https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1762332/000139834424011580/fp0088639-1_497.htm
497 1 fp0088639-1_497.htm
FROST FAMILY OF FUNDS
(the “Trust”)
Frost Municipal Bond Fund
(the “Fund”)
Supplement dated June 11, 2024 to the Fund’s Summary Prospectus (the “Summary Prospectus”), Prospectus (the “Prospectus”) and Statement of Additional Information (“SAI”), each dated November 28, 2023
This supplement provides new and additional information beyond that contained in the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI, and should be read in conjunction with the Summary Prospectus, Prospectus and SAI.
The Board of Trustees of the Trust, at the recommendation of Frost Investment Advisors, LLC (the “Adviser”), the investment adviser of the Fund, has approved a plan of liquidation providing for the liquidation of the Fund’s assets and the distribution of the net proceeds pro rata to the Fund’s shareholders, effective as of August 5, 2024. In connection therewith, the Fund is closed to investments from new and existing shareholders effective July 31, 2024. The Fund is expected to cease operations and liquidate on or about September 5, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”). The Liquidation Date may be changed without notice at the discretion of the Trust’s officers.
Prior to the Liquidation Date, shareholders may redeem (sell) their shares in the manner described in the “Purchasing, Selling and Exchanging Fund Shares – How to Redeem Fund Shares” section of the Prospectus. For those Fund shareholders that do not redeem (sell) their shares prior to the Liquidation Date, the Fund will distribute to each such shareholder, on or promptly after the Liquidation Date, a liquidating cash distribution equal in value to the shareholder’s interest in the net assets of the Fund as of the Liquidation Date.
Beginning August 5, 2024, in anticipation of the liquidation of the Fund, the Adviser may manage the Fund in a manner intended to facilitate the Fund’s orderly liquidation, such as by holding cash or making investments in other highly liquid assets. As a result, during this time, all or a portion of the Fund may not be invested in a manner consistent with its stated investment strategies, which may prevent the Fund from achieving its investment objective.
The liquidation distribution amount will include any accrued income and capital gains, will be treated as a payment in exchange for shares and will generally be a taxable event for shareholders investing through taxable accounts. You should consult your personal tax advisor concerning your particular tax situation. Shareholders remaining in the Fund on the Liquidation Date will not be charged any transaction fees by the Fund. However, the net asset value of the Fund on the Liquidation Date will reflect costs of liquidating the Fund. Shareholders will receive liquidation proceeds as soon as practicable after the Liquidation Date.
PLEASE RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT FOR FUTURE REFERENCE.

Most investors should keep it simple. The SP500 has proven that over long time, think 20-30 years it beats most stock funds because it represents 2 simple ideas
1) American capitalism.
2) The index is a cap weighted index
Bogle built Vanguard on that.
Why mess up with this formula is beyond me? but many "experts" have been trying for decades to come up with "great" new ideas and many continue to fall for that.
It doesn't mean it's a guaranteed but in most cases, less is more, more diversification usually means more trading= more mistakes.
It gets worse, so much time and energy are being wasted too.

FYI - The link takes one to the login page.
If you're already logged in (requires a Merrill account) the link takes you to the cited page. If you have a log in but are not logged in, then when you log in on that login page you'll land on the cited page.
If you don't have a login, you can still get the list of available MMFs from the next link (rates and mins). But you won't know what their settlement date is or by what hour you must submit orders for execution on the indicated day (ranging from 11:45AM to 5:00PM(!)).
Why it matters is that settlement dates affect when cash is needed for trades. I've been unable to do an exchange between two MMFs in the same family simply because they had different settlement days. I had to sell one fund and subsequently buy another. What other timing/trading impacts the differences in settlement days have I leave as an exercise.
Among other things, the inability to invest pennies means that small amounts of cash (earning virtually nothing) will gradually pile up. If your fund is paying $N.75 per month, then you'll have 75¢ in cash after one month, $1.50 in cash after two months, etc. I expect loose change in a couch but not in a financial institution. Material or not, this is a shortcoming that I've not seen at any other institution.

Thanks for the suggestion @bee / Nice looking etf. I’m just looking out a month or two at a potential need. Adding things to my watch list that look enticing. Yes - I’m aware Yogi pointed out that BKIPX was for retirement plans. I was just jesting about the $5 Mil minimum.

Tech XLK Rebalancing
The next rebalancing of tech XLK may lead to a drastic change.
Its indexing rule limits the super-sized weight total to 50%, so MSFT and AAPL are super-sized now, but NVDA’s weight is clipped*, and everything else is capped under 5%. If NVDA continues to have market=cap bigger than AAPL, then NVDA would be super-sized (i.e. MSFT, NVDA would be super-sized), and AAPL would be clipped*. This would require selling $11.4 billion of AAPL and buying $9.8 billion of NVDA. Both being maga-caps, this may be just a ripple, or not.
Other tech ETFs do things differently and won't be affected by this change in XLK.
*This is a weird aspect of SPDR XLK indexing rule. More rational would be to proportionately reduce the super-sized weights, but XLK takes it all from the smallest of the group, now NVDA.
https://www.morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/xlk/portfolio
https://x.com/JSeyff/status/1800602335733059779
https://theedgemalaysia.com/node/715084

@msf- If you can temporarily pool enough cash to get into SUTXX, once that fund is open you can reduce the holding to well below the $1m. I was advised on that at our local Schwab branch, and that's our situation at the moment, having just taken cash from SUTXX to buy a couple of CDs

Oddly enough, we just got a call from Fidelity. It was from the rep just assigned to our account after two years without one.
Since I'm in the process of moving assets from Vanguard (all to Fidelity and then some, possibly, to a new Schwab account), I had an extended conversation of what I'm looking for. Including a solid Treasury MMF. He made the same suggestion as you - if I can temporarily pool enough cash to get into FSIXX (Fidelity's equivalent of SUTXX), then I can reduce the holding to any amount.
I admit it - we're not starved for cash - but $1M is a whole heap of pocket change. Merrill provides access to FSIXX with a $1 min.
A couple of quirks with buying this via Merrill is that it settles same day, not T+1, and one can only invest whole dollars. I believe that even div reinvestments must be in whole dollars; any remaining cents go into the settlement account.
To avoid these quirks, at Merrill one might instead use TFFXX. Blackrock reports that 98.65% of its income was state-exempt last year, and 98.81% was state-exempt in 2022.
MMFs at Merrill (generally next day settlement funds don't restrict transactions to whole dollars)
MMF rates and mins

Thank you @yogibearbull.
BAIPX wouldn’t come up for me at Fido.
BIIPX did come up, but with a $2 Mil minimum. So I shouldn’t need it any time soon.
BKIPX which I asked about now shows a $5 Mil minimum. (Didn’t notice that earlier) Yet in a separate article, M* promotes it as a top performer in its class. Go figure. How many dudes reading M* have $5 Mil to sink into a single fund?

Not all funds are supported at Fido even when it has a deal with iShares on many funds.
iShares ST-TIPS:
BAIPX https://digital.fidelity.com/search/main?q=BAIPX
BIIPX is TF & $2 million min https://fundresearch.fidelity.com/mutual-funds/summary/09258N885
BTW, BKIPX is retirement plan class K and not available to retail.

Thanks for the suggestion.
Elsewhere (another thread) I considered SGOV or USFR as partial subs for Vanguard Cash Plus (which can hold MMFs as well as having a bank sweep).

I could use an internet bank for FDIC-covered cash (many still paying 5%+), and something like SGOV or USFR for liquid Treasury cash.

It looks like USFR has done slightly better than TFLO, outperforming or matching returns each year since 2017, with higher Sharpe ratio albeit with slightly higher volatility.
Portfolio Visualizer comparison
As it turns out, last year at least USFR held slightly more in Treasuries (99.9868%) than did TFLO (97.76%). Though that difference could easily be noise and could vary year by year. They're both essentially 100% Treasury funds. Just don't try telling that to the state taxing authorities :-)
A problem using ETFs (or any bond fund) in lieu of a MMF is that either one takes the monthly divs in cash (rather than reinvesting) or one runs the risk of dealing with wash sales on each redemption. A minor nuisance but still something one needs to keep in mind.

In think what @baseball_fan is asking is if there is a potential fraud involved in Nvidia's revenue recognition? I would venture to guess there is probably some creativity involved (let us say, no more than 5% of the revenue) but within the bounds of GAAP / SEC's acceptable thresholds. Any one that is worried about Nvidia's Rev Rec issues instead should look at its cash flows. If you want a professional opinion on Nvidia's Rev Rec, send @Stillers, the accounting auditor professional in this forum, a private message. When Nvidia is being fed the revenue, I do not think they will go out of their way to be creative with Rev Rec.

@WABAC - The other way around. "Musk had redirected about 12,000 Nvidia H100 graphics processing units originally shipped to Tesla (TSLA) to two of his other companies, X and xAI."

Talk about a conflict of interest and/or corporate malfeasance.... and yet he wants $50billion more salary from Tesla despite screwing them over. Yeah, good job, Melon, you cosplaying business jenius.

Was wondering where to put this.

“If Tesla is to retain Elon's attention and motivate him to continue to devote his time, energy, ambition and vision to deliver comparable results in the future, we must stand by our deal," she added.

I'll take who/what is CoreWeave for $500 please....and what is their relationship with NVDA really about...

@WABAC - The other way around. "Musk had redirected about 12,000 Nvidia H100 graphics processing units originally shipped to Tesla (TSLA) to two of his other companies, X and xAI."

Talk about a conflict of interest and/or corporate malfeasance.... and yet he wants $50billion more salary from Tesla despite screwing them over. Yeah, good job, Melon, you cosplaying business jenius.

If you are looking for a highly competitive MM interest rate for your cash and can't find it at your brokerage, why not just put it into iShares Treasury Floating Rate Bond ETF (TFLO)?
Currently, the 30 Day SEC Yield is 5.33%. In addition, while interest on US Treasury bonds is taxable at the federal level, it is exempt from state and local income taxes.
TFLO currently invests 100% in Treasuries, hence the fund's interest is tax exempt at the state and local level.

Thanks. As it turns out, I just had a couple of conversations with Schwab today. They let me know about this option; they even referred to it as a loophole.
No way I could come up with that much cash in a taxable account. Whatever taxable cash I have has been gradually depleted over the past 15 years - going to pay taxes on Roth conversions. (The income restriction on conversions was removed in 2010.)

The card readers that set the crypto codes every 24 hours used a type of IBM paper punch hole card.
Old, old joke:
How was Thomas J Watson buried?
9 edge down.
Etymology of "nine-edge" and "twelve-edge"

Costco gold bars/biscuits, 1 oz, are in very limited supply. They are gone as soon as the new supply is loaded. Maybe the store signs alert to the current availability.
There used to be a limit of 2 per membership, but in the current order screen, the limit is 5.
What started as a small experiment overwhelmed what the supplier could provide. But things may have improved. But est $2.4 billion/yr in gold sales at Costco is impressive.
https://www.costco.com/1-oz-gold-bar-pamp-suisse-lady-fortuna-veriscan-new-in-assay.product.4000186760.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2024/04/09/costco-selling-up-to-200-million-in-gold-bars-a-month-wells-fargo-estimates.html

[snip]
I wonder if they have their "same-day" delivery service using their minimum wage delivery drivers for those?
[snip]

Costco has a reputation for paying their employees well within the retail industry.
Indeed indicates the average salary for Costco truck drivers is $28.05 per hour
which is 20% above the national average.
https://www.indeed.com/cmp/Costco-Wholesale/salaries/Truck-Driver
Edit/Add: Costco Pay Ranges PDF

@chinfist,
"Every time frame I have looked at (1 month, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, and 5 years) RPHIX has outperformed USFR. Expense ratios can be important, but ultimately don’t matter if the returns after the expense ratio are better." [bold added]
Preaching to the choir. I probably pay least attention to ERs than most. But in the context of this thread of stashing cash and cash equivalents, a 1% ER should not be overlooked.
Each subsequent question in my post is in the context of the prior question. Answering the last question independently is inevitably out of context. If RPHIX is currently preferred over USFR, then it should be preferred over MM funds (and any 3 month (or any 1-6 month) Treasury bills) that @Chang owns.
Sorry, I do not have more time to elaborate (and not interested in debating). If you currently like the fund, enjoy it, I am not asking you to sell.
My post was trying to get more color from @chang (whose post was right above my post - I neglected by not directly addressing it to him), as to why he is using RPHIX as a cash equivalent.
There was a time when people were posting about using PIMIX as a cash sub. So, everyone has their own reasons. However, David Sherman was clear RPHIX is not a MM (cash) substitute.

Personally, I would care more about getting access to as many funds as possible than having to pay a transaction fees. I am fine to pay Fidelity's $50+$5 (auto pay). For example, I can not buy QLENX in my Schwab retail account ("institutional customers only" fund) but I can buy it in my Fidelity retail account. If I covert the Schwab account into an advisory account, I will be able to buy QLENX at Schwab but I will have to pay the advisory fees plus additional friction of it being an advisory account. So, QLEIX (Institutional class) being available for a $100K minimum at Schwab is of no use to me as the fees for the advisory account will exceed the difference in ER between QLENX and QLEIX. That is the example I was trying to drive at in my referring to QDSNX unavailability at Schwab in my earlier post.
I end up buying the funds Schwab makes available to "institutional customers only" in my Fidelity account and my Schwab account is more loaded with long term holdings of ETFs, individual stocks, and institutional class of mutual funds. I also use ETFs in place of Schwab MM funds. I do not know how much money Schwab makes on their payment for order flows but I can bet Fidelity makes a lot more from me on their MM funds and 12b-1 fees on non-Fidelity funds.
(Also, Fidelity's requirement of 60 days holding period to avoid their STR fees is a lot better than Schwab's 90 day requirement. So, if Schwab gives me access to QLENX, that is not as attractive as if it gave me access to QLEIX.)
I think it is a terrible business model for Schwab to classify so many funds as "institutional customers only" funds. But if it is working for Schwab and for many of you, who am I to ask for a change. Keep it going.