Table of Contents

File Nos. 33-37459 and 811-6200

As filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on June 28, 2013

 

 

 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

 

FORM N-1A

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

THE SECURITIES ACT OF 1933   x

Post-Effective Amendment No. 110

 

and

 

REGISTRATION STATEMENT

UNDER

 
THE INVESTMENT COMPANY ACT OF 1940   x

Amendment No. 114

 

 

SCHWAB INVESTMENTS

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Charter)

 

 

211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105

(Address of Principal Executive Offices) (zip code)

Registrant’s Telephone Number, including Area Code:

(800) 648-5300

Marie Chandoha

211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105

(Name and Address of Agent for Service)

 

 

Copies of communications to:

 

Douglas P. Dick, Esq.   John M. Loder, Esq.   David Lekich, Esq.

Dechert LLP

1900 K Street, NW

Washington, DC 20006-2401

 

Ropes & Gray LLP

Prudential Tower

800 Boylston Street

Boston, MA 02199-3600

 

Charles Schwab Investment

Management, Inc.

211 Main Street

211MN-05-491

San Francisco, CA 94105

 

 

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

 

  ¨ Immediately upon filing pursuant to paragraph (b)
  x On June 28, 2013, pursuant to paragraph (b)
  ¨ 60 days after filing pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)
  ¨ On (date), pursuant to paragraph (a)(1)
  ¨ 75 days after filing pursuant to paragraph (a)(2)
  ¨ On (date), pursuant to paragraph (a)(2) of Rule 485

If appropriate, check the following box:

 

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

 

 

 


Table of Contents

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund SWASX

LOGO

 

Prospectus

June 28, 2013

 

 

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


Table of Contents

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund

 


Table of Contents
 

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund

Ticker Symbol:    SWASX

 

Investment objective

The fund seeks capital growth and income consistent with prudent investment management.

Fund fees and expenses

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

 

Shareholder fees (fees paid directly from your investment)  

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

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

Management fees

     0.77   

Distribution (12b-1) fees

     None   

Other expenses

     0.39   
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses

     1.16   

Less expense reduction

     (0.11
  

 

 

 

Total annual fund operating expenses after expense reduction 1

     1.05   
  

 

 

 

 

1  

The investment adviser and its affiliates have agreed to limit the total annual fund operating expenses (excluding interest, taxes and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 1.05% for so long as the investment adviser serves as the adviser to the fund. This agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the fund’s Board of Trustees.

 

Example

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

 

Expenses on a $10,000 investment

 

1 year   3 years   5 years   10 years
$107   $334   $579   $1,283
Portfolio turnover

The fund pays transaction costs, such as commissions, when it buys and sells securities (or “turns over” its portfolio). A higher portfolio turnover may indicate higher transaction costs and may result in higher taxes when fund shares are held in a taxable account. These costs, which are not reflected in the annual fund operating expenses or in the example, affect the fund’s performance. During the most recent fiscal year, the fund’s portfolio turnover rate was 128% of the average value of its portfolio.

Principal investment strategies

Under normal circumstances, the fund invests at least 80% of its net assets in securities of real estate companies and companies related to the real estate industry. The fund will provide shareholders with at least 60 days notice before changing this policy. Real estate companies include U.S. and non-U.S. issuers that, in the opinion of the adviser, derive at least 50% of their revenues or profits from the ownership, construction, development, financing, management, servicing, sale or leasing of commercial, industrial or residential real estate or have 50% of their total assets in real estate. Companies related to the real estate industry include companies whose products and services pertain to the real estate industry, such as mortgage lenders and mortgage servicing companies. The fund does not invest directly in real estate.

The fund invests a significant portion of its total assets in real estate investment trusts (REITs) and other similar REIT-like structures. REITs are U.S. real estate companies that own and commonly operate income producing real estate, or that use their assets to finance real estate. REITs are not subject to U.S. corporate income tax provided they comply with a number of tax requirements, including the distribution to shareholders of at least 90% of their net income. A number of other countries have adopted REIT-like structures that are not subject to local corporate income tax provided they distribute a significant portion of their net income to shareholders and meet certain other requirements. The fund also invests in real estate operating companies (REOCs). REOCs are real estate companies that engage in the ownership, development, management or financing of real estate. They may also provide services such as property management, property development, facilities management and real estate financing. REOCs are publicly-traded corporations that have not elected to be taxed as REITs. The three primary reasons for such an election are the

 

 

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund     1   


Table of Contents

(a) availability of tax-loss carry-forwards, (b) operation in non-REIT-qualifying lines of business, and (c) ability to retain earnings.

The fund invests in equity securities, primarily common stocks. The fund may also invest in other types of equity securities, including preferred stocks, convertible securities, rights or warrants to purchase stocks, and exchange traded funds. The fund may also invest in debt securities, including high yield securities (junk bonds), issued by or guaranteed by real estate companies or companies related to the real estate industry, such as fixed, floating or variable rate corporate bonds, collateralized debt obligations, fixed-rate capital securities, mortgage pass through certificates, real estate mortgage investment conduit certificates and collateralized mortgage obligations.

The fund selects investments based on the investment adviser’s analysis of each issuer. In making this determination, the investment adviser may take into account a variety of factors that it determines to be relevant from time to time, such as the issuer’s financial condition, industry position, earnings estimates, management and local and global economic and market conditions. The investment adviser uses a proprietary database and investment model to help choose and allocate the fund’s investments.

The fund may invest in derivative securities, such as swaps, options, futures and options on futures, which are principally tied to the real estate industry, for hedging purposes and to seek returns on the fund’s otherwise uninvested cash. The derivative securities may relate to a specific investment, a group of investments, or the fund’s portfolio as a whole. Derivatives are financial contracts whose values depend upon or are derived from the values of underlying assets, reference rates or indexes. The fund may use investment techniques such as short sales and reverse repurchase agreements. Please see the “Principal risks” section for a description of these investments. The fund may lend its securities to certain financial institutions to earn additional income.

Under normal market conditions, the fund seeks to invest its assets across different countries and regions. The fund’s investments in a single country or a limited number of countries may represent a higher percentage of the fund’s assets from time to time. The fund invests primarily in developed market countries, but may invest up to 15% of its total assets in emerging market countries. “Emerging market” countries include, but are not limited to, countries included in the MSCI Emerging Markets Index SM . In allocating the fund’s investments, the investment adviser considers the size and condition of the real estate market in each country and region and the global real estate market as a whole. Except as provided above, the fund is not required to invest or restricted from investing any minimum or maximum percentage of its assets in any one country or region.

The fund sells securities when the investment adviser believes it is appropriate to do so, regardless of how long the securities have been held. Such sales may cause the fund to experience high portfolio turnover and correspondingly increased transaction costs. The sales may also result in capital gain or loss, including short-term capital gain or loss. High portfolio turnover may adversely impact the fund’s performance.

The fund may hold up to 100% of its assets in cash, cash equivalents and other short-term investments for temporary or defensive purposes. The fund may utilize such tactics when the investment adviser believes that market or economic interests are unfavorable for investors. Under such circumstances, the fund may not achieve its investment objective.

Principal risks

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

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

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

Small- and Mid-Cap Risk.  Larger REITs and other real estate companies may be small- to medium-sized companies in relation to the equity markets as a whole. Historically, mid- and small-cap stocks have been riskier than large-cap stocks. Mid- and small-cap companies themselves may be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic events than larger, more established companies. Stock prices of smaller companies may be based in substantial part on future expectations rather than current achievements and may move sharply, especially during market upturns and downturns. During a period when mid- and small-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — bonds or large-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s small- and mid-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Real Estate Investment Risk.  The fund has a policy of concentrating its investments in real estate companies and companies related to the real estate industry. As such, the fund is subject to risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate securities and an investment in the fund will be closely linked to the performance of the real estate markets. These risks include, among others, declines in the value of real estate; risks related to general and local economic conditions; possible lack of availability of mortgage funds or other limits to accessing the credit or capital markets; defaults by borrowers or tenants, particularly during an economic downturn; and changes in interest rates.

REITs Risk.  In addition to the risks associated with investing in securities of real estate companies and real estate related companies, REITs are subject to certain additional risks. Equity REITs may be affected by changes in the value of the underlying properties owned by the trusts, and mortgage REITs may be affected by the quality of any credit extended. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills and may have their investments in relatively few properties, or in a small geographic area or a single property type. Failure of a company to qualify as a REIT under federal tax law may have adverse consequences to the fund. In addition, REITs have their own expenses, and the fund will bear a proportionate share of those expenses.

 

 

2   Schwab Global Real Estate Fund


Table of Contents

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

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

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

Geographic Risk. To the extent the fund’s investments in a single country or a limited number of countries represent a higher percentage of the fund’s assets, the fund assumes the risk that economic, political and social conditions in those countries will have a significant impact on its investment performance and it may be subject to increased price volatility.

Convertible Securities Risk.  The value of a convertible security is influenced by changes in interest rates, with investment value declining as interest rates increase and increasing as interest rates decline, and the credit standing of the issuer. The price of a convertible security will also normally vary in some proportion to changes in the price of the underlying common stock because of the conversion or exercise feature.

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

principal amount invested. In addition, investments in derivatives may involve leverage, which means a small percentage of assets invested in derivatives can have a disproportionately large impact. However, these risks are less severe when the fund uses derivatives for hedging rather than to enhance the fund’s returns or as a substitute for a position or security.

Leverage Risk.  Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, short sales and reverse repurchase agreements, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities, which means even a small amount of leverage can have a disproportionately large impact on the fund. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

Short Sales Risk.  The fund will incur a loss if the price of the security sold short increases between the time of the short sale and the time the fund replaces the borrowed security.

Management Risk.  As an actively managed mutual fund, the fund is subject to the risk that its investment adviser will make poor security selections. The fund’s investment adviser applies its own investment techniques and risk analyses in making investment decisions for the fund, but there can be no guarantee that they will produce the desired results.

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

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

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

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

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

Performance

The bar chart below shows how the fund’s investment results have varied from year to year, and the following table shows how the fund’s average annual total returns for various periods compared to that of an index. This information provides some indication of the risks of investing in the fund. All figures assume distributions were reinvested. Keep in mind that future performance (both before and after taxes) may differ from past performance. For current performance information, please see www.schwabfunds.com/prospectus . On September 28, 2009, the Investor Share class and Select Share class were combined into a single class of shares of the fund, and the fund no longer offers multiple classes of shares. The performance history of

 

 

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund     3   


Table of Contents

the fund prior to September 28, 2009 is that of the fund’s former Select Shares.

 

Annual total returns (%) as of 12/31

 

LOGO

Best quarter:  36.54% Q2 2009

Worst quarter:  (31.24%) Q4 2008

Year-to-date performance (before taxes) as of 3/31/13:  4.15%

 

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

 

       1 year      5 years     Since
Inception
(5/31/07)
 

Before taxes

     25.57%         1.04%        (1.93%

After taxes on distributions

     23.19%         (0.59%     (3.49%

After taxes on distributions and sale of shares

     16.78%         (0.06%     (2.51%

Comparative Index (reflects no deductions for expenses or taxes)

       

FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Global Index (Net) 1

     28.98%         N/A 2       N/A 2  

FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Global Index (Gross)

     29.85%         0.66%        (1.45%

 

1  

Effective June 28, 2013, the fund changed its comparative index, for purposes of performance calculation, from FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Global Index (Gross) to FTSE EPRA/NAREIT Global Index (Net). The Net version of the index more accurately reflects how dividends paid to the fund on its foreign securities are treated for tax purposes, and provides a better basis for comparing the fund’s performance. The net version of the index reflects reinvested dividends net of withholding taxes, but reflects no deductions for expenses or other taxes.

2  

Index inception date: 10/31/2008.

The after-tax figures reflect the highest individual federal income tax rates in effect during the period and do not reflect the impact of state and local taxes. Your actual after-tax returns depend on your individual tax situation. In addition, after-tax returns are not relevant if you hold your fund shares through a tax-deferred arrangement, such as a 401(k) plan, an individual retirement account (IRA) or other tax-advantaged account. In some cases, the return after taxes may exceed the return before taxes due to an assumed benefit from any losses on a sale of shares at the end of the measurement period.

Investment adviser

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

Portfolio managers

Jonas Svallin, CFA, Managing Director and Head of Disciplined Active Equity Strategies, is responsible for the day-to-day co-management of the fund. He has co-managed the fund since June 2012.

Wei Li, Ph.D., CFA, Portfolio Manager, is responsible for the day-to-day co-management of the fund. She has co-managed the fund since March 2013.

Purchase and sale of fund shares

The fund is open for business each day that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is open. When you place orders to purchase, exchange or redeem fund shares through an account at Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Schwab) or another financial intermediary, you must follow Schwab’s or the other financial intermediary’s transaction procedures.

Eligible Investors (as determined by the fund and which generally are limited to institutional investors) may invest directly in the fund by placing purchase, exchange and redemption orders through the fund’s transfer agent. Eligible Investors must contact the transfer agent by phone or in writing to obtain an account application. Eligible Investors may contact the transfer agent:

 

   

by telephone at 1-800-407-0256; or

 

   

by mail in writing to Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Schwab Funds, P.O. Box 8283, Boston, MA 02266-8323.

The minimum initial investment for the fund is $100. The minimum may be waived for certain investors or in the fund’s sole discretion.

Tax information

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

Payments to financial intermediaries

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

 

 

4   Schwab Global Real Estate Fund


Table of Contents

Fund details

Investment objective

The fund seeks capital growth and income consistent with prudent investment management.

More information about principal investment risks

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

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

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

Small- and Mid-Cap Risk.  Larger REITs and other real estate companies may be small- to medium-sized companies in relation to the equity markets as a whole. Real estate equity share prices therefore can be more volatile than, and perform differently from, those of larger company stocks. Historically, mid- and small-cap stocks have been riskier than large-cap stocks. Mid- and small-cap companies themselves may be more vulnerable to adverse business or economic events than larger, more established companies. Stock prices of smaller companies may be based in substantial part on future expectations rather than current achievements and may move sharply, especially during market upturns and downturns. In addition, there may be less activity in smaller company stocks than in larger company stocks and, as a result, trading may have a greater impact on the stock price of smaller companies. During a period when mid- and small-cap stocks fall behind other types of investments — bonds or large-cap stocks, for instance — the fund’s small- and mid-cap holdings could reduce performance.

Real Estate Investment Risk.  Although the fund does not invest directly in real estate, the fund has a policy of concentrating its investments in securities of real estate companies and companies related to the real estate industry. As such, the fund is subject to risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate securities and an investment in the fund will be closely linked to the performance of the real estate markets. These risks include, among others, declines in the value of real estate; risks related to general and local economic conditions; possible lack of availability of mortgage funds; overbuilding; extended vacancies of properties; defaults by borrowers or tenants, particularly during an economic downturn; increasing competition; increases in property taxes and operating expenses; changes in zoning laws; losses due to costs resulting from the clean-up of environmental problems; liability to third parties for damages resulting from environmental problems; casualty or condemnation losses; limitations on rents; changes in market and sub-market values and the appeal of properties to tenants; and changes in interest rates.

REITs Risk.  In addition to the risks associated with investing in securities of real estate companies and real estate related companies, REITs are subject to certain additional risks. Equity REITs may be affected by changes in the value of the underlying properties owned by the trusts, and mortgage REITs may be affected by the quality of any credit extended. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills and may have their investments in relatively few properties, or in a small geographic area or a single property type. REITs are also subject to heavy cash flow dependency, defaults by borrowers and self-liquidation. In addition, REITs could possibly fail to qualify for tax free pass-through of income under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (Internal Revenue Code), or to maintain their exemptions from registration under the Investment Company Act of 1940. The failure of a company to qualify as a REIT under federal tax law may have adverse consequences to the fund. The above factors may also adversely affect a borrower’s or a lessee’s ability to meet its obligations to the REIT. In the event of a default by a borrower or lessee, the REIT may experience delays in enforcing its rights as a mortgagee or lessor and may incur substantial costs associated with protecting its investments. In addition, REITs have their own expenses, and the fund will bear a proportionate share of those expenses.

Interest Rate Risk.  The fund’s investments in fixed income securities are subject to the risk that interest rates rise and fall over time. When interest rates rise, the value of the fund’s fixed income securities is likely to decline. Securities with longer durations tend to be more sensitive to interest rate changes than securities with shorter durations. When interest rates are low, a change in a central bank’s monetary policy or improving economic conditions may result in an increase in interest rates. Rising interest rates may decrease liquidity in the fixed income securities markets, making it more difficult for the fund to sell its fixed income securities at a time when the investment adviser might wish to sell such securities. In addition, decreased market liquidity may make it more difficult to value some or all of the fund’s fixed income securities.

Credit Risk.  The fund is subject to the risk that a decline in the credit quality of a portfolio investment could cause the fund’s share price to fall. The fund could lose money if the issuer or guarantor of a portfolio investment or the counterparty to a derivatives contract fails to make timely principal or interest payments or otherwise honor its obligations. The negative perceptions of an issuer’s ability to make such

 

Fund details     5   


Table of Contents

payments could also cause the price of that investment to decline. High yield securities (junk bonds) involve greater risks of default or downgrade and are more volatile than investment-grade securities. High yield securities involve greater risk of price declines than investment-grade securities due to actual or perceived changes in an issuer’s creditworthiness. In addition, issuers of high yield securities may be more susceptible than other issuers to economic downturns. Such securities are subject to the risk that the issuer may not be able to pay interest or dividends and ultimately to repay principal upon maturity. Discontinuation of these payments could substantially adversely affect the market value of the securities.

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

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

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

Currency Risk.  As a result of the fund’s investments in securities denominated in, and/or receiving revenues in, foreign currencies, the fund will be subject to currency risk. This is the risk that these currencies will decline in value relative to the U.S. dollar, or, in the case of hedging positions, that the U.S. dollar will decline in value relative to the currency hedged. In either event, the dollar value of the fund’s investment would be adversely affected. Currency exchange rates may fluctuate in response to factors extrinsic to that country’s economy, which makes the forecasting of currency market movements difficult. Currency rates in foreign countries may fluctuate significantly over short periods of time for a number of reasons, including changes in interest rates, intervention (or failure to intervene) by governments, central banks or supranational entities, such as the International Monetary Fund, or by the imposition of currency controls or other political developments in the United States or abroad. These can result in losses to the fund if the fund is unable to deliver or receive currency or monies in settlement of obligations and could also cause hedges it has entered into to be rendered useless, resulting in full currency exposure as well as incurring transaction costs.

Geographic Risk. To the extent the fund’s investments in a single country or a limited number of countries represent a higher percentage of the fund’s assets, the fund assumes the risk that economic, political and social conditions in those countries will have a significant impact on its investment performance and it may be subject to increased price volatility.

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

Derivatives Risk.  Examples of derivatives are options, futures, options on futures and swaps. An option is the right to buy or sell an instrument at a specific price before a specific date. A future is an agreement to buy or sell a financial instrument at a specific price on a specific day. A swap is an agreement whereby two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities and a predetermined amount. A credit default swap is an agreement in which the seller agrees to make a payment to the buyer in the event of a specified credit event in exchange for a fixed payment or series of fixed payments.

 

6   Fund details


Table of Contents

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

Leverage Risk.  Certain fund transactions, such as derivatives, short sales and reverse repurchase agreements, may give rise to a form of leverage and may expose the fund to greater risk. In a reverse repurchase agreement, the fund would sell a security and enter into an agreement to repurchase the security at a specified future date and price. Leverage tends to magnify the effect of any decrease or increase in the value of the fund’s portfolio securities. The use of leverage may cause the fund to liquidate portfolio positions when it would not be advantageous to do so in order to satisfy its obligations.

Short Sales Risk.  Short sales are transactions in which the fund sells a security it does not own. To complete a short sale, the fund must borrow the security to deliver to the buyer. The fund is then obligated to replace the borrowed security by purchasing the security at the market price at the time of replacement. This price may be more or less than the price at which the security was sold by the fund and the fund will incur a loss if the price of the security sold short increases between the time of the short sale and the time the fund replaces the borrowed security.

Management Risk.  The fund is an actively managed mutual fund. Any actively managed mutual fund is subject to the risk that its investment adviser will make poor security selections. The fund’s investment adviser applies its own investment techniques and risk analyses in making investment decisions for the fund, but there can be no guarantee that they will produce the desired results.

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

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

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

Portfolio holdings

A description of the fund’s policies and procedures with respect to the disclosure of portfolio securities is available in the fund’s Statement of Additional Information (SAI).

 

Fund details     7   


Table of Contents

 

Financial highlights

This section provides further details about the fund’s financial history for the past five years. Certain information reflects financial results for a single fund share. “Total return” shows the percentage that an investor in the fund would have earned or lost during a given period, assuming all distributions were reinvested. The fund’s independent registered accountants, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”), audited these figures. PwC’s full report is included in the fund’s annual report (see back cover).

 

     3/1/12–
2/28/13
    3/1/11–
2/29/12
    3/1/10–
2/28/11
    3/1/09–
2/28/10
1
    3/1/08–
2/28/09
          
Per-Share Data ($)                                                      

Net asset value at beginning of period

     6.32        6.69        5.71        3.27        7.89        
  

 

 

Income (loss) from investment operations:

               

Net investment income (loss)

     0.14        0.12        0.19        0.16        0.16        

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)

     0.89        (0.27     1.28        2.64        (4.65     
  

 

 

Total from investment operations

     1.03        (0.15     1.47        2.80        (4.49     

Less distributions:

         

Distributions from net investment income

     (0.41     (0.22     (0.49     (0.36     (0.13     
  

 

 

Net asset value at end of period

     6.94        6.32        6.69        5.71        3.27        
  

 

 

Total return (%)

     16.64        (2.13     26.70        86.27        (57.72     
Ratios/Supplemental Data (%)                                                      

Ratios to average net assets:

               

Net operating expenses

     1.05        1.05        1.05        1.07 2       1.05        

Gross operating expenses

     1.16        1.18        1.20        1.30        1.24        

Net investment income (loss)

     1.70        1.79        2.29        2.31        2.83        

Portfolio turnover rate

     128        120        129        115        108        

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

     233        198        200        147        45        

 

 

1  

Effective September 28, 2009, the Investor Shares class and the Select Shares class were combined into a single class of shares of the fund. The financial history as shown in the financial highlights is that of the former Select Shares.

 

2  

The ratio of net operating expenses would have been 1.05% if certain non-routine expenses (proxy and tax expense) had not been incurred.

 

8   Financial highlights


Table of Contents

Fund management

The investment adviser for the fund is Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (CSIM), 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105. CSIM was founded in 1989 and, as of May 31, 2013, managed approximately $224 billion in assets.

As the investment adviser, CSIM oversees the asset management and administration of the fund. As compensation for these services, CSIM is entitled to receive a management fee from the fund of 0.77% of the fund’s average daily net assets. For the 12 months ended 2/28/13, the management fee was 0.67%. This figure, which is expressed as a percentage of the fund’s average daily net assets, represents the actual amount paid, including the effect of reductions.

A discussion regarding the basis for the Board of Trustees’ approval of the fund’s investment advisory agreement is available in the fund’s August 31, 2012 semi-annual report, which covers the period February 29, 2012 through August 31, 2012.

Jonas Svallin, CFA, Managing Director and Head of Disciplined Active Equity Strategies, leads the portfolio management team of Schwab’s disciplined active equity funds. He also has overall responsibility for all aspects of the management of the fund. Prior to joining CSIM in 2012, Mr. Svallin spent nearly three years as a partner and a director of quantitative analytics & research at Fiduciary Research & Consulting, where he provided oversight of quantitative analytics and risk management efforts. From 2003 until 2009, Mr. Svallin was a principal and head portfolio manager at Algert Coldiron Investors (ACI). Prior to joining ACI, Mr. Svallin worked as a quantitative research associate at RCM Capital Management and as a senior consultant at FactSet Research Systems.

Wei Li, Ph.D., CFA, Portfolio Manager, is responsible for the day-to-day co-management of the fund. Prior to joining CSIM in 2012, Ms. Li spent more than ten years at BlackRock, Inc. (formerly Barclays Global Investors), where she held a number of positions. From 2001 to 2009, she worked in various roles in the Global Advanced Active group, including portfolio management and quantitative research for both U.S. and international equity markets. After 2009, she worked in the defined contribution research and product development area for almost two years.

Additional information about the portfolio managers’ compensation, other accounts managed by the portfolio managers and the portfolio managers’ ownership of securities in the fund is available in the fund’s SAI.

 

Fund management     9   


Table of Contents

Investing in the fund

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

Investing through a financial intermediary

Placing orders through your intermediary

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

Only certain intermediaries are authorized to accept orders on behalf of the fund. If your fund shares are no longer held by an authorized intermediary, the fund may impose restrictions on your ability to manage or maintain your shares. For example, you will not be able to place orders to purchase additional shares. To remove these restrictions, you have two options. First, you may move your shares to Schwab or another intermediary that is authorized to accept fund orders. Second, you may maintain a direct account with the fund if you meet the eligibility requirements for placing direct orders and your completed account application and supporting documentation is returned to and accepted by the fund’s transfer agent, Boston Financial Data Services (transfer agent). The eligibility requirements and instructions for submitting an account application are set forth in the “Investing directly with the fund” section of the prospectus. If you do not exercise one of these options within ninety days, the fund reserves the right to redeem your shares.

Buying, selling and exchanging shares through an intermediary

To purchase, redeem or exchange shares held in your Schwab account or in your account at another intermediary, you must place your orders with the intermediary that holds your shares. You may not purchase, redeem or exchange shares held in your intermediary account directly with the fund.

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

 

 

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

 

 

The fund reserves the right to honor redemptions in liquid portfolio securities instead of cash when your redemptions over a 90-day period exceed $250,000 or 1% of the fund’s assets, whichever is less. You may incur transaction expenses in converting these securities to cash.

 

 

Exchange orders are limited to other Schwab Funds® or Laudus MarketMasters Funds® that are not Sweep Investments® and must meet the minimum investment and other requirements for the fund and share class into which you are exchanging.

 

 

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

Investing directly with the fund

Investor eligibility requirements for placing direct orders

Only Eligible Investors (as defined below) may purchase shares directly from the fund’s transfer agent, Boston Financial Data Services. Eligible Investors include, but are not limited to, qualified and non-qualified employee benefit plans (including but not limited to defined benefit plans, defined contribution plans, 401(k) plans), foundations and endowments, banks, trusts, investment companies and corporate capital and cash management accounts. Eligible Investors may also be shareholders who receive shares of a Schwab Fund as a result of a reorganization. The fund reserves the right to determine which potential investors qualify as Eligible Investors. Shares held by a non-Eligible Investor directly with the fund are subject to involuntary redemption by the fund.

 

10   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

Opening an account to place direct orders

You must satisfy the investor eligibility requirements for direct order clients in order to place direct orders for the fund’s shares. Eligible Investors must open an account with the fund through the fund’s transfer agent, prior to placing direct orders. You may obtain an account application by calling the transfer agent at 1-800-407-0256. Your completed application and supporting documents must be returned to, and accepted by, the transfer agent before you can place direct orders. You cannot place direct orders through your Schwab account or through your account at another intermediary.

Initial and additional direct purchases by wire

Subject to acceptance by the fund, you may make your initial purchase and any additional purchases of shares by wiring federal funds to the transfer agent. If you have not yet opened an account with the fund, you must fax a signed, hard copy of the completed account application and all supporting documents to the transfer agent at 1-816-218-0490. You must call the transfer agent at 1-800-407-0256 prior to the close of the fund (generally 4:00 p.m. Eastern time or the close of the NYSE, whichever is earlier) to place your order and to receive wire instructions. Orders received by the transfer agent in good order on or prior to the close of the fund will be processed at the net asset value per share of the fund for that day. Your wired funds must be received and accepted by the transfer agent prior to 6:00 p.m. Eastern time or the deadline for the Fedwire Funds Service for initiating third party transfers, whichever is earlier, on the day your purchase order is placed. Please call the transfer agent at 1-800-407-0256 if you have any questions or need additional information.

Initial and additional direct purchases by mail

Subject to acceptance by the fund, you may open an account and make your initial purchase and any additional purchases of the fund’s shares by mail. To open an account by mail, complete and sign the account application and mail the account application, all supporting documents and a check for the desired purchase amount to the transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Schwab Funds, PO Box 8283, Boston, MA 02266-8323. Additional investments may be made at any time by mailing a check (payable to Schwab Funds) to the transfer agent at the address above. Be sure to include your account number on your check.

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

Direct redemptions and exchanges

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

 

 

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

 

 

The fund reserves the right to honor redemptions in liquid portfolio securities instead of cash when your redemptions over a 90-day period exceed $250,000 or 1% of the fund’s assets, whichever is less. You may incur transaction expenses in converting these securities to cash.

 

 

Exchange orders are limited to other Schwab Funds® or Laudus MarketMasters Funds® that are not Sweep Investments® and must meet the minimum investment and other requirements for the fund and share class into which you are exchanging.

 

 

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

 

 

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

Direct redemptions by telephone

If you authorized the telephone redemption option in the account application, you may place a redemption order by calling the transfer agent at 1-800-407-0256 and requesting that the redemption proceeds be wired per the authorized instructions in the account application or mailed to the primary registration address. Your redemption order will be processed at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after receipt of your telephone redemption order by the transfer agent. Please note that the transfer agent may only act on telephone instructions believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. The transfer agent’s records of such instructions are binding on the shareholder. The fund and its service providers (including the transfer agent, Schwab and CSIM) are not responsible for any losses or costs that may arise from following telephone instructions that the transfer agent reasonably believes to be genuine. The transfer agent will employ reasonable procedures to confirm that instructions communicated are genuine. These procedures include tape recording of telephone instructions and requiring some form of personal identification prior to acting upon instructions received by telephone.

 

Investing in the fund     11   


Table of Contents

Direct redemptions by mail

You may redeem your fund shares by mail by sending a request letter to the fund’s transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Schwab Funds, PO Box 8283, Boston, MA 02266-8323. Your redemption request will be processed by the fund at the net asset value per share of the fund next determined after the request is received in good order. To be in good order, the redemption request must include the name of the fund and the number of shares or the dollar amount to be redeemed, all required signatures and authorizations and any required signature guarantees.

Additional direct redemption information

To protect you, the fund and its service providers from fraud, signature guarantees may be required to enable the transfer agent to verify the identity of the person who has authorized a redemption from an account. Signature guarantees are required for (1) redemptions where the proceeds are to be sent to someone other than the registered shareholder(s) at the registered address, (2) redemptions if your account address has changed within the last 10 business days, (3) share transfer requests, and (4) redemptions where the proceeds are wired in connection with bank instructions not already on file with the transfer agent. Signature guarantees may be obtained from certain eligible financial institutions, including, but not limited to, the following: U.S. banks, trust companies, credit unions, securities brokers and dealers, savings and loan associations and participants in the Securities and Transfer Association Medallion Program (“STAMP”), the Stock Exchange Medallion Program (“SEMP”) or the New York Stock Exchange Medallion Signature Program (“MSP”). Signature guarantees from non-U.S. banks that do not include a stamp may require a U.S. consulate stamp. You may contact the transfer agent at 1-800-407-0256 for further details.

Direct exchange privileges

Upon request, and subject to certain limitations, shares of the fund may be exchanged into shares of any other Schwab Fund or Laudus MarketMasters Fund that is not a Sweep Investment. To exchange your shares to another fund, you must meet the minimum investment and other requirements for the fund and share class into which you are exchanging. Further, you should read the prospectus for the fund into which you are exchanging prior to placing your order. A new account opened by exchange must be established with the same name(s), address(es) and tax identification number(s) as the existing account. All exchanges will be made based on the respective net asset values next determined following receipt of the request by the fund containing the information indicated below.

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

Direct exchanges by telephone

If you authorized the telephone redemption option in the account application, you may exchange fund shares by telephone by calling the fund’s transfer agent at 1-800-407-0256. Please be prepared to provide the following information: (a) the account number, tax identification number and account registration; (b) the class of shares to be exchanged (if applicable); (c) the name of the fund from which and the fund into which the exchange is to be made; and (d) the dollar or share amount to be exchanged. Please note that the transfer agent may act only on telephone instructions believed by the transfer agent to be genuine. Please see the section entitled “Direct redemptions by telephone” for more information regarding transacting with the fund’s transfer agent via telephone.

Direct exchanges by mail

To exchange fund shares by mail, simply send a letter of instruction to the fund’s transfer agent at Boston Financial Data Services, Attn: Schwab Funds, PO Box 8283, Boston, MA 02266-8323. The letter of instruction must include: (a) your account number; (b) the class of shares to be exchanged (if applicable); (c) the fund from and the fund into which the exchange is to be made; (d) the dollar or share amount to be exchanged; and (e)  the signatures of all registered owners or authorized parties.

Share price

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

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

In valuing its securities, the fund uses market quotes or official closing prices if they are readily available. In cases where quotes are not readily available or the adviser deems them unreliable, the fund may value securities based on fair values developed using methods approved by the fund’s Board of Trustees. When valuing fixed income securities with remaining maturities of more than 60 days, the fund uses the

 

12   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

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

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

Additional policies affecting your investment

 

Minimum initial investment

$100

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

Choose an option for fund distributions

If you are an Eligible Investor placing direct orders with the fund, you will have one of the three options described below for fund distributions. If you don’t indicate a choice, you will receive the first option. If you are placing orders through an intermediary, you will select from the options for fund distributions provided by your intermediary, which may be different than those provided by the fund to Eligible Investors. You should consult with your financial intermediary to discuss available options.

 

Option    Feature
Reinvestment    All dividends and capital gain distributions are invested automatically in shares of the fund.
Cash/reinvestment mix    You receive payment for dividends, while any capital gain distributions are invested in shares of the fund.
Cash    You receive payment for all dividends and capital gain distributions.

The fund reserves certain rights, including the following:

 

   

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

 

   

To change or waive the fund’s investment minimums.

 

   

To suspend the right to sell shares back to the fund, and delay sending proceeds, during times when trading on the NYSE is restricted or halted, or otherwise as permitted by the SEC.

 

   

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

Payments by the investment adviser or its affiliates

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

Shareholder servicing plan

The Board of Trustees has adopted a Shareholder Servicing Plan (the “Plan”) on behalf of the fund. The Plan enables the fund to bear expenses relating to the provision by service providers, including Schwab, of certain account maintenance, customer liaison and shareholder services to the current shareholders of the fund. Schwab serves as the fund’s paying agent under the Plan for making payments of the shareholder service fee due to the service providers (other than Schwab) under the Plan. All shareholder service fees paid by the fund to Schwab in its capacity as the fund’s paying agent will be passed through to the service providers, and Schwab will not retain any portion of such fees.

Pursuant to the Plan, the fund’s shares are subject to an annual shareholder servicing fee of up to 0.25%. The shareholder servicing fee paid to a particular service provider is made pursuant to its written agreement with Schwab (or, in the case of payments made to Schwab, pursuant to Schwab’s written agreement with the fund), and the fund will pay no more than 0.25% of the average annual daily net asset value of the fund shares owned by shareholders holding shares through such service provider. Payments under the Plan are made as described above regardless

 

Investing in the fund     13   


Table of Contents

of Schwab’s or the service provider’s actual cost of providing the services. If the cost of providing the services under the Plan is less than the payments received, the unexpended portion of the fees may be retained as profit by Schwab or the service provider.

Policy regarding short-term or excessive trading

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

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

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

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

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

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

Fair value pricing

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

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

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

Redemption fee

Shares redeemed or exchanged within 30 days of purchase, which shall be calculated to include the 30th day, will be subject to a fee of 2%, which is intended to limit short-term trading in the fund, or to the extent that short-term trading persists, to impose the costs of that type of

 

14   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

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

Large shareholder redemptions

Certain accounts or Schwab affiliates may from time to time own (beneficially or of record) or control a significant percentage of the fund’s shares. Redemptions by these shareholders of their holdings in the fund may impact the fund’s liquidity and NAV. These redemptions may also force the fund to sell securities, which may negatively impact the fund’s brokerage costs.

Customer identification and verification and anti-money laundering program

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

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

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

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

Distributions and taxes

Any investment in the fund typically involves several tax considerations. The information below is meant as a general summary for U.S. citizens and residents. Please see the SAI for additional information. Because each person’s tax situation is different, you should consult your tax advisor about the tax implications of your investment in the fund. You also can visit the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) web site at www.irs.gov.

As a shareholder, you are entitled to your share of the dividends and gains the fund earns. Every year, the fund distributes to its shareholders substantially all of its net investment income and net capital gains, if any. Income distributions are typically paid at the end of every calendar quarter, and net capital gains, if any, are paid in December to all shareholders of record. During the fourth quarter of the year, typically in early November, an estimate of the fund’s capital gains distributions, if any, may be made available on the fund’s website: www.schwab.com/schwabfunds.

Unless you are investing through an IRA, 401(k) or other tax-advantaged retirement account, your fund distributions generally have tax consequences. The fund’s net investment income and short-term capital gains are distributed as dividends and will be taxable as ordinary income or qualified dividend income. Other capital gain distributions are taxable as long-term capital gains, regardless of how long you have

 

Investing in the fund     15   


Table of Contents

held your shares in the fund. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, the maximum individual rate applicable to “qualified dividend income” and long-term capital gains depends on whether the individual’s income exceeds certain threshold amounts. The maximum rate is generally 15% for taxpayers whose income is equal to or less than $400,000 (individual filers) or $450,000 (married filing jointly), and 20% for taxpayers whose income exceeds the foregoing thresholds. Distributions generally are taxable in the tax year in which they are declared, whether you reinvest them or take them in cash.

Generally, any sale or exchange of your shares is a taxable event. For tax purposes, an exchange of your shares for shares of another Schwab Fund or Laudus MarketMasters Fund is treated the same as a sale. A sale may result in a capital gain or loss for you. The gain or loss generally will be treated as short term if you held the shares for one year or less, long term if you held the shares longer. For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, the maximum individual rate applicable to long-term capital gains depends on whether the individual’s income exceeds certain threshold amounts. The maximum rate is generally 15% for taxpayers whose income is equal to or less than $400,000 (individual filers) or $450,000 (married filing jointly), and 20% for taxpayers whose income exceeds the foregoing thresholds. Any loss realized upon a taxable disposition of shares held for six months or less will be treated as long-term, rather than short-term, to the extent of any long-term capital gain distributions received (or deemed received) by you with respect to the shares. All or a portion of any loss realized upon a taxable disposition of shares will be disallowed if you purchase other substantially identical shares within 30 days before or after the disposition. In such a case, the basis of the newly purchased shares will be adjusted to reflect the disallowed loss.

For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, an additional 3.8% Medicare tax will be imposed on certain net investment income (including ordinary dividends and capital gain distributions received from the fund and net gains from redemptions or other taxable dispositions of fund shares) of U.S. individuals, estates and trusts to the extent that such person’s “modified adjusted gross income” (in the case of an individual) or “adjusted gross income” (in the case of an estate or trust) exceeds a threshold amount.

Shareholders in the fund may have additional tax considerations as a result of foreign tax payments made by the fund. Typically, these payments will reduce the fund’s dividends but will still be included in your taxable income. You may be able to claim a tax credit or deduction for your portion of foreign taxes paid by the fund, however.

At the beginning of every year, the fund will provide shareholders with a tax reporting statement containing information detailing the estimated tax status of any distributions that the fund paid during the previous calendar year. Schwab customers also receive information on distributions and transactions in their monthly account statements. REITs in which the fund invests often do not provide complete and final tax information to the fund until after the time that the fund issues the tax reporting statement. As a result, the fund may at times find it necessary to reclassify the amount and character of its distributions to you after it issues your tax reporting statement. When such reclassification is necessary, the fund will send you a corrected, final Form 1099-DIV to reflect reclassified information. If you receive a corrected Form 1099-DIV, use the information on this corrected form, and not the information on the previously issued tax reporting statement, in completing your tax returns.

Prior to January 1, 2012 when shareholders sold fund shares from a taxable account, they typically received information on their tax forms that calculated their gain or loss using the average cost method. This information was not previously reported to the IRS, and shareholders had the option of calculating gains or losses using an alternative IRS permitted method. However, in accordance with legislation passed by Congress in 2008, the fund began reporting cost basis information to the IRS for shares purchased on or after January 1, 2012 and sold thereafter. The fund permits shareholders to elect their preferred cost basis method. In the absence of an election, the fund will use an average cost basis method. Please consult your tax adviser to determine the appropriate cost basis method for your particular tax situation and to learn more about how the new cost basis reporting laws apply to you and your investments, including investments made prior to January 1, 2012 and sold thereafter.

More on qualified dividend income and distributions

Dividends that are reported by the fund as qualified dividend income are currently eligible for a reduced maximum tax rate as noted above. Qualified dividend income is, in general, dividend income from taxable domestic corporations and certain foreign corporations. Dividend income that the fund received from REITs, if any, generally will not be treated as qualified dividend income.

If you are investing through a taxable account and purchase shares of the fund just before it declares a distribution, you may receive a portion of your investment back as a taxable distribution. This is because when the fund makes a distribution, the share price is reduced by the amount of the distribution. You can avoid “buying a dividend,” as it is often called, by finding out if a distribution is imminent and waiting until afterwards to invest. Of course, you may decide that the opportunity to gain a few days of investment performance outweighs the tax consequences of buying a dividend.

 

16   Investing in the fund


Table of Contents

The fund may be required to withhold U.S. federal income tax on all taxable distributions payable to shareholders if they fail to provide the fund with their correct taxpayer identification number or to make required certifications, or if they have been notified by the IRS that they are subject to backup withholding. Backup withholding is not an additional tax. Any amounts withheld may be credited against U.S. federal income tax liability.

Foreign shareholders may be subject to different U.S. federal income tax treatment, including withholding tax at the rate of 30% on amounts treated as ordinary dividends from the fund, as discussed in more detail in the SAI. Furthermore, effective January 1, 2014, the fund will be required to withhold U.S. tax (at a 30% rate) on payments of taxable dividends and (effective January 1, 2017) redemption proceeds made to certain non-U.S. entities that fail to comply (or be deemed compliant) with extensive new reporting and withholding requirements designed to inform the U.S. Department of the Treasury of U.S.-owned foreign investment accounts. Shareholders may be requested to provide additional information to the fund to enable the fund to determine whether withholding is required.

 

Investing in the fund     17   


Table of Contents

Notes


Table of Contents

To learn more

This prospectus contains important information on the fund and should be read and kept for reference. You also can obtain more information from the following sources:

Annual and semi-annual reports, which are mailed to current fund investors, contain more information about the fund’s holdings and detailed financial information about the fund. Annual reports also contain information from the fund’s managers about strategies, recent market conditions and trends and their impact on fund performance.

The Statement of Additional Information (SAI) includes a more detailed discussion of investment policies and the risks associated with various investments. The SAI is incorporated by reference into the prospectus, making it legally part of the prospectus.

For a free copy of any of these documents or to request other information or ask questions about the fund, call Schwab at 1-800-435-4000. In addition, you may visit www.schwabfunds.com/prospectus for a free copy of a prospectus, SAI or an annual or semi-annual report.

The SAI, the fund’s annual and semi-annual reports and other related materials are available from the EDGAR Database on the SEC’s web site (http://www.sec.gov). You can obtain copies of this information, after paying a duplicating fee, by sending a request by e-mail to publicinfo@sec.gov or by writing the Public Reference Section of the SEC, Washington, D.C. 20549-1520. You can also review and copy information about the fund, including the fund’s SAI, at the SEC’s Public Reference Room in Washington, D.C. Call 1-202-551-8090 for information on the operation of the SEC’s Public Reference Room.

 

SEC File Number   

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund TM

     811-6200   

REG36895FLT-09

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund

Prospectus

June 28, 2013

 

 

LOGO


Table of Contents

STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Schwab Investments

Schwab Global Real Estate Fund™

Ticker Symbol: SWASX

June 28, 2013

The Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) is not a prospectus. It should be read in conjunction with the fund’s prospectus dated June 28, 2013 (as amended from time to time).

To obtain a free copy of the prospectus, please contact Schwab Funds ® at 1-800-435-4000, day or night. For TDD service call 1-800-345-2550, day or night. The prospectus and SAI also may be available on the Internet at: www.schwabfunds.com

The fund is a series of Schwab Investments (the “Trust”). The Trust, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios are collectively referred to as the “Schwab Funds”.

The audited financial statements from the fund’s annual report for the fiscal year ended February 28, 2013 are incorporated by reference into this SAI. A copy of the fund’s 2013 annual report is delivered with the SAI.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

     Page  

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE

     2   

INVESTMENT STRATEGY

     2   

INVESTMENT SECURITIES AND RISKS

     2   

INVESTMENT LIMITATIONS

     36   

MANAGEMENT OF THE FUND

     39   

CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES

     48   

INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES

     48   

BROKERAGE ALLOCATION AND OTHER PRACTICES

     53   

DESCRIPTION OF THE TRUST

     58   

PURCHASE, REDEMPTION, DELIVERY OF SHAREHOLDER DOCUMENTS AND PRICING OF SHARES

     59   

TAXATION

     62   

APPENDIX – RATINGS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES

  

APPENDIX – DESCRIPTION OF PROXY VOTING POLICY AND PROCEDURES

  

REG38787-11

 

1


Table of Contents

INVESTMENT OBJECTIVE

The fund seeks capital growth and income consistent with prudent investment management.

Change of Investment Objective

The fund’s investment objective may be changed by vote of a majority of its outstanding voting securities. A majority of the outstanding voting shares of the fund means the affirmative vote of the lesser of: (a) 67% or more of the voting shares represented at the meeting, if more than 50% of the outstanding voting shares of the fund are represented at the meeting or (b) more than 50% of the outstanding voting shares of the fund.

There is no guarantee that the fund will achieve its investment objective.

INVESTMENT STRATEGY

Change to 80% Investment Policy

Under normal circumstances, the fund invests at least 80% of its net assets in securities of real estate companies and companies related to the real estate industry. The fund will notify its shareholders at least 60 days before changing this policy. For purposes of this policy, net assets means net assets plus the amount of any borrowings for investment purposes.

INVESTMENT SECURITIES AND RISKS

The following descriptions of investment securities, risks and limitations supplement those set forth in the fund’s prospectus and may be changed without shareholder approval, unless otherwise noted. The fund will invest in securities or engage in techniques that are intended to help achieve its investment objective.

Borrowing may subject the fund to interest costs, which may exceed the interest received on the securities purchased with the borrowed funds. The fund normally may borrow at times to meet redemption requests rather than sell portfolio securities to raise the necessary cash. The fund may borrow money from banks and make other investments or engage in other transactions permissible under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the 1940 Act), which may be considered a borrowing (such as mortgage dollar rolls and reverse repurchase agreements).

The fund may establish lines-of-credit (lines) with certain banks by which it may borrow funds for temporary or emergency purposes. A borrowing is presumed to be for temporary or emergency purposes if it is (a) not in excess of 5% of a fund’s total assets; (b) repaid by a fund within 60 days; and (c) not extended or renewed. The fund intends to use the lines to meet large or unexpected redemptions that would otherwise force the fund to liquidate securities under circumstances that are unfavorable to the fund’s remaining shareholders. The fund will pay a fee to the bank for using its lines.

Borrowing can also involve leveraging when securities are purchased with the borrowed money. Leveraging creates interest expenses that can exceed the income from the assets purchased with the borrowed money. In addition, leveraging may magnify changes in the net asset value of the fund’s shares and in its portfolio yield. The fund will earmark or segregate assets to cover such borrowings in accordance with positions of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). If assets used to secure a borrowing decrease in value, a fund may be required to pledge additional collateral to avoid liquidation of those assets.

 

2


Table of Contents

Concentration means that substantial amounts of assets are invested in a particular industry or group of industries. The fund has a policy to concentrate its investments in securities of real estate companies and other companies related to the real estate industry.

Based on the characteristics of mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), the fund has identified MBS issued by private lenders and not guaranteed by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities as a separate industry for purposes of the fund’s concentration policy.

For purposes of the fund’s concentration policy, the fund will determine the industry classification of asset-backed securities based upon the investment adviser’s evaluation of the risks associated with an investment in the underlying assets. For example, asset-backed securities whose underlying assets share similar economic characteristics because, for example, they are funded (or supported) primarily from a single or similar source or revenue stream will be classified in the same industry sector. In contrast, asset-backed securities whose underlying assets represent a diverse mix of industries, business sectors and/or revenue streams will be classified into distinct industries based on their underlying credit and liquidity structures. With the exception of the real estate industry, the fund will limit its investments in each identified industry to less than 25% of its total assets.

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

Debt securities experience price changes when interest rates change. For example, when interest rates fall, the prices of debt securities generally rise. Also, issuers tend to pre-pay their outstanding debts and issue new ones paying lower interest rates. This is especially true for bonds with sinking fund provisions, which commit the issuer to set aside a certain amount of money to cover timely repayment of principal and typically allow the issuer to annually repurchase certain of its outstanding bonds from the open market or at a pre-set call price.

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

When short- and long-term interest rates are low, a change in the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy or improving economic conditions may lead to an increase in interest rates, which could significantly impact the value of debt securities in which the fund invests. Some debt securities are more sensitive to interest rate changes than others and may experience an immediate and considerable reduction in value if interest rates rise. Longer duration securities tend to be more volatile than shorter duration securities. As the values of debt securities in the fund’s portfolio adjust to a rise in interest rates, the fund’s share price may fall. In the event that the fund holds a large portion of its portfolio in longer duration securities when interest rates increase, the share price of the fund may fall significantly.

Debt securities also are subject to the risk that the issuers will not make timely interest and/or principal payments or fail to make them at all. This is called credit risk. Corporate debt securities (bonds) tend to have higher credit risk generally than U.S. government debt securities. Debt securities also may be subject to price volatility due to market perception of future interest rates, the creditworthiness of the issuer and general market liquidity (market risk). Investment-grade debt securities are considered medium- and/or

 

3


Table of Contents

high-quality securities, although some still possess varying degrees of speculative characteristics and risks. Debt securities rated below investment-grade are riskier, but may offer higher yields. These securities are sometimes referred to as high yield securities or “junk bonds.”

Corporate bonds are debt securities issued by corporations. Although a higher return is expected from corporate bonds, these securities, while subject to the same general risks as U.S. government securities, are subject to greater credit risk than U.S. government securities. Their prices may be affected by the perceived credit quality of their issuer.

Certain debt securities have provisions that allow the issuer to redeem or “call” a bond before its maturity at a price below or above its current market value. Issuers are most likely to call these securities during periods of falling interest rates. When this happens, the fund may have to replace these securities with lower yielding securities, which could result in a lower return.

See Appendix A for a full description of the various ratings assigned to debt securities by various nationally recognized statistical rating organizations (“NRSROs”).

High Yield Securities , also called lower quality bonds (“junk bonds”), are frequently issued by companies without long track records of sales and earnings, or by those of questionable credit strength, and are more speculative and volatile (though typically higher yielding) than investment grade bonds. Adverse economic developments could disrupt the market for high yield securities, and severely affect the ability of issuers, especially highly-leveraged issuers, to service their debt obligations or to repay their obligations upon maturity.

Also, the secondary market for high yield securities at times may not be as liquid as the secondary market for higher-quality debt securities. As a result, the investment adviser could find it difficult to sell these securities or experience difficulty in valuing certain high yield securities at certain times. Prices realized upon the sale of such lower rated securities, under these circumstances, may be less than the prices at which the fund purchased them.

Thus, high yield securities are more likely to react to developments affecting interest rates and market and credit risk than are more highly rated securities, which primarily react to movements in the general level of interest rates. When economic conditions appear to be deteriorating, medium- to lower-quality debt securities may decline in value more than higher-quality debt securities due to heightened concern over credit quality, regardless of prevailing interest rates. Prices for high yield securities also could be affected by legislative and regulatory developments. These laws could adversely affect the fund’s net asset value and investment practices, the secondary market value for high yield securities, the financial condition of issuers of these securities and the value of outstanding high yield securities.

Inflation-Protected Securities are fixed income securities whose value is periodically adjusted according to the rate of inflation. Two structures are common. The U.S. Treasury and some other issuers utilize a structure that accrues inflation into the principal value of the bond. Other issuers pay out the Consumer Price Index (“CPI”) accruals as part of a semiannual coupon.

Inflation protected securities issued by the U.S. Treasury have maturities of approximately five, ten or thirty years, although it is possible that securities with other maturities will be issued in the future. The U.S. Treasury securities pay interest on a semi-annual basis equal to a fixed percentage of the inflation adjusted principal amount.

 

4


Table of Contents

If the periodic adjustment rate measuring inflation falls, the principal value of inflation protected bonds will be adjusted downward, and consequently the interest payable on these securities (calculated with respect to a smaller principal amount) will be reduced. Repayment of the original bond principal upon maturity (as adjusted for inflation) is guaranteed by the U.S. Treasury in the case of U.S. Treasury inflation protected bonds, even during a period of deflation. However, the current market value of the bonds is not guaranteed and will fluctuate. The fund may also invest in other inflation related bonds which may or may not provide a similar guarantee. If a guarantee of principal is not provided, the adjusted principal value of the bond to be repaid at maturity may be less than the original principal amount and, therefore, is subject to credit risk.

The value of inflation protected bonds is expected to change in response to changes in real interest rates. Real interest rates in turn are tied to the relationship between nominal interest rates and the rate of inflation. Therefore, if the rate of inflation rises at a faster rate than nominal interest rates, real interest rates might decline, leading to an increase in value of inflation protected bonds. In contrast, if nominal interest rates increase at a faster rate than inflation, real interest rates might rise, leading to a decrease in value of inflation protected bonds.

While these securities are expected to be protected from long-term inflationary trends, short-term increases in inflation may lead to a decline in value. If interest rates rise due to reasons other than inflation (for example, due to changes in currency exchange rates), investors in these securities may not be protected to the extent that the increase is not reflected in the bond’s inflation measure.

The periodic adjustment of U.S. inflation-protected bonds is tied to the non-seasonally adjusted U.S. City Average All Items Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (“CPI-U”), published monthly by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPI-U is a measurement of changes in the cost of living, made up of components such as housing, food, transportation and energy. Inflation protected bonds issued by a foreign government are generally adjusted to reflect a comparable inflation index calculated by that government. There can be no assurance that the CPI-U or any foreign inflation index will accurately measure the real rate of inflation in the prices of goods and services. Moreover, there can be no assurance that the rate of inflation in a foreign country will be correlated to the rate of inflation in the United States.

Any increase in principal for an inflation protected security resulting from inflation adjustments is considered by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) to be taxable income in the year it occurs. The fund’s distributions to shareholders include interest income and the income attributable to principal adjustments, both of which will be taxable to shareholders. The tax treatment of the income attributable to principal adjustments may result in the situation where the fund needs to make its required annual distributions to shareholders in amounts that exceed the cash received. As a result, the fund may need to liquidate certain investments when it is not advantageous to do so. Also, if the principal value of an inflation protected security is adjusted downward due to deflation, amounts previously distributed in the taxable year may be characterized in some circumstances as a return of capital.

International Bonds are certain obligations or securities of foreign issuers, including Eurodollar Bonds, which are U.S. dollar-denominated bonds issued by foreign issuers payable in Eurodollars (U.S. dollars held in banks located outside the United States, primarily Europe), Yankee Bonds, which are U.S. dollar-denominated bonds issued in the U.S. by foreign banks and corporations, and EuroBonds, which are bonds denominated in U.S. dollars and usually issued by large underwriting groups composed of banks and issuing houses from many countries. Investments in securities issued by foreign issuers, including American Depositary Receipts (“ADRs”) and securities purchased on foreign securities exchanges, may subject the fund to additional investment risks, such as adverse political and economic developments, possible seizure, nationalization or expropriation of foreign investments, less stringent disclosure requirements, non-U.S. withholding taxes and the adoption of other foreign governmental restrictions.

 

5


Table of Contents

Additional risks include less publicly available information, the risk that companies may not be subject to the accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards and requirements of U.S. companies, the risk that foreign securities markets may have less volume and therefore may be less liquid and their prices more volatile than U.S. securities, and the risk that custodian and transaction costs may be higher. Foreign issuers of securities or obligations are often subject to accounting requirements and engage in business practices different from those respecting domestic issuers of similar securities or obligations. Foreign branches of U.S. banks and foreign banks may be subject to less stringent reserve requirements than those applicable to domestic branches of U.S. banks.

Loan Interests, and other direct debt instruments or interests therein, may be acquired by the fund. A loan interest is typically originated, negotiated, and structured by a U.S. or foreign commercial bank, insurance company, finance company, or other financial institution (“Agent”) for a lending syndicate of financial institutions. The Agent typically administers and enforces the loan on behalf of the other lenders in the syndicate. In addition, an institution typically but not always the Agent (“Collateral Bank”), holds collateral (if any) on behalf of the lenders. When a Collateral Bank holds collateral, such collateral typically consists of one or more of the following asset types: inventory, accounts receivable, property, plant and equipment, intangibles, common stock of subsidiaries or other investments. These loan interests may take the form of participation interests in, assignments of or novations of a loan during its second distribution, or direct interests during a primary distribution. Such loan interests may be acquired from U.S. or foreign banks, insurance companies, finance companies, or other financial institutions that have made loans or are members of a lending syndicate or from other holders of loan interests. The fund may also acquire loan interests under which the fund derives its rights directly from the borrower. Such loan interests are separately enforceable by the fund against the borrower and all payments of interest and principal are typically made directly to the fund from the borrower. In the event that the fund and other lenders become entitled to take possession of shared collateral, it is anticipated that such collateral would be held in the custody of the Collateral Bank for their mutual benefit. The fund may not act as an Agent, a Collateral Bank, a guarantor or sole negotiator or structurer with respect to a loan. The investment adviser will analyze and evaluate the financial condition of the borrower in connection with the acquisition of any loan interest. Credit ratings are typically assigned to loan interests in the same manner as with other fixed income debt securities, and the investment adviser analyzes and evaluates these ratings, if any, in deciding whether to purchase a loan interest. The investment adviser also analyzes and evaluates the financial condition of the Agent and, in the case of loan interests in which the fund does not have privity with the borrower, those institutions from or through whom the fund derives its rights in a loan (“Intermediate Participants”).

In a typical loan, the Agent administers the terms of the loan agreement. In such cases, the Agent is normally responsible for the collection of principal and interest payments from the borrower and the apportionment of these payments to the credit of all the institutions that are parties to the loan agreement. The fund will generally rely upon the Agent or Intermediate Participant to receive and forward to the fund its portion of the principal and interest payments on the loan. Furthermore, unless under the terms of a participation agreement the fund has direct recourse against the borrower, the fund will rely on the Agent and the other members of the lending syndicate to use appropriate credit remedies against the borrower. The Agent is typically responsible for monitoring compliance with covenants contained in the loan agreement based upon reports prepared by the borrower. The seller of the loan interest usually does, but is often not obligated to, notify holders of loan interests of any failures of compliance. The Agent may monitor the value of the collateral and, if the value of the collateral declines, may accelerate the loan, may give the borrower an opportunity to provide additional collateral or may seek other protection for the benefit of the participants in the loan. The Agent is compensated by the borrower for providing these services under a loan agreement, and such compensation may include special fees paid upon structuring and funding the loan and other fees paid on a continuing basis. With respect to loan interests for which the Agent does not perform such administrative and enforcement functions, the fund will perform such tasks on its own behalf, although a Collateral Bank will typically hold any collateral on behalf of the fund and the other holders pursuant to the applicable loan agreement.

 

6


Table of Contents

A financial institution’s appointment as Agent may usually be terminated in the event that it fails to observe the requisite standard of care or becomes insolvent, enters Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) receivership, or, if not FDIC insured, enters into bankruptcy proceedings. A successor agent generally would be appointed to replace the terminated Agent, and assets held by the Agent under the loan agreement should remain available to holders of loan interests. However, if assets held by the Agent for the benefit of the fund were determined to be subject to the claims of the Agent’s general creditors, the fund might incur certain costs and delays in realizing payment on a loan interest, or suffer a loss of principal and/or interest. In situations involving Intermediate Participants, similar risks may arise.

Purchasers of loan interests depend primarily upon the creditworthiness of the borrower for payment of principal and interest. If the fund does not receive a scheduled interest or principal payment on such indebtedness, the fund’s share price and yield could be adversely affected. Loans that are fully secured offer the fund more protections than an unsecured loan in the event of non-payment of scheduled interest or principal. However, there is no assurance that the liquidation of collateral from a secured loan would satisfy the borrower’s obligation, or that the collateral can be liquidated. Indebtedness of borrowers whose creditworthiness is poor involves substantially greater risks, and may be highly speculative. Borrowers that are in bankruptcy or restructuring may never pay off their indebtedness, or may pay only a small fraction of the amount owed. Direct indebtedness of developing countries also will involve a risk that the governmental entities responsible for the repayment of the debt may be unable, or unwilling, to pay interest and repay principal when due.

The loan interests market is in a developing phase with increased participation among several investor types. The dealer community has become increasingly involved in this secondary market. If, however, a particular loan interest is deemed to be illiquid, it would be valued using procedures adopted by the Board of Trustees. In such a situation, there is no guarantee that the fund will be able to sell such loan interests, which could lead to a decline in the value of the loan interests and the value of the fund’s shares.

Loan Participations. The fund may purchase participations in commercial loans. Such indebtedness may be secured or unsecured. Loan participations typically represent direct participation in a loan to a corporate borrower, and generally are offered by banks or other financial institutions or lending syndicates. The fund may participate in such syndications, or can buy part of a loan, becoming a part lender. When purchasing loan participations, the fund assumes the credit risk associated with the corporate borrower and may assume the credit risk associated with an interposed bank or other financial intermediary. The participation interests in which the fund intends to invest may not be rated by any nationally recognized rating service.

A loan is often administered by an agent bank acting as agent for all holders. The agent bank administers the terms of the loan, as specified in the loan agreement. In addition, the agent bank is normally responsible for the collection of principal and interest payments from the corporate borrower and the apportionment of these payments to the credit of all institutions which are parties to the loan agreement. Unless, under the terms of the loan or other indebtedness, the fund has direct recourse against the corporate borrower, the fund may have to rely on the agent bank or other financial intermediary to apply appropriate credit remedies against a corporate borrower.

A financial institution’s employment as agent bank might be terminated in the event that it fails to observe a requisite standard of care or becomes insolvent. A successor agent bank would generally be appointed to replace the terminated agent bank, and assets held by the agent bank under the loan agreement should remain available to holders of such indebtedness. However, if assets held by the agent bank for the benefit

 

7


Table of Contents

of the fund were determined to be subject to the claims of the agent bank’s general creditors, the fund might incur certain costs and delays in realizing payment on a loan or loan participation and could suffer a loss of principal and/or interest. In situations involving other interposed financial institutions (e.g., an insurance company or governmental agency) similar risks may arise.

Purchasers of loans and other forms of direct indebtedness depend primarily upon the creditworthiness of the corporate borrower for payment of principal and interest. If the fund does not receive scheduled interest or principal payments on such indebtedness, the fund’s share price and yield could be adversely affected. Loans that are fully secured offer the fund more protection than an unsecured loan in the event of non-payment of scheduled interest or principal. However, there is no assurance that the liquidation of collateral from a secured loan would satisfy the corporate borrower’s obligation, or that the collateral can be liquidated.

The fund may invest in loan participations with credit quality comparable to that of issuers of its securities investments. Indebtedness of companies whose creditworthiness is poor involves substantially greater risks, and may be highly speculative. Some companies may never pay off their indebtedness, or may pay only a small fraction of the amount owed. Consequently, when investing in indebtedness of companies with poor credit, the fund bears a substantial risk of losing the entire amount invested.

The fund limits the amount of its total assets that it will invest in any one issuer or in issuers within the same industry. For purposes of these limits, the fund generally will treat the corporate borrower as the “issuer” of indebtedness held by the fund. In the case of loan participations where a bank or other lending institution serves as a financial intermediary between the fund and the corporate borrower, if the participation does not shift to the fund the direct debtor-creditor relationship with the corporate borrower, SEC interpretations require the fund to treat both the lending bank or other lending institution and the corporate borrower as “issuers” for the purposes of determining whether the fund has invested more than 5% of its assets in a single issuer. Treating a financial intermediary as an issuer of indebtedness may restrict the fund’s ability to invest in indebtedness related to a single financial intermediary, or a group of intermediaries engaged in the same industry, even if the underlying borrowers represent many different companies and industries.

Loans and other types of direct indebtedness may not be readily marketable and may be subject to restrictions on resale. In some cases, negotiations involved in disposing of indebtedness may require weeks to complete. Consequently, some indebtedness may be difficult or impossible to dispose of readily at what the investment adviser believes to be a fair price. In addition, valuation of illiquid indebtedness involves a greater degree of judgment in determining the fund’s net asset value than if that value were based on available market quotations, and could result in significant variations in the fund’s daily share price. At the same time, some loan interests are traded among certain financial institutions and accordingly may be deemed liquid. As the market for different types of indebtedness develops, the liquidity of these instruments is expected to improve. In addition, the fund currently intends to treat indebtedness for which there is no readily available market as illiquid for purposes of the fund’s limitation on illiquid investments. Investments in loan participations are considered to be debt obligations for purposes of the fund’s investment restriction relating to the lending of funds or assets by the fund.

Investments in loans through a direct assignment of the financial institution’s interests with respect to the loan may involve additional risks to the fund. For example, if a loan is foreclosed, the fund could become part owner of any collateral, and would bear the costs and liabilities associated with owning and disposing of the collateral. In addition, it is conceivable that under emerging legal theories of lender liability, the fund could be held liable as co-lender. It is unclear whether loans and other forms of direct indebtedness offer securities law protections against fraud and misrepresentation. In the absence of definitive regulatory guidance, the fund relies on the investment adviser’s research in an attempt to avoid situations where fraud or misrepresentation could adversely affect the fund.

 

8


Table of Contents

Maturity of Investments will generally be determined using a portfolio security’s final maturity date (date on which the final principal payment of a bond is scheduled to be paid); however, for securitized products, such as MBS and certain other asset-backed securities, maturity will be determined on an average life basis (weighted average time to receipt of all principal payments) by the investment adviser. Because pre-payment rates of individual mortgage pools vary widely, the average life of a particular pool cannot be predicted precisely. For securities with embedded demand features, such as puts or calls, either the demand date or the final maturity date will be used depending on interest rates, yields and other market conditions. The average portfolio maturity of the fund is dollar-weighted based upon the market value of the fund’s securities at the time of the calculation.

Stripped Securities are securities whose income and principal components are detached and sold separately. While risks associated with stripped securities are similar to other fixed income securities, stripped securities are typically subject to greater changes in value. U.S. Treasury securities that have been stripped by the Federal Reserve Bank are obligations of the U.S. Treasury. Privately stripped government securities are created when a dealer deposits a U.S. Treasury security or other U.S. government security with a custodian for safekeeping; the custodian issues separate receipts for the coupon payments and the principal payment, which the dealer then sells. There are two types of stripped securities: coupon strips, which refer to the zero coupon bonds that are backed by the coupon payments; and principal strips, which are backed by the final repayments of principal. Unlike coupon strips, principal strips do not accrue a coupon payment. They are sold at a discounted price and accrete up to par. An investor in a principal strip would only need to pay capital gains tax on the principal strip.

The funds may invest in U.S. Treasury bonds that have been stripped of their unmatured interest coupons, the coupons themselves, and receipts or certificates representing interests in such stripped debt obligations and coupons. Interest on zero coupon bonds is accrued and paid at maturity rather than during the term of the security. Such obligations have greater price volatility than coupon obligations and other normal interest-paying securities, and the value of zero coupon securities reacts more quickly to changes in interest rates than do coupon bonds. Because dividend income is accrued throughout the term of the zero coupon obligation, but it is not actually received until maturity, a fund may have to sell other securities to pay accrued dividends prior to the maturity of the zero coupon obligation.

Unlike regular U.S. Treasury bonds which pay semi-annual interest, U.S. Treasury zero coupon bonds do not generate semi-annual coupon payments. Instead, zero coupon bonds are purchased at a substantial discount from the maturity of such securities. The discount reflects the current value of the deferred interest and is amortized as interest income over the life of the securities; it is taxable even though there is no cash return until maturity.

Zero coupon U.S. Treasury issues originally were created by government bond dealers who bought U.S. Treasury bonds and issued receipts representing an ownership interest in the interest coupons or the principal portion of the bonds. Subsequently, the U.S. Treasury began directly issuing zero coupon bonds with the introduction of the Separate Trading of Registered Interest and Principal of Securities (“STRIPS”) program. Under the STRIPS program, the principal and interest components are separately issued by the U.S. Treasury at the request of depository financial institutions, which then trade the component parts separately.

While zero coupon bonds eliminate the reinvestment risk of regular coupon issues, i.e., the risk of subsequently investing the periodic interest payments at a lower rate than that of the security currently held, zero coupon bonds fluctuate much more sharply than regular coupon-bearing bonds. Thus, when interest rates rise, the value of zero coupon bonds will decrease to a greater extent than will the value of regular bonds having the same interest rate.

 

9


Table of Contents

Variable- and Floating-Rate Debt Securities pay an interest rate, which is adjusted either periodically or at specific intervals or which floats continuously according to a formula or benchmark. Although these structures generally are intended to minimize the fluctuations in value that occur when interest rates rise and fall, some structures may be linked to a benchmark in such a way as to cause greater volatility to the security’s value.

Some variable-rate securities may be combined with a put or demand feature (variable-rate demand securities) that entitles the holder to the right to demand repayment in full or to resell at a specific price and/or time. While the demand feature is intended to reduce credit risks, it is not always unconditional, and may be subject to termination if the issuer’s credit rating falls below investment grade or if the issuer fails to make payments on other debt. While most variable-rate demand securities allow a fund to exercise its demand rights at any time, some such securities may only allow a fund to exercise its demand rights at certain times, which reduces the liquidity usually associated with this type of security. A fund could suffer losses in the event that the demand feature provider, usually a bank, fails to meet its obligation to pay the demand.

Synthetic variable or floating rate securities include tender option bond receipts. Tender option bond receipts are derived from fixed-rate municipal bonds that are placed in a trust that also contains a liquidity facility. The trust issues two classes of receipts, one of which is a synthetic variable-rate demand obligation and one of which is an inverse-rate long-term obligation; each obligation represents a proportionate interest in the underlying bonds. The remarketing agent for the trust sets a floating or variable rate on typically a weekly basis. The synthetic variable-rate demand obligations, or floater receipts, grant the investors (floater holders) the right to require the liquidity provider to purchase the receipts at par, on a periodic (e.g., daily, weekly or monthly) basis. The trust receives the interest income paid by the issuer of the underlying bonds and, after paying fees to the trustee, remarketing agent and liquidity provider, the remaining income is paid to the floater holders based on the prevailing market rate set by the remarketing agent and the remaining (or inverse) amount is paid to the long-term investor. The trust is collapsed prior to the maturity of the bonds and the receipts holders may participate in any gain realized from the sale of the bonds at that time. In the event of certain defaults or a significant downgrading in the credit rating assigned to the issuer of the bond, the liquidity facility provider may not be obligated to accept tendered floater receipts. In this event, the underlying bonds in the trust are priced for sale in the market and the proceeds are used to repay the floater and inverse receipt holders. If the receipts holders cannot be repaid in full from the sale of the underlying bonds then the bonds will be distributed to the receipts holders on a pro-rata basis, in which case the holders would anticipate a loss. Tender option bonds may be considered derivatives and are subject to the risk thereof.

The funds may invest in tender option bonds the interest on which will, in the opinion of bond counsel or counsel for the issuer of interests therein, be exempt from regular federal income tax. Tender option bond trust receipts generally are structured as private placements and, accordingly, may be deemed to be restricted securities for purposes of a fund’s investment limitations.

Depositary Receipts, including ADRs as well as other “hybrid” forms of ADRs, including European Depositary Receipts (EDRs) and Global Depositary Receipts (GDRs), are certificates evidencing ownership of shares of a foreign issuer. Depositary receipts may be sponsored or unsponsored. These certificates are issued by depository banks and generally trade on an established market in the United States or elsewhere. The underlying shares are held in trust by a custodian bank or similar financial institution in the issuer’s home country. The depository bank may not have physical custody of the underlying securities at all times and may charge fees for various services, including forwarding

 

10


Table of Contents

dividends and interest and corporate actions. ADRs are alternatives to directly purchasing the underlying foreign securities in their national markets and currencies. However, ADRs continue to be subject to many of the risks associated with investing directly in foreign securities.

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

Although the two types of depositary receipt facilities (unsponsored or sponsored) are similar, there are differences regarding a holder’s rights and obligations and the practices of market participants. A depository may establish an unsponsored facility without participation by (or acquiescence of) the underlying issuer; typically, however, the depository requests a letter of non-objection from the underlying issuer prior to establishing the facility. Holders of unsponsored depositary receipts generally bear all the costs of the facility. The depository usually charges fees upon the deposit and withdrawal of the underlying securities, the conversion of dividends into U.S. dollars or other currency, the disposition of non-cash distributions, and the performance of other services. The depository of an unsponsored facility frequently is under no obligation to distribute shareholder communications received from the underlying issuer or to pass through voting rights to depositary receipt holders with respect to the underlying securities.

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

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

A derivative instrument generally consists of, is based upon, or exhibits characteristics similar to options or forward contracts. Options and forward contracts are considered to be the basic “building blocks” of derivatives. For example, forward-based derivatives include forward contracts, as well as exchange-traded futures. Option-based derivatives include privately negotiated, over-the-counter (OTC) options (including caps, floors, collars, and options on forward and swap contracts) and exchange-traded options on futures. Diverse types of derivatives may be created by combining options or forward contracts in different ways, and applying these structures to a wide range of underlying assets. Risk management strategies include investment techniques designed to facilitate the sale of portfolio securities, manage the average duration of the portfolio or create or alter exposure to certain asset classes, such as equity, other debt or foreign securities.

 

11


Table of Contents

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

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

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

Credit and Liquidity Supports or Enhancements may be employed by issuers or the fund to reduce the credit risk of their securities. Credit supports include letters of credit, insurance, total return and credit swap agreements and guarantees provided by foreign and domestic financial institutions. Liquidity supports include puts, demand features, and lines of credit. Most of these arrangements move the credit risk of an investment from the issuer of the security to the support provider. The investment adviser may rely on its evaluation of the credit and liquidity support provider in determining whether to purchase or hold a security enhanced by such a support. Changes in the credit quality of a support provider could cause losses to the fund.

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

Futures Contracts are instruments that represent an agreement between two parties that obligates one party to buy, and the other party to sell, specific instruments at an agreed-upon price on a stipulated future date. In the case of futures contracts relating to an index or otherwise not calling for physical delivery at the close of the transaction, the parties usually agree to deliver the final cash settlement price of the contract. The fund may purchase and sell futures contracts based on securities, securities indices and foreign currencies, interest rates, or any other futures contracts traded on U.S. exchanges or boards of trade that the Commodities Future Trading Commission (“CFTC”) licenses and regulates on foreign exchanges. Consistent with CFTC regulations, the fund has claimed an exclusion from the definition of the term “commodity pool operator” under the Commodity Exchange Act and, therefore, is not subject to registration or regulation as a pool operator. However, investors should note that the CFTC has adopted certain rules that significantly affect the exclusion available to the fund. CFTC rules require that the fund claiming an exclusion from commodity pool operator registration limit its trades in futures contracts with certain limited exceptions. If the fund is unable to claim an exclusion from registration, the fund’s adviser may be required to register as a commodity pool operator and comply with certain CFTC rules.

 

12


Table of Contents

Additional CFTC regulation may cause the fund to change its investment strategies or to incur additional expenses.

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

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

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

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

Futures contracts normally require actual delivery or acquisition of an underlying security or cash value of an index on the expiration date of the contract. In most cases, however, the contractual obligation is fulfilled before the date of the contract by buying or selling, as the case may be, identical futures contracts. Such offsetting transactions terminate the original contracts and cancel the obligation to take or make delivery of the underlying securities or cash. There may not always be a liquid secondary market at the time the fund seeks to close out a futures position. If the fund is unable to close out its position and prices move adversely, the fund would have to continue to make daily cash payments to maintain its margin requirements. If the fund had insufficient cash to meet these requirements it may have to sell portfolio securities at a disadvantageous time or incur extra costs by borrowing the cash. Also, the fund may be required to make or take delivery and incur extra transaction costs buying or selling the underlying securities. The fund would seek to reduce the risks associated with futures transactions by buying and selling futures contracts that are traded on national exchanges or for which there appears to be a liquid secondary market.

 

13


Table of Contents

With respect to futures contracts that are not legally required to “cash settle,” the fund may cover the open position by setting aside or earmarking liquid assets in an amount equal to the market value of the futures contracts. With respect to futures contracts that are required to “cash settle,” however, the fund is permitted to set aside or earmark liquid assets in an amount equal to the fund’s daily marked to market (net) obligation, if any, (in other words, the fund’s daily net liability, if any) rather than the market value of the futures contracts. By setting aside assets or earmarking equal to only its net obligation under cash-settled futures, the fund will have the ability to employ leverage to a greater extent than if the fund were required to set aside or earmark assets equal to the full market value of the futures contract.

Hybrid Instruments are a type of potentially high-risk derivative that combines a traditional stock, bond, or commodity with an option or forward contract. Generally, the principal amount, amount payable upon maturity or redemption, or interest rate of a hybrid is tied (positively or negatively) to the price of some commodity, currency or securities index or another interest rate or some other economic factor (each a “benchmark”). The interest rate or (unlike most fixed income securities) the principal amount payable at maturity of a hybrid security may be increased or decreased, depending on changes in the value of the benchmark. An example of a hybrid could be a bond issued by an oil company that pays a small base level of interest with additional interest that accrues in correlation to the extent to which oil prices exceed a certain predetermined level. Such a hybrid instrument would be a combination of a bond and a call option on oil.

Hybrids can be used as an efficient means of pursuing a variety of investment goals, including currency hedging, duration management, and increased total return. Hybrids may not bear interest or pay dividends. The value of a hybrid or its interest rate may be a multiple of a benchmark and, as a result, may be leveraged and move (up or down) more steeply and rapidly than the benchmark. These benchmarks may be sensitive to economic and political events, such as commodity shortages and currency devaluations, which cannot be readily foreseen by the purchaser of a hybrid. Under certain conditions, the redemption value of a hybrid could be zero. Thus, an investment in a hybrid may entail significant market risks that are not associated with a similar investment in a traditional, U.S. dollar-denominated bond that has a fixed principal amount and pays a fixed rate or floating rate of interest. The purchase of hybrids also exposes the fund to the credit risk of the issuer of the hybrids. These risks may cause significant fluctuations in the net asset value of the fund. The fund will not invest more than 5% of its total assets in hybrid instruments.

Certain hybrid instruments may provide exposure to the commodities markets. These are derivative securities with one or more commodity-linked components that have payment features similar to commodity futures contracts, commodity options, or similar instruments. Commodity-linked hybrid instruments may be either equity or debt securities, and are considered hybrid instruments because they have both security and commodity-like characteristics. A portion of the value of these instruments may be derived from the value of a commodity, futures contract, index or other economic variable. The fund will only invest in commodity-linked hybrid instruments that qualify under applicable rules of the CFTC for an exemption from the provisions of the CEA.

Certain issuers of structured products such as hybrid instruments may be deemed to be investment companies as defined in the 1940 Act. As a result, the fund’s investments in these products may be subject to limits applicable to investments in investment companies and may be subject to restrictions contained in the 1940 Act.

 

14


Table of Contents

Index Participations and index participation contracts provide the equivalent of a position in the securities comprising an index, with each security’s representation equaling its index weighting. Moreover, their holders are entitled to payments equal to the dividends paid by the underlying index securities. Generally, the value of an index participation or index participation contract will rise and fall along with the value of the related index. The fund will invest in index participation contracts only if a liquid market for them appears to exist.

Reverse Repurchase Agreements, Mortgage Dollar Rolls and Sale-Buybacks may be used by the fund. The fund may engage in reverse repurchase agreements to facilitate portfolio liquidity, a practice common in the mutual fund industry, or for arbitrage transactions as discussed below. In a reverse repurchase agreement, the fund would sell a security and enter into an agreement to repurchase the security at a specified future date and price. The fund generally retains the right to interest and principal payments on the security. Because the fund receives cash upon entering into a reverse repurchase agreement, it may be considered a borrowing. When required by guidelines of the SEC, the fund will set aside permissible liquid assets earmarked or in a segregated account to secure its obligations to repurchase the security.

The fund also may enter into mortgage dollar rolls, in which the fund would sell MBS for delivery in the current month and simultaneously contract to purchase substantially similar securities on a specified future date. While the fund would forego principal and interest paid on the MBS during the roll period, the fund would be compensated by the difference between the current sales price and the lower price for the future purchase as well as by any interest earned on the proceeds of the initial sale. The fund also could be compensated through the receipt of fee income equivalent to a lower forward price. At the time the fund would enter into a mortgage dollar roll, it would set aside permissible liquid assets earmarked or in a segregated account to secure its obligation for the forward commitment to buy MBS. This transaction allows the fund to have the same price and duration exposure in the mortgage security while having the cash for the bonds for the given time period. The net effect is that the fund is able to maintain mortgage exposure while having the cash available to facilitate redemptions. Mortgage dollar roll transactions may be considered a borrowing by the fund.

The mortgage dollar rolls and reverse repurchase agreements entered into by the fund may be used as arbitrage transactions in which the fund will maintain an offsetting position in short duration investment-grade debt obligations. Since the fund will receive interest on the securities or repurchase agreements in which it invests the transaction proceeds, such transactions may involve leverage. However, since such securities or repurchase agreements will be high quality and short duration, the investment adviser believes that such arbitrage transactions present lower risks to the fund than those associated with other types of leverage. There can be no assurance that the fund’s use of the cash it receives from a mortgage dollar roll will provide a positive return.

The fund also may effect simultaneous purchase and sale transactions that are known as “sale-buybacks.” A sale-buyback is similar to a reverse repurchase agreement, except that in a sale-buyback, the counterparty who purchases the security is entitled to receive any principal or interest payments made on the underlying security pending settlement of the fund’s repurchase of the underlying security. The fund’s obligations under a sale-buyback typically would be offset by liquid assets equal in value to the amount of the fund’s forward commitment to repurchase the subject security.

Options Contracts generally provide the right to buy or sell a security, commodity, futures contract or foreign currency in exchange for an agreed upon price. If the right is not exercised after a specified period, the option expires and the option buyer forfeits the money paid to the option seller.

 

15


Table of Contents

A call option gives the buyer the right to buy a specified number of shares of a security at a fixed price on or before a specified date in the future. For this right, the call option buyer pays the call option seller, commonly called the call option writer, a fee called a premium. Call option buyers are usually anticipating that the price of the underlying security will rise above the price fixed with the call writer, thereby allowing them to profit. If the price of the underlying security does not rise, the call option buyer’s losses are limited to the premium paid to the call option writer. For call option writers, a rise in the price of the underlying security will be offset, in part, by the premium received from the call option buyer. If the call option writer does not own the underlying security, however, the losses that may ensue if the price rises could be potentially unlimited. If the call option writer owns the underlying security or commodity, this is called writing a covered call. All call options written by the fund will be covered, which means that the fund will own the securities subject to the option so long as the option is outstanding or the fund will earmark or segregate assets for any outstanding option contracts.

A put option is the opposite of a call option. It gives the buyer the right to sell a specified number of shares of a security at a fixed price on or before a specified date in the future. Put option buyers are usually anticipating a decline in the price of the underlying security, and wish to offset those losses when selling the security at a later date. All put options the fund writes will be covered, which means that the fund will earmark or segregate cash, U.S. government securities or other liquid securities with a value at least equal to the exercise price of the put option, or will otherwise “cover” its position as required by the 1940 Act (e.g., the fund will hold a put option on the same underlying security with the same or higher strike price). The purpose of writing such options is to generate additional income for the fund. However, in return for the option premium, the fund accepts the risk that it may be required to purchase the underlying securities at a price in excess of the securities’ market value at the time of purchase.

The fund may purchase and write put and call options on any securities in which it may invest or any securities index or basket of securities based on securities in which it may invest. In addition, the fund may purchase and sell foreign currency options and foreign currency futures contracts and related options. The fund may purchase and write such options on securities that are listed on domestic or foreign securities exchanges or traded in the over-the-counter market. Like futures contracts, option contracts are rarely exercised. Option buyers usually sell the option before it expires. Option writers may terminate their obligations under a written call or put option by purchasing an option identical to the one it has written. Such purchases are referred to as “closing purchase transactions.” The fund may enter into closing sale transactions in order to realize gains or minimize losses on options it has purchased or written.

An exchange-traded currency option position may be closed out only on an options exchange that provides a secondary market for an option of the same series. Although the fund generally will purchase or write only those options for which there appears to be an active secondary market, there is no assurance that a liquid secondary market will exist for any particular option or at any particular time. If the fund is unable to effect a closing purchase transaction with respect to options it has written, it will not be able to sell the underlying securities or dispose of assets earmarked or held in a segregated account until the options expire or are exercised. Similarly, if the fund is unable to effect a closing sale transaction with respect to options it has purchased, it would have to exercise the options in order to realize any profit and will incur transaction costs upon the purchase or sale of underlying securities.

Reasons for the absence of a liquid secondary market on an exchange include the following: (1) there may be insufficient trading interest in certain options; (2) an exchange may impose restrictions on opening transactions or closing transactions or both; (3) trading halts, suspensions or other restrictions may be imposed with respect to particular classes or series of options; (4) unusual or unforeseen circumstances may interrupt normal operations on an exchange; (5) the facilities of an exchange or the Options Clearing Corporation (the “OCC”) may not at all times be adequate to handle current trading volume; or (6) one or more exchanges could, for economic or other reasons, decide or be compelled at some future date to discontinue the trading of options (or a particular class or series of options), although outstanding options on that exchange that had been issued by the OCC as a result of trades on that exchange would continue to be exercisable in accordance with their terms.

 

16


Table of Contents

The ability to terminate over-the-counter options is more limited than with exchange-traded options and may involve the risk that broker-dealers participating in such transactions will not fulfill their obligations. Until such time as the staff of the SEC changes its position, the fund will treat purchased over-the-counter options and all assets used to cover written over-the-counter options as illiquid securities, except that with respect to options written with primary dealers in U.S. government securities pursuant to an agreement requiring a closing purchase transaction at a formula price, the amount of illiquid securities may be calculated with reference to a formula the staff of the SEC approves.

Additional risks are involved with options trading because of the low margin deposits required and the extremely high degree of leverage that may be involved in options trading. There may be imperfect correlation between the change in market value of the securities held by the fund and the prices of the options, possible lack of a liquid secondary market, and the resulting inability to close such positions prior to their maturity dates.

The fund may write or purchase an option only when the market value of that option, when aggregated with the market value of all other options transactions made on behalf of the fund, does not exceed 5% of its total assets.

Puts are agreements that allow the buyer to sell a security at a specified price and time to the seller or “put provider.” When the fund buys a security with a put feature, losses could occur if the put provider does not perform as agreed. If a put provider fails to honor its commitment upon the fund’s attempt to exercise the put, the fund may have to treat the security’s final maturity as its effective maturity. If that occurs, the security’s price may be negatively impacted, and its sensitivity to interest rate changes may be increased, possibly contributing to increased share price volatility for the fund. This also could lengthen the fund’s overall average effective maturity. Standby commitments are types of puts.

Spread Transactions may be used for hedging or managing risk. The fund may purchase covered spread options from securities dealers. Such covered spread options are not presently exchange-listed or exchange-traded. The purchase of a spread option gives the fund the right to put, or sell, a security that it owns at a fixed dollar spread or fixed yield spread in relation to another security that the fund does not own, but which is used as a benchmark. The risk to the fund in purchasing covered spread options is the cost of the premium paid for the spread option and any transaction costs. In addition, there is no assurance that closing transactions will be available. The purchase of spread options will be used to protect the fund against adverse changes in prevailing credit quality spreads, i.e ., the yield spread between high quality and lower quality securities. Such protection is only provided during the life of the spread option.

Structured Notes are derivative debt securities, the interest rate or principal of which is determined by an unrelated indicator. Indexed securities include structured notes as well as securities other than debt securities, the interest rate or principal of which is determined by an unrelated indicator. Indexed securities may include a multiplier that multiplies the indexed element by a specified factor and, therefore, the value of such securities may be very volatile. The terms of the structured and indexed securities may provide that in certain circumstances no principal is due at maturity and therefore, may result in a loss of invested capital. Structured and indexed securities may be positively or negatively indexed, so that appreciation of the reference may produce an increase or a decrease in the interest rate or the value of the structured or indexed security at maturity may be calculated as a specified multiple of the change in the value of the reference; therefore, the value of such security may be very volatile. Structured and indexed securities may entail a greater degree of market risk than other types of debt securities because the investor bears the risk of the reference. Structured or indexed securities may also be more volatile, less liquid, and more difficult to accurately price than less complex securities or more traditional debt securities.

 

17


Table of Contents

Swap Agreements are privately negotiated over-the-counter derivative products in which two parties agree to exchange payment streams calculated in relation to a rate, index, instrument or certain securities (referred to as the “underlying”) and a predetermined amount (referred to as the “notional amount”). The underlying for a swap may be an interest rate (fixed or floating), a currency exchange rate, a commodity price index, a security, group of securities or a securities index, a combination of any of these, or various other rates, assets or indices. Swap agreements generally do not involve the delivery of the underlying or principal, and a party’s obligations generally are equal to only the net amount to be paid or received under the agreement based on the relative values of the positions held by each party to the swap agreement.

Swap agreements can be structured to increase or decrease the fund’s exposure to long or short term interest rates, corporate borrowing rates and other conditions, such as changing security prices and inflation rates. They also can be structured to increase or decrease the fund’s exposure to specific issuers or specific sectors of the bond market such as mortgage securities. For example, if the fund agreed to pay a longer-term fixed rate in exchange for a shorter-term floating rate while holding longer-term fixed rate bonds, the swap would tend to decrease the fund’s exposure to longer-term interest rates. Swap agreements tend to increase or decrease the overall volatility of the fund’s investments and its share price and yield. Changes in interest rates, or other factors determining the amount of payments due to and from the fund, can be the most significant factors in the performance of a swap agreement. If a swap agreement calls for payments from the fund, the fund must be prepared to make such payments when they are due. In order to help minimize risks, the fund will earmark or segregate appropriate assets for any accrued but unpaid net amounts owed under the terms of a swap agreement entered into on a net basis. All other swap agreements will require the fund to earmark or segregate assets in the amount of the accrued amounts owed under the swap. The fund could sustain losses if a counterparty does not perform as agreed under the terms of the swap. The fund will enter into swap agreements with counterparties deemed creditworthy by the investment adviser.

In addition, the fund may invest in swaptions, which are privately-negotiated option-based derivative products. Swaptions give the holder the right to enter into a swap. The fund may use a swaption in addition to or in lieu of a swap involving a similar rate or index.

For purposes of applying the fund’s investment policies and restrictions (as stated in the fund’s prospectus and this SAI), swap agreements are generally valued by the fund at market value. In the case of a credit default swap sold by the fund (i.e., where the fund is selling credit default protection), however, the fund will generally value the swap at its notional amount. The manner in which certain securities or other instruments are valued by the fund for purposes of applying investment policies and restrictions may differ from the manner in which those investments are valued by other types of investors.

Diversification involves investing in a wide range of securities and thereby spreading and reducing the risks of investment. The fund is a series of an open-end investment management company. The fund is a diversified mutual fund. When formed, the fund was sub-classified as a “non-diversified” fund, as defined in the 1940 Act. However, due to the fund’s principal investment strategy and investment process, it has historically operated as a “diversified” fund. Therefore, the fund will not operate in the future as “non-diversified” fund without first obtaining shareholder approval, except as allowed pursuant to the 1940 Act and rules or interpretations thereof.

 

18


Table of Contents

Emerging or Developing Markets exist in countries that are considered to be in the initial stages of industrialization. The risks of investing in these markets are similar to the risks of international investing in general, although the risks are greater in emerging and developing markets. Countries with emerging or developing securities markets tend to have economic structures that are less stable than countries with developed securities markets. This is because their economies may be based on only a few industries and their securities markets may trade a small number of securities. Prices on these exchanges tend to be volatile, and securities in these countries historically have offered greater potential for gain (as well as loss) than securities of companies located in developed countries.

The fund’s investments in emerging markets can be considered speculative, and therefore may offer higher potential for gains and losses than investments in developed markets of the world. With respect to an emerging country, there may be a greater potential for nationalization, expropriation or confiscatory taxation, political changes, government regulation, social instability or diplomatic developments (including war) which could affect adversely the economies of such countries or investments in such countries. The economies of developing countries generally are heavily dependent upon international trade and, accordingly, have been and may continue to be adversely affected by trade barriers, exchange or currency controls, managed adjustments in relative currency values and other protectionist measures imposed or negotiated by the countries with which they trade.

In addition to the risks of investing in emerging market country debt securities, the fund’s investment in government or government-related securities of emerging market countries and restructured debt instruments in emerging markets are subject to special risks, including the inability or unwillingness to repay principal and interest, requests to reschedule or restructure outstanding debt, and requests to extend additional loan amounts. The fund may have limited recourse in the event of default on such debt instruments.

Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) such as Standard and Poor’s Depositary Receipts (SPDRs) Trust, are investment companies that typically are registered under the 1940 Act as open-end funds or unit investment trusts (UITs). ETFs are actively traded on national securities exchanges and are generally based on specific domestic and foreign market indices. Shares of an ETF may be bought and sold through the day at market prices, which may be higher or lower than the shares’ net asset value. An “index-based ETF” seeks to track the performance of an index holding in its portfolio either the contents of the index or a representative sample of the securities in the index. Because ETFs are based on an underlying basket of stocks or an index, they are subject to the same market fluctuations as these types of securities in volatile market swings. ETFs, like mutual funds, have expenses associated with their operation, including advisory fees. When the fund invests in an ETF, in addition to directly bearing expenses associated with its own operations, it will bear a pro rata portion of the ETF’s expenses. As with any exchange listed security, ETF shares purchased in the secondary market are subject to customary brokerage fees. Pursuant to an exemptive order issued by the SEC to iShares and procedures approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees (the “Board”), the fund may invest in iShares not to exceed 25% of the fund’s total assets, provided that the fund has described ETF investments in its prospectus and otherwise complies with the conditions of the exemptive order and other applicable investment limitations.

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

 

19


Table of Contents

Types of equity securities include common stocks, preferred stocks, convertible securities, warrants, rights, ADRs, EDRs, and certain interests in real estate investment trusts. For more information on real estate investment trusts, please see the section entitled “Real Estate Investment Trusts”.

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

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

Convertible securities are typically preferred stocks or bonds that are exchangeable for a specific number of another form of security (usually the issuer’s common stock) at a specified price or ratio. A convertible security generally entitles the holder to receive interest paid or accrued on bonds or the dividend paid on preferred stock until the convertible security matures or is redeemed, converted or exchanged. A corporation may issue a convertible security that is subject to redemption after a specified date, and usually under certain circumstances. A holder of a convertible security that is called for redemption would be required to tender it for redemption to the issuer, convert it to the underlying common stock or sell it to a third party. The convertible structure allows the holder of the convertible bond to participate in share price movements in the company’s common stock. The actual return on a convertible bond may exceed its stated yield if the company’s common stock appreciates in value and the option to convert to common stocks becomes more valuable.

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

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

 

20


Table of Contents

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

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

Rights and Warrants. Rights and warrants are types of securities that entitle the holder to purchase a proportionate amount of common stock at a specified price for a specific period of time. Rights allow a shareholder to buy more shares directly from the company, usually at a price somewhat lower than the current market price of the outstanding shares. Warrants are usually issued with bonds and preferred stock. Rights and warrants can trade on the market separately from the company’s stock. The prices of rights and warrants do not necessarily move parallel to the prices of the underlying common stock. Rights usually expire within a few weeks of issuance, while warrants may not expire for several years. If a right or warrant is not exercised within the specified time period, it will become worthless and the fund will lose the purchase price it paid for the right or warrant and the right to purchase the underlying security.

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

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

MLPs are typically structured such that common units and general partner interests have first priority to receive quarterly cash distributions up to an established minimum amount (“minimum quarterly distributions”). Common and general partner interests also accrue arrearages in distributions to the extent the minimum quarterly distribution is not paid. Once common and general partner interests have been paid, subordinated units receive distributions of up to the minimum quarterly distribution; however,

 

21


Table of Contents

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

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

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

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

 

22


Table of Contents

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

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

Small-Cap Stocks include common stocks issued by operating companies with market capitalizations that place them at the lower end of the stock market, as well as the stocks of companies that are determined to be small based on several factors, including the capitalization of the company and the amount of revenues. Historically, small-cap company stocks have been riskier than stocks issued by large- or mid-cap companies for a variety of reasons. Small-cap companies may have less certain growth prospects and are typically less diversified and less able to withstand changing economic conditions than larger capitalized companies. Small-cap companies also may have more limited product lines, markets or financial resources than companies with larger capitalizations, and may be more dependent on a relatively small management group. In addition, small-cap companies may not be well known to the investing public, may not have institutional ownership and may have only cyclical, static or moderate growth prospects. Most small-cap company stocks pay low or no dividends.

These factors and others may cause sharp changes in the value of a small-cap company’s stock, and even cause some small-cap companies to fail. Additionally, small-cap stocks may not be as broadly traded as large- or mid-cap stocks, and a fund’s positions in securities of such companies may be substantial in relation to the market for such securities. Accordingly, it may be difficult for a fund to dispose of securities of these small-cap companies at prevailing market prices in order to meet redemptions. This lower degree of liquidity can adversely affect the value of these securities. For these reasons and others, the value of a fund’s investments in small-cap stocks is expected to be more volatile than other types of investments, including other types of stock investments. While small-cap stocks are generally considered to offer greater growth opportunities for investors, they involve greater risks and the share price of a fund that invests in small-cap stocks may change sharply during the short term and long term.

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

The fund may, but is not required to, use foreign currency options and foreign currency forward contracts to increase exposure to a foreign currency or to shift exposure to foreign currency fluctuations from one country to another. The fund will earmark or segregate assets for any open positions in forwards used for non-hedging purposes and mark to market daily as may be required under the federal securities laws.

A forward involves an obligation to purchase or sell a specific currency at a future date, which may be any fixed number of days from the date of the contract agreed upon by the parties, at a price set at the time of the contract. These contracts may be bought or sold to protect the fund against a possible loss resulting from an adverse change in the relationship between foreign currencies and the U.S. dollar or to

 

23


Table of Contents

increase exposure to a particular foreign currency. Many foreign securities markets do not settle trades within a time frame that would be considered customary in the U.S. stock market. Therefore, the fund may engage in forward foreign currency exchange contracts in order to secure exchange rates for fund securities purchased or sold, but awaiting settlement. These transactions do not seek to eliminate any fluctuations in the underlying prices of the securities involved. Instead, the transactions simply establish a rate of exchange that can be expected when the fund settles its securities transactions in the future. Forwards involve certain risks. For example, if the counterparties to the contracts are unable to meet the terms of the contracts or if the value of the foreign currency changes unfavorably, the fund could sustain a loss.

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

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

Suitable hedging transactions may not be available in all circumstances and there can be no assurance that the fund will engage in such transactions at any given time or from time to time. Also, such transactions may not be successful and may eliminate any chance for the fund to benefit from favorable fluctuations in relevant foreign currencies. Forwards will be used primarily to adjust the foreign exchange exposure of the fund with a view to protecting the outlook, and the fund might be expected to enter into such contracts under the following circumstances:

Lock In: When the investment adviser desires to lock in the U.S. dollar price on the purchase or sale of a security denominated in a foreign currency.

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

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

 

24


Table of Contents

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

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

Tax Consequences of Hedging. Under applicable tax law, the fund may be required to limit its gains from hedging in foreign currency forwards, futures, and options. Although the fund is expected to comply with such limits, the extent to which these limits apply is subject to tax regulations as yet unissued. Hedging may also result in the application of the mark-to-market and straddle provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Internal Revenue Code”). Those provisions could result in an increase (or decrease) in the amount of taxable dividends paid by the fund and could affect whether dividends paid by the fund are classified as capital gains or ordinary income.

Foreign Securities involve additional risks. The fund may invest in U.S. dollar-denominated securities issued by foreign institutions or securities that are subject to credit or liquidity enhancements provided by foreign institutions. Foreign institutions may not be subject to uniform accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards, practices and requirements that are comparable to those applicable to U.S. corporations. In addition, there may be less publicly available information about foreign entities. Foreign economic, political and legal developments could have effects on the value of the foreign securities issued or supported by foreign institutions. For example, conditions within and around foreign countries, such as the possibility of expropriation or confiscatory taxation, political or social instability, diplomatic developments, change of government or war could affect the value of these securities. In addition, there may be difficulties in obtaining or enforcing judgments against the foreign institutions that issue or support securities in which the fund may invest. These factors and others may increase the risks with respect to the liquidity of the fund, and its ability to meet a large number of shareholder redemption requests.

Financial markets in the eurozone have experienced volatility over the past few years due, in part, to concerns about rising levels of government debt and the prevalence of increased budget deficits. Delays by politicians and regulators to address structural and policy issues in the eurozone have added to instability in the region. The implementation of austerity measures in Spain, Italy, Greece, Portugal and Ireland at a time when the eurozone is experiencing higher unemployment and slowing economic activity has raised the possibility of a prolonged recession in the region. However, recent policy actions by leaders of the European Union (“EU”) and the European Central Bank have significantly reduced the possibility of a default by a eurozone government and have reduced market volatility.

The severity and prolonged nature of the eurozone crisis caused certain individuals and institutions to question the continued viability of the euro as a unit of currency. It is possible individual EU member countries that have already adopted the euro may abandon that currency and revert to a national currency or otherwise exit the EU. It is also possible that the euro will cease to exist as a single unit of currency in

 

25


Table of Contents

its current form. The precise effects of any such outcome on regional or global financial markets are impossible to predict. However, the abandonment of the euro or the exit of any country out of the EU would likely have an extremely destabilizing effect on all EU member countries and their economies, which would likely impact the global economy.

As the fund may hold certain investments of issuers located in the eurozone, any material negative developments in the region could have a negative impact on the investments held by the fund, which could hurt their overall performance.

Illiquid Securities generally are any securities that cannot be disposed of promptly and in the ordinary course of business at approximately the amount at which the fund has valued the instruments. The liquidity of the fund’s investments is monitored under the supervision and direction of the Board of Trustees. Investments currently considered illiquid include, among others, repurchase agreements not maturing within seven days and certain restricted securities.

Interfund Borrowing and Lending. The SEC has granted an exemption to the Schwab Funds that permits the funds to borrow money from and/or lend money to other Schwab Funds. All loans are for temporary or emergency purposes and the interest rates to be charged will be the average of the overnight repurchase agreement rate and the short-term bank loan rate. All loans are subject to numerous conditions designed to ensure fair and equitable treatment of all participating funds/portfolios. The interfund lending facility is subject to the oversight and periodic review of the board of trustees of each Schwab Fund.

Money Market Securities are high-quality, short-term debt securities that may be issued by entities such as the U.S. government, corporations and financial institutions (like banks). Money market securities include commercial paper, certificates of deposit, bankers’ acceptances, notes and time deposits.

Money market securities pay fixed, variable or floating rates of interest and are generally subject to credit and interest rate risks. The maturity date or price of and financial assets collateralizing a security may be structured in order to make it qualify as or act like a money market security. These securities may be subject to greater credit and interest rate risks than other money market securities because of their structure. Money market securities may be issued with puts or sold separately, sometimes called demand features or guarantees, which are agreements that allow the buyer to sell a security at a specified price and time to the seller or “put provider.” When the fund buys a put, losses could occur as a result of the costs of the put or if it exercises its rights under the put and the put provider does not perform as agreed. Standby commitments are types of puts.

The fund must keep a portion of its assets in cash for business operations. In order to reduce the effect this otherwise uninvested cash would have on its performance, the fund may invest in money market securities.

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

Certificates of Deposit or Time Deposits are issued against funds deposited in a banking institution for a specified period of time at a specified interest rate. The fund will invest only in certificates of deposit of banks that have capital, surplus and undivided profits in the aggregate in excess of $100 million.

 

26


Table of Contents

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

Fixed Time Deposits are bank obligations payable at a stated maturity date and bearing interest at a fixed rate. Fixed time deposits may be withdrawn on demand by the investor, but may be subject to early withdrawal penalties, which vary depending upon market conditions and the remaining maturity of the obligation. There are no contractual restrictions on the right to transfer a beneficial interest in a fixed time deposit to a third party, although there is no market for such deposits. The fund will not invest in fixed time deposits, which (1) are not subject to prepayment or (2) provide for withdrawal penalties upon prepayment (other than overnight deposits) if, in the aggregate, more than 15% of its net assets would be invested in such deposits, repurchase agreements maturing in more than seven days and other illiquid assets.

Promissory Notes are written agreements committing the maker or issuer to pay the payee a specified amount either on demand or at a fixed date in the future, with or without interest. These are sometimes called negotiable notes or instruments and are subject to credit risk. Bank notes are notes used to represent obligations issued by banks in large denominations.

Repurchase Agreements are instruments under which a buyer acquires ownership of certain securities (usually U.S. government securities) from a seller who agrees to repurchase the securities at a mutually agreed-upon time and price, thereby determining the yield during the buyer’s holding period. Any repurchase agreements a fund enters into will involve the fund as the buyer and banks or broker-dealers as sellers. The period of repurchase agreements is usually short - from overnight to one week, although the securities collateralizing a repurchase agreement may have longer maturity dates. Default by the seller might cause a fund to experience a loss or delay in the liquidation of the collateral securing the repurchase agreement. The fund also may incur disposition costs in liquidating the collateral. In the event of a bankruptcy or other default of a repurchase agreement’s seller, a fund might incur expenses in enforcing its rights, and could experience losses, including a decline in the value of the underlying securities and loss of income. The fund will make payment under a repurchase agreement only upon physical delivery or evidence of book entry transfer of the collateral to the account of its custodian bank.

Mortgage-Backed Securities and other Asset-Backed Securities may be purchased by the fund. MBS represent participations in mortgage loans, and include pass-through securities, collateralized mortgage obligations and stripped mortgage-backed securities. MBS may be issued or guaranteed by U.S. government agencies or instrumentalities, such as the Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA” or “Ginnie Mae”) and the Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA” or “Fannie Mae”) or the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC” or “Freddie Mac”).

The National Housing Act authorized GNMA to guarantee the timely payment of principal and interest on securities backed by a pool of mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”) or guaranteed by the Veterans Administration (“VA”). The GNMA guarantee is backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. The GNMA is also empowered to borrow without limitation from the U.S. Treasury if necessary to make any payments required under its guarantee.

GNMA are mortgage securities which evidence an undivided interest in a pool or pools of mortgages. GNMA Certificates that the fund may purchase are the “modified pass-through” type, which entitle the holder to receive timely payment of all interest and principal payments due on the mortgage pool, net of fees paid to the “issuer” and GNMA, regardless of whether or not the mortgagor actually makes the payment.

 

27


Table of Contents

The average life of a GNMA Certificate is likely to be substantially shorter than the original maturity of the mortgages underlying the securities. Prepayments of principal by mortgagors and mortgage foreclosures will usually result in the return of the greater part of principal investment long before the maturity of the mortgages in the pool. Foreclosures impose no risk to principal investment because of the GNMA guarantee, except to the extent that the fund has purchased the certificates above par in the secondary market.

FHLMC was created in 1970 to promote development of a nationwide secondary market in conventional residential mortgages. The FHLMC issues two types of mortgage pass-through securities (“FHLMC Certificates”): mortgage participation certificates (“PCs”) and guaranteed mortgage certificates (“GMCs”). PCs resemble GNMA Certificates in that each PC represents a pro rata share of all interest and principal payments made and owed on the underlying pool. The FHLMC guarantees timely monthly payment of interest on PCs and the ultimate payment of principal, but its issues are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

GMCs also represent a pro rata interest in a pool of mortgages. However, these instruments pay interest semi-annually and return principal once a year in guaranteed minimum payments. The expected average life of these securities is approximately 10 years. The FHLMC guarantee is not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

FNMA was established in 1938 to create a secondary market in mortgages the FHA insures. FNMA issues guaranteed mortgage pass-through certificates (“FNMA Certificates”). FNMA Certificates resemble GNMA Certificates in that each FNMA Certificate represents a pro rata share of all interest and principal payments made and owed on the underlying pool. FNMA guarantees timely payment of interest and principal on FNMA Certificates. The FNMA guarantee is not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.

MBS may also be issued by private issuers, generally originators and investors in mortgage loans, including savings associations, mortgage banks, commercial banks, and special purpose entities (collectively, “private lenders”). MBS are based on different types of mortgages including those on commercial real estate and residential property. MBS issued by private lenders may be supported by pools of mortgage loans or other MBS that are guaranteed, directly or indirectly, by the U.S. government or one of its agencies or instrumentalities, or they may be issued without any governmental guarantee of the underlying mortgage assets but with some form of credit enhancement.

Asset-backed Securities (“ABS”) have structural characteristics similar to MBS. ABS represent direct or indirect participation in assets such as automobile loans, credit card receivables, trade receivables, home equity loans (which sometimes are categorized as MBS) or other financial assets. Therefore, repayment depends largely on the cash flows generated by the assets backing the securities. The credit quality of most ABS depends primarily on the credit quality of the assets underlying such securities, how well the entity issuing the security is insulated from the credit risk of the originator or any other affiliated entities, and the amount and quality of any credit enhancement of the securities. Payments or distributions of principal and interest on ABS may be supported by credit enhancements including letters of credit, an insurance guarantee, reserve funds and overcollateralization. Asset-backed securities also may be debt instruments, which are also known as collateralized obligations and are generally issued as the debt of a special purpose entity, such as a trust, organized solely for the purpose of owning such assets and issuing debt obligations.

Collateralized Debt Obligations. The fund may invest in collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”), which include collateralized bond obligations (“CBOs”), collateralized loan obligations (“CLOs”) and other similarly structured securities. CBOs and CLOs are types of asset-backed securities. A CBO is a trust that is backed by a diversified pool of high risk, below investment grade fixed income securities. A CLO is a trust typically collateralized by a pool of loans, which may include, among others, domestic and foreign senior secured loans, senior unsecured loans, and subordinate corporate loans, including loans that may be rated below investment grade or equivalent unrated loans.

 

28


Table of Contents

For both CBOs and CLOs, the cash flows from the trust are split into two or more portions, called tranches, varying in risk and yield. The riskiest portion is the “equity” tranche which bears the bulk of defaults from the bonds or loans in the trust and serves to protect the other, more senior tranches from default in all but the most severe circumstances. Since it is partially protected from defaults, a senior tranche from a CBO trust or CLO trust typically has higher ratings and lower yields than their underlying securities, and can be rated investment grade. Despite the protection from the equity tranche, CBO or CLO tranches can experience substantial losses due to actual defaults, increased sensitivity to defaults due to collateral default and disappearance of protecting tranches, market anticipation of defaults, as well as aversion to CBO or CLO securities as a class.

The risks of an investment in a CDO depend largely on the type of the collateral securities and the class of the CDO in which the fund invests. Normally, CBOs, CLOs and other CDOs are privately offered and sold, and thus, are not registered under the securities laws. As a result, investments in CDOs may be characterized by the fund as illiquid securities, however an active dealer market may exist for CDOs allowing a CDO to qualify for Rule 144A transactions. In addition to the normal risks associated with fixed income securities discussed elsewhere in this SAI and the fund’s prospectus ( e.g., interest rate risk and default risk), CDOs carry additional risks including, but not limited to: (i) the possibility that distributions from collateral securities will not be adequate to make interest or other payments; (ii) the quality of the collateral may decline in value or default; (iii) the fund may invest in CDOs that are subordinate to other classes; and (iv) the complex structure of the security may not be fully understood at the time of investment and may produce disputes with the issuer or unexpected investment results.

Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities include securities that reflect an interest in, and are secured by, mortgage loans on commercial real property. The market for commercial mortgage-backed securities developed more recently and in terms of total outstanding principal amount of issues is relatively small compared to the market for residential single-family MBS. Many of the risks of investing in commercial MBS reflect the risks of investing in the real estate securing the underlying mortgage loans. These risks reflect the effects of local and other economic conditions on real estate markets, the ability of tenants to make loan payments, and the ability of a property to attract and retain tenants. Commercial MBS may be less liquid and exhibit greater price volatility than other types of mortgage- or asset-backed securities.

Collateralized Mortgage Obligations (“CMO”) are a hybrid between mortgage-backed bonds and mortgage pass-through securities. Similar to a bond, interest and prepaid principal is paid, in most cases, on a monthly basis. CMOs may be collateralized by whole mortgage loans, but are more typically collateralized by portfolios of mortgage pass-through securities guaranteed by Ginnie Mae, Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and their income streams as well as private issuers.

CMOs are structured into multiple classes, each bearing a different stated maturity. Actual maturity and average life will depend upon the prepayment experience of the collateral. CMOs provide for a modified form of call protection through a de facto breakdown of the underlying pool of mortgages according to how quickly the loans are repaid. Monthly payment of principal received from the pool of underlying mortgages, including prepayments, is first returned to investors holding the shortest maturity class. Investors holding the longer maturity classes receive principal only after the first class has been retired. An investor is partially guarded against a sooner than desired return of principal because of the sequential payments.

 

29


Table of Contents

In a typical CMO transaction, a corporation (“issuer”) issues multiple series ( e.g. , A, B, C, Z) of CMO bonds (“Bonds”). Proceeds of the Bond offering are used to purchase mortgages or mortgage pass-through certificates (“Collateral”). The Collateral is pledged to a third party trustee as security for the Bonds. Principal and interest payments from the Collateral are used to pay principal on the Bonds in the order A, B, C, Z. The Series A, B, and C Bonds all bear current interest. Interest on the Series Z Bond is accrued and added to principal and a like amount is paid as principal on the Series A, B, or C Bond currently being paid off. When the Series A, B, and C Bonds are paid in full, interest and principal on the Series Z Bond begins to be paid currently. With some CMOs, the issuer serves as a conduit to allow loan originators (primarily builders or savings and loan associations) to borrow against their loan portfolios.

The rate of principal payment on MBS and ABS generally depends on the rate of principal payments received on the underlying assets which in turn may be affected by a variety of economic and other factors. As a result, the price and yield on any MBS or ABS is difficult to predict with precision and price and yield to maturity may be more or less than the anticipated yield to maturity. If the fund purchases these securities at a premium, a prepayment rate that is faster than expected will reduce yield to maturity, while a prepayment rate that is slower than expected will have the opposite effect of increasing the yield to maturity. Conversely, if the fund purchases these securities at a discount, a prepayment rate that is faster than expected will increase yield to maturity, while a prepayment rate that is slower than expected will reduce yield to maturity. Amounts available for reinvestment by the fund are likely to be greater during a period of declining interest rates and, as a result, are likely to be reinvested at lower interest rates than during a period of rising interest rates.

While many MBS and ABS are issued with only one class of security, many are issued in more than one class, each with different payment terms. Multiple class MBS and ABS are issued as a method of providing credit support, typically through creation of one or more classes whose right to payments on the security is made subordinate to the right to such payments of the remaining class or classes. In addition, multiple classes may permit the issuance of securities with payment terms, interest rates, or other characteristics differing both from those of each other and from those of the underlying assets. Examples include stripped securities, which are MBS and ABS entitling the holder to disproportionate interest or principal compared with the assets backing the security, and securities with classes having characteristics different from the assets backing the securities, such as a security with floating interest rates with assets backing the securities having fixed interest rates. The market value of such securities and CMO’s generally is more or less sensitive to changes in prepayment and interest rates than is the case with traditional MBS and ABS, and in some cases such market value may be extremely volatile.

CMO Residuals are mortgage securities issued by agencies or instrumentalities of the U.S. government or by private originators of, or investors in, mortgage loans, including savings and loan associations, homebuilders, mortgage banks, commercial banks, investment banks and special purpose entities of the foregoing.

The cash flow generated by the mortgage assets underlying a series of CMOs is applied first to make required payments of principal and interest on the CMOs and second to pay the related administrative expenses of the issuer. The residual in a CMO structure generally represents the interest in any excess cash flow remaining after making the foregoing payments. Each payment of such excess cash flow to a holder of the related CMO residual represents income and/or a return of capital. The amount of residual cash flow resulting from a CMO will depend on, among other things, the characteristics of the mortgage assets, the coupon rate of each class of CMO, prevailing interest rates, the amount of administrative expenses and the prepayment experience on the mortgage assets. In particular, the yield to maturity on CMO residuals is extremely sensitive to prepayments on the related underlying mortgage assets, in the same manner as an interest-only (“IO”) class of stripped mortgage-backed securities. See “Stripped Mortgage-Backed Securities.” In addition, if a series of a CMO includes a class that bears interest at an

 

30


Table of Contents

adjustable rate, the yield to maturity on the related CMO residual will also be extremely sensitive to changes in the level of the index upon which interest rate adjustments are based. As described below with respect to stripped mortgage-backed securities, in certain circumstances the fund may fail to recoup fully its initial investment in a CMO residual.

CMO residuals are generally purchased and sold by institutional investors through several investment banking firms acting as brokers or dealers. The CMO residual market has only very recently developed and CMO residuals currently may not have the liquidity of other more established securities trading in other markets. Transactions in CMO residuals are generally completed only after careful review of the characteristics of the securities in question. In addition, CMO residuals may, or pursuant to an exemption therefrom, may not have been registered under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”). CMO residuals, whether or not registered under the 1933 Act, may be subject to certain restrictions on transferability, and may be deemed “illiquid” and subject to the fund’s limitations on investment in illiquid securities.

Stripped Mortgage-Backed Securities (“SMBS”) are derivative multi-class mortgage securities. SMBS may be issued by agencies or instrumentalities of the U.S. government, or by private originators of, or investors in, mortgage loans, including savings and loan associations, mortgage banks, commercial banks, investment banks and special purpose entities of the foregoing.

SMBS are usually structured with two classes that receive different proportions of the interest and principal distributions on a pool of mortgage assets. A common type of SMBS will have one class receiving some of the interest and most of the principal from the mortgage assets, while the other class will receive most of the interest and the remainder of the principal. In the most extreme case, one class will receive all of the interest (the “IO” class), while the other class will receive all of the principal (the principal-only or “PO” class). The yield to maturity on an IO class is extremely sensitive to the rate of principal payments (including prepayments) on the related underlying mortgage assets, and a rapid rate of principal payments may have a material adverse effect on the fund’s yield to maturity from these securities. If the underlying mortgage assets experience greater than anticipated prepayments of principal, the fund may fail to recoup some or all of its initial investment in these securities even if the security is in one of the highest rating categories.

Under certain circumstances these securities may be deemed “illiquid” and subject to the fund’s limitations on investment in illiquid securities.

Non-Publicly Traded Securities and Private Placements are securities that are neither listed on a stock exchange nor traded over-the-counter, including privately placed securities. Such unlisted securities may involve a higher degree of business and financial risk that can result in substantial losses. As a result of the absence of a public trading market for these securities, they may be less liquid than publicly traded securities. Although these securities may be resold in privately negotiated transactions, the prices realized from these sales could be less than those originally paid by the fund or less than what may be considered the fair value of such securities. Furthermore, companies whose securities are not publicly traded may not be subject to the disclosure and other investor protection requirements which might be applicable if their securities were publicly traded. If such securities are required to be registered under the securities laws of one or more jurisdictions before being sold, the fund may be required to bear the expenses of registration.

Real Estate Investments. The fund invests in securities of real estate companies and other companies related to the real estate industry. Real estate companies include U.S. and non-U.S. issuers that in the opinion of the adviser derive at least 50% of their revenues or profits from the ownership, construction, development, financing, management, servicing, sale or leasing of commercial, industrial or residential

 

31


Table of Contents

real estate or have 50% of their total assets in real estate. Companies related to the real estate industry include companies whose products and services pertain to the real estate industry, such as mortgage lenders and mortgage servicing companies. The fund may invest a significant portion of its assets in real estate investment trusts (“REITs”) (which are more fully discussed below) and in real estate operating companies (“REOCs”).

REOCs are corporations that engage in the ownership, development, management or financing of real estate. They include, for example, developers, brokers and building suppliers. REOCs are publicly traded real estate companies that have chosen not to be taxed as REITs. Because REOCs reinvest earnings rather than distribute dividends to unit holders, they do not get the same benefits of lower corporate taxation that are a common characteristic of REITs. The value of the fund’s REOC securities generally will be affected by the same factors that adversely affect a REIT.

Although the fund may not invest directly in real estate, concentration in securities of companies that are principally engaged in the real estate industry exposes the fund to special risks associated with the direct ownership of real estate, and an investment in the fund will be closely linked to the performance of the real estate markets. These risks may include, but are not limited to, the following: declines in the value of real estate; risks related to general and local economic conditions; possible lack of availability of mortgage funds; lack of ability to access the credit or capital markets; overbuilding; extended vacancies of properties; defaults by borrowers or tenants, particularly during an economic downturn; increasing competition; increases in property taxes and operating expenses; changes in zoning laws; losses due to costs resulting from the clean-up of environmental problems; liability to third parties for damages resulting from environmental problems; casualty or condemnation losses; limitations on rents; changes in market and sub-market values and the appeal of properties to tenants; and changes in interest rates.

REITs are pooled investment vehicles, which invest primarily in income producing real estate or real estate related loans or interests and, in some cases, manage real estate. REITs are sometimes referred to as equity REITs, mortgage REITs or hybrid REITs. An equity REIT invests primarily in properties and generates income from rental and lease properties and, in some cases, from the management of real estate. Equity REITs also offer the potential for growth as a result of property appreciation and from the sale of appreciated property. Mortgage REITs invest primarily in real estate mortgages, which may secure construction, development or long-term loans, and derive income for the collection of interest payments. Hybrid REITs may combine the features of equity REITs and mortgage REITs. REITs are generally organized as corporations or business trusts, but are not taxed as a corporation if they meet certain requirements of Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. To qualify, a REIT must, among other things, invest substantially all of its assets in interests in real estate (including other REITs), cash and government securities, distribute at least 90% of its taxable income to its shareholders and receive at least 75% of that income from rents, mortgages and sales of property. The fund may also invest in REIT-like structures adopted by foreign countries.

Like any investment in real estate, a REIT’s performance depends on many factors, such as its ability to find tenants for its properties, to renew leases, and to finance property purchases and renovations. In general, REITs may be affected by changes in underlying real estate values, which may have an exaggerated effect to the extent a REIT concentrates its investment in certain regions or property types. For example, rental income could decline because of extended vacancies, increased competition from nearby properties, tenants’ failure to pay rent, or incompetent management. Property values could decrease because of overbuilding, environmental liabilities, uninsured damages caused by natural disasters, a general decline in the neighborhood, losses due to casualty or condemnation, increases in property taxes, or changes in zoning laws. Ultimately, a REIT’s performance depends on the types of properties it owns and how well the REIT manages its properties.

 

32


Table of Contents

In general, during periods of rising interest rates, REITs may lose some of their appeal for investors who may be able to obtain higher yields from other income-producing investments, such as long term bonds. Higher interest rates also mean that financing for property purchases and improvements is more costly and difficult to obtain. During periods of declining interest rates, certain mortgage REITs may hold mortgages that mortgagors elect to prepay, which can reduce the yield on securities issued by mortgage REITs. Mortgage REITs may be affected by the ability of borrowers to repay debts to the REIT when due and equity REITs may be affected by the ability of tenants to pay rent.

Like small-cap stocks in general, certain REITs have relatively small market capitalizations and their securities can be more volatile than—and at times will perform differently from—large-cap stocks. In addition, because small-cap stocks are typically less liquid than large-cap stocks, REIT stocks may sometimes experience greater share-price fluctuations than the stocks of larger companies. Further, REITs are dependent upon specialized management skills, have limited diversification, and are therefore subject to risks inherent in operating and financing a limited number of projects. By investing in REITs indirectly through the fund, a shareholder will bear indirectly a proportionate share of the REIT’s expenses in addition to their proportionate share of the fund’s expenses. Finally, REITs could possibly fail to qualify for tax-free pass-through of income under the Code or to maintain their exemptions from registration under the 1940 Act and CFTC regulations.

Restricted Securities are securities that are subject to legal restrictions on their sale. Difficulty in selling restricted securities may result in a loss or be costly to a fund. Restricted securities generally can be sold in privately negotiated transactions, pursuant to an exemption from registration under the 1933 Act, or in a registered public offering. Where registration is required, the holder of a registered security may be obligated to pay all or part of the registration expense and a considerable period may elapse between the time it decides to seek registration and the time it may be permitted to sell a security under an effective registration statement. If, during such a period, adverse market conditions were to develop, the holder might obtain a less favorable price than prevailed when it decided to seek registration of the security. Certain restricted securities, such as 4(2) commercial paper and Rule 144A securities, may be considered to be liquid if they meet the criteria for liquidity established by the Board. To the extent the fund invests in restricted securities that are deemed liquid, the general level of illiquidity in the fund’s portfolio may be increased if such securities become illiquid.

Securities Lending of portfolio securities is a common practice in the securities industry. The fund may engage in security lending arrangements with the primary objective of increasing its income. For example, the fund may receive cash collateral and may invest it in short-term, interest-bearing obligations, but will do so only to the extent that it will not lose the tax treatment available to regulated investment companies. Lending portfolio securities involves risks that the borrower may fail to return the securities or provide additional collateral. Also, voting rights with respect to the loaned securities may pass with the lending of the securities.

The fund may loan portfolio securities to qualified broker-dealers or other institutional investors provided: (1) the loan is secured continuously by collateral consisting of U.S. government securities, letters of credit, cash or cash-equivalents or other appropriate instruments maintained on a daily marked-to-market basis in an amount at least equal to the current market value of the securities loaned; (2) the fund may at any time call the loan and obtain the return of the securities loaned; (3) the fund will receive any interest or dividends paid on the loaned securities; and (4) an aggregate market value of securities loaned will not at any time exceed one-third of the total assets of the fund, including collateral received from the loan (at market value computed at the time of the loan).

Although voting rights with respect to loaned securities pass to the borrower, the lender retains the right to recall a security (or terminate a loan) for the purpose of exercising the security’s voting rights. Efforts to recall such securities promptly may be unsuccessful, especially for foreign securities or thinly traded securities such as small-cap stocks. In addition, because recalling a security may involve expenses to the fund, it is expected that the fund will do so only where the items being voted upon are, in the judgment of the investment adviser, either material to the economic value of the security or threaten to materially impact the issuer’s corporate governance policies or structure.

 

33


Table of Contents

Securities of Other Investment Companies and those issued by foreign investment companies may be purchased and sold by the fund. Mutual funds are registered investment companies, which may issue and redeem their shares on a continuous basis (open-end mutual funds) or may offer a fixed number of shares usually listed on an exchange (closed-end mutual funds). Mutual funds generally offer investors the advantages of diversification and professional investment management, by combining shareholders’ money and investing it in various types of securities, such as stocks, bonds and money market securities. Mutual funds also make various investments and use certain techniques in order to enhance their performance. These may include entering into delayed-delivery and when-issued securities transactions or swap agreements, buying and selling futures contracts, illiquid and restricted securities and repurchase agreements and borrowing or lending money and/or portfolio securities. The risks of investing in mutual funds generally reflect the risks of the securities in which the mutual funds invest and the investment techniques they may employ. Also, mutual funds charge fees and incur operating expenses.

If the fund decides to purchase securities of other investment companies, the fund intends to purchase shares of mutual funds in compliance with the requirements of federal law or any applicable exemptive relief received from the SEC. Mutual fund investments for the fund are currently restricted under federal regulations, and therefore, the extent to which the fund may invest in another mutual fund may be limited.

Funds in which the fund also may invest include unregistered or privately-placed funds, such as hedge funds and off-shore funds, and unit investment trusts. Hedge funds and off-shore funds are not registered with the SEC, and therefore are largely exempt from the regulatory requirements that apply to registered investment companies (mutual funds). As a result, these types of funds may have greater ability to make investments or use investment techniques that offer a higher degree of investment return, such as leveraging, which also may subject their fund assets to substantial risk to the investment principal. These funds, while not regulated by the SEC like mutual funds, may be indirectly supervised by the sources of their assets, which tend to be commercial and investment banks and other financial institutions. Investments in these funds also may be more difficult to sell, which could cause losses to the fund. For example, hedge funds typically require investors to keep their investment in a hedge fund for some period of time, such as one month or one year. This means investors would not be able to sell their shares of a hedge fund until such time had past. The fund is prohibited from acquiring any securities of registered open-end investment companies or registered unit investment trusts in reliance on Section 12(d)(1)(G) or Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the 1940 Act.

Short Sales may be used by the fund as part of its overall portfolio management strategies or to offset (hedge) a potential decline in the value of a security. The fund may engage in short sales that are either “against the box” or “uncovered.” A short sale is “against the box” if, at all times during which the short position is open, the fund owns at least an equal amount of the securities or securities convertible into, or has the right to acquire, at no added cost, the securities of the same issue as the securities that are sold short. A short sale against the box is a taxable transaction to the fund with respect to the securities that are sold short. “Uncovered” short sales are transactions under which the fund sells a security it does not own. To complete such transaction, the fund may borrow the security through a broker to make delivery to the buyer and, in doing so, the fund becomes obligated to replace the security borrowed by purchasing the security at the market price at the time of the replacement. The fund also may have to pay a fee to borrow particular securities, which would increase the cost of the security. In addition, the fund is often obligated to pay any accrued interest and dividends on the securities until they are replaced. The proceeds of the short sale position will be retained by the broker until the fund replaces the borrowed securities.

 

34


Table of Contents

The fund will incur a loss if the price of the security sold short increases between the time of the short sale and the time the fund replaces the borrowed security and, conversely, the fund will realize a gain if the price declines. Any gain will be decreased, and any loss increased, by the transaction costs described above. A short sale creates the risk of an unlimited loss, as the price of the underlying securities could theoretically increase without limit, thus increasing the cost of buying those securities to cover the short position. If the fund sells securities short “against the box,” it may protect unrealized gains, but will lose the opportunity to profit on such securities if the price rises. The successful use of short selling as a hedging strategy may be adversely affected by imperfect correlation between movements in the price of the security sold short and the securities being hedged.

The fund’s obligation to replace the securities borrowed in connection with a short sale will be secured by collateral deposited with the broker that consists of cash or other liquid securities. In addition, the fund will earmark cash or liquid assets or place in a segregated account an amount of cash or other liquid assets equal to the difference, if any, between (1) the market value of the securities sold short, marked-to-market daily, and (2) any cash or other liquid securities deposited as collateral with the broker in connection with the short sale.

Temporary Defensive Strategies are strategies the fund may take for temporary or defensive purposes. The investment strategies for the fund are those that the fund uses during normal circumstances. The fund may hold up to 100% of its assets in cash, cash equivalents and other short-term investments for temporary or defensive purposes. The fund may utilize such tactics when the investment adviser believes that market or economic interests are unfavorable for investors. Under such circumstances, the fund may not achieve its investment objective.

Trust Preferred Securities . The fund may purchase trust preferred securities which are preferred stocks issued by a special purpose trust subsidiary backed by subordinated debt of the corporate parent. These securities typically bear a market rate coupon comparable to interest rates available on debt of a similarly rated company. The securities are generally senior in claim to standard preferred stock but junior to other bondholders. Holders of the trust preferred securities have limited voting rights to control the activities of the trust and no voting rights with respect to the parent company.

Trust preferred securities may have varying maturity dates, at times in excess of 30 years, or may have no specified maturity date with an onerous interest rate adjustment if not called on the first call date. Dividend payments of the trust preferred securities generally coincide with interest payments on the underlying subordinated debt. Trust preferred securities generally have a yield advantage over traditional preferred stocks, but unlike preferred stocks, distributions are treated as interest rather than dividends for federal income tax purposes.

Trust preferred securities are subject to unique risks, which include the fact that dividend payments will only be paid if interest payments on the underlying obligations are made, which interest payments are dependent on the financial condition of the parent corporation and may be deferred for up to 20 consecutive quarters. There is also the risk that the underlying obligations, and thus the trust preferred securities, may be prepaid after a stated call date or as a result of certain tax or regulatory events, resulting in a lower yield to maturity.

Trust preferred securities prices fluctuate for several reasons including changes in investors’ perception of the financial condition of an issuer or the general condition of the market for trust preferred securities, or when political or economic events affecting the issuers occur. Trust preferred securities are also (a) sensitive to interest rate fluctuations, as the cost of capital rises and borrowing costs increase in a rising interest rate environment, and (b) subject to the risk that they may be called for redemption in a falling interest rate environment.

 

35


Table of Contents

U.S. Government Securities are issued by the U.S. Treasury or issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities. Not all U.S. government securities are backed by the full faith and credit of the United States. Some U.S. government securities, such as those issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, the Student Loan Marketing Association (SLMA or Sallie Mae), and the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLB), are supported by a line of credit the issuing entity has with the U.S. Treasury. Others are supported solely by the credit of the issuing agency or instrumentality such as obligations issued by the Federal Farm Credit Banks Funding Corporation (FFCB). There can be no assurance that the U.S. government will provide financial support to U.S. government securities of its agencies and instrumentalities if it is not obligated to do so under law. Of course U.S. government securities, including U.S. Treasury securities, are among the safest securities, however, not unlike other debt securities, they are still sensitive to interest rate changes, which will cause their yields and prices to fluctuate.

On September 7, 2008, the U.S. Treasury announced a federal takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, placing the two federal instrumentalities in conservatorship. Under the takeover, the U.S. Treasury agreed to acquire $1 billion of senior preferred stock of each instrumentality and obtained warrants for the purchase of common stock of each instrumentality. Under these Senior Preferred Stock Purchase Agreements (SPAs), the U.S. Treasury has pledged to provide up to $100 billion per instrumentality as needed, including the contribution of cash capital to the instrumentalities in the event their liabilities exceed their assets. On May 6, 2009, the U.S. Treasury increased its maximum commitment to each instrumentality under the SPAs to $200 billion per instrumentality. On December 24, 2009, the U.S. Treasury further amended the SPAs to allow the cap on Treasury’s funding commitment to increase as necessary to accommodate any cumulative reduction in Fannie Mae’s and Freddie Mac’s net worth through the end of 2012. At the start of 2013, the unlimited support the U.S. Treasury extended to the two companies expired – Fannie Mae’s bailout is capped at $125 billion and Freddie Mac has a limit of $149 billion. On August 17, 2012, the U.S. Treasury announced that it was again amending the SPAs to terminate the requirement that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac each pay a 10% dividend annually on all amounts received under the funding commitment. Instead, they will transfer to the U.S. Treasury on a quarterly basis all profits earned during a quarter that exceed a capital reserve amount of $3 billion. It is anticipated that the new amendment would put Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in a better position to service their debt.

The actions of the U.S. Treasury are intended to ensure that Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac maintain a positive net worth and meet their financial obligations preventing mandatory triggering of receivership. No assurance can be given that the U.S. Treasury initiatives will be successful.

On August 5, 2011, S&P lowered the long-term sovereign credit rating assigned to the United States to AA+ with a negative outlook. On August 8, 2011, S&P downgraded the long-term senior debt rating of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to AA+ with a negative outlook. The long-term impacts of any future downgrades are unknown. However, any future downgrades could have a material adverse impact on global financial markets and worldwide economic conditions, and could negatively impact the fund.

INVESTMENT LIMITATIONS

The following investment limitations are fundamental investment polices and restrictions and may be changed only by vote of a majority of the fund’s outstanding voting securities.

 

1) The fund will concentrate its investments in a particular industry or group of industries, as concentration is defined under the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time. The fund will concentrate its investments in securities of companies engaged in, and related to, the real estate industry.

 

36


Table of Contents

The fund may not:

 

2) (i) Purchase or sell commodities, commodities contracts, real estate; (ii) lend or borrow, (iii) issue senior securities, (iv) underwrite securities or (v) pledge, mortgage or hypothecate any of its assets, except as permitted (or not prohibited) by the 1940 Act, the rules or regulations thereunder or any exemption therefrom, as such statute, rules or regulations may be amended or interpreted from time to time.

The following descriptions of the 1940 Act may assist investors in understanding the above policies and restrictions.

Concentration . The SEC has presently defined concentration as investing 25% or more of an investment company’s net assets in an industry or group of industries, with certain exceptions, such as with respect to investments in obligations issued or guaranteed by the U.S. government or its agencies and instrumentalities, or tax-exempt obligations of state or municipal governments and their political subdivisions.

Borrowing . The 1940 Act presently allows the fund to borrow from any bank (including pledging, mortgaging or hypothecating assets) in an amount up to 33 1/3% of its total assets (not including temporary borrowings).

Diversification. Under the 1940 Act and the rules, regulations and interpretations thereunder, a “diversified company,” as to 75% of its total assets, may not purchase securities of any issuer (other than obligations of, or guaranteed by, the U.S. government or its agencies, or instrumentalities or securities of other investment companies) if, as a result, more than 5% of its total assets would be invested in the securities of such issuer, or more than 10% of the issuer’s voting securities would be held by the fund.

Lending . Under the 1940 Act, the fund may only make loans if expressly permitted by its investment policies. The fund’s non-fundamental investment policy on lending is set forth below.

Underwriting. Under the 1940 Act, underwriting securities involves the fund purchasing securities directly from an issuer for the purpose of selling (distributing) them or participating in any such activity either directly or indirectly. Under the 1940 Act, a diversified fund may not make any commitment as underwriter, if immediately thereafter the amount of its outstanding underwriting commitments, plus the value of its investments in securities of issuers (other than investment companies) of which it owns more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities, exceeds 25% of the value of its total assets.

Real Estate. The 1940 Act does not directly restrict the fund’s ability to invest in real estate, but does require every fund to have a fundamental investment policy governing such investments. The fund has adopted a fundamental policy that would permit direct investment in real estate. However, the fund has adopted a non-fundamental investment policy that prohibits it from investing directly in real estate. This non-fundamental policy may be changed only by vote of the fund’s Board of Trustees.

Senior Securities. Senior securities may include any obligation or instrument issued by the fund evidencing indebtedness. The 1940 Act generally prohibits funds from issuing senior securities, although it provides allowances for certain borrowings and certain other investments, such as short sales, reverse repurchase agreements, firm commitment agreements and standby commitments, with appropriate earmarking or segregation of assets to cover such obligation.

 

37


Table of Contents

The following are non-fundamental investment policies and restrictions and may be changed by the Board.

The fund may not:

 

1) Sell securities short unless it owns the security or the right to obtain the security or equivalent securities, or unless it covers such short sale as required by current SEC rules and interpretations (transactions in futures contracts, options and other derivative instruments are not considered selling securities short).

 

2) Purchase securities on margin, except such short-term credits as may be necessary for the clearance of purchases and sales of securities and provided that margin deposits in connection with futures contracts, options on futures or other derivative instruments shall not constitute purchasing securities on margin.

 

3) Borrow money except that the fund may (i) borrow money from banks or through an interfund lending facility, if any, only for temporary or emergency purposes (and not for leveraging) and (ii) engage in reverse repurchase agreements with any party; provided that (i) and (ii) in combination do not exceed 33 1/3% of its total assets (any borrowings that come to exceed this amount will be reduced to the extent necessary to comply with the limitation within three business days).

 

4) Lend any security or make any other loan if, as a result, more than 33 1/3% of its total assets would be lent to other parties (this restriction does not apply to purchases of debt securities or repurchase agreements).

 

5) Invest more than 15% of its net assets in illiquid securities.

 

6) Purchase or sell commodities, commodity contracts or real estate; provided that the fund may (i) (a) invest in securities of companies that own or invest in real estate or are engaged in the real estate business, including REITs, REIT-like structures and securities secured by real estate or interests therein and (b) the fund may hold and sell real estate or mortgages acquired on real estate acquired through default, liquidation or other distributions of an interest in real estate as a result of the fund’s ownership of such securities; (ii) purchase or sell commodities contracts on financial instruments, such as futures contracts, options on such contracts, equity index participations and index participation contracts, and (iii) purchase securities of companies that deal in precious metals or interests therein.

Subsequent Changes In Net Assets

Policies and investment limitations that state a maximum percentage of assets that may be invested in a security or other asset, or that set forth a quality standard shall be measured immediately after and as a result of the fund’s acquisition of such security or asset, unless otherwise noted. Except with respect to limitations on borrowing and futures and option contracts, any subsequent change in net assets or other circumstances does not require the fund to sell an investment if it could not then make the same investment. With respect to the limitation on illiquid securities, in the event that a subsequent change in net assets or other circumstances causes the fund to exceed its limitation, the fund will take steps to bring the aggregate amount of illiquid instruments back within the limitations as soon as reasonably practicable.

 

38


Table of Contents

MANAGEMENT OF THE FUND

The fund is overseen by a Board of Trustees. The trustees are responsible for protecting shareholder interests. The trustees regularly meet to review the investment activities, contractual arrangements and the investment performance of the fund. The trustees met 6 times during the most recent fiscal year.

Certain trustees are “interested persons.” A trustee is considered an interested person of the Trust under the 1940 Act if, among other things, he or she is an officer, director, or an employee of Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM”) or Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (“Schwab”). A trustee also may be considered an interested person of the Trust under the 1940 Act if he or she owns stock of The Charles Schwab Corporation, a publicly traded company and the parent company of the fund’s investment adviser and distributor.

As used herein the terms “Fund Complex” and “Family of Investment Companies” each refer collectively to The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Strategic Trust, Laudus Trust, and Laudus Institutional Trust which, as of June 15, 2013, included 94 funds.

Each of the officers and/or trustees also serves in the same capacity, as described for the Trust, for The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust. The tables below provide information about the trustees and officers for the Trust, which includes the fund in this SAI. The address of each individual listed below is 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

 

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND
POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS

DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS

  

NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE

  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE

PAST FIVE

YEARS

INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES

Mariann Byerwalter

1960

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2000; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2004)

   Chairman of JDN Corporate Advisory LLC (advisory services firm) (Oct. 2001 – Present).    77   

Director, WageWorks, Inc. (2010 – present)

 

Director, Redwood Trust, Inc. (1998 – present)

 

Director, PMI Group Inc. (2001 – 2009)

John F. Cogan

1947

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2008; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2010)

   Senior Fellow: The Hoover Institution at Stanford University (Oct. 1979 – present); Senior Fellow Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research; Professor of Public Policy, Stanford University (Sept. 2000 – present).    77   

Director, Gilead Sciences, Inc. (2005 – present)

 

Director, Monaco Coach Corporation (2005 – 2009)

 

39


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND
POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS

DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS

  

NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE

  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE

PAST FIVE

YEARS

William A. Hasler

1941

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2000; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2004)

   Dean Emeritus, Haas School of Business, University of California, Berkeley (July 1998 – present).    77   

Director, TOUSA (1998 – present)

 

Director, Globalstar, Inc. (2009 – present)

 

Director, Aviat Networks (2001 – present)

 

Director, Mission West Properties (1998 –2012)

 

Director, Ditech Networks Corporation (1997 –2012)

Director, Genitope Corporation (2000 –2009)

David L. Mahoney

1954

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2011)

   Private Investor.    77   

Director, Symantec Corporation (2003 – present)

 

Director, Corcept Therapeutics Incorporated (2004 – present)

 

Director, Tercica Inc. (2004 – 2008)

Kiran M. Patel

1948

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2011)

   Executive Vice President and General Manager of Small Business Group, Intuit, Inc. (financial software and services firm for consumers and small businesses) (Dec. 2008 – present); Senior Vice President and General Manager of Consumer Group, Intuit, Inc. (June 2007 – Dec. 2008); Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Intuit, Inc. (Sept. 2005 – Jan. 2008).    77   

Director, KLA-Tencor Corporation (2008 – present)

 

Director, BEA Systems, Inc. (2007 – 2008)

 

40


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND
POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND

LENGTH OF TIME SERVED 1 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS

DURING THE PAST FIVE YEARS

  

NUMBER OF
PORTFOLIOS
IN FUND
COMPLEX
OVERSEEN
BY THE
TRUSTEE

  

OTHER

DIRECTORSHIPS

DURING THE

PAST FIVE

YEARS

Gerald B. Smith

1950

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2000; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2010)

   Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Founder of Smith Graham & Co. (investment advisors) (1990 –present).    77   

Director and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Oneok Partners LP (2003 – present)

 

Director, Oneok, Inc. (2009 – present)

 

Lead Independent Director, Board of Cooper Industries (2002 – 2012)

Joseph H. Wender

1944

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2008; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2010)

   Senior Consultant, Goldman Sachs & Co., Inc. (investment banking and securities firm) (Jan. 2008- present); Partner, Colgin Partners, LLC (vineyards) (February 1998 – present).    77    Board Member and Chairman of the Audit Committee, Isis Pharmaceuticals (1994 – present)
INTERESTED TRUSTEES

Charles R. Schwab 2

1937

Chairman and Trustee

(Chairman and Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds since 1989; Schwab Investments since 1991

; Schwab Capital Trust since 1993; Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 1994; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2010)

   Chairman and Director, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., Charles Schwab Bank, N. A.; Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Schwab (SIS) Holdings Inc. I, Schwab International Holdings, Inc.; Chief Executive Officer, Schwab Holdings, Inc.; Through June 2007, Director, U.S. Trust Company, N. A., U.S. Trust Corporation, United States Trust Company of New York. Until October 2008, Chief Executive Officer, The Charles Schwab Corporation, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.    77    None.

Walter W. Bettinger II 2

1960

Trustee

(Trustee of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2008; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2010)

   As of October 2008, President and Chief Executive Officer, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation. Since October 2008, Director, The Charles Schwab Corporation. Since May 2008, Director, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and Schwab Holdings, Inc. Since 2006, Director, Charles Schwab Bank. Until October 2008, President and Chief Operating Officer, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. and The Charles Schwab Corporation. From 2004 through 2007, Executive Vice President and President, Schwab Investor Services. From 2004 through 2005, Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Individual Investor Enterprise, and from 2002 through 2004, Executive Vice President, Corporate Services.    94    None.

 

41


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 3 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING THE PAST

FIVE YEARS

OFFICERS

Marie Chandoha

1961

President and Chief Executive Officer

(Officer

of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2010)

   Executive Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. (Sept. 2010 – present); Director, President and Chief Executive Officer (Dec. 2010 – present), Chief Investment Officer (Sept. 2010 – Oct. 2011), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.; President, Chief Executive Officer (Dec. 2010 – present), and Chief Investment Officer (Sept. 2010 – Oct. 2011), Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds and Schwab ETFs; Global Head of Fixed Income Business Division, BlackRock, Inc. (formerly Barclays Global Investors) (March 2007 – August 2010.

George Pereira

1964

Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer, Schwab Funds

Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, Laudus Funds

(Officer of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2004; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2006)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Nov. 2004 – present), Chief Operating Officer (Jan. 2011 – present), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (November 2004 – present); Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer, Laudus Funds (2006 – present).

Omar Aguilar

1970

Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Equities

(Officer of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2011)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer - Equities, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (April 2011 – present); Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer - Equities, Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds (June 2011 – present); Head of the Portfolio Management Group and Vice President of Portfolio Management, Financial Engines, Inc. (May 2009 – April 2011); Head of Quantitative Equity, ING Investment Management (July 2004 – Jan. 2009).

 

42


Table of Contents

NAME, YEAR OF BIRTH, AND

POSITION(S) WITH THE TRUST;

(TERM OF OFFICE AND LENGTH OF TIME

SERVED 3 )

  

PRINCIPAL OCCUPATIONS DURING THE PAST

FIVE YEARS

Brett Wander

1961

Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Fixed Income

(Officer of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2011)

   Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Fixed Income, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (April 2011 – present); Senior Vice President and Chief Investment Officer – Fixed Income, Schwab Funds and Laudus Funds (June 2011 – present); Senior Managing Director, Global Head of Active Fixed-Income Strategies, State Street Global Advisors (Jan. 2008 – Oct. 2010); Director of Alpha Strategies Loomis, Sayles & Company (April 2006 – Jan. 2008).

David Lekich

1964

Chief Legal Officer and Secretary, Schwab Funds

Vice President and Assistant Clerk, Laudus Funds (Officer of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2011)

   Senior Vice President (Sept. 2011 – present), Vice President (March 2004 – Sept. 2011), Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.; Senior Vice President and Chief Counsel (Sept. 2011 – present), Vice President (Jan. 2011 – Sept. 2011), Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.; Secretary (April 2011 – present) and Chief Legal Officer (Dec. 2011 – present), Schwab Funds; Vice President and Assistant Clerk, Laudus Funds (April 2011 – present); Secretary (May 2011 – present) and Chief Legal Officer (Nov. 2011 – present), Schwab ETFs.

Catherine MacGregor

1964

Vice President and Assistant Secretary, Schwab Funds

Chief Legal Officer and Clerk, Laudus Funds

(Officer of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust and Schwab Annuity Portfolios since 2005; Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust since 2007)

   Vice President, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (July 2005-present); Vice President (Dec. 2005-present), Chief Legal Officer and Clerk (March 2007-present), Laudus Funds; Vice President and Assistant Secretary, Schwab Funds (June 2007 – present) and Schwab ETFs (Oct. 2009-present).

 

1  

Trustees remain in office until they resign, retire or are removed by shareholder vote. The Schwab and Laudus Funds’ retirement policy requires that independent trustees retire at age 72 or after twenty years as a trustee, whichever comes first. In addition, the retirement policy requires any independent trustee of Schwab Funds or Laudus Funds to retire from all Boards upon their required retirement date from either Board.

2  

Mr. Schwab and Mr. Bettinger are Interested Trustees because they own stock of The Charles Schwab Corporation, the parent company of the investment adviser .

3  

The President, Treasurer and Secretary hold office until their respective successors are chosen and qualified or until he or she sooner dies, resigns, is removed or becomes disqualified. Each of the other officers serves at the pleasure of the Boards .

*******************************************************************

Board Leadership Structure

The Chairman of the Board of Trustees, Charles R. Schwab, is Chairman of the Board of Directors of The Charles Schwab Corporation and an “interested person” of the Trust as that term is defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940. The Trust does not have a single lead independent trustee. The Board

 

43


Table of Contents

is comprised of a super-majority (77 percent) of trustees who are not interested persons of the Trust (i.e., “independent trustees”). There are three primary committees of the Board: the Audit and Compliance Committee; the Governance Committee; and the Investment Oversight Committee. Each of the Committees is chaired by an independent trustee, and each Committee is comprised solely of independent trustees. The Committee chairs preside at Committee meetings, participate in formulating agendas for those meetings, and coordinate with management to serve as a liaison between the independent trustees and management on matters within the scope of the responsibilities of each Committee, as set forth in its Board-approved charter. The Board has determined that this leadership structure is appropriate given the specific characteristics and circumstances of the Trust. The Board made this determination in consideration of, among other things, the fact that the independent trustees of the Trust constitute a super-majority of the Board, the fact that Committee chairs are independent trustees, the number of funds (and classes) overseen by the Board, and the total number of trustees on the Board.

Board Oversight of Risk Management

Like most mutual funds, fund management and its other service providers have responsibility for day-to-day risk management for the fund. The Board, as part of its risk oversight of the trust, monitors risks identified during regular and special reports to the Committees of the Board, as well as regular and special reports to the full Board. In addition to monitoring such risks, the Committees and the Board oversee efforts of fund management and service providers to manage risks to which the fund may be exposed. For example, the Investment Oversight Committee meets with portfolio managers and receives regular reports regarding investment risk and credit risk of the fund’s portfolio. The Audit and Compliance Committee meets with the fund’s Chief Compliance Officer and Chief Financial Officer and receives regular reports regarding compliance risks, operational risks and risks related to the valuation and liquidity of portfolio securities. From its review of these reports and discussions with management, each Committee receives information about the material risks of the fund and about how management and service providers mitigate those risks, enabling the independent Committee chairs and other independent members of the Committees to discuss these risks with the full Board.

The Board recognizes that not all risks that may affect the fund can be identified nor can processes and controls be developed to eliminate or mitigate the occurrence or effects of certain risks; some risks are simply beyond the reasonable control of the fund, its management, and service providers. Although the risk oversight functions of the Board, and the risk management policies of fund management and fund service providers, are designed to be effective, there is no guarantee that they will eliminate or mitigate all risks. In addition, it may be necessary to bear certain risks (such as investment-related risks) to achieve the fund’s investment objective. As a result of the foregoing and other factors, the fund’s ability to manage risk is subject to significant limitations.

Individual Trustee Qualifications

The Board has concluded that each of the trustees should initially and continue to serve on the Board because of (i) his or her ability to review and understand information about the Trust provided to them by management, to identify and request other information they may deem relevant to the performance of their duties, to question management regarding material factors bearing on the management of the Trust, and to exercise their business judgment in a manner that serves the best interests of the Trust’s shareholders and (ii) the trustee’s experience, qualifications, attributes or skills as described below.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Bettinger should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience he gained as president and chief executive officer of The Charles Schwab Corporation, his knowledge of and experience in the financial services industry, and the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008.

 

44


Table of Contents

The Board has concluded that Ms. Byerwalter should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience she gained as chairman of her own corporate advisory and consulting firm and as former chief financial officer of a university and a bank, the experience she has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000 and the Laudus Funds since 2004, and her service on other public company and mutual insurance company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Cogan should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience he has gained serving as a senior fellow and professor of public policy at a university and his former service in government, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Hasler should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience he gained serving as former vice chair of the consulting practice of an accounting firm and as former co-chief executive officer of a public company, his service as former dean of a business school, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000 and the Laudus Funds since 2004, his service on other public company boards, and his experience serving as Chair of the Trust’s Audit and Compliance Committee.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Mahoney should serve as a trustee of the Trust because of the experience he gained as co-chief executive officer of a healthcare services company, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Patel should serve as a trustee of the Trust because of the experience he gained as executive vice president, general manager and chief financial officer of a software company, and his service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Schwab should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience he has gained as founder and chairman of the board of Schwab and subsequently its parent corporation, The Charles Schwab Corporation, his experience in and knowledge of the financial services industry, the experience he has gained serving as Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Schwab Funds since their inception, and his former service on other public company boards.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Smith should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience he has gained as managing partner of his own investment advisory firm, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2000, his service on other public company boards, and his experience serving as Chair of the Trust’s Investment Oversight Committee.

The Board has concluded that Mr. Wender should serve as trustee of the Trust because of the experience he gained serving as former partner and chairman of the finance committee of an investment bank, the experience he has gained serving as trustee of the Schwab Funds since 2008, and his service on other public company boards.

Trustee Committees

The Board of Trustees has established certain committees and adopted Committee charters with respect to those committees, each as described below:

   

The Audit and Compliance Committee reviews the integrity of the Trust’s financial reporting processes and compliance policies, procedures and processes, and the Trust’s overall system of internal controls. The Audit and Compliance Committee also reviews and evaluates the qualifications, independence and performance of the Trust’s independent auditors. This Committee is comprised of at least three Independent Trustees and currently has the following members: William A. Hasler (Chairman), Mariann Byerwalter and Kiran M. Patel. The charter directs that the Committee must meet four times annually, with additional meetings as the Committee deems appropriate. The Committee met 4 times during the most recent fiscal year.

 

45


Table of Contents
   

The Governance Committee reviews and makes recommendations to the Board regarding Trust governance-related matters, including but not limited to Board compensation practices, retirement policies and term limits, Board self-evaluations, the effectiveness and allocation of assignments and functions by the Board, the composition of Committees of the Board, and the training of Trustees. The Governance Committee is also responsible for selecting and nominating candidates to serve as Trustees. The Governance Committee does not have a policy with respect to consideration of candidates for Trustee submitted by shareholders. However, if the Governance Committee determined that it would be in the best interests of the Trust to fill a vacancy on the Board of Trustees, and a shareholder submitted a candidate for consideration by the Board of Trustees to fill the vacancy, the Governance Committee would evaluate that candidate in the same manner as it evaluates nominees identified by the Governance Committee. Nominee recommendations may be submitted to the Secretary of the Trust at the Trust’s principal business address. This Committee is comprised of at least three Independent Trustees and currently has the following members: Mariann Byerwalter (Chairman), John F. Cogan, William A. Hasler and Joseph H. Wender. The charter directs that the Committee meets at such times and with such frequency as is deemed necessary or appropriate by the Committee. The Committee met 3 times during the most recent fiscal year.

 

   

The Investment Oversight Committee reviews the investment activities of the Trust and the performance of the Fund’s investment adviser. This Committee is comprised of at least three Trustees (at least two-thirds of whom shall be Independent Trustees) and currently has the following members: Gerald B. Smith (Chairman), John F. Cogan, David L. Mahoney and Joseph H. Wender. The charter directs that the Committee meet at such times and with such frequency as is deemed necessary or appropriate by the Committee. The Committee met 4 times during the most recent fiscal year.

Trustee Compensation

The following table provides trustee compensation for the fiscal year ending February 28, 2013.

 

Name of Trustee

   ($)
Aggregate
Compensation
from the Fund
     ($)
Total Compensation from  the
Trust and Fund Complex
 

Interested Trustees

     

Charles R. Schwab

     0         0   

Walter W. Bettinger II

     0         0   

Independent Trustees

     

Mariann Byerwalter

   $ 1,820       $ 308,000   

John F. Cogan

   $ 1,750       $ 295,500   

William A. Hasler

   $ 1,820       $ 308,000   

David L. Mahoney

   $ 1,750       $ 293,500   

Kiran M. Patel

   $ 1,750       $ 295,500   

Gerald B. Smith

   $ 1,820
      $ 308,000
  

Joseph H. Wender

   $ 1,750
      $ 295,500
  

 

46


Table of Contents

Securities Beneficially Owned By Each Trustee

The following table provides each trustee’s equity ownership of the fund and ownership of all registered investment companies overseen by each trustee in the Family of Investment Companies as of December 31, 2012.

 

Name of Trustee

  

Dollar Range of Trustee Ownership

of Equity Securities in the Fund

  

Aggregate Dollar

Range of Trustee

Ownership In the

Family of

Investment

Companies*

Interested Trustees

     

Charles R. Schwab

   $50,001-$100,000    Over $100,000

Walter W. Bettinger II

   None    Over $100,000

Independent Trustees

     

Mariann Byerwalter

   None    Over $100,000

John F. Cogan

   None    Over $100,000

William A. Hasler

   None    Over $100,000

David L. Mahoney

   None    Over $100,000

Kiran M. Patel

   None    Over $100,000

Gerald B. Smith

   $10,001-$50,000    $10,001-$50,000

Joseph H. Wender

   None    None

Deferred Compensation Plan

Independent Trustees may enter into a fee deferral plan. Under this plan, deferred fees will be credited to an account established by the Trust as of the date that such fees would have been paid to the trustee. The value of this account will equal the value that the account would have if the fees credited to the account had been invested in the shares of Schwab Funds selected by the trustee. Currently, none of the Independent Trustees has elected to participate in this plan.

Code of Ethics

The fund, its investment adviser and Schwab have adopted a Code of Ethics as required under the 1940 Act. Subject to certain conditions or restrictions, the Code of Ethics permits the trustees, directors, officers or advisory representatives of the fund or the investment adviser or the directors or officers of Schwab to buy or sell directly or indirectly securities for their own accounts. This includes securities that may be purchased or held by the fund. Securities transactions by some of these individuals may be subject to prior approval of the investment adviser’s Chief Compliance Officer or alternate. Most securities transactions are subject to quarterly reporting and review requirements.

 

47


Table of Contents

CONTROL PERSONS AND PRINCIPAL HOLDERS OF SECURITIES

As of June 12, 2013, each of the officers and trustees of the fund, as a group, owned, of record or beneficially, less than 1% of the outstanding voting securities of the fund.

As of June 3, 2013, the following represents persons or entities that owned, of record or beneficially, more than 5% of the outstanding voting securities of the fund:

 

Charles Schwab & Co

FBO Customers

Attn SchwabFunds Team N

211 Main St

San Francisco CA 94105-1905

     98

Schwab Target 2040

211 Main Street

San Francisco CA 94105-1905

     10 % 1  

Schwab Target 2030

211 Main St

San Francisco CA 94105-1905

     9 % 1  

Schwab Target 2030

211 Main St

San Francisco CA 94105-1905

    
 
5
 
% 1  
  

 

1  

These shares are held within the Charles Schwab & Co., Inc. account listed elsewhere in the table.

INVESTMENT ADVISORY AND OTHER SERVICES

Investment Adviser

CSIM, a wholly owned subsidiary of The Charles Schwab Corporation, 211 Main Street, San Francisco, CA 94105, serves as the fund’s investment adviser and administrator pursuant to an Investment Advisory and Administration Agreement (“Advisory Agreement”) between it and the Trust. Schwab is an affiliate of the investment adviser and is the Trust’s distributor and shareholder services paying agent. Charles R. Schwab is the founder, Chairman and Director of The Charles Schwab Corporation. As a result of his ownership of and interests in The Charles Schwab Corporation, Mr. Schwab may be deemed to be a controlling person of the investment adviser and Schwab.

Advisory Agreement

The continuation of the fund’s Advisory Agreement must be specifically approved at least annually (1) by the vote of the trustees or by a vote of the shareholders of the fund, and (2) by the vote of a majority of the trustees who are not parties to the investment advisory agreement or “interested persons” of any party (the “Independent Trustees”), cast in person at a meeting called for the purpose of voting on such approval.

 

48


Table of Contents

Each year, the Board of Trustees calls and holds a meeting to decide whether to renew the Advisory Agreement between the Trust and CSIM with respect to existing funds in the Trust. In preparation for the meeting, the Board requests and reviews a wide variety of materials provided by the funds’ investment adviser, as well as extensive data provided by third parties, and the Independent Trustees receive advice from counsel to the Independent Trustees.

For its advisory and administrative services to the fund, the investment adviser is entitled to receive an annual fee, payable monthly, based on the fund’s average daily net assets equal to 0.77%.

For the fiscal years ended February 28, 2011, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2013, the fund paid net investment advisory fees of $1,062,739 (gross fees were reduced by $231,960), $1,273,074 (gross fees were reduced by $231,772), and $1,390,221 (gross fees were reduced by $218,697), respectively.

Schwab and the investment adviser have agreed to limit the total annual operating expenses (excluding interest, taxes and certain non-routine expenses) of the fund to 1.05% for so long as the investment adviser serves as the adviser to the fund. This agreement may only be amended or terminated with the approval of the Board.

The amount of the expense cap is determined in coordination with the Board, and the expense cap is intended to limit the effects on shareholders of expenses incurred in the ordinary operation of the fund. The expense cap is not intended to cover all fund expenses, and the fund’s expenses may exceed the expense cap. For example, the expense cap does not cover investment-related expenses, such as brokerage commissions, interest, taxes and the fees and expenses of pooled investment vehicles, such as REITs and other investment companies, that are held by the fund, nor does it cover extraordinary or non-routine expenses, such as shareholder meeting costs.

Distributor

Pursuant to an Amended and Restated Distribution Agreement between Schwab and the Trust, Schwab is the principal underwriter for shares of the fund and is the Trust’s agent for the purpose of the continuous offering of the fund’s shares. The fund pays for prospectuses and shareholder reports to be prepared and delivered to existing shareholders. Schwab pays such costs when the described materials are used in connection with the offering of shares to prospective investors and for supplemental sales literature and advertising. Schwab receives no fee under the Distribution Agreement.

Shareholder Servicing Plan

The Trust’s Board of Trustees has adopted a Shareholder Servicing Plan (the “Plan”) on behalf of the fund. The Plan enables the fund, directly or indirectly through Schwab, to bear expenses relating to the provision by service providers, including Schwab, of certain shareholder services to the current shareholders of the fund. The Trust has appointed Schwab to act as its shareholder servicing fee paying agent under the Plan for the purpose of making payments to the service providers (other than Schwab) under the Plan. Pursuant to the Plan, the fund is subject to an annual shareholder servicing fee of up to 0.25%.

Pursuant to the Plan, the fund (or Schwab as paying agent) may pay Schwab or service providers that, pursuant to written agreements with Schwab, provide certain account maintenance, customer liaison and shareholder services to fund shareholders. Schwab and the other service providers may provide fund shareholders with the following shareholder services, among other shareholder services: (i) maintaining records for shareholders that hold shares of the fund; (ii) communicating with shareholders, including the mailing of regular statements and confirmation statements, distributing fund-related materials, mailing prospectuses and reports to shareholders, and responding to shareholder inquiries; (iii) communicating and processing shareholder purchase, redemption and exchange orders; (iv) communicating mergers, splits or other reorganization activities to fund shareholders; and (v) preparing and filing tax information, returns and reports.

 

49


Table of Contents

The shareholder servicing fee paid to a particular service provider is calculated at the annual rate set forth above and is based on the average daily net asset value of the shares owned by shareholders holding shares through such service provider. Payments under the Plan are made as described above regardless of Schwab’s or the service provider’s actual cost of providing the services. If the cost of providing the services under the Plan is less than the payments received, the unexpended portion of the fees may be retained as profit by Schwab or the service provider.

The Plan shall continue in effect for the fund for so long as its continuance is specifically approved at least annually by a vote of the majority of both (i) the Board and (ii) the trustees of the Trust who are not interested persons of the Trust and who have no direct or indirect financial interest in the operation of the Plan or any agreements related to it (the “Qualified Trustees”). The Plan requires that Schwab or any person authorized to direct the disposition of monies paid or payable by the fund pursuant to the Plan furnish quarterly written reports of amounts spent under the Plan and the purposes of such expenditures to the Board of the Trust for review. All material amendments to the Plan must be approved by votes of the majority of both (i) the Board and (ii) the Qualified Trustees.

Transfer Agent

Boston Financial Data Services, Inc. (“BFDS”), 2000 Crown Colony Drive, Quincy, Massachusetts 02169-0953, serves as the fund’s transfer agent. As part of these services, the firm maintains records pertaining to the sale, redemption and transfer of the fund’s shares.

Custodian and Fund Accountant

Brown Brothers Harriman & Co. (“BBH”), 40 Water Street, Boston, MA, 02109, serves as custodian for the fund. State Street Bank and Trust Company (“State Street”), One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111, serves as fund accountant for the fund.

The custodian is responsible for the daily safekeeping of securities and cash held or sold by the fund. The accountant maintains the books and records related to the fund’s transactions.

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The fund’s independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (“PwC”), Three Embarcadero Center, San Francisco, CA 94111, audits and reports on the annual financial statements of the fund and reviews certain regulatory reports and the fund’s U.S. federal income tax return. PwC also performs other professional, auditing, tax and advisory services when the trust engages them to do so.

Portfolio Manager

Other Accounts. In addition to the fund, the portfolio managers are responsible for the day-to-day management of certain other accounts, as listed below. The accounts listed below are not subject to performance-based advisory fees.

 

50


Table of Contents

Name

   Registered Investment
Companies

(this amount does not include
the fund in this Statement of
Additional Information)
     Other Pooled
Investment Vehicles
     Other Accounts  
   Number of
Accounts
   Total Assets      Number of
Accounts
   Total
Assets
     Number of
Accounts
   Total
Assets
 

Jonas Svallin (As of 2/28/13)

   9    $ 5,320,885,480       0      —         0   

 

—  

  

Wei Li (As of 5/31/13)

   6    $ 3,082,762,960       0      —         0      —     

Conflicts of Interest.

The portfolio managers’ management of other accounts may give rise to potential conflicts of interest in connection with their management of the fund’s investments, on the one hand, and the investments of the other managed accounts, on the other. The other managed accounts include other mutual funds and ETFs advised by CSIM (collectively, the “Other Managed Accounts”). The Other Managed Accounts might have similar investment objectives as the fund, track the same index the fund tracks or otherwise hold, purchase, or sell securities that are eligible to be held, purchased, or sold by the fund. While the portfolio managers’ management of Other Managed Accounts may give rise to the potential conflicts of interest listed below, CSIM does not believe that the conflicts, if any, are material or, to the extent any such conflicts are material, CSIM believes it has adopted policies and procedures that are designed to manage those conflicts in an appropriate way.

Knowledge of the Timing and Size of Fund Trades . A potential conflict of interest may arise as a result of the portfolio managers’ day-to-day management of the fund. Because of their position with the fund, the portfolio managers knows the size, timing, and possible market impact of fund trades. It is theoretically possible that the portfolio managers could use this information to the advantage of the Other Managed Accounts they manage and to the possible detriment of the fund. However, CSIM has adopted policies and procedures reasonably designed to allocate investment opportunities on a fair and equitable basis over time. When it is determined to be in the best interest of both accounts, a portfolio manager may aggregate trade orders for the Other Managed Accounts with those of the fund. All aggregated orders are subject to CSIM’s aggregation and allocation policy and procedures, which provide, among other things, that (i) a portfolio manager will not aggregate orders unless he or she believes such aggregation is consistent with his or her duty to seek best execution; (ii) no account will be favored over any other account; (iii) each account that participates in an aggregated order will participate at the average security price with all transaction costs shared on a pro-rata basis; and (iv) if the aggregated order cannot be executed in full, the partial execution is allocated pro-rata among the participating accounts in accordance with the size of each account’s order.

Investment Opportunities. A potential conflict of interest may arise as a result of the portfolio managers’ management of the fund and Other Managed Accounts which, in theory, may allow them to allocate investment opportunities in a way that favors the Other Managed Accounts over the fund, which conflict of interest may be exacerbated to the extent that CSIM or the portfolio managers receive, or expect to receive, greater compensation from their management of the Other Managed Accounts than the fund. Notwithstanding this theoretical conflict of interest, it is CSIM’s policy to manage each account based on its investment objectives and related restrictions and, as discussed above, CSIM has adopted policies and procedures reasonably designed to allocate investment opportunities on a fair and equitable basis over time and in a manner consistent with each account’s investment objectives and related restrictions. For

 

51


Table of Contents

example, while the portfolio managers may buy for an Other Managed Account securities that differ in identity or quantity from securities bought for the fund or refrain from purchasing securities for an Other Managed Account that they are otherwise buying for the fund in an effort to outperform its specific benchmark, such an approach might not be suitable for the fund given its investment objectives and related restrictions.

Compensation. During the most recent fiscal year, each portfolio manager’s compensation consists of a fixed annual (“base”) salary and a discretionary bonus. The base salary is determined considering compensation payable for a similar position across the investment management industry and an evaluation of the individual portfolio manager’s overall performance such as the portfolio manager’s contribution to the investment process, good corporate citizenship, risk management and mitigation, and functioning as an active contributor to the firm’s success. The discretionary bonus is determined in accordance with the CSIM Equity and Fixed Income Portfolio Manager Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) as follows:

There are two independent funding components for the Plan:

 

   

75% of the funding is based on equal weighting of Investment Fund Performance and Risk Management and Mitigation

 

   

25% of the funding is based on Corporate results

At year-end, the full-year funding for both components of the Plan will be pooled together. The total pool is allocated to Plan participants by CSIM senior management based on their assessment of a variety of performance factors.

Factors considered in CSIM senior management’s allocation process will include objective and subjective factors that will take into consideration total performance and will include, but are not limited to:

 

   

Fund performance relative to performance measure;

 

   

Risk management and mitigation;

 

   

Individual performance against key objectives;

 

   

Contribution to overall group results;

 

   

Functioning as an active contributor to the firm’s success;

 

   

Team work;

 

   

Collaboration between analysts and portfolio managers; and

 

   

Regulatory/Compliance management.

The portfolio managers’ compensation is not based on the value of the assets held in the fund’s portfolio.

Ownership of Fund Shares. The following table shows the dollar amount range of the portfolio managers’ “beneficial ownership” of shares of the fund as of May 31, 2013. Dollar amount ranges disclosed are established by the SEC. “Beneficial ownership” is determined in accordance with Rule 16a-1(a)(2) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

 

Portfolio Manager

  

Fund

   Dollar Range of Fund
Shares Owned
Jonas Svallin    Schwab Global Real Estate Fund    None
Wei Li    Schwab Global Real Estate Fund    None

 

52


Table of Contents

BROKERAGE ALLOCATION AND OTHER PRACTICES

Portfolio Turnover

For reporting purposes, the fund’s turnover rate is calculated by dividing the value of purchases or sales of portfolio securities for the fiscal year, whichever is less, by the monthly average value of portfolio securities the fund owned during the fiscal year. When making the calculation, all securities whose maturities at the time of acquisition were one year or less (“short-term securities”) are excluded.

A 100% portfolio turnover rate would occur, for example, if all portfolio securities (aside from short-term securities) were sold and either repurchased or replaced once during the fiscal year.

Typically, a fund with high turnover (such as 100% or more) tends to generate higher capital gains and transaction costs, such as brokerage commissions.

Variations in turnover rate may be due to a fluctuating volume of shareholder purchase and redemption orders, market conditions, and/or changes in the investment adviser’s investment outlook.

The fund’s portfolio turnover rate for fiscal years 2012 and 2013 was 120% and 128%, respectively.

Portfolio Transactions

The investment adviser makes decisions with respect to the purchase and sale of portfolio securities on behalf of the fund. The investment adviser is responsible for implementing these decisions, including the negotiation of commissions and the allocation of principal business and portfolio brokerage. A portfolio generally does not incur any commissions or sales charges when it invests in underlying Schwab Funds or Laudus Funds, but it may incur such costs if it invests directly in other types of securities or in unaffiliated funds. Purchases and sales of securities on a stock exchange, including ETF shares, or certain riskless principal transactions placed on NASDAQ are typically effected through brokers who charge a commission for their services. Exchange fees may also apply to transactions effected on an exchange. Purchases and sales of fixed income securities may be transacted with the issuer, the issuer’s underwriter, or a dealer. The fund does not usually pay brokerage commissions on purchases and sales of fixed income securities, although the price of the securities generally includes compensation, in the form of a spread or a mark-up or mark-down, which is not disclosed separately. The prices the fund pays to underwriters of newly-issued securities usually include a commission paid by the issuer to the underwriter. Transactions placed through dealers who are serving as primary market makers reflect the spread between the bid and asked prices. The money market securities in which the fund invests are traded primarily in the over-the-counter market on a net basis and do not normally involve either brokerage commissions or transfer taxes. It is expected that the cost of executing portfolio securities transactions of the fund will primarily consist of dealer spreads and brokerage commissions.

The investment adviser seeks to obtain the best execution for the fund in executing portfolio transactions. The investment adviser considers a number of factors in selecting brokers or dealers to execute transactions on behalf of the fund. Such factors may include commission rates as well as other factors relating to the quality of execution. Considered factors may cover the full range and quality of a broker’s service, including, without limitation, value provided, execution capability, commission rate, financial responsibility and responsiveness to the investment adviser. The investment adviser may also consider brokerage and research services provided by the broker. The investment adviser does not take into consideration fund sales when selecting a broker to effect a portfolio transaction; however, the investment adviser may execute through brokers that sell shares of funds advised by the investment adviser.

 

53


Table of Contents

The investment adviser generally will not enter into soft-dollar arrangements with brokers to obtain third-party research or other services in exchange for brokerage commissions paid by advised accounts. However, the investment adviser does receive various forms of eligible proprietary research that is bundled with brokerage services at no additional cost from certain of the brokers with whom the investment adviser executes equity or fixed income trades. These services or products may include: company financial data and economic data (e.g., unemployment, inflation rates and gross domestic product (“GDP”) figures), stock quotes, last sale prices and trading volumes, research reports analyzing the performance of a particular company or stock, access to websites that contain data about various securities markets, narrowly distributed trade magazines or technical journals covering specific industries, products, or issuers, seminars or conferences registration fees which provide substantive content relating to eligible research, discussions with research analysts or meetings with corporate executives which provide a means of obtaining oral advice on securities, markets or particular issuers, short-term custody related to effecting particular transactions and clearance and settlement of those trades, lines between the broker-dealer and order management systems operated by a third party vendor, dedicated lines between the broker-dealer and the investment adviser’s order management system, dedicated lines providing direct dial-up service between the investment adviser and the trading desk at the broker-dealer, and message services used to transmit orders to broker-dealers for execution.

The investment adviser does not currently cause a client to pay a higher commission in return for brokerage or research services or products to obtain research or other products or services. If the investment adviser elected to do so, the investment adviser would receive a benefit because it would not have to produce or pay for the research, products or services. Consequently, this would create an incentive for the investment adviser to select or recommend a broker-dealer based on its interest in receiving the research or other products or services.

The fund may purchase new issues of securities for clients in a fixed price offering. In these situations, the seller may be a member of the selling group that will, in addition to selling securities, provide the investment adviser with research services, in accordance with applicable rules and regulations permitting these types of arrangements.

The investment adviser may place orders directly with electronic communications networks or other alternative trading systems. Placing orders with electronic communications networks or other alternative trading systems may enable the fund to trade directly with other institutional holders. At times, this may allow the fund to trade larger blocks than would be possible trading through a single market maker.

The investment adviser may aggregate securities sales or purchases among two or more clients. The investment adviser will not aggregate transactions unless it believes such aggregation is consistent with its duty to seek best execution for each affected client and is consistent with the terms of the investment advisory agreement for such client. In any single transaction in which purchases and/or sales of securities of any issuer for the account of the fund are aggregated with other accounts managed by the investment adviser, the actual prices applicable to the transaction will be averaged among the accounts for which the transaction is effected, including the account of the fund.

In determining when and to what extent to use Schwab or any other affiliated broker-dealer as a broker for executing orders for the fund, the investment adviser follows procedures, adopted by the Board of Trustees, that are designed to ensure that affiliated brokerage commissions (if relevant) are reasonable and fair in comparison to unaffiliated brokerage commissions for comparable transactions. The Board reviews the procedures annually and approves and reviews transactions involving affiliated brokers quarterly.

 

54


Table of Contents

In certain market circumstances, the investment adviser may determine that its clients, which include registered investment companies and other advisory clients, are best served by placing one order on behalf of several of them. The investment adviser will not aggregate transactions if it determines that to do so (i) would be unfair or inequitable in the circumstances; (ii) is impractical; or (iii) is otherwise inappropriate under the circumstances. Clients may pay higher brokerage costs or otherwise receive less favorable prices or execution if the investment adviser does not aggregate trades when it has an opportunity to do so.

The investment adviser’s aggregation and allocation guidelines are intended to ensure that trade allocations are timely, that no set of trade allocations is accomplished to unfairly advantage or disadvantage particular clients or types of clients and that, over time, client accounts are treated fairly and equitably, even though a specific trade may have the effect of benefiting one account against another when viewed in isolation. In connection with the aggregation of purchase and sale orders for two or more client accounts, the following requirements must be met:

1) The investment adviser shall not receive additional compensation or remuneration of any kind as a result of aggregating transactions for clients.

2) The investment adviser, for each client, must determine that the purchase or sale of each particular security involved is appropriate for the client and consistent with its investment objectives and its investment guidelines or restrictions.

3) Each client that participates in a block trade will participate at the average security price with all transaction costs shared on a pro-rata basis.

4) Client account information at the investment adviser must separately reflect the securities that have been bought, sold and held for each client.

For equity transactions, the investment adviser’s trading department determines whether aggregation is appropriate for orders received on the trading desk. Generally, mutual fund trade orders received at a contemporaneous point in time that contain the same security trading in the same direction (buy/sell) and which utilize the same trading strategy are candidates for potential aggregation. However, such trades will only be aggregated if the trader believes that such aggregation is necessary and consistent with the investment adviser’s duty to seek best execution. Portfolio managers and traders may determine other circumstances where it may be appropriate to aggregate trades across multiple fund accounts. Portfolio managers and traders may elect to aggregate orders not meeting the above criteria provided that such aggregation is determined to be in the best interest of each client account and consistent with the investment adviser’s duty to seek best execution. Adjustments to the pro-rata allocation may be made to avoid having odd lots of shares held in any client account, or to avoid conflicts with limitations established for a client.

Brokerage Commissions

During the fiscal years ended February 28, 2011, February 29, 2012 and February 28, 2013, the fund paid brokerage commissions of $214,922, $201,691 and $244,818, respectively.

Regular Broker-Dealers

The fund’s regular broker-dealers during its most recent fiscal year are: (1) the ten broker-dealers that received the greatest dollar amount of brokerage commissions from the fund; (2) the ten broker-dealers that engaged as principal in the largest dollar amount of portfolio transactions; and (3) the ten broker-dealers that sold the largest dollar amount of the fund’s shares.

 

55


Table of Contents

As of February 28, 2013, the fund held securities issued by their respective regular broker-dealers, as indicated below:

 

Regular Broker-Dealer

   Value of Fund’s
Holdings as of
February 28, 2013
 

SG AMERICAS SECURITIES, LLC

     5,546,753   

Proxy Voting

The Board has delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through its Advisory Agreement. The Trustees have adopted CSIM’s Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures with respect to proxies voted on behalf of the various Schwab Funds portfolios. A description of CSIM’s Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures is included in Appendix B.

The Trust is required to disclose annually the fund’s complete proxy voting record on Form N-PX. The fund’s proxy voting record for the most recent 12 month period ended June 30 th is available by visiting the Schwab website at www.schwabfunds.com. The fund’s Form N-PX will also be available on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

Portfolio Holdings Disclosure

The Board has approved policies and procedures that govern the timing and circumstances regarding the disclosure of fund portfolio holdings information to shareholders and third parties. These policies and procedures are designed to ensure that disclosure of information regarding the fund’s portfolio securities is in the best interests of fund shareholders, and include procedures to address conflicts between the interests of the fund’s shareholders, on the one hand, and those of the fund’s investment adviser, principal underwriter or any affiliated person of the fund, its investment adviser or its principal underwriter, on the other. Pursuant to such procedures, the Board has authorized the President of the Trust to authorize the release of the fund’s portfolio holdings, as necessary, in conformity with the foregoing principles.

The Board exercises on-going oversight of the disclosure of fund portfolio holdings by overseeing the implementation and enforcement of the fund’s policies and procedures by the Chief Compliance Officer and by considering reports and recommendations by the Chief Compliance Officer concerning any material compliance matters. The Board receives periodic updates, at least annually, regarding entities which were authorized to be provided “early disclosure” (as defined below) of the fund’s portfolio holdings information, and periodically reviews any agreements that the Trust has entered into to selectively disclose portfolio holdings.

A complete list of the fund’s portfolio holdings is published on the Schwab Funds website at www.schwabfunds.com/prospectus, under “Prospectuses & Reports”, typically 60-80 days after the end of the fund’s fiscal quarter. The portfolio holdings information available on the fund’s website is the same that is filed with the SEC on Form N-Q or Form N-CSR. In addition, the fund provides on the website quarterly information regarding certain attributes of the fund’s portfolio, such as its top ten holdings, sector weightings, composition, credit quality and duration and maturity, as applicable. This information is generally updated within 20-30 days after the end of the fiscal quarter. The information on the website is publicly available to all categories of persons.

The fund’s top ten holdings list is posted on schwab.com monthly, typically with a 10-day lag. In addition to the top ten holdings information, the fund also provides monthly information regarding certain attributes of the fund’s portfolio, such as sector weightings, composition, credit quality, duration and maturity, as applicable. This information is available publicly to all persons.

 

56


Table of Contents

The fund may disclose portfolio holdings information to certain persons and entities prior to and more frequently than the public disclosure of such information (“early disclosure”). The President of the Trust may authorize early disclosure of portfolio holdings information to such parties at differing times and/or with different lag times provided that (a) the President determines that the disclosure is in the best interests of the fund and that there are no conflicts of interest between the fund’s shareholders and fund’s adviser and distributor; and (b) the recipient is, either by contractual agreement or otherwise by law, required to maintain the confidentiality of the information.

Portfolio holdings may be made available on a selective basis to ratings agencies, certain industry organizations, consultants and other qualified financial professionals when the President of the trust determines such disclosure meets the requirements noted above and serves a legitimate business purpose. Agreements entered into with such entities will describe the permitted use of portfolio holdings and provide that, among other customary confidentiality provisions: (i) the portfolio holdings will be kept confidential; (ii) the person will not trade on the basis of any material non-public information; and (iii) the information will be used only for the purpose described in the agreement.

The fund’s service providers including, without limitation, the investment adviser, the distributor, the custodian, fund accountant, transfer agent, auditor, proxy voting service provider, pricing information vendors, publisher, printer and mailing agent may receive disclosure of portfolio holdings information as frequently as daily in connection with the services they perform for the fund. The names of those service providers to whom the fund selectively discloses portfolio holdings information will be disclosed in this SAI. CSIM, Glass Lewis, State Street and BBH, as service providers to the fund, are currently receiving this information on a daily basis. RR Donnelley, as a service provider to the fund, is currently receiving this information on a quarterly basis. PwC, BFDS and Schwab, as service providers to the fund, receive this information on an as-needed basis. Service providers are subject to a duty of confidentiality with respect to any portfolio holdings information they receive whether imposed by the confidentiality provisions of the service providers’ agreements with the Trust or by the nature of its relationship with the Trust. Although certain of the service providers are not under formal confidentiality obligations in connection with disclosure of portfolio holdings, the fund will not continue to conduct business with a service provider who the fund believes is misusing the disclosed information.

To the extent that the fund invests in an ETF, the Trust will, in accordance with exemptive orders issued by the SEC to ETF sponsors and the procedures adopted by the Board, promptly notify the ETF in writing of any purchase or acquisition of shares of the ETF that causes the fund to hold (i) 5% or more of such ETF’s total outstanding voting securities, and (ii) 10% or more of such ETF’s total outstanding voting securities. In addition, CSIM will, upon causing the fund to acquire more than 3% of an open-end ETF’s outstanding shares, notify the open-end ETF of the investment.

The fund’s policies and procedures prohibit the fund, the fund’s investment adviser or any related party from receiving any compensation or other consideration in connection with the disclosure of portfolio holdings information.

The fund may disclose non-material information including commentary and aggregate information about the characteristics of the fund in connection with or relating to the fund or its portfolio securities to any person if such disclosure is for a legitimate business purpose, such disclosure does not effectively result in the disclosure of the complete portfolio securities of the fund (which can only be disclosed in accordance with the above requirements), and such information does not constitute material non-public information. Such disclosure does not fall within the portfolio securities disclosure requirements outlined above.

 

57


Table of Contents

Whether the information constitutes material non-public information will be made on a good faith determination, which involves an assessment of the particular facts and circumstances. In most cases commentary or analysis would be immaterial and would not convey any advantage to a recipient in making a decision concerning the fund. Commentary and analysis include, but are not limited to, the allocation of the fund’s portfolio securities and other investments among various asset classes, sectors, industries and countries, the characteristics of the stock components and other investments of the fund, the attribution of fund returns by asset class, sector, industry and country, and the volatility characteristics of the fund.

DESCRIPTION OF THE TRUST

The fund is a series of Schwab Investments, an open-end, management investment company. Schwab Investments was organized under Massachusetts law on October 26, 1990.

The fund may hold special shareholder meetings, which may cause the fund to incur non-routine expenses. These meetings may be called for purposes such as electing trustees, changing fundamental policies and amending management contracts. Shareholders are entitled to one vote for each share owned and may vote by proxy or in person. Proxy materials will be mailed to shareholders prior to any meetings, and will include a voting card and information explaining the matters to be voted upon.

The bylaws of the Trust provide that a majority of shares entitled to vote shall be a quorum for the transaction of business at a shareholders’ meeting, except that where any provision of law, or of the Declaration of Trust or of the bylaws permits or requires that (1) holders of any series shall vote as a series, then a majority of the aggregate number of shares of that series entitled to vote shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business by that series, or (2) holders of any class shall vote as a class, then a majority of the aggregate number of shares of that class entitled to vote shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business by that class. Any lesser number shall be sufficient for adjournments. Any adjourned session or sessions may be held, within a reasonable time after the date set for the original meeting, without the necessity of further notice. The Declaration of Trust specifically authorizes the Board of Trustees to terminate the Trust (or any of its investment portfolios) by notice to the shareholders without shareholder approval.

Under Massachusetts law, shareholders of a Massachusetts business trust could, under certain circumstances, be held personally liable for the Trust’s obligations. The Declaration of Trust, however, disclaims shareholder liability for the Trust’s acts or obligations and requires that notice of such disclaimer be given in each agreement, obligation or instrument entered into or executed by the Trust or the trustees. In addition, the Declaration of Trust provides for indemnification out of the property of an investment portfolio in which a shareholder owns or owned shares for all losses and expenses of such shareholder or former shareholder if he or she is held personally liable for the obligations of the Trust solely by reason of being or having been a shareholder. Moreover, the Trust will be covered by insurance which the trustees consider adequate to cover foreseeable tort claims. Thus, the risk of a shareholder incurring financial loss on account of shareholder liability is considered remote, because it is limited to circumstances in which a disclaimer is inoperative and the Trust itself is unable to meet its obligations. There is a remote possibility that the fund could become liable for a misstatement in the prospectus or SAI about another fund.

As more fully described in the Declaration of Trust, the trustees may each year, or more frequently, distribute to the shareholders of each series accrued income less accrued expenses and any net realized capital gains less accrued expenses. Distributions of each year’s income of each series shall be distributed pro rata to shareholders in proportion to the number of shares of each series held by each of them. Distributions will be paid in cash or shares or a combination thereof as determined by the trustees. Distributions paid in shares will be paid at the net asset value as determined in accordance with the bylaws.

 

58


Table of Contents

Any series of the Trust may reorganize or merge with one or more other series of the Trust or of another investment company. Any such reorganization or merger shall be pursuant to the terms and conditions specified in an agreement and plan of reorganization authorized and approved by the Trustees and entered into by the relevant series in connection therewith. In addition, such reorganization or merger may be authorized by vote of a majority of the Trustees then in office and, to the extent permitted by applicable law, without the approval of shareholders of any series.

PURCHASE, REDEMPTION, DELIVERY OF SHAREHOLDER DOCUMENTS

AND PRICING OF SHARES

Purchasing and Redeeming Shares of the Funds

The fund is open each day that the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is open (business days). The NYSE’s trading session is normally conducted from 9:30 a.m. Eastern time until 4:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday through Friday, although some days, such as in advance of and following holidays, the NYSE’s trading session closes early. The following holiday closings are currently scheduled for 2013-2014: New Year’s Day, Martin Luther King Jr.’s Birthday, Presidents’ Day, Good Friday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Thanksgiving Day and Christmas Day.

Only orders that are received in good order by the fund’s transfer agent (or an authorized intermediary) prior to the close of the NYSE’s trading session will be executed that day at the fund’s share price calculated that day. On any day that the NYSE closes early the fund reserves the right to advance the time by which purchase, redemption and exchange orders must be received by the fund’s transfer agent (or an authorized intermediary) that day in order to be executed that day at that day’s share price.

The fund has authorized one or more brokers to accept on its behalf purchase and redemption orders. Such brokers have also been authorized to designate other intermediaries to accept purchase and redemption orders on the fund’s behalf. The fund will be deemed to have received a purchase or redemption order when an authorized broker or, if applicable, a broker’s authorized designee, receives such order. Such orders will be priced at the fund’s net asset value per share next determined after such orders are received by an authorized broker or the broker’s authorized designee.

As long as the fund or Schwab follow reasonable procedures to confirm that an investor’s telephone or Internet order is genuine, they will not be liable for any losses the investor may experience due to unauthorized or fraudulent instructions. These procedures may include requiring a form of personal identification or other confirmation before acting upon any telephone or Internet order, providing written confirmation of telephone or Internet orders and tape recording all telephone orders.

Share certificates will not be issued in order to avoid additional administrative costs, however, share ownership records are maintained by Schwab.

The Trust’s Declaration of Trust provides that shares may be automatically redeemed if held by a shareholder in an amount less than the minimum required by the fund. The fund’s minimum initial investments and minimum balance requirements, if any, are set forth in the prospectus. These minimums may be waived for certain retirement plans, including Schwab Corporate Services retirement plans, and plan participants, and for shareholders who roll into an individual retirement account (“IRA”) from an exempted retirement plan. These minimums may also be waived for certain other investors, including trustees and officers of Schwab, and for certain investment programs, including programs for education savings or charitable giving. Schwab may receive other compensation for providing services to these clients, investors and programs.

 

59


Table of Contents

The fund has made an election with the SEC to pay in cash all redemptions requested by any shareholder of record limited in amount during any 90-day period to the lesser of $250,000 or 1% of its net assets at the beginning of such period. This election is irrevocable without the SEC’s prior approval. Redemption requests in excess of these limits may be paid, in whole or in part, in investment securities or in cash, as the Board of Trustees may deem advisable. Payment will be made wholly in cash unless the Board of Trustees believes that economic or market conditions exist that would make such payment a detriment to the best interests of the fund. If redemption proceeds are paid in investment securities, such securities will be valued as set forth in “Pricing of Shares.” A redeeming shareholder would normally incur transaction costs if he or she were to convert the securities to cash.

The fund is designed for long-term investing. Because short-term trading activities can disrupt the smooth management of the fund and increase its expenses, the fund reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to refuse any purchase or exchange order, or large purchase or exchange orders, including any purchase or exchange order which appears to be associated with short-term trading activities or “market timing.” Because market timing decisions to buy and sell securities typically are based on an individual investor’s market outlook, including such factors as the perceived strength of the economy or the anticipated direction of interest rates, it is difficult for the fund to determine in advance what purchase or exchange orders may be deemed to be associated with market timing or short-term trading activities. The fund and Schwab reserve the right to refuse any purchase or exchange order, including large orders, that may negatively impact their operations. More information regarding the fund’s policies regarding “market timing” is included in the fund’s prospectus.

Only certain intermediaries are authorized to accept orders on behalf of the fund. If your fund shares are no longer held by an authorized intermediary, the fund may impose restrictions on your ability to manage or maintain your shares. For example, you will not be able to place orders to purchase additional shares. To remove these restrictions, you have two options. First, you may move your shares to Schwab or another intermediary that is authorized to accept fund orders. Second, you may maintain a direct account with the fund if you meet the eligibility requirements for placing direct orders and your completed account application and supporting documentation is returned to and accepted by the fund’s sub-transfer agent. The eligibility requirements and instructions for submitting an account application are set forth in the fund’s prospectus. If you do not exercise one of these options within ninety days, the fund reserves the right to redeem your shares.

As explained in more detail in the fund’s prospectus, the fund charges a redemption fee of 2.00% on shares sold or exchanged 30 days or less after purchasing them. The fund reserves the right to waive its early redemption fee for certain tax-advantaged retirement plans or charitable giving funds, certain fee-based or wrap programs, or in other circumstances when the fund’s officers determine that such a waiver is in the best interest of the fund and its shareholders.

The fund’s share price and principal value change, and when you sell your shares they may be worth less than what you paid for them.

Exchanging Shares of the Fund

Shares of any Schwab Fund ® , including any class of shares, may be sold and shares of any other Schwab Fund or class purchased, provided the minimum investment and any other requirements of the fund or class purchased are satisfied. “An exchange order,” which is a simultaneous order to sell shares of one fund or class and automatically invest the proceeds in another fund or class, may not be executed between shares of Sweep Investments and shares of non-Sweep Investments. Shares of Sweep Investments may be bought and sold automatically pursuant to the terms and conditions of your Schwab account agreement or by direct order as long as you meet the minimums for direct investments. In addition, different exchange policies may apply to Schwab Funds that are bought and sold through third-party financial intermediaries and the exchange privilege between Schwab Funds may not be available through third-party financial intermediaries.

 

60


Table of Contents

The fund and Schwab reserve certain rights with regard to exchanging shares of the fund. These rights include the right to: (i) refuse any purchase or exchange order that may negatively impact the fund’s operations; (ii) refuse orders that appear to be associated with short-term trading activities; and (iii) materially modify or terminate the exchange privilege upon 60 days’ written notice to shareholders.

Delivery of Shareholder Documents

Typically once a year, an updated prospectus will be mailed to shareholders describing the fund’s investment strategies, risks and shareholder policies. Twice a year, financial reports will be mailed to shareholders describing the fund’s performance and investment holdings. In order to eliminate duplicate mailings of shareholder documents, each household may receive one copy of these documents, under certain conditions. This practice is commonly called “householding.” If you want to receive multiple copies, you may write or call your fund at the address or telephone number on the front of this SAI. Your instructions will be effective within 30 days of receipt by Schwab.

Pricing of Shares

Each business day, the fund calculates its share price, or net asset value per share (NAV), as of the close of the NYSE (generally 4 p.m. Eastern time). This means that NAVs are calculated using the values of the fund’s portfolio securities as of the close of the NYSE. Such values are required to be determined in one of two ways: securities for which market quotations are readily available are required to be valued at current market value; and securities for which market quotations are not readily available or the investment adviser deems them to be unreliable are required to be valued at fair value using procedures approved by the Board of Trustees.

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

The fund uses approved pricing services to provide values for their portfolio securities. Current market values are generally determined by the approved pricing services as follows: securities traded on stock exchanges, excluding the NASDAQ National Market System, are valued at the last-quoted sales price on the exchange on which such securities are primarily traded (closing value), or, lacking any sales, at the mean between the bid and ask prices; securities traded in the over-the-counter market are valued at the last reported sales price that day, or, if no sales are reported, at the mean between the bid and ask prices. Securities listed on the NASDAQ National Market System are valued in accordance with the NASDAQ Official Closing Price. In addition, securities that are primarily traded on foreign exchanges are generally valued at the official closing price or last sales price on the exchange where the securities are primarily traded with these values then translated into U.S. dollars at the current exchange rate. Fixed income securities normally are valued based on valuations provided by approved pricing services. Securities may be fair valued pursuant to procedures approved by the fund’s Board of Trustees when approved pricing services do not provide a value for a security, a furnished price appears manifestly incorrect or events occur prior to the close of the NYSE that materially affect the furnished price. The Board of Trustees regularly reviews fair value determinations made by the funds pursuant to the procedures.

TAXATION

This discussion of federal income tax consequences is based on the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations issued thereunder as in effect on the date of this SAI. New legislation, as well as administrative changes or court decisions, may significantly change the conclusions expressed herein, and may have a retroactive effect with respect to the transactions contemplated herein.

 

61


Table of Contents

Federal Tax Information for the Fund

It is the fund’s policy to qualify for taxation as a “regulated investment company” (a “RIC”) by meeting the requirements of Subchapter M of the Internal Revenue Code. By qualifying as a RIC, the fund expects to eliminate or reduce to a nominal amount the federal income tax to which it is subject. If the fund does not qualify as a RIC under the Internal Revenue Code, it will be subject to federal income tax, at regular corporate rates on its net income, including any net realized capital gains.

The fund is treated as a separate entity for federal income tax purposes and is not combined with the Trust’s other funds. The fund intends to qualify as a RIC so that it will be relieved of federal income tax on that part of its income that is distributed to shareholders. In order to qualify for treatment as a RIC, the fund must, among other requirements, distribute annually to its shareholders at least the sum of 90% of its investment company taxable income (generally, net investment income plus the excess, if any, of net short-term capital gain over net long-term capital losses) and 90% of its net tax-exempt income. Among these requirements are the following: (i) at least 90% of the fund’s gross income each taxable year must be derived from dividends, interest, payments with respect to securities loans, and gains from the sale or other disposition of stock, securities or foreign currencies, or other income derived with respect to its business of investing in such stock or securities or currencies and net income derived from an interest in a qualified publicly traded partnership; (ii) at the close of each quarter of the fund’s taxable year, at least 50% of the value of its total assets must be represented by cash and cash items, U.S. government securities, securities of other RICs and other securities, with such other securities limited, in respect of any one issuer, to an amount that does not exceed 5% of the value of the fund’s assets and that does not represent more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of such issuer; and (iii) at the close of each quarter of the fund’s taxable year, not more than 25% of the value of its assets may be invested in securities (other than U.S. government securities or the securities of other RICs) of any one issuer or of two or more issuers which the fund controls and which are engaged in the same, similar, or related trades or businesses, or the securities of one or more qualified publicly traded partnerships.

The Internal Revenue Code imposes a non-deductible excise tax on RICs that do not distribute in a calendar year (regardless of whether they otherwise have a non-calendar taxable year) an amount equal to 98% of their “ordinary income” (as defined in the Internal Revenue Code) for the calendar year plus 98.2% of their net capital gain for the one-year period ending on October 31 of such calendar year, plus any undistributed amounts from prior years. The non-deductible excise tax is equal to 4% of the deficiency. For the foregoing purposes, the fund is treated as having distributed any amount on which it is subject to income tax for any taxable year ending in such calendar year. The fund may in certain circumstances be required to liquidate fund investments in order to make sufficient distributions to avoid federal excise tax liability at a time when the investment adviser might not otherwise have chosen to do so, and liquidation of investments in such circumstances may affect the ability of the fund to satisfy the requirements for qualification as a RIC.

If the fund fails to qualify as a RIC for any taxable year, it will be taxable at regular corporate rates. In such an event, all distributions (including capital gains distributions) will be taxable as ordinary dividends to the extent of the fund’s current and accumulated earnings and profits, subject to the dividends-received deduction for corporate shareholders and the lower tax rates applicable to qualified dividend income distributed to individuals. The Board reserves the right not to maintain the qualification of the fund as a regulated investment company if it determines such course of action to be beneficial to shareholders.

Although the fund intends to distribute substantially all of its net investment income and its capital gains for each taxable year, the fund will be subject to federal income tax to the extent any such income or gains are not distributed. If the fund’s distributions exceed its taxable income and capital gains realized during a taxable year, all or a portion of the distributions made in the taxable year may be recharacterized as a return of capital to shareholders. A return of capital distribution generally will not be taxable but will reduce the shareholder’s cost basis and result in a higher capital gain or lower capital loss when those shares on which the distribution was received are sold.

 

62


Table of Contents

Dividends and interest received by the fund may give rise to withholding and other taxes imposed by foreign countries. Tax conventions between certain countries and the United States may reduce or eliminate such taxes. If the fund meets certain requirements, which include a requirement that more than 50% of the value of the fund’s total assets at the close of its taxable year consists of stocks or securities of foreign corporations, then the fund should be eligible to file an election with the IRS that may enable shareholders, in effect, to receive either the benefit of a foreign tax credit, or a tax deduction, with respect to any foreign and U.S. possessions income taxes paid by the fund, subject to certain limitations. Pursuant to this election, the fund will treat those taxes as dividends paid to its shareholders. Each such shareholder will be required to include a proportionate share of those taxes in gross income as income received from a foreign source and must treat the amount so included as if the shareholder had paid the foreign tax directly. The shareholder may then either deduct the taxes deemed paid by him or her in computing his or her taxable income or, alternatively, use the foregoing information in calculating any foreign tax credit the shareholder may be entitled to use against such shareholder’s federal income tax. If the fund makes this election, the fund will report annually to its shareholders the respective amounts per share of the fund’s income from sources within, and taxes paid to, foreign countries and U.S. possessions.

The fund’s transactions in foreign currencies and forward foreign currency contracts will be subject to special provisions of the Internal Revenue Code that, among other things, may affect the character of gains and losses realized by the fund (i.e., may affect whether gains or losses are ordinary or capital), accelerate recognition of income to the funds and defer losses. These rules could therefore affect the character, amount and timing of distributions to shareholders. These provisions also may require the fund to mark-to-market certain types of positions in their portfolios (i.e., treat them as if they were closed out) which may cause the fund to recognize income without receiving cash with which to make distributions in amounts necessary to satisfy the RIC distribution requirements for avoiding income and excise taxes. The fund intends to monitor its transactions, intends to make the appropriate tax elections, and intends to make the appropriate entries in its books and records when it acquires any foreign currency or forward foreign currency contract in order to mitigate the effect of these rules so as to prevent disqualification of the fund as a RIC and minimize the imposition of income and excise taxes.

The fund’s transactions in futures contracts, options and certain other investment activities may be restricted by the Internal Revenue Code and are subject to special tax rules. In a given case, these rules may accelerate income to the fund, defer its losses, cause adjustments in the holding periods of the fund’s assets, convert short-term capital losses into long-term capital losses or otherwise affect the character of the fund’s income. These rules could therefore affect the amount, timing and character of distributions to shareholders. The fund will endeavor to make any available elections pertaining to these transactions in a manner believed to be in the best interest of the fund and its shareholders.

The fund is required for federal income tax purposes to mark-to-market and recognize as income for each taxable year its net unrealized gains and losses on certain futures contracts as of the end of the year as well as those actually realized during the year. Gain or loss from futures and options contracts on broad-based indexes required to be marked to market will be 60% long-term and 40% short-term capital gain or loss. Application of this rule may alter the timing and character of distributions to shareholders. The fund may be required to defer the recognition of losses on futures contracts, options contracts and swaps to the extent of any unrecognized gains on offsetting positions held by the fund. It is anticipated that any net gain realized from the closing out of futures or options contracts will be considered gain from the sale of securities and therefore will be qualifying income for purposes of the 90% requirement. The fund distributes to shareholders at least annually any net capital gains which have been recognized for federal income tax purposes, including unrealized gains at the end of the fund’s fiscal year on futures or options transactions. Such distributions are combined with distributions of capital gains realized on the fund’s other investments and shareholders are advised on the nature of the distributions.

 

63


Table of Contents

Investments by the fund in zero coupon or other discount securities will result in income to the fund equal to a portion of the excess face value of the securities over their issue price (the “original issue discount” or “OID”) each year that the securities are held, even though the fund receives no cash interest payments. In other circumstances, whether pursuant to the terms of a security or as a result of other factors outside the control of the fund, the fund may recognize income without receiving a commensurate amount of cash. Such income is included in determining the amount of income that the fund must distribute to maintain its status as a RIC and to avoid the payment of federal income tax, including the nondeductible 4% excise tax. Because such income may not be matched by a corresponding cash distribution to the fund, the fund may be required to borrow money or dispose of other securities to be able to make distributions to its shareholders.

The fund may invest in stocks of foreign companies that are classified under the Internal Revenue Code as passive foreign investment companies (“PFICs”). In general, a foreign company is classified as a PFIC if at least 50% of its assets constitute investment-type assets or 75% or more of its gross income is investment-type income. In general, under the PFIC rules, an “excess distribution” received with respect to PFIC stock is treated as having been realized ratably over the period during which the fund held the PFIC stock. The fund itself will be subject to tax on the portion, if any, of the excess distribution that is allocated to the fund’s holding period in prior taxable years (and an interest factor will be added to the tax, as if the tax had actually been payable in such prior taxable years) even though the fund distributes the corresponding income to shareholders. Excess distributions include any gain from the sale of PFIC stock as well as certain distributions from a PFIC. All excess distributions are taxable as ordinary income.

The fund may be able to elect alternative tax treatment with respect to PFIC stock. Under an election that may be available, the fund generally would be required to include in its gross income its share of the earnings of a PFIC on a current basis, regardless of whether any distributions are received from the PFIC. If this election is made, the special rules, discussed above, relating to the taxation of excess distributions, would not apply. Alternatively, another election may be available that involves marking-to-market the fund’s PFIC stock at the end of each taxable year with the result that unrealized gains are treated as though they were realized and are reported as ordinary income; any mark-to-market losses, as well as loss from an actual disposition of PFIC stock, are reported as ordinary loss to the extent of any net mark-to-market gains included in income in prior years.

Because the application of the PFIC rules may affect, among other things, the character of gains, the amount of gain or loss and the timing of the recognition of income with respect to PFIC stock, as well as subject the fund itself to tax on certain income from PFIC stock, the amount that must be distributed to shareholders, and which will be taxed to shareholders as ordinary income or long-term capital gain, may be increased or decreased substantially as compared to a fund that did not invest in PFIC stock.

Federal Income Tax Information for Shareholders

The discussion of federal income taxation presented below supplements the discussion in the fund’s prospectus and only summarizes some of the important federal tax considerations generally affecting shareholders of the fund. Accordingly, prospective investors (particularly those not residing or domiciled in the United States) should consult their own tax advisors regarding the consequences of investing in the fund.

 

64


Table of Contents

Any dividends declared by the fund in October, November or December and paid the following January are treated, for tax purposes, as if they were received by shareholders on December 31 of the year in which they were declared. Distributions of net investment income and short-term capital gains are taxed as ordinary income. Long-term capital gains distributions are taxable as long-term capital gains, regardless of how long you have held your shares. However, if you receive a long-term capital gains distribution with respect to fund shares held for six months or less, any loss on the sale or exchange of those shares shall, to the extent of the long-term capital gains distribution, be treated as a long-term capital loss.

The fund will report to shareholders annually the amounts of dividends received from ordinary income, the amount of distributions received from capital gains and the portion of dividends which may qualify for the dividends received deduction. A portion of the dividends received from the fund may be treated as qualified dividend income (eligible for the reduced rates to individuals as described below) to the extent that the fund receives qualified dividend income. Qualified dividend income includes, in general, subject to certain holding period requirements and other requirements, dividend income from certain foreign corporations. Eligible foreign corporations include those incorporated in possessions of the United States, those incorporated in certain countries with comprehensive tax treaties with the United States and those whose stock is tradable on an established securities market in the United States. Dividend income that the fund received from REITs, if any, generally will not be treated as qualified dividend income. The fund may derive capital gains and losses in connection with the sale or other disposition of its portfolio securities. Distributions from net short-term capital gains will be taxable to shareholders as ordinary income. Distributions from net long-term gains will be taxable to you at long-term capital gains rates, regardless of how long you have held your shares in a Fund.

Under the recently enacted American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, the maximum individual rate applicable to “qualified dividend income” and long-term capital gains for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, depends on whether the taxpayer’s income exceeds certain threshold amounts. The maximum rate is generally 15% for taxpayers whose income is equal to or less than $400,000 (individual filers) or $450,000 (married filing jointly), and 20% for taxpayers whose income exceeds the foregoing thresholds.

In general, a sale of shares results in capital gain or loss, and for individual shareholders, is taxable at a federal rate dependent upon the length of time the shares were held. A redemption of a shareholder’s fund shares is normally treated as a sale for tax purposes. Fund shares held for a period of one year or less at the time of such sale or redemption will, for tax purposes, generally result in short-term capital gains or losses, and those held for more than one year will generally result in long-term capital gains or losses.

The maximum individual rate applicable to long-term capital gains for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, depends on whether the taxpayer’s income exceeds certain threshold amounts. The maximum rate is generally 15% for taxpayers whose income is equal to or less than $400,000 (individual filers) or $450,000 (married filing jointly), and 20% for taxpayers whose income exceeds the foregoing thresholds .

Gain or loss on the sale or redemption of shares in the fund is measured by the difference between the amount received and the adjusted tax basis of the shares. Shareholders should keep records of investments made (including shares acquired through reinvestment of dividends and distribution) so they can compute the tax basis of their shares.

A loss realized on a sale or exchange of shares of the fund may be disallowed if other substantially identical shares are acquired (whether through the automatic reinvestment of dividends or otherwise) within a sixty-one (61) day period beginning thirty (30) days before and ending thirty (30) days after the date that the shares are disposed of. In such a case, the basis of the shares acquired must be adjusted to reflect the disallowed loss. Any loss upon the sale or exchange of shares held for six (6) months or less is treated as long-term capital loss to the extent of any capital gain dividends received by the shareholders.

 

65


Table of Contents

At the beginning of every year, the fund will provide shareholders with a tax reporting statement containing information detailing the estimated tax status of any distributions that the fund paid during the previous calendar year. REITs in which the fund invests often do not provide complete and final tax information to the fund until after the time that the fund issues the tax reporting statement. As a result, the fund may at times find it necessary to reclassify to the amount and character of its distributions to you after it issues your tax reporting statement. When such reclassification is necessary, the fund will send you a corrected, final Form 1099-DIV to reflect the reclassified information. If you receive a corrected Form 1099-DIV, use the information on this corrected form, and not the information on the previously issued tax reporting statement in completing your tax returns.

Under the Regulated Investment Company Modernization Act of 2010, net capital losses incurred by the fund in the taxable years after the effective enactment date, December 22, 2010, will not expire. However, such losses must be utilized prior to the losses incurred in the year preceding enactment. As a result of this ordering rule, pre-enactment capital loss carry forwards may be more likely to expire unused. Post-enactment capital losses arise in fiscal years beginning after the enactment date exclude any elective post-October capital losses deferred during the period from November 1 to the end of the fund’s fiscal year. In addition, post-enactment capital losses that are carried forward will retain their character as either short-term or long-term losses rather than short-term as under previous law.

For taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, an additional 3.8% Medicare tax will be imposed on certain net investment income (including ordinary dividends and capital gain distributions received from the fund and net gains from redemptions or other taxable dispositions of fund shares) of U.S. individuals, estates and trusts to the extent that such person’s “modified adjusted gross income” (in the case of an individual) or “adjusted gross income” (in the case of an estate or trust) exceeds a threshold amount.

The fund will be required in certain cases to withhold at the applicable withholding rate and remit to the U.S. Treasury the withheld amount of taxable dividends and redemption proceeds paid to any shareholder who (1) fails to provide a correct taxpayer identification number certified under penalty of perjury; (2) is subject to withholding by the IRS for failure to properly report all payments of interest or dividends; (3) fails to provide a certified statement that he or she is not subject to “backup withholding;” or (4) fails to provide a certified statement that he or she is a U.S. person (including a U.S. resident alien). Backup withholding is not an additional tax and any amounts withheld may be credited against the shareholder’s ultimate U.S. tax liability.

Foreign shareholders (i.e., nonresident alien individuals and foreign corporations, partnerships, trusts and estates) are generally subject to U.S. withholding tax at the rate of 30% (or a lower tax treaty rate) on distributions derived from net investment income and short-term capital gains; provided, however, that for the fund’s taxable year beginning before January 1, 2014 (or a later date if extended by the U.S. Congress), U.S. source interest related dividends and short-term capital gain dividends generally will not be subject to U.S. withholding taxes if a fund elects to make reports with respect to such dividends. Distributions to foreign shareholders of such short-term capital gain dividends and of long-term capital gains, and any gains from the sale or other disposition of shares of the fund, generally are not subject to U.S. taxation, unless the recipient is an individual who either (1) meets the Internal Revenue Code’s definition of “resident alien” or (2) is physically present in the U.S. for 183 days or more per year. Different tax consequences may result if the foreign shareholder is engaged in a trade or business within the United States. In addition, the tax consequences to a foreign shareholder entitled to claim the benefits of a tax treaty may be different than those described above.

 

66


Table of Contents

The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 retroactively extended through December 31, 2013, a look-through rule for distributions of so-called FIRPTA gain by the fund if the fund is classified as a “qualified investment entity,” which includes an entity taxable as a RIC if, in general, more than 50% of the RIC’s assets consists of interests in REITs and other U.S. real property holding corporations. If this condition is met, in the absence of certain exceptions (described below), distributions by the fund to a foreign shareholder, to the extent derived from gain from the disposition of a U.S. real property interest (USRPI), may also be treated as FIRPTA gain and therefore subject to U.S. withholding tax at a rate of 35%, and require that the foreign shareholder file nonresident U.S. income tax returns. Also, such gain may be subject to a 30% branch profits tax in the hands of a foreign shareholder that is a corporation. Absent further legislative action, after December 31, 2013, if the fund is classified as a qualified investment entity, the look-through will apply only in respect of fund distributions that are attributable to REIT distributions received by the fund.

Provided, however, that the class of fund shares held by a foreign shareholder is regularly traded on an established U.S. securities exchange and the foreign shareholder did not own more than 5% of that class of shares at any time during the one-year period ending on the date of the distribution, distributions made by the fund will not be treated as FIRPTA gain under the look-through rule; instead, capital gain distributions from USRPI gain in the hands of a foreign shareholder will be taxed as ordinary income and will generally be subject to withholding at a 30% rate (or lower treaty rate). In addition, the look-through rule for distributions of FIRPTA gain will not apply to a fund distribution if the fund is a “domestically controlled entity,” meaning that less than 50% of the shares of the fund is held directly of indirectly by foreign shareholders for a five-year period ending on the date of the distribution.

Effective January 1, 2014, the fund will be required to withhold U.S. tax (at a 30% rate) on payments of dividends and (effective January 1, 2017), redemption proceeds made to certain non-U.S. entities that fail to comply (or be deemed compliant) with extensive new reporting and withholding requirements designed to inform the U.S. Department of the Treasury of U.S.-owned foreign investment accounts. Shareholders may be requested to provide additional information to the fund to enable the fund to determine whether withholding is required.

If the fund invests in certain REITs or in REMIC residual interests, a portion of the fund’s income may be classified as “excess inclusion income.” A shareholder that is otherwise not subject to tax may be taxable on their share of any such excess inclusion income as “unrelated business taxable income” (“UBTI”) in the case of tax-exempt shareholders. In respect of non-U.S. shareholders, no exemption or reduction in withholding tax will apply to such excess inclusion income. In addition, tax may be imposed on the fund on the portion of any excess inclusion income allocable to any shareholders that are classified as “disqualified organizations.” Tax-exempt investors sensitive to UBTI and non-U.S. investors wishing to minimize U.S. withholding taxes are strongly encouraged to consult their tax advisers prior to investment in the fund regarding this issue and recent IRS pronouncements regarding the treatment of such income in the hands of such investors.

General State and Local Tax Information

Distributions by the fund also may be subject to state, local and foreign taxes, and their treatment under such applicable tax laws may differ from the federal income tax treatment.

The foregoing discussion is a summary only and is not intended as a substitute for careful tax planning. Purchasers of shares should consult their own tax advisors as to the tax consequences of investing in such shares, including under state, local and other tax laws. Finally, the foregoing discussion is based on applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, regulations, judicial authority and administrative interpretations in effect on the date hereof. Changes in applicable authority could materially affect the conclusions discussed above, and such changes often occur.

 

67


Table of Contents

Reportable Transactions

Under promulgated Treasury regulations, if a shareholder recognizes a loss on disposition of the fund’s shares of $2 million or more for an individual shareholder or $10 million or more for a corporate shareholder, the shareholder must file with the IRS a disclosure statement on Form 8886. Direct shareholders of portfolio securities are in many cases excepted from this reporting requirement, but under current guidance, shareholders of a regulated investment company are not excepted. Future guidance may extend the current exception from this reporting requirement to shareholders of most or all regulated investment companies. In addition, pursuant to recently enacted legislation, significant penalties may be imposed for the failure to comply with the reporting requirements. The fact that a loss is reportable under these regulations does not affect the legal determination of whether the taxpayer’s treatment of the loss is proper. Shareholders should consult their tax advisers to determine the applicability of these regulations in light of their individual circumstances.

 

68


Table of Contents

APPENDIX – RATINGS OF INVESTMENT SECURITIES

From time to time, the fund may report the percentage of its assets that falls into the rating categories set forth below.

BONDS

Moody’s Investors Service

Aaa Bonds which are rated Aaa are judged to be of the best quality. They carry the smallest degree of investment risk and are generally referred to as “gilt edged.” Interest payments are protected by a large or by an exceptionally stable margin and principal is secure. While the various protective elements are likely to change, such changes as can be visualized are most unlikely to impair the fundamentally strong position of such issues.

Aa Bonds which are rated Aa are judged to be of high quality by all standards. Together with the Aaa group they comprise what are generally known as high-grade bonds. They are rated lower than the best bonds because margins of protection may not be as large as in Aaa securities or fluctuation of protective elements may be of greater amplitude or there may be other elements present which make the long-term risk appear somewhat larger than the Aaa securities.

A Bonds which are rated A possess many favorable investment attributes and are to be considered as upper-medium grade obligations. Factors giving security to principal and interest are considered adequate, but elements may be present which suggest a susceptibility to impairment some time in the future.

Baa Bonds which are rated Baa are considered as medium-grade obligations (i.e., they are neither highly protected nor poorly secured). Interest payments and principal security appear adequate for the present but certain protective elements may be lacking or may be characteristically unreliable over any great length of time. Such bonds lack outstanding investment characteristics and in fact have speculative characteristics as well.

Ba Bonds which are rated Ba are judged to have speculative elements; their future cannot be considered as well-assured. Often the protection of interest and principal payments may be very moderate and thereby not well safeguarded during both good and bad times over the future. Uncertainty of position characterizes bonds in this class.

B Bonds which are rated B generally lack characteristics of the desirable investment. Assurance of interest and principal payments or of maintenance of other terms of the contract over any long period of time may be small.

Standard & Poor’s Corporation

Investment Grade

AAA Debt rated ‘AAA’ has the highest rating assigned by S&P. Capacity to pay interest and repay principal is extremely strong.

AA Debt rated ‘AA’ has a very strong capacity to pay interest and repay principal and differs from the highest rated debt only in small degree.


Table of Contents

A Debt rated ‘A’ has a strong capacity to pay interest and repay principal, although it is somewhat more susceptible to adverse effects of changes in circumstances and economic conditions than debt in higher-rated categories.

BBB Debt rated ‘BBB’ is regarded as having an adequate capacity to pay interest and repay principal. Whereas it normally exhibits adequate protection parameters, adverse economic conditions or changing circumstances are more likely to lead to a weakened capacity to pay interest and repay principal for debt in this category than in higher rated categories.

Speculative Grade

Debt rated ‘BB’ and ‘B’ is regarded as having predominantly speculative characteristics with respect to capacity to pay interest and repay principal. While such debt will likely have some quality and protective characteristics, these are outweighed by large uncertainties or major risk exposures to adverse conditions.

BB Debt rated ‘BB’ has less near-term vulnerability to default than other speculative grade debt. However, it faces major ongoing uncertainties or exposure to adverse business, financial, or economic conditions that could lead to inadequate capacity to meet timely interest and principal payments. The ‘BB’ rating category is also used for debt subordinated to senior debt that is assigned an actual or implied ‘BBB-’ rating.

B Debt rate ‘B’ has greater vulnerability to default but presently has the capacity to meet interest payments and principal repayments. Adverse business, financial, or economic conditions would likely impair capacity or willingness to pay interest and repay principal. The ‘B’ rating category also is used for debt subordinated to senior debt that is assigned an actual or implied ‘BB’ or ‘BB-’ rating.

Fitch, Inc.

Investment Grade Bond

 

AAA   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of the highest credit quality. The obligor has an exceptionally strong ability to pay interest and repay principal, which is unlikely to be affected by reasonably foreseeable events.
AA   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of very high credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is very strong, although not quite as strong as bonds rated ‘AAA’. Because bonds rated in the ‘AAA’ and ‘AA’ categories are not significantly vulnerable to foreseeable future developments, short-term debt of these issuers is generally rated ‘F1+’.
A   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of high credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is considered to be strong, but may be more vulnerable to adverse changes in economic conditions and circumstances than bonds with higher ratings.
BBB   Bonds considered to be investment grade and of satisfactory credit quality. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal is considered to be adequate. Adverse changes in economic conditions and circumstances, however, are more likely to have adverse impact on these bonds, and therefore impair timely payment. The likelihood that the ratings of these bonds will fall below investment grade is higher than for bonds with higher ratings.


Table of Contents

Speculative grade bond

 

BB   Bonds are considered speculative. The obligor’s ability to pay interest and repay principal may be affected over time by adverse economic changes. However, business and financial alternatives can be identified which could assist the obligor in satisfying its debt service requirements.
B   Bonds are considered highly speculative. While bonds in this class are currently meeting debt service requirements, the probability of continued timely payment of principal and interest reflects the obligor’s limited margin of safety and the need for reasonable business and economic activity throughout the life of the issue.

SHORT-TERM NOTES AND VARIABLE RATE DEMAND OBLIGATIONS

Moody’s Investors Service

Short-term notes/variable rate demand obligations bearing the designations MIG-1/VMIG-1 are considered to be of the best quality, enjoying strong protection from established cash flows, superior liquidity support or demonstrated broad-based access to the market for refinancing. Obligations rated MIG-2/VMIG-3 are of high quality and enjoy ample margins of protection although not as large as those of the top rated securities.

Standard & Poor’s Corporation

An S&P SP-1 rating indicates that the subject securities’ issuer has a strong capacity to pay principal and interest. Issues determined to possess very strong safety characteristics are given a plus (+) designation. S&P’s determination that an issuer has a satisfactory capacity to pay principal and interest is denoted by an SP-2 rating.

Fitch, Inc.

Obligations supported by the highest capacity for timely repayment are rated F1+. An F1 rating indicates that the obligation is supported by a very strong capacity for timely repayment. Obligations rated F2 are supported by a good capacity for timely repayment, although adverse changes in business, economic, or financial conditions may affect this capacity.

COMMERCIAL PAPER

Moody’s Investors Service

Prime-1 is the highest commercial paper rating assigned by Moody’s. Issuers (or related supporting institutions) of commercial paper with this rating are considered to have a superior ability to repay short-term promissory obligations. Issuers (or related supporting institutions) of securities rated Prime-2 are viewed as having a strong capacity to repay short-term promissory obligations. This capacity will normally be evidenced by many of the characteristics of issuers whose commercial paper is rated Prime-1 but to a lesser degree.


Table of Contents

Standard & Poor’s Corporation

A Standard & Poor’s Corporation (“S&P”) A-1 commercial paper rating indicates a strong degree of safety regarding timely payment of principal and interest. Issues determined to possess overwhelming safety characteristics are denoted A-1+. Capacity for timely payment on commercial paper rated A-2 is satisfactory, but the relative degree of safety is not as high as for issues designated A-1.

Fitch, Inc.

F1+ is the highest category, and indicates the strongest degree of assurance for timely payment. Issues rated F1 reflect an assurance of timely payment only slightly less than issues rated F1+. Issues assigned an F2 rating have a satisfactory degree of assurance for timely payment, but the margin of safety is not as great as for issues in the first two rating categories.


Table of Contents

Appendix – Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc.

The Charles Schwab Family of Funds

Schwab Investments

Schwab Capital Trust

Schwab Annuity Portfolios

Laudus Trust

Laudus Institutional Trust

Schwab Strategic Trust

Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures

As of April 2012

Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (“CSIM”), as an investment adviser, is generally responsible for voting proxies with respect to the securities held in accounts of investment companies and other clients for which it provides discretionary investment management services. CSIM’s Proxy Committee exercises and documents CSIM’s responsibility with regard to voting of client proxies (the “Proxy Committee”). The Proxy Committee is composed of representatives of CSIM’s Fund Administration, Portfolio Management, and Legal Departments, and chaired by CSIM’s Chief Investment Officer, Equities or his/her delegate. The Proxy Committee reviews and, as necessary, may amend periodically these Procedures to address new or revised proxy voting policies or procedures. The policies stated in these Proxy Voting Policy and Procedures (the “CSIM Proxy Procedures”) pertain to all of CSIM’s clients.

The Boards of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Investments, Schwab Capital Trust, and Schwab Annuity Portfolios (“Schwab Funds”) have delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through their respective Investment Advisory and Administration Agreements. In addition, the Boards of Trustees (the “Trustees”) of Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust (“Laudus Funds”) and the Schwab Strategic Trust (“Schwab ETFs”; collectively, the Schwab Funds, the Laudus Funds and the Schwab ETFs are the “Funds”) have delegated the responsibility for voting proxies to CSIM through their respective investment advisory and administration agreements. The Trustees have adopted these Proxy Procedures with respect to proxies voted on behalf of the various Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds, and Schwab ETFs portfolios. CSIM will present amendments to the Trustees for approval. However, there may be circumstances where the Proxy Committee deems it advisable to amend the Proxy Procedures between regular Schwab Funds, Laudus Funds and Schwab ETFs Board meetings. In such cases, the Trustees will be asked to ratify any changes at the next regular meeting of the Board.

To assist CSIM in its responsibility for voting proxies and the overall proxy voting process, CSIM has retained Glass Lewis & Co. (“Glass Lewis”) as an expert in the proxy voting and corporate governance area. The services provided by Glass Lewis include in-depth research, global issuer analysis, and voting recommendations as well as vote execution, reporting and record keeping.

 

Page 1 of 5


Table of Contents

Proxy Voting Policy

For investment companies and other clients for which CSIM exercises its responsibility for voting proxies, it is CSIM’s policy to vote proxies in the manner that CSIM and the Proxy Committee believes will maximize the economic benefit to CSIM’s clients. In furtherance of this policy, the Proxy Committee has received and reviewed Glass Lewis’ written proxy voting policies and procedures (“Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures”) and has determined that Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures are consistent with the CSIM Proxy Procedures and CSIM’s fiduciary duty with respect to its clients. The Proxy Committee has also implemented custom policies as set forth below. The Proxy Committee will review any material amendments to Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures to determine whether such procedures continue to be consistent with the CSIM Proxy Voting Procedures, and CSIM’s fiduciary duty with respect to its clients.

Except under each of the circumstances described below, the Proxy Committee will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting proxies, including timely submission of votes, on behalf of CSIM’s clients in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

For proxy issues that the Proxy Committee or the applicable portfolio manager or other relevant portfolio management staff believe raise significant concerns with respect to the accounts of CSIM clients, the Proxy Committee will review the analysis and recommendation of Glass Lewis. Examples of factors that could cause a matter to raise significant concerns include, but are not limited to: issues whose outcome has the potential to materially affect the company’s industry, or regional or national economy, and matters which involve broad public policy developments which may similarly materially affect the environment in which the company operates. The Proxy Committee also will solicit input from the assigned portfolio manager and other relevant portfolio management staff for the particular portfolio security. After evaluating all such recommendations, the Proxy Committee will decide how to vote the shares and will instruct Glass Lewis to vote consistent with its decision. The Proxy Committee has the ultimate responsibility for making the determination of how to vote the shares to seek to maximize the value of that particular holding.

With respect to proxies of a Fund, the Proxy Committee will vote such proxies in the same proportion as the vote of all other shareholders of the Fund ( i.e. , “echo vote”), unless otherwise required by law. When required by law or applicable exemptive order, the Proxy Committee will also “echo vote” proxies of an unaffiliated mutual fund or exchange traded fund (“ETF”). For example, certain exemptive orders issued to the Funds by the Securities and Exchange Commission and Section 12(d)(1)(F) of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, require the Funds, under certain circumstances, to “echo vote” proxies of registered investment companies that serve as underlying investments of the Funds. When not required to “echo vote,” the Proxy Committee will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting proxies of an unaffiliated mutual fund or ETF in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures, subject to the custom policies set forth below.

 

Page 2 of 5


Table of Contents

In addition, with respect to holdings of The Charles Schwab Corporation (“CSC”) (ticker symbol: SCHW), the Proxy Committee will vote such proxies in the same proportion as the vote of all other shareholders of CSC ( i.e. , “echo vote”), unless otherwise required by law.

Exceptions from Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures : The Proxy Committee has reviewed the particular policies set forth in Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures and has determined that the implementation of the following custom policies is consistent with CSIM’s fiduciary duty to its clients:

 

   

Independent Chairman : With respect to shareholder proposals requiring that a company chairman’s position be filled by an independent director, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold, as calculated below. In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote the shareholder proposals requiring that the chairman’s position be filled by an independent director in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures. In cases where a company is a registered investment company, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals. Additionally, with respect to the election of a director who serves as the governance committee chair (or, in the absence of a governance committee, the chair of the nominating committee), the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote for the director in cases where the company chairman’s position is not filled by an independent director and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed.

 

   

Classified Boards : With respect to shareholder proposals declassifying a staggered board in favor of the annual election of directors, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold, as calculated below. In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote the shareholder proposals declassifying a staggered board in favor of the annual election of directors in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

 

   

Proxy Access : With respect to shareholder proposals requesting proxy access for shareholders, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote with management on such proposals unless the company does not meet one of the following triggers:

 

   

The company did not implement a shareholder proposal that was passed by shareholders at two previous shareholder meetings.

 

   

The company nominated directors for election that did not receive a majority of shareholder support at the previous shareholder meeting.

 

   

The company had material financial statement restatements.

 

   

The company’s board adopted a poison pill during the past year and did not put the adoption up for shareholder approval.

 

Page 3 of 5


Table of Contents

In cases where a company fails to meet the threshold, the Proxy Committee has instructed Glass Lewis to vote shareholder proposals requesting proxy access in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

Glass Lewis uses a three-year total return performance methodology to calculate the applicable minimum total shareholder return threshold. For Russell 3000 Index constituents, if a company’s total annual shareholder return is in the bottom 25% of Russell 3000 constituent companies’ total annual shareholder returns for three consecutive years, the company will be deemed not to have met the threshold. For companies not in the Russell 3000 Index, the universe of companies used for the minimum total shareholder return threshold calculation is all Glass Lewis covered companies outside of the Russell 3000 Index.

If Glass Lewis does not provide an analysis or recommendation for voting a particular proxy measure or measures, CSIM will generally abstain, however (1) two members of the Proxy Committee, including at least one representative from Portfolio Management, in consultation with the Chair of the Proxy Committee or his/her designee, may decide how to vote such proxy, or (2) the Proxy Committee may meet to decide how to vote such proxy.

Conflicts of Interest . Except as described above for proxies solicited by the Funds or CSC and the exceptions to Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures, proxy issues that present material conflicts of interest between CSIM, and/or any of its affiliates, and CSIM’s clients, CSIM will delegate to Glass Lewis responsibility for voting such proxies in accordance with Glass Lewis’ Proxy Procedures.

Voting Foreign Proxies . CSIM has arrangements with Glass Lewis for voting proxies. However, voting proxies with respect to shares of foreign securities may involve significantly greater effort and corresponding cost than voting proxies with respect to domestic securities, due to the variety of regulatory schemes and corporate practices in foreign countries with respect to proxy voting. Problems voting foreign proxies may include the following:

 

   

proxy statements and ballots written in a foreign language;

 

   

untimely and/or inadequate notice of shareholder meetings;

 

   

restrictions of foreigner’s ability to exercise votes;

 

   

requirements to vote proxies in person;

 

   

requirements to provide local agents with power of attorney to facilitate CSIM’s voting instructions.

In consideration of the foregoing issues, Glass Lewis uses its best-efforts to vote foreign proxies. As part of its ongoing oversight, the Proxy Committee will monitor the voting of foreign proxies to determine whether all reasonable steps are taken to vote foreign proxies. If the Proxy Committee determines that the cost associated with the attempt to vote outweighs the potential benefits clients may derive from voting, the Proxy Committee may decide not to attempt to vote. In addition, certain foreign countries impose restrictions on the sale of securities for a period of time before and/or after the shareholder meeting. To avoid these trading restrictions, the Proxy Committee instructs Glass Lewis not to vote such foreign proxies.

 

Page 4 of 5


Table of Contents

Securities Lending Programs . Certain of the Funds enter into securities lending arrangements with lending agents to generate additional revenue for their portfolios. In securities lending arrangements, any voting rights that accompany the loaned securities generally pass to the borrower of the securities, but the lender retains the right to recall a security and may then exercise the security’s voting rights. In order to vote the proxies of securities out on loan, the securities must be recalled prior to the established record date. CSIM will use its best efforts to recall a Fund’s securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies if (a) the proxy relates to a special meeting of shareholders of the issuer (as opposed to the issuer’s annual meeting of shareholders), or (b) the Fund owns more than 5% of the outstanding shares of the issuer. Further, it is CSIM’s policy to use its best efforts to recall securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies if CSIM determines that the proxies involve a material event affecting the loaned securities. CSIM may utilize third-party service providers to assist it in identifying and evaluating whether an event is material. CSIM may also recall securities on loan and vote such securities’ proxies in its discretion.

Sub-Advisory Relationships . Where CSIM has delegated day-to-day investment management responsibilities to an investment sub-adviser, CSIM may (but generally does not) delegate proxy voting responsibility to such investment sub-adviser. Each sub-adviser to whom proxy voting responsibility has been delegated will be required to review all proxy solicitation material and to exercise the voting rights associated with the securities it has been allocated in the best interest of each investment company and its shareholders, or other client. Prior to delegating the proxy voting responsibility, CSIM will review each sub-adviser’s proxy voting policy to determine whether it believes that each sub-adviser’s proxy voting policy is generally consistent with the maximization of economic benefits to the investment company or other client.

Reporting and Record Retention

CSIM will maintain, or cause Glass Lewis to maintain, records that identify the manner in which proxies have been voted (or not voted) on behalf of CSIM clients. CSIM will comply with all applicable rules and regulations regarding disclosure of its or its clients’ proxy voting records and procedures.

CSIM will retain all proxy voting materials and supporting documentation as required under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and the rules and regulations thereunder.

 

Page 5 of 5


Table of Contents

LOGO

PROXY PAPERTM GUIDELINES 2013 PROXY SEAS On AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO PROXY ADVICE UNITED STATES COPYRIGHT 2012 GLASS LEWIS, & CO., LLC GUIDELINES GLASS LEWIS & CO.


Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

I. OVERVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT UPDATES FOR 2013

     1   

II. A BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT SERVES THE INTERESTS OF SHAREHOLDERS

     3   

Election of Directors

     3   

Independence

     3   

Performance

     6   

Experience

     14   

Other Considerations

     14   

Controlled Companies

     16   

Unofficially Controlled Companies and 20-50% Beneficial Owners

     17   

Exceptions for Recent IPOs

     17   

Mutual Fund Boards

     18   

Declassified Boards

     19   

Mandatory Director Term and Age limits

     19   

Requiring Two or More Nominees per Board Seat

     20   

Proxy Access

     20   

Majority Vote for the Election of Directors

     20   

The plurality vote standard

     21   

Advantages of a majority vote standard

     21   

III. TRANSPARENCY AND INTEGRITY OF FINANCIAL REPORTING

     22   

Auditor Ratification

     22   

Voting Recommendations on Auditor Ratification

     22   

Pension Accounting Issues

     23   

IV. THE LINK BETWEEN COMPENSATION AND PERFORMANCE

     24   

Advisory Vote on Executive Compensation (“Say-on-Pay”)

     24   

Say-on-Pay Voting Recommendations

     25   

 

I


Table of Contents

Additional Scrutiny for Companies with Significant Opposition in 2011

     26   

Short-Term Incentives

     26   

Long-Term Incentives

     26   

Pay for Performance

     27   

Recoupment (“Clawback”) Provisions

     27   

Frequency of Say-on-Pay

     28   

Vote on Golden Parachute Arrangements

     28   

Equity-Based Compensation Plan Proposals

     28   

Option Exchanges

     29   

Option Backdating, Spring-Loading, and Bullet-Dodging

     30   

162(m) Plans

     31   

Director Compensation Plans

     31   

V. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AND THE SHAREHOLDER FRANCHISE

     32   

Anti-Takeover Measures

     32   

Poison Pills (Shareholder Rights Plans)

     32   

NOL Poison Pills

     32   

Fair Price Provisions

     33   

Reincorporation

     33   

Exclusive Forum Provisions

     34   

Authorized Shares

     34   

Advance Notice Requirements

     35   

Voting Structure

     35   

Cumulative Voting

     35   

Supermajority Vote Requirements

     36   

Transaction of Other Business

     36   

Anti-Greenmail Proposals

     36   

Mutual Funds: Investment Policies and Advisory Agreements

     37   

Real Estate Investment Trusts

     37   

Preferred Stock Issuances at REITs

     37   

Business Development Companies

     38   

Authorization to Sell Shares at a Price below Net Asset Value

     38   

VI. COMPENSATION, ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE SHAREHOLDER INITIATIVES

     39   

 

II


Table of Contents

I. OVERVIEW OF SIGNIFICANT UPDATES FOR 2013

Glass Lewis evaluates these guidelines on an ongoing basis and formally updates them on an annual basis. This year we’ve made noteworthy enhancements in the following areas, which are summarized below but discussed in greater detail throughout this document:

BOARD RESPONSIVENESS TO A SIGNIFICANT SHAREHOLDER VOTE

 

   

We’ve included a general section clarifying our long-standing approach in this area. Glass Lewis believes that any time 25% or more of shareholders vote against the recommendation of management, the board should demonstrate some level of engagement and responsiveness to address the shareholder concerns.

The Role of a Committee Chairman

 

   

We’ve included a general section explaining our analysis of the role of a committee chairman. Glass Lewis believes that a designated committee chairman maintains primary responsibility for the actions of his or her respective committee. As such, many of our committee-specific vote recommendations deal with the applicable committee chair rather than the entire committee (depending on the seriousness of the issue). However, in cases where we would ordinarily recommend voting against a committee chairman but the chair is not specified, we apply the following general rules, which apply throughout our guidelines:

 

   

If there is no committee chair, we recommend voting against the longest-serving committee member or, if the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, the longest-serving board member serving on the committee (i.e. in either case, the “senior director”);

 

   

If there is no committee chair, but multiple senior directors serving on the committee, we recommend voting against both (or all) such senior directors.

Public Company Executives and Excessive Board Memberships

 

   

We typically recommend voting against a director who serves as an executive officer of any public company while serving on more than two other public company boards. However, we will not recommend voting against the director at the company where he or she serves as an executive officer, only at the other public companies where he or she serves on the board.

Equity-Based Compensation Plan Proposals

 

   

We’ve added an item to our list of overarching principles on which we evaluate equity compensation plans, namely, that plans should not count shares in ways that understate the potential dilution, or cost, to common shareholders. This refers to “inverse” full-value award multipliers.

Exclusive Forum Provisions

 

   

While our general approach to exclusive forum provisions remains unchanged—that we recommend that shareholders vote against any bylaw or charter amendment seeking to adopt such a provision—we further explain that in certain cases we may support such a provision if the company: (i) provides a compelling argument on why the provision would directly benefit shareholders; (ii) provides evidence of abuse of legal process in other, non-favored jurisdictions; and (iii) maintains a strong record of good corporate governance practices.

 

1


Table of Contents

Real Estate Investment Trusts

 

   

We’ve included a general section on REITs and our approach to evaluating preferred stock issuances at these firms.

Business Development Companies

 

   

We’ve included a new section on our approach to analyzing business development companies and requests to sell shares at prices below Net Asset Value.

 

2


Table of Contents

II. A BOARD OF DIRECTORS THAT SERVES THE INTERESTS OF SHAREHOLDERS

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The purpose of Glass Lewis’ proxy research and advice is to facilitate shareholder voting in favor of governance structures that will drive performance, create shareholder value and maintain a proper tone at the top. Glass Lewis looks for talented boards with a record of protecting shareholders and delivering value over the medium- and long-term. We believe that boards working to protect and enhance the best interests of shareholders are independent, have directors with diverse backgrounds, have a record of positive performance, and have members with a breadth and depth of relevant experience.

INDEPENDENCE

The independence of directors, or lack thereof, is ultimately demonstrated through the decisions they make. In assessing the independence of directors, we will take into consideration, when appropriate, whether a director has a track record indicative of making objective decisions. Likewise, when assessing the independence of directors we will also examine when a director’s service track record on multiple boards indicates a lack of objective decision-making. Ultimately, we believe the determination of whether a director is independent or not must take into consideration both compliance with the applicable independence listing requirements as well as judgments made by the director.

We look at each director nominee to examine the director’s relationships with the company, the company’s executives, and other directors. We do this to evaluate whether personal, familial, or financial relationships (not including director compensation) may impact the director’s decisions. We believe that such relationships make it difficult for a director to put shareholders’ interests above the director’s or the related party’s interests. We also believe that a director who owns more than 20% of a company can exert disproportionate influence on the board and, in particular, the audit committee.

Thus, we put directors into three categories based on an examination of the type of relationship they have with the company:

Independent Director – An independent director has no material financial, familial or other current relationships with the company, its executives, or other board members, except for board service and standard fees paid for that service. Relationships that existed within three to five years 1 before the inquiry are usually considered “current” for purposes of this test.

In our view, a director who is currently serving in an interim management position should be considered an insider, while a director who previously served in an interim management position for less than one year and is no longer serving in such capacity is considered independent. Moreover, a director who previously served in an interim management position for over one year and is no longer serving in such capacity is considered an affiliate for five years following the date of his/her resignation or departure from the interim management position. Glass Lewis applies a three-year look-back period to all directors who have an affiliation with the company other than former employment, for which we apply a five-year look-back.

 

 

1

NASDAQ originally proposed a five-year look-back period but both it and the NYSE ultimately settled on a three-year look-back prior to finalizing their rules. A five-year standard is more appropriate, in our view, because we believe that the unwinding of conflicting relationships between former management and board members is more likely to be complete and final after five years. However, Glass Lewis does not apply the five-year look-back period to directors who have previously served as executives of the company on an interim basis for less than one year.

 

3


Table of Contents

Affiliated Director – An affiliated director has a material financial, familial or other relationship with the company or its executives, but is not an employee of the company. 2 This includes directors whose employers have a material financial relationship with the company. 3 In addition, we view a director who owns or controls 20% or more of the company’s voting stock as an affiliate. 4

We view 20% shareholders as affiliates because they typically have access to and involvement with the management of a company that is fundamentally different from that of ordinary shareholders. More importantly, 20% holders may have interests that diverge from those of ordinary holders, for reasons such as the liquidity (or lack thereof) of their holdings, personal tax issues, etc.

Definition of “Material”: A material relationship is one in which the dollar value exceeds:

 

   

$50,000 (or where no amount is disclosed) for directors who are paid for a service they have agreed to perform for the company, outside of their service as a director, including professional or other services; or

 

   

$120,000 (or where no amount is disclosed) for those directors employed by a professional services firm such as a law firm, investment bank, or consulting firm where the company pays the firm, not the individual, for services. This dollar limit would also apply to charitable contributions to schools where a board member is a professor; or charities where a director serves on the board or is an executive; 5 and any aircraft and real estate dealings between the company and the director’s firm; or

 

   

1% of either company’s consolidated gross revenue for other business relation-ships (e.g., where the director is an executive officer of a company that provides services or products to or receives services or products from the company). 6

Definition of “Familial”: Familial relationships include a person’s spouse, parents, children, siblings, grandparents, uncles, aunts, cousins, nieces, nephews, in-laws, and anyone (other than domestic employees) who shares such person’s home. A director is an affiliate if the director has a family member who is employed by the company and who receives compensation of $120,000 or more per year or the compensation is not disclosed.

Definition of “Company”: A company includes any parent or subsidiary in a group with the company or any entity that merged with, was acquired by, or acquired the company.

Inside Director – An inside director simultaneously serves as a director and as an employee of the company. This category may include a chairman of the board who acts as an employee of the company or is paid as an employee of the company. In our view, an inside director who derives a greater amount of income as a result of affiliated transactions with the company rather than through compensation paid by the company (i.e., salary, bonus, etc. as a company employee) faces a conflict between making decisions that are in the best interests of the company versus those in the director’s own best interests. Therefore, we will recommend voting against such a director.

 

 

2

If a company classifies one of its non-employee directors as non-independent, Glass Lewis will classify that director as an affiliate.

3

We allow a five-year grace period for former executives of the company or merged companies who have consulting agreements with the surviving company. (We do not automatically recommend voting against directors in such cases for the first five years.) If the consulting agreement persists after this five-year grace period, we apply the materiality thresholds outlined in the definition of “material.”

4

This includes a director who serves on a board as a representative (as part of his or her basic responsibilities) of an investment firm with greater than 20% ownership. However, while we will generally consider him/her to be affiliated, we will not recommend voting against unless (i) the investment firm has disproportionate board representation or (ii) the director serves on the audit committee.

5

We will generally take into consideration the size and nature of such charitable entities in relation to the company’s size and industry along with any other relevant factors such as the director’s role at the charity. However, unlike for other types of related party transactions, Glass Lewis generally does not apply a look-back period to affiliated relationships involving charitable contributions; if the relationship ceases, we will consider the director to be independent.

6

This includes cases where a director is employed by, or closely affiliated with, a private equity firm that profits from an acquisition made by the company. Unless disclosure suggests otherwise, we presume the director is affiliated.

 

4


Table of Contents

VOTING RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE BASIS OF BOARD INDEPENDENCE

Glass Lewis believes a board will be most effective in protecting shareholders’ interests if it is at least two-thirds independent. We note that each of the Business Roundtable, the Conference Board, and the Council of Institutional Investors advocates that two-thirds of the board be independent. Where more than one-third of the members are affiliated or inside directors, we typically 7 recommend voting against some of the inside and/or affiliated directors in order to satisfy the two-thirds threshold.

In the case of a less than two-thirds independent board, Glass Lewis strongly supports the existence of a presiding or lead director with authority to set the meeting agendas and to lead sessions outside the insider chairman’s presence.

In addition, we scrutinize avowedly “independent” chairmen and lead directors. We believe that they should be unquestionably independent or the company should not tout them as such.

COMMITTEE INDEPENDENCE

We believe that only independent directors should serve on a company’s audit, compensation, nominating, and governance committees. 8 We typically recommend that shareholders vote against any affiliated or inside director seeking appointment to an audit, compensation, nominating, or governance committee, or who has served in that capacity in the past year.

INDEPENDENT CHAIRMAN

Glass Lewis believes that separating the roles of CEO (or, more rarely, another executive position) and chairman creates a better governance structure than a combined CEO/chairman position. An executive manages the business according to a course the board charts. Executives should report to the board regarding their performance in achieving goals the board set. This is needlessly complicated when a CEO chairs the board, since a CEO/chairman presumably will have a significant influence over the board.

It can become difficult for a board to fulfill its role of overseer and policy setter when a CEO/chairman controls the agenda and the boardroom discussion. Such control can allow a CEO to have an entrenched position, leading to longer-than-optimal terms, fewer checks on management, less scrutiny of the business operation, and limitations on independent, shareholder-focused goal-setting by the board.

A CEO should set the strategic course for the company, with the board’s approval, and the board should enable the CEO to carry out the CEO’s vision for accomplishing the board’s objectives. Failure to achieve the board’s objectives should lead the board to replace that CEO with someone in whom the board has confidence.

Likewise, an independent chairman can better oversee executives and set a pro-shareholder agenda without the management conflicts that a CEO and other executive insiders often face. Such oversight and concern for shareholders allows for a more proactive and effective board of directors that is better able to look out for the interests of shareholders.

Further, it is the board’s responsibility to select a chief executive who can best serve a company and its shareholders and to replace this person when his or her duties have not been appropriately fulfilled. Such a replacement becomes more difficult and happens less frequently when the chief executive is also in the position of overseeing the board.

Glass Lewis believes that the installation of an independent chairman is almost always a positive step from a corporate governance perspective and promotes the best interests of shareholders. Further,

 

 

7

With a staggered board, if the affiliates or insiders that we believe should not be on the board are not up for election, we will express our concern regarding those directors, but we will not recommend voting against the other affiliates or insiders who are up for election just to achieve two-thirds independence. However, we will consider recommending vot-ing against the directors subject to our concern at their next election if the concerning issue is not resolved.

8

We will recommend voting against an audit committee member who owns 20% or more of the company’s stock, and we believe that there should be a maximum of one director (or no directors if the committee is comprised of less than three directors) who owns 20% or more of the company’s stock on the compensation, nominating, and governance committees.

 

5


Table of Contents

the presence of an independent chairman fosters the creation of a thoughtful and dynamic board, not dominated by the views of senior management. Encouragingly, many companies appear to be moving in this direction—one study even indicates that less than 12 percent of incoming CEOs in 2009 were awarded the chairman title, versus 48 percent as recently as 2002. 9 Another study finds that 41 percent of S&P 500 boards now separate the CEO and chairman roles, up from 26 percent in 2001, although the same study found that of those companies, only 21 percent have truly independent chairs. 10

We do not recommend that shareholders vote against CEOs who chair the board. However, we typically encourage our clients to support separating the roles of chairman and CEO whenever that question is posed in a proxy (typically in the form of a shareholder proposal), as we believe that it is in the long-term best interests of the company and its shareholders.

PERFORMANCE

The most crucial test of a board’s commitment to the company and its shareholders lies in the actions of the board and its members. We look at the performance of these individuals as directors and executives of the company and of other companies where they have served.

VOTING RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE BASIS OF PERFORMANCE

We disfavor directors who have a record of not fulfilling their responsibilities to shareholders at any company where they have held a board or executive position. We typically recommend voting against:

 

  1.

A director who fails to attend a minimum of 75% of board and applicable committee meetings, calculated in the aggregate. 11

 

  2.

A director who belatedly filed a significant form(s) 4 or 5, or who has a pattern of late filings if the late filing was the director’s fault (we look at these late filing situations on a case-by-case basis).

 

  3.

A director who is also the CEO of a company where a serious and material restatement has occurred after the CEO had previously certified the pre-restatement financial statements.

 

  4.

A director who has received two against recommendations from Glass Lewis for identical reasons within the prior year at different companies (the same situation must also apply at the company being analyzed).

 

  5.

All directors who served on the board if, for the last three years, the company’s performance has been in the bottom quartile of the sector and the directors have not taken reasonable steps to address the poor performance.

BOARD RESPONSIVENESS TO A SIGNIFICANT SHAREHOLDER VOTE

Glass Lewis believes that any time 25% or more of shareholders vote against the recommendation of management, the board should demonstrate some level of engagement and responsiveness to address the shareholder concerns. These include instances when 25% or more of shareholders (excluding abstentions and broker non-votes): WITHOLD votes from (or vote AGAINST) a director nominee, vote AGAINST a management-sponsored proposal, or vote FOR a shareholder proposal. In our view, a 25% threshold is significant enough to warrant a close examination of the underlying issues and an evaluation of whether or not the board responded appropriately following the vote. While the 25% threshold alone will not automatically generate a negative vote recommendation from Glass Lewis on a future proposal (e.g. to recommend against a director nominee, against a say-on-pay proposal, etc.), it will bolster our argument to vote against management’s recommendation in the event we determine that the board did not respond appropriately.

 

 

9

Ken Favaro, Per-Ola Karlsson and Gary Neilson. “CEO Succession 2000-2009: A Decade of Convergence and Compression.” Booz & Company (from Strategy+Business, Issue 59, Summer 2010).

10

Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 6

11

However, where a director has served for less than one full year, we will typically not recommend voting against for failure to attend 75% of meetings. Rather, we will note the poor attendance with a recommendation to track this issue going forward. We will also refrain from recommending to vote against directors when the proxy discloses that the director missed the meetings due to serious illness or other extenuating circumstances.

 

6


Table of Contents

As a general framework, our evaluation of board responsiveness involves a review of publicly available disclosures (e.g. the proxy statement, annual report, 8-Ks, company website, etc.) released following the date of the company’s last annual meeting up through the publication date of our most current Proxy Paper. Depending on the specific issue, our focus typically includes, but is not limited to, the following:

 

   

At the board level, any changes in directorships, committee memberships, disclosure of related party transactions, meeting attendance, or other responsibilities.

 

   

Any revisions made to the company’s articles of incorporation, bylaws or other governance documents.

 

   

Any press or news releases indicating changes in, or the adoption of, new company policies, business practices or special reports.

 

   

Any modifications made to the design and structure of the company’s compensation program.

Our Proxy Paper analysis will include a case-by-case assessment of the specific elements of board responsiveness that we examined along with an explanation of how that assessment impacts our current vote recommendations.

THE ROLE OF A COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN

Glass Lewis believes that a designated committee chairman maintains primary responsibility for the actions of his or her respective committee. As such, many of our committee-specific vote recommendations deal with the applicable committee chair rather than the entire committee (depending on the seriousness of the issue). However, in cases where we would ordinarily recommend voting against a committee chairman but the chair is not specified, we apply the following general rules, which apply throughout our guidelines:

 

   

If there is no committee chair, we recommend voting against the longest-serving committee member or, if the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, the longest-serving board member serving on the committee (i.e. in either case, the “senior director”);

 

   

If there is no committee chair, but multiple senior directors serving on the committee, we recommend voting against both (or all) such senior directors.

In our view, companies should provide clear disclosure of which director is charged with overseeing each committee. So in cases where that simple framework is ignored and a reasonable analysis cannot determine which committee member is the designated leader, we believe shareholder action against the longest serving committee member(s) is warranted. Again, this only applies if we would ordinarily recommend voting against the committee chair but there is either no such position or no designated director in such role.

On the contrary, in cases where there is a designated committee chair and the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.

AUDIT COMMITTEES AND PERFORMANCE

Audit committees play an integral role in overseeing the financial reporting process because “[v] ibrant and stable capital markets depend on, among other things, reliable, transparent, and objective financial information to support an efficient and effective capital market process. The vital oversight role audit committees play in the process of producing financial information has never been more important.” 12

 

 

12

Audit Committee Effectiveness – What Works Best.” PricewaterhouseCoopers. The Institute of Internal Auditors Re-search Foundation. 2005.

 

7


Table of Contents

When assessing an audit committee’s performance, we are aware that an audit committee does not prepare financial statements, is not responsible for making the key judgments and assumptions that affect the financial statements, and does not audit the numbers or the disclosures provided to investors. Rather, an audit committee member monitors and oversees the process and procedures that management and auditors perform. The 1999 Report and Recommendations of the Blue Ribbon Committee on Improving the Effectiveness of Corporate Audit Committees stated it best:

A proper and well-functioning system exists, therefore, when the three main groups responsible for financial reporting – the full board including the audit committee, financial management including the internal auditors, and the outside auditors – form a ‘three legged stool’ that supports responsible financial disclosure and active participatory oversight. However, in the view of the Committee, the audit committee must be ‘first among equals’ in this process, since the audit committee is an extension of the full board and hence the ultimate monitor of the process.

STANDARDS FOR ASSESSING THE AUDIT COMMITTEE

For an audit committee to function effectively on investors’ behalf, it must include members with sufficient knowledge to diligently carry out their responsibilities. In its audit and accounting recommendations, the Conference Board Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise said “members of the audit committee must be independent and have both knowledge and experience in auditing financial matters.” 13

We are skeptical of audit committees where there are members that lack expertise as a Certified Public Accountant (CPA), Chief Financial Officer (CFO) or corporate controller or similar experience. While we will not necessarily vote against members of an audit committee when such expertise is lacking, we are more likely to vote against committee members when a problem such as a restatement occurs and such expertise is lacking.

Glass Lewis generally assesses audit committees against the decisions they make with respect to their oversight and monitoring role. The quality and integrity of the financial statements and earnings reports, the completeness of disclosures necessary for investors to make informed decisions, and the effectiveness of the internal controls should provide reasonable assurance that the financial statements are materially free from errors. The independence of the external auditors and the results of their work all provide useful information by which to assess the audit committee.

When assessing the decisions and actions of the audit committee, we typically defer to its judgment and would vote in favor of its members, but we would recommend voting against the following members under the following circumstances: 14

 

  1.

All members of the audit committee when options were backdated, there is a lack of adequate controls in place, there was a resulting restatement, and disclosures indicate there was a lack of documentation with respect to the option grants.

 

  2.

The audit committee chair, if the audit committee does not have a financial expert or the committee’s financial expert does not have a demonstrable financial background sufficient to understand the financial issues unique to public companies.

 

  3.

The audit committee chair, if the audit committee did not meet at least 4 times during the year.

 

  4.

The audit committee chair, if the committee has less than three members.

 

  5.

Any audit committee member who sits on more than three public company audit committees, unless the audit committee member is a retired CPA, CFO, controller or has similar experience, in which case the limit shall be four committees, taking time and availability into consideration including a review of the audit committee member’s attendance at all board and committee meetings. 15

 

 

13

Commission on Public Trust and Private Enterprise. The Conference Board. 2003.

14

As discussed under the section labeled “Committee Chairman,” where the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against the members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.

15

Glass Lewis may exempt certain audit committee members from the above threshold if, upon further analysis of relevant factors such as the director’s experience, the size, industry-mix and location of the companies involved and the director’s attendance at all the companies, we can reasonably determine that the audit committee member is likely not hindered by multiple audit committee commitments.

 

8


Table of Contents
  6.

All members of an audit committee who are up for election and who served on the committee at the time of the audit, if audit and audit-related fees total one-third or less of the total fees billed by the auditor.

 

  7.

The audit committee chair when tax and/or other fees are greater than audit and audit-related fees paid to the auditor for more than one year in a row (in which case we also recommend against ratification of the auditor).

 

  8.

All members of an audit committee where non-audit fees include fees for tax services (including, but not limited to, such things as tax avoidance or shelter schemes) for senior executives of the company. Such services are now prohibited by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”).

 

  9.

All members of an audit committee that reappointed an auditor that we no longer consider to be independent for reasons unrelated to fee proportions.

 

  10.

All members of an audit committee when audit fees are excessively low, especially when compared with other companies in the same industry.

 

  11.

The audit committee chair 16 if the committee failed to put auditor ratification on the ballot for shareholder approval. However, if the non-audit fees or tax fees exceed audit plus audit-related fees in either the current or the prior year, then Glass Lewis will recommend voting against the entire audit committee.

 

  12.

All members of an audit committee where the auditor has resigned and reported that a section 10A 17 letter has been issued.

 

  13.

All members of an audit committee at a time when material accounting fraud occurred at the company. 18

 

  14.

All members of an audit committee at a time when annual and/or multiple quarterly financial statements had to be restated, and any of the following factors apply:

 

   

The restatement involves fraud or manipulation by insiders;

 

   

The restatement is accompanied by an SEC inquiry or investigation;

 

   

The restatement involves revenue recognition;

 

   

The restatement results in a greater than 5% adjustment to costs of goods sold, operating expense, or operating cash flows; or

 

   

The restatement results in a greater than 5% adjustment to net income, 10% adjustment to assets or shareholders equity, or cash flows from financing or investing activities.

 

 

16

As discussed under the section labeled “Committee Chairman,” in all cases, if the chair of the committee is not specified, we recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest.

17

Auditors are required to report all potential illegal acts to management and the audit committee unless they are clearly inconsequential in nature. If the audit committee or the board fails to take appropriate action on an act that has been determined to be a violation of the law, the independent auditor is required to send a section 10A letter to the SEC. Such letters are rare and therefore we believe should be taken seriously.

18

Recent research indicates that revenue fraud now accounts for over 60% of SEC fraud cases, and that companies that engage in fraud experience significant negative abnormal stock price declines—facing bankruptcy, delisting, and material asset sales at much higher rates than do non-fraud firms (Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. “Fraudulent Financial Reporting: 1998-2007.” May 2010).

 

9


Table of Contents
  15.

All members of an audit committee if the company repeatedly fails to file its financial reports in a timely fashion. For example, the company has filed two or more quarterly or annual financial statements late within the last 5 quarters.

 

  16.

All members of an audit committee when it has been disclosed that a law enforcement agency has charged the company and/or its employees with a violation of the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA).

 

  17.

All members of an audit committee when the company has aggressive accounting policies and/ or poor disclosure or lack of sufficient transparency in its financial statements.

 

  18.

All members of the audit committee when there is a disagreement with the auditor and the auditor resigns or is dismissed (e.g. the company receives an adverse opinion on its financial statements from the auditor)

 

  19.

All members of the audit committee if the contract with the auditor specifically limits the auditor’s liability to the company for damages. 19

 

  20.

All members of the audit committee who served since the date of the company’s last annual meeting, and when, since the last annual meeting, the company has reported a material weakness that has not yet been corrected, or, when the company has an ongoing material weakness from a prior year that has not yet been corrected.

We also take a dim view of audit committee reports that are boilerplate, and which provide little or no information or transparency to investors. When a problem such as a material weakness, restatement or late filings occurs, we take into consideration, in forming our judgment with respect to the audit committee, the transparency of the audit committee report.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE PERFORMANCE

Compensation committees have the final say in determining the compensation of executives. This includes deciding the basis on which compensation is determined, as well as the amounts and types of compensation to be paid. This process begins with the hiring and initial establishment of employment agreements, including the terms for such items as pay, pensions and severance arrangements. It is important in establishing compensation arrangements that compensation be consistent with, and based on the long-term economic performance of, the business’s long-term shareholders returns.

Compensation committees are also responsible for the oversight of the transparency of compensation. This oversight includes disclosure of compensation arrangements, the matrix used in assessing pay for performance, and the use of compensation consultants. In order to ensure the independence of the compensation consultant, we believe the compensation committee should only engage a compensation consultant that is not also providing any services to the company or management apart from their contract with the compensation committee. It is important to investors that they have clear and complete disclosure of all the significant terms of compensation arrangements in order to make informed decisions with respect to the oversight and decisions of the compensation committee.

Finally, compensation committees are responsible for oversight of internal controls over the executive compensation process. This includes controls over gathering information used to determine compensation, establishment of equity award plans, and granting of equity awards. Lax controls can and have contributed to conflicting information being obtained, for example through the use of nonobjective consultants. Lax controls can also contribute to improper awards of compensation such as through granting of backdated or spring-loaded options, or granting of bonuses when triggers for bonus payments have not been met.

Central to understanding the actions of a compensation committee is a careful review of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A) report included in each company’s proxy. We review

 

 

19

The Council of Institutional Investors. “Corporate Governance Policies,” p. 4, April 5, 2006; and “Letter from Council of Institutional Investors to the AICPA,” November 8, 2006.

 

10


Table of Contents

the CD&A in our evaluation of the overall compensation practices of a company, as overseen by the compensation committee. The CD&A is also integral to the evaluation of compensation proposals at companies, such as advisory votes on executive compensation, which allow shareholders to vote on the compensation paid to a company’s top executives.

When assessing the performance of compensation committees, we will recommend voting against for the following: 20

 

  1.

All members of the compensation committee who are up for election and served at the time of poor pay-for-performance (e.g., a company receives an F grade in our pay-for-performance analysis) when shareholders are not provided with an advisory vote on executive compensation at the annual meeting. 21

 

  2.

Any member of the compensation committee who has served on the compensation committee of at least two other public companies that received F grades in our pay-for-performance model and who is also suspect at the company in question.

 

  3.

The compensation committee chair if the company received two D grades in consecutive years in our pay-for-performance analysis, and if during the past year the Company performed the same as or worse than its peers. 22

 

  4.

All members of the compensation committee (during the relevant time period) if the company entered into excessive employment agreements and/or severance agreements.

 

  5.

All members of the compensation committee when performance goals were changed (i.e., lowered) when employees failed or were unlikely to meet original goals, or performance-based compensation was paid despite goals not being attained.

 

  6.

All members of the compensation committee if excessive employee perquisites and benefits were allowed.

 

  7.

The compensation committee chair if the compensation committee did not meet during the year, but should have (e.g., because executive compensation was restructured or a new executive was hired).

 

  8.

All members of the compensation committee when the company repriced options or completed a “self tender offer” without shareholder approval within the past two years.

 

  9.

All members of the compensation committee when vesting of in-the-money options is accelerated or when fully vested options are granted.

 

  10.

All members of the compensation committee when option exercise prices were backdated. Glass Lewis will recommend voting against an executive director who played a role in and participated in option backdating.

 

  11.

All members of the compensation committee when option exercise prices were spring-loaded or otherwise timed around the release of material information.

 

 

20

As discussed under the section labeled “Committee Chairman,” where the recommendation is to vote against the committee chair and the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern with regard to the committee chair.

21

Where there are multiple CEOs in one year, we will consider not recommending against the compensation committee but will defer judgment on compensation policies and practices until the next year or a full year after arrival of the new CEO. In addition, if a company provides shareholders with a say-on-pay proposal and receives an F grade in our pay-for-performance model, we will recommend that shareholders only vote against the say-on-pay proposal rather than the members of the compensation committee, unless the company exhibits egregious practices. However, if the company receives successive F grades, we will then recommend against the members of the compensation committee in addition to recommending voting against the say-on-pay proposal.

22

In cases where the company received two D grades in consecutive years, but during the past year the company performed better than its peers or improved from an F to a D grade year over year, we refrain from recommending to vote against the compensation chair. In addition, if a company provides shareholders with a say-on-pay proposal in this instance, we will consider voting against the advisory vote rather than the compensation committee chair unless the company exhibits unquestionably egregious practices.

 

11


Table of Contents
  12.

All members of the compensation committee when a new employment contract is given to an executive that does not include a clawback provision and the company had a material restatement, especially if the restatement was due to fraud.

 

  13.

The chair of the compensation committee where the CD&A provides insufficient or unclear information about performance metrics and goals, where the CD&A indicates that pay is not tied to performance, or where the compensation committee or management has excessive discretion to alter performance terms or increase amounts of awards in contravention of previously defined targets.

 

  14.

All members of the compensation committee during whose tenure the committee failed to implement a shareholder proposal regarding a compensation-related issue, where the proposal received the affirmative vote of a majority of the voting shares at a shareholder meeting, and when a reasonable analysis suggests that the compensation committee (rather than the governance committee) should have taken steps to implement the request. 23

 

  15.

All members of a compensation committee during whose tenure the committee failed to address shareholder concerns following majority shareholder rejection of the say-on-pay proposal in the previous year. Where the proposal was approved but there was a significant shareholder vote (i.e., greater than 25% of votes cast) against the say-on-pay proposal in the prior year, if there is no evidence that the board responded accordingly to the vote including actively engaging shareholders on this issue, we will also consider recommending voting against the chairman of the compensation committee or all members of the compensation committee, depending on the severity and history of the compensation problems and the level of vote against.

NOMINATING AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE PERFORMANCE

The nominating and governance committee, as an agency for the shareholders, is responsible for the governance by the board of the company and its executives. In performing this role, the board is responsible and accountable for selection of objective and competent board members. It is also responsible for providing leadership on governance policies adopted by the company, such as decisions to implement shareholder proposals that have received a majority vote.

Consistent with Glass Lewis’ philosophy that boards should have diverse backgrounds and members with a breadth and depth of relevant experience, we believe that nominating and governance committees should consider diversity when making director nominations within the context of each specific company and its industry. In our view, shareholders are best served when boards make an effort to ensure a constituency that is not only reasonably diverse on the basis of age, race, gender and ethnicity, but also on the basis of geographic knowledge, industry experience and culture.

Regarding the nominating and or governance committee, we will recommend voting against the following: 24

 

  1.

All members of the governance committee 25 during whose tenure the board failed to implement a shareholder proposal with a direct and substantial impact on shareholders and their rights - i.e., where the proposal received enough shareholder votes (at least a majority) to allow the board to implement or begin to implement that proposal. 26 Examples of these types of shareholder proposals are majority vote to elect directors and to declassify the board.

 

 

23

In all other instances (i.e. a non-compensation-related shareholder proposal should have been implemented) we recommend that shareholders vote against the members of the governance committee.

24

As discussed in the guidelines section labeled “Committee Chairman,” where we would recommend to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern regarding the committee chair.

25

If the board does not have a governance committee (or a committee that serves such a purpose), we recommend voting against the entire board on this basis.

26

Where a compensation-related shareholder proposal should have been implemented, and when a reasonable analysis suggests that the members of the compensation committee (rather than the governance committee) bear the responsibility for failing to implement the request, we recommend that shareholders only vote against members of the compensation committee.

 

12


Table of Contents
  2.

The governance committee chair, 27 when the chairman is not independent and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed. 28

 

  3.

In the absence of a nominating committee, the governance committee chair when there are less than five or the whole nominating committee when there are more than 20 members on the board.

 

  4.

The governance committee chair, when the committee fails to meet at all during the year.

 

  5.

The governance committee chair, when for two consecutive years the company provides what we consider to be “inadequate” related party transaction disclosure (i.e. the nature of such transactions and/or the monetary amounts involved are unclear or excessively vague, thereby preventing an average shareholder from being able to reasonably interpret the independence status of multiple directors above and beyond what the company maintains is compliant with SEC or applicable stock-exchange listing requirements).

 

  6.

The governance committee chair, when during the past year the board adopted a forum selection clause (i.e. an exclusive forum provision) 29 without shareholder approval, or, if the board is currently seeking shareholder approval of a forum selection clause pursuant to a bundled bylaw amendment rather than as a separate proposal.

Regarding the nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the following: 30

 

  1.

All members of the nominating committee, when the committee nominated or renominated an individual who had a significant conflict of interest or whose past actions demonstrated a lack of integrity or inability to represent shareholder interests.

 

  2.

The nominating committee chair, if the nominating committee did not meet during the year, but should have (i.e., because new directors were nominated or appointed since the time of the last annual meeting).

 

  3.

In the absence of a governance committee, the nominating committee chair 31 when the chairman is not independent, and an independent lead or presiding director has not been appointed. 32

 

  4.

The nominating committee chair, when there are less than five or the whole nominating committee when there are more than 20 members on the board. 33

 

  5.

The nominating committee chair, when a director received a greater than 50% against vote the prior year and not only was the director not removed, but the issues that raised shareholder concern were not corrected. 34

 

 

27

As discussed in the guidelines section labeled “Committee Chairman,” if the committee chair is not specified, we recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest. If the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, we will recommend voting against the longest-serving board member serving on the committee.

28

We believe that one independent individual should be appointed to serve as the lead or presiding director. When such a position is rotated among directors from meeting to meeting, we will recommend voting against as if there were no lead or presiding director.

29

A forum selection clause is a bylaw provision stipulating that a certain state, typically Delaware, shall be the exclusive forum for all intra-corporate disputes (e.g. shareholder derivative actions, assertions of claims of a breach of fiduciary duty, etc.). Such a clause effectively limits a shareholder’s legal remedy regarding appropriate choice of venue and related relief offered under that state’s laws and rulings.

30

As discussed in the guidelines section labeled “Committee Chairman,” where we would recommend to vote against the committee chair but the chair is not up for election because the board is staggered, we do not recommend voting against any members of the committee who are up for election; rather, we will simply express our concern regarding the committee chair.

31

As discussed under the section labeled “Committee Chairman,” if the committee chair is not specified, we will recommend voting against the director who has been on the committee the longest. If the longest-serving committee member cannot be determined, we will recommend voting against the longest-serving board member on the committee.

32

In the absence of both a governance and a nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the board on this basis, unless if the chairman also serves as the CEO, in which case we will recommend voting against the director who has served on the board the longest.

33

In the absence of both a governance and a nominating committee, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the board on this basis, unless if the chairman also serves as the CEO, in which case we will recommend voting against the director who has served on the board the longest.

34

Considering that shareholder discontent clearly relates to the director who received a greater than 50% against vote rather than the nominating chair, we review the validity of the issue(s) that initially raised shareholder concern, follow-up on such matters, and only recommend voting against the nominating chair if a reasonable analysis suggests that it would be most appropriate. In rare cases, we will consider recommending against the nominating chair when a director receives a substantial (i.e., 25% or more) vote against based on the same analysis.

 

13


Table of Contents

BOARD-LEVEL RISK MANAGEMENT OVERSIGHT

Glass Lewis evaluates the risk management function of a public company board on a strictly case-by-case basis. Sound risk management, while necessary at all companies, is particularly important at financial firms which inherently maintain significant exposure to financial risk. We believe such financial firms should have a chief risk officer reporting directly to the board and a dedicated risk committee or a committee of the board charged with risk oversight. Moreover, many non-financial firms maintain strategies which involve a high level of exposure to financial risk. Similarly, since many non-financial firms have significant hedging or trading strategies, including financial and non-financial derivatives, those firms should also have a chief risk officer and a risk committee.

Our views on risk oversight are consistent with those expressed by various regulatory bodies. In its December 2009 Final Rule release on Proxy Disclosure Enhancements, the SEC noted that risk oversight is a key competence of the board and that additional disclosures would improve investor and shareholder understanding of the role of the board in the organization’s risk management practices. The final rules, which became effective on February 28, 2010, now explicitly require companies and mutual funds to describe (while allowing for some degree of flexibility) the board’s role in the oversight of risk.

When analyzing the risk management practices of public companies, we take note of any significant losses or writedowns on financial assets and/or structured transactions. In cases where a company has disclosed a sizable loss or writedown, and where we find that the company’s board-level risk committee contributed to the loss through poor oversight, we would recommend that shareholders vote against such committee members on that basis. In addition, in cases where a company maintains a significant level of financial risk exposure but fails to disclose any explicit form of board-level risk oversight (committee or otherwise) 35 , we will consider recommending to vote against the chairman of the board on that basis. However, we generally would not recommend voting against a combined chairman/CEO except in egregious cases.

EXPERIENCE

We find that a director’s past conduct is often indicative of future conduct and performance. We often find directors with a history of overpaying executives or of serving on boards where avoidable disasters have occurred appearing at companies that follow these same patterns. Glass Lewis has a proprietary database of directors serving at over 8,000 of the most widely held U.S. companies. We use this database to track the performance of directors across companies.

Voting Recommendations on the Basis of Director Experience

We typically recommend that shareholders vote against directors who have served on boards or as executives of companies with records of poor performance, inadequate risk oversight, overcompensation, audit- or accounting-related issues, and/or other indicators of mismanagement or actions against the interests of shareholders. 36

Likewise, we examine the backgrounds of those who serve on key board committees to ensure that they have the required skills and diverse backgrounds to make informed judgments about the subject matter for which the committee is responsible.

OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

In addition to the three key characteristics – independence, performance, experience – that we use to evaluate board members, we consider conflict-of-interest issues as well as the size of the board of directors when making voting recommendations.

 

 

35

A committee responsible for risk management could be a dedicated risk committee, or another board committee, usually the audit committee but occasionally the finance committee, depending on a given company’s board structure and method of disclosure. At some companies, the entire board is charged with risk management.

36

We typically apply a three-year look-back to such issues and also research to see whether the responsible directors have been up for election since the time of the failure, and if so, we take into account the percentage of support they received from shareholders.

 

14


Table of Contents

Conflicts of Interest

We believe board members should be wholly free of identifiable and substantial conflicts of interest, regardless of the overall level of independent directors on the board. Accordingly, we recommend that shareholders vote against the following types of affiliated or inside directors:

 

  1.

A CFO who is on the board: In our view, the CFO holds a unique position relative to financial reporting and disclosure to shareholders. Because of the critical importance of financial disclosure and reporting, we believe the CFO should report to the board and not be a member of it.

 

  2.

A director who is on an excessive number of boards: We will typically recommend voting against a director who serves as an executive officer of any public company while serving on more than two other public company boards and any other director who serves on more than six public company boards typically receives an against recommendation from Glass Lewis. 37 Academic literature suggests that one board takes up approximately 200 hours per year of each member’s time. We believe this limits the number of boards on which directors can effectively serve, especially executives at other companies. 38 Further, we note a recent study has shown that the average number of outside board seats held by CEOs of S&P 500 companies is 0.6, down from 0.8 in 2006 and 1.2 in 2001. 39

 

  3.

A director, or a director who has an immediate family member, providing material consulting or other material professional services to the company: These services may include legal, consulting, or financial services. We question the need for the company to have consulting relationships with its directors. We view such relationships as creating conflicts for directors, since they may be forced to weigh their own interests against shareholder interests when making board decisions. In addition, a company’s decisions regarding where to turn for the best professional services may be compromised when doing business with the professional services firm of one of the company’s directors.

 

  4.

A director, or a director who has an immediate family member, engaging in airplane, real estate, or similar deals, including perquisite-type grants from the company, amounting to more than $50,000: Directors who receive these sorts of payments from the company will have to make unnecessarily complicated decisions that may pit their interests against shareholder interests.

 

  5.

Interlocking directorships: CEOs or other top executives who serve on each other’s boards create an interlock that poses conflicts that should be avoided to ensure the promotion of shareholder interests above all else. 40

 

  6.

All board members who served at a time when a poison pill was adopted without shareholder approval within the prior twelve months. 41 In the event a board is classified and shareholders are therefore unable to vote against all directors, we will recommend voting against the remaining directors the next year they are up for a shareholder vote.

 

37

Glass Lewis will not recommend voting against the director at the company where he or she serves as an executive officer, only at the other public companies where he or she serves on the board.

38

Our guidelines are similar to the standards set forth by the NACD in its “Report of the NACD Blue Ribbon Commission on Director Professionalism,” 2001 Edition, pp. 14-15 (also cited approvingly by the Conference Board in its “Corporate Governance Best Practices: A Blueprint for the Post-Enron Era,” 2002, p. 17), which suggested that CEOs should not serve on more than 2 additional boards, persons with full-time work should not serve on more than 4 additional boards, and others should not serve on more than six boards.

39

Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 8.

40

We do not apply a look-back period for this situation. The interlock policy applies to both public and private companies. We will also evaluate multiple board interlocks among non-insiders (i.e. multiple directors serving on the same boards at other companies), for evidence of a pattern of poor oversight.

41

Refer to Section V. Governance Structure and the Shareholder Franchise for further discussion of our policies regarding anti-takeover measures, including poison pills.

 

15


Table of Contents

Size of the Board of Directors

While we do not believe there is a universally applicable optimum board size, we do believe boards should have at least five directors to ensure sufficient diversity in decision-making and to enable the formation of key board committees with independent directors. Conversely, we believe that boards with more than 20 members will typically suffer under the weight of “too many cooks in the kitchen” and have difficulty reaching consensus and making timely decisions. Sometimes the presence of too many voices can make it difficult to draw on the wisdom and experience in the room by virtue of the need to limit the discussion so that each voice may be heard.

To that end, we typically recommend voting against the chairman of the nominating committee at a board with fewer than five directors. With boards consisting of more than 20 directors, we typically recommend voting against all members of the nominating committee (or the governance committee, in the absence of a nominating committee). 42

CONTROLLED COMPANIES

Controlled companies present an exception to our independence recommendations. The board’s function is to protect shareholder interests; however, when an individual or entity owns more than 50% of the voting shares, the interests of the majority of shareholders are the interests of that entity or individual. Consequently, Glass Lewis does not apply our usual two-thirds independence rule and therefore we will not recommend voting against boards whose composition reflects the makeup of the shareholder population.

Independence Exceptions

The independence exceptions that we make for controlled companies are as follows:

 

  1.

We do not require that controlled companies have boards that are at least two-thirds independent. So long as the insiders and/or affiliates are connected with the controlling entity, we accept the presence of non-independent board members.

 

  2.

The compensation committee and nominating and governance committees do not need to consist solely of independent directors.

 

   

We believe that standing nominating and corporate governance committees at controlled companies are unnecessary. Although having a committee charged with the duties of searching for, selecting, and nominating independent directors can be beneficial, the unique composition of a controlled company’s shareholder base makes such committees weak and irrelevant.

 

   

Likewise, we believe that independent compensation committees at controlled companies are unnecessary. Although independent directors are the best choice for approving and monitoring senior executives’ pay, controlled companies serve a unique shareholder population whose voting power ensures the protection of its interests. As such, we believe that having affiliated directors on a controlled company’s compensation committee is acceptable. However, given that a controlled company has certain obligations to minority shareholders we feel that an insider should not serve on the compensation committee. Therefore, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against any insider (the CEO or otherwise) serving on the compensation committee.

 

  3.

Controlled companies do not need an independent chairman or an independent lead or presiding director. Although an independent director in a position of authority on the board – such as chairman or presiding director – can best carry out the board’s duties, controlled companies serve a unique shareholder population whose voting power ensures the protection of its interests.

 

 

42

The Conference Board, at p. 23 in its May 2003 report “Corporate Governance Best Practices, Id.,” quotes one of its roundtable participants as stating, “[w]hen you’ve got a 20 or 30 person corporate board, it’s one way of assuring that nothing is ever going to happen that the CEO doesn’t want to happen.”

 

16


Table of Contents

Size of the Board of Directors

We have no board size requirements for controlled companies.

Audit Committee Independence

We believe that audit committees should consist solely of independent directors. Regardless of a company’s controlled status, the interests of all shareholders must be protected by ensuring the integrity and accuracy of the company’s financial statements. Allowing affiliated directors to oversee the preparation of financial reports could create an insurmountable conflict of interest.

UNOFFICIALLY CONTROLLED COMPANIES AND 20-50% BENEFICIAL OWNERS

Where an individual or entity owns more than 50% of a company’s voting power but the company is not a “controlled” company as defined by relevant listing standards, we apply a lower independence requirement of a majority of the board but believe the company should otherwise be treated like another public company; we will therefore apply all other standards as outlined above.

Similarly, where an individual or entity holds between 20-50% of a company’s voting power, but the company is not “controlled” and there is not a “majority” owner, we believe it is reasonable to allow proportional representation on the board and committees (excluding the audit committee) based on the individual or entity’s percentage of ownership.

EXCEPTIONS FOR RECENT IPOs

We believe companies that have recently completed an initial public offering (“IPO”) should be allowed adequate time to fully comply with marketplace listing requirements as well as to meet basic corporate governance standards. We believe a one-year grace period immediately following the date of a company’s IPO is sufficient time for most companies to comply with all relevant regulatory requirements and to meet such corporate governance standards. Except in egregious cases, Glass Lewis refrains from issuing voting recommendations on the basis of corporate governance best practices (eg. board independence, committee membership and structure, meeting attendance, etc.) during the one-year period following an IPO.

However, two specific cases warrant strong shareholder action against the board of a company that completed an IPO within the past year:

 

  1.

Adoption of a poison pill: in cases where a board implements a poison pill preceding an IPO, we will consider voting against the members of the board who served during the period of the poison pill’s adoption if the board (i) did not also commit to submit the poison pill to a shareholder vote within 12 months of the IPO or (ii) did not provide a sound rationale for adopting the pill and the pill does not expire in three years or less. In our view, adopting such an anti-takeover device unfairly penalizes future shareholders who (except for electing to buy or sell the stock) are unable to weigh in on a matter that could potentially negatively impact their ownership interest. This notion is strengthened when a board adopts a poison pill with a 5-10 year life immediately prior to having a public shareholder base so as to insulate management for a substantial amount of time while postponing and/or avoiding allowing public shareholders the ability to vote on the pill’s adoption. Such instances are indicative of boards that may subvert shareholders’ best interests following their IPO.

 

  2.

Adoption of an exclusive forum provision: consistent with our general approach to boards that adopt exclusive forum provisions without shareholder approval (refer to our discussion of nominating and governance committee performance in Section I of the guidelines), in cases where a board adopts such a provision for inclusion in a company’s charter or bylaws before the company’s IPO, we will recommend voting against the chairman of the governance committee, or, in the absence of such a committee, the chairman of the board, who served during the period of time when the provision was adopted.

 

17


Table of Contents

Further, shareholders should also be wary of companies in this category that adopt supermajority voting requirements before their IPO. Absent explicit provisions in the articles or bylaws stipulating that certain policies will be phased out over a certain period of time (e.g. a predetermined declassification of the board, a planned separation of the chairman and CEO, etc.) long-term shareholders could find themselves in the predicament of having to attain a supermajority vote to approve future proposals seeking to eliminate such policies.

MUTUAL FUND BOARDS

Mutual funds, or investment companies, are structured differently from regular public companies (i.e., operating companies). Typically, members of a fund’s adviser are on the board and management takes on a different role from that of regular public companies. Thus, we focus on a short list of requirements, although many of our guidelines remain the same.

The following mutual fund policies are similar to the policies for regular public companies:

 

  1.

Size of the board of directors: The board should be made up of between five and twenty directors.

 

  2.

The CFO on the board: Neither the CFO of the fund nor the CFO of the fund’s registered investment adviser should serve on the board.

 

  3.

Independence of the audit committee: The audit committee should consist solely of independent directors.

 

  4.

Audit committee financial expert: At least one member of the audit committee should be designated as the audit committee financial expert.

The following differences from regular public companies apply at mutual funds:

 

  1.

Independence of the board: We believe that three-fourths of an investment company’s board should be made up of independent directors. This is consistent with a proposed SEC rule on investment company boards. The Investment Company Act requires 40% of the board to be independent, but in 2001, the SEC amended the Exemptive Rules to require that a majority of a mutual fund board be independent. In 2005, the SEC proposed increasing the independence threshold to 75%. In 2006, a federal appeals court ordered that this rule amendment be put back out for public comment, putting it back into “proposed rule” status. Since mutual fund boards play a vital role in overseeing the relationship between the fund and its investment manager, there is greater need for independent oversight than there is for an operating company board.

 

  2.

When the auditor is not up for ratification: We do not recommend voting against the audit committee if the auditor is not up for ratification because, due to the different legal structure of an investment company compared to an operating company, the auditor for the investment company (i.e., mutual fund) does not conduct the same level of financial review for each investment company as for an operating company.

 

  3.

Non-independent chairman: The SEC has proposed that the chairman of the fund board be independent. We agree that the roles of a mutual fund’s chairman and CEO should be separate. Although we believe this would be best at all companies, we recommend voting against the chairman of an investment company’s nominating committee as well as the chairman of the board if the chairman and CEO of a mutual fund are the same person and the fund does not have an independent lead or presiding director. Seven former SEC commissioners support the appointment of an independent chairman and we agree with them that “an independent board chairman would be better able to create conditions favoring the long-term interests of fund shareholders than would a chairman who is an executive of the adviser.” (See the comment letter sent to the SEC in support of the proposed rule at http://sec.gov/rules/proposed/s70304/ s70304-179.pdf)

 

18


Table of Contents
  4.

Multiple funds overseen by the same director: Unlike service on a public company board, mutual fund boards require much less of a time commitment. Mutual fund directors typically serve on dozens of other mutual fund boards, often within the same fund complex. The Investment Company Institute’s (“ICI”) Overview of Fund Governance Practices, 1994-2010, indicates that the average number of funds served by an independent director in 2010 was 49. Absent evidence that a specific director is hindered from being an effective board member at a fund due to service on other funds’ boards, we refrain from maintaining a cap on the number of outside mutual fund boards that we believe a director can serve on.

DECLASSIFIED BOARDS

Glass Lewis favors the repeal of staggered boards and the annual election of directors. We believe staggered boards are less accountable to shareholders than boards that are elected annually. Furthermore, we feel the annual election of directors encourages board members to focus on shareholder interests.

Empirical studies have shown: (i) companies with staggered boards reduce a firm’s value; and (ii) in the context of hostile takeovers, staggered boards operate as a takeover defense, which entrenches management, discourages potential acquirers, and delivers a lower return to target shareholders.

In our view, there is no evidence to demonstrate that staggered boards improve shareholder returns in a takeover context. Research shows that shareholders are worse off when a staggered board blocks a transaction. A study by a group of Harvard Law professors concluded that companies whose staggered boards prevented a takeover “reduced shareholder returns for targets... on the order of eight to ten percent in the nine months after a hostile bid was announced.” 43 When a staggered board negotiates a friendly transaction, no statistically significant difference in premiums occurs. 44 Further, one of those same professors found that charter-based staggered boards “reduce the market value of a firm by 4% to 6% of its market capitalization” and that “staggered boards bring about and not merely reflect this reduction in market value.” 45 A subsequent study reaffirmed that classified boards reduce shareholder value, finding “that the ongoing process of dismantling staggered boards, encouraged by institutional investors, could well contribute to increasing shareholder wealth.” 46

Shareholders have increasingly come to agree with this view. In 2011 more than 75% of S&P 500 companies had declassified boards, up from approximately 41% a decade ago. 47 Clearly, more shareholders have supported the repeal of classified boards. Resolutions relating to the repeal of staggered boards garnered on average over 70% support among shareholders in 2008, whereas in 1987, only 16.4% of votes cast favored board declassification. 48

Given the empirical evidence suggesting staggered boards reduce a company’s value and the increasing shareholder opposition to such a structure, Glass Lewis supports the declassification of boards and the annual election of directors.

MANDATORY DIRECTOR TERM AND AGE LIMITS

Glass Lewis believes that director age and term limits typically are not in shareholders’ best interests. Too often age and term limits are used by boards as a crutch to remove board members who have served for an extended period of time. When used in that fashion, they are indicative of a board that has a difficult time making “tough decisions.”

 

 

43

Lucian Bebchuk, John Coates IV, Guhan Subramanian, “The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Further Findings and a Reply to Symposium Participants,” 55 Stanford Law Review 885-917 (2002), page 1.

44

Id. at 2 (“Examining a sample of seventy-three negotiated transactions from 2000 to 2002, we find no systematic benefits in terms of higher premia to boards that have [staggered structures].”).

45

Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen, “The Costs of Entrenched Boards” (2004).

46

Lucian Bebchuk, Alma Cohen and Charles C.Y. Wang, “Staggered Boards and the Wealth of Shareholders: Evidence from a Natural Experiment,” SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1706806 (2010), p. 26.

47

Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 14

48

Lucian Bebchuk, John Coates IV and Guhan Subramanian, “The Powerful Antitakeover Force of Staggered Boards: Theory, Evidence, and Policy,” 54 Stanford Law Review 887-951 (2002).

 

19


Table of Contents

Academic literature suggests that there is no evidence of a correlation between either length of tenure or age and director performance. On occasion, term limits can be used as a means to remove a director for boards that are unwilling to police their membership and to enforce turnover. Some shareholders support term limits as a way to force change when boards are unwilling to do so.

While we understand that age limits can be a way to force change where boards are unwilling to make changes on their own, the long-term impact of age limits restricts experienced and potentially valuable board members from service through an arbitrary means. Further, age limits unfairly imply that older (or, in rare cases, younger) directors cannot contribute to company oversight.

In our view, a director’s experience can be a valuable asset to shareholders because of the complex, critical issues that boards face. However, we support periodic director rotation to ensure a fresh perspective in the boardroom and the generation of new ideas and business strategies. We believe the board should implement such rotation instead of relying on arbitrary limits. When necessary, shareholders can address the issue of director rotation through director elections.

We believe that shareholders are better off monitoring the board’s approach to corporate governance and the board’s stewardship of company performance rather than imposing inflexible rules that don’t necessarily correlate with returns or benefits for shareholders.

However, if a board adopts term/age limits, it should follow through and not waive such limits. If the board waives its term/age limits, Glass Lewis will consider recommending shareholders vote against the nominating and/or governance committees, unless the rule was waived with sufficient explanation, such as consummation of a corporate transaction like a merger.

REQUIRING TWO OR MORE NOMINEES PER BOARD SEAT

In an attempt to address lack of access to the ballot, shareholders sometimes propose that the board give shareholders a choice of directors for each open board seat in every election. However, we feel that policies requiring a selection of multiple nominees for each board seat would discourage prospective directors from accepting nominations. A prospective director could not be confident either that he or she is the board’s clear choice or that he or she would be elected. Therefore, Glass Lewis generally will vote against such proposals.

PROXY ACCESS

Proxy Access has garnered significant attention in recent years. As in 2012, we expect to see a number of shareholder proposals regarding this topic in 2013 and perhaps even some companies unilaterally adopting some elements of proxy access. However, considering the uncertainty in this area and the inherent case-by-case nature of those situations, we refrain from establishing any specific parameters at this time.

For a discussion of recent regulatory events in this area, along with a detailed overview of the Glass Lewis approach to Shareholder Proposals regarding Proxy Access, refer to Glass Lewis’ Guidelines on Shareholder Resolutions and Initiatives .

MAJORITY VOTE FOR THE ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

In stark contrast to the failure of shareholder access to gain acceptance, majority voting for the election of directors is fast becoming the de facto standard in corporate board elections. In our view, the majority voting proposals are an effort to make the case for shareholder impact on director elections on a company-specific basis.

While this proposal would not give shareholders the opportunity to nominate directors or lead to elections where shareholders have a choice among director candidates, if implemented, the proposal would allow shareholders to have a voice in determining whether the nominees proposed by the board should actually serve as the overseer-representatives of shareholders in the boardroom. We believe this would be a favorable outcome for shareholders.

 

20


Table of Contents

During the first half of 2012, Glass Lewis tracked over 35 shareholder proposals seeking to require a majority vote to elect directors at annual meetings in the U.S., roughly on par with what we reviewed in each of the past several years, but a sharp contrast to the 147 proposals tracked during all of 2006. The large drop in the number of proposals being submitted in recent years compared to 2006 is a result of many companies having already adopted some form of majority voting, including approximately 79% of companies in the S&P 500 index, up from 56% in 2008. 49 During 2012 these proposals received on average 61.2% shareholder support (based on for and against votes), up from 54% in 2008.

THE PLURALITY VOTE STANDARD

Today, most US companies still elect directors by a plurality vote standard. Under that standard, if one shareholder holding only one share votes in favor of a nominee (including himself, if the director is a shareholder), that nominee “wins” the election and assumes a seat on the board. The common concern among companies with a plurality voting standard was the possibility that one or more directors would not receive a majority of votes, resulting in “failed elections.” This was of particular concern during the 1980s, an era of frequent takeovers and contests for control of companies.

ADVANTAGES OF A MAJORITY VOTE STANDARD

If a majority vote standard were implemented, a nominee would have to receive the support of a majority of the shares voted in order to be elected. Thus, shareholders could collectively vote to reject a director they believe will not pursue their best interests. We think that this minimal amount of protection for shareholders is reasonable and will not upset the corporate structure nor reduce the willingness of qualified shareholder-focused directors to serve in the future.

We believe that a majority vote standard will likely lead to more attentive directors. Occasional use of this power will likely prevent the election of directors with a record of ignoring shareholder interests in favor of other interests that conflict with those of investors. Glass Lewis will generally support proposals calling for the election of directors by a majority vote except for use in contested director elections.

In response to the high level of support majority voting has garnered, many companies have voluntarily taken steps to implement majority voting or modified approaches to majority voting. These steps range from a modified approach requiring directors that receive a majority of withheld votes to resign (e.g., Ashland Inc.) to actually requiring a majority vote of outstanding shares to elect directors (e.g., Intel).

We feel that the modified approach does not go far enough because requiring a director to resign is not the same as requiring a majority vote to elect a director and does not allow shareholders a definitive voice in the election process. Further, under the modified approach, the corporate governance committee could reject a resignation and, even if it accepts the resignation, the corporate governance committee decides on the director’s replacement. And since the modified approach is usually adopted as a policy by the board or a board committee, it could be altered by the same board or committee at any time.

 

 

49 Spencer Stuart Board Index, 2011, p. 14

 

21


Table of Contents

III. TRANSPARENCY AND INTEGRITY OF FINANCIAL REPORTING

AUDITOR RATIFICATION

The auditor’s role as gatekeeper is crucial in ensuring the integrity and transparency of the financial information necessary for protecting shareholder value. Shareholders rely on the auditor to ask tough questions and to do a thorough analysis of a company’s books to ensure that the information provided to shareholders is complete, accurate, fair, and that it is a reasonable representation of a company’s financial position. The only way shareholders can make rational investment decisions is if the market is equipped with accurate information about a company’s fiscal health. As stated in the October 6, 2008 Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury:

“The auditor is expected to offer critical and objective judgment on the financial matters under consideration, and actual and perceived absence of conflicts is critical to that expectation. The Committee believes that auditors, investors, public companies, and other market participants must understand the independence requirements and their objectives, and that auditors must adopt a mindset of skepticism when facing situations that may compromise their independence.”

As such, shareholders should demand an objective, competent and diligent auditor who performs at or above professional standards at every company in which the investors hold an interest. Like directors, auditors should be free from conflicts of interest and should avoid situations requiring a choice between the auditor’s interests and the public’s interests. Almost without exception, shareholders should be able to annually review an auditor’s performance and to annually ratify a board’s auditor selection. Moreover, in October 2008, the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession went even further, and recommended that “to further enhance audit committee oversight and auditor accountability... disclosure in the company proxy statement regarding shareholder ratification [should] include the name(s) of the senior auditing partner(s) staffed on the engagement.” 50

On August 16, 2011, the PCAOB issued a Concept Release seeking public comment on ways that auditor independence, objectivity and professional skepticism could be enhanced, with a specific emphasis on mandatory audit firm rotation. The PCAOB convened several public roundtable meeting during 2012 to further discuss such matters. Glass Lewis believes auditor rotation can ensure both the independence of the auditor and the integrity of the audit; we will typically recommend supporting proposals to require auditor rotation when the proposal uses a reasonable period of time (usually not less than 5-7 years) particularly at companies with a history of accounting problems.

VOTING RECOMMENDATIONS ON AUDITOR RATIFICATION

We generally support management’s choice of auditor except when we believe the auditor’s independence or audit integrity has been compromised. Where a board has not allowed shareholders to review and ratify an auditor, we typically recommend voting against the audit committee chairman. When there have been material restatements of annual financial statements or material weakness in internal controls, we usually recommend voting against the entire audit committee.

 

 

50

“Final Report of the Advisory Committee on the Auditing Profession to the U.S. Department of the Treasury.” p. VIII:20, October 6, 2008.

 

22


Table of Contents

Reasons why we may not recommend ratification of an auditor include:

 

  1.

When audit fees plus audit-related fees total less than the tax fees and/or other non-audit fees.

 

  2.

Recent material restatements of annual financial statements, including those resulting in the reporting of material weaknesses in internal controls and including late filings by the company where the auditor bears some responsibility for the restatement or late filing. 51

 

  3.

When the auditor performs prohibited services such as tax-shelter work, tax services for the CEO or CFO, or contingent-fee work, such as a fee based on a percentage of economic benefit to the company.

 

  4.

When audit fees are excessively low, especially when compared with other companies in the same industry.

 

  5.

When the company has aggressive accounting policies.

 

  6.

When the company has poor disclosure or lack of transparency in its financial statements.

 

  7.

Where the auditor limited its liability through its contract with the company or the audit contract requires the corporation to use alternative dispute resolution procedures without adequate justification.

 

  8.

We also look for other relationships or concerns with the auditor that might suggest a conflict between the auditor’s interests and shareholder interests.

PENSION ACCOUNTING ISSUES

A pension accounting question often raised in proxy proposals is what effect, if any, projected returns on employee pension assets should have on a company’s net income. This issue often arises in the executive-compensation context in a discussion of the extent to which pension accounting should be reflected in business performance for purposes of calculating payments to executives.

Glass Lewis believes that pension credits should not be included in measuring income that is used to award performance-based compensation. Because many of the assumptions used in accounting for retirement plans are subject to the company’s discretion, management would have an obvious conflict of interest if pay were tied to pension income. In our view, projected income from pensions does not truly reflect a company’s performance.

 

 

51

An auditor does not audit interim financial statements. Thus, we generally do not believe that an auditor should be opposed due to a restatement of interim financial statements unless the nature of the misstatement is clear from a reading of the incorrect financial statements.

 

23


Table of Contents

IV. THE LINK BETWEEN COMPENSATION AND PERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis carefully reviews the compensation awarded to senior executives, as we believe that this is an important area in which the board’s priorities are revealed. Glass Lewis strongly believes executive compensation should be linked directly with the performance of the business the executive is charged with managing. We believe the most effective compensation arrangements provide for an appropriate mix of performance-based short- and long-term incentives in addition to base salary.

Glass Lewis believes that comprehensive, timely and transparent disclosure of executive pay is critical to allowing shareholders to evaluate the extent to which the pay is keeping pace with company performance. When reviewing proxy materials, Glass Lewis examines whether the company discloses the performance metrics used to determine executive compensation. We recognize performance metrics must necessarily vary depending on the company and industry, among other factors, and may include items such as total shareholder return, earning per share growth, return on equity, return on assets and revenue growth. However, we believe companies should disclose why the specific performance metrics were selected and how the actions they are designed to incentivize will lead to better corporate performance.

Moreover, it is rarely in shareholders’ interests to disclose competitive data about individual salaries below the senior executive level. Such disclosure could create internal personnel discord that would be counterproductive for the company and its shareholders. While we favor full disclosure for senior executives and we view pay disclosure at the aggregate level (e.g., the number of employees being paid over a certain amount or in certain categories) as potentially useful, we do not believe shareholders need or will benefit from detailed reports about individual management employees other than the most senior executives.

ADVISORY VOTE ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION (“SAY-ON-PAY”)

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) required most companies 52 to hold an advisory vote on executive compensation at the first shareholder meeting that occurs six months after enactment of the bill (January 21, 2011).

This practice of allowing shareholders a non-binding vote on a company’s compensation report is standard practice in many non-US countries, and has been a requirement for most companies in the United Kingdom since 2003 and in Australia since 2005. Although Say-on-Pay proposals are non-binding, a high level of “against” or “abstain” votes indicate substantial shareholder concern about a company’s compensation policies and procedures.

Given the complexity of most companies’ compensation programs, Glass Lewis applies a highly nuanced approach when analyzing advisory votes on executive compensation. We review each company’s compensation on a case-by-case basis, recognizing that each company must be examined in the context of industry, size, maturity, performance, financial condition, its historic pay for performance practices, and any other relevant internal or external factors.

We believe that each company should design and apply specific compensation policies and practices that are appropriate to the circumstances of the company and, in particular, will attract and retain competent executives and other staff, while motivating them to grow the company’s long-term shareholder value.

 

 

52

Small reporting companies (as defined by the SEC as below $75,000,000 in market capitalization) received a two-year reprieve and will only be subject to say-on-pay requirements beginning at meetings held on or after January 21, 2013.

 

24


Table of Contents

Where we find those specific policies and practices serve to reasonably align compensation with performance, and such practices are adequately disclosed, Glass Lewis will recommend supporting the company’s approach. If, however, those specific policies and practices fail to demonstrably link compensation with performance, Glass Lewis will generally recommend voting against the say-on-pay proposal.

Glass Lewis focuses on four main areas when reviewing Say-on-Pay proposals:

 

   

The overall design and structure of the Company’s executive compensation program including performance metrics;

 

   

The quality and content of the Company’s disclosure;

 

   

The quantum paid to executives; and

 

   

The link between compensation and performance as indicated by the Company’s current and past pay-for-performance grades

We also review any significant changes or modifications, and rationale for such changes, made to the Company’s compensation structure or award amounts, including base salaries.

SAY-ON-PAY VOTING RECOMMENDATIONS

In cases where we find deficiencies in a company’s compensation program’s design, implementation or management, we will recommend that shareholders vote against the Say-on-Pay proposal. Generally such instances include evidence of a pattern of poor pay-for-performance practices (i.e., deficient or failing pay for performance grades), unclear or questionable disclosure regarding the overall compensation structure (e.g., limited information regarding benchmarking processes, limited rationale for bonus performance metrics and targets, etc.), questionable adjustments to certain aspects of the overall compensation structure (e.g., limited rationale for significant changes to performance targets or metrics, the payout of guaranteed bonuses or sizable retention grants, etc.), and/or other egregious compensation practices.

Although not an exhaustive list, the following issues when weighed together may cause Glass Lewis to recommend voting against a say-on-pay vote:

 

   

Inappropriate peer group and/or benchmarking issues

 

   

Inadequate or no rationale for changes to peer groups

 

   

Egregious or excessive bonuses, equity awards or severance payments, including golden handshakes and golden parachutes

 

   

Guaranteed bonuses

 

   

Targeting overall levels of compensation at higher than median without adequate justification

 

   

Bonus or long-term plan targets set at less than mean or negative performance levels

 

   

Performance targets not sufficiently challenging, and/or providing for high potential payouts

 

   

Performance targets lowered, without justification

 

   

Discretionary bonuses paid when short- or long-term incentive plan targets were not met

 

   

Executive pay high relative to peers not justified by outstanding company performance

 

25


Table of Contents
   

The terms of the long-term incentive plans are inappropriate (please see “Long-Term Incentives” below)

In the instance that a company has simply failed to provide sufficient disclosure of its policies, we may recommend shareholders vote against this proposal solely on this basis, regardless of the appropriateness of compensation levels.

ADDITIONAL SCRUTINY FOR COMPANIES WITH SIGNIFICANT OPPOSITION IN 2012

At companies that received a significant shareholder vote (anything greater than 25%) against their say on pay proposal in 2012, we believe the board should demonstrate some level of engagement and responsiveness to the shareholder concerns behind the discontent. While we recognize that sweeping changes cannot be made to a compensation program without due consideration and that a majority of shareholders voted in favor of the proposal, we will look for disclosure in the proxy statement and other publicly-disclosed filings that indicates the compensation committee is responding to the prior year’s vote results including engaging with large shareholders to identify the concerns causing the substantial vote against. In the absence of any evidence that the board is actively engaging shareholders on this issue and responding accordingly, we will recommend holding compensation committee members accountable for a failure to respond in consideration of the level of the vote against and the severity and history of the compensation problems.

Where we identify egregious compensation practices, we may also recommend voting against the compensation committee based on the practices or actions of its members during the year, such as approving large one-off payments, the inappropriate, unjustified use of discretion, or sustained poor pay for performance practices.

SHORT-TERM INCENTIVES

A short-term bonus or incentive (“STI”) should be demonstrably tied to performance. Whenever possible, we believe a mix of corporate and individual performance measures is appropriate. We would normally expect performance measures for STIs to be based on internal financial measures such as net profit after tax, EPS growth and divisional profitability as well as non-financial factors such as those related to safety, environmental issues, and customer satisfaction. However, we accept variations from these metrics if they are tied to the Company’s business drivers.

Further, the target and potential maximum awards that can be achieved under STI awards should be disclosed. Shareholders should expect stretching performance targets for the maximum award to be achieved. Any increase in the potential maximum award should be clearly justified to shareholders.

Glass Lewis recognizes that disclosure of some measures may include commercially confidential information. Therefore, we believe it may be reasonable to exclude such information in some cases as long as the company provides sufficient justification for non-disclosure. However, where a short-term bonus has been paid, companies should disclose the extent to which performance has been achieved against relevant targets, including disclosure of the actual target achieved.

Where management has received significant STIs but short-term performance as measured by such indicators as increase in profit and/or EPS growth over the previous year prima facie appears to be poor or negative, we believe the company should provide a clear explanation why these significant short-term payments were made.

LONG-TERM INCENTIVES

Glass Lewis recognizes the value of equity-based incentive programs. When used appropriately, they can provide a vehicle for linking an executive’s pay to company performance, thereby aligning their interests with those of shareholders. In addition, equity-based compensation can be an effective way to attract, retain and motivate key employees.

 

26


Table of Contents

There are certain elements that Glass Lewis believes are common to most well-structured long-term incentive (“LTI”) plans. These include:

 

   

No re-testing or lowering of performance conditions

 

   

Performance metrics that cannot be easily manipulated by management

 

   

Two or more performance metrics

 

   

At least one relative performance metric that compares the company’s performance to a relevant peer group or index

 

   

Performance periods of at least three years

 

   

Stretching metrics that incentivize executives to strive for outstanding performance

 

   

Individual limits expressed as a percentage of base salary

Performance measures should be carefully selected and should relate to the specific business/industry in which the company operates and, especially, the key value drivers of the company’s business.

Glass Lewis believes that measuring a company’s performance with multiple metrics serves to provide a more complete picture of the company’s performance than a single metric, which may focus too much management attention on a single target and is therefore more susceptible to manipulation. External benchmarks should be disclosed and transparent, such as total shareholder return (“TSR”) against a well-selected sector index, peer group or other performance hurdle. The rationale behind the selection of a specific index or peer group should be disclosed. Internal benchmarks (e.g. earnings per share growth) should also be disclosed and transparent, unless a cogent case for confidentiality is made and fully explained.

We also believe shareholders should evaluate the relative success of a company’s compensation programs, particularly existing equity-based incentive plans, in linking pay and performance in evaluating new LTI plans to determine the impact of additional stock awards. We will therefore review the company’s pay-for-performance grade, see below for more information, and specifically the proportion of total compensation that is stock-based.

PAY FOR PERFORMANCE

Glass Lewis believes an integral part of a well-structured compensation package is a successful link between pay and performance. Therefore, Glass Lewis developed a proprietary pay-for-performance model to evaluate the link between pay and performance of the top five executives at US companies. Our model benchmarks these executives’ pay and company performance against four peer groups and across seven performance metrics. Using a forced curve and a school letter-grade system, we grade companies from A-F according to their pay-for-performance linkage. The grades guide our evaluation of compensation committee effectiveness and we generally recommend voting against compensation committee of companies with a pattern of failing our pay-for-performance analysis.

We also use this analysis to inform our voting decisions on say-on-pay proposals. As such, if a company receives a failing grade from our proprietary model, we are likely to recommend shareholders to vote against the say-on-pay proposal. However, there may be exceptions to this rule such as when a company makes significant enhancements to its compensation programs.

RECOUPMENT (“CLAWBACK”) PROVISIONS

Section 954 of the Dodd-Frank Act requires the SEC to create a rule requiring listed companies to adopt policies for recouping certain compensation during a three-year look-back period. The rule applies to incentive-based compensation paid to current or former executives if the company is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to erroneous data resulting from material non-compliance with any financial reporting requirements under the securities laws.

 

27


Table of Contents

These recoupment provisions are more stringent than under Section 304 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in three respects: (i) the provisions extend to current or former executive officers rather than only to the CEO and CFO; (ii) it has a three-year look-back period (rather than a twelve-month look-back period); and (iii) it allows for recovery of compensation based upon a financial restatement due to erroneous data, and therefore does not require misconduct on the part of the executive or other employees.

FREQUENCY OF SAY-ON-PAY

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires companies to allow shareholders a non-binding vote on the frequency of say-on-pay votes, i.e. every one, two or three years. Additionally, Dodd-Frank requires companies to hold such votes on the frequency of say-on-pay votes at least once every six years.

We believe companies should submit say-on-pay votes to shareholders every year. We believe that the time and financial burdens to a company with regard to an annual vote are relatively small and incremental and are outweighed by the benefits to shareholders through more frequent accountability. Implementing biannual or triennial votes on executive compensation limits shareholders’ ability to hold the board accountable for its compensation practices through means other than voting against the compensation committee. Unless a company provides a compelling rationale or unique circumstances for say-on-pay votes less frequent than annually, we will generally recommend that shareholders support annual votes on compensation.

VOTE ON GOLDEN PARACHUTE ARRANGEMENTS

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires companies to provide shareholders with a separate non-binding vote on approval of golden parachute compensation arrangements in connection with certain change-in-control transactions. However, if the golden parachute arrangements have previously been subject to a say-on-pay vote which shareholders approved, then this required vote is waived.

Glass Lewis believes the narrative and tabular disclosure of golden parachute arrangements will benefit all shareholders. Glass Lewis will analyze each golden parachute arrangement on a case-by-case basis, taking into account, among other items: the ultimate value of the payments particularly compared to the value of the transaction, the tenure and position of the executives in question, and the type of triggers involved (single vs double).

EQUITY-BASED COMPENSATION PLAN PROPOSALS

We believe that equity compensation awards are useful, when not abused, for retaining employees and providing an incentive for them to act in a way that will improve company performance. Glass Lewis evaluates equity-based compensation plans using a detailed model and analytical review.

Equity-based compensation programs have important differences from cash compensation plans and bonus programs. Accordingly, our model and analysis takes into account factors such as plan administration, the method and terms of exercise, repricing history, express or implied rights to reprice, and the presence of evergreen provisions.

Our analysis is primarily quantitative and focused on the plan’s cost as compared with the business’s operating metrics. We run twenty different analyses, comparing the program with absolute limits we believe are key to equity value creation and with a carefully chosen peer group. In general, our model seeks to determine whether the proposed plan is either absolutely excessive or is more than one standard deviation away from the average plan for the peer group on a range of criteria, including dilution to shareholders and the projected annual cost relative to the company’s financial performance. Each of the twenty analyses (and their constituent parts) is weighted and the plan is scored in accordance with that weight.

 

28


Table of Contents

In our analysis, we compare the program’s expected annual expense with the business’s operating metrics to help determine whether the plan is excessive in light of company performance. We also compare the option plan’s expected annual cost to the enterprise value of the firm rather than to market capitalization because the employees, managers and directors of the firm contribute to the creation of enterprise value but not necessarily market capitalization (the biggest difference is seen where cash represents the vast majority of market capitalization). Finally, we do not rely exclusively on relative comparisons with averages because, in addition to creeping averages serving to inflate compensation, we believe that some absolute limits are warranted.

We evaluate equity plans based on certain overarching principles:

 

  1.

Companies should seek more shares only when needed.

 

  2.

Requested share amounts should be small enough that companies seek shareholder approval every three to four years (or more frequently).

 

  3.

If a plan is relatively expensive, it should not grant options solely to senior executives and board members.

 

  4.

Annual net share count and voting power dilution should be limited.

 

  5.

Annual cost of the plan (especially if not shown on the income statement) should be reasonable as a percentage of financial results and should be in line with the peer group.

 

  6.

The expected annual cost of the plan should be proportional to the business’s value.

 

  7.

The intrinsic value that option grantees received in the past should be reasonable compared with the business’s financial results.

 

  8.

Plans should deliver value on a per-employee basis when compared with programs at peer companies.

 

  9.

Plans should not permit repricing of stock options.

 

  10.

Plans should not contain excessively liberal administrative or payment terms.

 

  11.

Plans should not count shares in ways that understate the potential dilution, or cost, to common shareholders. This refers to “inverse” full-value award multipliers.

 

  12.

Selected performance metrics should be challenging and appropriate, and should be subject to relative performance measurements.

 

  13.

Stock grants should be subject to minimum vesting and/or holding periods sufficient to ensure sustainable performance and promote retention.

OPTION EXCHANGES

Glass Lewis views option repricing plans and option exchange programs with great skepticism. Shareholders have substantial risk in owning stock and we believe that the employees, officers, and directors who receive stock options should be similarly situated to align their interests with shareholder interests.

We are concerned that option grantees who believe they will be “rescued” from underwater options will be more inclined to take unjustifiable risks. Moreover, a predictable pattern of repricing or exchanges substantially alters a stock option’s value because options that will practically never expire deeply out of the money are worth far more than options that carry a risk of expiration.

In short, repricings and option exchange programs change the bargain between shareholders and employees after the bargain has been struck.

There is one circumstance in which a repricing or option exchange program is acceptable: if macroeconomic or industry trends, rather than specific company issues, cause a stock’s value to decline dramatically and the repricing is necessary to motivate and retain employees. In this circumstance, we think it fair to conclude that option grantees may be suffering from a risk that was not foreseeable when the original “bargain” was struck. In such a circumstance, we will recommend supporting a repricing only if the following conditions are true:

 

  1. Officers and board members cannot participate in the program;

 

29


Table of Contents
  2. The stock decline mirrors the market or industry price decline in terms of timing and approximates the decline in magnitude;

 

  3. The exchange is value-neutral or value-creative to shareholders using very conservative assumptions and with a recognition of the adverse selection problems inherent in voluntary programs; and

 

  4. Management and the board make a cogent case for needing to motivate and retain existing employees, such as being in a competitive employment market.

OPTION BACKDATING, SPRING-LOADING, AND BULLET-DODGING

Glass Lewis views option backdating, and the related practices of spring-loading and bullet-dodging, as egregious actions that warrant holding the appropriate management and board members responsible. These practices are similar to repricing options and eliminate much of the downside risk inherent in an option grant that is designed to induce recipients to maximize shareholder return.

Backdating an option is the act of changing an option’s grant date from the actual grant date to an earlier date when the market price of the underlying stock was lower, resulting in a lower exercise price for the option. Since 2006, Glass Lewis has identified over 270 companies that have disclosed internal or government investigations into their past stock-option grants.

Spring-loading is granting stock options while in possession of material, positive information that has not been disclosed publicly. Bullet-dodging is delaying the grants of stock options until after the release of material, negative information. This can allow option grants to be made at a lower price either before the release of positive news or following the release of negative news, assuming the stock’s price will move up or down in response to the information. This raises a concern similar to that of insider trading, or the trading on material non-public information.

The exercise price for an option is determined on the day of grant, providing the recipient with the same market risk as an investor who bought shares on that date. However, where options were backdated, the executive or the board (or the compensation committee) changed the grant date retroactively. The new date may be at or near the lowest price for the year or period. This would be like allowing an investor to look back and select the lowest price of the year at which to buy shares.

A 2006 study of option grants made between 1996 and 2005 at 8,000 companies found that option backdating can be an indication of poor internal controls. The study found that option backdating was more likely to occur at companies without a majority independent board and with a long-serving CEO; both factors, the study concluded, were associated with greater CEO influence on the company’s compensation and governance practices. 53

Where a company granted backdated options to an executive who is also a director, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against that executive/director, regardless of who decided to make the award. In addition, Glass Lewis will recommend voting against those directors who either approved or allowed the backdating. Glass Lewis feels that executives and directors who either benefited from backdated options or authorized the practice have breached their fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.

Given the severe tax and legal liabilities to the company from backdating, Glass Lewis will consider recommending voting against members of the audit committee who served when options were backdated, a restatement occurs, material weaknesses in internal controls exist and disclosures indicate there was a lack of documentation. These committee members failed in their responsibility to ensure the integrity of the company’s financial reports.

When a company has engaged in spring-loading or bullet-dodging, Glass Lewis will consider

 

 

53 Lucian Bebchuk, Yaniv Grinstein and Urs Peyer. “LUCKY CEOs.” November, 2006.

 

30


Table of Contents

recommending voting against the compensation committee members where there has been a pattern of granting options at or near historic lows. Glass Lewis will also recommend voting against executives serving on the board who benefited from the spring-loading or bullet-dodging.

162(M) PLANS

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code allows companies to deduct compensation in excess of $1 million for the CEO and the next three most highly compensated executive officers, excluding the CFO, upon shareholder approval of the excess compensation. Glass Lewis recognizes the value of executive incentive programs and the tax benefit of shareholder-approved incentive plans.

We believe the best practice for companies is to provide robust disclosure to shareholders so that they can make fully-informed judgments about the reasonableness of the proposed compensation plan. To allow for meaningful shareholder review, we prefer that disclosure should include specific performance metrics, a maximum award pool, and a maximum award amount per employee. We also believe it is important to analyze the estimated grants to see if they are reasonable and in line with the company’s peers.

We typically recommend voting against a 162(m) plan where: a company fails to provide at least a list of performance targets; a company fails to provide one of either a total pool or an individual maximum; or the proposed plan is excessive when compared with the plans of the company’s peers.

The company’s record of aligning pay with performance (as evaluated using our proprietary pay-for-performance model) also plays a role in our recommendation. Where a company has a record of setting reasonable pay relative to business performance, we generally recommend voting in favor of a plan even if the plan caps seem large relative to peers because we recognize the value in special pay arrangements for continued exceptional performance.

As with all other issues we review, our goal is to provide consistent but contextual advice given the specifics of the company and ongoing performance. Overall, we recognize that it is generally not in shareholders’ best interests to vote against such a plan and forgo the potential tax benefit since shareholder rejection of such plans will not curtail the awards; it will only prevent the tax deduction associated with them.

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION PLANS

Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive reasonable and appropriate compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. Director fees should be competitive in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. But excessive fees represent a financial cost to the company and threaten to compromise the objectivity and independence of non-employee directors. Therefore, a balance is required. We will consider recommending supporting compensation plans that include option grants or other equity-based awards that help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders. However, equity grants to directors should not be performance-based to ensure directors are not incentivized in the same manner as executives but rather serve as a check on imprudent risk-taking in executive compensation plan design.

Glass Lewis uses a proprietary model and analyst review to evaluate the costs of equity plans compared to the plans of peer companies with similar market capitalizations. We use the results of this model to guide our voting recommendations on stock-based director compensation plans.

 

31


Table of Contents

V. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AND THE SHAREHOLDER FRANCHISE

ANTI-TAKEOVER MEASURES

POISON PILLS (SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS PLANS)

Glass Lewis believes that poison pill plans are not generally in shareholders’ best interests. They can reduce management accountability by substantially limiting opportunities for corporate takeovers. Rights plans can thus prevent shareholders from receiving a buy-out premium for their stock. Typically we recommend that shareholders vote against these plans to protect their financial interests and ensure that they have an opportunity to consider any offer for their shares, especially those at a premium.

We believe boards should be given wide latitude in directing company activities and in charting the company’s course. However, on an issue such as this, where the link between the shareholders’ financial interests and their right to consider and accept buyout offers is substantial, we believe that shareholders should be allowed to vote on whether they support such a plan’s implementation. This issue is different from other matters that are typically left to board discretion. Its potential impact on and relation to shareholders is direct and substantial. It is also an issue in which management interests may be different from those of shareholders; thus, ensuring that shareholders have a voice is the only way to safeguard their interests.

In certain circumstances, we will support a poison pill that is limited in scope to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what we believe to be a reasonable qualifying offer clause. We will consider supporting a poison pill plan if the qualifying offer clause includes each of the following attributes:

 

  1.

The form of offer is not required to be an all-cash transaction;

 

  2.

The offer is not required to remain open for more than 90 business days;

 

  3.

The offeror is permitted to amend the offer, reduce the offer, or otherwise change the terms;

 

  4.

There is no fairness opinion requirement; and

 

  5.

There is a low to no premium requirement.

Where these requirements are met, we typically feel comfortable that shareholders will have the opportunity to voice their opinion on any legitimate offer.

NOL POISON PILLS

Similarly, Glass Lewis may consider supporting a limited poison pill in the unique event that a company seeks shareholder approval of a rights plan for the express purpose of preserving Net Operating Losses (NOLs). While companies with NOLs can generally carry these losses forward to offset future taxable income, Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code limits companies’ ability to use NOLs in the event of a “change of ownership.” 54 In this case, a company may adopt or amend a poison pill (“NOL pill”) in order to prevent an inadvertent change of ownership by multiple investors purchasing small chunks of stock at the same time, and thereby preserve the ability to carry the NOLs forward. Often such NOL pills have trigger thresholds much lower than the common 15% or 20% thresholds, with some NOL pill triggers as low as 5%.

 

 

54

Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code refers to a “change of ownership” of more than 50 percentage points by one or more 5% shareholders within a three-year period. The statute is intended to deter the “trafficking” of net operating losses.

 

32


Table of Contents

Glass Lewis evaluates NOL pills on a strictly case-by-case basis taking into consideration, among other factors, the value of the NOLs to the company, the likelihood of a change of ownership based on the size of the holding and the nature of the larger shareholders, the trigger threshold and whether the term of the plan is limited in duration (i.e., whether it contains a reasonable “sunset” provision) or is subject to periodic board review and/or shareholder ratification. However, we will recommend that shareholders vote against a proposal to adopt or amend a pill to include NOL protective provisions if the company has adopted a more narrowly tailored means of preventing a change in control to preserve its NOLs. For example, a company may limit share transfers in its charter to prevent a change of ownership from occurring.

Furthermore, we believe that shareholders should be offered the opportunity to vote on any adoption or renewal of a NOL pill regardless of any potential tax benefit that it offers a company. As such, we will consider recommending voting against those members of the board who served at the time when an NOL pill was adopted without shareholder approval within the prior twelve months and where the NOL pill is not subject to shareholder ratification.

FAIR PRICE PROVISIONS

Fair price provisions, which are rare, require that certain minimum price and procedural requirements be observed by any party that acquires more than a specified percentage of a corporation’s common stock. The provision is intended to protect minority shareholder value when an acquirer seeks to accomplish a merger or other transaction which would eliminate or change the interests of the minority stockholders. The provision is generally applied against the acquirer unless the takeover is approved by a majority of “continuing directors” and holders of a majority, in some cases a supermajority as high as 80%, of the combined voting power of all stock entitled to vote to alter, amend, or repeal the above provisions.

The effect of a fair price provision is to require approval of any merger or business combination with an “interested stockholder” by 51% of the voting stock of the company, excluding the shares held by the interested stockholder. An interested stockholder is generally considered to be a holder of 10% or more of the company’s outstanding stock, but the trigger can vary.

Generally, provisions are put in place for the ostensible purpose of preventing a back-end merger where the interested stockholder would be able to pay a lower price for the remaining shares of the company than he or she paid to gain control. The effect of a fair price provision on shareholders, however, is to limit their ability to gain a premium for their shares through a partial tender offer or open market acquisition which typically raise the share price, often significantly. A fair price provision discourages such transactions because of the potential costs of seeking shareholder approval and because of the restrictions on purchase price for completing a merger or other transaction at a later time.

Glass Lewis believes that fair price provisions, while sometimes protecting shareholders from abuse in a takeover situation, more often act as an impediment to takeovers, potentially limiting gains to shareholders from a variety of transactions that could significantly increase share price. In some cases, even the independent directors of the board cannot make exceptions when such exceptions may be in the best interests of shareholders. Given the existence of state law protections for minority shareholders such as Section  203 of the Delaware Corporations Code, we believe it is in the best interests of shareholders to remove fair price provisions.

REINCORPORATION

In general, Glass Lewis believes that the board is in the best position to determine the appropriate jurisdiction of incorporation for the company. When examining a management proposal to reincorporate to a different state or country, we review the relevant financial benefits, generally related to improved corporate tax treatment, as well as changes in corporate governance provisions, especially those relating to shareholder rights, resulting from the change in domicile. Where the financial benefits are de minimis and there is a decrease in shareholder rights, we will recommend voting against the transaction.

 

33


Table of Contents

However, costly, shareholder-initiated reincorporations are typically not the best route to achieve the furtherance of shareholder rights. We believe shareholders are generally better served by proposing specific shareholder resolutions addressing pertinent issues which may be implemented at a lower cost, and perhaps even with board approval. However, when shareholders propose a shift into a jurisdiction with enhanced shareholder rights, Glass Lewis examines the significant ways would the Company benefit from shifting jurisdictions including the following:

 

  1.

Is the board sufficiently independent?

 

  2.

Does the Company have anti-takeover protections such as a poison pill or classified board in place?

 

  3.

Has the board been previously unresponsive to shareholders (such as failing to implement a shareholder proposal that received majority shareholder support)?

 

  4.

Do shareholders have the right to call special meetings of shareholders?

 

  5.

Are there other material governance issues at the Company?

 

  6.

Has the Company’s performance matched or exceeded its peers in the past one and three years?

 

  7.

How has the Company ranked in Glass Lewis’ pay-for-performance analysis during the last three years?

 

  8.

Does the company have an independent chairman?

We note, however, that we will only support shareholder proposals to change a company’s place of incorporation in exceptional circumstances.

EXCLUSIVE FORUM PROVISIONS

Glass Lewis believes that charter or bylaw provisions limiting a shareholder’s choice of legal venue are not in the best interests of shareholders. Such clauses may effectively discourage the use of shareholder derivative claims by increasing their associated costs and making them more difficult to pursue. As such, shareholders should be wary about approving any limitation on their legal recourse including limiting themselves to a single jurisdiction (e.g. Delaware) without compelling evidence that it will benefit shareholders.

For this reason, we recommend that shareholders vote against any bylaw or charter amendment seeking to adopt an exclusive forum provision unless the company: (i) provides a compelling argument on why the provision would directly benefit shareholders; (ii) provides evidence of abuse of legal process in other, non-favored jurisdictions; and (ii) maintains a strong record of good corporate governance practices.

Moreover, in the event a board seeks shareholder approval of a forum selection clause pursuant to a bundled bylaw amendment rather than as a separate proposal, we will weigh the importance of the other bundled provisions when determining the vote recommendation on the proposal. We will nonetheless recommend voting against the chairman of the governance committee for bundling disparate proposals into a single proposal (refer to our discussion of nominating and governance committee performance in Section I of the guidelines).

AUTHORIZED SHARES

Glass Lewis believes that adequate capital stock is important to a company’s operation. When analyzing a request for additional shares, we typically review four common reasons why a company might need additional capital stock:

 

  1.

Stock Split – We typically consider three metrics when evaluating whether we think a stock split is likely or necessary: The historical stock pre-split price, if any; the current price relative to the company’s most common trading price over the past 52 weeks; and some absolute limits on stock price that, in our view, either always make a stock split appropriate if desired by management or would almost never be a reasonable price at which to split a stock.

 

34


Table of Contents
  2.

Shareholder Defenses – Additional authorized shares could be used to bolster takeover defenses such as a poison pill. Proxy filings often discuss the usefulness of additional shares in defending against or discouraging a hostile takeover as a reason for a requested increase. Glass Lewis is typically against such defenses and will oppose actions intended to bolster such defenses.

 

  3.

Financing for Acquisitions – We look at whether the company has a history of using stock for acquisitions and attempt to determine what levels of stock have typically been required to accomplish such transactions. Likewise, we look to see whether this is discussed as a reason for additional shares in the proxy.

 

  4.

Financing for Operations – We review the company’s cash position and its ability to secure financing through borrowing or other means. We look at the company’s history of capitalization and whether the company has had to use stock in the recent past as a means of raising capital.

Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in limited circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where we find that the company has not detailed a plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of shares far exceeds those needed to accomplish a detailed plan, we typically recommend against the authorization of additional shares.

While we think that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, we prefer that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of a large pool of unallocated shares available for any purpose.

ADVANCE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS

We typically recommend that shareholders vote against proposals that would require advance notice of shareholder proposals or of director nominees.

These proposals typically attempt to require a certain amount of notice before shareholders are allowed to place proposals on the ballot. Notice requirements typically range between three to six months prior to the annual meeting. Advance notice requirements typically make it impossible for a shareholder who misses the deadline to present a shareholder proposal or a director nominee that might be in the best interests of the company and its shareholders.

We believe shareholders should be able to review and vote on all proposals and director nominees. Shareholders can always vote against proposals that appear with little prior notice. Shareholders, as owners of a business, are capable of identifying issues on which they have sufficient information and ignoring issues on which they have insufficient information. Setting arbitrary notice restrictions limits the opportunity for shareholders to raise issues that may come up after the window closes.

VOTING STRUCTURE

CUMULATIVE VOTING

Cumulative voting increases the ability of minority shareholders to elect a director by allowing shareholders to cast as many shares of the stock they own multiplied by the number of directors to be elected. As companies generally have multiple nominees up for election, cumulative voting allows shareholders to cast all of their votes for a single nominee, or a smaller number of nominees than up for election, thereby raising the likelihood of electing one or more of their preferred nominees to the board. It can be important when a board is controlled by insiders or affiliates and where the company’s ownership structure includes one or more shareholders who control a majority-voting block of company stock.

 

35


Table of Contents

Glass Lewis believes that cumulative voting generally acts as a safeguard for shareholders by ensuring that those who hold a significant minority of shares can elect a candidate of their choosing to the board. This allows the creation of boards that are responsive to the interests of all shareholders rather than just a small group of large holders.

However, academic literature indicates that where a highly independent board is in place and the company has a shareholder-friendly governance structure, shareholders may be better off without cumulative voting. The analysis underlying this literature indicates that shareholder returns at firms with good governance structures are lower and that boards can become factionalized and prone to evaluating the needs of special interests over the general interests of shareholders collectively.

We review cumulative voting proposals on a case-by-case basis, factoring in the independence of the board and the status of the company’s governance structure. But we typically find these proposals on ballots at companies where independence is lacking and where the appropriate checks and balances favoring shareholders are not in place. In those instances we typically recommend in favor of cumulative voting.

Where a company has adopted a true majority vote standard (i.e., where a director must receive a majority of votes cast to be elected, as opposed to a modified policy indicated by a resignation policy only), Glass Lewis will recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals due to the incompatibility of the two election methods. For companies that have not adopted a true majority voting standard but have adopted some form of majority voting, Glass Lewis will also generally recommend voting against cumulative voting proposals if the company has not adopted antitakeover protections and has been responsive to shareholders.

Where a company has not adopted a majority voting standard and is facing both a shareholder proposal to adopt majority voting and a shareholder proposal to adopt cumulative voting, Glass Lewis will support only the majority voting proposal. When a company has both majority voting and cumulative voting in place, there is a higher likelihood of one or more directors not being elected as a result of not receiving a majority vote. This is because shareholders exercising the right to cumulate their votes could unintentionally cause the failed election of one or more directors for whom shareholders do not cumulate votes.

SUPERMAJORITY VOTE REQUIREMENTS

Glass Lewis believes that supermajority vote requirements impede shareholder action on ballot items critical to shareholder interests. An example is in the takeover context, where supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit the voice of shareholders in making decisions on such crucial matters as selling the business. This in turn degrades share value and can limit the possibility of buyout premiums to shareholders. Moreover, we believe that a supermajority vote requirement can enable a small group of shareholders to overrule the will of the majority shareholders. We believe that a simple majority is appropriate to approve all matters presented to shareholders.

TRANSACTION OF OTHER BUSINESS

We typically recommend that shareholders not give their proxy to management to vote on any other business items that may properly come before an annual or special meeting. In our opinion, granting unfettered discretion is unwise.

ANTI-GREENMAIL PROPOSALS

Glass Lewis will support proposals to adopt a provision preventing the payment of greenmail, which would serve to prevent companies from buying back company stock at significant premiums from

 

36


Table of Contents

a certain shareholder. Since a large or majority shareholder could attempt to compel a board into purchasing its shares at a large premium, the anti-greenmail provision would generally require that a majority of shareholders other than the majority shareholder approve the buyback.

MUTUAL FUNDS: INVESTMENT POLICIES AND ADVISORY AGREEMENTS

Glass Lewis believes that decisions about a fund’s structure and/or a fund’s relationship with its investment advisor or sub-advisors are generally best left to management and the members of the board, absent a showing of egregious or illegal conduct that might threaten shareholder value. As such, we focus our analyses of such proposals on the following main areas:

 

   

The terms of any amended advisory or sub-advisory agreement;

 

   

Any changes in the fee structure paid to the investment advisor; and

 

   

Any material changes to the fund’s investment objective or strategy.

We generally support amendments to a fund’s investment advisory agreement absent a material change that is not in the best interests of shareholders. A significant increase in the fees paid to an investment advisor would be reason for us to consider recommending voting against a proposed amendment to an investment advisory agreement. However, in certain cases, we are more inclined to support an increase in advisory fees if such increases result from being performance-based rather than asset-based. Furthermore, we generally support sub-advisory agreements between a fund’s advisor and sub-advisor, primarily because the fees received by the sub-advisor are paid by the advisor, and not by the fund.

In matters pertaining to a fund’s investment objective or strategy, we believe shareholders are best served when a fund’s objective or strategy closely resembles the investment discipline shareholders understood and selected when they initially bought into the fund. As such, we generally recommend voting against amendments to a fund’s investment objective or strategy when the proposed changes would leave shareholders with stakes in a fund that is noticeably different than when originally contemplated, and which could therefore potentially negatively impact some investors’ diversification strategies.

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS

The complex organizational, operational, tax and compliance requirements of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“REITs”) provide for a unique shareholder evaluation. In simple terms, a REIT must have a minimum of 100 shareholders (the “100 Shareholder Test”) and no more than 50% of the value of its shares can be held by five or fewer individuals (the “5/50 Test”). At least 75% of a REITs’ assets must be in real estate, it must derive 75% of its gross income from rents or mortgage interest, and it must pay out 90% of its taxable earnings as dividends. In addition, as a publicly traded security listed on a stock exchange, a REIT must comply with the same general listing requirements as a publicly traded equity.

In order to comply with such requirements, REITs typically include percentage ownership limitations in their organizational documents, usually in the range of 5% to 10% of the REITs outstanding shares. Given the complexities of REITs as an asset class, Glass Lewis applies a highly nuanced approach in our evaluation of REIT proposals, especially regarding changes in authorized share capital, including preferred stock.

PREFERRED STOCK ISSUANCES AT REITS

Glass Lewis is generally against the authorization of preferred shares that allows the board to determine the preferences, limitations and rights of the preferred shares (known as “blank-check preferred stock”). We believe that granting such broad discretion should be of concern to common shareholders, since blank-check preferred stock could be used as an antitakeover device or in some other fashion

 

37


Table of Contents

that adversely affects the voting power or financial interests of common shareholders. However, given the requirement that a REIT must distribute 90% of its net income annually, it is inhibited from retaining capital to make investments in its business. As such, we recognize that equity financing likely plays a key role in a REIT’s growth and creation of shareholder value. Moreover, shareholder concern regarding the use of preferred stock as an anti-takeover mechanism may be allayed by the fact that most REITs maintain ownership limitations in their certificates of incorporation. For these reasons, along with the fact that REITs typically do not engage in private placements of preferred stock (which result in the rights of common shareholders being adversely impacted), we may support requests to authorize shares of blank-check preferred stock at REITs.

BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES

Business Development Companies (“BDCs”) were created by the U.S. Congress in 1980; they are regulated under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and are taxed as regulated investment companies (“RICs”) under the Internal Revenue Code. BDCs typically operate as publicly traded private equity firms that invest in early stage to mature private companies as well as small public companies. BDCs realize operating income when their investments are sold off, and therefore maintain complex organizational, operational, tax and compliance requirements that are similar to those of REITs—the most evident of which is that BDCs must distribute at least 90% of their taxable earnings as dividends.

AUTHORIZATION TO SELL SHARES AT A PRICE BELOW NET ASSET VALUE

Considering that BDCs are required to distribute nearly all their earnings to shareholders, they sometimes need to offer additional shares of common stock in the public markets to finance operations and acquisitions. However, shareholder approval is required in order for a BDC to sell shares of common stock at a price below Net Asset Value (“NAV”). Glass Lewis evaluates these proposals using a case-by-case approach, but will recommend supporting such requests if the following conditions are met:

 

  1.

The authorization to allow share issuances below NAV has an expiration date of one year or less from the date that shareholders approve the underlying proposal (i.e. the meeting date);

 

  2.

The proposed discount below NAV is minimal (ideally no greater than 20%);

 

  3.

The board specifies that the issuance will have a minimal or modest dilutive effect (ideally no greater than 25% of the Company’s then-outstanding common stock prior to the issuance); and

 

  4.

A majority of the Company’s independent directors who do not have a financial interest in the issuance approve the sale.

In short, we believe BDCs should demonstrate a responsible approach to issuing shares below NAV, by proactively addressing shareholder concerns regarding the potential dilution of the requested share issuance, and explaining if and how the Company’s past below-NAV share issuances have benefitted the Company.

 

38


Table of Contents

VI. COMPENSATION, ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND GOVERNANCE SHAREHOLDER INITIATIVES OVERVIEW

Glass Lewis typically prefers to leave decisions regarding day-to-day management and policy decisions, including those related to social, environmental or political issues, to management and the board, except when there is a clear link between the proposal and value enhancement or risk mitigation. We feel strongly that shareholders should not attempt to micromanage the company, its businesses or its executives through the shareholder initiative process. Rather, we believe shareholders should use their influence to push for governance structures that protect shareholders and promote director accountability. Shareholders should then put in place a board they can trust to make informed decisions that are in the best interests of the business and its owners, and then hold directors accountable for management and policy decisions through board elections. However, we recognize that support of appropriately crafted shareholder initiatives may at times serve to promote or protect shareholder value.

To this end, Glass Lewis evaluates shareholder proposals on a case-by-case basis. We generally recommend supporting shareholder proposals calling for the elimination of, as well as to require shareholder approval of, antitakeover devices such as poison pills and classified boards. We generally recommend supporting proposals likely to increase and/or protect shareholder value and also those that promote the furtherance of shareholder rights. In addition, we also generally recommend supporting proposals that promote director accountability and those that seek to improve compensation practices, especially those promoting a closer link between compensation and performance.

For a detailed review of compensation, environmental, social and governance shareholder initiatives, please refer to our comprehensive Proxy Paper Guidelines on Shareholder Initiatives.

 

39


Table of Contents

DISCLAIMER

This document sets forth the proxy voting policy and guidelines of Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC. The policies included herein have been developed based on Glass Lewis’ experience with proxy voting and corporate governance issues and are not tailored to any specific person. Moreover, these guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive and do not include all potential voting issues. The information included herein is reviewed periodically and updated or revised as necessary. Glass Lewis is not responsible for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of this information. This document may not be reproduced or distributed in any manner without the written permission of Glass Lewis.

Copyright © 2012 Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC. All Rights Reserved.

 

40


Table of Contents

LOGO

SAN FRANCISCO

Headquarters

Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC

One Sansome Street

Suite 3300

San Francisco, CA 94104

Tel: +1 415-678-4110

Tel: +1 888-800-7001

Fax: +1 415-357-0200

NEW YORK

Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC

48 Wall Street

15th Floor

New York, N.Y. 10005

Tel: +1 212-797-3777

Fax: +1 212-980-4716

AUSTRALIA

CGI Glass Lewis Pty Limited

Suite 8.01, Level 8,

261 George St

Sydney NSW 2000

Australia

Tel: +61 2 9299 9266

Fax: +61 2 9299 1866

IRELAND

Glass Lewis Europe, Ltd.

6th Floor, Riverpoint

Bishop’s Quay

Limerick, Ireland

Phone: +353 61 404700

Fax: +353 61 404711


Table of Contents

LOGO

PROXY PAPERTM

GUIDELINES

2013 PROXY SEASOn

AN OVERVIEW OF THE GLASS LEWIS APPROACH TO PROXY ADVICE

INTERNATIONAL

COPYRIGHT 2013 GLASS LEWIS, & CO., LLC GLASS LEWIS & CO. GUIDELINES


Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

I. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

     1   

Board Composition

     1   

Slate Elections

     2   

Board Committee Composition

     2   

Review of Risk Management Controls

     2   

Classified Boards

     2   

II. FINANCIAL REPORTING

     3   

Accounts and Reports

     3   

Income Allocation (Distribution of Dividend)

     3   

Appointment of Auditors and Authority to Set Fees

     3   

III. COMPENSATION

     4   

Compensation Report/Compensation Policy

     4   

Long Term Incentive Plans

     4   

Director Compensation

     5   

Limits on Executive Compensation

     5   

IV. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

     6   

Amendments to the Articles of Association

     6   

Anti-Takeover Measures

     6   

Increase in Authorized Shares

     6   

Issuance of Shares

     7   

Repurchase of Shares

     7   

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISK

     8   

 

I


Table of Contents

I. ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Boards are put in place to represent shareholders and protect their interests. Glass Lewis seeks boards with a proven record of protecting shareholders and delivering value over the medium- and long-term. In our view, boards working to protect and enhance the best interests of shareholders typically include some independent directors (the percentage will vary by local market practice and regulations), boast a record of positive performance, have directors with diverse backgrounds, and appoint directors with a breadth and depth of experience.

BOARD COMPOSITION

When companies disclose sufficient relevant information, we look at each individual on the board and examine his or her relationships with the company, the company’s executives and with other board members. The purpose of this inquiry is to determine whether pre-existing personal, familial or financial relationships are likely to impact the decisions of that board member. Where the company does not disclose the names and backgrounds of director nominees with sufficient time in advance of the shareholder meeting to evaluate their independence and performance, we will consider recommending abstaining on the directors’ election.

We vote in favor of governance structures that will drive positive performance and enhance shareholder value. The most crucial test of a board’s commitment to the company and to its shareholders is the performance of the board and its members. The performance of directors in their capacity as board members and as executives of the company, when applicable, and in their roles at other companies where they serve is critical to this evaluation.

We believe a director is independent if he or she has no material financial, familial or other current relationships with the company, its executives or other board members except for service on the board and standard fees paid for that service. Relationships that have existed within the three-five years prior to the inquiry are usually considered to be “current” for purposes of this test.

In our view, a director is affiliated if he or she has a material financial, familial or other relationship with the company or its executives, but is not an employee of the company. This includes directors whose employers have a material financial relationship with the Company. This also includes a director who owns or controls 10-20% or more of the company’s voting stock.

We define an inside director as one who simultaneously serves as a director and as an employee of the company. This category may include a chairman of the board who acts as an employee of the company or is paid as an employee of the company.

Although we typically vote for the election of directors, we will recommend voting against directors for the following reasons:

 

   

A director who attends less than 75% of the board and applicable committee meetings.

 

   

A director who is also the CEO of a company where a serious restatement has occurred after the CEO certified the pre-restatement financial statements.

We also feel that the following conflicts of interest may hinder a director’s performance and will therefore recommend voting against a:

 

   

CFO who presently sits on the board.

 

1


Table of Contents
   

Director who presently sits on an excessive number of boards.

 

   

Director, or a director whose immediate family member, provides material professional services to the company at any time during the past five years.

 

   

Director, or a director whose immediate family member, engages in airplane, real estate or other similar deals, including perquisite type grants from the company.

 

   

Director with an interlocking directorship.

SLATE ELECTIONS

In some countries, companies elect their board members as a slate, whereby shareholders are unable to vote on the election of each individual director, but rather are limited to voting for or against the board as a whole. If significant issues exist concerning one or more of the nominees or in markets where directors are generally elected individually, we will recommend voting against the entire slate of directors.

BOARD COMMITTEE COMPOSITION

We believe that independent directors should serve on a company’s audit, compensation, nominating and governance committees. We will support boards with such a structure and encourage change where this is not the case.

REVIEW OF RISK MANAGEMENT CONTROLS

We believe companies, particularly financial firms, should have a dedicated risk committee, or a committee of the board charged with risk oversight, as well as a chief risk officer who reports directly to that committee, not to the CEO or another executive. In cases where a company has disclosed a sizable loss or writedown, and where a reasonable analysis indicates that the company’s board-level risk committee should be held accountable for poor oversight, we would recommend that shareholders vote against such committee members on that basis. In addition, in cases where a company maintains a significant level of financial risk exposure but fails to disclose any explicit form of board-level risk oversight (committee or otherwise), we will consider recommending to vote against the chairman of the board on that basis.

CLASSIFIED BOARDS

Glass Lewis favors the repeal of staggered boards in favor of the annual election of directors. We believe that staggered boards are less accountable to shareholders than annually elected boards. Furthermore, we feel that the annual election of directors encourages board members to focus on protecting the interests of shareholders.

 

2


Table of Contents

II. FINANCIAL REPORTING

ACCOUNTS AND REPORTS

Many countries require companies to submit the annual financial statements, director reports and independent auditors’ reports to shareholders at a general meeting. Shareholder approval of such a proposal does not discharge the board or management. We will usually recommend voting in favor of these proposals except when there are concerns about the integrity of the statements/reports. However, should the audited financial statements, auditor’s report and/or annual report not be published at the writing of our report, we will recommend that shareholders abstain from voting on this proposal.

INCOME ALLOCATION (DISTRIBUTION OF DIVIDEND)

In many countries, companies must submit the allocation of income for shareholder approval. We will generally recommend voting for such a proposal. However, we will give particular scrutiny to cases where the company’s dividend payout ratio is exceptionally low or excessively high relative to its peers and the company has not provided a satisfactory explanation.

APPOINTMENT OF AUDITORS AND AUTHORITY TO SET FEES

We believe that role of the auditor is crucial in protecting shareholder value. Like directors, auditors should be free from conflicts of interest and should assiduously avoid situations that require them to make choices between their own interests and the interests of the shareholders.

We generally support management’s recommendation regarding the selection of an auditor and support granting the board the authority to fix auditor fees except in cases where we believe the independence of an incumbent auditor or the integrity of the audit has been compromised. However, we recommend voting against ratification of the auditor and/or authorizing the board to set auditor fees for the following reasons:

 

   

When audit fees added to audit-related fees total less than one-half of total fees.

 

   

When there have been any recent restatements or late filings by the company where the auditor bears some responsibility for the restatement or late filing (e.g., a restatement due to a reporting error).

 

   

When the company has aggressive accounting policies.

 

   

When the company has poor disclosure or lack of transparency in financial statements.

 

   

When there are other relationships or issues of concern with the auditor that might suggest a conflict between the interest of the auditor and the interests of shareholders.

 

   

When the company is changing auditors as a result of a disagreement between the company and the auditor on a matter of accounting principles or practices, financial statement disclosure or auditing scope or procedures.

 

3


Table of Contents

III. COMPENSATION

COMPENSATION REPORT/COMPENSATION POLICY

We closely review companies’ remuneration practices and disclosure as outlined in company filings to evaluate management-submitted advisory compensation report and policy vote proposals. In evaluating these proposals, which can be binding or non-binding depending on the country, we examine how well the company has disclosed information pertinent to its compensation programs, the extent to which overall compensation is tied to performance, the performance metrics selected by the company and the levels of remuneration in comparison to company performance and that of its peers.

We will usually recommend voting against approval of the compensation report or policy when the following occur:

 

   

Gross disconnect between pay and performance;

 

   

Performance goals and metrics are inappropriate or insufficiently challenging;

 

   

Lack of disclosure regarding performance metrics and goals as well as the extent to which the performance metrics, targets and goals are implemented to enhance company performance and encourage prudent risk-taking;

 

   

Excessive discretion afforded to or exercised by management or the compensation committee to deviate from defined performance metrics and goals in making awards;

 

   

Ex gratia or other non-contractual payments have been made and the reasons for making the payments have not been fully explained or the explanation is unconvincing;

 

   

Guaranteed bonuses are established;

 

   

There is no clawback policy; or

 

   

Egregious or excessive bonuses, equity awards or severance payments.

LONG TERM INCENTIVE PLANS

Glass Lewis recognizes the value of equity-based incentive programs. When used appropriately, they can provide a vehicle for linking an employee’s pay to a company’s performance, thereby aligning their interests with those of shareholders. Tying a portion of an employee’s compensation to the performance of the Company provides an incentive to maximize share value. In addition, equity-based compensation is an effective way to attract, retain and motivate key employees.

In order to allow for meaningful shareholder review, we believe that incentive programs should generally include: (i) specific and appropriate performance goals; (ii) a maximum award pool; and (iii) a maximum award amount per employee. In addition, the payments made should be reasonable relative to the performance of the business and total compensation to those covered by the plan should be in line with compensation paid by the Company’s peers.

PERFORMANCE-BASED EQUITY COMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes in performance-based equity compensation plans for senior executives. We feel that executives should be compensated with equity when their performance and that of the company warrants such rewards. While we do not believe that equity-based compensation plans for

 

4


Table of Contents

all employees need to be based on overall company performance, we do support such limitations for grants to senior executives (although even some equity-based compensation of senior executives without performance criteria is acceptable, such as in the case of moderate incentive grants made in an initial offer of employment).

Boards often argue that such a proposal would hinder them in attracting talent. We believe that boards can develop a consistent, reliable approach, as boards of many companies have, that would still attract executives who believe in their ability to guide the company to achieve its targets. We generally recommend that shareholders vote in favor of performance-based option requirements. There should be no retesting of performance conditions for all share- and option- based incentive schemes. We will generally recommend that shareholders vote against performance-based equity compensation plans that allow for re-testing.

DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

Glass Lewis believes that non-employee directors should receive appropriate types and levels of compensation for the time and effort they spend serving on the board and its committees. Director fees should be reasonable in order to retain and attract qualified individuals. In particular, we support compensation plans that include non performance-based equity awards, which help to align the interests of outside directors with those of shareholders.

Glass Lewis compares the costs of these plans to the plans of peer companies with similar market capitalizations in the same country to help inform its judgment on this issue.

RETIREMENT BENEFITS FOR DIRECTORS

We will typically recommend voting against proposals to grant retirement benefits to non-executive directors. Such extended payments can impair the objectivity and independence of these board members. Directors should receive adequate compensation for their board service through initial and annual fees.

LIMITS ON EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

As a general rule, Glass Lewis believes that shareholders should not be involved in setting executive compensation. Such matters should be left to the board’s compensation committee. We view the election of directors, and specifically those who sit on the compensation committee, as the appropriate mechanism for shareholders to express their disapproval or support of board policy on this issue. Further, we believe that companies whose pay-for-performance is in line with their peers should be granted the flexibility to compensate their executives in a manner that drives growth and profit.

However, Glass Lewis favors performance-based compensation as an effective means of motivating executives to act in the best interests of shareholders. Performance-based compensation may be limited if a chief executive’s pay is capped at a low level rather than flexibly tied to the performance of the company.

 

5


Table of Contents

IV. GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE

AMENDMENTS TO THE ARTICLES OF ASSOCIATION

We will evaluate proposed amendments to a company’s articles of association on a case-by-case basis. We are opposed to the practice of bundling several amendments under a single proposal because it prevents shareholders from evaluating each amendment on its own merits. In such cases, we will analyze each change individually and will recommend voting for the proposal only when we believe that the amendments on balance are in the best interests of shareholders.

ANTI-TAKEOVER MEASURES

POISON PILLS (SHAREHOLDER RIGHTS PLANS)

Glass Lewis believes that poison pill plans generally are not in the best interests of shareholders. Specifically, they can reduce management accountability by substantially limiting opportunities for corporate takeovers. Rights plans can thus prevent shareholders from receiving a buy-out premium for their stock.

We believe that boards should be given wide latitude in directing the activities of the company and charting the company’s course. However, on an issue such as this where the link between the financial interests of shareholders and their right to consider and accept buyout offers is so substantial, we believe that shareholders should be allowed to vote on whether or not they support such a plan’s implementation.

In certain limited circumstances, we will support a limited poison pill to accomplish a particular objective, such as the closing of an important merger, or a pill that contains what we believe to be a reasonable ‘qualifying offer’ clause.

SUPERMAJORITY VOTE REQUIREMENTS

Glass Lewis favors a simple majority voting structure. Supermajority vote requirements act as impediments to shareholder action on ballot items that are critical to our interests. One key example is in the takeover context where supermajority vote requirements can strongly limit shareholders’ input in making decisions on such crucial matters as selling the business.

INCREASE IN AUTHORIZED SHARES

Glass Lewis believes that having adequate capital stock available for issuance is important to the operation of a company. We will generally support proposals when a company could reasonably use the requested shares for financing, stock splits and stock dividends. While we think that having adequate shares to allow management to make quick decisions and effectively operate the business is critical, we prefer that, for significant transactions, management come to shareholders to justify their use of additional shares rather than providing a blank check in the form of large pools of unallocated shares available for any purpose.

In general, we will support proposals to increase authorized shares up to 100% of the number of shares currently authorized unless, after the increase the company would be left with less than 30% of its authorized shares outstanding.

 

6


Table of Contents

ISSUANCE OF SHARES

Issuing additional shares can dilute existing holders in some circumstances. Further, the availability of additional shares, where the board has discretion to implement a poison pill, can often serve as a deterrent to interested suitors. Accordingly, where we find that the company has not disclosed a detailed plan for use of the proposed shares, or where the number of shares requested are excessive, we typically recommend against the issuance. In the case of a private placement, we will also consider whether the company is offering a discount to its share price.

In general, we will support proposals to issue shares (with pre-emption rights) when the requested increase is the lesser of (i) the unissued ordinary share capital; or (ii) a sum equal to one-third of the issued ordinary share capital. This authority should not exceed five years. In some countries, if the proposal contains a figure greater than one-third, the company should explain the nature of the additional amounts.

We will also generally support proposals to suspend pre-emption rights for a maximum of 5-20% of the issued ordinary share capital of the company, depending on the country in which the company is located. This authority should not exceed five years, or less for some countries.

REPURCHASE OF SHARES

We will recommend voting in favor of a proposal to repurchase shares when the plan includes the following provisions: (i) a maximum number of shares which may be purchased (typically not more than 15% of the issued share capital); and (ii) a maximum price which may be paid for each share (as a percentage of the market price).

 

7


Table of Contents

V. ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL RISK

We believe companies should actively evaluate risks to long-term shareholder value stemming from exposure to environmental and social risks and should incorporate this information into their overall business risk profile. In addition, we believe companies should consider their exposure to changes in environmental or social regulation with respect to their operations as well as related legal and reputational risks. Companies should disclose to shareholders both the nature and magnitude of such risks as well as steps they have taken or will take to mitigate those risks.

When we identify situations where shareholder value is at risk, we may recommend voting in favor of a reasonable and well-targeted shareholder proposal if we believe supporting the proposal will promote disclosure of and/or mitigate significant risk exposure. In limited cases where a company has failed to adequately mitigate risks stemming from environmental or social practices, we will recommend shareholders vote against: (i) ratification of board and/or management acts; (ii) approving a company’s accounts and reports and/or; (iii) directors (in egregious cases).

 

8


Table of Contents

DISCLAIMER

This document sets forth the proxy voting policy and guidelines of Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC. The policies included herein have been developed based on Glass Lewis’ experience with proxy voting and corporate governance issues and are not tailored to any specific person. Moreover, these guidelines are not intended to be exhaustive and do not include all potential voting issues. The information included herein is reviewed periodically and updated or revised as necessary. Glass Lewis is not responsible for any actions taken or not taken on the basis of this information. This document may not be reproduced or distributed in any manner without the written permission of Glass Lewis.

Copyright © 2013 Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC. All Rights Reserved.

 

9


Table of Contents

LOGO

SAN FRANCISCO

Headquarters

Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC

One Sansome Street

Suite 3300

San Francisco, CA 94104

Tel: +1 415-678-4110

Tel: +1 888-800-7001

Fax: +1 415-357-0200

NEW YORK

Glass, Lewis & Co., LLC

48 Wall Street

15th Floor

New York, N.Y. 10005

Tel: +1 212-797-3777

Fax: +1 212-980-4716

AUSTRALIA

CGI Glass Lewis Pty Limited

Suite 8.01, Level 8,

261 George St

Sydney NSW 2000

Australia

Tel: +61 2 9299 9266

Fax: +61 2 9299 1866

IRELAND

Glass Lewis Europe, Ltd.

6th Floor, Riverpoint

Bishop’s Quay

Limerick, Ireland

Phone: +353 61 404700

Fax: +353 61 404711

[Graphic Appears Here]


Table of Contents

Schwab Investments

File Nos. 33-37459 and 811-6200

PEA No. 110

Part C: Other Information

Item 28. Exhibits .

 

(a)    Articles of Incorporation

  

(i)      Agreement and Declaration of Trust, dated October 25, 1990, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 1 of Post-Effective Amendment No. 22, filed December 31, 1997 (“PEA No. 22”).

  

(ii)     Amendment to the Agreement and Declaration of Trust, dated August 29, 2006, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (a)(ii) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 65, filed September 14, 2006 (“PEA No. 65”).

(b)    By-Laws

  

Amended and Restated Bylaws, dated November 16, 2004, are incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (b) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 56, filed February 25, 2005 (“PEA No. 56”).

(c)    Instruments Defining Rights of Security Holders

  

(i)      Article III, Section 5, Article V, Article VI, Article VIII, Section 4 and Article IX, Sections 1, 5 and 7 of (a) the Agreement and Declaration of Trust, which is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 1 of PEA No. 22, and (b) the Amendment to the Agreement and Declaration of Trust, dated August 29, 2006, which is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (a)(ii) of PEA No. 65.

  

(ii)     Article 9 and Article 11 of the Amended and Restated By-Laws, which are incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (b) of PEA No. 56.

(d)    Investment Advisory Contracts

  

(i)      Investment Advisory and Administration Agreement between Registrant and Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. (the “Investment Adviser”), dated June 15, 1994, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 5(a) of PEA No. 22.

  

(ii)     Amendment, dated June 5, 2007, to the Investment Advisory and Administration Agreement between Registrant and Investment Adviser, dated June 15, 1994, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(ii) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 75, filed November 14, 2007.

  

(iii)   Amended Schedules A and D, dated July 1, 2009, to the Investment Advisory and Administration Agreement between Registrant and the Investment Adviser, dated June 15, 1994, are incorporated by reference to Exhibit (d)(iii) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 81, filed on November 13, 2009 (“PEA No. 81”).

  

(iv)    Expense Limitation Agreement, dated May 2, 2007, as amended July 1, 2009, among the Investment Adviser, Charles Schwab & Co. Inc. (“Schwab”), and the Registrant, on behalf of the Schwab Tax-Free Bond Fund, Schwab California Tax-Free Bond Fund, Schwab Short-Term Bond Market Fund, Schwab Total Bond Market Fund, Schwab GNMA Fund, Schwab Inflation Treasury Protected Securities Fund, Schwab Premier Income Fund, Schwab Global Real Estate Fund and Schwab 1000 Index Fund, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(iv) of PEA No. 81.

 

1


Table of Contents
  

(v)     Amended Schedule A, dated December 4, 2012, to the Expense Limitation Agreement dated May 2, 2007, as amended July 1, 2009, June 15, 2011 and September 25, 2012, among Investment Adviser, Schwab and the Registrant is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (d)(v) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 103, filed with the SEC on December 14, 2012.

(e)    Underwriting Contracts

  

Amended and Restated Distribution Agreement between Registrant and Schwab, dated July 1, 2009, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (e) of PEA No. 81.

(f)     Bonus or Profit Sharing Contracts

  

Inapplicable.

(g)    Custodian Agreement

  

(i)      Amended and Restated Master Custodian Agreement between Registrant and State Street Bank and Trust Company (“State Street”), dated October 17, 2005, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (g)(xv) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 60, filed November 14, 2005 (“PEA No. 60”).

  

(ii)     Custodian Agreement between Registrant and Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., dated April 1, 2007, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (g)(ii) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 87, filed June 23, 2010.

(h)    Other Material Contracts

  

(i)      Transfer Agency and Service Agreement between Registrant and Boston Financial Data Services, Inc., dated July 1, 2009, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(i) of PEA No. 81.

  

(ii)     Shareholder Servicing Plan, dated July 1, 2009, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (h)(ii) of PEA No. 81.

  

(iii)   Master Fund Accounting and Services Agreement between Registrant and State Street, dated October 1, 2005, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (g)(xvi) of PEA No. 60.

(i)     Legal Opinion

   Opinion and Consent of Counsel is filed herewith as Exhibit (i).

(j)     Other Opinions

  

(i)      Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP is filed herewith as Exhibit (j)(i).

 

(ii)     Powers of Attorney for each of Mariann Byerwalter, William A. Hasler, Gerald B. Smith, Charles R. Schwab, George Pereira, Walter W. Bettinger, II, Joseph Wender and John F. Cogan are incorporated herein by reference to Post-Effective Amendment No. 88, filed September 24, 2010.

 

(iii)   Powers of Attorney for each of David L. Mahoney and Kiran M. Patel are incorporated herein by reference to Post-Effective Amendment No. 92, filed February 25, 2011.

 

(iv)    Power of Attorney for Marie Chandoha is incorporated herein by reference to Post-Effective Amendment No. 90, filed December 9, 2010.

 

2


Table of Contents

(k)    Omitted Financial Statements

  

Inapplicable.

(l)     Initial Capital Agreement

  

(i)      Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to shares of the Schwab 1000 Index Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(i) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 29, filed July 21, 1999 (“PEA No. 29”).

  

(ii)     Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to shares of the Schwab Short-Term Bond Market Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(ii) of PEA No. 29.

  

(iii)   Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to shares of the Schwab California Tax-Free Bond Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(iii) of PEA No. 29.

  

(iv)    Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to shares of the Schwab Tax-Free Bond Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(iv) of PEA No 29.

 

(v)     Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to shares of the Schwab Total Bond Market Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 13 of PEA No. 22.

 

(vi)    Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to the purchase of one share of each class of the Schwab GNMA Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(vii) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 46, filed January 24, 2003.

 

(vii)  Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to the purchase of one share of each class of the Schwab Treasury Inflation Protected Securities Fund is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(ix) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 61, filed January 23, 2006.

 

(viii) Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to the purchase of one share of the Schwab Premier Income Fund Investor Shares, two shares of the Schwab Premier Income Fund Select Shares and three shares of Schwab Premier Income Fund Institutional Shares is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(x) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 73, filed September 19, 2007.

  

(ix)    Purchase Agreement between Registrant and Schwab relating to the purchase of two shares of the Schwab Global Real Estate Fund Investor Shares and one share of the Schwab Global Real Estate Fund Select Shares is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (l)(xi) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 77, filed June 27, 2008.

 

3


Table of Contents

(m)   Rule 12b-1 Plan

   Inapplicable.

(n)    Rule 18f-3 Plan

   Inapplicable.

(o)    (Reserved)

  

(p)    Code of Ethics

   Registrant, Investment Adviser, and Schwab Code of Ethics, dated October 1, 2011, is incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit (p) of Post-Effective Amendment No. 96, filed December 14, 2011.

Item 29. Persons Controlled by or under Common Control with the Registrant .

The Board of Trustees of the Registrant is identical to the boards of trustees of The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust. Each such trust has Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc. as its investment adviser. In addition, the officers of the Registrant are also identical to those of each such other trust, with the exception of the Chief Legal Officer. As a result, the above-named trusts may be deemed to be under common control with the Registrant. Nonetheless, the Registrant takes the position that it is not under common control with such other trusts because the power residing in the respective trusts’ boards and officers arises as a result of an official position with each such trust.

Item 30. Indemnification .

Article VIII of Registrant’s Agreement and Declaration of Trust (Exhibit (1) hereto, which is incorporated herein by reference) provides in effect that Registrant will indemnify its officers and trustees against all liabilities and expenses, including but not limited to amounts paid in satisfaction of judgments, in compromise, or as fines and penalties, and counsel fees reasonably incurred by any such officer or trustee in connection with the defense or disposition of any action, suit, or other proceeding. However, in accordance with Section 17(h) and 17(i) of the 1940 Act and its own terms, said Agreement and Declaration of Trust does not protect any person against any liability to Registrant or its shareholders to which he or she would otherwise be subject by reason of willful misfeasance, bad faith, gross negligence or reckless disregard of the duties involved in the conduct of his or her office. In any event, Registrant will comply with 1940 Act Releases No. 7221 and 11330 respecting the permissible boundaries of indemnification by an investment company of its officers and trustees.

Insofar as indemnification for liability arising under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), may be permitted to trustees, officers and controlling persons of the Registrant pursuant to the foregoing provisions, or otherwise, Registrant has been advised that, in the opinion of the Securities and Exchange Commission, such indemnification is against public policy as expressed in the 1933 Act and is, therefore, unenforceable. In the event that a claim for indemnification against such liabilities (other than the payment by Registrant of expenses incurred or paid by a trustee, officer or controlling person of Registrant in the successful defense of any action, suit or proceeding) is asserted by such trustee, officer or controlling person in connection with the securities being registered, Registrant will, unless in the opinion of its counsel the matter has been settled by controlling precedent, submit to a court of appropriate jurisdiction the question whether such indemnification by it is against public policy as expressed in the 1933 Act and will be governed by the final adjudication of such issue.

Item 31. Business and Other Connections of Investment Manager

Registrant’s investment adviser, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., a Delaware corporation, organized in October 1989 to serve as investment manager to Registrant, also serves as the investment manager to The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios, Schwab Strategic Trust, Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust, each an open-end management

 

4


Table of Contents

investment company. The principal place of business of the investment adviser is 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105. The only business in which the investment adviser engages is that of investment adviser and administrator to Registrant, The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Capital Trust, Schwab Annuity Portfolios and Schwab Strategic Trust, investment adviser of Laudus Trust and Laudus Institutional Trust and any other investment companies that Schwab may sponsor in the future, and an investment adviser to certain non-investment company clients.

The business, profession, vocation or employment of a substantial nature in which each director and/or senior or executive officer of the Investment Adviser is or has been engaged during the past two fiscal years is listed below. The name of any company for which any director and/or senior or executive officer of the investment adviser serves as director, officer, employee, partner or trustee is also listed below.

 

Name and Position with Adviser

 

Name of Other Company

 

Capacity

Charles R. Schwab, Chairman and Director   The Charles Schwab Corporation   Chairman and Director
  Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.   Chairman and Director
  The Charles Schwab Bank, N.A.   Chairman, Director
  Schwab Holdings, Inc.   Director, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
  Schwab International Holdings, Inc.   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
  Schwab (SIS) Holdings, Inc. I   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
  Schwab Charitable Fund   Director
  Charles Schwab Foundation   Director and Chairman
  JustAnswer Corp.   Director
  Museum of American Finance   Advisory Board
  San Francisco Museum of Modern Art   Board of Trustees
  Charles and Helen Schwab Foundation   Director
  University of Californa San Francisco   Chancellor’s Executive Board
  Laudus Funds   Trustee
  Schwab Funds   Trustee
Marie Chandoha, Director, President and Chief Executive Officer   Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.   Executive Vice President
  Schwab Funds   President and Chief Executive Officer
  Schwab ETFs   President and Chief Executive Officer
  Laudus Funds   President and Chief Executive Officer
  Charles Schwab Worldwide Funds, PLC   Director
  Charles Schwab Asset Management (Ireland) Limited   Director

 

5


Table of Contents
David Lekich, Senior Vice President, Chief Counsel and Corporate Secretary   Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.   Senior Vice President, Associate General Counsel
  Schwab Funds   Secretary and Chief Legal Officer
  Schwab ETFs   Secretary and Chief Legal Officer
  Laudus Funds   Vice President and Assistant Clerk
Michael Hogan, Chief Compliance Officer   Schwab Funds   Chief Compliance Officer
  Schwab ETFs   Chief Compliance Officer
  Laudus Funds   Chief Compliance Officer
  Charles Schwab & Co., Inc.   Vice President and Chief Compliance Officer
George Pereira, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer   Schwab Funds   Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
  Schwab ETFs   Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
  Laudus Funds   Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
  Charles Schwab Worldwide Funds, PLC   Director
  Charles Schwab Asset Management (Ireland) Limited   Director

Item 32. Principal Underwriters.

(a) Schwab acts as principal underwriter and distributor of Registrant’s shares. Schwab also acts as principal underwriter for The Charles Schwab Family of Funds, Schwab Capital Trust, and Schwab Annuity Portfolios and may act as such for any other investment company which Schwab may sponsor in the future.

(b) Information with respect to Schwab’s directors and officers is as follows:

 

Name

  

Position and Offices with the Underwriter

   Position and Offices with the Registrant
Charles R. Schwab    Chairman    Chairman and Trustee
Walter Bettinger II    President and Chief Executive Officer    Trustee
Jay Allen    Executive Vice President, Human Resources    None
Ron Carter    Executive Vice President and Head, Operational Services    None
Marie Chandoha    Executive Vice President, Investment Management Services    President and Chief Executive Officer
Bernie Clark    Executive Vice President, Advisor Services    None
John Clendening    Executive Vice President, Shared Strategic Services    None

 

6


Table of Contents
Carrie Dwyer   Executive Vice President, Corporate Oversight   None
Jonathan M. Craig   Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer   None
G. Andrew Gill   Executive Vice President, Schwab Investor Services   None
Lisa Kidd Hunt   Executive Vice President, International Services and Special Business Development   None
Joseph Martinetto   Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer   None
James McCool   Executive Vice President, Institutional Services   None
Nigel J. Murtagh   Executive Vice President, Corporate Risk   None
Brad Peterson   Executive Vice President and Chief Information Officer   None
Leona Tang   Executive Vice President, Internal Audit   None
Paul V. Woolway   Executive Vice President and President, Charles Schwab Bank   None

The principal business address of all directors and officers of Schwab is 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105.

(c) None.

Item 33. Location of Accounts and Records .

All accounts, books and other documents required to be maintained pursuant to Section 31(a) of the 1940 Act and the Rules thereunder are maintained at the offices of: Registrant and Registrant’s investment adviser and administrator, Charles Schwab Investment Management, Inc., 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105; Registrant’s principal underwriter, Charles Schwab & Co., Inc., 211 Main Street, San Francisco, California 94105; Registrant’s custodian for the Schwab Global Real Estate Fund, Brown Brothers Harriman & Co., 40 Water Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02109, Registrant’s custodian for the balance of the Registrant’s funds, State Street Bank and Trust Company, One Lincoln Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02111; and Registrant’s transfer agent, Boston Financial Data Services, Inc., 2000 Crown Colony Drive Quincy Massachusetts, 02169.

Item 34. Management Services .

Not applicable.

Item 35. Undertakings.

Not applicable.

 

7


Table of Contents

SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “1933 Act”), and the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, Registrant certifies that it meets all of the requirements for the effectiveness of this Post Effective Amendment No. 110 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A pursuant to Rule 485(b) under the 1933 Act and has duly caused this Post Effective Amendment No. 110 to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereto duly authorized, in the City of Washington in the District of Columbia, on this 28th day of June, 2013.

 

SCHWAB INVESTMENTS
Registrant

Charles R. Schwab*

Charles R. Schwab, Chairman and Trustee

Pursuant to the requirements of the 1933 Act, this Post-Effective Amendment No. 110 to Registrant’s Registration Statement on Form N-1A has been signed below by the following persons in the capacities indicated this 28th day of June, 2013.

 

Signature

         

Title

Charles R. Schwab*

      Chairman and Trustee
Charles R. Schwab      

Walter W. Bettinger, II*

      Trustee
Walter W. Bettinger, II      

Mariann Byerwalter*

      Trustee
Mariann Byerwalter      

John F. Cogan*

      Trustee
John F. Cogan      

William A. Hasler*

      Trustee
William A. Hasler      

David L. Mahoney*

      Trustee
David L. Mahoney      

Kiran M. Patel*

      Trustee
Kiran M. Patel      

Gerald B. Smith*

      Trustee
Gerald B. Smith      

Joseph H. Wender*

      Trustee
Joseph H. Wender      

Marie Chandoha*

      President and Chief Executive Officer
Marie Chandoha      

George Pereira*

      Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer
George Pereira      

 

*By:  

/s/ Douglas P. Dick

  Douglas P. Dick, Attorney-in-Fact
  Pursuant to Power of Attorney


Table of Contents

Exhibit Index

 

Ex.
No.

 

Document

(i)   Opinion of Counsel
(j)(i)   Consent of PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Grafico Azioni Prolor Biotech, Inc. (AMEX:PBTH)
Storico
Da Giu 2024 a Lug 2024 Clicca qui per i Grafici di Prolor Biotech, Inc.
Grafico Azioni Prolor Biotech, Inc. (AMEX:PBTH)
Storico
Da Lug 2023 a Lug 2024 Clicca qui per i Grafici di Prolor Biotech, Inc.