https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1137360/000113736020000525/vvtkol2020liquidations.htm
(KOL)
497 1 vvtkol2020liquidations.htm 497E SUPPLEMENT TO PROSPECTUS AND SAI
SUPPLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 3, 2020 TO
THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND PROSPECTUS DATED MAY 1, 2020 AND THE CURRENT STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
OF VANECK VECTORS ETF TRUST DATED NOVEMBER 24, 2020
This Supplement updates certain information contained in the above-dated Summary Prospectus and Prospectus and the current Statement of Additional Information for VanEck Vectors® ETF Trust (the “Trust”) regarding VanEck Vectors Coal ETF (the “Fund”), a series of the Trust. You may obtain copies of the Fund’s Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information free of charge, upon request, by calling toll-free1.800.826.2333 or by visiting the VanEck website at www.vaneck.com.
At a meeting held on December 3, 2020, the Board of Trustees of the Trust unanimously approved the liquidation, winding down and termination of the Fund, which is expected to happen on or about Tuesday, December 22, 2020.
After the close of business on Monday, December 14, 2020, 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 NYSE Arca, Inc. (“NYSE Arca”). Shareholders should be aware that when the Fund commences liquidation, it will no longer pursue its stated investment objective or 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”). During this period, the Fund is likely to incur higher tracking error than is typical for the Fund. Furthermore, during the time between market close on Monday, December 14, 2020 and Tuesday, December 22, 2020, shareholders will be unable to dispose of their shares on NYSE Arca.
Shareholders may sell their holdings of the Fund, incurring typical transaction fees from their broker-dealer, on NYSE Arca until market close on Monday, December 14, 2020, at which point the Fund’s shares will no longer trade on NYSE Arca and the shares will be subsequently delisted. Shareholders who continue to hold shares of the Fund on the Fund’s 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 NYSE Arca prior to market close on Monday, December 14, 2020. 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.
Shareholders should call the Fund’s distributor, Van Eck Securities Corporation, at 1.800.826.2333 for additional information.
Please retain this supplement for future reference.

Just received an email from GP which states:
December 17, 2020
Dear Fellow Investors,
We are announcing today that the Grandeur Peak Global Opportunities Fund (GPGIX/GPGOX) and Grandeur Peak International Opportunities Fund (GPIIX/GPIOX) (the "Funds") will close to new investors through intermediary platforms after December 31, 2020. The Funds will remain open to existing investors. Retirement plans and financial advisors with existing clients in the Funds will still be able to invest in the Funds for existing as well as new clients as long as their clearing platform will allow this exception. The Funds will remain open to new investors who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds.
Both Funds were re-opened during the market melt-down in the spring in order to provide an opportunity for investors to invest during the sell-off. With the strong rebound in the market, and even stronger performance by the Funds this year, they are back to assets levels where we feel it’s necessary to limit inflows. As you know, we carefully review capacity at the firm level and strategy level. We are committed to keeping all of our investment strategies small enough to be able to fully pursue their investment strategies without being encumbered by either their individual asset base or the firms’ collective assets. Achieving performance for our clients will always be our paramount objective.
As a reminder, these two Funds, as well as all of the Grandeur Peak Funds, will be making their annual capital gains and income distributions on December 29th, with a shareholder record date of December 28th. If you would like to make further investments in these Funds within taxable accounts prior to year-end, you may wish to wait until after December 28th to avoid the distribution.1
Thank you for your continued interest and trust. If you have any questions, don’t hesitate to reach out to me or a member of our Client Relations Team.
Best Regards,
Eric Huefner
President

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000139834420024642/fp0060307_497.htm
497 1 fp0060307_497.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST: GRANDEUR PEAK FUNDS
SUPPLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 17, 2020 TO THE SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND
PROSPECTUS FOR THE GRANDEUR PEAK GLOBAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND AND
GRANDEUR PEAK INTERNATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES FUND (THE “FUNDS”) DATED
AUGUST 31, 2020
Effective as of the close of business on December 31, 2020, the Funds will close to new investors seeking to purchase shares of the Fund through third party intermediaries subject to certain exceptions for financial advisors with an established position in the Fund and participants in certain qualified retirement plans with an existing position in the Fund. The Funds remain open to purchases from existing shareholders, and to new shareholders who purchase directly from Grandeur Peak Funds.
The Fund retains the right to make exceptions to any action taken to close the Fund or limit inflows into the Fund.
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

@wxman123
Here is the answer: pay businesses to be closed:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/12/15/false-choice-between-economy-containing-virus/

Nothin.
Unsure about travel in 2021. That’s the biggest discretionary expense. So, like 2020, next year might require little drawdown from investments. That argues for staying the course rather than building cash. Somehow wish it were other. (But have reduced spec positions while waiting for the next 25-30% selloff).
Nice bounce today across the boards. DJI is up 300 in early afternoon - above the 30,000 mark.
Energy’s strong with Brent over $50 and NYMX close behind.
And a pop of about $25 for gold, with miners up a couple percent today.
I remain convinced a lot of the action is of “the elephant chasing his tail” variety, with folks investing $$ they’d have spent on things without the Covid related restrictions. But “don’t fight the tape” (or do so at your own peril).
In the meantime .... What’s not to like?
At this point I view bonds as the wastewater of the investment plumbing infrastructure. They still serve some purpose - but don’t expect them to contribute to your prosperity.

When it comes to allocation, it is meant to be equally allocated to the underlying funds...

Source? De facto ≠ de jure
Prospectus:

Investment Objective
The fund seeks long-term growth of capital.
----
Principal Investment Strategies
Normally investing assets in a combination of five Fidelity ® funds, each of which normally invests in equity securities of companies that represent a disruptive theme.

• Fidelity ® Disruptive Automation Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Communications Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Finance Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Medicine Fund ...
  
• Fidelity ® Disruptive Technology Fund ...

Fidelity’s disruptive strategies seek to identify innovative developments ...

That's the complete description of how this fund operates in the statutory prospectus.
Just "a combination" of funds, not an equal combination.

Do you mean any other funds of funds, or funds in general?
You may remember the Strong Advisor funds of the 1990s and early 2000s, with their turnover ratios of
 60.3% (Small Cap Value, 2000),
 87.8% (Opportunity Fund, 2001),
 88.1% (International Core Fund, 2003),
 95.4% (Common Stock Fund, 2000),
116.1% (US Value Fund, 2001),
116.6% (US Small/Mid Cap Growth Fund, 2004),
174.2% (Utilities and Energy Fund, 2003),
184.5% (Technology Fund, 2003),
186.8% (Emerging Growth Fund, 2000),
199.4% (Growth and Income Fund, 2003),
221.6% (Large Company Core Fund, 2001),
234.1% (Balanced Fund, 2001),
268.5% (Blue Chip Fund, 2003),
269.3% (Large Cap Core Fund, 2002),
285.3% (Large Company Growth Fund, 2001),
399.8% (Growth Fund, 2001),
416.8% (Endeavor Fund, 2002),
420.4% (Endeavor Large Cap Fund, 2002),
437.3% (Select Fund, 2002),
468.7% (Large Cap Growth Fund, 2001),
501.7% (Discovery Fund, 2001),
605.7% (Focus Fund, 2001),
629.8% (Enterprise Fund, 2001),
658.7% (Growth 20 Fund, 2001),
683.7% (Mid Cap Growth Fund, 2000)
https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/723257/000119312505044665/dncsr.htm
Aside from such "believe it or not" figures, the ICI reports that turnover ratios have been trending downward. The ICI's 2020 Fact Book has a graph (Figure 3.7) showing this trend in the asset-weighted average turnover ratio of equity funds. There's a peak in 1987 a bit over 80% turnover, and another peak around 2000 at just under 80%. The current figure is 28%.
Still, some funds like Magellan (FMAGX) have turnover rates north of 100% today.
With respect to funds of funds, the M* premium screener reports 123 distinct funds of funds (about 12%) with turnover rates above 100%, including what seems to be a favorite here, Columbia Thermostat (CTFAX). That fund has a turnover ratio of 158%.

Received my weekly Capital Wealth Planning email today:

I can't understand why SWAN has a low ranking. It has to offer amongst the best risk-reward over it's short life, CAGR 15.9 Sharp 1.59 Max DD 5.06.

@waxman, Thanks for reading and commenting. Here is an explanation that I just posted on Seeking Alpha:
The Ranking system is good but not perfect. This article exploited some of areas, such as my lowest ranked funds, where an investor may follow shorter term trends instead of the ranking system. The benefit is that the spreadsheet does millions of calculations and provides good insights that would be impossible to keep straight without it.
One thing that hurts SWAN is its Lipper Category, "Large Cap Core", because I use the average bear market performance of the Lipper Category for the past three bear markets. It would be better classified as an "Alternative" in my opinion. Low yield also hurts. Momentum has been low during the past three months. Finally, Consistency is the percent of times the fund performed average or better during its life up to 13 years. It did great in 2020, but not 2020 for the Large-Cap Core Category.

I bought DIVO during the COVID pullback in March. Several years ago, I had spoken with the subadvisor, Capital Wealth Planning in Naples, FL about a separately managed account based on this strategy. Why bother when you can buy DIVO?

I agree, @little5bee on DIVO. I don't own it, but I like Amplify. The fund has been around since 2017 and has $140M in assets. I do prefer ETFs over CEFs, and the yield is competitive.
Thanks for reading.

I bought DIVO during the COVID pullback in March. Several years ago, I had spoken with the subadvisor, Capital Wealth Planning in Naples, FL about a separately managed account based on this strategy. Why bother when you can buy DIVO?

DIVO trades just like CII with a little less volatility, nice if you prefer an ETF over a CEF. Solid pick.

I bought DIVO during the COVID pullback in March. Several years ago, I had spoken with the subadvisor, Capital Wealth Planning in Naples, FL about a separately managed account based on this strategy. Why bother when you can buy DIVO?

Another Value Perspective:
Unravelling value's decade-long underperformance (and imminent resurgence)
unravelling-values-decade-long

Thank you, well written and insightful read.

The OP spoke of an 18yo and "ways to mitigate that [7y hole based on GMO predictions] risk."

>> If there are ways to mitigate that risk and increase the likelihood of a better outcome then it'd be interesting to think about the options.
So what would concrete advice be? DCA? Delay starting now because valuations? Some sort of reverse glide path?
>> In the real world, workers invest money periodically over their careers. Sequence of return matters.

How do we know how and when to do act?
If people are proposing that GMO predictions are truly useful, everyone had better start paying attention to them.
Here's a paper concluding they are indeed prescient. It's from 12y and 1mo ago, middle of November '08.
http://public.econ.duke.edu/Papers//PDF/GMO_Predictions1.pdf
Of course here's the end of Q1:
https://www.gmo.com/americas/research-library/gmo-7-year-asset-class-forecast-1q-2020/

Hello
Many good funds to look at especially Fidelity schwab Vanguard families
Thank you Mr Bolin for a good read
Kind regards
Happy holidays
Best Funds To Own In 2021
https://www.google.com/amp/s/seekingalpha.com/amp/article/4394450-best-funds-to-own-in-2021
Dec. 13, 2020 12:00 PM ETAOM, ARBIX, BASIX...2
Summary
Over 300 no load mutual funds available to small investors, nearly 200 exchange-traded funds, and over a dozen closed-end funds representing 120 Lipper Categories are ranked.
The funds are ranked based on Risk, Risk Adjusted Performance, Momentum, Quality, Yield, and Consistency. They are divided into 15 investment buckets for risk, exposure, yields and trends.
The funds are reported by short-term performance including three-month returns and trends, ten-month moving average, fund flows, maximum draw downs, and yield.

While Dodge and Cox was buying Facebook early in 2020 (see my above post), it appears David Giroux over at TRP was selling it.
From PRWCX’s June 30 Semi Annual Report: “In addition, we have systematically reduced our exposure to COVID-19 winners such as Amazon (now a top 5 underweight), life science tool companies, Visa, and Facebook.”
Hmmm ... :(

VWINX is my "go-to" fund to benchmark this category. That's not to say there aren't comparable funds. But because it is such a solid long term performer, for me to prefer another fund to this one I would want to see something about the other fund that was significantly better.
BAMPX also looks like a solid fund. Slightly weaker than VWINX over ten years, a dead heat over five, better over the past three years, and much better over the past year. Its better numbers are due primarily to its current (2020) year's performance. For periods ending in 2019, the long term figures still look great, but not superior:
1 year (2019): 16.68% (BAMPX) vs. 16.87% (VWINX)
3 years (2017-2019): 24.04% vs. 24.96%
5 years (2015-2019): 28.97% vs. 36.41%
10 years (2010-2019): 104.79% vs. 111.41%
While I don't disregard this year's performance, I do ask whether the gap between these funds was a one off or something repeatable. In addition, you might want to discard all BAMPX history before 2016, because its current lead manager Michael Gates took over in mid 2015 and the fund shifted from being a moderate allocation fund to being a conservative allocation fund. That's a serious point to consider.
VWINX is what I might call an old school conservative allocation fund - large cap value, bond allocation hugging 60% (57% - 61% over the past five years). BAMPX is more "modern", with a growth leaning blend portfolio and a lower bond allocation, around 50% (39% to 56% over the past five years). This has resulted in performance that has been slightly more volatile. Standard deviation comparisons over the past 3/5/10 years are:
8.52 (BAMPX) vs. 7.72 (VWINX) / 6.96 vs 6.35 / 7.44 vs. 5.51
As noted above, perhaps we should disregard the 10 year figure. The volatility of BAMPX over the 3 and 5 year periods are below category average, so this comparison is not to suggest that it is an excessively volatile fund.
On the plus side, the fund is pretty small at $½B. I happen to like the fact that it invests some equity overseas (currently about ¼ of its equity); others may consider this a negative. Its cost, 0.68% ER (0.73% without waivers) is reasonable, though obviously much higher than that of VWINX.
Where it looks a bit odd is in its portfolio. This is a fund of funds, so one would expect it to have a modest turnover, tweaking allocations. But its turnover rate of 98% is somewhat high even for funds that invest directly in individual securities. According to its latest (Sept. 30th) annual report, it holds 11 equity funds, 3 fixed income funds, and 2 MMFs.
Blackrock equity funds: EM class K (5% of portfolio), Technology Opportunities class K, Master Advantage Large Cap Core Portfolio (5%)
iShares equity ETFs: Core MSCI EAFE (4%), Core S&P Small Cap (4%), Core S&P Total US Stock Market (15%), ESG Aware MSCI USA (11%), MSCI EAFE Growth (7%), MSCI Min Vol USA, MSCI USA Value Factor, US Medical Devices
Blackrock fixed income funds: Strategic Income Opportunities Portfolio class K (8%), Master Total Return Portfolio (22%)
iShares fixed income ETF: iBoxx $ Investment Grade Corporate Bond (6%)
(The Master funds are "master" funds in master/feeder configurations. MDLRX is a retail fund feeding into Master Advantage Large Cap Core, MAHQX is a retail fund feeding into Master Total Return.)
Overall, BAMPX looks like a solid fund from an excellent fund family. While its portfolio seems slightly aggressive (both in terms of a higher equity allocation and its dabbling in sectors), it manages to keep volatility in check. Based on its turnover rate and plethora of underlying funds, I couldn't guess at its strategy (spaghetti against a wall?), but it seems to work. It looks like a worthwhile fund; for me I don't see a compelling reason to prefer it to VWINX.

@Mav123,

Thank you for sharing. 25% in equities, wow. I always thought even retirees should have more to make sure funds lasts. I'm in my early 40s. Curious, what is the rate of return for the overall portfolio if only 25% in equities?

Bond and conservative funds have made roughly 8% YTD will little risk because interest rates have fallen, compared to the S&P 500 with 14% YTD, but a maximum drawdown of 20%. Stock valuations are very high now. The 25% is Benjamin Graham's lower limit on stock allocation when the markets are fully priced. This is similar to COTZX's strategy of decreasing allocations as the markets become fully valued. TMSRX's strategy is to make 6% plus inflation regardless of market direction.
My December article shows that following periods of high valuations over long periods of time (decades), conservative portfolios outperform aggressive portfolios.
https://www.mutualfundobserver.com/2020/12/enoughin-the-coming-lost-decade/
When I was your age in the early 1990's I was 100% stocks, but times have changed. The secular bear market of the 1960's and 1970's was followed by the secular bull market of the 1980's and 1990's. You could not go wrong in stocks until the market hit the wall in 1999. Now we are in a period of high debts and deficits, high valuations, aging workforce (deflationary), falling dollar (inflationary), and COVID. I choose to be more conservative now.
Best wishes in your investing.

Isn’t it funny how Racqueteer said five posts ago “OK, last try for me,” yet he continues to argue his false position that attempting to eviscerate a Democratic clean energy policy that doesn’t even have all its details in place yet is “not political” as if scientifically there were another better policy put forward by the political opposition. The GOP has no real clean energy policy at all because it continues to argue as part of its libertarian death cult that anthropogenic climate change is a liberal hoax or that there’s nothing little old America can do as the second largest emitter of carbon emissions in the world. If you think you have a better plan, Racqueteer, submit it to the president elect’s team or apply for a job there. I’m sure if you’re as knowledgeable as you claim, they’ll hire you. Yet why do I suspect your “last try” wasn’t your last one and we’ll have another all-cap filled response? This isn’t about the truth or solving the problem for you. It’s about winning and getting the last word. So go ahead, and when you’re done submit your better ideas to the new president.
Oh wait, it seems like part of Biden’s failure of a clean energy plan includes nuclear: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2020/08/17/what-will-a-biden-harris-administration-do-for-nuclear-energy/amp/
I guess just send your geothermal idea with your resume because no one on Biden’s team is smart enough to think of that.

Arnott isn't the only one who was wrong for years
1) US stocks are over value, the rest of the world is undervalue. US stocks did better in the last 10 years.
2) The GMO team and Arnott have been wrong for 10 years.
3) Gundlach was way wrong when he predicted the 10 year will be at 6% in 2021
4) Bogle was wrong when he predicted stocks/bonds performance based on the past and averages.
5) Inflation and interest rates can only go up. Both wrong for years.
6) inverted yield signals recession = wrong. High PE, PE10 signal the end of the bull market...wrong again for years.
7) There is no way stocks will have a V recovery in March 2020 based on blah, blah, whatever...and they did.
8) The economy is bad, unemployment is high, the debt is huge = bad future stock market. The reality? Stocks are still up.
9) If Trump will be elected, it will be a disaster. Reality? stocks were up
The truth is the 24/7 media has to write about something for someone to click and read and how they get paid.
The Fed successfully managed to do all the above and why many "experts" were wrong
If you didn't get the message already, most investors should do nothing to very little. Predictions area a flipping coin. Some will be correct just because markets go sometimes down
BTW, I always do something big when I see something crucial happening NOW but I don't recommend it to anybody. I don't mind being wrong because I invest to meet my specific goals.
Lastly, why Arnott still in business? most of us lose their jobs after just several mistakes so why people who manage money don't.