Tthe complaint hinged partly on CapOne advertising the old account as having one of the highest interest rates. Otherwise, it might have no more obligation to its customers to notify them of a better in-house account than it would have to notify them of a superior account at a competitor.

The type of savings account at the center of the Capital One lawsuit was advertised to customers as having one of the “highest” interest rates in the nation, according to the CFPB.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2025/02/27/cfpb-drops-capital-one-lawsuit-other-cases-launched-under-biden/
Banks know that checking/savings account money is sticky.

Makes me wonder how much of Capital Ones $2 billion in savings will be deposited ti trumps pocket.

That will make it easier for the Fed and the OCC to approve Capital One/COF and Discover/DFS acquisition/merger if the DOJ doesn't object.
I have COF accounts and I wasn't happy with the practices of COF. It introduced new types of a/c with higher interest rates without ever alerting or informing existing customers whose money could remain in older lower-paying a/c. I called to complain and was told to just open new a/c that was easy to do online - I did that. I don't know if this is cheating, but it's certainly bad business practice. If my COF a/c wasn't already linked to my several of my other a/c, I would have ditched it long time ago. I did however move much of the money out.

Following are excerpts from a current report in The Guardian:
Agency had accused bank of cheating consumers out of more than $2bn in interest payments on savings accounts

The US Consumer Financial Protection Bureau on Thursday dropped a legal action against Capital One, which the agency had accused last month of cheating consumers out of more than $2bn in interest payments on savings accounts.
The dismissal continues Donald Trump’s rapid moves to dismantle the agency, which he has said should be eliminated, but comes the same day as his nominee to head the CFPB, Jonathan McKernan, testified before the Senate in a confirmation hearing. The action pointed to a broader retrenchment of CFPB enforcement actions under the Trump administration.
The agency earlier on Thursday had already dismissed a lawsuit brought last year against the student loan servicer Pennsylvania Higher Education Assistance Agency (PHEAA) accused of illegally collecting on student loans discharged in bankruptcy, and last week dropped a case against the online lender Solo Funds, which the agency had said deceived borrowers about loan costs.
Since taking office, Trump and his associate Elon Musk have vowed to destroy the CFPB, firing scores of staff, shutting its Washington offices and moving to cancel its lease, while placing virtually all agency workers on temporary leave, actions which employee unions and consumer advocates have challenged in court.
The administration has said in court filings, however, that it intends to operate a more streamlined and efficient CFPB, which Democrats say will be one wholly inadequate to meet the agency’s legal mandates.
In his confirmation testimony on Thursday, McKernan criticized the agency’s past enforcement actions as excessive but said if confirmed he would work to uphold the agency’s legal mandates.
“I’m fully committed to following the law fully and faithfully,” he said.

Were you investing in 1986, 2000, 2008, 2020 and 2022? Market drops happen much faster than rises. And sometimes they take many years to recover. The S&P actually lost money from 2000-2010.

Those inflows were in 2020 & 2022 (just citing recent history), and stocks went down. So, yes, stocks can go down. It isn't different this time.

Some random thoughts on bond funds which in many cases are beating stocks YTD. The big winner so far has been emerging market debt. Some funds there are already coming off two consecutive years of double digit gains. Yet we seldom read much on that category. That is a good thing. Many of the better bond traders are heavy there. The greatest bond bull run I ever witnessed was the emerging market bull run from late 98 through the early 2000s.
While everyone is enamored with the CrossingBridge bond funds - RSIVX, CBLDX, and NRCDX - and rightfully so, how about some love for CBRDX. Its November performance caught my eye and it has continued to outperform. My fear is they fold this small and concentrated fund into one of their larger ones.
As much as I abhor junk bonds they have been more than resilient. Like MNHYX there and learned long ago not to let my opinions impact my positioning.
The MBS funds continue to sparkle especially my favorite SEMMX/PX as well as BDKNX/AX. Interesting though that some of the bond funds tied to the lowest of low in MBS, the legacy non agencies from yesteryear such as EIXIX, IOFIX and a few others aren’t shining at all.
The CLO funds are hanging in there but underperforming. Would not expect a repeat of the past two years performance in funds such as HOSIX or SCFZX nor the CLO ETFs. It was a good run for the bank loan funds but they too are underperforming. The cat bonds while also hanging in there, at least for CBYYX and EMPIX, doubtful they will see anything close to their double digit returns of 2023 and 2024,
The Treasury secretary has on numerous occasions mentioned his desire to focus on the 10 year Treasury bond. Almost so much you would think he would welcome a brief recession to get it even lower. But you would think junk bonds would have to break before that. The administration also seems intent on lowering oil. So a lot going well for bonds YTD. The action in treasuries and emerging markets explains much of the renaissance in PIMIX YTD, Will the recent run in bonds continue or will inflation be the big bugadoo. Your guess is as good as mine. Just go with the flow.

Following are excerpts from a current report in The Wall Street Journal:
The highest-earning 10% of Americans have increased their spending far beyond inflation. Everyone else hasn’t.

Many Americans are pinching pennies, exhausted by high prices and stubborn inflation. The well-off are spending with abandon. The top 10% of earners—households making about $250,000 a year or more—are splurging on everything from vacations to designer handbags, buoyed by big gains in stocks, real estate and other assets.
Those consumers now account for 49.7% of all spending, a record in data going back to 1989, according to an analysis by Moody’s Analytics. Three decades ago, they accounted for about 36%. All this means that economic growth is unusually reliant on rich Americans continuing to shell out. Moody’s Analytics has estimated that spending by the top 10% alone accounted for almost one-third of gross domestic product.
Between September 2023 and September 2024, the high earners increased their spending by 12%. Spending by working-class and middle-class households, meanwhile, dropped over the same period.
Taken together, well-off people have increased their spending far beyond inflation, while everyone else hasn’t. The bottom 80% of earners spent 25% more than they did four years earlier, barely outpacing price increases of 21% over that period. The top 10% spent 58% more.
The buying power of the richest Americans, who tend to be older and more educated, stems in part from the swelling values of homes and the stock market over the past several years. Rising asset prices are widening the gap between those who own property and stocks, and those who don’t.
During the pandemic, Americans across the spectrum saved at record levels. Then inflation struck, and prices rose sharply. Most Americans turned to their extra savings to keep up with their rising bills. But the top 10% of earners kept most of what they had saved up.

And with respect to that 90% who most likely are not MFO readers-
Following are excerpts, severely edited for brevity, from a current report in The Wall Street Journal:

President Trump cautioned lawmakers earlier this month about making cuts to Medicaid. But just after Trump left the room, one budget hawk remarked: “We could get $2.5 trillion if we cut Medicaid.”
House Republicans are deeply divided on Medicaid, split between spending hard-liners who want big savings and pragmatists who warn against angering voters. Steve Bannon recently warned about the dangers of cutting Medicaid. “A lot of MAGAs on Medicaid,” he said. “Just can’t take a meat ax to it, although I would love to.”
House Freedom Caucus members and other budget hawks successfully pressed for an amendment that directly ties $2 trillion in spending reductions over 10 years to the party’s tax-cut effort. Under that provision, the more the GOP pulls from Medicaid and other programs, the more financial room Republicans have.
States help fund and manage the program, which provides health insurance for roughly 72 million people, or about one in five Americans, including children and people with low incomes or disabilities. The federal government spends about $600 billion annually on Medicaid.
Republicans aren’t allowed to touch Social Security in the fast-track legislative process they are using, and Trump has said he opposes reducing Medicare benefits, leaving Medicaid as one of the remaining ways to significantly shrink spending. Within a 24-hour period, Trump stated that Medicaid shouldn’t be touched but also posted on X that he backs the House-led package that is likely to rely on cuts to Medicaid to meet its targets.
White House spokesman Kush Desai said that the Trump administration is “committed to protecting Medicaid while slashing the waste, fraud, and abuse within the program—reforms that will increase efficiency and improve care for beneficiaries.”
Some House Republicans say keeping Medicaid intact is essential if they want to hold the House majority in 2026. Some are privately warning party leadership that there are scores of members—including some in safe GOP districts—who oppose deep cuts. Rep. David Valadao (R., Calif.) argues that the Trump coalition now includes many Medicaid recipients.
The program is popular. A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation found nearly 80% of respondents—and 65% of Republicans—think the federal government spends about the right amount or not enough on Medicaid. But budget hawks believe now is their best chance to address deepening federal deficits, which have ballooned the U.S. debt to $34 trillion.

Comment: So here we have yet another disconnect: the majority of voters are not in that lucky top 10%, and many within the Trump party that they voted for would cut their Medicaid so as to transfer even more wealth from the 90% to that top 10%.
Note: Text emphasis was added to the above WSJ reports.

Just curious if anyone knows why JPMorgan Hedged Equity 2 (JHDAX) had a big cap gains distribution in 2022. Looks like it was about 3.7% LTCG and 1.6% STCG. Just that one year. Otherwise none of the JPMorgan hedged equity funds seem to distribute any cap gains at all.

"...in a country where people are facing systematically higher financial and job insecurity, the people are, on average, less likely to save...."
This is a rather odd conclusion involving multiple uses of the word "saving". It does not come from the study cited in the linked webpage. That study shows, as one would expect, that if one has a fixed amount of money to save and/or invest, the higher the sense of risk the less one is inclined to take on more additional risk by investing.
The linked article's author notes that this higher savings rate (and lower investing rate) results in lower total assets over time. This combination of savings, investing, and growth they then rename "savings". Thus "savings" is used two different ways.

this study shows that if more people are in a financially precarious position ... the more they will stay away from investing in risky assets .... and instead remain invested in bonds and savings accounts. But as we know, this means that over time, these people can save less

But "as we know", the more uncertain people feel about the future, the more they save. Rather than allocate a fixed amount of money (as in the cited study) between savings and investing, people increase the size of the pot - save more - when they are worried.

Policymakers and academics have linked the increase in savings to higher economic uncertainty often pointing to ... increases the volatility of expected future income, while at the same time lowering the level. Both of these effects may induce people to save more ...

Juelsrud, Ragnar E. & Wold, Ella Getz, 2020. "The Saving and Employment Effects of Higher Job Loss Risk"
dont like gov stats , such as on inflation?
The Politico piece doesn't say that there's anything wrong with the statistics, just how they're analyzed and presented. Which is why, rather than stopping at U-3, I gave U-4 and a cite to other government "filterings" of the statistics. Think that some of the 80,000 different items in the CPI should get different weightings? Then do your own arithmetic. The raw data and how it's collected is published. At least for now.
its just the media has suddenly stopped assigning political blame for egg, car, and house prices.
Say what?
https://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/5154415-trump-moves-hamper-bird-flu-response-as-egg-prices-spike/
https://edition.cnn.com/2025/02/19/cars/trumps-autos-tariffs-prices/index.html
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/trump-administration-slash-hud-workers-tackling-housing-crisis-119046960

@Mark, most bank preferred are noncumulative so that those can be counted as bank capital. Add to that that most preferred are bank preferreds.
Beware that preferred "stocks" are really debt of very long or indefinite maturities. The name "preferred stock" simply means that in the capital structure of the company, they are ahead of common stock in bankruptcy or liquidation.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1388485/000182912625001161/fundvantage_497.htm
497 1 fundvantage_497.htm 497
Filed Pursuant to Rule 497(e)
1933 Act File No. 333-141120
1940 Act File No. 811-22027
FundVantage Trust
(the “Trust”)
Polen Bank Loan Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated February 21, 2025 to the Fund’s Summary Prospectus, Statutory Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information, each dated September 1, 2024, as supplemented to date.
For all existing and prospective shareholders of the Polen Bank Loan Fund:
● The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Trust has approved the reorganization of the Polen Bank Loan Fund with and into the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF, which is expected to occur on or about March 21, 2025.
● The Polen Bank Loan Fund is a mutual fund, and the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF is an exchange-traded fund (an “ETF”).
● If you are an existing shareholder of the Polen Bank Loan Fund and your account can hold an ETF, your fund shares will be converted, and no action is needed by you.
● If you hold shares of the Polen Bank Loan Fund in an account that CANNOT hold an ETF (i.e., your account is not permitted to purchase securities traded in the stock market), there are certain actions you can take. See the “Questions and Answers” section below for further information.
At a meeting held on December 2-3, 2024, the Board of the Trust unanimously approved, on behalf of the Polen Bank Loan Fund, the reorganization of the Fund into the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF (the “Reorganization”). The Polen Floating Rate Income ETF will continue to be managed by Polen Capital Credit, LLC (“Polen Credit” or the “Adviser”), the investment adviser for the Polen Bank Loan Fund. The Board, including all of the Trustees who are not “interested persons” (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”)) of the Trust, determined that participation in the Reorganization is in the best interests of the Fund and that the interests of existing shareholders of the Fund will not be diluted as a result of the Reorganization.
The Polen Floating Rate Income ETF will have identical investment objectives and fundamental investment policies, the same portfolio managers and substantially similar investment strategies as the Fund. The Fund will no longer exist after it is reorganized into the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF. The Polen Floating Rate Income ETF has not commenced investment operations, and it is not expected to have shareholders before the Reorganization. It is anticipated that the Reorganization will occur on or around March 21, 2025.
By changing the Fund from a mutual fund into an ETF, Polen Credit believes shareholders in the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF could benefit from lower overall net expenses, increased flexibility to buy and sell shares at current market prices, increased portfolio holdings transparency and the potential for enhanced tax efficiency.
The Reorganization will be conducted pursuant to an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization (the “Plan”). The Reorganization is expected to be treated as a tax-free reorganization under the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. As a result, Fund shareholders generally will not recognize a taxable gain (or loss) for U.S. tax purposes as a result of the Reorganization (although cash received as part of the Reorganization may be taxable, as noted below).
Upon completion of the Reorganization, Fund shareholders will receive Polen Floating Rate Income ETF shares with the same aggregate NAV as their Fund shares (except with respect to cash received, as noted below).
Importantly, in order to receive shares of the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF as part of the Reorganization, Fund shareholders must hold their shares of the Fund through a brokerage account that can accept shares of an ETF. If Fund shareholders do not hold their shares of the Fund through that type of brokerage account or have not provided acceptable alternative delivery instructions to the Adviser prior to March 14, 2025, they will not receive shares of the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF as part of the Reorganization and will receive cash equal in value to the NAV of their mutual fund shares. For Fund shareholders that do not currently hold their shares of the Fund through a brokerage account that can hold shares of an ETF, please see the Q&A that follows for additional actions that those Fund shareholders must take in order to receive shares of the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF as part of the Reorganization. No further action is required for Fund shareholders that hold shares of the Fund through a brokerage account that can hold shares of an ETF.
Completion of the Reorganization is subject to a number of conditions under the Plan. The Reorganization has been approved by the written consent of a majority of shareholders, and you are not being asked to vote on the Reorganization. Fund shareholders will receive, on or around February 24, 2025, an information statement/prospectus describing in detail both the Reorganization and the Polen Floating Rate Income ETF, and a summary of the Board’s considerations in approving the Reorganization.
In anticipation of the Reorganization, the Fund will be closed to new accounts beginning on March 10, 2025. Purchases, including exchange purchases, by existing shareholders will be accepted by the Fund until 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 17, 2025. Redemptions, including exchange redemptions, into shares of another Polen Fund of the Trust will be accepted until 4:00 p.m. Eastern Time on March 18, 2025. These dates may change if the closing date of the Reorganization changes.
In addition, as part of the Reorganization, the following preliminary event will occur before the Reorganization is completed. On March 11, 2025, all of the outstanding shares of the Fund will be combined into fewer shares through a reverse stock split (the “Reverse Stock Split”). To accommodate the Reverse Stock Split, Fund shares will be restricted from trading on March 11, 2025 and no Fund shares may be purchased or redeemed on that date. Regular trading will resume on March 12, 2025. Prior to the Reorganization, the Fund will conduct the Reverse Stock Split to increase the Fund’s NAV per share to $25.00 while decreasing the total number of Fund shares issued and outstanding. The total net asset value of each shareholder’s shares will be the same after the reverse split as before the reverse split. The Reverse Stock Split will not result in a taxable transaction for shareholders...

So if one was interested on VTCLX, with it's "
VTCLX has 65% in unrealized gains", more for a tax advantage account ?

If VTCLX floats your boat, there are a couple of ETFs tracking the R1K. VONE (Vanguard) and IWB (iShares). VTCLX also tracks the R1K though more loosely for better tax efficiency.
The ETFs have slightly higher tax cost ratios than VTCLX (0.41% and 0.40% respectively vs. 0.31%). Over the past 1 and 3 years they have slightly outperformed VTCLX pre-tax (with Vanguard's ETF being the best), though VTCLX has done slightly better over five years.
Here's Portfolio Visualizer's comparison of these funds over 10 years.
VTCLX has 65% in unrealized gains while the ETFs have lower exposure (likely due to their ETF structure): 17% for IWB and 35% for VONE.
Again, when it comes to tracking market cap weighted indexes, you can often find "regular" funds that are comparable to ones focused on tax efficiency. This tool may help finding comparable ETFs:
https://etfdb.com/tool/mutual-fund-to-etf/

The only competitor for VTMFX that I'm aware of is TAIFX. It is also 5*, also M* silver-rated (FWIW), but performance is slightly less.
Index funds are naturally somewhat tax efficient. So with a fund like VTMSX you might look at "regular" index funds. For example, VIOO (Vanguard's "regular" S&P 600 index ETF) has a tax cost ratio of 0.40% and unrealized gains of virtually zero vs. VTMSX's 0.41% and 24% in unrealized gains.
When it comes to bonds (not exactly what you were asking about), tax-efficient (munis) funds may not produce the best after-tax returns. I haven't been looking at bond funds lately, but when it comes to MMFs, Treasury or Treasury only funds have been doing better than muni MMFs after tax.
Finally, perhaps the most tax-efficient way to deal with unneeded RMDs is to make qualified charitable contributions. You're not left with any earnings or principal, but it's certainly tax-efficient and might leave you with a warm fuzzy feeling.

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1047712/000119312525030708/d835373d497.htm
497 1 d835373d497.htm UNDISCOVERED MANAGERS FUNDS
UNDISCOVERED MANAGERS FUNDS
Undiscovered Managers Behavioral Value Fund
(the “Fund”)
(All Share Classes)
Supplement dated February 20, 2025
to the Current Prospectuses, Summary Prospectuses and Statements of Additional
Information, as supplemented
Effective as of the close of business on April 1, 2025 (the “Closing Date”), the Fund is offered on a limited basis and investors are not eligible to purchase shares of the Fund, except as described below. In addition, both before and after the Closing Date, the Fund may from time to time, in its sole discretion based on the Fund’s net asset levels and other factors, limit new purchases into the Fund or otherwise modify the closure policy at any time on a case-by-case basis.
The following groups will be permitted to continue to purchase Fund shares. Except as otherwise described below, shareholders of record are permitted to continue to purchase shares; if the shareholder of record is an omnibus account, beneficial owners in that account as of the applicable closing date are permitted to continue to purchase:
•Shareholders of record of the Fund as of the Closing Date are able to continue to purchase additional shares in their existing Fund accounts and may continue to reinvest dividends or capital gains distributions from shares owned in the Fund;
•Shareholders of record of the Fund as of the Closing Date are able to add to their existing Fund accounts through exchanges from other J.P. Morgan Funds;
•Group Retirement Plans (as defined in the glossary) (and their successor, related and affiliated plans), which have the Fund available to participants on or before the Closing Date may continue to open accounts for new participants and can purchase additional shares in existing participant accounts. A new Group Retirement Plan may establish a new account with the Fund only if the Group Retirement Plan has been accepted for investment by the Fund and its distributor by May 1, 2025 and the plan’s account with the Fund must be either funded by the plan or available to participant directed investments by October 31, 2025. The funding date for plans approved by May 1st may be extended with approval by the Fund and its distributor;
•Fully discretionary fee-based advisory programs, where investment discretion (fund and investment allocations) solely reside with the Financial Intermediary’s home office and where the Financial Intermediary’s home office has full authority to make investment changes without approval from the shareholder, may continue to utilize the Fund for new and existing program accounts. This includes affiliated platforms that have approval from the Fund and its distributor. These programs must be accepted for continued investment by the Fund and its distributor by the Closing Date. Additionally, after the Closing Date, new fully discretionary fee-based advisory programs may utilize the Fund for program accounts only with the approval by the Fund and its distributor;
•Registered Investment Advisory firms who have included the Fund in their discretionary models by the closing date and utilize an approved clearing platform may continue to make Fund shares available to new and existing accounts. These particular firms must be accepted for continued investment by the Fund and its distributor on or before the Closing Date;
•Other fee-based advisory programs (including Rep as Advisor and Portfolio Manager programs) may continue to utilize the Fund for existing program accounts, but will not be able to open new program accounts after the Closing Date;
•Model portfolios directed by J.P. Morgan Investment Management Inc. (“JPMIM”), and J.P. Morgan Funds that are permitted to invest in other J.P. Morgan Funds, may purchase shares of the Fund; and
•Named investment professionals listed in the Fund’s prospectus may utilize the Fund for both new accounts and existing Fund accounts.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT WITH THE
PROSPECTUSES, SUMMARY PROSPECTUSES AND
STATEMENTS OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1485894/000119312525028586/d898508d497.htm
97 1 d898508d497.htm J.P. MORGAN EXCHANGE-TRADED FUND TRUST
J.P. MORGAN EXCHANGE-TRADED FUNDS
JPMorgan Sustainable Infrastructure ETF
(the “Fund”)
(a series of J.P. Morgan Exchange-Traded Fund Trust)
Supplement dated February 18, 2025
to the current Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information
dated March 1, 2024, as supplemented
NOTICE OF LIQUIDATION OF THE JPMORGAN SUSTAINABLE INFRASTRUCTURE ETF. The Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of the Fund has approved the liquidation and dissolution of the Fund on or about March 28, 2025 (the “Liquidation Date”). Effective immediately, in connection with the liquidation and dissolution, the Fund may depart from its stated investment objective and strategies as it increases its cash holdings in preparation for its liquidation. On the Liquidation Date (for settlement the date after the Liquidation Date), the Fund shall distribute pro rata to its shareholders of record all of the assets of the Fund in complete cancellation and redemption of all of the outstanding shares of beneficial interest, cash, bank deposits or cash equivalents in an estimated amount necessary to (i) discharge any unpaid liabilities and obligations of the Fund on the Fund’s books on the Liquidation Date, including, but not limited to, income dividends and capital gains distributions, if any, payable through the Liquidation Date, and (ii) pay such contingent liabilities as the officers of the Fund deem appropriate subject to ratification by the Board. Income dividends and capital gain distributions, if any, may be paid on or prior to the Liquidation Date.
After the close of business on Friday, March 21, 2025, the Fund will no longer accept creation orders. This is also expected to be the last day of trading of shares of the Fund on The Nasdaq Stock Market® LLC (“Nasdaq”). Shareholders should be aware that after the close of business on Tuesday, February 18, 2025, the Fund will no longer engage in any business activities except for the purposes of selling and converting into cash all of the assets of the Fund, paying its liabilities, and distributing its remaining proceeds or assets to shareholders (the “Liquidating Distribution”). Furthermore, during the time between market close on Friday, March 21, 2025 and the Liquidation Date, shareholders will be unable to dispose of their shares on Nasdaq.
Shareholders may sell their holdings of the Fund, incurring typical transaction fees from their broker-dealer, on Nasdaq until market close on Friday, March 21, 2025, at which point the Fund’s shares will no longer trade on Nasdaq and the shares will be subsequently delisted. Shareholders who continue to hold shares of the Fund on the Liquidation Date will receive a Liquidating Distribution (if any) with a value equal to their proportionate ownership interest in the Fund on that date. Such Liquidating Distribution received by a shareholder, if any, may be in an amount that is greater or less than the amount a shareholder might receive if they dispose of their shares on Nasdaq prior to market close on Friday, March 21, 2025. The Fund’s liquidation and payment of the Liquidating Distribution may occur prior to or later than the dates listed above.
Shareholders who receive a Liquidating Distribution generally will recognize a capital gain or loss equal to the amount received for their shares over their adjusted basis in such shares. Please consult your personal tax advisor about the potential tax consequences.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT
WITH THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS, PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
FOR FUTURE REFERENCE
SUP-BLLD-225

Distillate Capital also runs at least three ETFs using a cash-flow model. COWZ had wonderful performance in 2020, 2021, and 2022, and has attracted a whopping $25B in AUM. I was a fan of DSTL, DSMC, SYLD and COWZ until 2023 when fortunes turned notably south and have not reversed. During the COVID drawdown, MFO members batted about these funds when many were in search of something that might stem the downward trend of the markets.

Boaz Weinstein faced a series of defeats when executing his activist playbook against UK investment trusts.
However, the trusts' NAV discounts have narrowed since he began the campaign.
Saba Capital Management (Weinstein's firm) may still profit from the venture.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/boaz-weinstein-doomed-uk-trust-084926913.html

i personally agree, but this is ultimately an investing forum.
and in such, the 2 most hackneyed phrases are :
' i am here to make money'
'i am for anyone\anything that lowers my taxes'
can you believe there exists anti-ESG funds? some people are actually against good governance in their underlying companies.
as with the above example, i simply wanted to point out free and stable societies are a sensible (evidenced) theme for making money via equity, if that happens to be an abstraction one could grasp.
many of these points flop on crypto and mkt timing investors, especially the lucky ones.
i dont see the 'trump trade' as anything more than mkt timing based on pro-autocracy, and 2016-2020 was such but to a lesser degree.