Litany against Fear I must not fear. Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear. I will permit it to pass over me and through me. And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path. Where the fear has gone there will be nothing. Only I will remain. (from Frank Herbert's Dune) Hoping this finds you healthy in mind, body, and spirit - as much as circumstances allow. We wanted to share what we've learned this past week. A summary of what follows: Good news for Italy (and for America?) New perspective: what we don't know (but must) What we do know Not feeble! Good News As described in our last note, Fielder's model had forecast that Italy’s curve would peak last week. Indeed, that appears to be the case ... This is less an indication of our forecasting skills than it is a reinforcement that our simple framework for modeling the virus's progression based on observed deaths is approximately correct. This, in turn, increases our confidence on the USA, which our model suggests is on course to peak within the coming week in terms of overall deaths.* This is not a unique view, as most others, including NY Governor Cuomo, have similar forecasts. Indeed, the number of new hospitalizations and COVID-19 deaths in New York appear to be leveling based on the past few days' data. New Perspective This week our perspective expanded thanks to two experts we trust: Dr. John Ioannidis and Dr. Peter Attia. Separately, they are advocating something critically important: We simply do not have good data on the true fatality rate. (Another way of saying, we do not know the denominator.) Although we already knew this, Ioannidis and Attia helped us appreciate an important nuance.** Heretofore, we have been focused on when the curve flattens. Now we know that the curve appears to have flattened in Italy and might be beginning to flatten in the US. (Fingers crossed!) This, however, only informs us on the near-term. We cannot yet be rationally pessimistic or optimistic about the longer-term outlook. The reason is that we don’t have good data on what the true fatality rate is. If it is high, the number of deaths to date implies a very small percentage of the population has been infected with the disease. That likely means a long – or at least recurring – pattern of off/on shelter-in-place. And thus, it will be a continued brake on our economy. If, however, the fatality rate is much lower (as Attia and Ioannidis counsel it might be), this implies a large percent of the population has already been exposed to the virus.*** Which means it would likely be safer than many believe to jump-start our normal lives and economy. Today we do not know whether 2% of the population or 40% of the population has been infected by the virus. Knowing whether it's 2% or 40% would make huge a difference in rational public policy. Likewise, it would key to positioning our portfolios. At this time, investors simply do not have sufficient data to be rationally bullish or bearish. The solution that Attia and Ioannidis both espouse is to conduct randomized testing on a broad population. From this we can infer the true infection rate and death rate. From that, we can infer what percent of our population has been exposed to the virus. That knowledge will give policy makers the conviction necessary to make critically important decisions. The same goes for investors. To be clear, we are focused on gaining conviction on the long-term outlook, not the short-term. Obviously, the virus is horrible for the economy in the near-term. Markets, however, are forward-looking. If we ultimately gain conviction that economic activity largely returns to normal within a few years, our outlook will be positive. We’d want to own more stocks at these lower prices. If, however, we ultimately believe we’ll see a recurring bout of on-again, off-again shelter-in-place orders for the next year, our outlook and positioning will become more cautious. Only randomized tests of large populations can give us the data necessary to know. We are thus keeping a keen eye out for news of such tests being done anywhere in the world. So far we have clues from relatively widespread testing in places like Iceland, Korea, cruise ships, and specific cities within Italy and Germany. Please share any such information that you come across on the subject. What We Do Know What we do know is that central bankers and politicians will do whatever it takes to fight rising unemployment or falling prices (consumer prices or asset prices). The Fed has dramatically increased its purchases of government bonds and is now buying even corporate bonds. Why stop there? Yesterday, former Fed Chair Janet Yellen suggested the Fed should be allowed to buy stocks as well. (The Bank of Japan does.) You can’t make this up. It is truth stranger than fiction. Congress passed a $2 trillion stimulus package. It will not be the last. People are hurting financially. Many can’t afford their next meal. The businesses that employ them are failing. It is the greatest economic threat of our lives. Washington will stop at nothing to mitigate the damage. Get ready to see fiscal and monetary activism that none of us heretofore conceived possible. Certainly, it will have consequences – some intended, some unintended. Not Feeble “We are neither a feeble society nor a feeble economy,” So declared Vernon Smith, a Nobel Laureate in Economics, in yesterday’s Wall Street Journal (“The Economy Will Survive Coronavirus”). We too are bullish on the resilience of innovative people everywhere, particularly in America. Despite this optimistic bias, we are realists. None of us yet knows the nature of the changes seeded by the virus these past weeks. We can only observe carefully the changes that we see unfolding and invest accordingly. This is our best chance of avoiding the mind-killer of fear. We value our dialogue with each of you and look forward to sharing our thoughts as they evolve/change with better data and frameworks. All we ask in return is that you share differentiated or contrary thoughts that might come to you. To brighter days ahead! Frank Byrd, CFA Steve Korn, CFA *As we emphasized in our prior note, all models are wrong; some models are useful. Ours has been useful in helping us have a better sense for the path and dynamics of the virus’s spread. We view our model’s utility as less predictive than helping us be better observers. **Listen/read for yourself… Dr. Peter Attia: Key video – this is the main one to watch (8 minutes) Follow up video for more nuance (begin watching at minute 5:30) Dr. John Ioannidis: Controversial article Video interview (long but worth every minute) BTW, Ioannidis was one of the first to blow the whistle on Theranos ***The Ioannidis article has drawn plenty of ire from folks – including some people we greatly respect. They miss his point. He is not saying don’t worry. He’s not saying the current shelter-in-place hammer is not wise; he embraces it and is personally complying. All he’s advocating is that it’s paramount to obtain better data than we have. This is so obtainable with random testing. Otherwise, we are all just guessing. Left to that, we may become prone to sheltering in place longer than is warranted. He is NOT saying that we should be more conservative, because we have too little data. Fielder is an independent, fee-only adviser that provides asset management and family office services. Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

Amidst all the anxiety and scary headlines, we wanted to update you on our latest thoughts. A summary of what follows: What this means for client portfolios The perfect scenario (and hoping for – fingers crossed!) Italy - cautious optimism The USA - our forecasts We’re still worried – that’s our job Fielder’s team is on duty What This Means for Portfolios This chart says it all: Stocks have had their fastest drop in modern history – faster than the Great Depression or Financial Crisis. (The purple line is the S&P 500 performance through last Thursday. The green line is the Great Depression, and the blue line is "dot com" crash.) Source: Factset We are counselling clients to neither get discouraged on days the market is down big nor get overly optimistic on days the market is up big. This is far from played out. Markets rarely go down -- or up -- in a straight line. At this time, there is no way for anyone to really know whether markets rally from here or retest lows. Certain city hospitals systems are about to get fully stretched, if not overwhelmed. Fears of such are reflected in current market prices. Credit spreads remain really wide. We believe markets continue experiencing lots of ups and downs over the coming weeks. In our last note, a couple of weeks ago, we said we would hold off for a couple of weeks before making any major moves, pending our having better information and a better framework with which to analyze it. Fast forward to today, we now believe we are close, if not already there. In the coming weeks, we expect to have the opportunity to add in compelling spots with attractive reward/risk for those willing to take a longer-term view. While none of us likes looking at lower prices, there are two positives worth stressing: Lower stock prices are only a bad thing if you’re forced to sell. If you’re buying (or even just reinvesting dividends), today’s prices are a gift. The only way these lower prices are bad is if you’re a seller (either out of fear or out of need). Hopefully, good planning ahead of time has ensured that neither of these should be the case. Future expected returns are now higher. One of the most important determinants to stocks future return is the starting price. The lower the initial purchase price, the higher the future return potential. The Perfect Scenario (fingers crossed!) In the near future, we are hopeful to be presented with an investor’s dream scenario: deteriorating news (keeping market prices weak or weaker) but improving fundamentals. The number of newly reported coronavirus cases in the US will surely spike higher in the coming days now that testing is finally becoming more available. We will also see the number of new deaths continue to rise in the US. However, we believe that the number of actual new infections in the US is near a peak – if not already peaked – which means the number of new deaths should begin declining within a few weeks. That might give us the opportunity to buy assets at cheap prices as the headlines are most negative, while the underlying fundamentals may actually be improving. We continue to monitor each day’s new data on the virus to confirm or refute the veracity of our framework/model. If we begin seeing positive confirmation, we will be reaching out to discuss whether it makes sense to increase your allocation to stocks. As for fixed income, we are beginning to see compelling value now that credit spreads have blown out in corporate, high yield, and municipals. We have been researching the best way to invest in this area and expect to be allocating selectively to this area at some point. Italy – Cautious Optimism A few weeks ago, we said Italy was critical to watch, since its data would prove informative to understanding the nature of the virus (in addition to S. Korea's). Earlier this week we were elated that the number of new reported deaths declined two days in a row. But in the past two days, new deaths in Italy jumped higher. At this point, it is too soon to know for sure if Italy is nearing stabilization. Day-to-day data will be bumpy. The one positive thing to note is that the new deaths in Italy are not spiraling exponentially higher. The curve hasn't flattened, but it appears to be heading in that direction. (The slope of the curve is declining.) Source: https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/country/italy/ Based on our own internal model for projecting the path of Coronavirus, we had been projecting that Italy would see peak new deaths this week. Time will tell whether that proves optimistic. The USA The data from Italy (as well as from S. Korea) helps inform our model for the US. Unfortunately, the US data has not yet turned positive. The death rate the past two days has been worse than we had modeled. We believe the reason is that the infection rate is higher here in the US, likely due to the virus being concentrated in densely populated NYC. Keep in mind that deaths are a LAGGING indicator (though deaths are the most reliable statistic available). We know that deaths occur several weeks after infection. What really matters is to what degree have we “flattened” – or ideally decreased – the number of new infections. We believe that the number of new infections (cases) should be peaking about now in the US. Critically important: this is Fielder’s estimate of the intrinsic (or true) number of cases, not reported cases. The number of reported cases is dramatically understated since we have not been testing people. Source: Both historical and projected are Fielder estimates. If our assumption is correct regarding actual new infections peaking about now, this implies the number of new deaths will peak by mid-April. Source: www.worldometers.info and Fielder estimates Our model currently estimates that 1% of the US population will be infected with the virus within the next several weeks, which leads to approximately 50,000 deaths in the US by April 30th. The key assumption (and it's a big one) is how effective recent US efforts have been at curtailing infections. Equally important is our future course. Do we enact a “hammer” response to the virus? Or do Americans prove half-hearted about social distancing? In that case, this crisis may last 18 months, and millions could die. If, however, we enact “hammer” methods that worked in Korea, China, and may be (we hope) working now in Italy, then we can beat this devil fast. We can all begin getting back to normal within two months, perhaps partly within a month. (Hat tip to Tomas Pueyo. Our views have evolved in large part thanks to his framework. His most recent note, Coronavirus: The Hammer and the Dance, is highly recommended for those seeking facts over sensationalism.) As the virus continues growing in the US and other parts of the world, we must take comfort in the fact that it CAN BE BEATEN - with appropriate policies. Both China and S. Korea have beaten the virus. Even better: Japan, Taiwan, and Singapore never let the virus get out of control. They squashed it immediately. If the US gets really serious, really fast, we should be able to win this war, with casualties in the thousands rather than in the millions. Americans pride ourselves on being scrappy innovators, so it’s our time to shine with innovations in new therapies, processes, and maybe even one day a vaccine. We’re Still Worried – That’s Our Job Notwithstanding the above positives, we are mindful of how things could turn out differently and take a very dark turn. Please know that we embrace this burden for you. Our clients have hired us to do the worrying for them. Know that we are doing that. We take nothing for granted. We will be guided by the data, not by emotions. We are making changes in the portfolio as we feel appropriate, being mindful of not overreacting or underreacting. Presently, we are optimistic that we will eventually emerge from this crisis with a growing economy and with a far more robust (less fragile) healthcare system that is far better equipped for the next (potentially more dangerous) pandemic. Fielder Is on Duty On the personal front, each of us on the Fielder team is now working remotely in accordance with our Business Continuity Plan. We are each operating efficiently and remain “on call” and available any time you wish to speak. We are on duty. Our very best to you and your family for the stamina and peace of mind to get through this crisis safely. To brighter days ahead! Yours in the Field, Frank Byrd, CFA Steve Korn, CFA *Important footnote: Why we built our own model: All models are wrong; some models are useful, as Dr. George Box famously said. We thus remain humble in with what we believe any model can and cannot do. We know it cannot predict the future with precision. Yet, we know that building and maintaining our own model gives us a framework for considering new data that comes each day on the virus. It allows us to frame whether objective observations (data) support or refute our framework. Our framework is simple: the number of deaths is the only “good” data we have. Since we know approximately how many days the average person has the virus before dying, we can deduce how many people were infected that many days ago. Our goal is to be approximately right, not precisely wrong, as Keynes once quipped. Most importantly, maintaining our own model has given us a better grasp of how the virus spreads. There is learning along the way. For instance, we now have a greater appreciation for how heroic Korea was in cracking down. Korea, China, and Italy’s efforts and later results inform what can happen to the infection rate (R0) following policy shifts (from mitigation to suppression). For instance, the past few days’ data out of Italy suggests that the suppression implemented a couple of weeks ago is working. Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

“Bureaucracy is a construction by which a person is conveniently separated from the consequences of his or her actions.” ― Nassim Taleb, Skin in the Game This week I was interviewed by Dan Ferris on his podcast. The topic was founder-led companies. Dan wanted to know why we believe this is a special universe that improves the odds of long-term success. You can listen to the podcast HERE. (My part begins at minute 24:15.) In the interview, I make some of the following points: We want to invest alongside people who have a track record of success, have significant “skin in the game”, and have incentives closely aligned with our own (as shareholders). ​ Founders Are Different ​ The person who gave birth to a company is often best equipped to nurture, lead, and inspire the people who comprise the company. Founder CEOs are more likely to have the will and the power to make tough decisions that go against conventional wisdom. This can lead to bolder product innovations, more inspired team-members, happier customers, and even better capital allocation decisions. ​ Some Good, Some Not Research shows that founder-led public firms have historically invested more in capital expenditures and generated more patents. They have also generated better long-term stock returns historically.* ​ However, not all founders are created equally. Some are past their prime. Some don't have "skin in the game". Some run unprofitable businesses. Skin & Soul ​ It is not just skin in the game that matters. Soul in the game matters too. Founder-CEO's are more likely to have it. They are often driven by a longer-term vision and sense of legacy. When a CEO has skin and soul in the game, we trust that their interests are better aligned with ours as shareholders. ​ Values Investing in founder-led public companies also aligns with our personal values. We want to invest in businesses that are innovating - that are creating new and better technologies and services that make all of our lives longer, safer, easier, more efficient, and more enjoyable. ​ Our Approach ​ Fielder Capital has developed a proprietary strategy that invests in a diversified portfolio of founder-led companies. This is one of several strategies that we may employ within a client's portfolio (when appropriate). ​ To receive our report on founder-led companies, including a list of the most notable research we've identified on the subject, simply reply to this email with "report please". To hear the podcast interview, just click HERE. (My part begins at minute 24:15.) Happy Fathers Day! Yours in the Field, Frank Byrd, CFA *Two notable examples of research on founder-led stocks are: Zook, Chris; Allen, James. The Founder’s Mentality. Harvard Business Review Press. 2016. Fahlenbrach, Rüdiger. “Founder-CEOs, Investment Decisions, and Stock Market Performance.” 2007 (revised 2009). For a list of other supporting research, you can download our full report HERE. IMPORTANT DISCLAIMERS ​ HISTORICAL RESULTS ARE HYPOTHETICAL. Past performance discussed in most of the above referenced research on founder-led companies is from back-tested hypothetical results. They do not reflect actual trading in real accounts. Future performance may be materially lower in actual client accounts. Since back-tested performance does not represent actual performance, it should not be interpreted as an indication of such performance. Actual future performance of the strategies referenced in the text and links above may be materially lower in actual client accounts. There are inherent limitations with such hypothetical back-tested results. For instance, such results do not reflect the impact of alternative market and economic scenarios. Nor do such hypothetical results reflect how an investment adviser's decision-making process managing actual client money might negatively impact actual results. Furthermore, back-tested performance has the advantage of the benefit of hindsight, which actual portfolio performance does not. ​ MAY BE RISKIER. A portfolio of founder-led stocks may invest in far fewer stocks than a traditional market index, such as the S&P 500 (“the market”). Further, such a portfolio may typically have a higher percentage allocation in smaller and/or higher risk stocks. Accordingly, a portfolio of founder-led stocks will likely experience substantially more price volatility than a traditional market benchmark. It may thus not be suitable for certain investors. ​ NOT A SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATION. The reference to any specific company or stock in the text or links above is for informational purposes only. It does not constitute a recommendation for investment in any individual stock. Fielder does not maintain an opinion on the merits of any particular stock mentioned and warns they could be very poor investments in the future. Fielder's employees or its clients may hold a position in some of the stocks mentioned herein. Please refer to Fielder’s Form ADV for more detailed disclosure. ​ GENERAL: NEITHER FIELDER CAPITAL GROUP LLC, ITS PRINCIPALS, ITS EMPLOYEES, NOR ANY ENTITY MENTIONED HEREIN CAN BE HELD LIABLE OR RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OUTCOMES RESULTING FROM ACTIONS OR INACTION ARISING AS A RESULT OF REVIEWING THE ABOVE MATERIAL. FIELDER CAPITAL GROUP LLC IS UNDER NO OBLIGATION TO NOTIFY YOU OF ANY ERRORS DISCOVERED LATER OR OF ANY SUBSEQUENT CHANGES IN ITS OPINIONS. THE INFORMATION AND COMMENTARY PROVIDED IN THE STATEMENTS AND LINKS ABOVE ARE FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. NOTHING THEREIN, INCLUDING ANY CHARTS, TABLES AND GRAPHS, CONSTITUTES INVESTMENT ADVICE OR ANY FORM OF RECOMMENDATION, AND SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED AS SUCH. NOR DOES ANY OF THE ABOVE CONSTITUTE A SOLICITATION TO BUY OR SELL ANY INSTRUMENT OR TO ENGAGE IN ANY TRADING OR INVESTMENT ACTIVITY OR STRATEGY. ANY PROJECTIONS, MARKET OUTLOOKS OR ESTIMATES ARE FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS AND ARE BASED UPON CERTAIN ASSUMPTIONS. OTHER EVENTS WHICH WERE NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT MAY OCCUR AND MAY SIGNIFICANTLY AFFECT THE RETURNS OR PERFORMANCE OF INVESTMENTS MENTIONED HEREIN. ANY PROJECTIONS, OUTLOOKS, OR ASSUMPTIONS SHOULD NOT BE CONSTRUED TO BE INDICATIVE OF THE ACTUAL EVENTS WHICH WILL OCCUR. FURTHER, THE VIEWS AND OPINIONS CONTAINED HEREIN MAY BE CHANGED AT ANY TIME WITHOUT NOTICE. YOU SHOULD NOT RELY ON THIS INFORMATION FOR TAX, LEGAL, ACCOUNTING, OR INVESTMENT PURPOSES. THIS DOES NOT PROVIDE ADVICE CONCERNING THE SUITABILITY OR VALUE OF ANY PARTICULAR INVESTMENT IN ANY SECURITY, STRUCTURED PRODUCT, FUTURE, OR OPTION, OR REGARDING ANY INVESTMENT STRATEGY. CERTAIN INVESTMENTS REFERENCED IN THE TEXTS OR LINKS ABOVE MAY BE UNSUITABLE FOR CERTAIN INVESTORS.

Since 2007, over two thirds of the world’s economic growth has come from China. It is thus critical to understand China looking forward. Fielder’s Chief Investment Officer, Steve Korn, and I have conducted extensive research on China over the past decade. We understand the nuance – or the “yin and yang” – of the country. There is both great opportunity and great risk. On the one hand, we believe some of the greatest innovation and growth may well come from China in the decade/s ahead. On the other hand, we are cautious given what we believe is a debt-fueled real estate bubble that, in time, may dwarf the crisis felt by the US and Western markets in 2008. You can listen to a replay of Steve and I discussing this subject in greater detail HERE. Not Your Grandfather’s World Is your portfolio stuck in the 1980's? Do you basically have your grandfather’s portfolio? Figuratively speaking, are you invested in Wal-Mart in an Amazon world? Extending the analogy geographically, are you invested in GM without even considering Toyota? That would be silly, considering GM’s market capitalization ($53 Bil) is dwarfed by Toyota’s ($196 Bil). Most investors are under-invested internationally. Consider that over half of the world’s stock market capitalization is comprised of companies outside of the U.S. Furthermore, three quarters of the world’s GDP is derived outside of the U.S. Nevertheless, U.S. investors have allocated only ~16% of their portfolios to international stocks.* That equates to making an outsized “bet” that the U.S. will out-perform in the coming decades. Granted, in the past decade, that has been the case: US stocks have indeed outperformed international stocks.* International companies, however, have been growing their sales faster than U.S. companies in the aggregate. And international companies are a better value. You can buy more earnings for your investment dollar.** The next 20 years will surely look different than the last 20 years. Is your portfolio looking toward the road ahead? Or in the rear-view mirror? Let us know if you would like some help adjusting its view. Yours in the Field, Frank Byrd, CFA *Per Morningstar research (estimate of investor allocation to international stocks is as of 2017). **International companies, however, have been growing their sales faster than U.S. companies in the aggregate. And international companies are a better value. You can buy more earnings for investment dollar.** Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

“... our job is to help you be greedy when others are frightened, and cautious when others are greedy... Correction can be a scary experience... How should we react? Mostly by doing nothing." - Peter Lynch, legendary investor (One Up on Wall Street) None of us wanted to think about global economics this holiday season! But markets gave us lumps of coal in our stockings, so we haven’t had much choice. Here’s my attempt at the ultimate holiday gift: Some peace of mind through. . . Perspective If you own stocks, remember that you are an owner of a collection of real businesses. That means that you own an earnings stream from these businesses. Over time, the earnings stream for your businesses should grow at a rate in line with the economy.* Thus, if you believe that people will continue producing and consuming, innovating and inventing, buying and selling, then you should have confidence that your earnings stream will grow over time. It is hard to be a pessimist on humanity if you've used an iPhone … or taken an Uber … or eaten an Impossible Burger. Improving livelihoods tends to correlate with growing economies. Approximately 35% of your companies’ earnings stream is paid out in the form of dividends, while the rest of the earnings are retained inside your companies. Historically, these retained earnings have earned over 10% returns on equity. (Global companies have a return on equity of over 13%.)** The good thing about lower stock prices is that you can buy additional shares of your companies at lower prices (thereby increasing your earnings stream). Based on today’s prices, shares acquired today have an Earnings Yield of approximately 7%.*** But there’s a catch . . . Or more precisely, there’s a cost: volatility and uncertainty. There’s volatility in the price “the market” will pay for your companies’ earnings streams. It is thus uncertain what the liquidation value of your portfolio is on any given day. That is the price we pay in exchange for the higher long-term return potential of owning stock in companies. For every $1 of your earnings stream, the market is willing to pay approximately $15. But "Mr. Market" is manic. Tomorrow he might be depressed and offer only $10 for your earnings. Another day down the road, Mr. Market might pay $20 or higher. Good luck trying to predict his moods. Warren Buffett argues that's a fool's path. Truly long-term investors are not vulnerable to stock price swings because they do not plan to sell their companies. They recognize that stock is a claim on an earnings stream. Thus, all they care about is (at some point) living off of this earnings stream (in the form of dividends that are paid out of it – typically ~35% of earnings). Another's Curse, Your Blessing If anything, lower near-term stock prices are a benefit to long-term investors, since it lets them buy more earnings at a lower price. For those still in the accumulation phase, lower prices are a blessing. Again, if your goal is to create a sustainable passive income stream that is immune to inflation long-term, owning a collection of businesses is your best choice. Historically that’s been the case, and I believe, it will remain the case for millennia to come. Publicly traded stocks are the cheapest, most efficient way for investors to do that. Whoever is in the White House. Whatever the crisis du jour may be. What really matters for your long-term financial well-being is accumulating an earnings stream.You want to acquire these earnings as cheaply as possible. Lower stock prices are thus a gift, not a lump of coal. Your Own Earnings Stream? How much stock must you accumulate to fund an adequate and sustainable retirement income? Reply to this email if you’d like to receive a simple spreadsheet I’ve designed to help you calculate this. All you have to say is “Spreadsheet!”. Happy Holidays from all of us at Fielder! Frank Byrd, CFA *Presuming you have a broadly diversified portfolio in line with broad market indices. **When discussing this hypothetical earnings stream throughout this note, I am referring to broad market averages. I use the Vanguard Total World Stock ETF (VT) as a proxy for the global stock market. Any reference to “your earnings stream” is not to be taken literally. This note is shared with a large number of readers and is for educational purposes only. Nothing described herein refers to any specific investor or client. Thus, you should not rely on these statistics as descriptive of your specific situation. This note is for educational purposes only and uses broad stock market indices as proxies for hypothetical group of companies described herein. ***Earnings Yield is calculated by the ratio of earnings per share to price (or E/P, the reciprocal of P/E). Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

Clients and Friends, It is with great pride and excitement that I announce Stephen Korn is joining Fielder as a Partner. Steve and I met 20 years ago as students at Columbia Business School. Ever since, we have enjoyed an active collaboration on various investments. It is exciting that we will now be doing this as business partners. Steve will act as Fielder’s Chief Investment Officer, leading the firm’s research and due diligence on investment strategies and the optimal ways to implement them for our clients. I have long considered Steve one of the smartest people I know. He is also a good person. I trust his character. I trust his intellect. I trust his judgment. It is an honor that he has chosen to join me in building Fielder. Steve began his investing career at Goldman Sachs Asset Management as an equity analyst. From there, he became a portfolio manager at Loews Corporation, which is owned and controlled by the Tisch family. He was later the Head of Research for a global hedge fund. Over the past ten years Steve has led the public investing arms for two separate family offices, which each managed the wealth of a founder of a large company (one was a Fortune 400). Steve obtained an MBA from Columbia Business School with honors in 2000 and a B.S. in Engineering from Cornell in 1995. He has been a CFA charterholder since 2003. You can learn more about Steve on LinkedIn. We are excited to have Steve on board. It materially accelerates the growth of Fielder’s resources and thus our ability to best allocate our clients' capital in an increasingly complex world. Very best regards, Frank Byrd, CFA Fielder Capital Group LLC 535 Fifth Avenue, Suite 602 New York, New York 10017

Char “Virtue isn't in just being nice to people others are prone to care about. So true virtue lies mostly in also being nice to those who are neglected by others, the less obvious cases, those people the grand charity business tends to miss. Or people who have no friends and would like someone once in a while to just call them for a chat or a cup of fresh roasted Italian-style coffee.” -- Nassim Taleb Skin in the Game 2 Tax Advantaged Giving Strategies The combination of recent tax law changes and the boom in the stock market have made two tax-advantaged charitable giving strategies particularly attractive: Using appreciated securities for charitable gifts Donor-Advised Funds (DAF’s) Each is a useful tool on its own. When used in combination, they can be a powerful means of reducing taxes and thus increasing the capital available for your favorite charities. How to Turn a Tax into a Charitable Donation After a nine-year bull-market in stocks, investors are sitting on a lot of unrealized capital gains. The desire to avoid paying taxes on these gains can leave you feeling trapped in positions you might otherwise prefer to sell. One strategy to manage such positions is to fund your charitable donations with appreciated securities (stocks or mutual funds with unrealized long-term capital gains). Done properly, this may allow you to avoid paying any taxes on the capital gains. The result: money that you otherwise would have given to the IRS goes instead to your favorite charity. This in turn allows you an even larger charitable tax deduction. How to Get a Bigger Deduction with a DAF Recent tax law changes make the Donor Advised Fund (DAF) an even more attractive charitable giving tool. The new tax legislation of 2017 raised the standard deduction to $24,000 for married couples. For families who have few itemizable deductions other than charitable contributions, this means that charitable gifts may not be deductible. For example, a couple who gives $20,000 each year to charities and has no other deductions would no longer receive any tax benefit from their contributions. Here’s where a DAF can help. Rather than donate $20,000 directly to charities each year, the couple could instead donate five years’ worth of giving ($100,000) to a DAF in the current year. The DAF would then donate $20,000 per year to their charities of choice over the next five years.* The $100,000 donation would bring the couples itemized deductions well above the $24,000 standard deduction and thereby ensure that their giving provides them substantial tax advantages, while at the same time maintaining their prior giving schedule. Even better, if the $100,000 donation is made with a stock that has doubled in value, the couple could turn the embedded capital gains liability into a beneficial tax-deduction. The following table shows the value of this combination of tools versus the traditional method of making cash gifts each year outright to charities. The tools save the couple $28,120 in taxes. Foregoing them costs them $11,900 in taxes. The difference between what the first scenario saves them and the second scenario costs them adds up to a $40,080 in tax benefit. This scenario illustrates how creative planning can mean real money to your family (and the people and organizations you love most). Your situation is unique and might warrant other strategies (like a private foundation). If your primary motivation is to reduce your exposure to a large investment with a low cost basis, there are additional strategies to help you diversify without a huge capital gains tax. Make us your first call when you need creative solutions. Maybe it's to help you diversify a highly appreciated, concentrated investment in a tax advantaged way. Maybe that's to help optimize your charitable giving. Maybe it's both. Either way, we're here to help. Yours in the Field, Peter Cook, CFP, CFA Frank Byrd, CFA *The DAF you select (managed by an institution like Schwab or Fidelity) must officially approve your preferred charities. In practice, the DAF will direct funds to just about any 501(c)(3) public charity of your choice, with only a few exceptions (such as private foundations). **The scenario in the left side of the table assumes you were to donate $100k worth of a stock that has doubled in value (ie: has a $50k unrealized capital gain). By donating this stock to a DAF all up front in year one, you can deduct $76k of the gift (above the $24k standard deduction). The DAF in turn can donate $20k/year for 5 years to your favorite charity. The right side of the table shows the result of poor planning. It assumes the stock is sold and the proceeds are donated to charity ratably over the course of the next 5 years. In this scenario, you would paying the capital gains tax and fail to get a charitable deduction since the annual gift falls below the $24k standard deduction. Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

“More great fortunes are made during bad times than good times.” -- Rhett Butler in Gone with the Wind This quote is in honor of Richard Jenrette, who passed away last week. He cited it in his memoir, The Contrarian Manager. Jenrette co-founded the legendary firm Donaldson, Lufkin, & Jenrette. Success on Wall Street is not rare; a great culture is. I had the good fortune to meet Jenrette, and he made a profound impression on me. The world has lost a great man. Safe Haven Impostors? Most commonly presumed “safe haven” investments do a poor job according to hedge fund manager Mark Spitznagel. He warns that many will fail to deliver the protection investors expect. Others will likely perform as expected, yet are an inefficient use of your capital. Spitznagel is a pioneer of “tail hedging”, which he contends is the most efficient safe haven strategy for protecting your portfolio from sudden, severe market declines. (Anyone remember 2008?) His long-time collaborator, Nassim Taleb, is far better known as the author of NY Times best-seller The Black Swan. Naturally, there’s been a growing interest in “safe havens”. Asset prices continue inflating to all-time highs. Whether it’s stocks, bonds, real estate, art, or you name it, everything looks expensive. Those of us old enough to have lived through past market euphorias have “seen this movie before”. We’re afraid of how it likely ends. But we’ve also seen enough movies to know that endings often have a twist. That’s why you shouldn’t walk out of a movie before it ends – even if you think you know what’s going to happen. Sometimes, even horror films surprise us with a happy ending. The ambition of safe haven investing is to allocate a portion of your portfolio to investments that perform well when stocks and/or bonds do poorly. But not all safe havens are created equal. There is an inherent trade-off between two things: 1) how much loss protection it provides in a crash and 2) how much capital you must allocate to it. Think of #2 as a “cost of capital”. The more capital required to allocate to a safe haven, the more it costs. The ideal safe haven provides substantial loss protection, isreliable, and uses up very little of your capital. In other words, you want a “big bang for your buck”. Further, you want a high degree of confidence that it will actually pay off if markets melt. (Remember from The Big Short how worried CDS investors were after the crash that failing brokers might fail to pay off on their successful bets?) Most investments commonly thought of (or pitched) as “safe havens” fail in at least one of these respects. They’re either not reliable (counter party risk), don’t perform that well in a crash, and/or cost too much (or require too heavy an allocation in your portfolio). For instance, "store-of-value" safe havens like US Treasuries or the Swiss franc help preserve capital in a market crash yet generate such meager returns that they fail to fully offset declining stock prices. Further, they require a substantial allocation in your portfolio, which “costs” a lot in the form of inferior long-term real returns to equities. Other traditional safe havens, such as gold, macro hedge funds, or “long volatility” strategies may produce higher and more negatively correlated returns in a crash. Yet, even here, most fail to provide significant upside relative to the capital allocated to them. Then there are safe haven impostors – investments that are commonly perceived (or pitched) as safe havens, yet fail to deliver a reliable and/or substantial return in a crash. This includes commodities, farmland, bonds, currencies, VIX futures, high-dividend stocks, value stocks, art, and most hedge funds. These range from “hopeful havens” (i.e.: low confidence level they’ll actually work sufficiently in a crash) to downright “unsafe havens” (i.e.: high dividend stocks). Granted, these may be diversifiers, or even attractive long-term investments. But Spitznagel contends they are likely to fail as true safe havens. What, then, does Spitznagel recommend? For over a decade he has been making the case for a “tail-hedge” strategy as the optimal safe haven strategy. (This is the strategy that his firm, Universa, employs.) It seeks a far bigger “bang for the buck”. The ambition is to allow an investor to allocate a far lower percentage of their capital to the safe haven bucket and have a higher degree of confidence in the reliability of the safe haven to work when it is most needed. Fielder has conducted extensive due diligence on this strategy. It is not a “free lunch” – those do not exist. Nor is a tail hedge strategy appropriate for every investor. The following video is a good overview of Spitznagel's reasoning and some of the numbers behind it: (Click image to watch the video) For more details on safe haven investment strategies, please contact me. We’d be happy to share what we’ve learned and how we’re implementing these strategies in different ways for our clients. Yours in the Field, Frank Byrd, CFA Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein. This note is intended merely to educate readers on the concept of safe havens. Nothing herein should be construed as an endorsement of Universa or a recommendation for any of the funds that it manages. Universa's funds may not be suitable for you.

The 10% Lie OK, maybe “lie” is a strong word. A more genteel label is “mischaracterization of the facts”. Financial advisers have a nasty habit of telling clients that stocks go up 8-10% per year. This is harmful. It creates the wrong expectations. The reality is that stock returns are far more volatile than that. A few years ago, I examined the returns of the S&P 500 over the 25-year period between 1990 and 2015. What I learned surprised me. Stocks rarely generated returns between 8-10% over any particular 12-month period. They were just as likely to fall 18% or leap 33% over the course of a year. If you own stocks, do not expect 8-10% per year. Stocks are volatile. They go up a lot some years; they go down a lot some years. Forget the idea of “safe haven” stocks. High-dividend and low-volatility stocks declined roughly in line with the S&P 500's ~8% decline between late January and early February.* And it wasn’t just stocks that went down a few weeks ago. Everything went down. Even bonds (-1%). Even commodities (-5%). Even gold (-2%). So much for diversification.** When things get bumpy like this, it’s important to know what you own and why you own it. Are you too heavy in stocks? Or too heavy in bonds? Or maybe too heavy in the wrong kind of stocks or bonds? Better to get these questions answered now while the waters are mostly calm. It’s much harder to make rational decisions amidst choppy water. Let us know if we can help. Yours in the Field, Frank Byrd, CFA *Between Jan 26th and Feb 8th, the SPY, SPLV and NOBL declined by -7.6%, -7.3%, and -8.3% respectively. **Between Jan 26th and Feb 8th, AGG, GSG, and GLD declined by 1.1%, 5.1%, and 1.5% respectively. Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

Amen of the Week: "I think frugality drives innovation, just like other constraints do. One of the only ways to get out of a tight box is to invent your way out." —Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon "Own It" ... but Title It Properly How you title your property matters. Big time. Married couples typically title their property as Joint Tenants with Rights of Survivorship. Few appreciate that this might have significantly negative tax and legal ramifications. There are alternative legal structures that may offer protection and peace of mind when unfortunate situations arise. The good news is that some of structures cost you nothing to implement. One such legal strategy is to hold assets as Tenants by Entirety: a special form of Joint Ownership that can provide greater protection from creditors for you and your family’s assets. Only certain states allow Tenancy by Entirety, but if you live in a state that does, you should strongly consider changing any assets owned Joint Tenants with Rights of Survivorship to "Tenancy by Entirety" ownership.* An Example: Suppose a married couple owns their home and titles it Joint Ownership with Rights of Survivorship (JTWROS). The wife owns a business and takes out a business loan backed by a pledge of her personal assets (a “personal guarantee”, as banks often require). During a recession, her business runs into trouble and her company defaults on the loan. Her creditors can now take the couple’s home. By contrast, if this couple’s home had instead been titled as Tenants by Entirety, the wife’s creditors could not have exercised a claim on the house at any time during their marriage. If the wife dies before her husband, her creditors lose all ability to exercise claims against their property.** It is important to recognize that this additional protection applies only when the assets have been pledged as collateral by only one spouse. In other words, the home mortgage must have been in the Wife’s single name to have kept the home outside of creditors’ reach. This is why couples should typically avoid co-signing loans whenever possible. For similar reasons, couples should not title automobiles in joint name to avoid exposing both spouses to liability in the event of an auto accident. If you live in a state that allows it, you should strongly consider changing any Joint Ownership With Rights of Survivorship assets over to Tenancy by Entirety.* States that recognize Tenancy by the Entirety:* Alaska Arkansas Delaware District of Columbia Florida Hawaii Illinois (real estate only) Indiana (real estate only) Kentucky (real estate only) Maryland Massachusetts Michigan (real estate only) Mississippi Missouri New Jersey New York (real estate only) North Carolina (real estate only) Oklahoma Oregon (real estate only) Pennsylvania Rhode Island Tennessee Vermont Virginia Wyoming Note: As indicated above, some of these states allow only Real Property (real estate only) to be held as Tenants by the Entirety. In this subset of states, other personal property cannot be held as Tenants by the Entirety. Have questions? We're here to help you think through the pros and cons of various asset titling strategies. Yours in the Field, Frank Byrd, CFA and Peter Cook, CFA, CFP A hat tip to Memphis-based estate planning attorney Mike Adams, CPA, LLM for educating us on the importance of this subject. You can read his thoughts on Joint Tenancy by Entirety in a recent whitepaper he authored. Just click HERE or email us to request a copy. *According to Charles Schwab & Co., as of 01/01/2017. **If the husband dies first, the creditors might ultimately be able to take the home (assuming the claim remains in force). Fortunately, in some states, there is the ability to create a trust to keep the property out of creditors’ hands even in this event. Please reach out for more information about these types of trusts. Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

“God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, Courage to change the things I can, And wisdom to know the difference.” – Reinhold Niebuhr The above passage, which many will recognize as the abbreviated Serenity Prayer, was first penned by the theologian Reinhold Niebuhr for his Massachusetts congregation as early as 1934.* Coincidentally 1934 was also the year that President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed into law the Revenue Act of 1934, which raised marginal tax rates for individual Americans.** Earlier today President Trump signed the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (Tax Reform). We think the best approach is to view today's tax reform in the spirit of Niebuhr’s prayer: Recognizing that most of the reform falls into the category of things we cannot change, we must therefore try to focus on the small parts that we can. While the Tax Reform will provide tax cuts for many Americans, it may create complications - or even higher taxes - for some. This creates anxiety as people rush to figure how they will be affected individually. What actions should you take? What change is within your power to improve your own situation? With that in mind, we’ve created the following list of changes to contemplate: Top Tax Planning Changes to Consider: Consider deferring income into 2018: Starting next year, marginal tax brackets should provide some reduction in marginal tax bracket for most tax payers. Thus, to the extent it’s possible, shifting income from 2017 to 2018 may be advantageous. Reconsider buying that “big” house: The 2017 Tax Reform caps the deductibility of mortgage interest to the first $750,000 of debt principal. The decision of buying a home naturally extends beyond tax considerations. However, if you’re contemplating taking on a new or bigger mortgage, realize that the math has changed. Consider bundling deductions into a single year: Because Tax Reform will increase the Standard Deduction to $12,000 for individuals and $24,000 for married couples, the hurdle for claiming itemized deductions will be higher. As a result, it may be advantageous to “bundle” deductions into a single year. Consider paying 4th quarter 2017 estimated property taxes before year end: Tax Reform will limit the deductibility of state and local property and income taxes up to a cap of $10,000 for joint filers. While prepayment of 2018 liabilities is not allowed, you can pay 4th quarter 2017 estimated taxes by the end of 2017 to use as a deduction in 2017. Consider potential medical expense deductions before 2019: Tax Reform temporarily reduces the threshold for medical expense deductions from 10% of Adjusted Gross Income (AGI) to 7.5% but only for 2017 and 2018. This reduction also applies to the medical expense deduction for Alternative Minimum Tax purposes. For those who have or are considering eligible expenses, it may be advantageous to use them during this period. It’s important to note that your individual tax situation is unique. The above strategies may not be appropriate for you. Consult with your tax professional before year-end to discuss these strategies and determine if any are in your best interest. Please reach out if we can be helpful to you or someone you know as you navigate the tax and investment landscape in 2018. Yours in the Field, Peter Cook, CFP®, CFA *https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serenity_Prayer **https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1934 Disclaimer: While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein.

"… there are certain structural advantages that founders may have … The social capital and moral authority that comes from being the founder and having built many of the company’s key products means that on balance people trust you more and give you the benefit of the doubt more when you make tough calls ... Everything is easier with social capital.” - Mark Zuckerberg, Founder/CEO of Facebook People matter. A lot. Wouldn’t it be great to invest alongside leaders who ... have a track record of success? have significant “skin in the game”? have incentives that are closely aligned with shareholders? The person who gave birth to the company is often best equipped to nurture, lead, and inspire the people who comprise the company. This can lead to better products, happier customers, and even better capital allocation decisions. Research suggests that this can result in better long-term stock returns. For instance, a recent study by Bain & Co. found that within the S&P 500, the companies whose founder was still deeply involved performed 3-times better than the other companies over a 25-year period (1990-2014).* Intrigued, we began to explore how we might invest in a passive (index) of founder-led companies. Ultimately, we found a solution that did this (an ETF). However, we did not like its cost structure or portfolio selection methodology. This led us to design our own. We are thus pleased to announce Fielder’s Founder-Led strategy. It is not a fund or ETF but rather a basket of ~50 individual stocks of founder-led firms. Passive (index) investing should not be mindless investing. We believe our Founder-Led strategy is a way to invest passively in a more “mindful” universe of companies. For more information, you can download a report on our Founder-Led strategy HERE. Yours in the Fielder, Frank Byrd, CFA *Zook, Chris. “Founder-Led Companies Outperform the Rest — Here’s Why”. Harvard Business Review. March 24, 2016. Disclaimer: The Founder-Led strategy may not be appropriate for all clients. Please consult with your financial adviser. The Founder-Led strategy is comprised of smaller and more volatile stocks, and as a result may involve a higher degree of risk. While the information presented herein is believed to be accurate, Fielder Capital Group LLC (Fielder) makes no express warranty as to the completeness or accuracy, nor can it accept responsibility for errors appearing in the document. Fielder is under no obligation to notify you of any errors discovered later or of any subsequent changes in opinions. Nothing herein should be construed as a recommendation to buy or sell any of these securities. It should not be assumed that any of the securities, transactions, or holdings discussed will prove to be profitable in the future or that investment recommendations or decisions Fielder makes in the future will be profitable or will equal the investment performance of the securities discussed herein. Fielder or its employees may have an economic interest in securities mentioned herein. This information is intended only for the recipient of this email. Under no circumstances should this report be shared with or forwarded to anyone else without the express permission of Fielder.