Mairs and Power Minnesota Municipal Bond ETF | ||||||||
SCHEDULE OF INVESTMENTS (unaudited) | September 30, 2022 | |||||||
Par Value | Security Description | Fair Value | ||||||
FIXED INCOME SECURITIES 98.6% | ||||||||
MUNICIPAL BONDS 98.6% (a) | ||||||||
$ | 200,000 | City of Richfield MN | 4.000% | 02/01/23 | $ | 200,535 | ||
140,000 | County of Redwood MN | 5.000% | 04/01/23 | 141,309 | ||||
100,000 | Minnesota Municipal Power Agency | 5.000% | 10/01/23 | 101,700 | ||||
275,000 | County of Hennepin MN | 5.000% | 12/15/23 | 281,016 | ||||
100,000 | Minnesota Higher Education Facilities Authority | 5.000% | 12/01/24 | 103,069 | ||||
125,000 | Minneapolis Special School District No 1 | 5.000% | 02/01/25 | 129,878 | ||||
115,000 | Spring Lake Park Independent School District No 16 | 4.000% | 02/01/25 | 116,804 | ||||
250,000 | Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan Independent School District No 196 | 5.000% | 04/01/25 | 259,510 | ||||
100,000 | City of Chaska MN Electric Revenue | 5.000% | 10/01/25 | 104,853 | ||||
220,000 | City of North Mankato MN | 4.000% | 12/01/25 | 224,162 | ||||
200,000 | Spring Lake Park Independent School District No 16 | 4.000% | 02/01/26 | 202,104 | ||||
200,000 | Southern Plains Education Cooperative No 915 | 3.000% | 02/01/26 | 193,404 | ||||
125,000 | Housing & Redevelopment Authority of The City of St Paul Minnesota | 3.500% | 09/01/26 | 118,032 | ||||
100,000 | City of Richfield MN | 4.000% | 02/01/27 | 102,206 | ||||
200,000 | City of Willmar MN | 5.000% | 02/01/27 | 213,211 | ||||
305,000 | State of Minnesota | 5.000% | 08/01/27 | 324,625 | ||||
135,000 | City of Center City MN | 4.000% | 11/01/27 | 135,304 | ||||
100,000 | City of Wayzata MN | 3.000% | 12/01/27 | 98,788 | ||||
175,000 | City of Fridley MN | 4.000% | 02/01/28 | 179,174 | ||||
200,000 | North Branch Independent School District No 138 | 5.000% | 02/01/28 | 214,438 | ||||
115,000 | City of Lonsdale MN | 3.000% | 02/01/28 | 112,165 | ||||
110,000 | City of Cannon Falls MN | 4.000% | 02/01/28 | 113,412 | ||||
210,000 | City of New Ulm MN | 4.000% | 12/01/28 | 218,516 | ||||
125,000 | City of Faribault MN | 4.000% | 12/15/28 | 129,384 | ||||
95,000 | City of Apple Valley MN | 3.000% | 12/15/28 | 93,845 | ||||
120,000 | Minneapolis-St Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission | 5.000% | 01/01/29 | 127,382 | ||||
175,000 | City of Brooklyn Center MN | 3.000% | 02/01/29 | 168,219 | ||||
225,000 | County of Le Sueur MN | 3.000% | 04/01/29 | 217,357 | ||||
120,000 | City of Apple Valley MN | 3.000% | 12/15/29 | 118,186 | ||||
125,000 | City of Faribault MN | 3.000% | 12/15/29 | 120,244 | ||||
200,000 | Minneapolis-St Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission | 5.000% | 01/01/30 | 216,258 | ||||
215,000 | City of North Mankato MN | 4.000% | 02/01/30 | 220,921 | ||||
185,000 | City of Hopkins MN | 2.000% | 02/01/30 | 160,680 | ||||
110,000 | Rocori Area Schools Independent School District No 750 | 4.000% | 02/01/30 | 113,330 | ||||
150,000 | Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan Independent School District No 196 | 1.300% | 04/01/30 | 119,286 | ||||
200,000 | City of Minneapolis MN | 2.000% | 12/01/30 | 172,031 | ||||
150,000 | County of Hennepin MN | 5.000% | 12/15/30 | 166,694 | ||||
200,000 | Duluth Independent School District No 709 | 0.000% (b) | 02/01/31 | 138,179 | ||||
200,000 | North St Paul-Maplewood-Oakdale Independent School District No 622 | 2.000% | 02/01/31 | 169,454 | ||||
130,000 | St Cloud Housing & Redevelopment Authority | 2.000% | 02/01/31 | 111,383 | ||||
325,000 | City of Elk River MN | 3.000% | 02/01/31 | 305,840 | ||||
275,000 | Springfield Independent School District No 85 | 3.000% | 02/01/31 | 259,805 | ||||
50,000 | Pelican Rapids Independent School District No 548 | 2.150% | 02/01/31 | 43,880 | ||||
65,000 | Dakota County Community Development Agency | 2.000% | 01/01/32 | 53,492 | ||||
175,000 | Minneapolis-St Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission | 5.000% | 01/01/32 | 183,407 | ||||
195,000 | City of Carver MN | 3.000% | 02/01/32 | 179,005 | ||||
200,000 | Pine City Independent School District No 578 | 2.000% | 04/01/32 | 160,941 | ||||
365,000 | City of Elk River MN Electric Revenue | 3.000% | 08/01/32 | 333,229 | ||||
75,000 | Housing & Redevelopment Authority of The City of St Paul Minnesota | 4.000% | 10/01/32 | 75,359 | ||||
100,000 | St Paul Public Library Agency | 3.000% | 10/01/32 | 92,290 | ||||
110,000 | Housing & Redevelopment Authority of The City of St Paul Minnesota | 3.125% | 11/15/32 | 95,658 | ||||
200,000 | St Paul Independent School District No 625 | 3.000% | 02/01/33 | 178,611 | ||||
115,000 | City of Madelia MN | 2.000% | 02/01/33 | 92,807 | ||||
200,000 | City of Carver MN | 3.000% | 02/01/33 | 180,494 | ||||
160,000 | St Cloud Housing & Redevelopment Authority | 2.000% | 02/01/33 | 130,516 | ||||
300,000 | Hibbing Independent School District No 701 | 3.000% | 03/01/33 | 271,719 | ||||
300,000 | City of St Paul MN | 2.000% | 05/01/33 | 233,525 | ||||
120,000 | City of Minneapolis MN | 5.000% | 11/15/33 | 123,319 | ||||
160,000 | County of Hennepin MN | 5.000% | 12/15/33 | 176,090 | ||||
200,000 | City of St Cloud MN | 2.000% | 02/01/34 | 150,623 | ||||
110,000 | Shakopee Independent School District No 720 | 3.500% | 02/01/34 | 110,075 | ||||
100,000 | City of Corcoran MN | 3.125% | 02/01/34 | 91,997 | ||||
300,000 | City of Hutchinson MN | 2.000% | 02/01/34 | 225,372 | ||||
125,000 | Zumbro Education District | 4.000% | 02/01/34 | 116,660 | ||||
275,000 | State of Minnesota | 5.000% | 08/01/34 | 299,720 | ||||
115,000 | Minneapolis-St Paul Metropolitan Airports Commission | 5.000% | 01/01/35 | 120,807 | ||||
350,000 | North St Paul-Maplewood-Oakdale Independent School District No 622 | 3.000% | 02/01/35 | 297,777 | ||||
100,000 | St Paul Independent School District No 625 | 2.250% | 02/01/35 | 75,557 | ||||
100,000 | County of Pennington MN | 2.375% | 02/01/35 | 79,341 | ||||
350,000 | County of St Louis MN | 2.000% | 12/01/35 | 253,561 | ||||
500,000 | Minneapolis Special School District No 1 | 4.000% | 02/01/36 | 474,972 | ||||
100,000 | City of Coon Rapids MN | 2.500% | 02/01/36 | 78,448 | ||||
100,000 | University of Minnesota | 5.000% | 04/01/36 | 103,617 | ||||
150,000 | Minnetonka Independent School District No 276 | 3.000% | 07/01/36 | 128,102 | ||||
200,000 | Minnesota Higher Education Facilities Authority | 3.000% | 10/01/36 | 155,409 | ||||
225,000 | Fergus Falls Independent School District No 544 | 3.000% | 02/01/37 | 190,062 | ||||
100,000 | City of Hanover MN | 3.300% | 02/01/37 | 86,860 | ||||
130,000 | Minnesota Higher Education Facilities Authority | 4.000% | 03/01/37 | 126,877 | ||||
250,000 | Housing & Redevelopment Authority of The City of St Paul Minnesota | 4.000% | 10/01/37 | 234,239 | ||||
75,000 | City of Minneapolis MN | 4.000% | 11/15/37 | 68,174 | ||||
275,000 | Zumbro Education District | 4.000% | 02/01/38 | 245,609 | ||||
295,000 | County of Wright MN | 3.000% | 12/01/38 | 234,178 | ||||
250,000 | Rochester Independent School District No 535 | 2.500% | 02/01/39 | 179,166 | ||||
485,000 | State of Minnesota | 5.000% | 08/01/39 | 524,562 | ||||
250,000 | County of Wright MN | 3.000% | 12/01/39 | 196,144 | ||||
545,000 | State of Minnesota | 5.000% | 08/01/40 | 588,227 | ||||
175,000 | City of Minneapolis MN | 4.000% | 11/15/40 | 158,987 | ||||
290,000 | City of Apple Valley MN | 4.000% | 09/01/41 | 235,121 | ||||
400,000 | Minnesota Higher Education Facilities Authority | 3.000% | 10/01/41 | 292,093 | ||||
500,000 | Anoka-Hennepin Independent School District No 11 | 3.000% | 02/01/43 | 393,253 | ||||
125,000 | Minnesota Higher Education Facilities Authority | 3.000% | 03/01/43 | 92,612 | ||||
100,000 | Western Minnesota Municipal Power Agency | 5.000% | 01/01/49 | 105,613 | ||||
16,334,850 | ||||||||
TOTAL FIXED INCOME SECURITIES | $ | 16,334,850 | ||||||
(cost $19,414,334) | ||||||||
SHORT-TERM INVESTMENTS 0.4% | ||||||||
63,271 | First American Government Obligations Fund, Class X, 2.770% (c) | $ | 63,271 | |||||
(cost $63,271) | ||||||||
TOTAL INVESTMENTS 99.0% | $ | 16,398,121 | ||||||
(cost $19,477,605) | ||||||||
OTHER ASSETS AND LIABILITIES (NET) 1.0% | 159,018 | |||||||
TOTAL NET ASSETS 100.0% | $ | 16,557,139 | ||||||
(a) | The date shown represents the earliest of the next put date or final maturity date. | |||||||
(b) | Zero coupon bond. | |||||||
(c) | The rate quoted is the annualized seven-day effective yield as of September 30, 2022. |
Significant Accounting Policies
The following is a summary of significant accounting policies consistently followed by the Funds in the preparation of the financial statements. These policies are in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (“GAAP”).
Investment Valuation
Each equity security owned by a Fund that is listed on a securities exchange, except for securities listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market LLC (“NASDAQ”), is valued at its last sale price on the exchange on the date as of which assets are valued. When the security is listed on more than one exchange, the Fund will use the price of the exchange that the Fund generally considers to be the principal exchange on which the stock is traded. Fund securities listed on NASDAQ will be valued at the NASDAQ Official Closing Price (“NOCP”), which may not necessarily represent the last sale price. If the NOCP is not available, such securities shall be valued at the last sale price on the day of valuation. If there has been no sale on such exchange or on NASDAQ on such day, the security is valued at (i) the mean between the most recent quoted bid and asked prices at the close of the exchange on such day or (ii) the latest sales price on the Composite Market for the day such security is being valued. “Composite Market” means a consolidation of the trade information provided by national securities and foreign exchanges and over-the- counter markets as published by an approved independent pricing service (a “Pricing Service”).
Debt securities, such as U.S. government securities, corporate securities, municipal securities and asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, including short-term debt instruments having a maturity of 60 days or less, are valued at the mean in accordance with prices supplied by a Pricing Service. Pricing Services may use various valuation methodologies such as the mean between the bid and the asked prices, matrix pricing and other analytical pricing models as well as market transactions and dealer quotations. If a price is not available from a Pricing Service, the most recent quotation obtained from one or more broker-dealers known to follow the issue will be obtained. Quotations will be valued at the mean between the bid and the offer. In the absence of available quotations, the securities will be priced at fair value. Any discount or premium is accreted or amortized over the expected life of the respective security using the constant yield to maturity method. Pricing Services generally value debt securities assuming orderly transactions of an institutional round lot size, but such securities may be held or transactions may be conducted in such securities in smaller, odd lot sizes. Odd lots often trade at lower prices than institutional round lots.
Money market funds, demand notes and repurchase agreements are valued at cost. If cost does not represent current market value the securities will be priced at fair value.
Redeemable securities issued by open-end, registered investment companies are valued at the net asset values (“NAVs”) of such companies for purchase and/or redemption orders placed on that day. If, on a particular day, a share of an investment company is not listed on NASDAQ, such security’s fair value will be determined.
When market quotations are not readily available, any security or other asset is valued at its fair value as determined under procedures approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees. These fair value procedures will also be used to price a security when corporate events, events in the securities market or world events cause the Adviser to believe that a security’s last sale price may not reflect its actual fair market value. The intended effect of using fair value pricing procedures is to ensure that the Fund is accurately priced. The Board of Trustees will regularly evaluate whether the Fund’s fair value pricing procedures continue to be appropriate in light of the specific circumstances of the Fund and the quality of prices obtained through their application by the Trust’s valuation committee.
FASB Accounting Standards Codification, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” Topic 820 (“ASC 820”), establishes an authoritative definition of fair value and sets out a hierarchy for measuring fair value. ASC 820 requires an entity to evaluate certain factors to determine whether there has been a significant decrease in volume and level of activity for the security such that recent transactions and quoted prices may not be determinative of fair value and further analysis and adjustment may be necessary to estimate fair value. ASC 820 also requires enhanced disclosure regarding the inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value in those instances as well as expanded disclosure of valuation levels for each class of investments. These inputs are summarized in the three broad levels listed below:
Level 1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical securities.
Level 2 – Other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar securities, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.).
Level 3 – Significant unobservable inputs (including the Fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments).
The inputs or methodology used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities. The following is a summary of the inputs used to value the Fund’s investments carried at fair value as of September 30, 2022:
Debt securities, such as U.S. government securities, corporate securities, municipal securities and asset-backed and mortgage-backed securities, including short-term debt instruments having a maturity of 60 days or less, are valued at the mean in accordance with prices supplied by a Pricing Service. Pricing Services may use various valuation methodologies such as the mean between the bid and the asked prices, matrix pricing and other analytical pricing models as well as market transactions and dealer quotations. If a price is not available from a Pricing Service, the most recent quotation obtained from one or more broker-dealers known to follow the issue will be obtained. Quotations will be valued at the mean between the bid and the offer. In the absence of available quotations, the securities will be priced at fair value. Any discount or premium is accreted or amortized over the expected life of the respective security using the constant yield to maturity method. Pricing Services generally value debt securities assuming orderly transactions of an institutional round lot size, but such securities may be held or transactions may be conducted in such securities in smaller, odd lot sizes. Odd lots often trade at lower prices than institutional round lots.
Money market funds, demand notes and repurchase agreements are valued at cost. If cost does not represent current market value the securities will be priced at fair value.
Redeemable securities issued by open-end, registered investment companies are valued at the net asset values (“NAVs”) of such companies for purchase and/or redemption orders placed on that day. If, on a particular day, a share of an investment company is not listed on NASDAQ, such security’s fair value will be determined.
When market quotations are not readily available, any security or other asset is valued at its fair value as determined under procedures approved by the Trust’s Board of Trustees. These fair value procedures will also be used to price a security when corporate events, events in the securities market or world events cause the Adviser to believe that a security’s last sale price may not reflect its actual fair market value. The intended effect of using fair value pricing procedures is to ensure that the Fund is accurately priced. The Board of Trustees will regularly evaluate whether the Fund’s fair value pricing procedures continue to be appropriate in light of the specific circumstances of the Fund and the quality of prices obtained through their application by the Trust’s valuation committee.
FASB Accounting Standards Codification, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” Topic 820 (“ASC 820”), establishes an authoritative definition of fair value and sets out a hierarchy for measuring fair value. ASC 820 requires an entity to evaluate certain factors to determine whether there has been a significant decrease in volume and level of activity for the security such that recent transactions and quoted prices may not be determinative of fair value and further analysis and adjustment may be necessary to estimate fair value. ASC 820 also requires enhanced disclosure regarding the inputs and valuation techniques used to measure fair value in those instances as well as expanded disclosure of valuation levels for each class of investments. These inputs are summarized in the three broad levels listed below:
Level 1 – Quoted prices in active markets for identical securities.
Level 2 – Other significant observable inputs (including quoted prices for similar securities, interest rates, prepayment speeds, credit risk, etc.).
Level 3 – Significant unobservable inputs (including the Fund’s own assumptions in determining the fair value of investments).
The inputs or methodology used for valuing securities are not necessarily an indication of the risk associated with investing in those securities. The following is a summary of the inputs used to value the Fund’s investments carried at fair value as of September 30, 2022:
Growth Fund | Balanced Fund | Small Cap Fund | Minnesota ETF | |||||||||||||
Level 1 * | $ | 4,225,215,103 | $ | 504,566,234 | $ | 318,874,918 | $ | 63,271 | ||||||||
Level 2** | - | 260,813,328 | - | 16,334,850 | ||||||||||||
Level 3 | - | - | - | - | ||||||||||||
Total | $ | 4,225,215,103 | $ | 765,379,562 | $ | 318,874,918 | $ | 16,398,121 | ||||||||
* All Level 1 investments are equity securities (common stocks and preferred stocks and short-term investments. | ||||||||||||||||
** All Level 2 investments are fixed income securities. | ||||||||||||||||
For detail of securities by major section classification for the Funds, please refer to the Schedule of Investments. | ||||||||||||||||
The Funds did not hold any Level 3 investments during the period ended September 30, 2022. | ||||||||||||||||
The Fund did not invest in any financial derivative instruments during the period ended September 30, 2022. |