|
|
|
Notes to Financial Statements (Cont.) |
|
|
Below are summaries of some, but not all, of the principal risks of investing in the Fund, each of which could adversely affect the Fund’s NAV, market price, yield, and total return. The Fund’s prospectus provided additional information regarding these and other risks of investing in the Fund at the time of the initial public offering of the Fund’s shares.
| |
• |
|
The price of the Fund’s common shares will fluctuate with market conditions and other factors. Shares of closed-end management investment companies frequently trade at a discount from their net asset value. |
| |
• |
|
Limited term and tender offer risk: Unless the limited term provision of the Fund’s Declaration of Trust is amended by shareholders in accordance with the Declaration of Trust, or unless the Fund completes a tender offer and converts to perpetual existence, the Fund will terminate on or about February 25, 2032 (the “Dissolution Date”). The Fund is not a so called “target date” or “life cycle” fund whose asset allocation becomes more conservative over time as its target date, often associated with retirement, approaches. Because the assets of the Fund will be liquidated in connection with the dissolution, the Fund will incur transaction costs in connection with dispositions of portfolio securities. The Fund does not limit its investments to securities having a maturity date prior to the Dissolution Date and may be required to sell portfolio securities when it otherwise would not, including at times when market conditions are not favorable, which may cause the Fund to lose money. |
| |
• |
|
Leverage is a speculative technique that may expose the Fund to greater risk and increased costs. When leverage is used, the NAV and market price of the Common Shares and the investment return to Common Shareholders will likely be more volatile. There can be no assurance that a leveraging strategy will be used by the Fund or that it will be successful. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that the Fund may be unable to sell a portfolio investment at a desirable time or at the value the Fund has placed on the investment. |
| |
• |
|
Portfolio management risk: the risk that an investment strategy may fail to produce the intended results or that the securities held by the Fund will underperform other comparable funds because of the portfolio managers’ choice of investments. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that the Fund will not value its investments in a manner that accurately reflects their market values or that the Fund will not be able to sell any investment at a price equal to the valuation ascribed to that investment for purposes of calculating the Fund’s net asset value. The valuation of the Fund’s investments involves subjective judgment and some valuations may involve assumptions, projections, opinions, discount rates, estimated data points and other uncertain or subjective amounts, all of which may prove inaccurate. In addition, the valuation of certain investments held by the Fund may involve the significant use of unobservable and non-market inputs. Certain securities in which the Fund may invest may be more difficult to value accurately, especially during periods of market disruptions or extreme market volatility. |
| |
• |
|
Investment and market risk: the risk that markets will perform poorly or that the returns from the securities in which the Fund invests will underperform returns from the general securities markets or other types of investments. Markets may, in response to governmental actions or intervention or general market conditions, including real or perceived adverse, political, economic or market conditions, tariffs and trade disruptions, inflation, recession, changes in interest or currency rates, lack of liquidity in the bond markets or adverse investor sentiment, or other external factors, experience periods of high volatility and reduced liquidity. Certain securities may be difficult to value during such periods. The value of securities and other instruments traded in markets, like other market investments, may move up or down, sometimes rapidly and unpredictably. Further, the value of securities and other instruments held by the Fund may decline in value due to factors affecting securities markets generally or particular industries. Recently, there have been inflationary price movements. As such, fixed income securities markets may experience heightened levels of interest rate volatility and liquidity risk. The U.S. Federal Reserve has raised interest rates from historically low levels and may continue to do so. Any additional interest rate increases in the future could cause the value of the Fund’s holdings to decrease. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that an issuer, counterparty or other obligor to the Fund will fail to pay its obligations to the Fund when they are due, which may reduce the Fund’s income and/or reduce, in whole or in part, the value of the Fund’s investment. Actual or perceived changes in the financial condition of an obligor, changes in economic, social or political conditions that affect a particular type of security, instrument, or obligor, and changes in economic, social or political conditions generally can increase the risk of default by an obligor, which can affect a security’s or other instrument’s credit quality or value and an obligor’s ability to honor its obligations when due. The values of lower-quality debt securities (commonly known as “junk bonds”), including floating rate loans, tend to be particularly sensitive to these changes. The values of securities or instruments also may decline for a number of other reasons that relate directly to the obligor, such as management |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DoubleLine Yield Opportunities Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
performance, financial leverage, and reduced demand for the obligor’s goods and services, as well as the historical and prospective earnings of the obligor and the value of its assets. |
| |
• |
|
Interest rate risk is the risk that debt instruments will change in value because of changes in interest rates. The value of an instrument with a longer duration (whether positive or negative) will be more sensitive to changes in interest rates than a similar instrument with a shorter duration. |
| |
• |
|
In addition to certain of the other risks described herein such as interest rate risk and credit risk, debt securities generally also are subject to the following risks: |
| |
|
|
Debt securities sometimes contain provisions that allow for redemption in the event of tax or security law changes in addition to call features at the option of the issuer. In the event of a redemption, the Fund may not be able to reinvest the proceeds at comparable rates of return. |
| |
|
|
the risk that if interest rates rise, repayments of principal on certain debt securities, including, but not limited to, floating rate loans and mortgage-related securities, may occur at a slower rate than expected and the expected maturity of those securities could lengthen as a result. Securities that are subject to extension risk generally have a greater potential for loss when prevailing interest rates rise, which could cause their values to fall sharply. |
| |
|
|
Wider credit spreads and decreasing market values typically represent a deterioration of the debt security’s credit soundness and a perceived greater likelihood or risk of default by the issuer. |
| |
|
|
Debt securities typically do not provide any voting rights, except in some cases when interest payments have not been made and the issuer is in default. Even in such cases, such rights may be limited to the terms of the debenture or other agreements. |
| |
|
|
Prepayment/reinvestment risk: the risk that income may decline when the Fund invests proceeds from investment income, sales of portfolio securities or matured, traded, pre-paid or called debt obligations, negatively effecting dividend levels and market price, NAV and/or overall return of the common shares. |
| |
• |
|
Mortgage-backed securities risks: include the risks that borrowers may default on their mortgage obligations or the guarantees underlying the mortgage-backed securities will default or otherwise fail and that, during periods of falling interest rates, mortgage-backed securities will be called or prepaid, which may result in the Fund having to reinvest proceeds in other investments at a lower interest rate. During periods of rising interest rates, the average life of a mortgage- backed security may extend, which may lock in a below-market interest rate, increase the security’s duration, and reduce the value of the security. Enforcing rights against the underlying assets or collateral may be difficult, or the underlying assets or collateral may be insufficient if the issuer defaults. The values of certain types of mortgage-backed securities, such as inverse floaters and interest-only and principal-only securities, may be extremely sensitive to changes in interest rates and prepayment rates. The Fund may invest in mortgage-backed securities that are subordinate in their right to receive payment of interest and repayment of principal to other classes of the issuer’s securities. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that investments in foreign securities or in issuers with significant exposure to foreign markets, as compared to investments in U.S. securities or in issuers with predominantly domestic market exposure, may be more vulnerable to economic, political, and social instability and subject to less government supervision, less protective custody practices, lack of transparency, inadequate regulatory and accounting standards, delayed or infrequent settlement of transactions, and foreign taxes. If the Fund buys securities denominated in a foreign currency, receives income in foreign currencies or holds foreign currencies from time to time, the value of the Fund’s assets, as measured in U.S. dollars, can be affected unfavorably by changes in exchange rates relative to the U.S. dollar or with respect to other foreign currencies. Foreign markets are also subject to the risk that a foreign government could restrict foreign exchange transactions or otherwise implement unfavorable currency regulations. In addition, foreign securities may be subject to currency exchange rates or regulations, the imposition of economic sanctions, tariffs or other government restrictions, higher transaction and other costs, reduced liquidity, and delays in settlement. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that fluctuations in exchange rates may adversely affect the value of the Fund’s investments denominated in foreign currencies. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that investing in emerging markets, as compared to foreign developed markets, increases the likelihood that the Fund will lose money, due to more limited information about the issuer and/or the security; higher brokerage costs; different accounting, auditing and financial reporting standards; less developed legal systems; fewer investor protections; less regulatory oversight; thinner trading markets; the possibility of currency blockages or transfer restrictions; an emerging market country’s dependence on revenue from particular commodities or international aid; and the risk of expropriation, nationalization or other adverse political or economic developments. |
|
|
|
Notes to Financial Statements (Cont.) |
|
|
| |
• |
|
Collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”) risk: the risks of an investment in a collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”) depend largely on the quality and type of the collateral and the tranche of the CDO in which the Fund invests. Normally, collateralized bond obligations (“CBOs”), collateralized loan obligations (“CLOs”) and other CDOs are privately offered and sold, and thus are not registered under the securities laws. As a result, investments in CDOs may be illiquid. In addition to the risks associated with debt instruments (e. , interest rate risk and credit risk), CDOs carry additional risks including, but not limited to: (i) the possibility that distributions from collateral will not be adequate to make interest or other payments; (ii) the quality of the collateral may decline in value or default; (iii) the possibility that the Fund may invest in CDOs that are subordinate to other classes of the issuer’s securities; and (iv) the complex structure of the security may not be fully understood at the time of investment and may produce disputes with the issuer or unexpected investment results. |
| |
• |
|
Asset-backed securities investment risk: Asset-backed securities involve the risk that borrowers may default on the obligations backing them and that the values of and interest earned on such investments will decline as a result. Loans made to lower quality borrowers, including those of sub-prime quality, involve a higher risk of default. |
| |
• |
|
Credit default swaps risk: Credit default swaps provide exposure to one or more reference obligations but involve greater risks than investing in the reference obligation directly, and expose the Fund to liquidity risk, counterparty risk and credit risk. A buyer of a credit default swap will lose its investment and recover nothing should no event of default occur. When the Fund acts as a seller of a credit default swap, it is exposed to many of the same risks of leverage described herein since if an event of default occurs the seller must pay the buyer the full notional value of the reference obligation(s). |
| |
• |
|
U.S. Government securities risk: the risk that debt securities issued or guaranteed by certain U.S. Government agencies, instrumentalities, and sponsored enterprises are not supported by the full faith and credit of the U.S. Government, and so investments in their securities or obligations issued by them involve greater risk than investments in other types of U.S. Government securities. |
| |
• |
|
Sovereign debt obligations risk: the risk that investments in debt obligations of sovereign governments may lose value due to the government entity’s unwillingness or inability to repay principal and interest when due in accordance with the terms of the debt or otherwise in a timely manner. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that (i) if the Fund holds a loan through another financial institution, or relies on a financial institution to administer the loan, its receipt of principal and interest on the loan may be subject to the credit risk of that financial institution; (ii) any collateral securing a loan may be insufficient or unavailable to the Fund because, for example, the value of the collateral securing a loan can decline, be insufficient to meet the obligations of the borrower, or be difficult to liquidate, and the Fund’s rights to collateral may be limited by bankruptcy or insolvency laws; (iii) investments in highly leveraged loans or loans of stressed, distressed, or defaulted issuers may be subject to significant credit and liquidity risk; (iv) a bankruptcy or other court proceeding could delay or limit the ability of the Fund to collect the principal and interest payments on that borrower’s loans or adversely affect the Fund’s rights in collateral relating to a loan; (v) there may be limited public information available regarding the loan and the relevant borrower(s); (vi) the use of a particular interest rate benchmark may limit the Fund’s ability to achieve a net return to shareholders that consistently approximates the average published Prime Rate of U.S. banks; (vii) the prices of certain floating rate loans that include a feature that prevents their interest rates from adjusting if market interest rates are below a specified minimum level may appreciate less than other instruments in response to changes in interest rates should interest rates rise but remain below the applicable minimum level; (viii) if a borrower fails to comply with various restrictive covenants that may be found in loan agreements, the borrower may default in payment of the loan; (ix) if the Fund invests in loans that contain fewer or less restrictive constraints on the borrower than certain other types of loans (“covenant lite” loans), it may have fewer rights against the borrowers of such loans, including fewer protections against the possibility of default and fewer remedies in the event of default; (x) the loan is unsecured; (xi) there is a limited secondary market; (xii) transactions in loans may settle on a delayed basis, and the Fund may not receive the proceeds from the sale of a loan for a substantial period of time after the sale, which may result in sale proceeds related to the sale of loans not being available to make additional investments or to meet the Fund’s redemption obligations until potentially a substantial period after the sale of the loans; (xiii) loans may be difficult to value and may be illiquid, which may adversely affect an investment in the Fund. Investments in loans through a purchase of a loan, loan origination or a direct assignment of a financial institution’s interests with respect to a loan may involve additional risks to the Fund. For example, if a loan is foreclosed, the Fund could become owner, in whole or in part, of any collateral, which could include, among other assets, real estate or other real or personal property, and would bear the costs and liabilities associated with owning and holding or disposing of the collateral. In addition, it is conceivable that under emerging legal theories of lender liability, the Fund as holder of a partial interest in a loan could be held liable as co-lender for acts of the agent lender. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DoubleLine Yield Opportunities Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
• |
|
Below investment grade/high yield securities risk: Debt instruments rated below investment grade or debt instruments that are unrated and of comparable or lesser quality are predominantly speculative. These instruments, commonly known as “junk bonds,” have a higher degree of default risk and may be less liquid than higher-rated bonds. These instruments may be subject to greater price volatility due to such factors as specific corporate developments, interest rate sensitivity, negative perceptions of high yield investments generally, general economic downturn, and less secondary market liquidity. |
| |
• |
|
Defaulted securities risk: the significant risk of the uncertainty of repayment of defaulted securities (e.g., a security on which a principal or interest payment is not made when due) and obligations of distressed issuers. Because the issuer of such securities is in default and is likely to be in distressed financial condition, repayment of defaulted securities and obligations of distressed issuers (including insolvent issuers or issuers in payment or covenant default, in workout or restructuring or in bankruptcy or insolvency proceedings) is subject to significant uncertainties. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that real estate-related investments may decline in value as a result of factors affecting the real estate sector, such as the supply of real property in certain markets, changes in zoning laws, delays in completion of construction, changes in real estate values, changes in property taxes, levels of occupancy, and local and regional and general market conditions. Along with the risks common to different types of real estate-related investments, real estate investment trusts (“REITs”), no matter the type, involve additional risk factors, including poor performance by the REIT’s manager, adverse changes to the tax laws, and the possible failure by the REIT to qualify for the favorable tax treatment available to REITs under the Internal Revenue Code, or the exemption from registration under the 1940 Act. REITs are not diversified and are heavily dependent on cash flow earned on the property interests they hold. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that an investment in derivatives will not perform as anticipated by the Adviser, may not be available at the time or price desired, cannot be closed out at a favorable time or price, will increase the Fund’s transaction costs, or will increase the Fund’s volatility; that derivatives may create investment leverage; that, when a derivative is used as a substitute for or alternative to a direct cash investment, the transaction may not provide a return that corresponds precisely or at all with that of the cash investment; that the positions may be improperly executed or constructed; that the Fund’s counterparty will be unable or unwilling to perform its obligations; or that, when used for hedging purposes, derivatives will not provide the anticipated protection, causing the Fund to lose money on both the derivatives transaction and the exposure the Fund sought to hedge. Recent changes in regulation relating to the Fund’s use of derivatives and related instruments could potentially limit or impact the Fund’s ability to invest in derivatives, limit the Fund’s ability to employ certain strategies that use derivatives and/or adversely affect the value of derivatives and the Fund’s performance. |
| |
• |
|
the risk that the Fund will be subject to credit risk presented with respect to the counterparties to derivative contracts and other instruments entered into directly by the Fund or held by special purpose or structured vehicles in which the Fund invests; that the Fund’s counterparty will be unable or unwilling to perform its obligations; that the Fund will be unable to enforce contractual remedies if its counterparty defaults; that if a counterparty (or an affiliate of a counterparty) becomes bankrupt, the Fund may experience significant delays in obtaining any recovery or may obtain limited or no recovery in a bankruptcy or other insolvency proceeding. To the extent that the Fund enters into multiple transactions with a single or a small set of counterparties, it will be subject to increased counterparty risk. |
| |
• |
|
Unrated securities may be less liquid than comparable rated securities and involve the risk that the Adviser may not accurately evaluate the security’s comparative credit rating and value. Some or all of the unrated instruments in which the Fund may invest will involve credit risk comparable to or greater than that of rated debt securities of below investment grade quality. |
| |
• |
|
Structured products and structured notes risk: the risk that an investment in a structured product, which includes, among other things, CDOs, mortgage-backed securities, other types of asset-backed securities and certain types of structured notes, may decline in value due to changes in the underlying instruments, indexes, interest rates or other factors on which the product is based (“ ”). Depending on the reference measure used and the use of multipliers or deflators (if any), changes in interest rates and movement of the reference measure may cause significant price and cash flow fluctuations. In addition to the general risks associated with fixed income securities discussed herein, structured products carry additional risks including, but not limited to: (i) the possibility that distributions from underlying investments will not be adequate to make interest or other payments; (ii) the quality of the underlying investments may decline in value or default; (iii) the possibility that the security may be subordinate to other classes of the issuer’s securities; (iv) the complex structure of the security may not be fully understood at the time of investment and may produce disputes with the issuer or unexpected investment results; and (v) because the structured products are generally privately offered and sold, they may be thinly traded or have a limited trading market, which may increase the Fund’s illiquidity and reduce the Fund’s income and the value of the investment, and the Fund may be unable to find qualified buyers for these securities. |
|
|
|
Notes to Financial Statements (Cont.) |
|
|
| |
• |
|
Issuer risk is the risk that the market price of securities may go up or down, sometimes rapidly or unpredictably, including due to factors affecting securities markets generally, particular industries represented in those markets, or the issuer itself. |
| |
• |
|
Market disruption and geopolitical risk: the risk that markets may, in response to governmental actions or intervention, political, economic or market developments, or other external factors, experience periods of high volatility and reduced liquidity, which may cause the Fund to sell securities at times when it would otherwise not do so, and potentially at unfavorable prices. |
| |
• |
|
to qualify as a regulated investment company under the Internal Revenue Code, the Fund must meet requirements regarding, among other things, the source of its income. Certain investments do not give rise to qualifying income for this purpose. Any income the Fund derives from investments in instruments that do not generate qualifying income must be limited to a maximum of 10% of the Fund’s annual gross income. If the Fund were to earn non-qualifying income in excess of 10% of its annual gross income, it could fail to qualify as a regulated investment company for that year. If the Fund were to fail to qualify as a regulated investment company, the Fund would be subject to tax and shareholders of the Fund would be subject to the risk of diminished returns. |
| |
• |
|
Operational and Information Security Risks: An investment in the Fund, like any fund, can involve operational risks arising from factors such as processing errors, human errors, inadequate or failed internal or external processes, failures in systems and technology, changes in personnel and errors caused by third-party service providers. The occurrence of any of these failures, errors or breaches could result in investment losses to the Fund, a loss of information, regulatory scrutiny, reputational damage or other events, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Fund. While the Fund seeks to minimize such events through controls and oversight, there may still be failures that could cause losses to the Fund. |
11. Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
In December 2022, the FASB issued an Accounting Standards Update, ASU
2022-06,
Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848)—Deferral of
the Sunset Date of Topic 848
(“ASU
2022-06”).
ASU
2022-06
is an amendment to ASU
2020-04,
which provided optional guidance
to ease the potential accounting burden due to the discontinuation of the LIBOR and other interbank-offered based reference rates
and which was effective as of March 12, 2020 through December 31, 2022. ASU
2022-06
extends the effective period through
December 31, 2024. Management is currently evaluating the impact, if any, of applying ASU
2022-06.
12. Common Shares Offering
The Fund has the authority to issue an unlimited number of common shares of beneficial interest, par value $0.00001 per share (“Common Shares”).
On September 29, 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission declared effective a registration statement relating to an offering of the Common Shares and filed using the “shelf” registration process (the “Shelf Registration”). The Fund has entered into a distribution agreement with Foreside Fund Services, LLC (“Foreside”), who has entered into a
sub-placement
agent agreement (the
“Sub-Placement
Agent Agreement”) with UBS Securities LLC (the
“Sub-Placement
Agent”), relating to the Common Shares offered in connection with the Shelf Registration. In accordance with the terms of the
Sub-Placement
Agent Agreement, the Fund may offer Common Shares having a value of up to $250,000,000, par value $0.00001 per share, from time to time through Foreside and the
Sub-Placement
Agent, as its agents for the offer and sale of the Common Shares. As of March 31, 2024, the Fund had not sold any Common Shares pursuant to the Shelf Registration.
Under the 1940 Act, the Fund may not sell any Common Shares at a price below the NAV of such Common Shares, exclusive of any distributing commission or discount. Sales of the Common Shares, if any, may be made in negotiated transactions or transactions that are deemed to be “at the market” as defined in Rule 415 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, including sales made directly on the NYSE or sales made to or through a market maker other than on an exchange at prices related to the prevailing market prices or at negotiated prices. Any proceeds from the Fund’s offering of its Common Shares will be invested in accordance with its investment objective and policies as set forth in its Registration Statement.
In preparing these financial statements, the Fund has evaluated events and transactions for potential recognition or disclosure through the date the financial statements were issued. The Fund has determined there are no subsequent events that would need to be disclosed in the Fund’s financial statements.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DoubleLine Yield Opportunities Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluation of Advisory Agreement by the Board of Trustees |
|
|
At a meeting held in February 2024 (the “February Meeting”), the Boards of Trustees (the “Board” or the “Trustees”) of the DoubleLine
open-end
mutual funds (“mutual funds”), exchange-traded funds (“ETFs”), and
closed-end
funds (“CEFs”) listed above (collectively, the “Funds”) approved the continuation of the investment advisory and
sub-advisory
agreements, as applicable (the “Advisory Agreements”), between DoubleLine and those Funds. That included approval by the Trustees who are not “interested persons” (as defined in the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”)) of the Funds (the “Independent Trustees”) voting separately. When used in this summary, “DoubleLine” or “Management” refers to DoubleLine Capital LP, DoubleLine ETF Adviser LP, and/or to DoubleLine Alternatives LP, as appropriate in the context.
The Trustees’ determination to approve the continuation of each Advisory Agreement was made on the basis of each Trustee’s business judgment after an evaluation of all of the relevant information provided to the Trustees, including information provided for their consideration at their February Meeting and at meetings held in preparation for the February Meeting with management and representatives of ISS Market Intelligence, an independent third-party provider of investment company data (“ISS MI”), and additional information requested by the Independent Trustees. The Independent Trustees also met with Independent Trustee counsel outside the presence of management prior to the February Meeting to consider the materials and information related to the proposed continuation of the Advisory Agreements.
The Trustees also meet regularly with investment advisory, compliance, risk management, operational, and other personnel from DoubleLine and regularly review detailed information, presented both orally and in writing, regarding the services performed by DoubleLine for the benefit of the Funds, DoubleLine’s investment program for each Fund, the performance of each Fund, the fees and expenses of each Fund, and the operations of each Fund. In considering whether to approve the continuation of the Advisory Agreements, the Trustees took into account information presented to them over the course of the past year and not just that which was provided specifically in relation to the proposed renewal of the Advisory Agreements.
This summary describes a number, but not necessarily all, of the most important factors considered by the Board and the Independent Trustees. Individual Trustees may have given different weights to certain factors and assigned various degrees of materiality to information received in connection with the approval process. No single factor was determined to be decisive or controlling. In all their deliberations, the Independent Trustees were advised by independent counsel.
The Trustees considered the nature, extent, and quality of the services, including the expertise and experience of investment personnel, provided and expected to be provided by DoubleLine to each Fund. In this regard, the Trustees considered that DoubleLine provides a full investment program for each Fund, with a strong emphasis on risk management for the Funds. The Board considered, where applicable, the difficulty of managing debt-related portfolios, noting that managing such portfolios requires a portfolio management team to balance a number of factors, which may include, among others, securities of varying maturities and durations, actual and anticipated interest rate changes and market volatility, prepayments, collateral management, counterparty management,
pay-downs,
credit events, workouts, and net new issuances. In their evaluation of the services provided by DoubleLine and the Funds’ contractual relationships with DoubleLine, the Trustees considered generally the long-term performance record of the firm’s portfolio management personnel, including, among others, Mr. Jeffrey Gundlach, and the strong historical investor interest in products managed by DoubleLine.
The Trustees reviewed reports prepared by ISS MI (the “ISS MI Reports”) that compared, among other information, each Fund’s net management fee rate and net total expense ratio (Class I shares with respect to the mutual funds) against the net management fee rate and net total expense ratio of a group of peers selected by ISS MI, and each Fund’s performance records (Class I shares with respect to the mutual funds) for the
one-year,
three-year (where applicable), five-year (where applicable), and
ten-year
(where applicable) periods ended October 31, 2023, against the performance records of those funds in each Fund’s Morningstar category and the performance of the Fund’s benchmark index. In preparation for the February Meeting, the Independent Trustees met with ISS MI representatives in January 2024 to review the comparative information set out in the ISS MI Reports, the methodologies used by ISS MI in compiling those reports and selecting the peer groups used within those reports, and the considerations for evaluating the comparative information presented in those reports. The Independent Trustees also considered the information ISS MI provided regarding the challenges ISS MI encountered in selecting or assembling peer groups for certain of the Funds due to, among other factors, the limited number of possible peer funds with substantially similar principal investment strategies or investment approaches. Where applicable, the Trustees also received information from DoubleLine, including regarding factors to consider in evaluating a Fund’s performance or management fees relative to its peer groups and factors that contributed to the relative underperformance of certain Funds relative to their benchmark indices or the median of their peer groups.
In respect of the mutual funds, the Trustees considered that a number of the mutual funds have achieved strong long-term performance relative to the median of their peers for the five-year and/or
ten-year
(where applicable) periods ended October 31, 2023, notwithstanding, in some cases, more recent periods of relative underperformance. Those Funds included DoubleLine Core
|
|
|
Evaluation of Advisory Agreement by the Board of Trustees (Cont.) |
|
|
Fixed Income Fund, DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund, DoubleLine Floating Rate Fund, DoubleLine Flexible Income Fund, DoubleLine Infrastructure Income Fund, DoubleLine Low Duration Bond Fund, DoubleLine Low Duration Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund, DoubleLine Shiller Enhanced CAPE
®
and DoubleLine Shiller Enhanced International CAPE
®
. The Trustees also considered that a number of the mutual funds had achieved strong relative performance more recently, such as over the
one-year
and/or three-year periods ended October 31, 2023, notwithstanding other periods of short-term or longer-term unfavorable relative performance. Those mutual funds included DoubleLine Long Duration Total Return Bond Fund, DoubleLine Emerging Markets Local Currency Bond Fund, DoubleLine Strategic Commodity Fund, DoubleLine Total Return Bond Fund, DoubleLine Income Fund and DoubleLine Selective Credit Fund. In each instance where a Fund exhibited relative underperformance over the
one-year,
three-year (as applicable), five-year (as applicable), or
ten-year
(as applicable) periods, the Trustees considered DoubleLine’s explanations for the periods of relative underperformance, including, in the cases of DoubleLine Long Duration Total Return Bond Fund, DoubleLine Global Bond Fund and DoubleLine Multi-Asset Trend Fund, differences in the Funds’ investment approach relative to their peer groups generally, as well as specifically in the case of DoubleLine Multi-Asset Trend Fund, that the Fund did not yet have three years of investment operations.
The Trustees considered the portion of the ISS MI Reports covering the Funds’ net management fees (where applicable) and net total expenses relative to their expense peer groups. The Trustees considered DoubleLine’s pricing policy for its advisory fees and that DoubleLine does not seek to be a low cost provider, nor does it have a policy to set its advisory fees below the median of a Fund’s peers, but rather seeks to set fees at a competitive level that reflects DoubleLine’s demonstrated significant expertise and experience in the investment strategies that if offers.
The Trustees also considered the relative net management fees and net total expenses of each of the mutual funds. They noted that all but five of the mutual funds had net management fees either below the median of their peer group or within five basis points of the median of their peer group. They noted that among those five mutual funds several, including DoubleLine Total Return Bond Fund, DoubleLine Emerging Markets Fixed Income Fund, DoubleLine Flexible Income Fund and DoubleLine Strategic Commodity Fund, had net total expense ratios either below or within five basis points of the median of their peer groups. In the case of DoubleLine Infrastructure Income Fund, the Trustees noted the very limited number of other mutual funds that invest principally in infrastructure-related debt as well as the information provided by ISS MI regarding challenges it encountered in constructing a peer group of funds with similar principal investment strategies. In all cases, the Trustees considered each Fund’s net management fees in light of that Fund’s historical performance net of expenses, that none of the mutual funds had the highest net management fee in its peer group, and that DoubleLine’s stated pricing philosophy for its advisory services did not include seeking to be a
low-cost
service provider. In light of all of the above and the other factors considered, The Trustees determined that neither the net management fees nor the net total expense ratios of any of the mutual funds appeared, on the basis of all of the information available to them, unreasonable or such as to call into question the continuation of the Funds’ Advisory Agreements.
In respect of the ETFs, the Trustees considered information in the ISS MI Reports regarding the ETFs’ performance records and net total expenses. The Trustees noted that DoubleLine Opportunistic Bond ETF and DoubleLine Shiller CAPE US Equities ETF commenced investment operations on March 31, 2022 and that DoubleLine Commercial Real Estate ETF and DoubleLine Mortgage ETF commenced investment operations on March 31, 2023. The Trustees noted that it was important to provide each Fund’s portfolio management team sufficient time to establish a more significant performance history. However, the Trustees considered that performance since inception for each ETF was within Management’s expectations and the Trustees considered Management’s explanation of any relative underperformance, including in respect of DoubleLine Opportunistic Bond ETF. In respect of DoubleLine Shiller CAPE Equities ETF, the Trustees noted that its performance was in line with, though below, its benchmark index. The Trustees noted also that its performance was shown relative to two peer groups and that the ETF compared more favorably against the peer group that was constructed using ISS MI’s more traditional approach. They noted that that ETF’s performance compared less favorably against the peer group that was constructed with just other active,
non-transparent
ETFs (the “ANT Group”). They noted that the ANT Group was comprised of ETFs with a broader spectrum of principal investment strategies and, consequently, with more dispersed performance records and they considered that in evaluating the ETF’s relative performance to date. On the basis of all of these factors, the Trustees determined that the performance records of the ETFs supported the continuance of the Advisory Agreement for each of the ETFs.
The Trustees considered the expenses of the ETFs. The Trustees noted that under the ETFs’ unitary fee structure, DoubleLine, in addition to providing investment management services, arranges for transfer agency, custody, fund administration and accounting, and other
non-distribution
related services necessary for the Funds to operate. The Trustees further noted that under the unitary fee structure, DoubleLine pays substantially all of the operating expenses of the Funds, except for, among other things, the management fees, taxes and transaction costs, distribution fees or expenses, and any extraordinary expenses (such as litigation). The Trustees considered DoubleLine’s pricing policy for its advisory fees and that DoubleLine does not seek to be a lowest cost
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
DoubleLine Yield Opportunities Fund |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
provider, nor does it have a policy to set its advisory fees below the median of an ETF’s peers, but rather seeks to set fees at a competitive level that reflects DoubleLine’s demonstrated significant expertise and experience in the investment strategies that if offers.
The Trustees noted that DoubleLine Shiller CAPE US Equities ETF and DoubleLine Opportunistic Bond ETF each had a net total expense ratio at or below the median of its peer group, though with DoubleLine Shiller CAPE US Equities ETF comparing less favorably again to the median of the ANT Group. In considering the net total expense ratios of DoubleLine Commercial Real Estate ETF and DoubleLine Mortgage ETF, the Trustees noted that while each Fund had a net total expense ratio that was above the median of its peer group, in each case, there were several peer funds with significantly higher net total expense ratios and that the ETFs’ net total expense ratios were within four or seven basis points of the median. The Trustees determined that none of the net total expense ratios of any of the ETFs appeared, on the basis of all of the information available to them, unreasonable or such as to call into question the continuation of the ETFs’ Advisory Agreements.
In respect of the CEFs, the Trustees considered the information in the ISS MI Reports regarding the Funds’ performance records and net management fees and net total expenses, based on each Fund’s net assets (excluding the principal amount of borrowings) and, separately, on each Fund’s total managed assets (including the principal amount of borrowings).
As to DoubleLine Income Solutions Fund (“DSL”), the Trustees noted that the Fund’s net management fees were in the third quartile of its peer group on both a net assets and total managed assets basis, though the Fund’s net total expenses (excluding investment related expenses) was either at or below the median of its expense peer group on those bases. The Trustees considered DoubleLine’s explanations for the Fund’s longer term relative underperformance with the Fund falling in the fourth quartile of its peers for the three-year, five-year and
ten-year
periods ended October 31, 2023 and noted the Fund’s stronger more recent performance, with the Fund performing in the second quartile of its peer group for the
one-year
period ended October 31, 2023, and the Fund outperforming its benchmark for the
one-
and three-year and
ten-year
periods ended October 31, 2023.
As to DoubleLine Opportunistic Credit Fund (“DBL”), the Trustees noted that DBL’s net management fees were in the third quartile of the Fund’s expense group on a net assets basis and in the fourth quartile of the expense group on a total managed assets basis. The Trustees also noted that DBL’s net total expense ratio was shown in the ISS MI Report to be in the third quartile of the Fund’s expense group on a net assets basis and in the fourth quartile of the expense group on a total managed assets basis. The Trustees considered that the Fund’s relative performance had improved recently, with the Fund performing in the second quartile of its peer group for the
one-year
period ended October 31, 2023, though the Fund had performed in the third quartile for the
ten-year
period ended October 31, 2023 and in the fourth quartile for the three- and five-year periods ended October 31, 2023. In considering the Fund’s performance, the Trustees noted also that the Fund had outperformed its benchmark index for the
one-,
three-, five- and
ten-year
periods shown in the ISS MI Report.
As to DoubleLine Yield Opportunities Fund (“DLY”), the Trustees considered that the Fund’s relative performance improved for the
one-year
period ended October 31, 2023, with the Fund performing in the first quartile of its peer group. They noted that the Fund performed in the fourth quartile for the three-year period ended October 31, 2023, though it had outperformed its benchmark index over
one-
and three-year periods ended October 31, 2023. In considering the fees and expenses of the Fund, the Trustees took into account DoubleLine’s statement that the Fund’s terms at its initial offering differed from many
closed-end
funds that came to market before it in that DoubleLine, as the Fund’s sponsor, bore all of the Fund’s initial organizational and offering expenses and that the Fund has a limited life, and that funds offered pursuant to such arrangements tend to pay higher advisory fees than funds whose sponsors do not bear those organizational and offering expenses and the related risks. The Trustees considered that ISS MI had developed an expense group comprising Funds with similar fee and expense arrangements, as ISS MI reported that it had done for a number of other fund families. The Trustees noted that the Fund’s net management fees and net total expenses, though above the medians of its peers on a total managed assets basis, was in the second quartile and slightly below the median of its peer group on a net assets basis.
The Trustees noted that each of DSL, DBL, and DLY had employed leverage during some or all of the periods shown in the ISS MI Reports, and considered information from DoubleLine that they receive quarterly regarding the estimated spread earned in respect of that leverage, after taking into account expenses related to the leverage, including incremental management fees.
For all of the Funds, Trustees considered that DoubleLine provides a variety of other services to the Funds in addition to investment advisory services, including, among others, a number of back-office services, valuation services, derivatives risk management services, compliance services, liquidity monitoring services, certain forms of information technology services (such as internal reporting), assistance with accounting and distribution services, and supervision and monitoring of the Funds’ other service providers. The Trustees considered DoubleLine’s ongoing efforts to keep the Trustees informed about matters relevant to the
|
|
|
Evaluation of Advisory Agreement by the Board of Trustees (Cont.) |
|
|
Funds and their shareholders. The Trustees also considered the nature and structure of the Funds’ compliance program, including the policies and procedures of the Funds and their various service providers (including DoubleLine). The Trustees considered the quality of those
non-investment
advisory services and determined that their quality appeared to support the continuation of the Funds’ arrangements with DoubleLine.
The Trustees considered information provided by DoubleLine relating to its historical and continuing commitment to hire the necessary personnel and to invest in technology enhancements to support DoubleLine’s ability to provide services to the Funds. The Trustees concluded that it appeared that DoubleLine continued to have sufficient quality and depth of personnel, resources, and investment methods to continue to provide services of the same nature and quality as DoubleLine has historically provided to the Funds.
The Trustees considered materials relating to the fees charged by DoubleLine to
non-Fund
clients for which DoubleLine employs investment strategies substantially similar to one or more Funds’ investment strategies, including institutional separate accounts advised by DoubleLine and mutual funds for which DoubleLine serves as subadviser. The Trustees noted the information DoubleLine provided regarding certain institutional separate accounts advised by it and funds subadvised by it that are subject to fee schedules that differ from, and are in most cases lower than, the rates paid by a Fund with substantially similar investment strategies. The Trustees noted DoubleLine’s representations that administrative, compliance, operational, legal, and other burdens of providing investment advice to registered investment companies (mutual funds, ETFs and
closed-end
funds) exceed in many respects those required to provide advisory services to
non-registered
investment company clients, such as institutional accounts for retirement or pension plans, which may have differing contractual requirements. The Trustees noted DoubleLine’s representations that DoubleLine also bears substantially greater legal and other responsibilities and risks in managing and sponsoring registered investment companies than in managing private accounts or in
sub-advising
funds, including registered investment companies, sponsored by others, and that the services and resources required of DoubleLine when it
sub-advises
registered investment companies by others generally are less extensive than those required of DoubleLine to serve the Funds, because, where DoubleLine serves as a
sub-adviser,
many of the sponsorship, operational, and compliance responsibilities related to the advisory function are retained by the primary adviser. In respect of the ETFs, the Trustees also noted the substantial financial risks assumed by DoubleLine in respect of each ETF’s unitary fee and that DoubleLine would generally bear, with limited exceptions, any increase in each ETF’s ordinary operating expenses.
The Trustees reviewed information as to general estimates of DoubleLine’s profitability with respect to each Fund, taking into account, among other things, information about both the direct and the indirect benefits to DoubleLine from managing the Funds. The Trustees considered information provided by DoubleLine as to the methods it uses, and the assumptions it makes, in calculating its profitability. The Trustees considered representations from DoubleLine that its compensation program, which is comprised of several components, including base salary, discretionary bonus and potential equity participation in DoubleLine, enables DoubleLine to attract, retain, and motivate highly qualified and experienced employees. The Trustees noted that DoubleLine experienced significant profitability in respect of certain of the Funds, but noted that in those cases it would be appropriate to consider that profitability in light of various other considerations such as the nature, extent, and quality of the services provided by DoubleLine, the relative long-term performance of the relevant Funds, the consistency of the Funds’ investment operations over time, and the competitiveness of the management fees and total operating expenses of the Funds. The Trustees separately considered in this respect information provided by DoubleLine regarding its reinvestment in its business to accommodate changing regulatory requirements and to maintain its ability to provide high-quality services to the Funds.
In their evaluation of economies of scale, the Trustees considered, among other things, the pricing of the Funds and DoubleLine’s reported profitability, and that a number of the mutual funds had achieved significant size. They noted also that none of the Funds have breakpoints in their advisory fee schedules, though the Trustees considered management’s view that the fee schedules for the Funds remained consistent with DoubleLine’s original pricing philosophy of proposing an initial management fee rate that generally, when taking into account expense limitations (where applicable), reflects reasonably foreseeable economies of scale. In this regard, the Trustees noted also that the information provided by ISS MI supported the view that the net management fees of the largest mutual funds remained competitively priced. The Trustees separately noted that DoubleLine had agreed to continue in place the expense limitation arrangements (where applicable) for a number of the mutual funds at current levels for an additional
one-year
period, with the prospect of recouping any waived fees or reimbursed expenses at a later date. In evaluating economies of scale more generally, the Trustees also noted ongoing changes to the regulatory environment, which required DoubleLine to
re-invest
in its business and infrastructure. Based on these factors and others, the Trustees concluded that it was not necessary at the present time to implement breakpoints for any of the Funds, although they would continue to consider the question periodically in the future.