As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on January 28, 2020
1933 Act Registration No. 333-182308
1940 Act Registration No. 811-22717
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. 120 | [X] |
and/or | |
Registration Statement Under the Investment Company Act of 1940 | [ ] |
Amendment No. 122 | [X] |
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI
(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 VI
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 February 3, 2020 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. 120
This Registration Statement comprises the following papers and contents:
The Facing Sheet
Part A - Prospectus for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF, First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund, First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF, First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF and Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund; Prospectus for First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF and First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF; Prospectus for First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF, First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF, First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF and First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF
Part B - Statement of Additional Information for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF, First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund, First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF, First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF and Multi Asset Diversified Income Index Fund; Statement of Additional Information for First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF and First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF; Statement of Additional Information for First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF, First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF, First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF and First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF
Part C - Other Information
Signatures
Index to Exhibits
Exhibits
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund VI |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | FVC | Nasdaq |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | FV | Nasdaq |
First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF | IFV | Nasdaq |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | DDIV | Nasdaq |
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | TDIV | Nasdaq |
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | AIRR | Nasdaq |
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | RDVY | Nasdaq |
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | FID | Nasdaq |
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | MDIV | Nasdaq |
Summary Information | |
|
3 |
|
12 |
|
21 |
|
31 |
|
38 |
|
45 |
|
51 |
|
57 |
|
65 |
|
75 |
|
76 |
|
78 |
|
94 |
|
94 |
|
95 |
|
97 |
|
97 |
|
99 |
|
100 |
|
101 |
|
101 |
|
101 |
|
103 |
|
106 |
|
110 |
|
119 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.30% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses | 0.41% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.71% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$73 | $227 | $395 | $883 |
1. | The selection universe of the Index begins with all of the First Trust ETFs and the Cash Index. |
2. | The Index then identifies the First Trust ETFs that are designed to target a specific sector or industry group, or that have a significant overweight towards a particular sector or industry group. The selected ETFs must also satisfy certain trading volume and liquidity requirements. |
3. | The sector and industry-based First Trust ETFs are then ranked using a relative strength methodology that is based upon each ETF’s market performance. Relative strength is a momentum technique that relies on unbiased, unemotional and objective data, rather than biased forecasting and subjective research. Relative strength is a way of recording historic performance patterns, and the Index uses relative strength signals as a trend indicator for current momentum trends of a security versus another security. |
4. | The Index then selects the five top-ranking First Trust sector and industry-based ETFs according to the proprietary relative strength methodology for inclusion in the Index. |
5. | The Index is evaluated on a bi-monthly basis (occurring in the second and fourth weeks of the month containing a Friday with the exception of the month of December wherein the Index holdings are evaluated once, in the second week of the month containing a Friday), and the five positions within the Index are held as long as those positions continue to suggest that they will outperform the majority of the inventory of other potential First Trust ETFs on a relative basis. An ETF included in the Index will only be removed if it falls to the bottom half of the universe of First Trust sector and industry-based ETFs according to the Index’s relative strength methodology. A new ETF is only added to the Index when a current member is removed. The Index will always be comprised of five First Trust sector and industry-based ETFs. The relative strength analysis is conducted on weeks containing the second and fourth Friday of the month with the exception of the week between Christmas Day and New Year’s Day. When a sector or industry ETF addition or deletion is made, the portfolio is rebalanced so each position is equally weighted. |
6. | In instances where the relative strength begins to diminish among more than one-third of the potential First Trust sector and industry-based ETFs relative to the Cash Index, the Index allocates to the Cash Index. The target allocation to the Cash Index is equal to the percentile rank of the Cash Index within the Index’s relative strength rankings. The Cash Index may constitute between 0% and 95% of the Index; however, the maximum level that the Cash Index can be increased or decreased during an evaluation week is limited to 33% per evaluation. Changes in the Cash Index allocation within the Index will not cause the five First Trust sector and industry-based ETFs in the Index to be rebalanced back to equally weighted. |
1. | First Trust Dow Jones Internet Index Fund (FDN) |
2. | First Trust Financials AlphaDEX® Fund (FXO) |
3. | First Trust NASDAQ-100-Technology Sector Index Fund (QTEC) |
4. | First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX® Fund (FXU) |
5. | First Trust Technology AlphaDEX® Fund (FXL) |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
13.86% | March 31, 2019 | -18.22% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 18.78% | 9.66% | 3/17/2016 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 18.26% | 9.35% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 11.11% | 7.42% | |
Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus Five Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 19.15% | 10.02% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 15.18% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.30% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses | 0.57% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.87% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$89 | $278 | $482 | $1,073 |
1. | The selection universe of the Index begins with all of the First Trust ETFs. |
2. | The Index Provider then identifies the First Trust ETFs that are designed to target a specific sector or industry group, or that have a significant overweight towards a particular sector or industry group. |
3. | The components are then ranked using a relative strength methodology that is based upon each ETF’s market performance and characteristics that the Index Provider believes offer the greatest potential to outperform the other ETFs in the selection universe. Relative strength is a momentum technique that relies on unbiased, unemotional and objective data, rather than biased forecasting and subjective research. Relative strength is a way of recording historic performance patterns, and the Index Provider uses relative strength signals as a trend indicator for current momentum trends of a security versus another security. |
4. | The Index Provider then uses its proprietary relative strength methodology to select the five top-ranking First Trust ETFs that satisfy trading volume and liquidity requirements for inclusion in the Index. |
5. | The Index is evaluated on a bi-monthly basis (occurring in the second and fourth weeks of the month containing a Friday with the exception of the month of December wherein the Index holdings are evaluated once, in the second week of the month containing a Friday), and the five positions within the Index are held as long as those positions continue to suggest that they will outperform the majority of the inventory of other potential First Trust ETFs on a relative basis. An Index component will only be removed if it falls to the bottom half of the universe of First Trust ETFs according to the Index Provider’s proprietary relative strength methodology. An ETF is only added to the Index when a current member is removed. The Index will always be comprised of five First Trust ETFs. On the day that an addition or deletion is made to the Index, the Index is rebalanced so that the components are equally weighted. |
1. | First Trust Dow Jones Internet Index Fund (FDN) |
2. | First Trust Financials AlphaDEX® Fund (FXO) |
3. | First Trust NASDAQ-100-Technology Sector Index Fund (QTEC) |
4. | First Trust Utilities AlphaDEX® Fund (FXU) |
5. | First Trust Technology AlphaDEX® Fund (FXL) |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
18.81% | March 31, 2019 | -18.19% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 25.42% | 8.03% | 8.62% | 3/5/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 25.12% | 7.80% | 8.41% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 15.04% | 6.21% | 6.74% | |
Dorsey Wright Focus Five Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 25.90% | 8.46% | 9.04% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 12.07% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.30% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses | 0.76% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 1.06% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$108 | $337 | $585 | $1,294 |
1. | The selection universe of the Index begins with all of the First Trust ETFs. |
2. | The Index Provider then identifies the First Trust ETFs that are designed to target a specific country or region, or that have a significant overweight towards a particular country or region. |
3. | The components of the Index’s potential inventory are then ranked using a relative strength methodology that is based upon each ETF’s market performance and characteristics that the Index Provider believes offer the greatest potential to outperform the other ETFs in the selection universe. Relative strength is a momentum technique that relies on unbiased, unemotional and objective data, rather than biased forecasting and subjective research. Relative strength is a way of recording historic performance patterns, and the Index Provider uses relative strength signals as a trend indicator for current momentum trends of a security versus another security. |
4. | The Index Provider then selects the five top-ranking First Trust ETFs according to the proprietary relative strength methodology for inclusion in the Index. |
5. | The Index is evaluated on a bi-monthly basis, and the five positions within the Index are held as long as those positions continue to suggest that they will outperform the majority of the inventory of other potential First Trust ETFs on a relative basis. An Index component will only be removed if it falls to the bottom half of the universe of First Trust ETFs according to the Index Provider’s proprietary relative strength methodology. An ETF is only added to the Index when a current member is removed. The Index will always be comprised of five First Trust ETFs. When an addition or deletion is made to the Index, the Index is rebalanced so that each position is equally weighted. |
1. | First Trust BICK Index Fund (BICK) |
2. | First Trust Brazil AlphaDEX® Fund (FBZ) |
3. | First Trust Latin America AlphaDEX® Fund (FLN) |
4. | First Trust Germany AlphaDEX® Fund (FGM) |
5. | First Trust Switzerland AlphaDEX® Fund (FSZ) |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
13.14% | December 31, 2019 | -13.71% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 25.32% | 4.99% | 2.69% | 7/22/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 23.79% | 4.23% | 1.99% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 14.95% | 3.51% | 1.74% | |
Dorsey Wright International Focus Five Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 25.79% | 5.46% | 3.01% | |
MSCI ACWI ex US Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 21.51% | 5.51% | 3.20% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.60% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.60% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$61 | $192 | $335 | $750 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
17.27% | March 31, 2019 | -16.56% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 32.27% | 7.06% | 7.91% | 3/10/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 30.66% | 5.86% | 6.69% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 19.07% | 4.92% | 5.62% | |
Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Dividend Yield Index(1) (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 33.35% | N/A | N/A | |
Dow Jones U.S. Select Dividend IndexSM (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 23.11% | 9.91% | 10.96% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 12.06% |
(1) | On September 6, 2018, the Fund's underlying index changed from the Richard Bernstein Advisors Quality Income Index to the Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Dividend Yield Index (the "Index"). Therefore, the Fund's performance and historical returns shown for the periods prior to September 6, 2018, are not necessarily indicative of the performance that the Fund, based on its current index, would have generated. Since the Index had an inception date of July 2, 2018, it was not in existence for all of the periods disclosed. |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.50% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.50% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$51 | $160 | $280 | $628 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
15.93% | March 31, 2019 | -12.79% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 33.31% | 12.14% | 13.96% | 8/13/2012 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 32.00% | 10.94% | 12.72% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 19.66% | 9.01% | 10.74% | |
NASDAQ Technology Dividend IndexSM (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 34.33% | 12.86% | 14.71% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 14.30% | |
S&P 500® Information Technology Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 50.29% | 20.20% | 19.56% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.70% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.70% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$72 | $224 | $390 | $871 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
15.41% | December 31, 2016 | -22.03% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 34.00% | 9.99% | 7.00% | 3/10/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 33.89% | 9.85% | 6.85% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 20.13% | 7.86% | 5.44% | |
Richard Bernstein Advisors American Industrial Renaissance® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 35.06% | 10.82% | 7.81% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 12.06% | |
S&P 500® Industrials Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 29.37% | 9.48% | 9.75% | |
Russell 2500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 27.77% | 8.93% | 8.26% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.50% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.50% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$51 | $160 | $280 | $628 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
13.35% | December 31, 2019 | -15.37% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 37.58% | 12.51% | 12.37% | 1/6/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 36.62% | 11.65% | 11.50% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 22.19% | 9.51% | 9.47% | |
NASDAQ US Rising Dividend Achievers Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 38.41% | 13.10% | 12.97% | |
Dow Jones U.S. Select DividendTM Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 23.11% | 9.91% | 11.13% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.60% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.60% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$61 | $192 | $335 | $750 |
• | Market Capitalization. Securities must have a float-adjusted market capitalization of at least $1 billion. |
• | Liquidity. Securities must have an average daily traded value of at least $5 million for the prior three months. |
• | Dividend Growth. Securities must have increased dividends or maintained stable dividends every year for at least the prior ten consecutive years. |
• | Payout Ratio. Securities must have a maximum 100% dividend payout ratio. The dividend payout ratio is the amount of dividend paid to stockholders relative to the amount of total net income of a company. It is calculated by dividing a security’s dividend-per-share amount by its earnings-per-share amount, using data from the prior twelve months. |
• | Dividend Yield. Securities must have a maximum 10% indicated dividend yield. A security’s indicated dividend yield is calculated by multiplying the amount of its most recent dividend payment by the number of dividend payments per year, and then dividing that number by the company’s stock price. |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
8.48% | December 31, 2019 | -11.70% | September 30, 2015 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 21.07% | 3.65% | 3.62% | 8/22/2013 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 19.19% | 1.64% | 1.46% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 12.41% | 1.84% | 1.75% | |
S&P International Dividend Aristocrats Index(1),(2) (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 22.71% | N/A | N/A | |
NASDAQ International Multi-Asset Diversified Income IndexSM(1) (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
MSCI World ex USA Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 22.49% | 5.42% | 5.19% | |
Dow Jones EPAC Select DividendTM Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 23.08% | 4.94% | 4.81% |
(1) | On August 30, 2018, the Fund's underlying index changed from the NASDAQ International Multi-Asset Diversified Income IndexSM to the S&P International Dividend Aristocrats Index. Therefore, the Fund’s performance and historical returns shown for the periods prior to August 30, 2018, are not necessarily indicative of the performance that the Fund, based on its current index, would have generated. Because the Fund's new underlying index had an inception date of April 29, 2018, performance information is not included above. |
(2) | Performance data is not available for all the periods shown in the table for the index because performance data does not exist for some of the entire periods. |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.60% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Acquired Fund Fees and Expenses | 0.25% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.85% |
Fee Waiver and Expense Reimbursement(1) | 0.12% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses After Fee Waiver | 0.73% |
(1) | Pursuant to a contractual agreement between the Trust, on behalf of the Fund, and First Trust Advisors, L.P., the Fund’s investment advisor, the management fees paid to the Fund’s investment advisor will be reduced by the proportional amount of the management fees earned by the Fund on assets invested in other investment companies advised by the Fund’s investment advisor. This contractual agreement shall continue until the earliest of (i) January 31, 2021, (ii) its termination at the direction of the Board of Trustees or (iii) upon the termination of the investment management agreement by and between the Fund, the Trust and the Fund’s investment advisor. |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$75 | $259 | $460 | $1,038 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
11.30% | March 31, 2013 | -7.68% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 18.38% | 3.91% | 5.29% | 8/13/2012 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 15.51% | 1.17% | 2.65% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 10.80% | 1.70% | 2.84% | |
NASDAQ US Multi-Asset Diversified Income IndexSM (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 19.15% | 4.55% | 5.99% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 14.30% | |
Dow Jones U.S. Select Dividend IndexSM (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 23.11% | 9.91% | 12.77% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Mr. Lindquist is Chairman of the Investment Committee and presides over Investment Committee meetings. Mr. Lindquist is responsible for overseeing the implementation of each Fund’s investment strategy. Mr. Lindquist was a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP from September 2005 to July 2012 and is now a Managing Director of First Trust and FTP. Mr. Lindquist is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. Erickson joined First Trust in 1994 and is a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP. As the head of First Trust’s Equity Research Group, Mr. Erickson is responsible for determining the securities to be purchased and sold by funds that do not utilize quantitative investment strategies. Mr. Erickson is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. McGarel is the Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and a Managing Director of First Trust and FTP. As First Trust’s Chief Investment Officer, Mr. McGarel consults with the other members of the Investment |
Committee on market conditions and First Trust’s general investment philosophy. Mr. McGarel was a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP from January 2004 to July 2012. Mr. McGarel is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. | |
• | Mr. Testin is a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP. Mr. Testin is the head of First Trust’s Portfolio Management Group. Mr. Testin has been a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP since November 2003. Mr. Testin is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. Ueland joined First Trust as a Vice President in August 2005 and has been a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP since September 2012. At First Trust, he plays an important role in executing the investment strategies of each portfolio of exchange-traded funds advised by First Trust. |
• | Mr. Peterson is a Senior Vice President and head of First Trust’s strategy research group. He joined First Trust in January of 2000. Mr. Peterson is responsible for developing and implementing quantitative equity investment strategies. Mr. Peterson received his B.S. in Finance from Bradley University in 1997 and his M.B.A. from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business in 2005. He has over 20 years of financial services industry experience and is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
Fund | Management Fee |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | 0.30% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | 0.30% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF | 0.30% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | 0.60% |
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | 0.50% |
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | 0.70% |
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | 0.50% |
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 0.60% |
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | 0.60% |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 112 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 140 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 133 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 119 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 98 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 150 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 211 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 41 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 175 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 76 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 163 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 89 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 207 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 45 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 109 | 28 | 5 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 89 | 20 | 1 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 178 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 74 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(7/22/2014) |
5 Years |
Inception
(7/22/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | -4.42% | 2.02% | 0.41% | 10.50% | 2.14% | |
Market Price | -4.43% | 1.93% | 0.38% | 10.04% | 1.99% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
Dorsey Wright International Focus Five Index | -4.13% | 2.38% | 0.70% | 12.50% | 3.71% | |
MSCI ACWI ex USA Index | -1.23% | 2.90% | 1.67% | 15.37% | 8.99% |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(3/10/2014) |
5 Years |
Inception
(3/10/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | 6.87% | 8.30% | 7.66% | 49.01% | 50.71% | |
Market Price | 6.95% | 8.28% | 7.67% | 48.85% | 50.78% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Dividend Yield Index(1) | 7.60% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
Dow Jones U.S. Select DividendTM Index (1) | 6.31% | 10.71% | 10.59% | 66.33% | 74.96% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 10.84% | 10.90% | 67.27% | 77.70% |
(1) | On September 6, 2018, the Fund's underlying index changed from the Richard Bernstein Advisors Quality Income Index to the Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Dividend Yield Index (the "Index"). Therefore, the Fund's performance and historical returns shown for the periods prior to September 6, 2018, are not necessarily indicative of the performance that the Fund, based on its current index, would have generated. Since the Index had an inception date of July 2, 2018, it was not in existence for all of the periods disclosed. |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(8/13/2012) |
5 Years |
Inception
(8/13/2012) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | 7.21% | 10.99% | 13.20% | 68.45% | 142.05% | |
Market Price | 7.29% | 10.99% | 13.20% | 68.43% | 142.09% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
NASDAQ Technology Dividend IndexSM | 7.94% | 11.70% | 13.93% | 73.87% | 153.51% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 10.84% | 13.45% | 67.27% | 145.95% | |
S&P 500® Information Technology Index | 8.60% | 18.21% | 18.07% | 130.81% | 226.85% |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(3/10/2014) |
5 Years |
Inception
(3/10/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | -3.95% | 8.25% | 5.71% | 48.63% | 36.18% | |
Market Price | -4.02% | 8.25% | 5.71% | 48.63% | 36.19% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
Richard Bernstein Advisors American Industrial Renaissance® Index | -3.40% | 9.08% | 6.52% | 54.44% | 42.04% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 10.84% | 10.90% | 67.27% | 77.70% | |
S&P 500® Industrials Index | 1.39% | 9.73% | 9.15% | 59.12% | 62.71% | |
Russell 2500® Index | -4.04% | 8.57% | 7.06% | 50.86% | 46.15% |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(1/6/2014) |
5 Years |
Inception
(1/6/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | 2.72% | 10.65% | 10.51% | 65.89% | 77.31% | |
Market Price | 2.68% | 10.66% | 10.51% | 65.93% | 77.35% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
NASDAQ US Rising Dividend Achievers Index | 3.26% | 11.24% | 11.09% | 70.30% | 82.75% | |
Dow Jones U.S. Select DividendTM Index | 6.31% | 10.71% | 10.77% | 66.33% | 79.76% |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(8/22/2013) |
5 Years |
Inception
(8/22/2013) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | 3.38% | 1.39% | 2.40% | 7.12% | 15.57% | |
Market Price | 3.80% | 1.30% | 2.46% | 6.66% | 15.98% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
S&P International Dividend Aristocrats Index(1) | 4.69% | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
NASDAQ International Multi-Asset Diversified Income IndexSM (1) | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | N/A | |
MSCI World ex USA Index | -0.95% | 3.06% | 4.12% | 16.28% | 27.94% | |
Dow Jones EPAC Select DividendTM Index | -0.33% | 2.11% | 3.34% | 11.01% | 22.22% |
(1) | On August 30, 2018, the Fund's underlying index changed from the NASDAQ International Multi-Asset Diversified Income IndexSM to the S&P International Dividend Aristocrats Index. Therefore, the Fund’s performance and historical returns shown for the periods prior to August 30, 2018, are not necessarily indicative of the performance that the Fund, based on its current index, would have generated. Because the Fund's new underlying index had an inception date of April 29, 2018, performance information is not included above. |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(8/13/2012) |
5 Years |
Inception
(8/13/2012) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | 5.74% | 3.27% | 4.99% | 17.47% | 41.53% | |
Market Price | 5.86% | 3.26% | 5.00% | 17.42% | 41.59% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
NASDAQ US Multi-Asset Diversified Income IndexSM | 6.36% | 3.98% | 5.69% | 21.53% | 48.41% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 10.84% | 13.45% | 67.27% | 145.95% | |
Dow Jones U.S. Select Dividend IndexSM | 6.31% | 10.71% | 12.54% | 66.33% | 132.24% |
Year Ended September 30, |
Period
Ended 9/30/2016(a) |
|||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $28.80 | $24.36 | $21.32 | $20.02 |
Income from investment operations: | ||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.22 | 0.08 | 0.17 | 0.09 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (2.37) | 4.51 | 3.04 | 1.25 |
Total from investment operations | (2.15) | 4.59 | 3.21 | 1.34 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||||
Net investment income | (0.20) | (0.15) | (0.16) | (0.04) |
Net realized gain | — | — | (0.01) | — |
Total distributions | (0.20) | (0.15) | (0.17) | (0.04) |
Net asset value, end of period | $26.45 | $28.80 | $24.36 | $21.32 |
Total Return (b) | (7.46)% | 18.91% | 15.13% | 6.68% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | ||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $468,253 | $620,537 | $328,881 | $234,540 |
Ratios to average net assets: | ||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets (c) | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% (d) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 0.79% | 0.32% | 0.80% | 1.45% (d) |
Portfolio turnover rate (e) | 90% | 42% | 54% | 15% |
(a) | Inception date is March 17, 2016, which 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) | The Fund indirectly bears its proportionate share of fees and expenses incurred by the underlying funds in which the Fund invests. This ratio does not include these indirect fees and expenses. |
(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. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $30.93 | $26.17 | $22.91 | $21.91 | $20.40 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.11 | 0.09 | 0.21 | 0.16 | 0.04 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (1.31) | 4.83 | 3.25 | 0.96 | 1.50 |
Total from investment operations | (1.20) | 4.92 | 3.46 | 1.12 | 1.54 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.10) | (0.16) | (0.20) | (0.12) | (0.03) |
Net asset value, end of period | $29.63 | $30.93 | $26.17 | $22.91 | $21.91 |
Total Return (a) | (3.92)% | 18.91% | 15.16% | 5.10% | 7.55% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $2,348,262 | $2,858,225 | $2,397,352 | $3,055,465 | $4,066,788 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets (b) | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 0.34% | 0.30% | 0.74% | 0.62% | 0.22% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 65% | 44% | 66% | 42% | 0% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | The Fund indirectly bears its proportionate share of fees and expenses incurred by the underlying funds in which the Fund invests. This ratio does not include these indirect fees and expenses. |
(c) | 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. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $20.33 | $21.35 | $17.55 | $17.08 | $18.57 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.37 | 0.33 | 0.25 | 0.22 | 0.20 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (1.26) | (0.93) | 3.73 | 0.52 | (1.50) |
Total from investment operations | (0.89) | (0.60) | 3.98 | 0.74 | (1.30) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.35) | (0.42) | (0.18) | (0.27) | (0.19) |
Return of capital | (0.02) | ___ | ___ | ___ | ___ |
Total distributions | (0.37) | (0.42) | (0.18) | (0.27) | (0.19) |
Net asset value, end of period | $19.07 | $20.33 | $21.35 | $17.55 | $17.08 |
Total Return (a) | (4.42)% | (2.91)% | 22.71% | 4.35% | (7.01)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $453,757 | $774,665 | $794,132 | $450,042 | $626,762 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets (b) | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% | 0.30% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.89% | 1.57% | 1.59% | 1.14% | 2.29% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 42% | 0% | 49% | 58% | 7% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | The Fund indirectly bears its proportionate share of fees and expenses incurred by the underlying funds in which the Fund invests. This ratio does not include these indirect fees and expenses. |
(c) | 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. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $25.15 | $24.54 | $22.11 | $20.10 | $19.91 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.78 | 0.65 | 0.60 | 0.55 | 0.53 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.86 | 0.59 | 2.44 | 1.96 | 0.19 |
Total from investment operations | 1.64 | 1.24 | 3.04 | 2.51 | 0.72 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.72) | (0.63) | (0.61) | (0.50) | (0.53) |
Net asset value, end of period | $26.07 | $25.15 | $24.54 | $22.11 | $20.10 |
Total Return (a) | 6.87% | 5.10% | 13.93% | 12.52% | 3.49% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $44,313 | $37,727 | $28,221 | $22,107 | $10,049 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.60% | 0.69% (b) | 0.70% | 0.70% | 0.70% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 3.50% | 2.79% | 2.61% | 2.79% | 2.64% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 160% | 297% (d) | 150% | 136% | 163% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | On September 6, 2018, the Fund reduced the annual management fee payable to First Trust, from 0.70% of the Fund’s average daily net assets to 0.60% of the Fund’s average daily net assets. |
(c) | 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. |
(d) | The variation in the portfolio turnover rate is due to the change in the Fund’s underlying index effective September 6, 2018, which resulted in a complete rebalance of the Fund’s portfolio. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $38.38 | $32.39 | $29.33 | $24.23 | $27.04 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.97 | 0.96 | 0.80 | 0.80 | 0.73 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 1.71 | 5.90 | 3.01 | 5.02 | (2.83) |
Total from investment operations | 2.68 | 6.86 | 3.81 | 5.82 | (2.10) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.97) | (0.87) | (0.75) | (0.72) | (0.71) |
Net asset value, end of period | $40.09 | $38.38 | $32.39 | $29.33 | $24.23 |
Total Return(a) | 7.21% | 21.37% | 13.10% | 24.31% | (7.92)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $1,010,557 | $948,172 | $717,616 | $572,100 | $470,112 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.50% | 0.50% | 0.50% | 0.50% | 0.50% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 2.59% | 2.70% | 2.64% | 3.01% | 2.58% |
Portfolio turnover rate (b) | 37% | 27% | 26% | 30% | 27% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | 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. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $27.93 | $26.04 | $20.49 | $15.31 | $18.27 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.10(a) | 0.09 | 0.08(a) | 0.08(a) | 0.07 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (1.21) | 1.88 | 5.53 | 5.16 | (2.97) |
Total from investment operations | (1.11) | 1.97 | 5.61 | 5.24 | (2.90) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.06) | (0.08) | (0.06) | (0.06) | (0.06) |
Net asset value, end of period | $26.76 | $27.93 | $26.04 | $20.49 | $15.31 |
Total Return(b) | (3.95)% | 7.56% | 27.39% | 34.27% | (15.90)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $66,900 | $195,500 | $169,282 | $20,492 | $42,867 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.70% | 0.70% | 0.70% | 0.70% | 0.70% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 0.40% | 0.32% | 0.33% | 0.47% | 0.35% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 58% | 35% | 52% | 62% | 66% |
(a) | Based on average shares outstanding. |
(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) | 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. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $31.54 | $27.84 | $22.12 | $20.34 | $21.02 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.54 | 0.41 | 0.34 | 0.53 | 0.39 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.27 | 3.68 | 5.73 | 1.86 | (0.68) |
Total from investment operations | 0.81 | 4.09 | 6.07 | 2.39 | (0.29) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.53) | (0.39) | (0.35) | (0.54) | (0.39) |
Net realized gain | — | — | — | (0.07) | — |
Total distributions | (0.53) | (0.39) | (0.35) | (0.61) | (0.39) |
Net asset value, end of period | $31.82 | $31.54 | $27.84 | $22.12 | $20.34 |
Total Return (a) | 2.72% | 14.78% | 27.53% | 11.98% | (1.47)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $832,156 | $690,709 | $271,405 | $27,646 | $28,477 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.50% | 0.50% | 0.50% | 0.50% | 0.50% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.85% | 1.50% | 1.60% | 2.50% | 2.03% |
Portfolio turnover rate (b) | 63% | 40% | 46% | 66% | 71% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | 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. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $17.19 | $18.52 | $17.28 | $15.85 | $20.10 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.63 | 0.85 | 0.77 | 0.77 | 0.82 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.08) | (1.26) | 1.39 | 1.34 | (4.18) |
Total from investment operations | 0.55 | (0.41) | 2.16 | 2.11 | (3.36) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.63) | (0.92) | (0.92) | (0.68) | (0.84) |
Return of capital | — | — | — | — | (0.05) |
Total distributions | (0.63) | (0.92) | (0.92) | (0.68) | (0.89) |
Net asset value, end of period | $17.11 | $17.19 | $18.52 | $17.28 | $15.85 |
Total Return (a) | 3.38% | (2.35)% | 12.96% | 13.57% | (17.29)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $19,678 | $13,753 | $12,038 | $12,962 | $12,676 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.60% | 0.69% (b) | 0.70% | 0.70% | 0.70% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 4.01% | 4.70% | 4.36% | 4.52% | 4.44% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 44% | 196% (d) | 129% | 151% | 132% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | On August 30, 2018, the Fund reduced the annual management fee payable to First Trust, from 0.70% of the Fund’s average daily net assets to 0.60% of the Fund’s average daily net assets. |
(c) | 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. |
(d) | The variation in the portfolio turnover rate is due to the change in the Fund’s underlying index effective August 30, 2018, which resulted in a complete rebalance of the Fund’s portfolio. |
Year Ended September 30, | |||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $18.54 | $19.22 | $18.89 | $18.37 | $21.48 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.83 | 0.87 | 0.81 | 0.83 | 0.99 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 0.18 | (0.36) | 0.59 | 0.94 | (2.73) |
Total from investment operations | 1.01 | 0.51 | 1.40 | 1.77 | (1.74) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.77) | (0.76) | (0.82) | (0.85) | (0.99) |
Return of capital | (0.35) | (0.43) | (0.25) | (0.40) | (0.38) |
Total distributions | (1.12) | (1.19) | (1.07) | (1.25) | (1.37) |
Net asset value, end of period | $18.43 | $18.54 | $19.22 | $18.89 | $18.37 |
Total Return (a) | 5.74% | 2.82% | 7.56% | 9.86% | (8.57)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $715,985 | $683,960 | $850,403 | $873,524 | $880,995 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets (b) | 0.60% | 0.60% | 0.60% | 0.60% | 0.60% |
Ratio of net expenses to average net assets (b) | 0.48% | 0.48% | 0.48% | 0.48% | 0.50% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 4.58% | 4.62% | 4.25% | 4.25% | 4.71% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 73% | 84% | 82% | 115% | 116% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | The Fund indirectly bears its proportionate share of fees and expenses incurred by the underlying funds in which the Fund invests. This ratio does not include these indirect fees and expenses. |
(c) | 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 VI |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund VI |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE |
First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF | FTHI | Nasdaq |
First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF | FTLB | Nasdaq |
Summary Information | |
|
3 |
|
10 |
|
16 |
|
16 |
|
17 |
|
22 |
|
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
|
27 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
|
30 |
|
32 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.85% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.85% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$87 | $271 | $471 | $1,049 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
8.10% | March 31, 2019 | -11.87% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 17.45% | 6.86% | 6.90% | 1/6/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 15.40% | 4.85% | 4.91% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 10.27% | 4.35% | 4.41% | |
CBOE S&P 500 BuyWrite Monthly Index(1) (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 15.68% | 7.00% | 6.80% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 12.28% |
(1) | The CBOE S&P 500 BuyWrite Monthly Index is a benchmark index designed to track the performance of a hypothetical buy-write strategy on the S&P 500® Index |
• | John Gambla, CFA, FRM, PRM, Senior Portfolio Manager of First Trust |
• | Rob A. Guttschow, CFA, Senior Portfolio Manager of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.85% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.85% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$87 | $271 | $471 | $1,049 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
7.16% | March 31, 2019 | -10.61% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year | 5 Years |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 13.44% | 5.19% | 5.23% | 1/6/2014 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 12.06% | 3.82% | 3.82% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 7.93% | 3.37% | 3.39% | |
CBOE S&P 500 95-110 Collar Index(1) (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 25.24% | 8.58% | 8.91% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.70% | 12.28% |
(1) | The CBOE S&P 500 95-110 Collar Index is designed to protect an investment in S&P 500® stocks against market declines. The passive collar strategy reflected by the index entails: holding the stocks in the S&P 500® Index; buying three-month S&P 500® put options to protect this S&P 500® portfolio from market decreases; and selling one-month S&P 500® call options to help finance the cost of the put options. |
• | 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 12/31/2019 | 182 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 70 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 109 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 142 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||||
1 Year | 5 Years |
Inception
(1/6/2014) |
5 Years |
Inception
(1/6/2014) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||||
Net Asset Value | 0.29% | 5.26% | 5.26% | 29.22% | 34.16% | |
Market Price | 0.20% | 5.16% | 5.25% | 28.62% | 34.07% | |
Index Performance | ||||||
CBOE S&P 500 95-110 Collar Index | 12.55% | 7.78% | 8.02% | 45.44% | 55.58% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 10.84% | 11.15% | 67.27% | 83.33% |
Year Ended September 30,
|
|||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $23.28 | $22.54 | $20.57 | $19.12 | $20.29 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.40 | 0.35 | 0.30 | 0.34 | 0.54 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.29) | 1.35 | 2.60 | 2.06 | (0.70) |
Total from investment operations | 0.11 | 1.70 | 2.90 | 2.40 | (0.16) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.86) | (0.96) | (0.13) | (0.35) | (0.32) |
Return of capital | (0.10) | — | (0.80) | (0.60) | (0.69) |
Total distributions | (0.96) | (0.96) | (0.93) | (0.95) | (1.01) |
Net asset value, end of period | $22.43 | $23.28 | $22.54 | $20.57 | $19.12 |
Total Return (a) | 0.72% | 8.12% | 13.93% | 12.80% | (0.96)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $80,155 | $66,898 | $52,385 | $7,198 | $6,691 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.85% | 0.85% | 0.87% (b) | 0.85% | 0.85% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.43% | 1.34% | 1.43% | 1.78% | 1.57% |
Portfolio turnover rate (c) | 209% | 239% | 315% (d) | 139% | 191% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | Includes reorganization fees. If this reorganization fee was not included, the expense ratio would have been 0.85%. |
(c) | 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. |
(d) | The variation in the portfolio turnover rate is due to the rebalance of the portfolio that occurred shortly after the reorganization of FTHI with the First Trust Dividend and Income Fund. |
Year Ended September 30,
|
|||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2016 | 2015 | |
Net asset value, beginning of period | $22.92 | $22.27 | $20.38 | $19.05 | $20.21 |
Income from investment operations: | |||||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.27 | 0.40 | 0.38 | 0.24 | 0.44 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.23) | 0.91 | 2.14 | 1.74 | (0.87) |
Total from investment operations | 0.04 | 1.31 | 2.52 | 1.98 | (0.43) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | |||||
Net investment income | (0.58) | (0.66) | (0.63) | (0.36) | (0.32) |
Return of capital | (0.08) | — | — | (0.29) | (0.41) |
Total distributions | (0.66) | (0.66) | (0.63) | (0.65) | (0.73) |
Net asset value, end of period | $22.30 | $22.92 | $22.27 | $20.38 | $19.05 |
Total Return (a) | 0.29% | 5.95% | 12.57% | 10.53% | (2.26)% |
Ratios/supplemental data: | |||||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $8,919 | $13,751 | $7,794 | $4,077 | $4,762 |
Ratios to average net assets: | |||||
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.85% | 0.85% | 0.85% | 0.85% | 0.85% |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.40% | 1.32% | 1.45% | 1.79% | 1.58% |
Portfolio turnover rate (b) | 205% | 219% | 184% | 143% | 205% |
(a) | 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. |
(b) | 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 VI |
First Trust
Exchange-Traded Fund VI |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | DVOL | Nasdaq |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | DVLU | Nasdaq |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | LEGR | Nasdaq |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | ROBT | Nasdaq |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | SDVY | Nasdaq |
Summary Information | |
|
3 |
|
10 |
|
16 |
|
24 |
|
31 |
|
37 |
|
38 |
|
39 |
|
47 |
|
47 |
|
48 |
|
50 |
|
50 |
|
52 |
|
52 |
|
53 |
|
53 |
|
53 |
|
55 |
|
56 |
|
59 |
|
64 |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.60% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.60% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$61 | $192 | $335 | $750 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
14.10% | March 31, 2019 | -1.39% | December 31, 2019 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 25.80% | 10.58% | 9/5/2018 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 24.88% | 9.79% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 15.26% | 7.73% | |
Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Low Volatility Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 26.67% | 11.28% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.06% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.60% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.60% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$61 | $192 | $335 | $750 |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
15.18% | March 31, 2019 | 2.12% | September 30, 2019 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 29.71% | 0.56% | 9/5/2018 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 28.77% | -0.17% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 17.56% | 0.10% | |
DorseyWright Momentum Plus Value Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 30.72% | 1.23% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 11.06% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.65% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.65% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$66 | $208 | $362 | $810 |
1. | the Index begins with a global universe of equity securities in both developed and emerging markets; |
2. | companies with market capitalizations of less than $250 million are removed; |
3. | companies with an average daily trading volume of less than $1 million over the last three months are removed; |
4. | companies that have not traded on at least 90% of the eligible trading days in the last six months (three months for securities with less than six months of trading history) are removed; |
5. | companies with a free float of less than 20% of outstanding shares are removed; |
6. | companies trading at a price of $10,000 or above per share are removed; |
7. | the universe is then narrowed to companies with exposure to blockchain technology and/or the potential to benefit from the increased process efficiency it could provide (as discussed above), as identified by the Index Provider; |
8. | from the eligible universe, each company is assigned to a tier based on three categories of exposure (see “Index Information” for additional information); |
i. | Tier 1 – Active Enablers – companies that are actively developing blockchain technology products or systems for their own use and for sale and support to other companies; companies that are direct service providers for blockchain technology; or, companies that have business models that rely on delivering products or services that utilize blockchain technology; |
ii. | Tier 2 – Active Users – companies that are using blockchain technology which is generally supported by an Active Enabler; or, companies that have at least one use or test case implementing blockchain technology; |
iii. | Tier 3 – Active Explorers – companies that have been publicly disclosed as being active in exploring the incorporation of blockchain technology into their business; or, companies that have a press release on their website or a news article stating that they have started working in the blockchain technology space; |
9. | companies assigned to Tiers 1 and 2 are eligible for inclusion in the Index; |
10. | the top 100 companies, ranked by exposure to blockchain technology, are included in the Index; |
11. | companies from Tier 1 and Tier 2 will each make up 50% of the Index, with companies equally-weighted within each tier (see “Index Information” for weighting restrictions). |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
14.49% | March 31, 2019 | -1.76% | September 30, 2019 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 27.96% | 5.27% | 1/24/2018 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 26.84% | 4.53% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 16.51% | 3.69% | |
Indxx Blockchain Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 29.23% | 6.21% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 9.10% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.65% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.65% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$66 | $208 | $362 | $810 |
• | Engagers: companies that design, create, integrate, or deliver robotics and/or AI in the form of products, software, or systems; |
• | Enablers: companies that develop the building block components for robotics or AI, such as advanced machinery, semiconductors and databases used for machine learning; and |
• | Enhancers: companies that provide their own value-added services on top of Engagers, but are not core to their product or service offering. |
1. | the starting universe consists of companies listed on an Index-eligible global stock exchange (see 2.iv. below) classified as AI or robotics engagers, enablers or enhancers, as determined by CTA; |
2. | companies that do not meet minimum liquidity and eligibility requirements, including the following, are excluded: |
i. | minimum worldwide market capitalization of $250 million; |
ii. | minimum three-month average daily dollar trading volume of $3 million; |
iii. | minimum free float of 20%; |
iv. | securities not listed on an Index-eligible global stock exchange (a global exchange will be deemed ineligible if securities cannot be readily obtained either due to foreign investment restrictions or otherwise); |
3. | each remaining company is ranked by its CTA AI/Robotics Exposure Score, which measures the percent a company is exposed to the AI/Robotics sector within its respective engager, enabler or enhancer category (see "Index Information" for a discussion of how Exposure Scores are calculated); |
4. | the Index then selects the top 30 companies within each category, including ties, based on their CTA AI/Robotics Exposure Scores; |
5. | the index divides the overall portfolio weight between the three classifications as follows: |
i. | Engagers: 60%; |
ii. | Enablers: 25%; |
iii. | Enhancers: 15%; |
6. | companies are equally weighted within their respective classifications. |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
23.08% | March 31, 2019 | -4.48% | September 30, 2019 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 33.78% | 8.22% | 2/21/2018 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 33.54% | 8.02% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 19.99% | 6.22% | |
Nasdaq CTA Artificial Intelligence and Robotics IndexSM (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 35.08% | 9.01% | |
S&P 500® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 31.49% | 12.33% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
Maximum Sales Charge (Load) Imposed on Purchases (as a percentage of offering price) | None |
Management Fees | 0.60% |
Distribution and Service (12b-1) Fees | 0.00% |
Other Expenses | 0.00% |
Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses | 0.60% |
1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years |
$61 | $192 | $335 | $750 |
• | have a minimum three-month average daily dollar trading value of $2 million; |
• | have a minimum market capitalization of $500 million; |
• | have paid a dividend in the trailing 12 months greater than the dividend paid in the trailing 12-month period three and five years prior; |
• | having earnings per share in the most recent fiscal year greater than the earnings per share the three fiscal years prior; |
• | have a cash-to-debt ratio greater than 25%; and |
• | have a trailing 12-month payout ratio (trailing 12-month dividends per share divided by trailing 12-month earnings per share) no greater than 65%. |
Best Quarter | Worst Quarter | ||
12.76% | March 31, 2019 | -16.25% | December 31, 2018 |
1 Year |
Since
Inception |
Inception
Date |
|
Return Before Taxes | 24.69% | 5.68% | 11/1/2017 |
Return After Taxes on Distributions | 23.80% | 4.99% | |
Return After Taxes on Distributions and Sale of Fund Shares | 14.59% | 4.05% | |
Nasdaq US Small Mid Cap Rising Dividend AchieversTM Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 25.51% | 6.34% | |
S&P 1000® Index (reflects no deduction for fees, expenses or taxes) | 25.14% | 7.42% |
• | Daniel J. Lindquist, Chairman of the Investment Committee and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Jon C. Erickson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | David G. McGarel, Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and Managing Director of First Trust |
• | Roger F. Testin, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Stan Ueland, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Chris A. Peterson, Senior Vice President of First Trust |
• | Mr. Lindquist is Chairman of the Investment Committee and presides over Investment Committee meetings. Mr. Lindquist is responsible for overseeing the implementation of the Fund’s investment strategy. Mr. Lindquist was a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP from September 2005 to July 2012 and is now a Managing Director of First Trust and FTP. Mr. Lindquist is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. Erickson joined First Trust in 1994 and is a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP. As the head of First Trust’s Equity Research Group, Mr. Erickson is responsible for determining the securities to be purchased and sold by funds that do not utilize quantitative investment strategies. Mr. Erickson is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. McGarel is the Chief Investment Officer, Chief Operating Officer and a Managing Director of First Trust and FTP. As First Trust’s Chief Investment Officer, Mr. McGarel consults with the other members of the Investment Committee on market conditions and First Trust’s general investment philosophy. Mr. McGarel was a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP from January 2004 to July 2012. Mr. McGarel is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. Testin is a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP. Mr. Testin is the head of First Trust’s Portfolio Management Group. Mr. Testin has been a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP since November 2003. Mr. Testin is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
• | Mr. Ueland joined First Trust as a Vice President in August 2005 and has been a Senior Vice President of First Trust and FTP since September 2012. At First Trust, he plays an important role in executing the investment strategies of each portfolio of exchange-traded funds advised by First Trust. |
• | Mr. Peterson is a Senior Vice President and head of First Trust’s strategy research group. He joined First Trust in January of 2000. Mr. Peterson is responsible for developing and implementing quantitative equity investment strategies. Mr. Peterson received his B.S. in Finance from Bradley University in 1997 and his M.B.A. from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business in 2005. He has over 20 years of financial services industry experience and is a recipient of the Chartered Financial Analyst designation. |
Fund | Unitary Management Fee |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | 0.60% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | 0.60% |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | 0.65% |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | 0.65% |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | 0.60% |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 220 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 32 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 200 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 52 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 49 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 201 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 235 | 3 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 189 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
0.00%–0.49% | 0.50%–0.99% | 1.00%–1.99% | >=2.00% | |
12 Months Ended 12/31/2019 | 63 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||
1 Year |
Inception
(1/24/2018) |
Inception
(1/24/2018) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||
Net Asset Value | -1.08% | 0.45% | 0.76% | |
Market Price | -1.51% | 0.35% | 0.59% | |
Index Performance | ||||
Indxx Blockchain Index | -0.29% | 1.34% | 2.27% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 4.98% | 8.52% |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||
1 Year |
Inception
(2/21/2018) |
Inception
(2/21/2018) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||
Net Asset Value | -1.81% | 3.81% | 6.19% | |
Market Price | -1.56% | 4.02% | 6.52% | |
Index Performance | ||||
Nasdaq CTA Artificial Intelligence & Robotics IndexSM | -1.09% | 4.54% | 7.40% | |
S&P 500® Index | 4.25% | 8.37% | 13.78% |
Average Annual | Cumulative | |||
1 Year |
Inception
(11/1/2017) |
Inception
(11/1/2017) |
||
Fund Performance | ||||
Net Asset Value | -2.59% | 2.65% | 5.13% | |
Market Price | -2.59% | 2.65% | 5.13% | |
Index Performance | ||||
Nasdaq US Small Mid Cap Rising Dividend AchieversTM Index | -2.08% | 3.28% | 6.36% | |
S&P 1000® Index | -4.66% | 4.46% | 8.71% |
Year Ended
September 30, |
Period
Ended 9/30/2018 (a) |
|
2019 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $19.94 | $19.97 |
Income from investment operations: | ||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.29 | 0.03 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | 2.85 | (0.06) |
Total from investment operations | 3.14 | (0.03) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||
Net investment income | (0.27) | ___ |
Net asset value, end of period | $22.81 | $19.94 |
Total Return (b) | 15.93% | (0.15)% |
Ratios to average net assets/supplemental data: | ||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $131,169 | $13,960 |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.60% | 0.60% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 2.37% | 3.81% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 81% | 0% |
(a) | Inception date is September 5, 2018, which 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. |
Year Ended
September 30, |
Period
Ended 9/30/2018 (a) |
|
2019 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $19.46 | $19.98 |
Income from investment operations: | ||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.33 | 0.02 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.94) | (0.54) |
Total from investment operations | (0.61) | (0.52) |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||
Net Investment Income | (0.33) | ____ |
Net asset value, end of period | $18.52 | $19.46 |
Total Return (b) | (3.04)% | (2.60)% |
Ratios to average net assets/supplemental data: | ||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $19,451 | $13,625 |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.60% | 0.60% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 2.01% | 3.61% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 152% | 0% |
(a) | Inception date is September 5, 2018, which 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. |
Year Ended September 30, |
Period
Ended 9/30/2018 (a) |
|
2019 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $30.31 | $29.99 |
Income from investment operations: | ||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.59 | 0.26 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.93) | 0.29 |
Total from investment operations | (0.34) | 0.55 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||
Net investment income | (0.65) | (0.23) |
Net asset value, end of period | $29.32 | $30.31 |
Total Return (b) | (1.08)% | 1.87% |
Ratios to average net assets/supplemental data: | ||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $41,048 | $50,017 |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.65% | 0.65% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.95% | 1.63% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 35% | 53% |
(a) | Inception date is January 24, 2018, which 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. |
Year Ended September 30, |
Period
Ended 9/30/2018 (a) |
|
2019 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $32.23 | $29.91 |
Income from investment operations: | ||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.17 | 0.12 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.75) | 2.31 |
Total from investment operations | (0.58) | 2.43 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||
Net investment income | (0.14) | (0.11) |
Net asset value, end of period | $31.51 | $32.23 |
Total Return (b) | (1.81)% | 8.15% |
Ratios to average net assets/supplemental data: | ||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $61,443 | $32,226 |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.65% | 0.65% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 0.68% | 0.62% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 43% | 67% |
(a) | Inception date is February 21, 2018, which 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. |
Year Ended September 30, |
Period
Ended 9/30/2018 (a) |
|
2019 | ||
Net asset value, beginning of period | $21.28 | $19.94 |
Income from investment operations: | ||
Net investment income (loss) | 0.35 | 0.26 |
Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) | (0.92) | 1.31 |
Total from investment operations | (0.57) | 1.57 |
Distributions paid to shareholders from: | ||
Net investment income | (0.34) | (0.23) |
Net asset value, end of period | $20.37 | $21.28 |
Total Return(b) | (2.59)% | 7.92% |
Ratios to average net assets/supplemental data: | ||
Net assets, end of period (in 000’s) | $7,128 | $4,257 |
Ratio of total expenses to average net assets | 0.60% | 0.60% (c) |
Ratio of net investment income (loss) to average net assets | 1.95% | 1.49% (c) |
Portfolio turnover rate (d) | 78% | 72% |
(a) | Inception date is November 1, 2017, which 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 VI |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | FVC | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | FV | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF | IFV | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | DDIV | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | TDIV | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | AIRR | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | RDVY | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | FID | Nasdaq | ||
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | MDIV | Nasdaq |
|
1 |
|
3 |
|
3 |
|
5 |
|
10 |
|
10 |
|
14 |
|
23 |
|
23 |
|
25 |
|
28 |
|
30 |
|
34 |
|
35 |
|
44 |
|
46 |
|
51 |
|
53 |
|
53 |
|
53 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
Fund Name | Classification |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | Non-Diversified |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | Non-Diversified |
First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF | Non-Diversified |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | Diversified |
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | Non-Diversified |
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | Diversified |
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | Diversified |
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | Diversified |
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | Diversified |
(1) | A Fund, may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | A Fund, except for First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF, may not borrow money, except that a 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 a Fund's total assets (including the amount borrowed), less a Fund's liabilities (other than borrowings). First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF 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 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) | 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 a 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 a Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of a 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 a 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 the securities of issuers in any one industry or group of industries, except to the extent that the Fund’s Index is based on concentrations in an industry or a group of industries. Accordingly, First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund will be concentrated in securities of technology companies. 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. |
(8) | With respect to 75% of its total assets, the First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF and the Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund may not purchase the securities of any issuer (except securities of other investment companies or securities issued or guaranteed by the United States government or any agency or instrumentality thereof) if, as a result, (i) more than 5% of a Fund's total assets would be invested in securities of that issuer; or (ii) the Fund would hold more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of that issuer. |
(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, Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and 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, and 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 First Trust 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 Investment Committee does 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 a 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 Investment Committee 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 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) | 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 a 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 a Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
||
Fund | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | |
2019 | 2018 | |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | 90% | 42% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | 65% | 44% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF | 42% | 0% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | 160% | 297% |
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | 37% | 27% |
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | 58% | 35% |
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | 63% | 40% |
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 44% | 196% |
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | 73% | 84% |
Name and
Year 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)
1955 |
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) | 169 Portfolios | None |
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES | |||||
Richard E. Erickson
1951 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Physician; Officer, Wheaton Orthopedics; Limited Partner, Gundersen Real Estate Limited Partnership (June 1992 to December 2016); Member, Sportsmed LLC (April 2007 to November 2015) | 169 Portfolios | None |
Thomas R. Kadlec
1957 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, ADM Investor Services, Inc. (Futures Commission Merchant) | 169 Portfolios | Director of ADM Investor Services, Inc., ADM Investor Services International, Futures Industry Association, and National Futures Association |
Robert F. Keith
1956 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, Hibs Enterprises (Financial and Management Consulting) | 169 Portfolios | Director of Trust Company of Illinois |
Niel B. Nielson
1954 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Advisor (August 2018 to present), Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer (January 2015 to August 2018), 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) | 169 Portfolios | None |
Name and
Year of Birth |
Position and
Offices with Trust |
Term of Office and
Length of Service |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||
James M. Dykas
1966 |
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 (January 2016 to present), BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) |
W. Scott Jardine
1960 |
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; and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC |
Daniel J. Lindquist
1970 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Kristi A. Maher
1966 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Donald P. Swade
1972 |
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. |
Roger F. Testin
1966 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Name and
Year of Birth |
Position and
Offices with Trust |
Term of Office and
Length of Service |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
Stan Ueland
1970 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
(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 Funds. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Funds (1) |
Total Compensation from
the First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $18,366 | $458,125 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $17,786 | $451,450 |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Funds (1) |
Total Compensation from
the First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Robert F. Keith | $18,070 | $454,098 |
Niel B. Nielson | $16,882 | $440,930 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Funds to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2019 for services to the Funds. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2019 for services to the 169 portfolios existing in 2019, which consisted of 6 open-end mutual funds, 15 closed-end funds and 148 exchange-traded funds. |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
Amount of Fees Waived By First Trust
|
|||||
Fund | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | ||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF | $1,553,798 | $1,394,000 | $859,233 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF | $7,224,128 | $7,928,426 | $7,723,442 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF | $1,656,192 | $2,696,605 | $1,634,843 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | $190,838 | $207,269 | $181,704 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
Amount of Fees Waived By First Trust
|
|||||
Fund | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | ||||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | 2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | $4,658,249 | $4,279,105 | $3,347,669 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | $715,937 | $1,373,541 | $1,057,920 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | $3,585,840 | $2,287,390 | $706,482 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | $80,130 | $98,668 | $72,421 | N/A | N/A | N/A |
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | $3,118,930 | $3,600,227 | $4,171,943 | $770,723 | $884,658 | $1,042,900 |
Name |
Position with
First Trust |
Length of Service
with First Trust |
Principal Occupation During
Past Five Years |
Daniel J. Lindquist |
Chairman of the
Investment Committee and Managing Director |
Since 2004 |
Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P.
and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
David G. McGarel |
Chief Operating Officer,
Chief Investment Officer and Managing Director |
Since 1997 |
Chief Operating Officer (2016 to present),
Chief Investment Officer and Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Jon C. Erickson | Senior Vice President | Since 1994 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and
First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Roger F. Testin | Senior Vice President | Since 2001 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and
First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Stan Ueland | Senior Vice President | Since 2005 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust
Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Chris A. Peterson | Senior Vice President | Since 2000 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and
First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Investment Committee Member |
Registered
Investment Companies Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Accounts
Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Daniel J. Lindquist | 103 ($50,132,886,479) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Jon C. Erickson | 103 ($50,132,886,479) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
David G. McGarel | 102 ($50,132,886,479) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Roger F. Testin | 102 ($50,132,886,479) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Stan Ueland | 96 ($49,082,174,694) | 28 ($734,461,332) | N/A |
Chris A. Peterson | 103 ($50,132,886,479) | 31 ($753,136,379) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
(a) | otherwise than in conformity with the provisions of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 and the European Union (Alternative Investment Fund Managers) Regulations 2013, each as amended; or |
(b) | in any way which would require the publication of a prospectus under the Companies Act 2014 or any regulations made thereunder; or |
(c) | in Ireland except in all circumstances that will result in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations in Ireland. |
• | the percentage of the Funds’ assets, if any, that are subject to special arrangements arising from their illiquid nature (including, but not limited to, deferrals of redemptions and suspensions); |
• | the current risk profile of each Fund and the risk management systems employed by the AIFM to manage those risks; and |
• | the total amount of leverage employed by each Fund, if any. |
Argentina | Australia | Austria | Belgium | Brazil | Canada | Chile |
March 4
March 5 April 2 April 9 April 10 May 1 June 17 June 20 July 8 July 9 August 17 October 12 November 23 December 8 December 25 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 June 8 December 25 December 28 January 1 January 26 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 June 1 October 26 December 8 December 25 January 1 |
April 13
May 1 May 21 November 11 December 25 January 1 |
February 24
February 25 February 26 April 10 April 21 May 1 June 11 July 9 September 7 October 12 November 2 November 20 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 17
April 10 May 18 July 1 August 3 September 7 October 12 November 11 December 24 December 25 December 28 January 1 |
April 10
April 11 May 1 May 21 July 16 August 15 September 18 October 12 December 8 December 25 January 1 |
China | Denmark | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Hong Kong |
May 1
April 6 June 25 October 1 October 2 October 5 October 6 October 7 January 1 |
April 9
April 10 April 13 May 8 May 21 May 22 June 1 June 5 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
January 6
April 10 April 13 May 1 May 21 June 19 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 22 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 8 May 21 June 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
March 2
March 25 April 10 April 13 April 17 April 20 May 1 June 8 October 28 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 January 6 |
February 5
February 6 February 7 April 5 April 19 April 22 May 1 May 13 June 7 July 1 October 1 October 7 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
India | Ireland | Israel | Italy | Japan | Malaysia | Mexico |
February 21
March 9 April 2 April 6 April 10 April 14 May 1 July 31 August 20 August 28 October 2 November 16 November 30 December 25 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
March 10
April 8 April 9 April 12 April 13 April 14 April 15 April 28 April 29 May 28 May 29 July 30 September 20 September 27 September 28 October 4 October 5 October 6 October 7 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 11
February 24 March 20 April 29 May 4 May 5 May 6 July 23 July 24 August 10 September 21 September 22 November 3 November 23 December 31 January 1 January 2 January 3 January 11 |
February 1
February 8 May 1 May 7 May 11 May 25 June 6 July 31 August 20 August 31 September 16 October 29 November 14 December 25 January 1 |
February 3
February 5 March 16 April 9 April 10 May 1 September 16 November 16 November 20 December 25 January 1 |
New Zealand | Netherlands | Norway | Portugal | Singapore | South Africa | South Korea |
February 6
April 10 April 13 April 27 June 1 October 26 December 24 December 25 December 28 December 31 January 1 January 4 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 21 June 1 August 3 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 9
April 10 April 13 May 1 May 21 June 1 June 17 August 3 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
May 1 May 7 May 25 July 31 August 10 November 14 December 25 January 1 |
March 21
April 10 April 13 April 27 May 1 June 16 August 9 September 24 December 16 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 30
May 1 May 5 June 6 September 30 October 1 October 2 October 9 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
Spain | Sweden | Switzerland | Taiwan | Thailand | United Kingdom | United States |
April 10
April 13 April 22 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 21 June 19 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 21 June 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 28
April 3 April 4 May 1 June 25 October 1 October 9 October 10 January 1 |
February 10
April 6 April 13 April 14 April 15 May 1 May 4 May 6 June 3 July 6 July 28 August 12 October 13 October 23 December 7 December 10 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 8 May 25 August 31 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 17
April 10 May 25 July 3 September 7 November 26 December 25 January 1 January 18 |
Fund |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund | 59,042,077 |
First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance® ETF | 26,196,120 |
Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund | 148,840,301 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF | 8,442,896 |
First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF | 3,132,841 |
(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 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 DORSEY WRIGHT DYNAMIC FOCUS 5 ETF | |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 16.40% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 14.60% |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 13.17% |
UBS Financial Services Inc. | 11.85% |
National Financial Services LLC | 7.43% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 6.69% |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 5.80% |
Pershing LLC | 5.44% |
FIRST TRUST DORSEY WRIGHT FOCUS 5 ETF | |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 17.49% |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 15.69% |
National Financial Services LLC | 9.20% |
Pershing LLC | 8.68% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 8.30% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 7.83% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 6.28% |
FIRST TRUST DORSEY WRIGHT INTERNATIONAL FOCUS 5 ETF | |
National Financial Services LLC | 20.84% |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 18.09% |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 16.73% |
UBS Financial Services Inc. | 8.61% |
Pershing LLC | 5.16% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 5.14% |
FIRST TRUST RISING DIVIDEND ACHIEVERS ETF | |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 11.74% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 10.66% |
National Financial Services LLC | 9.94% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 9.91% |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 8.99% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 7.26% |
Pershing LLC | 7.25% |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 7.21% |
FIRST TRUST NASDAQ TECHNOLOGY DIVIDEND INDEX FUND | |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 12.33% |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 11.81% |
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. | 10.00% |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 9.55% |
National Financial Services LLC | 8.64% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 7.80% |
UBS Financial Services Inc. | 6.22% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 5.92% |
FIRST TRUST RBA AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL RENAISSANCE® ETF |
NAME OF BENEFICIAL OWNER |
% OF
OUTSTANDING SHARES OWNED |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 22.51% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 17.70% |
UBS Financial Services Inc. | 13.26% |
National Financial Services LLC | 10.65% |
Pershing LLC | 5.97% |
FIRST TRUST DORSEY WRIGHT MOMENTUM & DIVIDEND ETF | |
National Financial Services LLC | 34.47% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 17.19% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 12.54% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 8.37% |
BB&T Securities, LLC | 7.80% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 5.12% |
FIRST TRUST S&P INTERNATIONAL DIVIDEND ARISTOCRATS ETF | |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 24.69% |
National Financial Services LLC | 11.38% |
Pershing LLC | 10.06% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 8.46% |
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. | 8.28% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 6.66% |
Janney Montgomery Scott LLC | 6.25% |
MULTI-ASSET DIVERSIFIED INCOME INDEX FUND | |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 13.30% |
Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC | 9.36% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 8.61% |
Edward Jones | 6.27% |
SEI Private Trust Company/C/O/ GWP | 5.98% |
Pershing LLC | 5.98% |
National Financial Services LLC | 5.59% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 5.43% |
American Enterprise Investment Services Inc. | 5.36% |
(1) | American Enterprise Investment Services Inc.: 901 3RD Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55474 |
(2) | BB&T Securities, LLC: 8006 Discovery Drive, Suite 200, Richmond, Virginia 23229 |
(3) | Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.: 2423 E Lincoln Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85016 |
(4) | Edward Jones: 201 Progress Parkway, Maryland Heights, MO 63043-3042 |
(5) | Janney Montgomery Scott LLC: 200 Regency Forest Drive, Cary, North Carolina 27518 |
(6) | LPL Financial Corporation: 1055 LPL Way Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715 |
(7) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF: 4804 Deer Lake Dr E, Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(8) | Morgan Stanley Smith Barney LLC: 1300 Thames St 6th Floor, Baltimore, Maryland 21231 |
(9) | National Financial Services LLC: 499 Washington Boulevard, Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(10) | Pershing LLC: One Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(11) | Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: 880 Carillon Parkway, St. Petersburg, Florida 33716 |
(12) | RBC Capital Markets, LLC: 60 S 6th Street P-09, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 |
(13) | SEI Private Trust Company/C/O/ GWP: 1 Freedom Valley Drive, Oaks, Pennsylvania 19456 |
(14) | TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc.: 200 S. 108th Ave., Omaha, Nebraska 68154 |
(15) | UBS Financial Services Inc.: 1000 Harbor Blvd, Weehawken, New Jersey 07086 |
(16) | Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC: 2801 Market Street H0006-09B, St. Louis, Missouri 63103 |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances (with new nominees1 considered on case-by-case basis): |
➤ | Independent directors comprise 50 percent or less of the board; |
➤ | The non-independent director serves on the audit, compensation, or nominating committee; |
➤ | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; or |
➤ | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee. |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
1 | A "new nominee" is a director who is being presented for election by shareholders for the first time. Recommendations on new nominees who have served for less than one year are made on a case-by-case basis depending on the timing of their appointment and the problematic governance issue in question. |
2 | 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. |
3 | Nominees who served for only part of the fiscal year are generally exempted from the attendance policy. |
➤ | Sit on more than five public company boards; or |
➤ | Are CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own— withhold only at their outside boards4. |
➤ | Until Feb. 1, 2021, a firm commitment, as stated in the proxy statement, to appoint at least one woman to the board within a year; |
➤ | The presence of a woman on the board at the preceding annual meeting and a firm commitment to appoint at least one woman to the board within a year; or |
➤ | Other relevant factors as applicable. |
➤ | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year or failed to act on a management proposal seeking to ratify an existing charter/bylaw provision that received opposition 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. |
➤ | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated); |
➤ | Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition; |
➤ | Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders' concerns; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
4 | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards with publicly-traded common stock will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote for 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. |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast. |
➤ | The company has a poison pill that was not approved by shareholders5. However, vote case-by-case on nominees if the board adopts an initial pill with a term of one year or less, depending on the disclosed rationale for the adoption, and other factors as relevant (such as a commitment to put any renewal to a shareholder vote). |
➤ | The board makes a material adverse modification to an existing pill, including, but not limited to, extension, renewal, or lowering the trigger, without shareholder approval. |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections, or a majority vote standard in contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A multi-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
➤ | 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; |
5 | Public shareholders only, approval prior to a company’s becoming public is insufficient. |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | Supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; |
➤ | A classified board structure; or |
➤ | Other egregious provisions. |
➤ | The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot; |
➤ | The board's rationale for seeking ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail; |
➤ | Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request; |
➤ | The level of impairment to shareholders' rights caused by the existing provision; |
➤ | The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings; |
➤ | Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals. |
➤ | The company’s governing documents impose 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, subject matter restrictions, or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against or withhold on an ongoing basis. |
➤ | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive; |
➤ | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | There is an unmitigated misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
➤ | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; or |
➤ | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
➤ | The company fails to include a Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions, or under the company’s declared frequency of say on pay; or |
➤ | The company fails to include a Frequency of Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions. |
➤ | The presence of an anti-pledging policy, disclosed in the proxy statement, that prohibits future pledging activity; |
➤ | The magnitude of aggregate pledged shares in terms of total common shares outstanding, market value, and trading volume; |
➤ | Disclosure of progress or lack thereof in reducing the magnitude of aggregate pledged shares over time; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement that shares subject to stock ownership and holding requirements do not include pledged company stock; and |
➤ | Any other relevant factors. |
➤ | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight7, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
➤ | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | General Recommendation: In cases where companies are targeted in connection with public “vote-no” campaigns, evaluate director nominees under the existing governance policies for voting on director nominees in uncontested elections. Take into consideration the arguments submitted by shareholders and other publicly available information. |
➤ | 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. |
7 | 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 settlement; or hedging of company stock. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chair position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
➤ | The scope and rationale 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. |
➤ | A majority non-independent board and/or the presence of non-independent directors on key board committees; |
➤ | A weak or poorly-defined lead independent director role that fails to serve as an appropriate counterbalance to a combined CEO/chair role; |
➤ | The presence of an executive or non-independent chair in addition to the CEO, a recent recombination of the role of CEO and chair, and/or departure from a structure with an independent chair; |
➤ | Evidence that the board has failed to oversee and address material risks facing the company; |
➤ | A material governance failure, particularly if the board has failed to adequately respond to shareholder concerns or if the board has materially diminished shareholder rights; or |
➤ | Evidence that the board has failed to intervene when management’s interests are contrary to shareholders' interests. |
➤ | 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: Generally vote against management proposals to ratify provisions of the company’s existing charter or bylaws, unless these governance provisions align with best practice. |
➤ | The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot; |
➤ | The board's rationale for seeking ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail; |
➤ | Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request; |
➤ | The level of impairment to shareholders' rights caused by the existing provision; |
➤ | The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings; |
➤ | Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals. |
➤ | 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: For U.S.-incorporated companies, and foreign-incorporated U.S. Domestic Issuers that are traded solely on U.S. exchanges, vote for management proposals to institute open-market share repurchase plans in which all shareholders may participate on equal terms, or to grant the board authority to conduct open-market repurchases, in the absence of company-specific concerns regarding: |
➤ | Greenmail, |
➤ | The use of buybacks to inappropriately manipulate incentive compensation metrics, |
➤ | Threats to the company's long-term viability, or |
➤ | Other company-specific factors as warranted. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote against shareholder proposals prohibiting executives from selling shares of company stock during periods in which the company has announced that it may or will be repurchasing shares of its stock. Vote for the proposal when there is a pattern of abuse by executives exercising options or selling shares during periods of share buybacks. |
➤ | Financial issues – company’s financial situation; degree of need of capital; use of proceeds; effect of the financing on the company’s cost of capital; |
➤ | Management efforts to pursue other alternatives; |
➤ | Control issues – change in management; change in control, guaranteed board and committee seats; standstill provisions; voting agreements; veto power over certain corporate actions; and |
➤ | Conflict of interest – arm’s length transaction, managerial incentives. |
➤ | 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 is reasonable and 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 (Say-on-Pay or “SOP”) if: |
➤ | There is an unmitigated 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 SOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an SOP would otherwise be 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 SOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
➤ | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, such as option repricing or option backdating; or |
➤ | The situation is egregious. |
1. | Peer Group9 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 rankings of CEO total pay and company financial performance 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 in the most recent fiscal year. |
2. | Absolute Alignment10– 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 incentive awards; |
➤ | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation to fixed or discretionary pay; |
➤ | The rigor of performance goals; |
➤ | The complexity and risks around pay program design; |
➤ | The transparency and clarity of disclosure; |
➤ | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
➤ | Financial/operational results, 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); |
8 | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
9 | 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. |
10 | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
➤ | Realizable pay11 compared to grant pay; and |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
➤ | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
➤ | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking or present a windfall risk; and |
➤ | Pay decisions that circumvent pay-for-performance, such as options backdating or waiving performance requirements. |
➤ | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
➤ | Extraordinary perquisites or tax gross-ups; |
➤ | New or materially amended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | Excessive termination or CIC severance payments (generally 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) or in connection with a problematic Good Reason definition; |
➤ | CIC excise tax gross-up entitlements (including "modified" gross-ups); |
➤ | Multi-year guaranteed awards that are not at risk due to rigorous performance conditions; |
➤ | Liberal CIC definition combined with any single-trigger CIC benefits; |
➤ | 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; |
➤ | Any other provision or practice deemed to be egregious and present a significant risk to investors. |
➤ | 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: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated); |
➤ | Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition; |
➤ | Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders’ concerns; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
11 | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
➤ | 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 plans12 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: |
➤ | Quality of disclosure around 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; |
➤ | Dividends payable prior to award vesting. |
➤ | Grant Practices: |
➤ | The company’s three-year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in CEO's recent 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 sufficient claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains sufficient 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; |
➤ | The plan is excessively dilutive to shareholders' holdings; |
➤ | The plan contains an evergreen (automatic share replenishment) feature; or |
➤ | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
21 | 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; amended plans will be further evaluated case-by-case. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, examining primarily whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value. The following factors will 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; |
➤ | Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's environmental or social practices; |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether 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 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 financial, physical, or regulatory risks it faces related to climate change on its operations and investments or on how the company identifies, measures, and manages such 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 compared to industry peers; and |
➤ | Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s climate change-related 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 case-by-case on requests for reports on a company's pay data by gender, race, or ethnicity, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices; |
➤ | Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap issues; and |
➤ | Whether the company's reporting regarding gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers. |
➤ | 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 requesting information on a company’s lobbying (including direct, indirect, and grassroots lobbying) activities, policies, or procedures, considering: |
➤ | The company’s current disclosure of relevant lobbying policies, and management and board oversight; |
➤ | The company’s disclosure regarding trade associations or other groups that it supports, or is a member of, that engage in lobbying activities; and |
➤ | Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding the company’s lobbying-related activities. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting greater disclosure of a company's political contributions and trade association spending policies and activities, considering: |
➤ | The company's policies, and management and board oversight related to its direct political contributions and payments to trade associations or other groups that may be used for political purposes; |
➤ | The company's disclosure regarding its support of, and participation in, trade associations or other groups that may make political contributions; and |
➤ | Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation related to the company's political contributions or political activities. |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF | FTHI | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF | FTLB | Nasdaq |
|
1 |
|
3 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
11 |
|
16 |
|
23 |
|
23 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
|
34 |
|
34 |
|
39 |
|
43 |
|
45 |
|
45 |
|
45 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-1 |
Fund Name | Classification |
First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF | Non-Diversified |
First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF | Non-Diversified |
(1) | A Fund may not issue senior securities, except as permitted under the 1940 Act. |
(2) | A Fund may not borrow money, except that a 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 a Fund’s total assets (including the amount borrowed), less a Fund’s liabilities (other than borrowings). |
(3) | A 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) | 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 a 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 a Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of a 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 a 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, Federal Home Loan Banks, the Federal Land Banks, the Central Bank for Cooperatives, Federal Intermediate Credit Banks and 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, and 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 First Trust 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 a 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 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) | 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 a 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 a Fund to lose money by investing in money market funds. |
Portfolio Turnover Rate
|
||
Fund | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | |
2019 | 2018 | |
First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF | 209% | 239% |
First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF | 205% | 219% |
(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 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 a Fund and its shareholders and is consistent with a 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 a 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 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 Funds 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 Funds. The Funds 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 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 assets or accounts or make such payments until the position expires, matures, or is closed out. These requirements might impair a 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 a Fund sell a portfolio security at a disadvantageous time. A 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 a 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 and
Year 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)
1955 |
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) | 169 Portfolios | None |
INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES | |||||
Richard E. Erickson
1951 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Physician; Officer, Wheaton Orthopedics; Limited Partner, Gundersen Real Estate Limited Partnership (June 1992 to December 2016); Member, Sportsmed LLC (April 2007 to November 2015) | 169 Portfolios | None |
Thomas R. Kadlec
1957 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, ADM Investor Services, Inc. (Futures Commission Merchant) | 169 Portfolios | Director of ADM Investor Services, Inc., ADM Investor Services International, Futures Industry Association, and National Futures Association |
Robert F. Keith
1956 |
Trustee |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
President, Hibs Enterprises (Financial and Management Consulting) | 169 Portfolios | Director of Trust Company of Illinois |
Name and
Year of Birth |
Position and
Offices with Trust |
Term of Office and
Length of Service |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||
James M. Dykas
1966 |
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 (January 2016 to present), BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) |
W. Scott Jardine
1960 |
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; and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC |
Daniel J. Lindquist
1970 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Kristi A. Maher
1966 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Donald P. Swade
1972 |
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. |
Roger F. Testin
1966 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Stan Ueland
1970 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
(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 Funds. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Funds (1) |
Total Compensation from
the First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $8,091 | $458,125 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $8,083 | $451,450 |
Robert F. Keith | $8,087 | $454,098 |
Niel B. Nielson | $8,073 | $440,930 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Funds to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2019 for services to the Funds. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2019 for services to the 169 portfolios existing in 2019, which consisted of 6 open-end mutual funds, 15 closed-end funds and 148 exchange-traded funds. |
Amount of Unitary Fees
|
|||
Fund | Fiscal Year Ended September 30, | ||
2019 | 2018 | 2017 | |
First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF | $551,484 | $517,972 | $396,064 |
First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF | $84,682 | $83,936 | $47,958 |
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. |
• | the percentage of each Fund’s assets, if any, that are subject to special arrangements arising from their illiquid nature (including, but not limited to, deferrals of redemptions and suspensions); |
• | the current risk profile of each Fund and the risk management systems employed by the AIFM to manage those risks; and |
• | the total amount of leverage employed by each Fund, if any. |
(a) | otherwise than in conformity with the provisions of the European Communities (Markets in Financial Instruments) Regulations 2007 and the European Union (Alternative Investment Fund Managers) Regulations 2013, each as amended; or |
(b) | in any way which would require the publication of a prospectus under the Companies Act 2014 or any regulations made thereunder; or |
(c) | in Ireland except in all circumstances that will result in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations in Ireland. |
• | the percentage of the Funds’ assets, if any, that are subject to special arrangements arising from their illiquid nature (including, but not limited to, deferrals of redemptions and suspensions); |
• | the current risk profile of each Fund and the risk management systems employed by the AIFM to manage those risks; and |
• | the total amount of leverage employed by each Fund, if any. |
Fund |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF | $8,648,457 |
First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF | 1,545,433 |
(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 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 BUYWRITE INCOME ETF | |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 15.45% |
National Financial Services LLC | 13.25% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 12.12% |
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. | 11.46% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 7.90% |
Pershing LLC | 7.15% |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 5.44% |
Cetera Investment Services LLC | 5.29% |
The Bank of New York Mellon | 5.12% |
FIRST TRUST HEDGED BUYWRITE INCOME ETF | |
LPL Financial Corporation | 31.33% |
National Financial Services LLC | 26.13% |
Pershing LLC | 8.99% |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 6.08% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 6.01% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated | 5.25% |
(1) | Cetera Investment Services LLC: 400 First Street South Suite 300, St. Cloud, Minnesota 56301 |
(2) | Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.: 2423 E Lincoln Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85016 |
(3) | LPL Financial Corporation: 1055 LPL Way, Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715 |
(4) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated: 4804 Deer Lake Dr E, Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(5) | National Financial Services LLC: 499 Washington Boulevard, Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(6) | Pershing LLC: One Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(7) | Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: 880 Carillon Parkway, St. Petersburg, Florida 33716 |
(8) | RBC Capital Markets, LLC: 60 S 6th Street P-09, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 |
(9) | TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc.: 200 S. 108th Avenue, Omaha, Nebraska 68154 |
(10) | The Bank of New York Mellon: 525 William Penn Place Suite 153-0400, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15259 |
(11) | Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC: 2801 Market Street H0006-09B, St. Louis, Missouri 63103 |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances (with new nominees1 considered on case-by-case basis): |
➤ | Independent directors comprise 50 percent or less of the board; |
➤ | The non-independent director serves on the audit, compensation, or nominating committee; |
➤ | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; or |
➤ | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee. |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
1 | A "new nominee" is a director who is being presented for election by shareholders for the first time. Recommendations on new nominees who have served for less than one year are made on a case-by-case basis depending on the timing of their appointment and the problematic governance issue in question. |
2 | 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. |
3 | Nominees who served for only part of the fiscal year are generally exempted from the attendance policy. |
➤ | Sit on more than five public company boards; or |
➤ | Are CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own— withhold only at their outside boards4. |
➤ | Until Feb. 1, 2021, a firm commitment, as stated in the proxy statement, to appoint at least one woman to the board within a year; |
➤ | The presence of a woman on the board at the preceding annual meeting and a firm commitment to appoint at least one woman to the board within a year; or |
➤ | Other relevant factors as applicable. |
➤ | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year or failed to act on a management proposal seeking to ratify an existing charter/bylaw provision that received opposition 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. |
➤ | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated); |
➤ | Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition; |
➤ | Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders' concerns; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
4 | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards with publicly-traded common stock will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote for 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. |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast. |
➤ | The company has a poison pill that was not approved by shareholders5. However, vote case-by-case on nominees if the board adopts an initial pill with a term of one year or less, depending on the disclosed rationale for the adoption, and other factors as relevant (such as a commitment to put any renewal to a shareholder vote). |
➤ | The board makes a material adverse modification to an existing pill, including, but not limited to, extension, renewal, or lowering the trigger, without shareholder approval. |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections, or a majority vote standard in contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A multi-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
➤ | 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; |
5 | Public shareholders only, approval prior to a company’s becoming public is insufficient. |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | Supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; |
➤ | A classified board structure; or |
➤ | Other egregious provisions. |
➤ | The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot; |
➤ | The board's rationale for seeking ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail; |
➤ | Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request; |
➤ | The level of impairment to shareholders' rights caused by the existing provision; |
➤ | The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings; |
➤ | Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals. |
➤ | The company’s governing documents impose 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, subject matter restrictions, or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against or withhold on an ongoing basis. |
➤ | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive; |
➤ | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | There is an unmitigated misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
➤ | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; or |
➤ | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
➤ | The company fails to include a Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions, or under the company’s declared frequency of say on pay; or |
➤ | The company fails to include a Frequency of Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions. |
➤ | The presence of an anti-pledging policy, disclosed in the proxy statement, that prohibits future pledging activity; |
➤ | The magnitude of aggregate pledged shares in terms of total common shares outstanding, market value, and trading volume; |
➤ | Disclosure of progress or lack thereof in reducing the magnitude of aggregate pledged shares over time; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement that shares subject to stock ownership and holding requirements do not include pledged company stock; and |
➤ | Any other relevant factors. |
➤ | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight7, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
➤ | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | General Recommendation: In cases where companies are targeted in connection with public “vote-no” campaigns, evaluate director nominees under the existing governance policies for voting on director nominees in uncontested elections. Take into consideration the arguments submitted by shareholders and other publicly available information. |
➤ | 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. |
7 | 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 settlement; or hedging of company stock. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chair position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
➤ | The scope and rationale 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. |
➤ | A majority non-independent board and/or the presence of non-independent directors on key board committees; |
➤ | A weak or poorly-defined lead independent director role that fails to serve as an appropriate counterbalance to a combined CEO/chair role; |
➤ | The presence of an executive or non-independent chair in addition to the CEO, a recent recombination of the role of CEO and chair, and/or departure from a structure with an independent chair; |
➤ | Evidence that the board has failed to oversee and address material risks facing the company; |
➤ | A material governance failure, particularly if the board has failed to adequately respond to shareholder concerns or if the board has materially diminished shareholder rights; or |
➤ | Evidence that the board has failed to intervene when management’s interests are contrary to shareholders' interests. |
➤ | 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: Generally vote against management proposals to ratify provisions of the company’s existing charter or bylaws, unless these governance provisions align with best practice. |
➤ | The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot; |
➤ | The board's rationale for seeking ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail; |
➤ | Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request; |
➤ | The level of impairment to shareholders' rights caused by the existing provision; |
➤ | The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings; |
➤ | Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals. |
➤ | 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: For U.S.-incorporated companies, and foreign-incorporated U.S. Domestic Issuers that are traded solely on U.S. exchanges, vote for management proposals to institute open-market share repurchase plans in which all shareholders may participate on equal terms, or to grant the board authority to conduct open-market repurchases, in the absence of company-specific concerns regarding: |
➤ | Greenmail, |
➤ | The use of buybacks to inappropriately manipulate incentive compensation metrics, |
➤ | Threats to the company's long-term viability, or |
➤ | Other company-specific factors as warranted. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote against shareholder proposals prohibiting executives from selling shares of company stock during periods in which the company has announced that it may or will be repurchasing shares of its stock. Vote for the proposal when there is a pattern of abuse by executives exercising options or selling shares during periods of share buybacks. |
➤ | Financial issues – company’s financial situation; degree of need of capital; use of proceeds; effect of the financing on the company’s cost of capital; |
➤ | Management efforts to pursue other alternatives; |
➤ | Control issues – change in management; change in control, guaranteed board and committee seats; standstill provisions; voting agreements; veto power over certain corporate actions; and |
➤ | Conflict of interest – arm’s length transaction, managerial incentives. |
➤ | 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 is reasonable and 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 (Say-on-Pay or “SOP”) if: |
➤ | There is an unmitigated 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 SOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an SOP would otherwise be 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 SOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
➤ | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, such as option repricing or option backdating; or |
➤ | The situation is egregious. |
1. | Peer Group9 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 rankings of CEO total pay and company financial performance 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 in the most recent fiscal year. |
2. | Absolute Alignment10– 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 incentive awards; |
➤ | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation to fixed or discretionary pay; |
➤ | The rigor of performance goals; |
➤ | The complexity and risks around pay program design; |
➤ | The transparency and clarity of disclosure; |
➤ | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
➤ | Financial/operational results, 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); |
8 | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
9 | 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. |
10 | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
➤ | Realizable pay11 compared to grant pay; and |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
➤ | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
➤ | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking or present a windfall risk; and |
➤ | Pay decisions that circumvent pay-for-performance, such as options backdating or waiving performance requirements. |
➤ | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
➤ | Extraordinary perquisites or tax gross-ups; |
➤ | New or materially amended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | Excessive termination or CIC severance payments (generally 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) or in connection with a problematic Good Reason definition; |
➤ | CIC excise tax gross-up entitlements (including "modified" gross-ups); |
➤ | Multi-year guaranteed awards that are not at risk due to rigorous performance conditions; |
➤ | Liberal CIC definition combined with any single-trigger CIC benefits; |
➤ | 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; |
➤ | Any other provision or practice deemed to be egregious and present a significant risk to investors. |
➤ | 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: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated); |
➤ | Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition; |
➤ | Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders’ concerns; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
11 | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
➤ | 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 plans12 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: |
➤ | Quality of disclosure around 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; |
➤ | Dividends payable prior to award vesting. |
➤ | Grant Practices: |
➤ | The company’s three-year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in CEO's recent 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 sufficient claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains sufficient 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; |
➤ | The plan is excessively dilutive to shareholders' holdings; |
➤ | The plan contains an evergreen (automatic share replenishment) feature; or |
➤ | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
21 | 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; amended plans will be further evaluated case-by-case. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, examining primarily whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value. The following factors will 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; |
➤ | Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's environmental or social practices; |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether 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 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 financial, physical, or regulatory risks it faces related to climate change on its operations and investments or on how the company identifies, measures, and manages such 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 compared to industry peers; and |
➤ | Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s climate change-related 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 case-by-case on requests for reports on a company's pay data by gender, race, or ethnicity, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices; |
➤ | Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap issues; and |
➤ | Whether the company's reporting regarding gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers. |
➤ | 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 requesting information on a company’s lobbying (including direct, indirect, and grassroots lobbying) activities, policies, or procedures, considering: |
➤ | The company’s current disclosure of relevant lobbying policies, and management and board oversight; |
➤ | The company’s disclosure regarding trade associations or other groups that it supports, or is a member of, that engage in lobbying activities; and |
➤ | Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding the company’s lobbying-related activities. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting greater disclosure of a company's political contributions and trade association spending policies and activities, considering: |
➤ | The company's policies, and management and board oversight related to its direct political contributions and payments to trade associations or other groups that may be used for political purposes; |
➤ | The company's disclosure regarding its support of, and participation in, trade associations or other groups that may make political contributions; and |
➤ | Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation related to the company's political contributions or political activities. |
FUND NAME | TICKER SYMBOL | EXCHANGE | ||
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | DVOL | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | DVLU | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | LEGR | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | ROBT | Nasdaq | ||
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | SDVY | Nasdaq |
|
1 |
|
3 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
|
8 |
|
9 |
|
12 |
|
20 |
|
20 |
|
22 |
|
24 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
|
28 |
|
33 |
|
35 |
|
39 |
|
41 |
|
42 |
|
42 |
|
A-1 |
|
B-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 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) | 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 a 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 a Fund if, as a result, the aggregate of such loans would exceed 33⅓% of the value of a 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 a 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 the securities of issuers in any one industry or group of industries, except to the extent that the Fund’s Index is concentrated in an industry or a 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. |
Fund | Index |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Low Volatility Index |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | Dorsey Wright Momentum Plus Value Index |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | Indxx Blockchain Index |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | Nasdaq CTA Artificial Intelligence and Robotics IndexSM |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | NASDAQ US Small Mid Cap Rising Dividend AchieversTM Index |
(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 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, 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 First Trust 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 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 Investment Committee monitors 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 Investment Committee does 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. The Investment Committee 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 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 in the case of First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF and First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF. In the case of First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF, First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF and First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, a Fund may invest in commercial paper rated at the day of purchase “Prime-1” by Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. or “A-1+” or “A-1” by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Group, Inc., or, if unrated, of comparable quality as determined by First Trust. | |
(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 Year Ended
September 30, 2019 |
Fiscal Period Ended
September 30, 2018 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | September 5, 2018 | 81% | 0% |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | September 5, 2018 | 152% | 0% |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | January 24, 2018 | 35% | 53% |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | February 21, 2018 | 43% | 67% |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | November 1, 2017 | 78% | 72% |
Name and
Year 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)
1955 |
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) | 169 Portfolios | None |
Name and
Year of Birth |
Position and
Offices with Trust |
Term of Office and
Length of Service |
Principal Occupations
During Past 5 Years |
OFFICERS OF THE TRUST | |||
James M. Dykas
1966 |
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 (January 2016 to present), BondWave LLC (Software Development Company) and Stonebridge Advisors LLC (Investment Advisor) |
W. Scott Jardine
1960 |
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; and Secretary, Stonebridge Advisors LLC |
Daniel J. Lindquist
1970 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Kristi A. Maher
1966 |
Chief Compliance Officer and Assistant Secretary |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Deputy General Counsel, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Donald P. Swade
1972 |
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. |
Roger F. Testin
1966 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Stan Ueland
1970 |
Vice President |
• Indefinite term
• Since inception |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
(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 Funds. |
Name of Trustee |
Total Compensation from
the Funds (1) |
Total Compensation from
the First Trust Fund Complex (2) |
Richard E. Erickson | $8,962 | $458,125 |
Thomas R. Kadlec | $8,947 | $451,450 |
Robert F. Keith | $8,953 | $454,098 |
Niel B. Nielson | $8,927 | $440,930 |
(1) | The compensation paid by the Funds to the Independent Trustees for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2019 for services to the Funds. |
(2) | The total compensation paid to the Independent Trustees for the calendar year ended December 31, 2019 for services to the 169 portfolios existing in 2019, which consisted of 6 open-end mutual funds, 15 closed-end funds and 148 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 Year Ended
September 30, 2019 |
Fiscal Period Ended
September 30, 2018 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | September 5, 2018 | $234,782 | $2,831 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | September 5, 2018 | $94,333 | $2,790 |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | January 24, 2018 | $275,994 | $165,504 |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | February 21, 2018 | $271,196 | $62,523 |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | November 1, 2017 | $26,099 | $16,428 |
Name |
Position with
First Trust |
Length of Service
with First Trust |
Principal Occupation During
Past Five Years |
Daniel J. Lindquist |
Chairman of the
Investment Committee and Managing Director |
Since 2004 |
Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P.
and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
David G. McGarel |
Chief Operating Officer,
Chief Investment Officer and Managing Director |
Since 1997 |
Chief Operating Officer (2016 to present),
Chief Investment Officer and Managing Director, First Trust Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Jon C. Erickson | Senior Vice President | Since 1994 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and
First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Roger F. Testin | Senior Vice President | Since 2001 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and
First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Stan Ueland | Senior Vice President | Since 2005 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust
Advisors L.P. and First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Chris A. Peterson | Senior Vice President | Since 2000 |
Senior Vice President, First Trust Advisors L.P. and
First Trust Portfolios L.P. |
Investment Committee Member |
Registered
Investment Companies Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Other Accounts
Number of Accounts ($ Assets) |
Daniel J. Lindquist | 107 ($52,422,177,545) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Jon C. Erickson | 106 ($52,422,177,545) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
David G. McGarel | 107 ($52,422,177,545) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Roger F. Testin | 106 ($52,422,177,545) | 35 ($850,974,836) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Stan Ueland | 100 ($51,371,465,759) | 28 ($734,461,332) | N/A |
Chris A. Peterson | 107 ($52,422,177,545) | 31 ($753,136,379) | 1,570 ($574,925,539) |
Aggregate Amount of Brokerage Commissions
|
|||
Fund | Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
September 30, 2019 |
Fiscal Period Ended
September 30, 2018 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | September 5, 2018 | $9,965 | $0 |
Aggregate Amount of Brokerage Commissions
|
|||
Fund | Inception Date |
Fiscal Year Ended
September 30, 2019 |
Fiscal Period Ended
September 30, 2018 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | September 5, 2018 | $11,821 | $0 |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | January 24, 2018 | $14,530 | $44,126 |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | February 21, 2018 | $26,772 | $26,930 |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | November 1, 2017 | $2,121 | $2,107 |
Argentina | Australia | Austria | Belgium | Brazil | Canada | Chile |
March 4
March 5 April 2 April 9 April 10 May 1 June 17 June 20 July 8 July 9 August 17 October 12 November 23 December 8 December 25 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 June 8 December 25 December 28 January 1 January 26 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 June 1 October 26 December 8 December 25 January 1 |
April 13
May 1 May 21 November 11 December 25 January 1 |
February 24
February 25 February 26 April 10 April 21 May 1 June 11 July 9 September 7 October 12 November 2 November 20 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 17
April 10 May 18 July 1 August 3 September 7 October 12 November 11 December 24 December 25 December 28 January 1 |
April 10
April 11 May 1 May 21 July 16 August 15 September 18 October 12 December 8 December 25 January 1 |
China | Denmark | Finland | France | Germany | Greece | Hong Kong |
May 1
April 6 June 25 October 1 October 2 October 5 October 6 October 7 January 1 |
April 9
April 10 April 13 May 8 May 21 May 22 June 1 June 5 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
January 6
April 10 April 13 May 1 May 21 June 19 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 22 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 8 May 21 June 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
March 2
March 25 April 10 April 13 April 17 April 20 May 1 June 8 October 28 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 January 6 |
February 5
February 6 February 7 April 5 April 19 April 22 May 1 May 13 June 7 July 1 October 1 October 7 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
India | Ireland | Israel | Italy | Japan | Malaysia | Mexico |
February 21
March 9 April 2 April 6 April 10 April 14 May 1 July 31 August 20 August 28 October 2 November 16 November 30 December 25 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
March 10
April 8 April 9 April 12 April 13 April 14 April 15 April 28 April 29 May 28 May 29 July 30 September 20 September 27 September 28 October 4 October 5 October 6 October 7 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 11
February 24 March 20 April 29 May 4 May 5 May 6 July 23 July 24 August 10 September 21 September 22 November 3 November 23 December 31 January 1 January 2 January 3 January 11 |
February 1
February 8 May 1 May 7 May 11 May 25 June 6 July 31 August 20 August 31 September 16 October 29 November 14 December 25 January 1 |
February 3
February 5 March 16 April 9 April 10 May 1 September 16 November 16 November 20 December 25 January 1 |
New Zealand | Netherlands | Norway | Portugal | Singapore | South Africa | South Korea |
February 6
April 10 April 13 April 27 June 1 October 26 December 24 December 25 December 28 December 31 January 1 January 4 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 21 June 1 August 3 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 9
April 10 April 13 May 1 May 21 June 1 June 17 August 3 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
May 1 May 7 May 25 July 31 August 10 November 14 December 25 January 1 |
March 21
April 10 April 13 April 27 May 1 June 16 August 9 September 24 December 16 December 25 December 26 January 1 |
April 30
May 1 May 5 June 6 September 30 October 1 October 2 October 9 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
Spain | Sweden | Switzerland | Taiwan | Thailand | United Kingdom | United States |
April 10
April 13 April 22 May 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 21 June 19 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 1 May 21 June 1 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 28
April 3 April 4 May 1 June 25 October 1 October 9 October 10 January 1 |
February 10
April 6 April 13 April 14 April 15 May 1 May 4 May 6 June 3 July 6 July 28 August 12 October 13 October 23 December 7 December 10 December 31 January 1 |
April 10
April 13 May 8 May 25 August 31 December 24 December 25 December 31 January 1 |
February 17
April 10 May 25 July 3 September 7 November 26 December 25 January 1 January 18 |
Fund |
Total
Non-Expiring Capital Loss Available |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF | $973,551 |
First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF | 2,093,969 |
First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF | 1,836,483 |
First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF | 829,597 |
First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF | 270,667 |
(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 an independent 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 DORSEY WRIGHT MOMENTUM & LOW VOLATILITY ETF | |
National Financial Services LLC | 19.30% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 18.65% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 12.68% |
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. | 9.99% |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 7.67% |
Pershing LLC | 7.13% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 6.98% |
FIRST TRUST DORSEY WRIGHT MOMENTUM & VALUE ETF | |
National Financial Services LLC | 69.77% |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 16.06% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 8.10% |
FIRST TRUST INDXX INNOVATIVE TRANSACTION & PROCESS ETF | |
UBS Financial Services Inc. | 16.28% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 12.42% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 10.15% |
National Financial Services LLC | 9.41% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 7.06% |
J.P. Morgan Securities LLC/JPMC | 6.63% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated | 6.49% |
FIRST TRUST NASDAQ ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE AND ROBOTICS ETF | |
TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. | 13.48% |
Raymond James & Associates, Inc. | 13.05% |
National Financial Services LLC | 13.05% |
Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF | 12.12% |
Pershing LLC | 8.56% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 8.04% |
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. | 5.38% |
FIRST TRUST SMID CAP RISING DIVIDEND ACHIEVERS ETF | |
Folio Investments, Inc. | 24.33% |
LPL Financial Corporation | 16.89% |
Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. | 16.41% |
Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC | 13.26% |
National Financial Services LLC | 7.37% |
RBC Capital Markets, LLC | 7.12% |
Pershing LLC | 6.38% |
(1) | Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.: 2423 E Lincoln Drive, Phoenix, Arizona 85016 |
(2) | Folio Investments, Inc.: 8180 Greensboro Drive, 8th Floor, McLean, Virginia 22102 |
(3) | J.P. Morgan Securities LLC/JPMC: 500 Stanton Christiana Road, OPS 4, Newark, Delaware 19713 |
(4) | LPL Financial Corporation: 1055 LPL Way, Fort Mill, South Carolina 29715 |
(5) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated: 4804 Deer Lake Dr E, Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(6) | Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith Incorporated/8862 MLPF: 4804 Deer Lake Dr E, Jacksonville, Florida 32246 |
(7) | National Financial Services LLC: 499 Washington Boulevard, Jersey City, New Jersey 07310 |
(8) | Pershing LLC: One Pershing Plaza, Jersey City, New Jersey 07399 |
(9) | Raymond James & Associates, Inc.: 880 Carillon Parkway, St. Petersburg, Florida 33716 |
(10) | RBC Capital Markets, LLC: 60 S 6th Street P-09, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402 |
(11) | TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc.: 200 S. 108th Ave., Omaha, Nebraska 68154 |
(12) | UBS Financial Services Inc.: 1000 Harbor Blvd, Weehawken, New Jersey 07086 |
(13) | Wells Fargo Clearing Services, LLC: 2801 Market Street H0006-09B, St. Louis, Missouri 63103 |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for director nominees, except under the following circumstances (with new nominees1 considered on case-by-case basis): |
➤ | Independent directors comprise 50 percent or less of the board; |
➤ | The non-independent director serves on the audit, compensation, or nominating committee; |
➤ | The company lacks an audit, compensation, or nominating committee so that the full board functions as that committee; or |
➤ | The company lacks a formal nominating committee, even if the board attests that the independent directors fulfill the functions of such a committee. |
➤ | Medical issues/illness; |
➤ | Family emergencies; and |
➤ | Missing only one meeting (when the total of all meetings is three or fewer). |
1 | A "new nominee" is a director who is being presented for election by shareholders for the first time. Recommendations on new nominees who have served for less than one year are made on a case-by-case basis depending on the timing of their appointment and the problematic governance issue in question. |
2 | 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. |
3 | Nominees who served for only part of the fiscal year are generally exempted from the attendance policy. |
➤ | Sit on more than five public company boards; or |
➤ | Are CEOs of public companies who sit on the boards of more than two public companies besides their own— withhold only at their outside boards4. |
➤ | Until Feb. 1, 2021, a firm commitment, as stated in the proxy statement, to appoint at least one woman to the board within a year; |
➤ | The presence of a woman on the board at the preceding annual meeting and a firm commitment to appoint at least one woman to the board within a year; or |
➤ | Other relevant factors as applicable. |
➤ | The board failed to act on a shareholder proposal that received the support of a majority of the shares cast in the previous year or failed to act on a management proposal seeking to ratify an existing charter/bylaw provision that received opposition 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. |
➤ | The board failed to act on takeover offers where the majority of shares are tendered; |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | The company’s previous say-on-pay received the support of less than 70 percent of votes cast. Factors that will be considered are: |
➤ | The company's response, including: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated); |
➤ | Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition; |
➤ | Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders' concerns; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
➤ | Whether the issues raised are recurring or isolated; |
4 | Although all of a CEO’s subsidiary boards with publicly-traded common stock will be counted as separate boards, ISS will not recommend a withhold vote for 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. |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Whether the support level was less than 50 percent, which would warrant the highest degree of responsiveness. |
➤ | The board implements an advisory vote on executive compensation on a less frequent basis than the frequency that received the plurality of votes cast. |
➤ | The company has a poison pill that was not approved by shareholders5. However, vote case-by-case on nominees if the board adopts an initial pill with a term of one year or less, depending on the disclosed rationale for the adoption, and other factors as relevant (such as a commitment to put any renewal to a shareholder vote). |
➤ | The board makes a material adverse modification to an existing pill, including, but not limited to, extension, renewal, or lowering the trigger, without shareholder approval. |
➤ | A classified board structure; |
➤ | A supermajority vote requirement; |
➤ | Either a plurality vote standard in uncontested director elections, or a majority vote standard in contested elections; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to call special meetings; |
➤ | The inability of shareholders to act by written consent; |
➤ | A multi-class capital structure; and/or |
➤ | A non-shareholder-approved poison pill. |
➤ | 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; |
5 | Public shareholders only, approval prior to a company’s becoming public is insufficient. |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | Supermajority vote requirements to amend the bylaws or charter; |
➤ | A classified board structure; or |
➤ | Other egregious provisions. |
➤ | The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot; |
➤ | The board's rationale for seeking ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail; |
➤ | Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request; |
➤ | The level of impairment to shareholders' rights caused by the existing provision; |
➤ | The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings; |
➤ | Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals. |
➤ | The company’s governing documents impose 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, subject matter restrictions, or time holding requirements in excess of SEC Rule 14a-8. Vote against or withhold on an ongoing basis. |
➤ | The non-audit fees paid to the auditor are excessive; |
➤ | The company receives an adverse opinion on the company’s financial statements from its auditor; or |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | There is an unmitigated misalignment between CEO pay and company performance (pay for performance); |
➤ | The company maintains significant problematic pay practices; or |
➤ | The board exhibits a significant level of poor communication and responsiveness to shareholders. |
➤ | The company fails to include a Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions, or under the company’s declared frequency of say on pay; or |
➤ | The company fails to include a Frequency of Say on Pay ballot item when required under SEC provisions. |
➤ | The presence of an anti-pledging policy, disclosed in the proxy statement, that prohibits future pledging activity; |
➤ | The magnitude of aggregate pledged shares in terms of total common shares outstanding, market value, and trading volume; |
➤ | Disclosure of progress or lack thereof in reducing the magnitude of aggregate pledged shares over time; |
➤ | Disclosure in the proxy statement that shares subject to stock ownership and holding requirements do not include pledged company stock; and |
➤ | Any other relevant factors. |
➤ | Material failures of governance, stewardship, risk oversight7, or fiduciary responsibilities at the company; |
➤ | Failure to replace management as appropriate; or |
➤ | 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. |
➤ | General Recommendation: In cases where companies are targeted in connection with public “vote-no” campaigns, evaluate director nominees under the existing governance policies for voting on director nominees in uncontested elections. Take into consideration the arguments submitted by shareholders and other publicly available information. |
➤ | 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. |
7 | 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 settlement; or hedging of company stock. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for shareholder proposals requiring that the chair position be filled by an independent director, taking into consideration the following: |
➤ | The scope and rationale 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. |
➤ | A majority non-independent board and/or the presence of non-independent directors on key board committees; |
➤ | A weak or poorly-defined lead independent director role that fails to serve as an appropriate counterbalance to a combined CEO/chair role; |
➤ | The presence of an executive or non-independent chair in addition to the CEO, a recent recombination of the role of CEO and chair, and/or departure from a structure with an independent chair; |
➤ | Evidence that the board has failed to oversee and address material risks facing the company; |
➤ | A material governance failure, particularly if the board has failed to adequately respond to shareholder concerns or if the board has materially diminished shareholder rights; or |
➤ | Evidence that the board has failed to intervene when management’s interests are contrary to shareholders' interests. |
➤ | 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: Generally vote against management proposals to ratify provisions of the company’s existing charter or bylaws, unless these governance provisions align with best practice. |
➤ | The presence of a shareholder proposal addressing the same issue on the same ballot; |
➤ | The board's rationale for seeking ratification; |
➤ | Disclosure of actions to be taken by the board should the ratification proposal fail; |
➤ | Disclosure of shareholder engagement regarding the board’s ratification request; |
➤ | The level of impairment to shareholders' rights caused by the existing provision; |
➤ | The history of management and shareholder proposals on the provision at the company’s past meetings; |
➤ | Whether the current provision was adopted in response to the shareholder proposal; |
➤ | The company's ownership structure; and |
➤ | Previous use of ratification proposals to exclude shareholder proposals. |
➤ | 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: For U.S.-incorporated companies, and foreign-incorporated U.S. Domestic Issuers that are traded solely on U.S. exchanges, vote for management proposals to institute open-market share repurchase plans in which all shareholders may participate on equal terms, or to grant the board authority to conduct open-market repurchases, in the absence of company-specific concerns regarding: |
➤ | Greenmail, |
➤ | The use of buybacks to inappropriately manipulate incentive compensation metrics, |
➤ | Threats to the company's long-term viability, or |
➤ | Other company-specific factors as warranted. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote against shareholder proposals prohibiting executives from selling shares of company stock during periods in which the company has announced that it may or will be repurchasing shares of its stock. Vote for the proposal when there is a pattern of abuse by executives exercising options or selling shares during periods of share buybacks. |
➤ | Financial issues – company’s financial situation; degree of need of capital; use of proceeds; effect of the financing on the company’s cost of capital; |
➤ | Management efforts to pursue other alternatives; |
➤ | Control issues – change in management; change in control, guaranteed board and committee seats; standstill provisions; voting agreements; veto power over certain corporate actions; and |
➤ | Conflict of interest – arm’s length transaction, managerial incentives. |
➤ | 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 is reasonable and 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 (Say-on-Pay or “SOP”) if: |
➤ | There is an unmitigated 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 SOP on the ballot, and an against vote on an SOP would otherwise be 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 SOP proposal that received less than 70 percent support of votes cast; |
➤ | The company has recently practiced or approved problematic pay practices, such as option repricing or option backdating; or |
➤ | The situation is egregious. |
1. | Peer Group9 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 rankings of CEO total pay and company financial performance 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 in the most recent fiscal year. |
2. | Absolute Alignment10– 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 incentive awards; |
➤ | The overall ratio of performance-based compensation to fixed or discretionary pay; |
➤ | The rigor of performance goals; |
➤ | The complexity and risks around pay program design; |
➤ | The transparency and clarity of disclosure; |
➤ | The company's peer group benchmarking practices; |
➤ | Financial/operational results, 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); |
8 | The Russell 3000E Index includes approximately 4,000 of the largest U.S. equity securities. |
9 | 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. |
10 | Only Russell 3000 Index companies are subject to the Absolute Alignment analysis. |
➤ | Realizable pay11 compared to grant pay; and |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
➤ | Any other factors deemed relevant. |
➤ | Problematic practices related to non-performance-based compensation elements; |
➤ | Incentives that may motivate excessive risk-taking or present a windfall risk; and |
➤ | Pay decisions that circumvent pay-for-performance, such as options backdating or waiving performance requirements. |
➤ | Repricing or replacing of underwater stock options/SARS without prior shareholder approval (including cash buyouts and voluntary surrender of underwater options); |
➤ | Extraordinary perquisites or tax gross-ups; |
➤ | New or materially amended agreements that provide for: |
➤ | Excessive termination or CIC severance payments (generally 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) or in connection with a problematic Good Reason definition; |
➤ | CIC excise tax gross-up entitlements (including "modified" gross-ups); |
➤ | Multi-year guaranteed awards that are not at risk due to rigorous performance conditions; |
➤ | Liberal CIC definition combined with any single-trigger CIC benefits; |
➤ | 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; |
➤ | Any other provision or practice deemed to be egregious and present a significant risk to investors. |
➤ | 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: |
➤ | Disclosure of engagement efforts with major institutional investors, including the frequency and timing of engagements and the company participants (including whether independent directors participated); |
➤ | Disclosure of the specific concerns voiced by dissenting shareholders that led to the say-on-pay opposition; |
➤ | Disclosure of specific and meaningful actions taken to address shareholders’ concerns; |
➤ | Other recent compensation actions taken by the company; |
11 | ISS research reports include realizable pay for S&P1500 companies. |
➤ | 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 plans12 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: |
➤ | Quality of disclosure around 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; |
➤ | Dividends payable prior to award vesting. |
➤ | Grant Practices: |
➤ | The company’s three-year burn rate relative to its industry/market cap peers; |
➤ | Vesting requirements in CEO's recent 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 sufficient claw-back policy; |
➤ | Whether the company maintains sufficient 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; |
➤ | The plan is excessively dilutive to shareholders' holdings; |
➤ | The plan contains an evergreen (automatic share replenishment) feature; or |
➤ | Any other plan features are determined to have a significant negative impact on shareholder interests. |
21 | 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; amended plans will be further evaluated case-by-case. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote case-by-case, examining primarily whether implementation of the proposal is likely to enhance or protect shareholder value. The following factors will 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; |
➤ | Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company's environmental or social practices; |
➤ | If the proposal requests increased disclosure or greater transparency, whether 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 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 financial, physical, or regulatory risks it faces related to climate change on its operations and investments or on how the company identifies, measures, and manages such 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 compared to industry peers; and |
➤ | Whether there are significant controversies, fines, penalties, or litigation associated with the company’s climate change-related 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 case-by-case on requests for reports on a company's pay data by gender, race, or ethnicity, or a report on a company’s policies and goals to reduce any gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap, taking into account: |
➤ | The company's current policies and disclosure related to both its diversity and inclusion policies and practices and its compensation philosophy and fair and equitable compensation practices; |
➤ | Whether the company has been the subject of recent controversy, litigation, or regulatory actions related to gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap issues; and |
➤ | Whether the company's reporting regarding gender, race, or ethnicity pay gap policies or initiatives is lagging its peers. |
➤ | 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 requesting information on a company’s lobbying (including direct, indirect, and grassroots lobbying) activities, policies, or procedures, considering: |
➤ | The company’s current disclosure of relevant lobbying policies, and management and board oversight; |
➤ | The company’s disclosure regarding trade associations or other groups that it supports, or is a member of, that engage in lobbying activities; and |
➤ | Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation regarding the company’s lobbying-related activities. |
➤ | General Recommendation: Generally vote for proposals requesting greater disclosure of a company's political contributions and trade association spending policies and activities, considering: |
➤ | The company's policies, and management and board oversight related to its direct political contributions and payments to trade associations or other groups that may be used for political purposes; |
➤ | The company's disclosure regarding its support of, and participation in, trade associations or other groups that may make political contributions; and |
➤ | Recent significant controversies, fines, or litigation related to the company's political contributions or political activities. |
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI
Part C – Other Information
Item 28. | Exhibits |
Exhibit No. Description
(a) | (1) Amended and Restated Declaration of Trust. (10) |
(2) Amended and Restated Establishment and Designation of Series. (14)
(b) | By-Laws of the Registrant. (1) |
(c) | Not Applicable. |
(d) | (1) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated August 10, 2012, relating to First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund and Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund. (2) |
(2) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated August 16, 2013, relating to First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF, First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF, First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF, First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF, First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissanceâ ETF and First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF. (3)
(3) Amended Schedule A of the Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated September 5, 2018, relating to First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF, First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF, First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF, First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF, First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissanceâ ETF and First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF. (14)
(4) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated July 17, 2014, relating to First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF. (5)
(5) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated March 8, 2016, relating to First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF. (7)
(6) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated October 25, 2017, relating to First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF. (8)
(7) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated February 7, 2018, relating to First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF. (11)
(8) Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated May 7, 2018, relating to First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF and First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF. (12)
(9) Schedule A of the Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated January 23, 2018, relating to First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF. (9)
(10) Schedule A of the Investment Management Agreement between Registrant and First Trust Advisors L.P., dated August 28, 2018, relating to First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF and First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF. (13)
(11) Amended and Restated Fee Offset Agreement, relating to Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund. (15)
(e) | (1) Distribution Agreement. (2) |
(2) Exhibit A to Distribution Agreement. (14)
(f) | Not Applicable. |
(g) | (1) Custody Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman Co. (2) |
(2) Appendix A to the Custody Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman Co. (14)
(h) | (1) Administrative Agency Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman Co. (2) |
(2) Appendix A to the Administrative Agency Agreement between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman Co. (14)
(3) Exhibit A to the CMS Authorization Letter between the Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman Co. (14)
(4) Sublicense Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P., who is a Licensee of Nasdaq, Inc. and First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF. (13)
(5) Sublicense Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P., who is a Licensee of Nasdaq, Inc. and First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF. (13)
(6) License Agreement by and between Indxx, LLC and First Trust Advisors L.P. (10)
(7) Sublicense Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P., who is a Licensee of Nasdaq, Inc. and First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF. (11)
(8) Sublicense Agreement by and between First Trust Advisors L.P., who is a Licensee of Nasdaq, Inc. and First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF. (8)
(9) Form of Subscription Agreement. (2)
(10) Form of Authorized Participant Agreement. (13)
(i) | Not applicable. |
(j) | Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. (16) |
(k) | Not Applicable. |
(l) | Not Applicable. |
(m) | (1) 12b-1 Service Plan. (2) |
(2) Exhibit A to 12b-1 Service Plan. (14)
(3) 12b-1 Plan Extension Letter Agreement. (16)
(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 James A. Bowen, W. Scott Jardine, James M. Dykas, Kristi A. Maher and Eric F. Fess to execute the Registration Statement. (6) |
__________________
(1) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on June 25, 2012. |
(2) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on January 28, 2013. |
(3) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on December 18, 2013. |
(4) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on July 16, 2014. |
(5) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on January 21, 2015. |
(6) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on January 14, 2016. |
(7) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on March 16, 2016. |
(8) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on October 27, 2017. |
(9) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on January 23, 2018. |
(10) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on January 29, 2018. |
(11) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on February 12, 2018. |
(12) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on May 11, 2018. |
(13) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on August 30, 2018. |
(14) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on September 6, 2018. |
(15) | Incorporated by reference to the Registrant's Registration Statement on Form N-1A (File No. 333-182308) filed on January 28, 2019. |
(16) | Filed herewith. |
Item 29. | Persons Controlled By or Under Common Control with Registrant |
Not Applicable
Item 30. | Indemnification |
Section 9.5 of the Registrant’s Declaration of Trust provides as follows:
Section 9.5. Indemnification and Advancement of Expenses. Subject to the exceptions and limitations contained in this Section 9.5, every person who is, or has been, a Trustee, officer, or employee of the Trust, including persons who serve at the request of the Trust as directors, trustees, officers, employees or agents of another organization in which the Trust has an interest as a shareholder, creditor or otherwise (hereinafter referred to as a “Covered Person”), shall be indemnified by the Trust to the fullest extent permitted by law against liability and against all expenses reasonably incurred or paid by him or in connection with any claim, action, suit or proceeding in which he becomes involved as a party or otherwise by virtue of his being or having been such a Trustee, director, officer, employee or agent and against amounts paid or incurred by him in settlement thereof.
No indemnification shall be provided hereunder to a Covered Person to the extent such indemnification is prohibited by applicable federal law.
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 such a Covered Person and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors and administrators of such a person.
Subject to applicable federal law, expenses of preparation and presentation of a defense to any claim, action, suit or proceeding subject to a claim for indemnification under this Section 9.5 shall be advanced by the Trust prior to final disposition thereof upon receipt of an undertaking by or on behalf of the recipient to repay such amount if it is ultimately determined that he is not entitled to indemnification under this Section 9.5.
To the extent that any determination is required to be made as to whether a Covered Person engaged in conduct for which indemnification is not provided as described herein, or as to whether there is reason to believe that a Covered Person ultimately will be found entitled to indemnification, the Person or Persons making the determination shall afford the Covered Person a rebuttable presumption that the Covered Person has not engaged in such conduct and that there is reason to believe that the Covered Person ultimately will be found entitled to indemnification.
As used in this Section 9.5, the words “claim,” “action,” “suit” or “proceeding” shall apply to all claims, demands, actions, suits, investigations, regulatory inquiries, proceedings or any other occurrence of a similar nature, whether actual or threatened and whether civil, criminal, administrative or other, including appeals, and the words “liability” and “expenses” shall include without limitation, attorneys’ fees, costs, judgments, amounts paid in settlement, fines, penalties and other liabilities.
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 III, First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund IV, First Trust Exchange Traded Fund V, 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, Wheaton, Illinois 60187, maintains the Registrant’s organizational documents, minutes of meetings, contracts of the Registrant and all advisory material of the investment adviser.
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 of 1933 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 January, 2020.
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI | ||
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 |
January 28, 2020 | |
James M. Dykas | |||
/s/ Donald P. Swade |
Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer
and Chief Accounting Officer |
January 28, 2020 | |
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 |
|
) | January 28, 2020 | ||
Niel B. Nielson * |
)
Trustee ) |
||
) |
* | Original powers of attorney authorizing James A. Bowen, 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, were previously executed, filed as an exhibit and are incorporated by reference herein. |
Index to Exhibits
(j) | Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. |
(m) | (3) 12b-1 Plan Extension Letter Agreement. |
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 120 to Registration Statement No. 333-182308 on Form N-1A of our reports dated November 21, 2019, relating to the financial statements and financial highlights of First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund, Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund, First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF, First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF, First Trust Hedged BuyWrite Income ETF, First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF, First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance(R) ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF, First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF, First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF, First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF, First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF, and First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF, appearing in the Annual Reports on Form N-CSR for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI as of and for the year ended September 30, 2019, and to the references to us under the headings "Financial Highlights" in the Prospectuses and "Information for Investors in the United Kingdom", "AIFM Directive Disclosures", "Miscellaneous Information", and "Financial Statements" in the Statements of Additional Information, which are part of such Registration Statement.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP Chicago, Illinois January 28, 2020 |
October 21, 2019
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI
120 East Liberty Drive
Wheaton, Illinois 60187
Re: 12b-1 Plan Extension Letter for First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI
(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 amended from time to time.
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 |
First Trust Exchange-Traded Fund VI
/s/ Donald P. Swade ----------------------------------- Donald Swade Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer |
EXHIBIT A -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- FUNDS DATES -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Exchange Traded Fund VI -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- 3/31 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Oil & Gas ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Food & Beverage ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Retail ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Bank ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Transportation ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Pharmaceuticals ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Semiconductor ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Developed International Equity Select ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Emerging Markets Equity Select ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Large Cap US Equity Select ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Mid Cap US Equity Select ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Small Cap US Equity Select ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- US Equity Dividend Select ETF 07/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- 9/30 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- Multi-Asset Diversified Income Index Fund 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust NASDAQ Technology Dividend Index Fund 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust S&P International Dividend Aristocrats ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust BuyWrite Income ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Hedged BuyWrite ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Rising Dividend Achievers ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright Focus 5 ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust RBA American Industrial Renaissance(R) ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Dividend ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright International Focus 5 ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright Dynamic Focus 5 ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust SMID Cap Rising Dividend Achievers ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Indxx Innovative Transaction & Process ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Nasdaq Artificial Intelligence and Robotics ETF 01/31/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Value ETF 8/30/2020 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright Momentum & Low Volatility ETF 8/30/2020 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- 12/31 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- First Trust Dorsey Wright DALI 1 ETF 04/30/2021 -------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- |