fund's Shares on the date the Creation Order is placed in proper form since, in addition to available Deposit Securities, cash
must be deposited in an amount equal to the sum of (i) the Cash Component, plus
(ii) one hundred fifteen percent (115%) of the market value of the undelivered
Deposit Securities (the "Additional Cash Deposit"). The Creation Order shall be
deemed to be received on the Business Day on which the order is placed provided
that the Creation Order is placed in proper form prior to 4:00 p.m., Eastern
time, on such date, and federal funds in the appropriate amount are deposited
with the Transfer Agent by 11:00 a.m., Eastern time, the following Business Day.
If the Creation Order is not placed in proper form by 4:00 p.m., Eastern time,
or federal funds in the appropriate amount are not received by 11:00 a.m.,
Eastern time, the next Business Day, then the Creation Order may be deemed to be
canceled and the Authorized Participant shall be liable to the Fund for losses,
if any, resulting therefrom. An additional amount of cash shall be required to
be deposited with the applicable Fund, pending delivery of the missing Deposit
Securities to the extent necessary to maintain the Additional Cash Deposit with
the Fund in an amount at least equal to one hundred fifteen percent (115%) of
the daily marked to market value of the missing Deposit Securities. The parties
hereto further agree that the Trust may purchase the missing Deposit Securities
at any time and the Participant agrees to accept liability for any shortfall
between the cost to the Trust of purchasing such securities and the amount of
the Additional Cash Deposit maintained with the Fund, as the Trust may determine
in its sole discretion.
5. Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. The Participant notified of acknowledgment of a Redemption Order to redeem Shares outside the Trusts' Clearing Process shall be required to effect a transfer to the Transfer Agent of (a) the requisite number of Shares through DTC no later than the NYSE Closing Time on the Business Day on which such Redemption Order is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent and (b) the Cash Redemption Amount, if any, through the Federal Reserve Bank wire system by no later than 2:00 p.m. on the next Business Day immediately following the Business Day on which such order is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent.
6. Transaction Fee. In connection with the creation or redemption of Creation Units, the Transfer Agent shall charge, and the Participant agrees to pay to the Transfer Agent, (i) the Creation Transaction Fee or Redemption Transaction Fee prescribed in the relevant Fund's Prospectus applicable to creations or redemptions through the Trusts' Clearing Process, or (ii) the applicable Creation Transaction Fee or Redemption Transaction Fee plus, in each case, such additional variable amounts as may be prescribed in the relevant Fund's Prospectus for (a) creations or redemptions outside the Trusts' Clearing Process and (b) creations through the Trusts' Clearing Process where the cash equivalent value of one or more Deposit Securities is being deposited in lieu of the inclusion of such Deposit Securities in the securities portion of the Fund Deposit. The Cash Component or Cash Redemption Amount payable or to be received, as the case may be, by the Participant in connection with the Creation Order or Redemption Order shall be adjusted by the amount of such applicable Transaction Fee and additional variable amounts, if any.
7. International Funds -- Creation Orders.
(a) Except as provided below, Deposit Securities must be delivered to an account maintained at the applicable local Subcustodian of the Trust on or before the International Contractual Settlement Date (defined below). The Participant must also pay on or before the International
Contractual Settlement Date immediately available or same day funds
estimated by Trust to be sufficient to pay the Cash Component next
determined after acceptance of the Creation Order, together with the
applicable Creation Transaction Fee and additional variable amounts (as
described below and in the Prospectus). The "International Contractual
Settlement Date" with respect to each International Fund is the earlier of
(i) the date upon which all of the required Deposit Securities, the Cash
Component and any other cash amounts which may be due are delivered to the
Fund and (ii) the latest day for settlement on the customary settlement
cycle in the jurisdiction(s) where any of the securities of such
International Fund are customarily traded.
(b) Except as provided in the next two paragraphs, a Creation Unit of Shares will not be issued until the transfer of good title to the Trust of the portfolio of Deposit Securities, the payment of the Cash Component, the payment of any other cash amounts and the Creation Transaction Fee have been completed. When the Subcustodian confirms to Custodian that the required Deposit Securities (or, when permitted in the sole discretion of Trust, the cash in lieu thereof) have been delivered to the account of the relevant Subcustodian, the Custodian shall notify Distributor and the Transfer Agent which, acting on behalf of the Trust, will issue and cause the delivery of the Creation Unit of Shares.
(c) The Trust may in its sole discretion permit or require the substitution of an amount of cash (i.e., a "cash in lieu" amount) to be added to the Cash Component to replace any Deposit Security which may not be available in sufficient quantity for delivery or for other similar reasons. If the Distributor, acting on behalf of the Trust, determines that a "cash in lieu" amount will be accepted, the Distributor will notify the Participant and the Transfer Agent, and the Participant shall deliver, on behalf of itself or the party on whose behalf it is acting, the "cash in lieu" amount, with any appropriate adjustments as advised by the Distributor.
(d) In the event that a Fund Deposit is incomplete on the International Contractual Settlement Date for a Creation Order because certain or all of the Deposit Securities are missing, the Trust may issue a Creation Unit of Shares notwithstanding such deficiency in reliance on the undertaking of the Participant to deliver the missing Deposit Securities as soon as possible, which undertaking shall be secured by an Additional Cash Deposit with respect to undelivered Deposit Securities as described above in Section 4.
(e) Cash shall be delivered through the Federal Reserve Bank wire system so as to be received by the Transfer Agent by 11:00 a.m., Eastern Time, on the International Contractual Settlement Date (defined above).
(f) In addition to the Creation Transaction Fee, the Participant shall pay additional variable amounts which may include expenses incurred by the Fund in the transfer of Deposit Securities to the Fund in connection with a creation of Creation Units. These expenses may include operational processing and brokerage costs, transfer fees, stamp taxes and
the like. When an International Fund permits a Participant to substitute cash or a different security in lieu of depositing one or more of the requisite Deposit Securities, the Participant may also be assessed an amount to cover the cost of purchasing the Deposit Securities and/or disposing of the substituted securities, including operational processing and brokerage costs, transfer fees, stamp taxes, and part or all of the spread between the expected bid and offer side of the market related to such Deposit Securities and/or substitute securities.
8. International Funds -- Redemption Orders.
(a) A Participant must maintain appropriate securities broker-dealer, bank or other custody arrangements to which account Deposit Securities will be delivered in connection with a Redemption Order. If the Participant, or any party on whose behalf the Participant is acting, does not have appropriate arrangements to take delivery of the Deposit Securities in the relevant foreign jurisdiction(s) and it is not possible to make other such arrangements, the Participant will be required to receive redemption proceeds in cash, as described in paragraph (d) below.
(b) The delivery of redemption proceeds will be made within twelve calendar days after the Redemption Order is received in proper form, except to the extent that a delivery is delayed due to the introduction of new or special holidays, the treatment by participants in the local market of certain days as "informal holidays" (e.g., days on which no or limited securities transactions occur, as a result of substantially shortened trading hours), or changes in local securities delivery practices. Under these circumstances, the Fund will notify the Participant as soon as reasonably practicable
(c) The Trust may in its sole discretion permit or require the substitution of an amount of cash (i.e., a "cash in lieu" amount) to be added to the Cash Component to replace any Deposit Security which may not be available in sufficient quantity for delivery or for other similar reasons. If the Distributor, acting on behalf of the Trust, determines that a "cash in lieu" amount will be delivered, Distributor will notify the Participant and the Transfer Agent and the Participant shall receive the "cash in lieu" amount, with any appropriate adjustments as advised by Trust.
(d) If a redeeming Participant, or any party on whose behalf the Participant is acting, does not have appropriate arrangements to take delivery of the Deposit Securities in the relevant foreign jurisdiction(s) and it is not possible to make other such arrangements, or if it is not possible to effect deliveries of the Deposit Securities in such foreign jurisdiction(s) and in certain other circumstances, the Trust may in its discretion redeem Shares for cash, and the redeeming Participant, on behalf of itself or any party for which it is acting, will be required to receive redemption proceeds in cash. In such case, the Participant will receive a cash payment equal to the net asset value (next determined after receipt of the Redemption Order) times the number of Shares in a Creation Unit of the relevant International Fund, minus the Transaction Fee.
(e) Cash shall be delivered through the Federal Reserve Bank wire system by no later than 2:00 p.m. on the next Business Day immediately following the Business Day on which such order is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent. Shares shall be delivered no later than 2:00 p.m. on the next Business Day immediately following the Business Day on which such order is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent.
(f) In addition to the Redemption Transaction Fee, the Participant shall pay additional variable amounts which may include expenses incurred by the Fund in the transfer of Deposit Securities to the Participant. These expenses may include operational processing and brokerage costs, transfer fees, stamp taxes and the like. When an International Fund redeems Shares for cash, the Participant may also be assessed an amount to cover the cost of selling the Deposit Securities, including operational processing and brokerage costs, transfer fees and stamp taxes.
SECTION III. TRANSFER AGENT'S RESPONSIBILITY FOR EFFECTING DELIVERY OF REQUISITE SHARES OR SECURITIES AND CASH PAYMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH ORDERS FOR CREATION OR REQUESTS FOR REDEMPTION
1. Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. After the Transfer Agent has received notification of a Submission from the Participant for a Creation Order for Shares through the Trusts' Clearing Process which has been Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent as set forth below in Section IV, the Transfer Agent shall initiate procedures to transfer the requisite Shares and the Cash Component, if any, through the Trusts' Clearing Process so as to be received by the creator no later than on the "regular way" settlement date following the Business Day on which the Submission is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent.
2. Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. After the Transfer Agent has received a Submission for a Redemption Order for Shares through the Trusts' Clearing Process which has been Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent as set forth below in Section IV, the Transfer Agent shall initiate procedures to transfer the requisite securities (or contracts to purchase such securities expected to be delivered through NSCC by the "regular way" settlement date) and the Cash Redemption Amount, if any, through the Trusts' Clearing Process so as to be received by the beneficial owner no later than on the "regular way" settlement date following the Business Day on which the Submission is Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent.
3. Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. After the Transfer Agent has received notification of a Submission from the Participant for a Creation Order for Shares outside the Trusts' Clearing Process which has been Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent as set forth below in Section IV, the Transfer Agent shall initiate procedures to transfer the requisite Shares through DTC and the Participants and the Cash Component, if any, through the Federal Reserve Bank wire system so as to be received by the creator no later than the same Business Day on which the transfer of Deposit Securities is required to be made pursuant to Section IV (3) in order for the Deemed Received order to continue to be Deemed Received. A Creation Order relating to Shares of an International Fund will be processed in the manner provided in this paragraph.
4. Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. After the Transfer Agent has received a Submission for a Redemption Order for Shares outside the Trusts' Clearing Process which has been Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent as set forth below in Section IV, the Transfer Agent shall initiate procedures to transfer the requisite securities (or contracts to purchase such securities expected to be delivered within three Business Days) through DTC and the DTC Participants and the Cash Redemption Amount, if any, through the Federal Reserve Bank wire system so as to be received by the Participant no later than the same Business Day on which the transfer of Shares is required to be made pursuant to Section IV (4) in order for the Deemed Received order to continue to be Deemed Received. A Redemption Order relating to Shares of an International Fund will be processed in the manner provided in this paragraph, except as otherwise provided in Section II 8 (b).
SECTION IV. PROCEDURES BY WHICH AN ORDER TO CREATE OR A REQUEST TO REDEEM SHALL BE "DEEMED RECEIVED"
1. Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. A Creation Order to create Shares through the Trusts' Clearing Process shall be "Deemed Received" by the Transfer Agent on the Transmittal Date only if (a) the Submission containing such order is in proper form and (b) such Submission is received by the Transfer Agent no later than the time on such Transmittal Date as set forth in Section I(3)(a) hereof. Orders to create Shares contained in Submissions transmitted after such time on a Transmittal Date shall be deemed invalid.
2. Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. A Redemption Order to
redeem Shares through the Trusts' Clearing Process shall be Deemed Received by
the Transfer Agent on the Transmittal Date only if (a) the Submission containing
such request is in proper form and (b) such Submission is received by the
Transfer Agent no later than the time on such Transmittal Date as set forth in
Section I(3)(b) hereof. Requests to redeem Shares contained in Submissions
transmitted after such time on a Transmittal Date shall be "Deemed Received" by
the Transfer Agent on the next Business Day immediately following such
Transmittal Date.
3. Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Creation Orders. An Creation Order to create Shares outside the Trusts' Clearing Process shall be Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent on the Transmittal Date only if: (a) the Submission containing such order is in proper form, and (b) such Submission is received by the Transfer Agent no later than the time on such Transmittal Date as set forth in Section I(3)(a) hereof, provided, however, that such order shall cease to be Deemed Received unless (a) the requisite number of Deposit Securities is transferred through DTC to the account of the applicable Fund no later than 11:00 a.m., Eastern Time, on the Business Day next following the Transmittal Date and (b) the cash equal to the Cash Component, if any, is transferred via the Federal Reserve Bank wire system to the account of the applicable Fund by no later than 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, on the Business Day next following the Transmittal Date. If either the Submission, the requisite Deposit Securities or the cash equal to the Cash Component is not received by the Transfer Agent within the time periods set forth above, such order shall be deemed invalid.
4. Outside the Trusts' Clearing Process -- Redemption Orders. A request to redeem Shares outside the Trusts' Clearing Process shall be Deemed Received by
the Transfer Agent on the Transmittal Date only if (a) the Submission containing such request is in proper form, and (b) such Submission is received by the Transfer Agent no later than the time as set forth in Section I(3)(b) hereof, provided, however, that such order shall cease to be Deemed Received unless (a) the requisite number of Shares is transferred via DTC to the account of the Transfer Agent by the NYSE Closing Time on such Transmittal Date and (b) the Cash Redemption Amount owed to the applicable Fund, if any, is received by the Transfer Agent no later than 2:00 p.m., Eastern Time, of the Business Day next following such Transmittal Date. If either the Submission, the Shares or cash equal to the Cash Redemption Amount, if any, is not received by the applicable Fund within the time periods set forth above, such redemption request shall be Deemed Received by the Transfer Agent on the Business Day on which both the Submission and the requisite number of Shares are delivered to the Transfer Agent within the proper time periods as set forth above; provided that the Cash Redemption Amount, if any, is then paid on the next Business Day within the time period set forth above.
5. Ambiguous Instructions. In the event that a Submission contains terms that differ from the information provided in the telephone call at the time of issuance of the Submission Number, the Trust Telephone Representative will attempt to contact the Participant to request confirmation of the terms of the order. If an Authorized Person confirms the terms as they appear in the Submission then the Submission will be accepted and processed. If an Authorized Person contradicts its terms, the Submission will be deemed invalid, and a corrected Submission must be received by the Transfer Agent, as applicable, not later than the earlier of (i) within fifteen (15) minutes of such contact with the Participant or (ii) forty-five (45) minutes after the NYSE Closing Time. For the avoidance of doubt, notwithstanding the invalidation of the initial Submission pursuant to this paragraph, a Submission that is otherwise in proper form shall be deemed submitted at the time of its initial Submission for purposes of determining when orders are Deemed Received hereunder. If the Trust Telephone Representative is not able to contact an Authorized Person, then the Submission shall be accepted and processed in accordance with its terms notwithstanding any inconsistency from the terms of the telephone information. In the event that a Submission contains terms that are illegible, the Submission will be deemed invalid and the Trust Telephone Representative will attempt to contact the Participant to request retransmission of the Submission. A corrected Submission must be received by the Transfer Agent, as applicable, not later than the earlier of (i) within fifteen (15) minutes of such contact with the Participant or (ii) forty-five (45) minutes after the NYSE Closing Time.
6. Suspension or Rejection of an Order. Each Trust reserves the absolute right to reject a Creation Order transmitted to it by the Distributor in respect of a Fund if: (i) the order is not in proper form; (ii) the Deposit Securities delivered are not as disseminated for that date by the Custodian, as described above; (iii) acceptance of the Fund Deposit would, in the opinion of counsel, be unlawful; (iv) acceptance of the Fund Deposit would otherwise, in the reasonable opinion of the applicable Trust or its investment adviser (the "Adviser"), have an adverse effect on the Trust, the applicable Fund or the rights of beneficial owners; or (v) in the event that circumstances exist outside the control of the applicable Trust or Fund, the Transfer Agent, the Distributor and the Adviser that, in their reasonable judgment, make it for all practical purposes impossible to process Creation Orders. Examples of such circumstances include acts of God; public service or utility problems such as fires, floods, extreme weather conditions and power outages resulting in telephone, telecopy and computer failures; market conditions or activities causing trading halts;
systems failures involving computer or other information systems affecting a Trust or Fund, the Adviser, the Distributor, DTC, NSCC, the Transfer Agent, the Custodian or sub-custodian or any other participant in the creation process, and similar extraordinary events. The applicable Trust shall notify immediately a prospective creator of a Creation Unit and/or the Authorized Participant acting on behalf of such prospective creator of its rejection of the order of such person. Each Trust and Fund, the Custodian, any sub-custodian and the Distributor are under no duty, however, to give notification of any defects or irregularities in the delivery of Fund Deposits, and shall not incur any liability for the failure to give any such notification.
SECTION V. TELEPHONE AND FACSIMILE NUMBERS EACH TRUST LISTED ON SCHEDULE I:
Telephone: (630) 765-8000
Facsimile: (630) 517-7509
TRANSFER AGENT:
Telephone: (617) 772-2011
Facsimile: (201) 418-4105
PARTICIPANT::
Telephone: ________________
Facsimile: ________________
FIRST TRUST PORTFOLIOS, L.P.
By _____________________________________
Title:_______________________________
[PARTICIPANT]
By _____________________________________
Title:_______________________________
ACCEPTED BY:
BROWN BROTHERS HARRIMAN & CO., as Transfer Agent
By_________________________________________________ Title:________________________________________
Dated:_____________________________________________
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 62 to Registration Statement No. 333-176976 on Form N-1A of our report dated December 21, 2016, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights of First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III, comprised of First Trust Preferred Securities and Income ETF, First Trust Managed Municipal ETF, First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF, and First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF, and our report dated December 22, 2016, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights of First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF, First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF, and First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF, appearing in the Annual Report on Form N-CSR for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III as of and for the period ended October 31, 2016, and to the references to us under the headings "Financial Highlights" in the Prospectuses and "Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm" and "Financial Statements" in the Statements of Additional Information, which are part of such Registration Statement.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP Chicago, Illinois February 28, 2017 |
February 21, 2017
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III
120 East Liberty Drive, Suite 400
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
Re: 12b-1 Plan Extension Letter for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund III (the "Trust").
Ladies and Gentlemen:
It is hereby acknowledged that First Trust Portfolios L.P. serves as the distributor of the shares of each series of the above-referenced Trust. The Trust is an open-end management investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the "1940 Act"), comprised of various exchange-traded funds (each, a "Fund," and, collectively, the "Funds") set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto, which may be supplemented to add new Funds.
It is further acknowledged that the Trust has adopted a Distribution and Service Plan (the "Plan") pursuant to Rule l2b-1 under the 1940 Act with respect to the shares of beneficial interest ("Shares") of the Funds. Pursuant to the Plan, each Fund may bear a fee not to exceed 0.25% per annum of such Fund's average daily net assets.
The purpose of this letter agreement is to agree and acknowledge that the Funds shall not pay, and we shall not collect, any fees pursuant to the Plan any time before the date set forth on Exhibit A attached hereto for each Fund.
Very Truly Yours,
FIRST TRUST PORTFOLIOS L.P.
/s/ James M. Dykas --------------------------------- James M Dykas Chief Financial Officer and Managing Director |
AGREED AND ACKNOWLEDGED:
FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND III
/s/ Donald P. Swade --------------------------------- Donald P. Swade Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer |
EXHIBIT A ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- FUNDS DATES ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- FIRST TRUST EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND III ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust Preferred Securities and Income ETF 3/01/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust Managed Municipal ETF 3/01/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust Long/Short Equity ETF 3/01/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond ETF 3/01/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Europe ETF 2/28/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Asia Pacific ETF 2/28/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Emerging Markets ETF 2/28/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- First Trust RiverFront Dynamic Developed International ETF 2/28/2018 ------------------------------------------------------------ ----------------- |