The FBR Funds
FBR Pegasus Fund™
FBR Pegasus Mid Cap Fund™
FBR Pegasus Small Cap Fund™
FBR Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund™
FBR Focus Fund
FBR Large Cap Financial Fund
FBR Small Cap Financial Fund
FBR Technology Fund
FBR Gas Utility Index Fund
1001 19th Street North
Arlington, VA 22209
PROXY STATEMENT
FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
This Proxy Statement is furnished in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Trustees (the “Board”) of The FBR Funds, a Delaware statutory trust (the “Trust”), on behalf of its separate investment series named above (each a “Fund” and collectively referred to sometimes as, the “Funds” or the “FBR Funds”), to be used in connection with a Special Meeting of Shareholders of the Funds to be held on October __, 2009 (the “Meeting”). All persons who are shareholders of one or more of the Funds as of the close of business on August 31, 2009 (the “Record Date”) will be entitled to notice of and to vote at the Meeting. The FBR Funds know of no other business to be voted upon at the Meeting other than those proposals set forth in the accompanying Notice of Special Meeting of Shareholders and described in this Proxy Statement.
The mailing address of the principal executive offices of the FBR Funds is 1001 19th Street North, Arlington, VA 22209. The approximate date on which this Proxy Statement and form of proxy are first being sent to shareholders of the Funds is September __, 2009.
Only shareholders of record of the FBR Funds at the close of business on the Record Date will be entitled to notice of and to vote at the Meeting. Shares represented by proxies, unless previously revoked, will be voted at the Meeting in accordance with the instructions of the shareholders. If no instructions are given, the proxies will be voted in favor of the proposals. To revoke a proxy, the shareholder giving such proxy must either submit to the Funds a subsequently dated proxy, deliver to the Funds a written notice of revocation or otherwise give notice of revocation in open meeting, in all cases prior to the exercise of the authority granted in the proxy.
The presence in person or by proxy of the holders of record of one-third of the outstanding shares of the Funds shall constitute a quorum at the Meeting, permitting action to be taken. In the event that sufficient votes are not received by the date of the Meeting, a person named as proxy may propose one or more adjournments of the Meeting for a reasonable period or periods to permit further solicitation of proxies. The persons named as proxies will vote in favor of such adjournment those proxies that they are entitled to vote in favor of the proposals and will vote against any such adjournment those proxies required to be voted against the proposals.
- 1 -
The FBR Funds will furnish, without charge, a copy of the Funds’ most recent annual and semi-annual reports to shareholders upon request, which may be made either by writing to the FBR Funds at the address above or by calling toll-free 888.888.0025. The annual and semi-annual reports will be mailed to you by first-class mail within three business days of your request.
_____________________
PROPOSAL 1 — TO APPROVE NEW INVESTMENT ADVISORY
AGREEMENTS FOR THE FUNDS
(All Funds)
You are being asked to approve new investment advisory agreements (the “New Advisory Agreements”) between each FBR Fund and FBR Fund Advisers, Inc. (“FBR Fund Advisers” or the “Adviser”). Additional information about the Adviser is found below under the heading “Information About the Funds’ Investment Adviser ” and in Exhibit C to this Proxy Statement.
Why are shareholders of the FBR Funds being asked to approve New Advisory Agreements?
As discussed further below, FBR Capital Markets, Inc. (“FBR Capital Markets”), which is the parent company of FBR Fund Advisers, entered into a series of transactions that ultimately resulted in a change of control of that entity as of June 16, 2009. As a result of this change of control, the Funds’ investment advisory agreements that were in effect as of that date (the “Prior Advisory Agreements”) automatically terminated. In order for the Adviser to continue to provide continuous services to the Funds, the Board approved interim advisory agreements (the “Interim Advisory Agreements”) between the Adviser and the Trust, on behalf of the Funds, that are to remain in effect until the earlier of: (1) the expiration of a 150 day period from the date the Prior Advisory Agreements were deemed terminated (that is, June 16, 2009), or (2) until such time as shareholders of the FBR Funds approve the New Advisory Agreements.
Section 15 of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”), requires that any investment advisory agreement be in writing and be approved initially by both (1) the fund’s board of trustees (including a majority of those trustees who are not considered to be “interested persons” of the fund or a party to the agreement, as that term is defined in the 1940 Act (“Independent Trustees”)) and (2) the fund’s shareholders. As permitted by the 1940 Act, each Prior Advisory Agreement had an initial term of two years, renewable annually thereafter by the vote of a majority of the Fund’s Board Members, including a majority of its Independent Trustees, at an in-person meeting. Furthermore, in accordance with the 1940 Act, the Prior Advisory Agreements provided that each such agreement was to automatically terminate in the event of the assignment of the agreement. In the event of such an assignment, the Funds must arrange for new agreements to be approved by each Fund’s Board and by shareholders pursuant to Section 15.
An assignment of an advisory agreement under the 1940 Act includes any transaction that results in a change in control of the investment adviser. Among other things, an assignment covers any transfer of a controlling block of the adviser’s outstanding voting securities. A controlling block is presumed if a person beneficially owns more than 25% of a company’s voting securities.
-2 -
Through a series of stock transactions, Arlington Asset Investment Corp. (“Arlington”, formerly known as Friedman, Billings, Ramsey Group, Inc.), reduced its ownership interest in FBR Capital Markets so that as of June 16, 2009, its ownership of the outstanding voting securities of FBR Capital Markets was less than 25%. Specifically, in connection with a stock repurchase transaction concluded on May 20, 2009, Arlington reduced its ownership interest to approximately 39% of the outstanding voting securities of FBR Capital Markets. Subsequently, in connection with a secondary stock offering conducted by FBR Capital Markets on June 16, 2009, Arlington further reduced its ownership interest to an amount below 25% by means of the sale of stock of FBR Capital Markets then held by Arlington and offered in connection with the secondary offering.
On June 16, 2009, Arlington is deemed to have sold a sufficient number of shares of FBR Capital Markets that resulted in a change of control of the Adviser (the “Change of Control”) and an assignment of each Prior Advisory Agreement.
At a special meeting held June 30, 2009, the Board of Trustees of each Fund approved Interim Advisory Agreements with the Adviser pursuant to Rule 15a-4 under the 1940 Act. Rule 15a-4 permits an investment adviser to provide services to a fund without shareholder approval of the agreement so long as the Board of the fund approves an “interim” contract and the interim agreement terminates upon the earlier of (1) shareholder approval of the final agreement or (2) 150 days from the termination of the Prior Advisory Agreements. At this meeting, the Board of each Fund also approved the New Advisory Agreements and determined that each such agreement be submitted to the Funds’ shareholders for their approval.
The Adviser currently provides services to the Funds pursuant to the Interim Advisory Agreements until such time as Fund shareholders approve the New Advisory Agreements. Compensation earned by the Adviser since the date of the termination of the Prior Advisory Agreements is being held in an interest-bearing escrow account pending shareholder approval of the New Advisory Agreements. If shareholders approve the New Advisory Agreements within 150 days after the termination of the Prior Advisory Agreements, the amount held in the escrow account, including interest, will then be paid to the Adviser. If shareholders do not approve one or more of the New Advisory Agreements, the Adviser will be paid, out of the escrow account, the lesser of (1) the costs incurred performing its services under the Interim Advisory Agreement or (2) the total amount in the escrow account, including interest earned, and the Board will either negotiate a new investment advisory agreement with an advisory organization selected by the Board or make other arrangements.
How does Proposal 1 affect shareholders of the FBR Funds?
The Change of Control and the New Advisory Agreements are not expected to have any affect on shareholders of the Funds. In particular, the terms of the New Advisory Agreements are substantially identical to those of the Prior Advisory Agreements, except for the dates of execution and termination, and certain non-material changes. No changes are proposed to the level of services that the Adviser currently provides to the FBR Funds nor to the fees payable by each Fund for those services. The Adviser has informed the Board that they do not anticipate any changes in the portfolio management arrangements of the Funds as a result of the Change of Control. Further, there are no changes contemplated to the FBR Funds’ investment goals or strategies.
What are the terms of the New Advisory Agreements?
The forms of the New Advisory Agreements are attached as Exhibits A-1 and A-2 to this Proxy Statement. The description in this section of the terms of the New Advisory Agreements is qualified in its entirety by reference to those Exhibits. The terms of the New Advisory Agreements approved by the Board and proposed for shareholder approval are substantially similar in all material respects to the Prior Advisory Agreements. The Adviser will continue to serve as investment adviser to each Fund, retain ultimate responsibility for the management of the Funds, and provide investment oversight and supervision. These investment management services will be identical to the services provided under the Prior Advisory Agreements and the Adviser’s compensation for these services, expressed as an annual rate of each applicable Fund’s net assets, remains unchanged under the New Advisory Agreements.
-3 -
Under the New Advisory Agreements, the Adviser will determine, subject to the general supervision of the Board and in accordance with each Fund’s investment objectives and restrictions, which securities are to be purchased and sold by each Fund and which brokers are eligible to execute these portfolio transactions. Allocation of transactions to broker-dealers is determined by the Adviser in its best judgment and in a manner deemed fair and reasonable to shareholders. Exhibit B to this Proxy Statement sets forth information regarding commissions paid by the Funds to affiliated brokers during their most recently completed fiscal years.
Each New Advisory Agreement permits the Adviser to delegate a portion of its responsibilities to a sub-adviser. In the event that the shareholders of the Funds approve the matters set forth in Proposal 2, which involves the proposed approval of a manager of managers arrangement for use by the Adviser and Funds, as is described more fully herein under Proposal 2, the New Advisory Agreements would also include applicable provisions necessary in order to implement the manager of manager arrangements. In addition, the New Advisory Agreement provides that the Adviser may render services through its own employees or the employees of one or more affiliated companies that are qualified to act as an investment adviser to a Fund and are under common control with FBR Capital Markets, the Adviser’s parent company, as long as all such persons are functioning as part of an organized group of persons, managed by authorized officers of the Adviser.
The Prior Advisory Agreements had an initial term of two years and could be renewed annually thereafter by the approval of a majority of the Trustees, including a majority of the Independent Trustees. The New Advisory Agreements will run for an initial term of one year and may be renewed annually thereafter so long as it is approved by a majority of the Trustees, including a majority of the Independent Trustees. Like the Prior Advisory Agreements, the New Advisory Agreements are terminable as to any Fund at any time without penalty on 60 days’ written notice by the Board, by vote of a majority of the outstanding shares of a Fund, or by the Adviser. Each New Advisory Agreement also terminates automatically in the event of any assignment, as defined in the 1940 Act.
The shareholders of the FBR Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund™ last approved the Prior Advisory Agreement for that Fund on January 20, 2004. The shareholders of the FBR Focus Fund, the FBR Large Cap Financial Fund, the FBR Small Cap Financial Fund, the FBR Gas Utility Index Fund and the FBR Technology Fund last approved the Prior Advisory Agreements for each of these Funds on February 20, 2004. The shareholders of the FBR Pegasus Fund™ last approved the Prior Advisory Agreement for that Fund on November 15, 2005. The shareholders of the FBR Pegasus Mid Cap Fund™ and the FBR Pegasus Small Cap Fund™ last approved the applicable Prior Advisory Agreements for each of these Funds on February 28, 2007.
How is the Adviser compensated for its services to the Funds?
Under the Prior Advisory Agreements and the New Advisory Agreements, the Adviser is entitled to investment advisory fees equal to the following percentage of each applicable Fund’s average daily net assets on an annualized basis:
Fund | Investment Advisory Fee* |
Pegasus Fund | 0.90% |
Pegasus Mid Cap Fund | 0.90% |
Pegasus Small Cap Fund | 0.90% |
Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund | 0.90% |
Focus Fund | 0.90% |
Large Cap Financial Fund | 0.90% |
Small Cap Financial Fund | 0.90% |
Technology Fund | 0.90% |
Gas Utility Index Fund | 0.40% |
_______________
* As a percentage of average daily net assets.
-4 -
Exhibit C to this Proxy Statement sets forth the aggregate advisory fees paid to the Adviser with respect to the FBR Funds during each Fund’s most recent fiscal year and any fees waived pursuant to contractual fee waiver agreement in place for the Funds.
What did the Board consider when approving the New Advisory Agreements?
In approving each New Advisory Agreement, the Board was required to act solely in the best interests of the Funds and the Funds’ shareholders in evaluating the terms of the New Advisory Agreements. The Board was required to judge the terms of the arrangement in light of those that would be reached as a result of arm’s length bargaining.
At the June 30, 2009 Board meeting, the Board considered the similarity of each New Advisory Agreement to the respective Prior Advisory Agreement. In determining whether or not it was appropriate to approve the New Advisory Agreements and to recommend approval to shareholders, the Board considered various materials and representations provided by the Adviser, as applicable, with respect to each applicable Fund separately, including information relating to the following factors: (1) each Fund’s requirements; (2) the level of fees, looking at the percentage of fees that comparable funds pay; (3) whether the Adviser had waived any fees; (4) the profitability of the Funds to the Adviser; (5) the scope of any “fall-out benefits,” that is, whether the Adviser received other benefits from their relationship with the Funds, such as soft dollars; (6) the capabilities and financial soundness of the Adviser; (7) current economic and industry trends; (8) historical factors involving the Adviser; (9) the responsiveness of management to the Board Members’ concerns and requests for information; and (10) such other factors deemed relevant by the Board.
After considering these factors, the Board, including all of the Independent Trustees, who were counseled by Independent Legal Counsel to the Independent Trustees, concluded that the New Advisory Agreements would benefit each Fund and its shareholders. In reaching their conclusion with respect to the approval of the New Advisory Agreements, the Board members did not identify any one single factor as being controlling, rather, the Board took note of a combination of factors that influenced their decision making process. The Board did, however, identify the overall favorable investment performance of the Funds and management’s demonstrated commitment to the continued enhancement of investment performance, the commitment of the Adviser to the successful operation of the Funds, and the level of expenses of the Funds, as well as the continued use of expense limitation agreements in order to reduce the overall operating expenses of the Funds, as being important elements of their consideration. The Board also considered the effectiveness of the compliance programs of the Funds and the Adviser in accordance with applicable requirements relating to mutual funds and their investment advisers. Based upon their review and consideration of these factors and other matters deemed relevant by the Board in reaching an informed business judgment, a majority of the Board of Trustees, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, concluded that the terms of the New Advisory Agreements are fair and reasonable and the Board voted to approve the New Advisory Agreements.
-5 -
Information about the Funds’ Investment Adviser
FBR Fund Advisers, Inc., located at Potomac Tower, 1001 Nineteenth Street North, Arlington, VA 22209, is registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) as an investment adviser and is a wholly-owned subsidiary of FBR Capital Markets. As of June 30, 2009 the Adviser and its asset management affiliates managed in the aggregate approximately $1.4 billion of gross assets (including leverage) for numerous clients including individuals, banks and thrift institutions, investment companies, pension and profit sharing plans and trusts, estates and charitable organizations, and private partnerships.
Additional information about the Adviser is found in Exhibit C to this Proxy Statement entitled, “More Information About the Funds’ Investment Adviser.”
Who is bearing the expenses related to Proposal 1?
All mailing, proxy solicitation and tabulation expenses associated with Proposal 1 will be borne by the Adviser.
Vote Required for Proposal 1
Approval of Proposal 1 requires the vote of a “majority of the outstanding voting securities” entitled to vote on the proposal, as defined in the 1940 Act, which means the vote of 67% or more of the voting securities entitled to vote on the proposal that are present at the Meeting, if the holders of more than 50% of the outstanding shares are present or represented by proxy, or the vote of more than 50% of the outstanding voting securities entitled to vote on the proposal, whichever is less.
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, INCLUDING ALL OF THE INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES, UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THAT SHAREHOLDERS VOTE “FOR” APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED NEW ADVISORY AGREEMENTS AS PROVIDED UNDER PROPOSAL 1. SIGNED BUT UNMARKED PROXIES WILL BE SO VOTED.
_____________________
PROPOSAL 2 — TO APPROVE A MANAGER OF MANAGERS ARRANGEMENT
(All Funds)
You are being asked to approve a so-called “manager of managers” arrangement that would permit the FBR Funds and the Adviser to enter into, and materially amend, subadvisory agreements with any subadvisers retained by the Adviser and the Funds to manage the Funds without obtaining shareholder approval, if the Board concludes that such arrangements would be in the best interests of the shareholders of the affected Fund. The Board, including the Independent Trustees, has approved the use of a manager of managers arrangement, and any such arrangement utilized by the Funds would be subject to Board oversight and conditions imposed by the SEC in either a rule or an exemptive order, including the requirement that any subadvisory agreement or material change to such agreement be approved by the Board (including a majority of the Independent Trustees).
-6 -
If shareholders of a Fund approve Proposal 2, that Fund would be able to implement a manager of managers arrangement in the event that either (1) the SEC adopts proposed Rule 15a-5 (or a comparable rule) under the 1940 Act (the “Proposed Rule”) or (2) the Funds are granted an SEC exemptive order. In either case, no further shareholder vote would be required either to approve a subadvisory agreement entered into by the Funds or materially amend any such subadvisory agreement, subject to the conditions in the Proposed Rule or the exemptive order, as applicable, including approval of any such agreement or material change to such agreement by the Board (including a majority of the Independent Trustees). In view of the fact that (1) manager of managers exemptive orders are typically subject to the condition that shareholders of a fund approve a manager of managers arrangement prior to reliance on the exemptive order and (2) it is likely that the final version of the Proposed Rule will also contain such a requirement, the Board has determined to ask shareholders to approve a manager of managers arrangement for the Funds in conjunction with the solicitation of shareholder approval of the other proposals in this Proxy Statement. This approach is expected to save the Funds the cost of seeking shareholder approval of a manager of managers arrangement following the adoption of the Proposed Rule or the issuance of a relevant exemptive order.
How would a manager of managers arrangement benefit the Funds?
The Board believes that it is in the best interests of each shareholder to provide the Adviser and the Board with increased flexibility to recommend, supervise, evaluate and change subadvisers without incurring the significant delay and expense associated with obtaining prior shareholder approval.
Currently, the Funds must call and hold a shareholder meeting of an affected Fund before it appoints a subadviser or materially amends a subadvisory agreement. Additionally, the Funds would have to seek shareholder approval of a new subadvisory agreement if a subadvisor undergoes a change of control, even if there will be no change in the persons managing the affected Fund. Each time a shareholder meeting is called, the Funds must create and distribute proxy materials and solicit proxy votes from the affected Fund’s shareholders. This process is time-consuming and costly, and such costs are generally borne by the affected Fund, thereby reducing shareholders’ investment returns. It is anticipated that a manager of managers arrangement will permit the Funds to operate more efficiently and cost-effectively.
If shareholders approve this Proposal, the Board will oversee the selection and engagement of subadvisers for the Funds. Further, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, will evaluate and consider for approval all new subadvisory agreements. Finally, under the 1940 Act, the Board, including a majority of the Independent Trustees, will be required to review and consider any subadvisory agreement for renewal annually. Prior to entering into, renewing or amending a subadvisory agreement, the Adviser and the relevant subadviser will have a legal duty to provide the Board with information on factors pertinent to the Board’s decision regarding those advisory arrangements.
If shareholders of the Funds do not approve Proposal 2, the Funds will continue to be required to solicit shareholder approval of new or materially amended subadvisory agreements.
What effect will this Proposal have on the advisory fees paid by the Funds to the Adviser or the quality of advisory services the Funds receive?
The Proposal does not effect the amount of investment advisory fees paid by the Funds to the Adviser. When entering into and amending subadvisory agreements, the Adviser will negotiate fees paid to the subadvisers for their services. The fees paid to the Adviser by the Funds are considered by the Board in approving and renewing advisory and subadvisory agreements.
Under Proposal 2, shareholder approval will continue to be required in the event of any proposed increase in the investment advisory fee paid by a Fund to the Adviser are increased. Further, whether or not shareholders approve Proposal 2, the Adviser will continue to be required to provide the same level of management and administrative services to the Funds as it currently provides, in accordance with the Prior Advisory Agreements and other agreements, including the New Advisory Agreements if approved by shareholders in Proposal 1.
-7 -
What are the conditions for establishing a manager of managers arrangement?
Currently, the only means for establishing a manager of managers arrangement is by filing an application with the SEC requesting an exemptive order that would provide relief from the provisions of Section 15(a) of the 1940 Act and Rule 18f-2 thereunder. These provisions of the 1940 Act require that shareholders approve advisory agreements, including any subadvisory agreements, and approve any material amendments to such agreements. The Adviser and the Funds intend to file a request for such exemptive relief with the SEC. Although there can be no assurance, the Adviser and the Funds expect that the SEC will grant such exemptive relief.
If shareholders of a Fund approve Proposal 2 and the appropriate exemptive relief is obtained, the Adviser and the Fund would be authorized to (1) engage new or additional subadvisers; (2) enter into and modify existing subadvisory agreements; and (3) terminate and replace subadvisers without obtaining further approval of the Fund’s shareholders, provided that (a) the subadviser is not an “affiliated person” of the Adviser or the Fund, other than by reason of serving as a subadviser to the Fund, and (b) the Board has approved the new or amended subadvisory agreement.
Similarly, if the SEC adopts the Proposed Rule, in the form proposed on October 23, 2003, it would grant relief similar to the relief that the Adviser and the Funds are seeking in their request for an SEC exemptive order. If the SEC adopts the Proposed Rule before, or in lieu of, any requested SEC exemptive order, the Adviser and the Funds would comply with the Rule’s terms and conditions.
Under the terms and conditions of any SEC exemptive order, if granted, and the Proposed Rule in its current form, the Adviser and the Funds would be subject to several conditions imposed by the SEC. For example, within 90 days of the hiring of a new sub-adviser, the Fund would be required to provide its shareholders with an information statement containing information about the subadviser and the subadvisory agreement, similar to that which would have been provided in a proxy statement seeking shareholder approval of such an arrangement or change thereto. For a complete list of the terms and conditions of the Proposed Rule and the conditions to be imposed if the SEC grants the exemptive relief sought by the Funds, please refer to Exhibit D.
There is no guarantee that the SEC will grant the exemptive order, even if Proposal 2 is approved by the shareholders of the Funds, nor is there any guarantee that the SEC will adopt the Proposed Rule. Furthermore, any exemptive order from the SEC or final rule issued by the SEC may differ from the general terms and conditions described in Exhibit D hereto. By approving Proposal 2 shareholders of the Funds are approving the operation of a manager of managers arrangement under any such terms or conditions, unless such terms and conditions differ materially from those provided in Exhibit D, in which case the Funds undertake to re-solicit shareholder approval of those new provisions.
Who is bearing the expenses related to Proposal 2?
All mailing, proxy solicitation and tabulation expenses associated with Proposal 2 will be borne by the Adviser.
Vote Required for Proposal 2
Approval of Proposal 2 requires the vote of a “majority of the outstanding voting securities” entitled to vote on the proposal, as defined in the 1940 Act, which means the vote of 67% or more of the voting securities entitled to vote on the proposal that are present at the Meeting, if the holders of more than 50% of the outstanding shares are present or represented by proxy, or the vote of more than 50% of the outstanding voting securities entitled to vote on the proposal, whichever is less.
-8 -
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, INCLUDING ALL OF THE INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES, UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THAT SHAREHOLDERS VOTE “FOR” APPROVAL OF A MANAGER OF MANAGERS ARRANGEMENT AS PROVIDED UNDER PROPOSAL 2. SIGNED BUT UNMARKED PROXIES WILL BE SO VOTED.
_____________________
PROPOSAL 3 — TO ELIMINATE CERTAIN
FUNDAMENTAL INVESTMENT RESTRICTIONS
(FBR Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund™ and FBR Gas Utility Index Fund)
What are shareholders being asked to approve in Proposal 3?
As further described below in each of the sub-proposals, shareholders of the FBR Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund™ are being asked to approve the elimination of that Fund’s concentration policy (Proposal 3(a)) and shareholders of the FBR Gas Utility Index Fund are being asked to approve the reclassification of the Fund as a “non-diversified” fund (Proposal 3(b)).
The 1940 Act requires all mutual funds, including the FBR Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund™ and FBR Gas Utility Index Fund, to adopt fundamental investment restrictions with respect to several specific types of activities, including such Fund’s ability to (1) borrow money; (2) issue senior securities; (3) underwrite securities issued by other persons; (4) purchase or sell real estate; (5) purchase or sell commodities; (6) make loans to other persons; and (7) concentrate its investments in any particular industry or group of industries. The 1940 Act also requires each of the Funds to state whether it is a diversified or non-diversified fund, as those terms are defined in the 1940 Act. In addition, the 1940 Act permits each of these Funds to designate any other of its policies as a fundamental policy, as the Fund deems necessary or desirable.
In order to modify or eliminate any of these Funds’ fundamental investment restrictions, including its classification as a diversified or non-diversified fund, the 1940 Act requires that such change be approved by a majority of the Fund’s outstanding voting securities. The Board is proposing that shareholders approve revisions to certain of these Funds’ fundamental investment restrictions, in an effort to permit the Funds the maximum investment flexibility under current law.
Why are shareholders being asked to approve changes to these Funds’ investment restrictions?
The primary purpose of the proposed modification or elimination of certain fundamental investment restrictions of these Funds is to increase the Funds’ investment flexibility with respect to certain investment strategies and techniques.
What effect will the proposed changes to the Funds’ investment restrictions have on these Funds?
While Proposal 3 is intended to provide the Adviser with greater flexibility in managing each Fund’s portfolio, should shareholders approve the Proposal, the Funds would continue to be managed subject to the limitations imposed by the 1940 Act and the rules and interpretive guidance provided thereunder, as well as the investments objectives, strategies and policies expressed in the Funds’ Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information. Importantly, the Adviser does not presently intend to alter the way in which it manages either of these Funds, nor does it believe that the proposed changes will materially affect the level of risk associated with investing in each of the Funds.
-9 -
Who is bearing the expenses related to Proposal 3?
All mailing, proxy solicitation and tabulation of expenses associated with Proposal 3 will be borne by the Adviser.
PROPOSAL 3(a) — CONCENTRATION
(FBR Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund™ Only)
Currently, the Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund has a fundamental investment restriction requiring the Fund to concentrate its investment in the technology group of industries. While the 1940 Act does not define what constitutes “concentration” in an industry, the SEC staff has taken the position that an investment of more than 25% of a fund’s total assets in one or more issuers conducting their principal business activities in the same industry (excluding the U.S. government, its agencies or instrumentalities) constitutes concentration. The Fund’s current fundamental investment restriction is consistent with this interpretation.
The Board has proposed the elimination of the Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund fundamental investment restriction requiring the Fund to concentrate its investments in the technology industry, effective upon obtaining shareholder approval. Prior to April 30, 2008, the Fund was operated subject to a principal investment strategy that required the Fund to invest, under normal market conditions, at least 80% of its net assets in the securities of small-cap companies principally engaged in the technology industry. Effective as of April 30, 2008, the Fund ceased being subject to the investment strategy requiring it to be primarily invested in small-cap issuers in the technology industry, and this proposal is intended to update the Fund’s investment provisions consistent with this previous change. The effect of this change will mean that the Fund would not be required to concentrate its investments in any one industry. If the Fund’s shareholders do not approve the proposal, the Fund will continue to be required to concentrate its investments in the technology industry.
PROPOSAL 3(b) — DIVERSIFICATION
(FBR Gas Utility Index Fund Only)
Currently, the Gas Utility Index Fund is considered to be a “diversified” fund. As that term is defined in the 1940 Act, a diversified fund may not, with respect to 75% of a fund’s total assets, (1) invest more than 5% of that fund’s total assets in the securities of one issuer, or (2) hold more than 10% of its securities in a single issuer (the “75% test”). Under the 1940 Act, a “non-diversified” fund is any fund that is not considered diversified and is not, therefore, constrained by the 75% test.
The Board has proposed that the Gas Utility Index Fund be reclassified as a non-diversified fund, effective upon obtaining shareholder approval. The effect of this change will mean that the Fund may invest a greater portion of its assets in fewer issuers. If the Fund’s shareholders do not approve the proposal, then the Fund will remain diversified and subject to the 75% test.
-10 -
Even if the shareholders of the Fund vote to change the Fund’s diversification status to non-diversified, the Fund will nonetheless be constrained under applicable provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Tax Code”), which require that at the end of each quarter of the Trust’s taxable year, at least 50% of the value of the Fund’s total assets be represented by cash and cash items, U.S. government securities, securities of other regulated investment companies and other securities. For this purpose, “other securities” do not include investments in the securities of any one issuer that represent more than 5% of the value of the fund’s total assets or more than 10% of the issuer’s outstanding voting securities. In addition, the Tax Code provides that at the end of each quarter of the Trust’s taxable year, not more than 25% of a fund’s total assets be invested in the securities of any one issuer, except for securities of the U.S. government or other regulated investment companies.
Accordingly, should the Fund’s shareholders vote to approve reclassifying the Fund as a non-diversified fund, the Fund’s fundamental investment restriction will be amended to read as follows:
The Gas Utility Index Fund May Not:
With respect to 50% of its total assets, purchase the securities of any issuer (other than securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government or any of its agencies or instrumentalities) if, as a result, (a) more than 5% of the Fund’s total assets would be invested in the securities of that issuer, or (b) the Fund would hold more than 10% of the outstanding voting securities of that issuer.
The change is sought in order to provide the Adviser with more investment flexibility to achieve the Fund’s investment objective and principal investment strategy, to seek income and capital appreciation by providing investment results that replicate the performance of the American Gas Association Stock Index. If the Fund is reclassified as a non-diversified fund, then the Fund may invest in the securities of a smaller total number of issuers than if it remained a diversified fund. In these circumstances, changes in the financial condition or market assessment of a single issuer may cause greater fluctuation and volatility in the Fund’s total returns or asset valuations than if the Fund were required to hold smaller positions of the securities of a larger number of issuers.
Vote Required for Proposals 3(a) and 3(b)
Approval of Proposals 3(a) and 3(b) requires the vote of a “majority of the outstanding voting securities” entitled to vote on the proposal, as defined in the 1940 Act, which means the vote of 67% or more of the voting securities entitled to vote on the proposal that are present at the Meeting, if the holders of more than 50% of the outstanding shares are present or represented by proxy, or the vote of more than 50% of the outstanding voting securities entitled to vote on the proposal, whichever is less.
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, INCLUDING ALL OF THE INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES, UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THAT SHAREHOLDERS VOTE “FOR” APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE APPLICABLE FUNDS’ FUNDAMENTAL POLICIES AS PROVIDED UNDER PROPOSAL 3.
SIGNED BUT UNMARKED PROXIES WILL BE SO VOTED.
-11 -
_____________________
PROPOSAL 4 — ELECTION OF TRUSTEES OF THE TRUST
(All Funds)
You are being asked to vote in favor of the election of each of the following nominees as a Trustee to hold office until the next meeting of shareholders at which trustees are elected or until their resignation, removal or death. Each of the nominees presently is a Trustee of the Trust and each nominee is considered by the Trust to be an Independent Trustee (other than Mr. Ellison). Pursuant to Rule 14a-4(d) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, each nominee has consented to be named in this Proxy Statement and to serve if elected. It is not expected that any of the nominees will decline or become unavailable for election, but in case this should happen, the discretionary power given in the proxy may be used to vote for a substitute nominee or nominees.
Trustee Nominees
Each of the Trustee nominees, their ages, and principal occupations during the past five years, are presented below. The address for each nominee is 1001 19th Street North, Arlington, VA 22209.
Name and Age | Term of Office* and Length of Time Served | Principal Occupation During Past 5 Years | Portfolios Overseen in the Fund Complex Overseen by Trustee or by Nominees for Trustee** | Other Directorships |
Independent Trustee Nominees |
Michael Willner, 52 | Since June 1997 | President, AlphaGrip, Inc., January 2001 to present | 10 | None |
| | | | |
Reena Aggarwal, 51 | Since July 2006 | Professor, Georgetown University, 2000 to present; Deputy Dean, McDonough School of Business, Georgetown University, 2006-2008; Interim Dean, 2004-2005; Visiting Professor, MIT Sloan School of Management, 2005-2006. | 10 | IndexIQ Trust |
| | | | |
William E. Cole, Jr., 59 | Since July 2006 | Retired, 2006. Partner, Ernst & Young LLP, 1972-2006. | 10 | None |
| | | | |
Charles O. Heller, 73 | Since September 2003 | President, Annapolis Capital Group, since 2005; Athlone Global Security (venture capital firm), 2006-2008; Beacon Global LLC (venture capital firm), 2003-2005. | 10 | None |
| | | | |
Interested Trustee Nominee+ |
David H. Ellison, 51 100 Federal Street, Boston, MA 02110 | Since September 2003 | Director, CIO and President, FBR Fund Advisers, Inc., since December 1999; Portfolio Manager for Equity Funds, since October 1996. | 10 | None |
_________
* Trustees serve until their resignation, removal, or death.
** The “Fund Complex” consists of all mutual funds advised by FBR Capital Markets, Inc. and its affiliates.
+ Mr. Ellison is considered to be an “Interested Trustee” of the Trust due to his position with FBR Fund Advisers.
-12 -
Trustees receiving a plurality vote shall be elected. This means that the five nominees receiving the largest number of votes will be elected.
The Trustees presently have an Audit Committee, a Valuation Committee, and a Nominating Committee, each of which are comprised of all of the Independent Trustees of the Trust: Messrs. Willner, Heller, Cole and Ms. Aggarwal. The function of the Audit Committee is to recommend independent auditors, pre-approve audit and certain non-audit services to be provided by the independent auditors to the Funds, and review and report on accounting and financial matters. The Board has adopted a written charter for the Audit Committee. The function of the Valuation Committee is to determine and monitor the value of the Funds’ assets pursuant to the Trust’s Valuation Procedures. The function of the Nominating Committee is to nominate persons to serve as Independent Trustees and to serve on committees of the Board. The Board does not have a policy related to considering nominees recommended by shareholders. There was no meeting of the Valuation or Nominating Committees during the Funds’ most recent fiscal year. The Audit Committee met twice during the most recent fiscal year of the Funds.
Officers of the Trust
The officers of the Trust, their ages, addresses and principal occupations during the past five years, are as detailed in Exhibit E to this Proxy Statement.
As of August 31, 2009, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a group, owned approximately __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Mid Cap Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Small Cap Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Technology Fund, and less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the Focus Fund, Large Cap Financial Fund, Small Cap Financial Fund, Gas Utility Index Fund and Fund for Government Investors.
Trustees’ Ownership of Fund Shares as of December 31, 2008
| Dollar Range of Equity Securities owned in: | Aggregate Dollar Range of Equity Securities in All Registered Investment Companies Overseen By Trustee in Family of Investment Companies* |
Michael A. Willner | Pegasus Fund | None | $10,001 - $50,000 |
| Pegasus Mid Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund | $10,001 - $50,000 | |
| Focus Fund | None | |
| Large Cap Financial Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Small Cap Financial Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Technology Fund | None | |
| Gas Utility Index Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Fund for Government Investors | None | |
-13 -
|
Reena Aggarwal | Pegasus Fund | None | $10,001-$50,000 |
| Pegasus Mid Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund | None | |
| Focus Fund | $10,001-$50,000 | |
| Large Cap Financial Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Small Cap Financial Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Technology Fund | None | |
| Gas Utility Index Fund | None | |
| Fund for Government Investors | None | |
| | | |
William E. Cole, Jr. | Pegasus Fund | $1 - $10,000 | $10,001 - $50,000 |
| Pegasus Mid Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund | None | |
| Focus Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Large Cap Financial Fund | None | |
| Small Cap Financial Fund | None | |
| Technology Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Gas Utility Index Fund | $1 - $10,000 | |
| Fund for Government Investors | None | |
| | | |
Charles O. Heller | Pegasus Fund | $10,001 - $50,000 | $50,001 - $100,000 |
| Pegasus Mid Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Fund | None | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund | None | |
| Focus Fund | None | |
| Large Cap Financial Fund | None | |
| Small Cap Financial Fund | None | |
| Technology Fund | $10,001 - $50,000 | |
| Gas Utility Index Fund | $10,001 - $50,000 | |
| Fund for Government Investors | None | |
| | | |
David H. Ellison | Pegasus Fund | Over $100,000 | Over $100,000 |
| Pegasus Mid Cap Fund | Over $100,000 | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Fund | Over $100,000 | |
| Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund | Over $100,000 | |
| Focus Fund | None | |
| Large Cap Financial Fund | Over $100,000 | |
| Small Cap Financial Fund | Over $100,000 | |
| Technology Fund | None | |
| Gas Utility Index Fund | None | |
| Fund for Government Investors | None | |
* “Family of Investment Companies” consists of all mutual funds advised by FBR Capital Markets, Inc. and its affiliate advisers.
-14 -
The following table sets forth information regarding all compensation paid to the Trustee nominees during the most recent fiscal year end of the Trust. The Trust does not have a pension or retirement plan in place for the benefit of the Trustees.
Nominee | Aggregate Compensation from the Trust | Total Compensation from the FBR Fund Complex* |
| | |
Michael A. Willner+ | $47,000 | $47,000 |
Reena Aggarwal | $39,000 | $39,000 |
William E. Cole, Jr. + | $41,000 | $41,000 |
Charles O. Heller | $39,000 | $39,000 |
David H. Ellison | None | None |
* “Fund Complex” consists of all mutual funds advised by FBR Capital Markets, Inc. and its affiliate advisers.
+ Mr. Willner serves as Chairman of the Board and receives additional compensation for his services in that capacity and Mr. Cole serves as Chairman of the Audit Committee and receives additional compensation for his services in that capacity.
Vote Required for Proposal 4
Approval of Proposal 4 requires the vote of a plurality of the Trust’s shares.
THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES, INCLUDING ALL OF THE INDEPENDENT TRUSTEES, UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THAT SHAREHOLDERS VOTE “FOR” APPROVAL OF THE ELECTION OF THE TRUSTEES AS PROVIDED UNDER PROPOSAL 4. SIGNED BUT UNMARKED PROXIES WILL BE SO VOTED.
_____________________
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ABOUT THE FUNDS
Ownership of Shares
Information regarding the percent ownership of each person who, as of August 31, 2009, owned of record and/or beneficially 5% or more of the outstanding shares of a Fund is included in Exhibit F to the Proxy Statement.
As of August 31, 2009, the Trustees and officers of the Trust, as a group, owned approximately __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Mid Cap Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Small Cap Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Pegasus Small Cap Growth Fund, __% of the outstanding shares of the Technology Fund, and less than 1% of the outstanding shares of the Focus Fund, Large Cap Financial Fund, Small Cap Financial Fund, Gas Utility Index Fund and Fund for Government Investors.
The Funds’ Distributor
FBR Investment Services, Inc., 1001 19th Street North, Arlington, Virginia 22209, a wholly-owned subsidiary of FBR Capital Markets, serves as the distributor of the shares of each Fund, pursuant to a Distribution Agreement with the Trust. In this capacity, it receives purchase orders and redemption requests relating to Fund shares.
-15 -
Fund Administration
JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A., (“JP Morgan”), serves as the administrator to the Funds and provides day-to-day administrative services pursuant to an Administration Agreement.
The Adviser also provides certain administrative services to the Funds that are in addition to the services provided by JPMorgan, including oversight of service providers, pursuant to an Administration Services Agreement. The Adviser also provides the Funds with office space, facilities and business equipment and generally administers the Funds’ business affairs and provides the services of executive and clerical personnel for administering the affairs of the Funds.
Voting Information
Shareholders of record of the Trust on the Record Date are entitled to be present and to vote at the meeting. Exhibit F to this Proxy Statement sets forth the number of shares of each Fund issued and outstanding on the Record Date.
With respect to the actions to be taken by the shareholders of the Trust on the matters described in this Proxy Statement, one-third of the outstanding shares present at the Meeting by proxy or in person of the Funds shall constitute a quorum at the Meeting. For purposes of determining the presence of a quorum for transacting business at the Meeting, abstentions and broker “non-votes” (that is, proxies from brokers or nominees indicating that such persons have not received instructions from the beneficial owner or other persons entitled to vote shares on a particular matter with respect to which the brokers or nominees do not have discretionary power) will be treated as shares that are present but which have not been voted. Accordingly, abstentions and broker non-votes effectively will be a vote against adjournment and against Proposals 1, 2 and 3, for which the required vote is a percentage of the shares present or outstanding.
Proxy Related Expenses
FBR Capital Markets and certain of its affiliates will bear the costs associated with the solicitation of proxies from Fund shareholders. Solicitations may be made by regular mail, telephone, e-mail, or other personal contact by officers or employees of the Advisers and their affiliates or by the proxy soliciting firm retained by to assist with the solicitation process. _______________, Inc. has been retained to provide proxy solicitation services in connection with the Meeting at an estimated cost of $____________. In addition, FBR Capital Markets and its affiliates may reimburse persons holding shares in their names or names of their nominees for expenses incurred in forwarding solicitation material to their beneficial owners.
Shareholder Communications and Proposals
Any shareholder proposal intended to be presented at any future meeting of shareholders must be received by the Trust at its principal offices a reasonable time before the solicitation of proxies for such meeting in order for such proposal to be considered for inclusion in the proxy statement and form or forms of proxy relating to such meeting.
By Order of the Board of Trustees |
Kimberly J. Bradshaw |
Secretary |
-16 -
The FBR Funds
September __, 2009
-17 -