https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1314414/000158064224001994/equity-hedged_497.htm
497 1 equity-hedged_497.htm 497
Navigator Equity Hedged Fund
Class A Shares NAVAX
Class I Shares NAVIX
Class C Shares NAVCX
(a series of Northern Lights Fund Trust)
Supplement dated April 4, 2024 to
the Prospectus and Statement of Information dated February 28, 2024
The Board of Trustees of Northern Lights Fund Trust (the “Board”) has determined based on the recommendation of the investment adviser of the Navigator Equity Hedged Fund (the “Fund”), that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all outstanding shares on May 24, 2024.
Effective at the close of business April 4, 2024, the Fund will not accept any purchases and may no longer pursue its stated investment objectives. The Fund may begin liquidating its portfolio and may invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. Any capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders. Shares of the Fund are otherwise not available for purchase.
Prior to May 24, 2024, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section in the Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, a redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. Please refer to the “Tax Status, Dividends and Distributions” section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO MAY 24, 2024 WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEED ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR DIRECTLY OR THE FUND AT 1-877-766-2264.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
This Supplement and the existing Prospectus dated February 28, 2024, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information dated February 28, 2024, have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund at 1-877-766-2264.

"What I saw scared me away."
@Crash- to amplify what larryB said:
• Open Schwab to Accounts: Summary
• On top line, next to "Summary", click "Trade"
• On "Trade" window click "CDs"
That brings up a simple page with a list of ten or so one-year CDs.
• Select one.
• Click "Buy"...
• That gives you to an info page showing everything that you need to know about that CD.
• Click "Review Order" and proceed from there.
Also notice on that first CD page the "Visit Find CDs for a detailed CD search experience" link. If you click on Find CDs you can enter any parameter that you want, such as "non-callable" or a longer maturity.
This is "scary" ???
Frankly Crash, we had to beat you up just to try Schwab. Now that you're there it's a little disappointing that you haven't taken the initiative to do a little exploring on your own. You seem to have plenty of time to do in-depth exploration of "March Madness" but no time to do the same with your financial broker.
Which is more important?

DJT -"Digital World Acquisition Corp. does not have significant operations. The company focuses on effecting a merger, capital stock exchange, asset acquisition, stock purchase, reorganization, or related business combination with one or more businesses. It intends to identify on technology-focused companies in the SaaS and technology, or fintech and financial services sector in the Americas. The company was incorporated in 2020 and is based in Miami, Florida." (Company description on Fidelity website quote page)
Maybe they should try the 'thoughts and prayers' approach.

"it is how we learn about our capabilities"
I now know enough about my financial capabilities to know that they are almost non-existent. No more tinkering !!!

"Hard and fast 'rules' for investing are not an optimal approach"
Exactamente. Flexibility to adjust investments is necessary to agree with the medium to long-term financial environment. Nothing always works "best" all the time.

I am 66 years old and have managed my own fund choices since 2018 and I have dutifully followed the advice of lowering my exposure to the stock market as I get closer to retirement. So, since June of 2018 I have been very close to a 50-50 Stock Bond portfolio with the stocks weighted towards the value end vs the growth end. The bond portfolio was weighted to the short end of the duration. Almost all of my fund choices can be found in the Great owls or the Honor Roll as described on this website. I just did an analysis of my past 5.75 years relative to if I had just left everything invested in the S&P 500.
The results are disappointing, and I do not understand the reasoning now of the balanced fund approach etc. So my overall return in this time period was 32% which works out to be 5.54% annually. The S&P 500 returned 84.09% or 14.62% annually. In real dollars I went from 660K to 871K. The S&P 500 would had taken me to 1.44Million.
In the up markets I got on average 61% of the return of the S&P 500 which I am okay with because I was not exposed as much to the market.
It's the down market. I managed to capture 85% of the down market, The Bond portfolio failed to moderate the losses. In 2022 in a down market I captured 107% of the loss suffered by the S&P 500 I was invested at 52% stocks and 48% the whole time period in 2022.
I am slowly learning that almost all financial advisor advice is BS sorry for my French.

"Never risk what you have and need for what you don’t have and don’t need."

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1314414/000158064224001866/astor-macro_497.htm
497 1 astor-macro_497.htm 497
Astor Macro Alternative Fund
Class A Shares ASTMX
Class C Shares ASTGX
Class I Shares GBLMX
(a series of Northern Lights Fund Trust)
Supplement dated March 28, 2024 to
the Prospectus and Statement of Information dated November 17, 2023
The Board of Trustees of Northern Lights Fund Trust (the “Board”) has determined based on the recommendation of the investment adviser of the Astor Macro Alternative Fund (the “Fund”), that it is in the best interests of the Fund and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all outstanding shares on April 29, 2024.
Effective at the close of business March 28, 2024, the Fund will not accept any purchases and will no longer pursue its stated investment objectives. The Fund may begin liquidating its portfolio and may invest in cash equivalents such as money market funds until all shares have been redeemed. Any capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders. Shares of the Fund are otherwise not available for purchase.
Prior to April 29, 2024, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section in the Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, a redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. Please refer to the “Tax Status, Dividends and Distributions” section in the Prospectus for general information. You may wish to consult your tax advisor about your particular situation.
ANY SHAREHOLDERS WHO HAVE NOT REDEEMED THEIR SHARES OF THE FUND PRIOR TO APRIL 29, 2024 WILL HAVE THEIR SHARES AUTOMATICALLY REDEEMED AS OF THAT DATE, AND PROCEEDS WILL BE SENT TO THE ADDRESS OF RECORD. IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OR NEED ASSISTANCE, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR FINANCIAL ADVISOR DIRECTLY OR THE FUND AT 1-877-738-0333.
IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR RETIREMENT PLAN INVESTORS
If you are a retirement plan investor, you should consult your tax advisor regarding the consequences of a redemption of Fund shares. If you receive a distribution from an Individual Retirement Account or a Simplified Employee Pension (SEP) IRA, you must roll the proceeds into another Individual Retirement Account within sixty (60) days of the date of the distribution in order to avoid having to include the distribution in your taxable income for the year. If you receive a distribution from a 403(b)(7) Custodian Account (Tax-Sheltered account) or a Keogh Account, you must roll the distribution into a similar type of retirement plan within sixty (60) days in order to avoid disqualification of your plan and the severe tax consequences that it can bring. If you are the trustee of a Qualified Retirement Plan, you may reinvest the money in any way permitted by the plan and trust agreement.
This Supplement and the existing Prospectus dated November 17, 2023, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. Both the Prospectus and the Statement of Additional Information dated November 17, 2023, have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference and can be obtained without charge by calling the Fund at 1-877-738-0333.

Hi, BaluBalu.
"Specific option strategies" is probably outside of the ambit of a daily newspaper, even a very good financial paper. A bit more likely in its sister publication, Barron's, I'd suspect.
David

Bloomberg had a guest that said advisers (e.g., RIAs) are required to wait 90 days from the launch of a new financial product (e.g., ETF) before adding or recommending the product to their client portfolio. Is that true? I can not find anything related to this on the internet.
(The guest was saying April 9th (90 days from the launch of the BTC ETFs) is a catalyst for more BTC demand.)

Two days ago - to my sadness and delight - I had learned via MFO that Eric Cinnamond, one of my all-time favorite managers with ARIVX/ICMAX was back in the mutual funds world with Palm Valley Capital Fund (PVCMX). ('Sadness' because I have missed almost 5 years of exploiting his financial acumen for a modest management fee and 'delight' because I have now been able to put a sizable investment into his new vehicle.)
This got me thinking, are there any other great/good managers who came back to manage a mutual fund or an ETF after being away for some time in the last, say, 20 years that I might be missing on?
(No knock on Bill Nygren, who's done an admirable job at the Oakmark Fund (OAKMX), but I am still hoping for the day that Robert Sanborn comes back with a publicly available investment offering.)

The DOJ filing against Apple is spot-on and very long overdue.
I especially like how they fantastically torpedo the usual 'security and privacy' justification Apple invokes in such situations.
"Apple wraps itself in a cloak of privacy, security, and consumer preferences to justify its anticompetitive conduct. Indeed, it spends billions on marketing and branding to promote the self-serving premise that only Apple can safeguard consumers’ privacy and security interests. Apple selectively compromises privacy and security interests when doing so is in Apple’s own financial interest—such as degrading the security of text messages, offering governments and certain companies the chance to access more private and secure versions of app stores, or accepting billions of dollars each year for choosing Google as its default search engine when more private options are available. In the end, Apple deploys privacy and security justifications as an elastic shield that can stretch or contract to serve Apple’s financial and business interests."
... yes, I'm a geek and lifelong Apple user & think they do offer some robust and mostly-trusted and reliable products*, but think this is a very good case. (It's also why I'm not all-in on the Apple ecosystem with my data and services.)
* except iCloud. They can't run a stable cloud service to save their lives, and imo the current iteration is held together with duct tape, bubblegum, and incantations uttered weekly by their engineering team.

The notion that because you or I invest in a Blackrock ETF, we give our proxy to Larry Fink is absurd. And its anti-democratic.
The notion that because you or I invest in virtually any mutual fund, we give our proxy to ISS or Glass-Lewis is absurd. That's the elephant in the room, more so because this duopoly advises nearly all (90%) fund sponsors on how they should vote their proxies.
https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2023/01/30/the-controversy-over-proxy-voting-the-role-of-asset-managers-and-proxy-advisors/
Anti-democratic? The corporate world was never democratic. Dollars, not people (dēmos - "common people") hold the power. If you don't like the way Blackrock funds are being run, vote your fund's of directors out of office. See how much sway your paltry dollars have. Or mine.

ESG means different things to different people, in no small part due to the marketing efforts of financial management companies to muddy the waters. On one end of the spectrum is impact investing, where one invests in companies and technologies specifically to improve the state of the environment. On the other end of the spectrum is what Blackrock and others call ESG integration - considering risk factors like increased exposure to flooding due to a changing environment - among all the risk factors considered when deciding whether to invest in a company.
https://www.blackrock.com/lu/intermediaries/themes/sustainable-investing/esg-integration
That's just prudent investing. And good marketing - slapping a label like ESG (popular until recently) onto something that is standard operating procedure. Failure to consider all significant risk factors could be considered investment malpractice.
For example, last year Texas proposed SB 1446 that would have prohibited state pensions from investing with any management company that considered ESG factors.

Despite declaring that [Texas County & District Retirement System] TCDRS “has never had an ESG policy,” and does not intend to have one, [Executive Director] Bishop said that the bill “would keep us from partnering with some of the best investment managers in the world.” Bishop added:
“If we had to adjust our asset allocation, we estimated it could cost us over $6 billion over the next 10 years. And this would cause our employers cost to more than double.”

https://www.esgtoday.com/texas-anti-esg-investing-bill-faces-pushback-over-6-billion-cost-to-pensions/

The last thing Boeing needs is financial restructuring. They need to reinstitute the pre-McDonnell Douglas merger ethos where engineering trumps cost cutting.

+1

The McDonnell Douglas merger precipitated Boeing's descent.
McDonnell Douglas management increased outsourcing which led to declines
in both aircraft quality and employee morale. Various "accidents" (some preventable)
involving Boeing aircraft in recent years have tarnished this once fine company's reputation.

As someone who's seen BA in the intergenerational portfolio for many many decades, agree completely!
(I only hold a toehold for sentimental reasons nowdays - I sold 95% of the position just as the 737 MAX fiasco started to tank the stock, so I thankfully got out quite nicely near the high)

The last thing Boeing needs is financial restructuring. They need to reinstitute the pre-McDonnell Douglas merger ethos where engineering trumps cost cutting.

+1
The McDonnell Douglas merger precipitated Boeing's descent.
McDonnell Douglas management increased outsourcing which led to declines
in both aircraft quality and employee morale. Various "accidents" (some preventable)
involving Boeing aircraft in recent years have tarnished this once fine company's reputation.

Well, you can remove GE from that list, thanks to Culp's triple-vision - GE, GEHC, and soon GEV.
Culp retired at Danaher/DHR, was called to fix GE, and some now say that he should now fix Boeing/BA. Will he ever get rest? (-:)

The last thing Boeing needs is financial restructuring. They need to reinstitute the pre-McDonnell Douglas merger ethos where engineering trumps cost cutting.

@rforno
I seem to remember PRBLX being criticised for this and responding in some way, but it would be hard to locate now.
As far as financial shenanigans are concerned there are several funds that claim to look for it so as to avoid it. The one I remember from years ago was Robert Olstein who made a big deal out of being able "look behind the numbers" focusing on cash flow with a "forensic analysis"
OFAFX has not exactly blown out the lights.

Parnassus told me they still 'had faith' in things and were 'monitoring the situation' but that seemed like a pro-forma response for folks like me/us who questioned things at the time. :(

@rforno
I seem to remember PRBLX being criticised for this and responding in some way, but it would be hard to locate now.
As far as financial shenanigans are concerned there are several funds that claim to look for it so as to avoid it. The one I remember from years ago was Robert Olstein who made a big deal out of being able "look behind the numbers" focusing on cash flow with a "forensic analysis"
OFAFX has not exactly blown out the lights.

I think that "ESG" like bitcoin is just another marketing tool to give the customers what the companies think they want. Fink did a marvelous 180 degree turn on Bitcoin when he realised he could make money on it.
I do not mean to say that "ESG" is hocus or "woke". Far from it. It certainly sounds reasonable well run companies in the "G" column will do better than poorly managed ones, although it is not clear most of the "G" fund managers know how to tell the difference, nor do they report their results.
There are dozens of companies thought to be good "G" selections until they aren't.
GE under Welch is a case in point. GE was a darling of Wall Street, until it wasn't and the financial manipulations were finally understood.
EQIX was just targeted today by Hindenburg Research for accounting irregularities which seem pretty real to me, but the stock is only down 3%
But most of these "G" managers seem not to care if earnings are reported in "non-GAAP" terms, or if the company issues gobs of stock options and then has to use piles of money on buy backs to avoid dilution, (justifying it as "tax efficient"), or when the stock drops below the CEO's option vesting price, repricing the options ( Looking at you Apple).
So maybe "G" managers are just looking for the least dirty shirt!
There are very good reasons to believe that rising sea levels, more intense storms increasing global temperatures etc will be bad for a number of companies. Even the GOP is putting gobs of money into renewable power etc. Texas is the poster child here.
But admitting that to voters would not be good for the brand.
There is also pretty good empirical data that companies that fostering a productive workplace, encouraging teams of people with broad range of skills and backgrounds and bringing people up through the ranks from a diverse variety of backgrounds do better than ones run in an autocratic method by the old guard. Creative managers can use the first methods to increase diversity without being forced to do so.
All of these "ESG" initiatives will be good for the bottom line and are recognised as such by Investment firms. They just don't have to slap a political label on them.