http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000091580215000101/grandeurpeakfeecapfootnoteup.htm
h497 1 grandeurpeakfeecapfootnoteup.htm
FINANCIAL INVESTORS TRUST
Grandeur Peak Emerging Markets Opportunities Fund
Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund
SUPPLEMENT DATED DECEMBER 4, 2015 TO THE PROSPECTUS DATED AUGUST 31, 2015
Grandeur Peak Emerging Markets Opportunities Fund
The footnote under the Table titled “FEES AND EXPENSES OF THE FUND” on page 2 of the Prospectus is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
** Grandeur Peak Global Advisors, LLC (the “Adviser”), has agreed to waive and/or reimburse fees or expenses in order to limit Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses After Fee Waiver/Expense Reimbursement (excluding acquired fund fees and expenses, brokerage expenses, interest expenses, taxes and extraordinary expenses) to 1.95% and 1.70% of the Fund’s average daily net assets for the Fund’s Investor Class Shares and Institutional Class Shares, respectively. This agreement (the “Expense Agreement”) is in effect through August 31, 2016. The Adviser will be permitted to recover, on a class- by-class basis, expenses it has borne through the Expense Agreement to the extent that a Fund’s expenses in later periods fall below the expense cap in effect at the time of waiver or reimbursement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Fund will not be obligated to pay any such deferred fees and expenses more than three years after the end of the fiscal year in which the fee and expenses was deferred. The Expense Agreement may not be terminated or modified prior to August 31, 2016 except with the approval of the Fund’s Board of Trustees.
Grandeur Peak Global Reach Fund
The second footnote under the Table titled “FEES AND EXPENSES OF THE FUND” on page 10 of the Prospectus is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
** Grandeur Peak Global Advisors, LLC (the “Adviser”), has agreed to waive and/or reimburse fees or expenses in order to limit Total Annual Fund Operating Expenses After Fee Waiver/Expense Reimbursement (excluding acquired fund fees and expenses, brokerage expenses, interest expenses, taxes and extraordinary expenses) to 1.60% and 1.35% of the Fund’s average daily net assets for the Fund’s Investor Class Shares and Institutional Class Shares, respectively. This agreement (the “Expense Agreement”) is in effect through August 31, 2016. The Adviser will be permitted to recover, on a class- by-class basis, expenses it has borne through the Expense Agreement to the extent that a Fund’s expenses in later periods fall below the expense cap in effect at the time of waiver or reimbursement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Fund will not be obligated to pay any such deferred fees and expenses more than three years after the end of the fiscal year in which the fee and expenses was deferred. The Expense Agreement may not be terminated or modified prior to August 31, 2016 except with the approval of the Fund’s Board of Trustees.
* * *
Please retain this supplement for future reference.
ttp://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/915802/000091580215000101/grandeurpeakfeecapfootnoteup.htm

FYI: With rising ETF popularity, some have written off mutual funds, but advisers need to understand the nuances.
Regards,
Ted
http://www.investmentnews.com/article/20151204/BLOG09/151209957?template=printart

Bitzer, imho, the best shot at figuring out why an MF fund loses or gains a ton on a given day/week is to look at the last portfolio data disclosure and see if the long and short exposures explain it. But of course the disclosures are infrequent and sometimes really sketchy, depending on the outfit, so good luck with that.
I came to the conclusion after a couple of tries at MF investing in Q4 2014/H1 2015 that they're just not worth it for the "alt" use I had in mind - mainly an investment less correlated with equity that at least partially sidesteps FI duration and credit risk. There were just too many days when equity and MF losses coincided, including some (apparently like yesterday?) when the MF losses were way worse than equities ...
Fwiw, back when I was giving MFs a trial run, one of the biggest drivers of their gains and losses was currency exposure.

As of market close (12/03/2015) Old_Skeet is down according to M* portfolio manager by about 1.5%. In comparison, the Lipper Balanced Index is about even for the year. I have a good number of funds in the Growth & Income and Growth Areas of my portfolio that are generating positive returns; but, overall they can not offset the others that are down. However, my broker generated monthly statements indicate I have positive returns thus far this year due to special investment positions (spiffs) that I have utilized from time-to-time. With this, my trading activity has put me net positive through November.
With a current high P/E Ratio (23.1 TTM) on stocks (S&P 500 Index) along with as reported earnings in decline, a strong dollar and expectations of a FOMC rate increase I'm thinking it is going to be a bad year for my portfolio. I could reduce my portfolio's equity allocation downward another 10% and still be within my equity allocation range of 40% to 60% equity; however, that would put me extremely overweight cash as I am already above my cash allocation range now of 10% to 20% along with being light fixed income (currently at 20%) with an allocation range of 20% to 40%. In addition, other assets as defined in Xray remain at 5%.
So, it is what it is. Some years you make good money, some years you do not. In addition, M* portfolio manager indicates that my portfolio's mutual fund holdings combined and on average are currently off their 52 week highs by about 8.5% as I write. With this, I've got some funds that have been extremely poor performers, thus far over the past 52 week peroid, with the worst performers being my emerging market and global infrastructure funds. I am glad I sold my gold and commodity funds, a while back, as they would also have been detractors.
In addition, @Old_Joe, I am thinking that @Junkster will make money this year along with @Ted. Then there is @bee that is an active investor ... she may as well. I am sure there are also a few others ... so, let's not leave out @Scott.
And, so it goes ...

@VintageFreak Buy some healthcare funds, too, please! ;)

Frankly I was thinking of slowly bottom fishing in energy heavy funds hence made that offer. My charity has limits :D
I'm not ready to buy Healthcare funds since they are at their highs. That wouldn't do much for you anyways.

http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1552947/000158064215005557/fortunatus497s2.htm
497 1 fortunatus497s2.htm 497
FORTUNATUS PROTACTICAL NEW OPPORTUNITY FUND
Class A FPOAX
Class C FPOCX
Class I FPOIX
A Series of Two Roads Shared Trust
Supplement dated December 3, 2015
to the Prospectus dated November 24, 2014, as supplemented.
__________________________________________
The Board of Trustees of Two Roads Shared Trust (the “Trust”) has concluded that it is in the best interests of the Fortunatus Protactical New Opportunity Fund (the “Fund”) and its shareholders that the Fund cease operations. The Board has determined to close the Fund and redeem all outstanding shares no later than the close of business on December 31, 2015.
Effective immediately, the Fund will not accept any new investments. The Fund will begin liquidating its portfolio and will invest in cash or cash equivalents (such as money market funds) until all shares have been redeemed. The Fund will no longer pursue its stated investment objective once it begins liquidating its portfolio. Any capital gains will be distributed as soon as practicable to shareholders and reinvested in additional shares, unless you have previously requested payment in cash. Shares of the Fund are otherwise not available for purchase.
Prior to December 31, 2015, you may redeem your shares, including reinvested distributions, in accordance with the “How to Redeem Shares” section of the Fund’s Prospectus. Unless your investment in the Fund is through a tax-deferred retirement account, a redemption is subject to tax on any taxable gains. No redemption fees will be assessed on redemptions of Fund shares made after the date of this notice. 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 DECEMBER 31, 2015 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 1-844-798-3646.
________________________
This Supplement and the existing Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”) each dated November 24, 2014, provide relevant information for all shareholders and should be retained for future reference. The Prospectus and the SAI have been filed with the U.S Securities and Exchange Commission, are incorporated by reference, and can be obtained without charge by calling 1-844-798-3646.

Well, as things stand; our house is going to be working on a 0% return for the year.
Perhaps time to retire in total and spread the money around into the best 5 active managed balanced, conservative and moderation allocation funds and be done with the hard work.
U.S. dollar down and futures indicate commodity area getting a shot in the arm. Hey, what does the futures markets know anyway?
http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
Doesn't appear I'll be getting that self rewarding holiday investment returns bonus gift this year.
Regards,
Catch

Typical antenna array of low-level cell-site
These antennas are driven by low power transmitters typically located in a small shed-enclosure near the antenna pole- note the black cables leading from the antenna array. Sometimes these antenna sites accommodate equipment from competing carriers. Installations such as this are typically interconnected to the internet or a central communication facility by either microwave radio or fiber cable.

An alternative inconspicuous antenna of a very low-level cell-site (from scott's Crown Castle links, above)
Antennas such as this are driven by very low power transmitters: note the small enclosure located on the light pole. This installation is interconnected to the internet or a central communication facility by fiber cable.

IMHO, we are seriously at the point of overthinking this. "Forced Selling" is more of an issue when market is falling (which of course could always happen).
One can also make argument manager can then buy shares cheaper subsequently.
M* is showing 23% cash for FAIRX. The true cash stake might be larger and that can be used to "weather redemptions" from those investors who will not reinvest distributions (yours truly, as a rule)
Finally, two more things.
First, let's debate about the dangers of FAIRX more in terms of how Berkowitz invests. What were people expecting? That he will keep AIG stake at 40% forever? Money is made when investment is SOLD. Else it is paper gain. Just one reason I don't reinvest distributions - it is a healthy way to take gains and diversify across your holdings buy re-deploying in another fund.
Second, of all the faults one thinks Berkowitz is (I include infatuation with Fartiromo which has gotten my goat in the past), he is hardly an idiot. I would like to think he has planned this out a little bit more than what people are giving him credit for, If you purchased FAIRX in June 2015 and are now complaining, I have no sympathy for you.

@scott- With respect to entities like American Tower, there are some "yes, buts". I'm speaking here from my experiences as a retired radio technician. It's important to understand the differences between "high level" and "low level" towers: the "level" indicates the altitude with respect to the surrounding terrain, and of course in that context high and low has the obvious meaning.

Fantastic post, and really useful. Thanks for the information. I don't own AMT, but I do own Crown Castle, which has ramped up its small cell projects (http://www.crowncastle.com/projects/communities_central-park.aspx, http://www.crowncastle.com/communities/small-cell-solutions.aspx) and has 15,000+ miles of fiber in major cities. Thanks again for your post, really informative and gives me a lot to think about in terms of how to look at this sector further.

Personally, I think this remains one of the more low-key ways to play energy infrastructure (I don't own a fund, I've always been interested in individual names) but as the move in crude shows no signs of really rebounding (and may get worse), pipelines have been drawn into the decline. There is also likely concern over the possibility of higher interest rates.
There's no bigger example than Kinder Morgan, the previously much-beloved pipeline co that has come down considerably. I think people are looking at Kinder and the concerns over that company (whose publicly traded warrants have gone from $5.40 in April to 25 cents) and taking that - to some degree - as a sign of distress across the whole industry, when I don't believe that's warranted. While there are concerns beyond Kinder, the recent moves lower in Kinder (including the recent need to issue convertible pfds that yield 9.75%, as well as the move a couple of days ago to increase their investment in a struggling pipeline that resulted in their being put on negative credit watch by Moody's - if Kinder's credit rating goes to junk, that's a real problem) seem to take the sector lower with it.
Elsewhere, Energy Transfer (ETE) is in the midst of buying Williams (WMB) and that will soon become the largest energy infrastructure play in the US (and perhaps the world), moving past Kinder.
Lastly, the other concern - although not a major one at this point - is the idea that f things do get worse, producers may try to push for renegotiation of fees with transport cos. At this point, the only notable case of that is Chesapeake and Williams. I'm not really concerned about that in terms of pipelines, especially with major players. I do think though, if you look at other aspects of the industry, this downturn has revealed that things thought safe-ish because of things like "take or pay" contracts can change quick - a big example of that are the frac sand companies. Hi Crush literally states on its front page, "Substantially all of our frac sand production is sold to leading investment grade-rated pressure pumping service providers under long-term, take-or-pay contracts that require our customers to pay a specified price for a specified volume of frac sand each month." Doesn't matter, stock has literally gone from $70 in the Summer of 2014 to $7 and just dropped the distribution.
That said, I don't see it going to zero and things like that are examples of energy-related plays that will eventually recover. However, the recovery won't happen tomorrow and it becomes one's time horizon and risk tolerance. How long is one willing to wait? The "willing to wait" part is understandably going to vary by the person and the investment. I don't know if I'm willing to wait for a frac sand play to recover, but I'm more than willing to wait for a massive pipeline company that basically provides energy to a huge portion of the country. While I haven't invested in anything Kinder Morgan-related since Kinder Morgan Partners was bought, when you have a company that moves about 33% of the US nat gas demand, at some point/price, I may consider that (although I'd probably look at the convertible preferred.) I am considering adding to current pipeline plays. Again though, it becomes what is one's time horizon and interest and understandably, that's going to vary from person-to-person. I really like owning what I consider vital infrastructure - pipelines, railroads, even financial infrastructure (ICE, CME) and really just see these plays as long-term holdings that will have their ups and downs over time.
Broadly though, the pipelines will recover when energy does. I have not sold my pipeline co's and don't plan to. If anything, I've thought about adding at these levels and simply continuing to reinvest. I don't really think about these holdings, I guess from the standpoint of their inevitable need as vital infrastructure. With further regulation highly likely, it is almost certain that the larger of these companies will retain a wide moat.

Some additional considerations when a fund has a large capital gain distribution:
1. If folks are not reinvesting their distributions, that'll mean the fund has to sell to meet those "redemptions". If half of Fairholme's shareholders are not reinvesting, this means 15%+ of the fund is going to be redeemed. Forced selling is never a good thing for a fund.
2. If you like the fund and have a gain that's less then the distributed gain, you can sell just before the record date and buy back just after to minimize the time you are out. (No wash sales on gains.)
3. If you like the fund and have a taxable loss, you can still sell use the "sell just before and buy just after" strategy. You'll have a wash sale, but this simply means you start off where you were with an embedded loss - not a big problem. Of course, you can get out for 30 days and get the benefit of the loss this year.
4. Remember that a distribution is simply a pre-payment of taxes. You might pay more tax this year, but (because of your higher basis) you'll pay less in the future. I'd prefer to control when I pay my taxes, but pre-paying is not a disaster.
5. If a fund is distributing long-term capital gains, you can sell the fund after the distribution (in the same tax year) and end up with the same tax consequences. This might help if you were surprised by the distribution.
I hope these aren't too obvious and are helpful.
Personally, I think funds that have 30%+ distributions have several things going on and they are all headwinds. Giving them a break as they regroup might be a good strategy.

Sorry about the delay. Been running since 5:30 this morning, trying to catch up on my professoring, chairing, dad-ing and email. Yikes.
The "us" in "several of us" are Ed and me, several equity managers I've talked with but who don't particularly want to be quoted on the matter, and the folks I cited in the original article (Leuthold, GMO, and so on).
Back to being dad.
David

I would not be an early buyer of this fund, but would prefer to watch and wait for an attractive track record to develop. As M* likes to err on the side of mutual fund companies and not investors, M* will likely post the relatively attractive performance of the "predecessor fund," which dates all the way back to 2005, despite the fact that this "fund" was not an open mutual fund available to all investors during this time period. The managers of this fund have done a decent but not stellar job at TFHIX.
Kevin

The apparent text section in question from the December 1 commentary is below and is opening of the paragraph just above "Briefly Noted", which is #17 in the content list.
I do agree with the two previous comments; that I also don't understand who to attribute this statement to.....as noted by @VintageFreak...."Who is Several of us?"; followed by @JohnChisum and his question/statement.
"Several of us have taken the position that we’re likely in the early stages of a bear market. The Wall Street Journal (12/01/2015) reports two troubling bits of economic data that might feed that concern: US corporate capital expenditures (capex) continue dropping and emerging market corporate debt defaults continue rising. For the first time in recent years, e.m. default rates exceed U.S. rates.
Briefly Noted . . ."
Regards,
Catch

HP Enteprise (HPE) article on the trends in Telecom. I like FSTCX and PRMTX to own exposure to these trends.
The six major disruptions that will drive the most change in Telecommunications by 2020 are:
Integration
Thingification
Mobility
Saturation
Security
Ascension
Let's visit each of these in turn, and take a look at the world of Telecommunications five years into the future.
https://hpematter.com/issue-no-4-spring-2015/content-barons-smart-dust-skynet-6-telecommunications-disruptions-2020

FYI:
Regards,
Ted
http://www.mfwire.com/common/artprint2007.asp?storyID=53075&wireid=2

Several of us have taken the position that we’re likely in the early stages of a bear market. The Wall Street Journal (12/01/2015) reports two troubling bits of economic data that might feed that concern: US corporate capital expenditures (capex) continue dropping and emerging market corporate debt defaults continue rising. For the first time in recent years, e.m. default rates exceed U.S. rates.
Who is Several of us?

A poster on the Bogleheads forum helpfully pointed out the difference between the upcoming fund and the current (closing) fund:
"By the way, nobody seems to have mentioned the difference between Style Premia Alternative (I) and Style Premia Alternative II. Looks like the latter uses equities, bonds, and currencies only, according to the filing. The original adds commodities and interest rates to that. This means that the new fund doesn't need the Cayman Islands subsidiary, as is common practice for running commodities trading.
I wonder if the risk weighting by asset class is going to change. Equities are already over half the old fund by risk (not by nominal dollar)."
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=178649#p2705215

Like Chinfist, I like to spread my exposure to ALT funds with at least a 5% position in each investment, preferably 10%.
There may be select pockets for attractive FI exposure going forward in an increasing interest rate environment, but they will likely be limited to one of the Doubleline funds/CEFS, muni funds/CEFs, and PIMIX. And going forward, I definitely prefer select ALT funds over FI funds/CEFs such as: QMNIX, QLEIX, MCXIX, and even the low cost VMNFX ($50 min in Wellstrade retirement accounts).
Kevin