Item 8: Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants for Open-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 9: Proxy Disclosures for Open-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 10: Remuneration Paid to Directors, Officers, and Others of Open-End Management Investment Companies.
Not applicable.
Item 11: Statement Regarding Basis for Approval of Investment Advisory Contracts.
Trustees Approve Advisory Arrangement – Energy Fund
The board of trustees of Vanguard Energy Fund has renewed the fund’s investment advisory arrangement with Wellington Management Company LLP (Wellington Management). The board determined that renewing the fund’s advisory arrangement was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders.
The board based its decision upon an evaluation of the advisor’s investment staff, portfolio management process, and performance. This evaluation included information provided to the board by Vanguard’s Portfolio Review Department, which is responsible for fund and advisor oversight and product management. The Portfolio Review Department met regularly with the advisors and made presentations to the board during the fiscal year that directed the board’s focus to relevant information and topics.
The board, or an investment committee made up of board members, also received information throughout the year during advisor presentations conducted by the Portfolio Review Department. For the advisor presentation, the board was provided with letters and reports that included information about, among other things, the advisory firm and the advisor’s assessment of the investment environment, portfolio performance, and portfolio characteristics.
In addition, the board received periodic reports throughout the year, which included information about the fund’s performance relative to its peers and benchmark, as applicable, and updates, as needed, on the Portfolio Review Department’s ongoing assessment of the advisor.
Prior to their meeting, the trustees were provided with a memo and materials that summarized the information they received over the course of the year. They also considered the factors discussed below, among others. However, no single factor determined whether the board approved the arrangements. Rather, it was the totality of the circumstances that drove the board’s decision.
Nature, extent, and quality of services
The board reviewed the quality of the fund’s investment management services over both the short and long term and took into account the organizational depth and stability of the advisor. The board considered that Wellington Management, founded in 1928, is among the nation’s oldest and most respected institutional investment managers. The investment team uses a bottom-up approach in which stocks are selected based on the advisor’s estimates of fundamental investment value. Fundamental research focuses on the quality of a company’s assets, the company’s internal reinvestment opportunities, and management quality. The firm has advised the fund since its inception in 1984.
The board concluded that the advisor’s experience, stability, depth, and performance, among other factors, warranted the continuation of the advisory arrangement.
Investment performance
The board considered the short- and long-term performance of the fund, including any periods of outperformance or underperformance compared with a relevant benchmark index and peer group. The board concluded that the performance was such that the advisory arrangement should continue.
Cost
The board concluded that the fund’s expense ratio was below the average expense ratio charged by funds in its peer group and that the fund’s advisory expense rate was also below the peer-group average.
The board did not consider the profitability of Wellington Management in determining whether to approve the advisory fee because Wellington Management is independent of Vanguard and the advisory fee is the result of arm’s-length negotiations.
The benefit of economies of scale
The board concluded that the fund’s shareholders benefit from economies of scale because of breakpoints in the fund’s advisory fee schedule for Wellington Management. The breakpoints reduce the effective rate of the fee as the fund’s assets managed by Wellington Management increase.
The board will consider whether to renew the advisory arrangement again after a one-year period.
Trustees Approve Advisory Arrangement – Health Care Fund
The board of trustees of Vanguard Health Care Fund has renewed the fund’s investment advisory arrangement with Wellington Management Company LLP (Wellington Management). The board determined that renewing the fund’s advisory arrangement was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders.
The board based its decision upon an evaluation of the advisor’s investment staff, portfolio management process, and performance. This evaluation included information provided to the board by Vanguard’s Portfolio Review Department, which is responsible for fund and advisor oversight and product management. The Portfolio Review Department met regularly with the advisor and made presentations to the board during the fiscal year that directed the board’s focus to relevant information and topics.
The board, or an investment committee made up of board members, also received information throughout the year during advisor presentations conducted by the Portfolio Review Department. For each advisor presentation, the board was provided with letters and reports that included information about, among other things, the advisory firm and the advisor’s assessment of the investment environment, portfolio performance, and portfolio characteristics.
In addition, the board received periodic reports throughout the year, which included information about the fund’s performance relative to its peers and benchmark, as applicable, and updates, as needed, on the Portfolio Review Department’s ongoing assessment of the advisor.
Prior to their meeting, the trustees were provided with a memo and materials that summarized the information they received over the course of the year. They also considered the factors discussed below, among others. However, no single factor determined whether the board approved the arrangement. Rather, it was the totality of the circumstances that drove the board’s decision.
Nature, extent, and quality of services
The board reviewed the quality of the fund’s investment management services over both the short and long term and took into account the organizational depth and stability of the advisor. The board considered that Wellington Management, founded in 1928, is among the nation’s oldest and most respected institutional investment managers. The portfolio manager is aided by a team of experienced Global Industry Analysts who cover health care industries. This health care team uses intensive fundamental analysis and deep knowledge of health care science and technology to identify companies with high-quality balance sheets, strong management, and the potential for new products that will lead to above-average growth in revenue and earnings. The advisor invests in stocks broadly representing the health care industry, seeking to maintain exposure across five primary subsectors: large-cap biotech/pharmaceuticals, mid-cap biotech/pharmaceuticals, small-cap biotech/pharmaceuticals, health care services, and medical technology. Wellington Management has advised the fund since its inception in 1984.
The board concluded that the advisor’s experience, stability, depth, and performance, among other factors, warranted continuation of the advisory arrangement.
Investment performance
The board considered the short- and long-term performance of the fund, including any periods of outperformance or underperformance compared with a relevant benchmark index and peer group. The board concluded that the performance was such that the advisory arrangement should continue.
Cost
The board concluded that the fund’s expense ratio was below the average expense ratio charged by funds in its peer group and that the fund’s advisory fee rate was also below the peer-group average.
The board did not consider the profitability of Wellington Management in determining whether to approve the advisory fee because Wellington Management is independent of Vanguard and the advisory fee is the result of arm’s-length negotiations.
The benefit of economies of scale
The board concluded that the fund’s shareholders benefit from economies of scale because of breakpoints in the fund’s advisory fee schedule for Wellington Management. The breakpoints reduce the effective rate of the fee as the fund’s assets increase.
The board will consider whether to renew the advisory arrangement again after a one-year period.
Trustees Approve Advisory Arrangement – Dividend Appreciation Index Fund
The board of trustees of Vanguard Dividend Appreciation Index Fund has renewed the fund’s investment advisory arrangement with The Vanguard Group, Inc. (Vanguard), through its Equity Index Group. The board determined that continuing the fund’s internalized management structure was in the best interests of the fund and its shareholders.
The board based its decision upon an evaluation of the advisor’s investment staff, portfolio management process, and performance. This evaluation included information provided to the board by Vanguard’s Portfolio Review Department, which is responsible for fund and advisor oversight and product management. The Portfolio Review Department met regularly with the advisor and made presentations to the board during the fiscal year that directed the board’s focus to relevant information and topics.
The board, or an investment committee made up of board members, also received information throughout the year during advisor presentations conducted by the Portfolio Review Department. For each advisor presentation, the board was provided with letters and reports that included information about, among other things, the advisory firm and the advisor’s assessment of the investment environment, portfolio performance, and portfolio characteristics.
In addition, the board received periodic reports throughout the year, which included information about the fund’s performance relative to its peers and benchmark, as applicable, and updates, as needed, on the Portfolio Review Department’s ongoing assessment of the advisor.
Prior to their meeting, the trustees were provided with a memo and materials that summarized the information they received over the course of the year. They also considered the factors discussed below, among others. However, no single factor determined whether the board approved the arrangement. Rather, it was the totality of the circumstances that drove the board’s decision.
Nature, extent, and quality of services
The board reviewed the quality of the fund’s investment management services over both the short and long term and took into account the organizational depth and stability of the advisor. The board considered that Vanguard has been managing investments for more than four decades. The Equity Index Group adheres to a sound, disciplined investment management process; the team has considerable experience, stability, and depth.
The board concluded that Vanguard’s experience, stability, depth, and performance, among other factors, warranted continuation of the advisory arrangement.
Investment performance
The board considered the short- and long-term performance of the fund, including any periods of outperformance or underperformance compared with its target index and peer group. The board concluded that the performance was such that the advisory arrangement should continue.
Cost
The board concluded that the fund’s expense ratio was below the average expense ratio charged by funds in its peer group and that the fund’s advisory expenses were also below the peer-group average.
The board does not conduct a profitability analysis of Vanguard because of Vanguard’s unique structure. Unlike most other mutual fund management companies, Vanguard is owned by the funds it oversees.
The benefit of economies of scale
The board concluded that the fund’s arrangement with Vanguard ensures that the fund will realize economies of scale as it grows, with the cost to shareholders declining as fund assets increase.
The board will consider whether to renew the advisory arrangement again after a one-year period.
