https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/897111/000089843224000164/form497.htm
497 1 form497.htm FORM 497
CARILLON SERIES TRUST
Carillon Chartwell Short Duration Bond Fund
SUPPLEMENT DATED FEBRUARY 26, 2024 TO
THE PROSPECTUS, SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION DATED
MAY 1, 2023, AS PREVIOUSLY AMENDED OR SUPPLEMENTED
The Board of Trustees of Carillon Series Trust has approved a Plan of Liquidation and Dissolution pursuant to which the Carillon Chartwell Short Duration Bond Fund (“Fund”) will be liquidated and terminated on or about April 19, 2024 (the “Liquidation Date”) based upon the recommendation of Carillon Tower Advisers, Inc. (“Carillon”), the Fund’s investment adviser.
In anticipation of the liquidation, effective on or about April 5, 2024, the Fund will be closed to new shareholders. To prepare for the liquidation, Carillon and/or Chartwell Investment Partners, LLC, the Fund’s subadviser, may need to increase the portion of the Fund’s assets held in cash and similar instruments in order to pay for Fund expenses and to meet redemption requests. As a result, the Fund may no longer be pursuing its investment objective during this transition. The Fund will distribute cash pro rata to all remaining shareholders who have not previously redeemed or exchanged all of their shares on or about the Liquidation Date. These distributions may be taxable events. Once the distributions are complete, the Fund will terminate.
Liquidation proceeds will be delivered in accordance with the existing instructions for your account. No action is needed on your part.
Please note that you may exchange your shares of the Fund at net asset value at any time prior to the Liquidation Date for the Class Chartwell shares of the Carillon Chartwell Income Fund, Carillon Chartwell Short Duration High Yield Fund, Carillon Chartwell Mid Cap Value Fund, Carillon Chartwell Small Cap Value Fund or Carillon Chartwell Small Cap Growth Fund. You may also redeem your shares of the Fund at any time prior to the Liquidation Date. No sales charges, redemption or termination fees will be imposed in connection with such exchanges and redemptions. In general, exchanges and redemptions are taxable events for shareholders.
In connection with the liquidation, the Fund may declare taxable distributions of its net investment income and net capital gains in advance of the Liquidation Date, which may be taxable to shareholders.
You should consult your tax adviser to discuss the Fund’s liquidation and determine its tax consequences.
For more information, please contact us at 1.800.421.4184.
* * * * *
INVESTORS SHOULD RETAIN THIS SUPPLEMENT WITH
THE PROSPECTUS, SUMMARY PROSPECTUS AND STATEMENT OF ADDITIONAL
INFORMATION FOR FUTURE REFERENCE

+1.
@MikeM: Maybe a typo there?
ET just paid, on 20th Feb. The very healthy dividend was .315 cents/share.
...You must be quoting me info re: BUI. I don't prefer ETFs. But I'm always acting against my own dictates. The latest illustration of that is FALN. (And I've been wanting to add a Yoot. This one might fit the bill.)

Nifty Fifty became a bad term in the US that is now reserved for speculative fever in the stock market. And Magnificent 7 (or 6) is an extreme play on that previous extreme.
But Nifty 50 has been deployed for normal use elsewhere, e.g. India Nifty 50 Index ^NSEI (ETF INDY),
https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/^NSEI/
Repurposing words is an interesting cultural phenomenon where many words have been repurposed with completely different connotations than their original meaning or use.

There have been a couple of interesting thoughts recently about how the "Nifty Fifty" really did going forward.
https://www.advisorperspectives.com/articles/2024/02/21/magnificent-seven-bubble-nifty-fifty?hsid=28049439&_hsmi=295446596
Table one is particularly interesting. I have found Leibowitz to be very thoughtful and insightful, and free!
He references Jeremy Siegel's article years ago, proving ( Siegel says) that even getting in a the peak, you made money in Nifty Fifty, as long as you held on ( for dear life!)
Hussman has a new "special edition" piece reiterating his previous concerns about valuations. He sounds so logical, but the differences between the portfolios of HSTRX and HSGFX could not be more extreme.
https://www.hussmanfunds.com/comment/observations/obs240225/

We've been holding this etf for reasons of quality growth, and add with dollar cost averaging. A big chunk of Mag 7. This etf doesn't release holdings information on a daily basis, so I don't know what is being held today.

FBCG Top holdings (Fido Blue Chip Growth, active etf)
Top 10 holdings AS OF Dec-31-2023
59.72%
of 159 total
MSFT Microsoft Corp 10.15%
NVDA NVIDIA Corp 9.81%
AAPL Apple Inc 9.63%
AMZN Amazon.com Inc 9.10%
GOOGL Alphabet Inc Class A 6.64%
META Meta Platforms Inc Class A 4.99%
UBER Uber Technologies Inc 2.62%
LLY Eli Lilly and Co 2.34%
NFLX Netflix Inc 2.22%
SNAP Snap Inc Class A 2.21%

I did some math for my state Massachusetts, which taxes income and LT Cap Gains at 5% but ST cap Gains at 12% !!!
If you hold BOXX for over a year there is a small benefit; you pay 15% plus 5% vs 22or 24% etc ( depending on income)
IF you sell before a year, you get hosed, as pay both ST federal tax and ST State tax.
This would only make sense if you plan to hold them for at least a year.
The % differences even so are small unless you are in a very high bracket

Welcome back!
As far as we can tell, the MySQL software we use (v 5.5) is so old that it crashes things every time it's touched. And, for reasons yet unexplained, our web host did not learn from Crash #1 or near-Crash #2 (hi, Crash!) and so didn't look to see if the site was back and live after last night's adventure.
Thanks to all who reached out, and to the many good folks who waited more-or-less patiently for us.
With luck, nothing happens now until after Eric updates all of the software on the offline version of the site and we hit the switch to redirect incoming traffic from the server with the old version of the site to the server with the new.
And really, what could possibly go wrong?

My most successful mutual fund is FCNTX, which I’ve owned about 25 years. I have sold portions over the years because it had grown so much that I was afraid it getting too large. Plus, I used to follow M* religiously, and they rarely have anything good to say about Fidelity funds except to da,n them with faint praise. It’s still one of my largest holdings and continues to amaze me. I don’t worry about its holdings because Danoff seems to find value in every market. Similar results from FBALX, another fund that gets no respect from M*.

Last call for posters to report your Mag 7 allocations.
After which, I hope to discuss those with the posters who were kind enough to share.
And, as an FYI, anyone interested in adding Mag 7 exposure to your port:
ETF: MAGS, all Mag 7, all the time! Or, as Jolt Cola used to advertise, "All the taste and twice the sugar!" or something like that!
OEF: VIGAX is the fund I've found (so far) with the highest (last I checked) Mag 7 allocation at ~51.2%

Great story @Anna. And we trust you are anything but obsolete!
If I may add one on devices...
Circa Spring 1977, Senior Year UG finals. Of all the challenging accounting major courses I took, there was nothing that compared to Business Statistics. The subject was SO difficult that we were always allowed Open Book Policy while taking exams, including the Final.
Factorials were the dastardly element that NOBODY seemed to be able to get their heads around, and I went to a great accounting school that produced some incredible talent. Even with our books wide open, we'd spend excessive amounts of time trying to calc factorials.
But lucky me. For Xmas 1976, my beloved got me a crazy new device, a Texas Instrument hand-held calculator. Say what? What does it even do?
I lugged it around for a few months without really using it, its newness, my skepticism and all. But lucky for me, it had a factorial button that I discovered right in the middle of that Business Statistics final LOADED with factorial calculations!
"Do I use it? Doesn't seem fair," I thought.
But then I thought, "Will I ever use or even know what a factorial is after I leave this classroom?"
I answered "No" to that question, and Cha-ching! Aced that puppy and NEVER once in my 35+-yr accounting career was the term factorial even spoken.
Without looking, anyone know what one is?

I took a brief look at this last night and have to read more about how the mechanism works, associated risks, etc.
1. One man's tax dodge is another man's smart investing. In theory, ETFs don't have an advantage over mutual funds - the statute that makes cap gains disappear in a puff of smoke (via in-kind distributions) originally applied to corporations as well as mutual funds. Decades ago it was rewritten, maintaining the break for mutual funds while excluding corporations from this benefit.
This all happened before ETFs existed. ETFs benefit because they just happen to be a form of mutual fund. In practice, ETFs have the advantage because they redeem shares in-kind, while OEFs rarely do so.
That said, my personal feeling is that this dodge "provides an unfair tax subsidy for ETFs and encourages the transfer of capital from other kinds of investment vehicle to ETFs." This has got little to do with Washington scrounging up extra dollars - a fix could be revenue neutral. IMHO it's a matter of providing a level playing field.
Jeffrey M Colon, The Great ETF Tax Swindle: The Taxation of In-Kind Redemptions, Penn State Law Review (2017)
There are lots of loopholes begging for attention, such as carried interest. And one that seems to curry favor here - unrestricted Roth conversions - a way of getting around income restrictions intended to limit tax benefits that higher earners receive. As the saying goes, it all depends on whose ox is being gored.
2. NYC is unusual in that it has both a high tax rate (combined NYS + NYC) and that rates go up pretty fast with income. This combination makes it quite possible for one to owe more taxes if the income is treated as cap gains (state/local taxable) than if it is treated as Treasury interest (ordinary tax, but only at federal level).
For example, in 2023 a couple with taxable income of $90K would pay 22% on ordinary income and 15% on cap gains. That 7% savings by treating the Treasury interest as cap gains would be more than offset by an added NYS tax of 5.5% plus a NYC tax of 3.876%.
Now this assumes that the taxpayer can't deduct the NY taxes due to SALT limits on deductions. That may change in 2026. In this particular example, even with a SALT deduction (worth 22% x 9.376% or about 2.06%), one would still pay more in net state and local taxes (7.3%) than one would save in fed taxes (7%). But it is close and one can easily conceive of other brackets where deductibility of SALT would make a difference.
In California, look at a couple with taxable income of $110K. As with the $90K NY couple, they'd be paying 22% fed tax on ordinary income and 15% on cap gains - a 7% difference. At the state level, they'd be paying 0% on Treasury interest but 8% on cap gains. Same problem.
This transmutation of Treasury interest into cap gains works very well for high earners - where the cap gains rate (even at 20%) is well below the fed rates of 35% or 37%. Of course it also works well for the hoi polloi in states with low or no local income taxes.

@rforno, I thought options income was short-term CGs, not ROC. May be will double-check.

I double-checked as well just to make sure my info was still current. Per Kiplinger:

Option-income funds designate much of their distributions as a "return of capital," a phrase that suggests you're not getting a true dividend. But just as there is good cholesterol and bad cholesterol, there are good and bad returns of capital. Cash inflows from option sales are repeatable and sustainable. So, unless an options-based fund is mismanaged, it shouldn't suffer the long-term erosion of NAV that plagues CEFs that regularly liquidate assets to maintain high payouts.
(src: https://www.kiplinger.com/article/investing/t052-c003-s001-option-income-cefs-may-be-a-smarter-choice.html0

Not to pick on GS here but...
Dateline: Oct 17, 2022
Starship: Goldman Sachs
Headline: The stock market is still too expensive even after its 25% decline, but there are bargains to be had in small caps, Goldman Sachs says
https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/stock-market-outlook-valuations-rich-small-caps-value-interest-rates-2022-10
Since 10/17/22:
FXAIX is UP 41.5%
IWM is UP 18.5%
I used to subscribe to IBD way back in the day when I traded individual stocks a bunch. I learned a LOT from that subscription, including the FACT that when individual stocks are making new highs, their P/E's are many times regarded as WAY TOO HIGH. (And, according to GS on 10/17/22, even after a 25% overall market decline, they were still too high!)
Perhaps something that supports @Graust's suggestion to "Don't fight the market."

For BUI, Yahoo Finance shows 7.39% fwd yield, M* shows 5-yr history of distributions with significant ROCs.

Saw a blurb on BOXX it at X/Twitter too, LINK.
It combines derivatives with in-kind trading features of the ETFs to avoid distributions. So, one buys it and then pays CGs only on sale. ER of 19.5 bps is OK. While remarkable, it looks lot of complicated work to achieve approximately the m-mkt returns.
If the links are behind the paywall, BOXX prospectus describes the strategy - it cannot be a total black box to get the SEC approval.
https://alphaarchitect.com/wp-content/uploads/compliance/etf/statutory_prospectus/BOXX_Prospectus.pdf

How to search for funds
p.s. I don't have a Schwab account

Several brokerages, including Schwab, have made it harder (or impossible) to use their tools without an account. As @Low_Tech observed, "Schwab re-arranged their whole fund/ETF research section in late '22"
The YouTube video referenced above says "To find these funds, I'll point to Research, then under Research Tools, select ETFs." You'll find the screen shot at the 0:40 mark in the video. The problem is that this isn't the screen that one sees without logging in. There is no "Research" drop down from the home page, or AFAIK any Schwab page one can navigate to without logging in. This is indeed a change from a year ago.
At least one can still access the Schwab screener(s) without logging in:
Schwab fund screener
Schwab ETF screener
From these pages you can also search for individual funds
E*Trade does enable visitors to navigate to its fund screener:
E*Trade fund screener
There's a different page to research specific funds:
E*Trade fund search box
Vanguard third party fund list by family
One can research a specific fund from the home page search box without logging in.
I haven't found a fund screener at Vanguard (for non-VG funds) even after logging in.
As Yogi observed, Fidelity lets you search for tickers from its home page search box. One can also navigate to its fund screener:
Fidelity fund screener
(use '>" at upper left to expand search critera and select "Include ETFs" for integrated fund/ETF search)
T. Rowe Price, Merrill Edge, Firstrade, and TIAA all seem to require brokerage account logins (TRP fund login doesn't suffice) to search for and/or research funds.

It just happened again Sunday, 25 February about 12:40pm (CST) when I tried to post comment on a thread.

Schwab Full Platform Tutorial
How to check your positions
How to search for funds
Charles Schwab Trading Platform Web Tutorial
Want more? Try googling "how to find things on the Schwab brokerage website"
p.s. I don't have a Schwab account.
EDIT: so I don't know if any of the above links/video/etc. work or not. You're on your own from here

On Motley Fool and Palantir see also
https://www.fool.com/investing/2024/02/24/will-hot-ticker-be-a-trillion-dollar-stock-by-2035/
At the end of their discussion, MF said:
The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Palantir Technologies wasn’t one of them.

@Edmond

At least one answer to that question is many of the chemical companies. Depending on their output, natural gas represents THE major input cost to create many of the chemicals which these companies produce/sell. Lower input costs mean fatter profit margins. The chemical industry is very cyclical/volatile. Probably the 'safe choice' here would be Dow Chemical which presently has divd yield just below5%. Value Line assesses Dow's financial strength as "A:".
I have no opinion, nor any direct holding in any chemical company at the present time.

FSCHX might be a consideration, though Dow is not part of its top 10 holdings.