Cited On
Pipeline170x170

How to Avoid Taxes on 80% of Your Investment Income. Hard to believe, right? But thanks to the way the US government supports US oil and gas companies, you may only pay taxes on around 20% of your income from energy related Master Limited Partnerships (“MLPs”). As an investor, this can be a pretty good deal.

Master Limited Partnerships are required to pay out 90% of their profits to shareholders much like Real Estate Investment Trusts. Unlike REITS, the payments an MLP makes to a shareholder are considered to a “return of capital” until the full principal is paid off at which point it converts to a taxable distribution, but with certain offsets to those taxes as a result of being a partnership. Energy MLP’s pay anywhere from a 4% to an 8% distribution, sometimes more.

Here’s how it works.
The hydrocarbon industry can be generally divided into three major classes: upstream operations, mid-stream operations, and downstream operations.
Upstream: These are the companies that work the fields – they build and maintain wells and draw oil and natural gas out of the ground.
Midstream: These companies control the pipelines or other transport systems to get the product from the upstream players to the downstream players.
Downstream: These are the companies that process and refine the hydrocarbons and also get them to the end users be it a major plastics manufacturer or a the gas station down the road.

In each of these classes companies have choices in how they organize themselves. Many choose a “Master Limited Partnership” partner structure and that is where the incredibly favorable tax treatment kicks in.

What are you actually taxed on when an MLP pays a distribution or partner’s share of net income? The difference between the distributions from your shares minus depreciation and maintenance expense.

Let’s look at a basic illustration of the concept. Let’s say you put $100,000 into an MLP stock, with a distribution rate of 10%. At the end of the year, you will have received $10,000 in distributions. Let’s say your shares are eligible for $7,000 of the company’s depreciation for the year, and another $2,000 in maintenance costs. From the IRS viewpoint, you earned $1,000 and that’s what you will get taxed on.

Not quite tax free, but pretty darn close considering. You picked up $10,000 you can spend on whatever, but only get taxed on $1,000 of it.
Wow, sounds great, right? But as in everything they do they government giveth and the government taketh away.

The IRS gets a big chunk of it’s money back when you sell your MLP shares. They view the depreciation and maintenance expenses as reducing your cost basis upon sale, and you can’t take depreciation against the income once your cost basis hits zero. You know get taxed at your income tax rate, not the capital gains rate.

You have to file a K-1 to file with the IRS. Here is where the pain starts. For those that don’t know, that’s a partnership tax form. They can be complex and if you aren’t a tax whiz, you are going to need to get your CPA to handle it. That may cost you a fair chunk of change each tax year. It’s also possible you will have to file in multiple states as a result, further complicating the picture.

If you hold on to your MLP shares for a decade or two, your cost basis is going to be at or pretty close to zero. If you sell, the IRS is going to want the difference between what you sold it for and what you paid for it, plus the depreciation and maintenance deduction.
There is a solution, which I will get to in a bit.

What about other drawbacks? MLP’s, like other oil and gas businesses, make more money when prices are higher and less when prices are lower. The issue? MLP’s usually borrow heavily to build their infrastructure. If prices fall too far, they may have trouble meeting their debt obligations, potentially a bad situation for shareholders if the company goes bankrupt and has to be reorganized – bond holders usually get first claim on the assets.

Is this a real risk? Maybe yes and maybe no – if you own individual MLP’s your risk is higher. If you own a basket of MLP’s, odds are pretty good most of them will make it through the low price period.

The other difficulty with MLP’s is that they are really designed for taxable accounts and some of their appeal is lost if they are owned inside tax deferred accounts such as IRA’s. That can trigger what’s known as the UBTI or “unrelated business taxable income.” That’s when the IRS basically says you owe that money and owe it right now even though you own the MLP inside an IRA. That can create other problems depending on your age and whether or not you have funds you have to withdraw from the IRA to pay Uncle Sam. And you still have those damn partnership forms.

There are other risks that are more difficult to estimate;

Will regulations change? In other words, will the government continue to allow this tax structure for MLP’s? Probably, but maybe not.

MLP’s seem likely to see some kind of adjustment when interest rates finally start rising. This could cause the price of MLP shares to drop.

It can be tough to understand the debt structure of an MLP and what point falling oil or gas prices will force them into bankruptcy or reorganization?

How do the very wealthy (or the very shrewd) handle MLPs? When they buy an MLP they basically plan to never sell. By never I mean ’till death do us part. The shares of the MLP get passed on to the next generation, but the accumulated depreciation accompanies you to the hereafter, leaving the shares unencumbered by a big depreciation recapture. On top of that, the cost basis gets reset to whatever the market price is at the time of inheritance using what is called a “step up.” So, your kids can now take that income and depreciate against it the same way you did, or they can sell the shares without capital gains taxes.

So, for some people MLPs can be a stellar investment. For others, MLPs may represent tax complications that make you want to strangle your CPA and investment advisor.

For the right investor, MLP’s can be a powerful option. Just don’t make the mistake of putting all your eggs in one basket, or in this case all your money into MLPs. It could work out well, but it could also turn out to be a spectacularly poor decision. Consult your advisor (or me) and your CPA and do some homework to make sure this type of investment fits.

Want more detail? Good article by the Executive Director of the MLP Association just click the title –> Making Sense of Master Limited Partnership Tax Rules.

Please share with one friend that you think may benefit from this information. Share buttons provided below for your convenience.

To Smarter Investing,

Dak Hartsock
Chief Market Strategist
ACI Wealth Advisors, LLC.
Process Portfolios, LLC.

© Copyright 2015
Dak Hartsock

Check out the background of this investment professional on FINRA's Brokercheck --> http://brokercheck.finra.org/
CA Department of Insurance License #OI12504

Investment Management

For ACI, investment management begins with understanding and actively managing risk for our clients and partners.  We do this through smarter investments built on low cost, highly liquid and diversified investments rather than expensive financial products.

×
RETIREMENT INCOME PLANNING

Understanding the needs of investors seeking stable results for portfolios greater than $500,000 is a core strength of ACI.  One of the most important things we do is help your investments to create stable income while generating sufficient growth to meet your future demands and the needs of those you care for. 

ACI uses customized planning and software to create retirement income plans to meet the specific needs of each of clients while providing confidence, flexibility, and cost efficiency.

×
FINANCIAL PLANNING

Success in any endeavor comes from hard work, vision, and planning. We can help you create a more confident future by working with you, your CPA, your tax and estate counsel to make sure that when the tomorrow becomes today, you are where you want to be.

×
Get Connected

* - Required

×
Market Income

This portfolio invests in a basket of highly liquid Index or Sector securities and sells off atypical returns in exchange for a premium on a rolling basis. That’s a fancy way of saying we take the bird in hand and let someone else have the two in the bush.  We buy sectors that are undervalued relative to the rest of the market or vs. their historical value ranges which reduces downside risk vs. the broad market.  Typically out-performs in bear markets, neutral markets and mild bull markets.   while under-performs strong bull markets.

×
Core Equity

Invests in diversified components of the financial markets and broad economy by targeting sectors which demonstrate the greatest potential for a consistent range of multi-year returns, while offering a risk adjusted investment profile equal to or lower than the broad markets.  Our research tells us which sectors demonstrate the greatest potential for consistent multi-year returns while offering greater risk efficiency than the broad markets.  We invest on an “Outcome Oriented” basis – meaning we have a good idea what the returns over time will be at a given purchase price.

×
Durable Opportunities

This portfolio invests in companies possessing a Durable Competitive Advantage.  Such companies are likely to be around for decades, easing the concern of principal return.  DCA companies often suffer less in bear markets and usually lead recoveries.  These companies allow ACI to build portfolios with minimum expected returns that can be in the mid-single digit range over any 3-5 year period which can provide long term stability partnered with long term growth in equity.

×
Full Cycle

This portfolio is derived from the ground breaking work in ‘risk parity’ by Ray Dalio, arguably one of the top 10 money managers in history and founder of Bridgewater Associates.  The Full Cycle portfolio is built on the allocation models Ray designed to provide the highest potential risk adjusted returns possible through all phases of the economic cycle.  Bridgewater’s “All Weather” fund was designed for pension funds and other large institutional investors that needed to earn stable returns with stable risk, and has been closed to new investors for years.  At the time the fund closed, the All Weather Portfolio had a minimum required investment of $100 million.

×
Equity Builder

This is a risk management overlay which helps build and protect accounts by collecting small premiums against held positions on an opportunistic basis during correcting markets.  EQB seeks to collect an extra 2% – 5% per year against the cost of underlying investments.  While primarily targeted at increasing account equity, EQB gives an extra layer of protection to capital during periods of higher volatility.

×
Fixed Income

Diversified, broad exposure to fixed income ETFs and best of breed no load funds including core fixed income components such as Government, Corporate or MBS, municipals, and unconstrained “Go Anywhere” funds.

×
ACI Investment Team

 

Dak Hartsock; Investment manager with over 15 years of experience with securities & securities options. Dak has worked full time in the financial markets since 2007. He has more than a decade of operating experience as a business owner & developer, with substantially all personal net worth invested in ACI. He is a graduate of the University of Virginia.

Robert Hartsock; MBA. Bob has over 30 years of senior management experience in diverse markets, products and businesses. He brings an exceptional record that includes management roles in two Fortune 500 companies and leadership of 7,500+ employees. Bob’s career features a specialization in identifying and fixing management and operational problems for multiple companies including leading over a dozen acquisitions, private placements and a public offering. He is uniquely positioned to provide ACI with highly relevant C-Level management perspective. Bob provides operational & macro perspective on investments ACI undertakes for client portfolios. Bob holds degrees from University of Illinois and University of Washington.

×
Test 1 Title

Content test Content test Content test Content test Content test Content test Content test Content test Content test Content test 

×
Privacy Policy & Disclosures

Privacy Policy & Disclosures

DakHartsock.com has a STRINGENT PRIVACY POLICY.

My Commitment to You

I will not share your email address or contact information with unaffiliated third parties under any circumstances except as required by law or at my discretion if information is requested by law enforcement.

DakHartsock.com protects the security and confidentiality of the personal information you supply to the site and makes efforts to ensure that such information is used for proper purposes in connection with your interest in the site or the published materials on www.dakhartsock.com I understand that you have entrusted us with your private information, and I do everything possible to maintain that trust. As part of protecting your privacy, subscribing to updates from dakhartsock.com requires you to opt-in twice: once when you complete the opt-in form on the site, and again via the email address you provided.

This is not a contract, but a clear statement of good intent.

Email dhartsock@aciwealth.com if you have additional questions or concerns regarding the site’s privacy policy or use the form provided on the contact page.

This web site reflects the opinions of Dak Hartsock and is not intended to offer personalized investment advice. Information regarding investment products, strategies, and services is provided solely for educational and informational purposes. Other information provided on the site, including updates on the Recession Probability Indicator (“RPI”) are presented for educational purposes and are not recommendations to buy or sell securities or solicitation for investment services.

Dak Hartsock does not provide personalized investment advice over the internet, nor should any information or materials presented here be construed as personalized investment or financial advice to any viewer. Mr. Hartsock is not a tax advisor and investors should obtain independent tax advice regarding investments. Neither Dak Hartsock, ACI Wealth Advisors, nor any affiliated persons or companies accept any liability in connection with your use of the information and materials provided on this site.

Dak Hartsock is a Series 65 licensed and registered Independent Advisor Representative with ACI Wealth Advisors, LLC (“ACI”). ACI is a Registered Investment Advisor (“RIA”), registered in the State of Florida and the State of California. ACI provides asset management and related services for clients in states where it is registered, or where it is exempt from registration through statute, exception, or exclusion from registration requirements. ACI is in no way responsible for the content of DakHartsock.com nor does ACI accept any responsibility for materials, articles, or links found on this site. A copy of ACI’s Form ADV Part 2 is available upon request.

Market data, articles, blogs and other content on this web site are based on generally-available information and are believed to be reliable. Dak Hartsock does not guarantee the accuracy of the information contained in this web site, nor is Mr. Hartsock under any obligation to update any information on the site. Information presented may not be current. Any information presented on this site should not be construed as investment advice or a solicitation to buy and sell securities under any circumstances.

×
Model & Performance Disclosures

Disclosures Regarding Investment Performance Reporting in compliance with Rule 206(4)-1(a)(5).

Visit http://www.dakhartsock.com/process-portfolios-historical-performance/ for historical performance of ACI’s Process Portfolios.

Market Income Portfolio
1. The performance of the broad market over the same time periods is included for both model and live portfolio to help investors understand market conditions present during the period examined by the model and during live investment.
2. Listed Index models and graphs do NOT include transaction, fund or Advisor Management fees as the index model is not available for investment. Live portfolio results include all fees, including Advisor Management fees.
3. Model results do NOT reflect reinvestment of dividends or other earnings. Actual results reflect limited reinvestment of dividends and other earnings, but do not reflect the impact of any applicable taxes which vary by investor and account type (deferred account vs. taxable, etc.).
4. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss and/or principle. While the Index model has historically shown reasonable performance versus the S&P 500 on a risk adjusted basis, there is no guarantee that will continue into the future. Market Income is designed to provide reasonable returns for less risk than the broad market on a risk adjusted basis, and while the firm believes model portfolios are capable of continued outperformance on this basis, there is no guarantee they will do so. Comparisons with the S&P 500 are included to help the average investor understand how an investment in Market Income may differ from investment in an index fund such as an S&P 500 index fund.
5. The model for Market Income is the Chicago Board of Exchange S&P 500 Buy/Write Index or “BXM.” BXM has historically displayed less volatility than the S&P 500 and Market Income. BXM cannot be directly invested in. Market Income does not exactly follow the BXM index model – the mechanics of closing and opening positions differ – BXM opens, closes or rolls positions on the same day every month regardless of the profit or loss in a position – Market Income generally, but not always, waits until after expiration before transacting. Market Income will also close or roll ahead of expiration if the position has a high percentage of profit present in order to capture that gain. Options are generally sold again within a week of the closure of the prior position, but not always, and often new position may be opened the same day the prior position is closed.
Benchmark and index comparisons are made on a best available basis – meaning that both the index model and live performance are believed to be compared with market and the closest possible benchmark for simplicity of comparison. However, there is no guarantee future volatility will be either less than, equal to, or greater than the volatility experienced in the model or the S&P 500 although the firm invests with an eye on reduced volatility vs. the S&P 500.
6. The model portfolio (BXM) utilizes the S&P 500 as its basis. Market Income differs from BXM in that the underlying securities are primarily selected on the basis of “relative” value. This simply means that sectors are compared with one another and Market Income generally invests in the sector or sector(s) trading at the greatest discount or the smallest premium relative to its historical average valuation. Other factors are also considered including sector earnings growth and expected return versus other available sector instruments. Advisor believes this gives Market Income a higher margin of safety than repeatedly investing in the S&P 500 on a rolling basis without regard to value or prevailing economic conditions, while preserving liquidity.
7. The BXM model on which Market Income is based is a non-traded index. As such, results do not represent actual trading or investment and do not reflect any impact that material economic or market factors may have had on the advisors decision making if advisor had been managing live money during the period the model covers, including transaction, fund, or management fees.
8. Market Income also differs from the BXM model in that Market Income seeks to reduce investment during recessionary economic periods while BXM stays invested regardless of economic or market conditions. Advisor believes this will better protect capital vs. BXM model but is materially different than staying invested in all market conditions. This action may cause Market Income to have reduced participation in markets that continue to move up despite Advisors reduction in investment.
9. Advisor clients have experienced results that exceed the performance of the model to date. There is no guarantee Market Income will continue to outperform BXM in the future regardless of Advisor efforts to do so.

Core Equity Portfolio
1. The performance of the broad market over the same time periods is included for both model and live portfolio to help investors understand market conditions present during the period examined by the model and during live investment.
2. Model is a historical back test and includes brokerage and fund fees but does NOT include Advisor Management fees which vary by account size, but in general reduce annual performance by approximately 1.5%. Live portfolio results include all fees, including Advisor Management fees.
Historical back-test means the model portfolio has been tracked on a backwards looking basis prior to the beginning of live investments in order to establish historical risks and results for investment in this portfolio. Back testing has certain inherent limitations as detailed in item #7 below.
3. Model results reflect regular investment of dividends or other earnings. Actual results reflect limited reinvestment of dividends and other earnings.
4. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss and/or principle. While the back tested Core Equity model has historically shown desirable performance versus the S&P 500 on a risk adjusted basis, there is no guarantee that will continue into the future. Core Equity is designed to provide reasonable returns for the same or less risk than the broad market on a risk adjusted basis, and while the firm believes model portfolios are capable of continued outperformance on this basis, there is no guarantee they will do so. Comparisons with the S&P 500 are included to help the average investor understand how an investment in Core Equity may differ from investment in an index fund such as an S&P 500 index fund.
5. The model for Core Equity is built of highly diversified, highly liquid sector and index securities, most frequently low cost ETFs. Core Equity live portfolios do not exactly follow the Core Equity model – variances in investor contributions, withdrawals, and risk tolerances result in measurable drift from the model. Over time, client accounts come closer in line with the Core Equity model.
Core Equity live portfolios may differ from the Core Equity model in an additional material way; when valuations on certain sectors become overly stretched versus their historical average valuations, the Advisor may reduce exposure to those sectors in favor of a sector position which is priced in a more reasonable range in comparison to it’s typical historical valuation. Periodically, Core Equity may allocate a small but measurable percent of assets (up to 5%) in volatility linked instruments in an effort to better manage the portfolio.
These factors may result in greater or less than model performance over time.
Benchmark and index comparisons are made on a best available basis – meaning that both the index model and live performance are compared with market and other benchmarks the
Advisors believe to be suitable for simplicity of comparison. However, there is no guarantee future volatility or performance will be either less than, equal to, or greater than the volatility or performance experienced in the model or the S&P 500 although the firm invests with an eye on reduced volatility vs. the S&P 500.
6. Core Equity invests in diversified components of the financial markets and broad economy by targeting sectors or indices which demonstrate potential for a consistent range of multi-year returns, while seeking a risk adjusted investment profile equal to or lower than the broad markets. These sectors contain a range of equity stocks with an equally broad range of characteristics – some sectors are present in the Core Equity portfolio due to their historically defensive nature, some are present due to their historical growth characteristics, some are a blend of the spectrum between. The intent is to provide a balanced equity portfolio suitable for most investors as an S&P 500 index fund replacement but which seeks lower risk while experiencing, on average, a greater return than an S&P 500 index investment.
7. The Core Equity model results do not represent actual trading or investment and do not reflect any impact that material economic or market factors may have had on the advisors decision making if advisor had been managing live money during the period the model covers, including transaction, fund, or management fees as detailed above in item #2.
8. Core Equity live portfolios also differ from the Core Equity model in that Core Equity seeks to reduce investment during recessionary economic periods while the Core Equity historical model stays invested regardless of economic or market conditions. Advisor believes this will better protect capital vs. model but is materially different than staying invested in all market conditions. This action may cause Core Equity live portfolios to have reduced participation in markets that continue to move up despite Advisors reduction in investment.
9. Advisor clients have experienced results that slightly lag the performance of the model to date. This lag is due to a number of factors, primarily the fact that different clients allocate different dollar amounts to Core Equity at different times. In general, the longer a client has been fully allocated to the Core Equity portfolio, the closer it is to model performance.
The benchmark for Core Equity (The S&P 500) has historically displayed greater volatility (risk) than the Core Equity model or live Core Equity portfolios. This may or may not be the case in the future.

Market Momentum Portfolio
1. The performance of the broad market over the same time periods is included to help investors understand market conditions present during the period covered by live investment.
2. Listed comparison Index graphs and statistics do NOT include transaction, fund or Advisor Management fees. Live portfolio results include all fees, including Advisor Management fees.
3. Actual results reflect limited reinvestment of dividends and other earnings, but do not reflect the impact of any applicable taxes which vary by investor and account type (deferred account vs. taxable, etc.).
4. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss and/or principle. While the closest benchmark for Market Momentum has historically shown reasonable performance versus the S&P 500 on a risk adjusted basis, there is no guarantee that Market Momentum that will continue such performance into the future. Market Momentum is designed to provide reasonable returns for less risk than the broad market on a risk adjusted basis, and while the firm believes the portfolio is capable of outperformance on this basis, there is no guarantee it will do so. Comparisons with the S&P 500 are included to help the average investor understand how an investment in Market Momentum may differ from investment in an index fund such as an S&P 500 index fund.
5. The closest benchmark for Market Momentum is the Chicago Board of Exchange S&P 500 Buy/Write Index or “BXM.” BXM has historically displayed less volatility than the S&P 500 and Market Income. BXM cannot be directly invested in. Market Momentum differs in key ways from BXM – the mechanics of closing and opening positions differ – BXM opens, closes or rolls positions on the same day every month regardless of the profit or loss in a position – Market Momentum targets closing or rolling positions based on technical factors including trend support and resistance. Market Momemtum will also close or roll ahead of expiration if the position has a high percentage of profit present in order to capture that gain. Options are generally not sold again until the underlying investment has moved into an area of resistance but not always; new position may be opened the same day the prior position is closed.
Benchmark comparisons are made on a best available basis – meaning that live performance is believed to be compared with the closest possible benchmark for simplicity of comparison. However, there is no guarantee future volatility will be either less than, equal to, or greater than the volatility experienced in the model or the S&P 500 although the firm invests with an eye on reduced volatility vs. the S&P 500. Market Momentum , like BXM, is an options writing strategy seeking to reduce investment volatility and improve risk adjusted returns for investors.
6. The model portfolio (BXM) utilizes the S&P 500 as its basis. Market Momentum differs from BXM in that the underlying securities are primarily selected on the basis of “relative” value. This simply means that sectors are compared with one another and Market Momentum generally invests in the sector or sector(s) trading at the greatest discount or the smallest premium relative to its historical average valuation. Other factors are also considered including sector earnings growth and expected return versus other available sector instruments. Advisor believes this gives Market Momentum a higher margin of safety than repeatedly investing in the S&P 500 on a rolling basis without regard to value or prevailing economic conditions, while preserving liquidity.
7. The BXM model on which Market Momentum is compared is a non-traded index. As such, results do not represent actual trading or investment and do not reflect any impact that material economic or market factors may have had on the advisors decision making if advisor had been managing live money during the period the model covers, including transaction, fund, or management fees.
8. Market Momentum also differs from the BXM model in that Market Momentum seeks to reduce investment during corrective or recessionary economic periods while BXM stays invested regardless of economic or market conditions. Advisor believes this will better protect capital in comparison to BXM but such action is materially different than staying invested in all market conditions. This action may cause Market Momentum to have reduced participation in markets that continue to move up despite Advisors reduction in investment.
9. Advisor clients have experienced results that exceed the performance of the benchmark to date. There is no guarantee Market Momentum will continue to outperform BXM in the future regardless of Advisor efforts to do so.

Durable Opportunities Portfolio
1. The performance of the broad market in the form of the Dow Jones Industrial Index over the same time periods is included for live portfolio comparison to help investors understand market conditions present during the period covered by live investment.
2. The Index results do not include brokerage, transaction, or Advisor fees. Live portfolio results include all fees, including Advisor Management fees.
3. Actual results reflect limited reinvestment of dividends and other earnings.
4. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss and/or principle. Portfolios compromised of companies matching the profile of those selected for including in Durable Opportunities have historically displayed superior risk adjusted performance to the Index, but there is no guarantee that will continue into the future. Durable Opportunities is designed to provide investment in companies that firm believes meet a stringent set of criteria firm believes reduces the likelihood of permanent capital impairment while allowing investors to participate in investment in companies firm believes will stand the test of time and provide superior long term returns. While the firm believes the portfolio is capable of outperformance on this basis, there is no guarantee it will do so. Comparisons with the Dow Jones are included to help the average investor understand how an investment in Durable Opportunities may differ from investment in a concentrated index fund such as a Dow Jones Industrials index fund. Durable Opportunities is not restricted to investment in industrial companies or in companies with a specific level of capitalization, unlike the Dow Jones.
5. Durable Opportunities is primarily a value driven strategy; when valuations in holdings become overly stretched versus their historical average valuations, the Advisor may reduce exposure to those holdings by either liquidation or hedging, and may re-allocate funds into a holding which is priced in a more reasonable range in comparison to it’s typical historical valuation. Periodically, Durable Opportunities may allocate a small but measurable percent of assets (up to 5%) in volatility linked instruments in an effort to better manage the portfolio.
Benchmark comparisons are made on a best available basis – meaning that live performance is compared with the benchmarks the firm believe to be suitable for simplicity of comparison. However, there is no guarantee future volatility or performance will be either less than, equal to, or greater than the volatility or performance experienced in the Dow Jones Industrials although the firm invests with an eye on reduced volatility vs. the Dow Jones Industrials Index. 6. Durable Opportunties invests in companies firm believes to possess a Durable Competitive Advantage. Such companies are likely to be around for decades, easing the concern of principal return. DCA companies often suffer less in bear markets and usually lead recoveries. These companies allow ACI to build portfolios with minimum expected returns that may be in the mid-single digit range over any 3-5 year period which may provide long term stability partnered with long term growth in equity. There are no guarantees the strategy will be successful in this endeavor.
6. The Durable Opportunities portfolios also differ from the benchmark comparison in that Durable Opportunities reduce investment by hedging or raising cash during recessionary economic periods while Dow Jones Industrial Index reflects 100% investment at all times regardless of economic or market conditions. Firm believes this will better protect capital vs. model but is materially different than staying invested in all market conditions. This action may cause the Durable Opportunities portfolio to experience reduced participation in markets that continue to move up despite Advisors reduction in investment.
7. Advisor clients have experienced results that have lagged the performance of the benchmark to date. This lag is due to a number of factors, primarily the fact that the current high valuation investing environment has made it difficult to identify companies that fit the parameters of Durable Opportunities at a desirable valuation level. Different clients allocate different dollar amounts to Durable Opportunities at different times, which has also impacted the performance of the overall portfolio.

Full Cycle Portfolio
1. The performance of the broad market over the same time periods is included for both model and live portfolio to help investors understand market conditions present during the period examined by the model and during live investment.
2. Model is a historical back test and includes brokerage and fund fees but does NOT include Advisor Management fees which vary by account size, but in general reduce annual performance by approximately 1.5%. Live portfolio results include all fees, including Advisor Management fees.
Historical back-test means the model portfolio has been tracked on a backwards looking basis prior to the beginning of live investments in order to establish historical risks and results for investment in this portfolio. Back testing has certain inherent limitations as detailed in item #7 below.
3. Model results reflect regular investment of dividends or other earnings. Actual results reflect limited reinvestment of dividends and other earnings.
4. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss and/or principle. While the back tested Full Cycle Portfolio model has historically shown desirable performance versus the S&P 500 on a risk adjusted basis, there is no guarantee that will continue into the future. Full Cycle Portfolio is designed to provide reasonable returns for the same or less risk than the broad market on a risk adjusted basis in all phases of the economic cycle by holding risk weighted non-correlated assets, and while the firm believes model portfolios are capable of continued outperformance on this basis, there is no guarantee they will do so in the future. Comparisons with the S&P 500 are included to help the average investor understand how an investment in the Full Cycle Portfolio may differ from investment in an index fund such as an S&P 500 index fund.
5. The model for the Full Cycle Portfolio is built of diversified, liquid sector and index securities, most frequently low cost ETFs and low cost funds. The live Full Cycle portfolio does not follow the Full Cycle model exactly – variances in investor contributions & withdrawals result in measurable drift from the model. Over time, client accounts come closer in line with the Full Cycle model.
Full Cycle live portfolios may differ from the Full Cycle model in an additional material way; when valuations on certain sectors become overly stretched versus their historical average valuations, the Advisor may reduce exposure to those sectors in favor of a comparable position which is priced in a more reasonable range in comparison to it’s typical historical valuation.
These factors may result in greater or less than model performance over time.
Benchmark and index comparisons are made on a best available basis – meaning that both the index model and live performance are compared with market and other benchmarks the
firm believes to be suitable for simplicity of comparison. However, there is no guarantee future volatility or performance will be either less than, equal to, or greater than the volatility or performance experienced in the model or the S&P 500 although the firm invests with an eye on reduced volatility vs. the S&P 500.
6. Full Cycle invests in diversified components of the global financial markets and broad economy by balancing risks with non-correlating or reduced correlation assets in opposition to one another each of which is designed to prosper in some phase of the economic cycle and intended to offset reduced or poor performance in other portfolio holdings.
7. The Full Cycle model results do not represent actual trading or investment and do not reflect any impact that material economic or market factors may have had on the advisors decision making if advisor had been managing live money during the period the model covers, including transaction, fund, or management fees as detailed above in item #2.
8. Full Cycle live portfolios also differ from the Full Cycle model in that the live portfolio may be rebalanced more or less frequently depending on prevailing market conditions. While firm believes this difference positions portfolio for improved risk adjusted performance, it is not clear that this difference results in clear over or under performance versus the Full Cycle model.
9. Advisor clients have experienced results that slightly outperform the performance of the model to date. This outperformance may or may not persist. In general, the longer a client has been fully allocated to the Full Cycle portfolio, the closer it is to model performance.

Fixed Income Portfolio
1. The performance of the broad bond markets over the same time periods is included to help investors understand market conditions present during the period covered by live investment.
2. Listed comparison Index graphs and statistics do NOT include transaction, fund or Advisor Management fees. Live portfolio results include all fees, including Advisor Management fees.
3. Actual results reflect limited reinvestment of dividends and other earnings, but do not reflect the impact of any applicable taxes which vary by investor and account type (deferred account vs. taxable, etc.).
4. Investing involves risk, including risk of loss and/or principle. While the closest benchmark for Fixed Income has historically shown reduced volatility and reasonable performance versus many classes of fixed income investments, there is no guarantee that Fixed Income that will continue such performance into the future. Market Momentum is designed to provide reasonable returns for less risk than the broad market on a risk adjusted basis, and while the firm believes the portfolio is capable of outperformance on this basis, there is no guarantee it will do so. Comparisons with US Aggregate Bond Market and PIMCO Total Return are included to help the average investor understand how an investment in Fixed Income may differ from investment in an alternative index or fixed income fund.
5. The closest benchmark for Fixed Income is the Pimco Total Return Fund. Fixed Income differs in key ways from BOND – including selection of underlying investments and reduced diversification. Benchmark comparisons are made on a best available basis – meaning that live performance is believed to be compared with the closest possible benchmark for simplicity of comparison. However, there is no guarantee future volatility and performance will be either less than, equal to, or greater than the volatility and performance experienced by the benchmark although the firm invests with an eye on out performance.
6. The benchmark may include securities not contained in Fixed Income, and vice versa. Fixed Income currently holds significantly more cash than PIMCO Total Return Fund, a situation likely to continue in the near future. This action may cause Fixed Income to have reduced participation in markets that move up despite Advisors reduction in investment.
7. Advisor clients have experienced results that lag the performance of the benchmarks to date. There is no guarantee Fixed Income will continue to outperform benchmarks in the future regardless of Advisor efforts to do so.

×