Item 1. Business
(a) General development of business
Global Macro Trust (the “Trust”) is a Delaware statutory trust organized on July 23, 2001 pursuant to a Declaration of Trust and Trust Agreement (the “Trust Agreement”), under the Delaware Statutory Trust Act. The Trust originally filed a registration statement, under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to register units of beneficial interest (the “Units”), which registration statement became effective March 26, 2002. Between April 1, 2002 and June 30, 2002, the Units were publicly offered at an initial price of $1,000 per Unit. The Trust commenced operations on July 1, 2002. The Trust has subsequently registered additional Units with the SEC. The net asset value of a Series 1 Unit that originally sold for $1,000 as of July 1, 2002 was $1,049.01 as of December 31, 2020. The net asset value of a Series 3 Unit that originally sold for $1,180.91 as of September 1, 2009 was $1,578.97 as of December 31, 2020. The net asset value of a Series 4 Unit that originally sold for $1,315.33 as of November 1, 2010 was $2,064.05 as of December 31, 2020. The net asset value of a Series 5 Unit that originally sold for $1,500.00 as of April 1, 2018 was $1,495.07 as of December 31, 2020.
Effective September 29, 2017, previously offered Series 1 and Series 2 Units are not being offered by the Trust. All Series 2 Units have been redeemed as of August 31, 2017, while outstanding Series 1 Units remain subject to their original terms.
As of December 31, 2020, Units were being offered on a monthly basis at net asset value per Unit. The Units are offered through a number of registered broker-dealer selling agents on a best efforts basis.
The Trust engages in speculative trading in the futures, forward and spot currency markets and may trade options thereon as well as swap contracts. The amount of capital raised for the Trust should not have a significant impact on its operations, as the Trust has no significant capital expenditure or working capital requirements other than to pay trading losses, brokerage fees and charges.
Millburn Ridgefield Corporation (the “Managing Owner”), a Delaware corporation operating in New York, New York, organized in May 1982, is the managing owner and the commodity trading advisor (“CTA”) for the Trust. It and its principals have been trading in the futures and forwards markets pursuant to systematic quantitative, trading and risk management methods since 1971. The Managing Owner has been registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “CFTC”) as a commodity pool operator (“CPO”) since July 1, 1982, as a CTA since September 13, 1984 and has been a member of the National Futures Association (the “NFA”) since July 1, 1982. The Managing Owner has been an approved swaps firm with the NFA since December 26, 2012. The Millburn Corporation, a former affiliate of the Managing Owner that, prior to January 1, 2019, performed certain research, trading, technology, operations, marketing, accounting, tax, legal, compliance, human resources, and other administrative functions for the Trust and other commodity pools and investment partnerships managed by the Managing Owner, merged with and into the Managing Owner on December 31, 2018, and the Managing Owner now performs the functions formerly performed by The Millburn Corporation.
The Managing Owner invested $400 in the Trust as an initial capital contribution to the Trust and $2,000,000 in the Trust at the outset of trading and subsequently has contributed an additional $3,812,100 and has redeemed $49,698,779 as of December 31, 2020. After reflecting net income of $7,892,327 and profit share of $38,769,019 from inception up to and including December 31, 2020, this investment totaled $2,775,067, as of December 31, 2020.
(c) Description of business
The Trust engages in the speculative trading of futures, forward and spot currency contracts and may trade options thereon as well as swap contracts. The Trust’s sole trading advisor is the Managing Owner. The Managing Owner trades the Trust’s assets in the agricultural, metals, energy, interest rate and stock indices futures markets and in the currency markets, trading primarily forward contracts in the interbank market. The Managing Owner makes its systematically-based trading decisions pursuant to its investment and trading methodology, based on signals generated from an analysis of price, price derivatives, fundamental and other quantitative data as well as incorporating money management principles, each of which may be revised from time to time. The objective of the Managing Owner’s investment and trading methods is to consider these multiple data inputs, or “factors,” in order to arrive at relatively near-term return forecasts for each traded instrument and take appropriate risk-managed positions.
Trades generated by quantitative models may be profitable or unprofitable. Since the Managing Owner is well aware that many trades will ultimately lose money, its objective is to more-than cover those losses by generating more frequent and/or larger profitable trades than losing trades. During periods in which market behavior differs significantly from that analyzed to build the models, or periods where data inputs important to predicting price movements were not included in those analyzed to build the models, substantial losses are possible, and even likely.
The Managing Owner is engaged in an ongoing research effort to improve its investment and trading methods and to apply its quantitative analytic expertise to new financial products, markets and instruments.
Successful systematic trading depends on several elements. Two of the main factors are the development and selection of the trading systems used in each market and the allocation of portfolio risk among the markets available for trading.
Market environments change over time, and particular systems may perform well in one environment but poorly in another. Likewise, market sectors and individual markets go through periods where systematic trading is profitable and other periods where no system is able to generate any profits.
The goal of the Managing Owner’s research has been to develop and select a mix of systems in each market and to allocate risk across a wide array of markets, so as to contain overall portfolio risk within a targeted range, while allowing exposure to profitable opportunities.
Over more than 50 years, the Managing Owner and its predecessor entities have developed hundreds of trading systems. These trading systems generate buy or sell decisions in a particular market based on the analysis of a range of quantitative data, and the interactions of such data, in the particular market or in markets in general.
Of course, systems can be materially different - better in some periods and worse in others. Some of the main distinguishing characteristics include: the time frame over which systems work (e.g., intra-day to long-term); the granularity of data fed into them (e.g., tick data to daily, weekly or monthly frequencies); the amount of historical data used to learn the market structure; the statistical methods used to make forecasts; the type of data (e.g., price, price-derivative, fundamental and other quantitative data); and the source of data (e.g., cash, futures, option or equity markets-generated data or government-, and industry- or company-generated statistical information). No single system will work all the time. Therefore, the Managing Owner’s objective is to have several systems operating in conjunction with one another.
When arriving at the portfolio allocation, the Managing Owner generally seeks maximum diversification, subject to liquidity and sector concentration constraints and subject to the mandate of the strategy. Each market is traded using a diversified set of systems, which may be optimized for groups of markets, sectors or specific markets. The markets traded and allocations are reviewed at least monthly, although changes may occur more or less frequently. The following factors, among others, are considered in constructing a universe of markets to trade for the Trust: profitability, liquidity of markets, professional judgment, desired diversification, transaction costs, exchange regulations and depth of markets. The current allocation to any market in the Trust’s portfolio does not exceed 3.0% of total market exposure, measured by risk allocation.
Risk is a function of both price level and price volatility. For example, for any given level of volatility, a 100,000 barrel crude oil position is worth more and is, therefore, probably more risky with oil at $90 per barrel than with oil at $50 per barrel. Similarly, oil would be more risky if prices are moving in a 5% daily range than if prices are moving in a 1% daily range. The Managing Owner sizes the position in each market taking into account its measurement of risk based on price level and volatility in that market. Market exposure is then managed by the position-sizing models which measure the risk in the portfolio’s position in each market. In the event the model determines that the risk has changed beyond an acceptable threshold, it will signal a change in the position - a decrease in position size when risk increases and an increase in position size when risk decreases. The Managing Owner’s position-sizing models maintain overall portfolio risk and distribution of risk across markets within designated ranges. The position-sizing model manages the position traded in aggregate by the combination of the (directional) trading systems discussed above.
In addition, the Managing Owner’s risk management processes focus on money management principles applicable to the portfolio as a whole and also to individual markets. The first principle is portfolio diversification, which attempts to improve the quality of profits by reducing volatility.
Additional money management principles applicable to the portfolio as a whole include: (1) limiting the assets committed as margin or collateral, generally within a range of 5% to 35% of an account’s net assets, though the amount may at any time be substantially higher or lower and (2) prohibiting pyramiding - that is, using unrealized profits in a particular market as margin for additional positions solely in the same market.
Another important risk management function is the careful control of leverage or total portfolio exposure. Leverage levels are determined by simulating the entire portfolio - all markets, all systems, all risk control models, the exact weightings of the markets in the portfolio and the proposed level of leverage - over multiple years to determine the portfolio’s simulated risk and return characteristics as well as the simulated worst case drawdown experienced by the portfolio in the simulation period. The simulated worst case drawdown, or peak-to-trough drawdown, is measured from a daily high in portfolio assets to the subsequent daily low whether that occurs days, weeks or months after the daily high. If the Managing Owner considers the simulated drawdown too severe or the portfolio’s simulated volatility too high, it can set the leverage or level of the actual portfolio accordingly so as to reduce the total portfolio exposure. There are, however, no restrictions on the amount of leverage the Trust may use at any given time.
Decisions whether to trade a particular market require the exercise of judgment. The decision not to trade certain markets for certain periods, or to reduce the size of a position in a particular market, may result at times in missing significant profit opportunities.
The Managing Owner’s discretion and expertise in the execution of trades plays a role in timing of orders and, from time to time, the Managing Owner may adjust the size of a position, long or short, in any given market indicated by its systematic trading strategies. This exercise of discretion (other than in trade execution) has historically been very rare and would generally occur only in response to unusual market conditions that may not have been factored into the design of the trading systems. Such adjustments would be done with the intention of reducing risk exposures as opposed to seeking additional risk. Decisions to make such adjustments also require the exercise of judgment and may include consideration of the volatility of the particular market; the pattern of price movements, both inter-day and intra-day; open interest; volume of trading; changes in spread relationships between various forward contracts; and overall portfolio balance and risk exposure.
The Trust is open-ended and may offer Units issued in difference Series. Currently, the Trust is offering Series 3, Series 4 and Series 5 Units at their respective net asset values as of the first day of each month. The only differences between the Units of each Series are the applicable fees and expenses. Otherwise, the Units of each Series are identical to the Units of such other Series and share pro rata in the profits and losses of the Trust. Series 3 Units are available only to investors participating in a registered investment adviser’s asset-based fee or fixed fee advisory program through which an investment adviser recommends a portfolio allocation to the Trust. Series 4 Units are available only to employees and former employees of the Managing Owner and its affiliates who purchase their Units through the Managing Owner’s 401(k) and Profit Sharing Plan. Unitholders (“Unitholders”) may redeem any or all of their Units upon 10 days’ written notice to the Managing Owner at their net asset value as of the last day of any month. An investor acquiring Series 5 Units through certain selling agents may be required to pay to such selling agents an upfront selling commission of up to 3% of the amount intended to be invested in Series 5 Units. Any such upfront selling commission will be deducted by the selling agent directly from the investor’s investment account maintained by the selling agent and will not be considered in calculating the profit shares attributable to Series 5 Units as described below. Requests for redemption will be honored and payment will be made, except in the event of highly unusual market disruptions, within 15 business days of the effective date of redemption.
Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, the Managing Owner receives a flat-rate monthly brokerage fee equal to 0.583% of the month-end Series 1 net assets (a 7.0% annual rate). The Managing Owner charges less than the annual brokerage rate of 7% to those subscribers who invested in amounts of $100,000 or more in the Series 1 Units or subscribed without incurring the selling commissions paid by the Managing Owner. These reductions have no effect on other investors. From this amount, the Managing Owner pays approximately 0.50% to the Trust’s executing and clearing brokers, and up to 4% to the selling agents. For Series 1 Units sold after June 4, 2009, the amount paid to selling agents shall not, however, exceed 9.5% of the gross offering proceeds. Once the 9.5% threshold is reached with respect to a Series 1 Unit, the selling agent will receive no future compensation and the up to 4% amount that would otherwise be paid to the selling agent for that Series 1 Unit will instead be rebated to the Trust for the benefit of all holders of Series 1 Units. The Managing Owner also receives a profit share equal to 20% of any new trading profit of Series 1 Units, determined as of the end of each calendar year. The annual profit share is calculated net of brokerage fees and administrative expenses and excluding interest income. The Managing Owner pays all the routine costs of executing and clearing the Trust’s trades and all compensation due to the selling agents with respect to the Series 1 Units.
The Trust pays the Managing Owner an annual management fee equal to 1.75% of the average month-end net assets attributable to the Series 3 Units after reduction for expenses but before reduction for any accrued but unpaid management fees or Series 3 profit share. Series 3 Units are also charged for their pro rata share of the Trust’s actual trade execution and clearing costs, including electronic platform trading costs, estimated at approximately 0.45% of the Trust’s average month-end net assets per year attributable to the Series 3 Units. The Trust pays the Managing Owner a profit share attributed to the Series 3 Units equal to 20% of any cumulative new trading profit of the Series 3 Units in the aggregate, determined as of the end of each calendar year. The annual Series 3 profit share is calculated net of management fees, execution and clearing costs, and ongoing offering and administrative expenses and excluding interest income.
Series 4 Units are charged for their pro rata share of the Trust’s actual trade execution and clearing costs, including electronic platform trading costs, estimated at approximately 0.45% of the Trust’s average month-end net assets per year attributable to the Series 4 Units. Series 4 Units are not charged a management fee or profit share.
With respect to the Series 5 Units, the Trust pays the Managing Owner an annual management fee equal to 2.50% of the average month-end net assets attributable to the Series 5 Units after reduction for expenses but before reduction for any accrued but unpaid management fees or Series 5 profit share. From this amount, the Managing Owner will pay up to 0.75% per year of the Trust’s net assets attributable to Series 5 Units to the selling agents, provided that cumulative compensation paid to selling agents for Series 5 Units will not exceed 9.5% of the gross offering proceeds from the sale of Series 5 Units. Once the 9.5% threshold is reached with respect to a Series 5 Unit, the selling agent will receive no future compensation and the up to 0.75% amount that would otherwise be paid to the selling agent for that Series 5 Unit will instead be rebated to the Trust for the benefit of all Series 5 Unitholders. Series 5 Units are also charged for their pro rata share of the Trust’s actual trade execution and clearing costs, including electronic platform trading costs, estimated at approximately 0.45% of the Trust’s average month-end net assets per year attributable to the Series 5 Units. The Trust pays the Managing Owner a profit share attributed to the Series 5 Units equal to 20% of any cumulative new trading profit of the Series 5 Units in the aggregate, determined as of the end of each calendar year. The annual Series 5 profit share is calculated net of management fees, execution and clearing costs, and ongoing offering and administrative expenses and excluding interest income.
The Trust’s organizational and initial offering costs were paid by the Managing Owner without reimbursement from the Trust or the Unitholders. The Trust pays all of its expenses incurred in the ordinary course of its business and any extraordinary expenses, if applicable.
Deutsche Bank Securities Inc. (“Deutsche Bank”), BofA Securities Inc. (“BofA”) and ) and Goldman Sachs & Co. LLC (“GS&Co”) act as the futures brokers for the Trust. The Trust also currently executes currency forward trades with Deutsche Bank AG and Bank of America, N.A., which serve as the Trust’s prime brokers for such transactions. The Trust pays “bid ask” spreads on its forward trades, as such spreads are incorporated into the pricing of forward contracts. The Managing Owner monitors the Trust’s trades to ensure that the prices it receives are competitive.
The Trust’s cash and short-term United States (“U.S.”) Treasury instruments are used by the Trust to engage in its trading activities and as reserves to support that trading. The Trust’s assets deposited with the Trust’s futures brokers as margin are maintained in “customer segregated funds accounts” or “foreign futures and foreign options secured amount accounts” and are held in cash, or U.S. Treasury instruments. Trust assets not deposited as margin are maintained in bank or brokerage accounts and are held primarily in bank money market funds or short-term U.S. Treasury instruments or a U.S. government securities and related instruments money market fund.
The Trust does not engage in lending (other than through permitted securities investments).
Regulation
Under the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended (the “CEA”), commodity exchanges and futures trading are subject to regulation by the CFTC. NFA, a “registered futures association” under the CEA, is the only non-exchange self-regulatory organization for futures industry professionals. The CFTC has delegated to NFA responsibility for the registration of CTAs, CPOs, “futures commission merchants,” “introducing brokers,” “swap dealers” and their respective associated persons and “floor brokers” and “floor traders.” The CEA requires CPOs and CTAs, such as the Managing Owner, and commodity brokers or futures commission merchants (“FCMs”) and swap dealers, such as Deutsche Bank, Deutsche Bank AG, BofA, Bank of America, N.A. and GS&Co to be registered and to comply with various reporting and record keeping requirements. The CFTC may suspend a CPO’s or CTA’s registration if it finds that its trading practices tend to disrupt orderly market conditions or in certain other situations. In the event that the registration of the Managing Owner as a CPO or a CTA were terminated or suspended, the Managing Owner would be unable to continue to manage the business of the Trust. Should the Managing Owner’s registration be suspended, termination of the Trust might result.
In addition to such registration requirements, the CFTC and certain commodity exchanges have established limits on the maximum net long or net short positions which any person may hold or control in certain futures contracts. Most exchanges also limit the changes in futures contract prices that may occur during a single trading day. The CFTC has also proposed, but not yet adopted, additional position limit rules governing energy, metals and agricultural derivative contracts. All accounts controlled by the Managing Owner are likely to be combined for speculative position limit purposes. The Managing Owner could be required to liquidate positions it holds for the Trust or may not be able to fully implement trading instructions generated by its trading models, in order to comply with the new position limits regime. Any such liquidation or limited implementation could result in substantial costs to the Trust. It is as yet unclear whether the rules will have an adverse effect on the Trust.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Reform Act”) mandates that a substantial portion of over-the-counter derivatives be executed in regulated markets and be submitted for clearing to regulated clearinghouses, subject to margin requirements. Associated dealer costs are generally passed through to other market participants in the form of clearing account maintenance fees and less favorable dealer marks.
The Trust may also trade forward contracts in the inter-bank currency market. Such forward contracts are not currently traded on exchanges; rather, banks and dealers act as principals in these markets. As a result of the Reform Act, the CFTC regulates non-deliverable forwards (including many deliverable forwards where the parties do not take delivery), although currency forward contracts are generally not otherwise subject to regulation by any other U.S. government agency. Changes in the forward markets may entail increased costs and result in burdensome reporting requirements. There is currently no limitation on the daily price movements of forward contracts. Principals in the forward markets have no obligation to continue to make markets in the forward contracts traded. The imposition of credit controls by governmental authorities or the implementation of regulations pursuant to the Reform Act might limit such forward trading to less than that which the Managing Owner would otherwise recommend, to the possible detriment of the Trust.
(1)(i) through (v) - not applicable.
(2)(i) - not applicable.
2(ii) - the Trust has no employees.
Item 1A.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
You Could Lose Your Entire Investment in the Trust
An investment in the Trust is a speculative investment. You will be relying on the Managing Owner to trade profitably for the Trust and profitability is not assured. You could lose all or substantially all of your investment in the Trust.
Past Performance Is Not Necessarily Indicative of Future Results
The Trust began trading on July 1, 2002 and has traded in both rising and falling markets. Nevertheless, the past performance of the Trust is not necessarily indicative of the Trust’s future results, and the Trust may sustain losses in the future under market conditions in which it achieved gains in the past.
The Trust Trades and Invests in Futures and Forward Contracts. Futures and Forward Contract Trading is Speculative and may Result in Losses.
Futures and forward contracts are leveraged instruments; leverage magnifies losses as well as gains. The prices of futures and forward contracts can be volatile leading to volatile performance of the Trust. Futures and forward contract markets may become illiquid from time to time potentially making it difficult for the Trust to enter or exit trading positions potentially resulting in lost opportunities or actual losses for the Trust. A Trust counterparty, such as a Clearing Broker, may fail, potentially resulting in losses for the Trust.
The Trust Is a Highly Leveraged Investment
The Trust acquires positions with an aggregate face value of as much as eight to ten times or more of its total equity. Consequently, small adverse movements in the prices of the Trust’s open positions can cause significant losses.
The Performance of the Trust Will Be Volatile
The Managing Owner expects that the performance of the Trust will be volatile. The Trust may suffer sudden and substantial losses from time to time and the day-to-day value of the Units will be variable and uncertain. The net asset value per Unit may change materially between the date on which you subscribe for Units and the date the Units are issued or the date you request a redemption and the month-end redemption date. In the last five years, monthly returns for the Series 1 Units, adjusted to reflect the cost/fee structure of the Series 5 Units, the highest fee paying Units currently offered, have ranged from up 6.32% to down 11.54%.
The Trust’s Expenses Will Cause Losses Unless Offset by Profits and Interest Income
The Trust pays annual expenses of up to approximately 3.00%, 1.25% and 3.75% of its average month-end net assets attributable to Series 3 Units, Series 4 Units and Series 5 Units, respectively. The Trust must earn trading profits and interest income allocable to each Series at least equal to these expenses to avoid losses. To the extent the Trust’s Net Assets decline, fixed costs of the Trust will constitute a greater percentage of the Trust’s Net Assets.
Series 5 Units sold through certain selling agents may be subject to upfront selling commissions paid directly to the selling agents by investors. To offset these upfront selling commissions, the Trust would need to earn, in addition to the amount described above, trading profits and interest income equal to the amount of any such upfront selling commission plus the profit share realized on such trading profits.
An Investment in the Trust Is Not Liquid
There is no secondary market for the Units. You may redeem your Units only as of the close of business on the last day of a calendar month, and you must give the Trust at least 10 days’ prior written notice of your intent to redeem.
The Timing of Your Investment and Redemption Decisions Will Affect the Profitability of Your Investment
The Managing Owner expects that a majority of the Trust’s trades will result in small profits only or in losses. The majority of any profits earned by the Trust will most likely come from a small number of trades each year. Accordingly, you will not know when is a good time to invest in the Trust or to redeem your Units, and the timing of your investment and redemption decisions will affect the amount of profit or loss you experience as an investor in the Trust.
The Managing Owner Alone Directs the Trust’s Trading
The Trust is a single-advisor fund. The use of a single advisor trading one program involves a greater risk of loss than the diversified, multi-advisor approach employed by many futures funds. In addition, if the management services of the Managing Owner were to become unavailable for any reason, the Trust would terminate. Furthermore, were the Managing Owner to lose the services of its key principals, the Managing Owner could decide to dissolve the Trust, subject to Unitholder approval, possibly causing it to realize losses.
The Managing Owner Is Primarily a Technical Trader and May Not Always Analyze Economic Factors External to Market Price
The Managing Owner’s systematic strategies are developed on the basis of, among other factors, a statistical analysis of market prices. Consequently, any factor external to the market itself that dominates prices may cause major losses to these strategies. For example, a pending political or economic event may be very likely to cause a major price movement, but certain of the Managing Owner’s traditional strategies may continue to maintain positions indicated by its trading method that would incur major losses if the event proved to be adverse.
The Managing Owner’s systematic strategies retain certain discretionary aspects. Decisions, for example, to adjust the size of the positions indicated by the systematic strategies, which contracts to trade and method of order entry require judgmental input from the Managing Owner’s principals. Additionally, the Managing Owner may determine not to enter a new position indicated by its strategies if the Managing Owner determines prevailing market conditions to be unusual, for example, significantly more volatile than the expected volatility factored into the design of the strategies. The Managing Owner does, however, exit positions when its trading strategies indicate that it should do so. Discretionary decision-making may result in the Managing Owner making unprofitable trades when a more wholly systematic approach would not have done so.
Lack of Price Trends May Cause Losses
The Trust may be less likely to trade profitably when there are no major price trends in at least some of the markets it trades. Moreover, the price trends must be of a type the Managing Owner’s systems are designed to identify.
Markets in which prices move rapidly and then reverse and then do so again may cause losses. In such “whipsaw” market conditions, the Managing Owner may establish positions for the Trust on the basis of incorrectly identifying the rapid movement or the reversal as a trend.
Market Behavior and Data Inputs May Cause Losses
During periods in which market behavior differs significantly from that analyzed to build the models, or periods where data inputs important to predicting price movements were not included in those analyzed to build the models, substantial losses are possible, and even likely.
Lack of Market Liquidity Could Make It Impossible for the Trust to Realize Profits or Limit Losses
In illiquid markets, the Trust could be unable to close out positions to limit losses or to take positions in order to follow trends. There are too many different factors that can contribute to market illiquidity to predict when or where illiquid markets may occur.
Unexpected market illiquidity has caused major losses for some traders in recent years in such market sectors as emerging markets and mortgage-backed securities. There can be no assurance that the same will not happen in the markets traded by the Trust. In addition, the large size of the positions the Trust may take increases the risk of illiquidity by both making its positions more difficult to liquidate and increasing the losses incurred while trying to do so.
U.S. commodity exchanges impose limits on the amount the price of some, but not all, futures contracts may change on a single day. Once a futures contract has reached its daily limit, it may be impossible for the Trust to liquidate a position in that contract, if the market has moved adversely to the Trust, until the limit is either raised by the exchange or the contract begins to trade away from the limit price.
Speculative Position Limits May Alter Investment Decisions for the Trust
The CFTC has established limits on the maximum net long or net short positions which any person may hold or control in certain futures contracts. Exchanges have also established such limits. The CFTC has also proposed, but not yet adopted, additional position limit rules covering energy, metals and agricultural derivative contracts. All accounts controlled by the Managing Owner, including the account of the Trust, are likely to be combined for speculative position limit purposes. The Managing Owner could be required to liquidate positions it holds for the Trust, or may not be able to fully implement trading instructions generated by its trading models, in order to comply with the such limits. Any such liquidation or limited implementation could result in substantial costs to the Trust. It is as yet unclear whether the rules will have an adverse effect on the Trust.
The Managing Owner’s Trading Systems Have Been Developed Over Time and Are Subject to Change
In executing its trading method, the Managing Owner uses combinations of trading systems to generate buy and sell signals in the various markets traded. The Managing Owner has developed, modified, retained and discarded numerous systems over more than 49 years. Consequently, some of the trading systems and combinations of systems currently being used to trade accounts pursuant to the Diversified Portfolio as the Trust is so traded, are not identical to those used 1, 5, 10, 15, 20 or more years ago.
The Managing Owner May Manage Accounts for Other Clients of the Managing Owner and Its Affiliates
The Managing Owner manages futures and forward accounts other than the Trust, including accounts in which the Managing Owner and its current and former principals and employees and their family members have significant investments. The Managing Owner and its affiliates may manage additional accounts in the future. It is possible that such accounts may be in competition with the Trust for the same or similar positions in the futures, forward and spot markets. The Managing Owner intends generally to use similar trading methods for the Trust and all other systematic accounts the Managing Owner and its affiliates manage. The Managing Owner will not knowingly or deliberately use systems for any account that are inferior to systems employed for any other account or favor any account over any other account.
In addition, the Managing Owner employs a neutral allocation system such that the portfolio of market positions, or portfolio, pursuant to which an account is traded will be allocated positions in financial instruments on a fair and equitable basis in comparison to the other portfolios offered by the Managing Owner. Certain portfolios, however, may receive larger allocations of positions on account of the specialized nature of such portfolios. For example, a portfolio concentrated in the commodities markets may receive a larger portion of commodity based financial instruments than the allocations received by portfolios trading a more diverse set of markets. Further, some portfolios, as traded on behalf of certain client accounts, may or may not be allocated positions in financial instruments, or may be allocated such positions at a reduced rate because of instructions received by a client and/or the size or nature of the client account. For example, if trading in certain markets constitutes a de minimis portion of the trading performed on behalf of a large account, the Managing Owner may decide not to trade in such markets on behalf of that account even though such market would otherwise be traded in the portfolio applicable to such account. As a result, certain portfolios and accounts may receive increased allocations to the detriment of other portfolios and accounts. No assurance is given that the results of the Trust’s trading will be similar to that of other accounts concurrently managed by the Managing Owner or its affiliates.
Trading on Foreign Exchanges Presents Greater Risk Than Trading on U.S. Exchanges
The Trust will trade on commodity exchanges outside the U.S. Trading on foreign exchanges is not regulated by any U.S. governmental agency and may involve certain risks that do not arise when trading on U.S. exchanges. For example, some foreign exchanges are “principals’ markets” in which performance is the responsibility only of the individual member with whom the Trust has traded, not of the exchange or a clearing facility. In such cases, the Trust will be subject to a risk that the member with whom the Trust has traded is unable or unwilling to perform its obligations under the transaction. Additionally, an adverse change in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the currency in which a non-U.S. futures contract is denominated would reduce the profit or increase the loss on a trade in that contract.
Trading on foreign exchanges also presents risks of loss due to: (1) the possible imposition of exchange controls, which could make it difficult or impossible for the Trust to repatriate some or all of its assets held by non-U.S. counterparties; (2) possible government confiscation of assets; (3) taxation; (4) possible government disruptions, which could result in market closures and thus an inability to exit positions and repatriate Trust assets for sustained periods of time, or even permanently; and (5) limited rights in the event of the bankruptcy or insolvency of a foreign broker or exchange resulting in a different and possibly less favorable distribution of the bankrupt’s assets than would occur in the U.S.
The Managing Owner Anticipates the Trust’s Performance to Be Non-Correlated to Stocks and Bonds, Not Negatively Correlated
The performance of the Trust has been generally non-correlated to the performance of the stock and bond markets, as represented by the S&P 500 Stock Index and the Barclays Long-Term Treasury Index. Non-correlation means that there is no statistically valid relationship between two asset classes and should not be confused with negative correlation, where the performance of two asset classes would be opposite. Because of this non-correlation, you should not expect the Trust to be automatically profitable during unfavorable periods for the stock and/or bond markets, or vice versa.
If the Trust does not perform in a manner non-correlated with the general financial markets or does not perform successfully, an investor will obtain little or no diversification benefits by investing in the Units and the Trust may have no gains to offset an investor’s losses from other investments.
The Trust May Be Subject to Profit Shares Despite Certain Units Having Declined in Value
Investors will purchase Units at different times and will, accordingly, recognize different amounts of profit and loss on their investments. Profit shares are accrued, or the accruals are reversed to reflect losses, on a monthly basis so that Units are not sold with an embedded profit share liability. However, profit shares attributable to Series 3 and Series 5 Units are each ultimately calculated on the basis of the net trading profits, if any, recognized by the Series 3 Units as a whole and the Series 5 Units as a whole, respectively, and not on the profits recognized by any particular Unit or Units. Consequently, the Managing Owner may still be allocated a profit share even though certain Units have lost value since the date they were purchased.
Conversely, Units purchased at a net asset value reduced by accrued profit shares will benefit from any reversal of such accruals, and the benefit of such reversals to Units outstanding at the time of such purchase will be diluted.
Similarly, Units may incur losses generating a loss carryforward for purposes of calculating subsequent profit shares. The benefit of any such loss carryforward will, in the case of Series 3 Units and Series 5 Units be diluted by the sale of additional Series 3 Units and Series 5 Units, respectively.
Further, with respect to Series 5 Units subject to upfront selling commissions, profit shares may be payable even though the trading profits attributable to such Series 5 Units do not fully offset the costs of the upfront selling commissions charged directly by a selling agent.
The Managing Owner’s Increased Equity Under Management Could Lead to Lower Returns for Investors
The Managing Owner has not agreed to limit the amount of money it may manage and is actively seeking additional accounts. The more money the Managing Owner manages, the more difficult it may become for the Managing Owner to trade profitably for the Trust because of the difficulty of trading larger positions without negatively affecting prices and performance.
Increased Competition Among Quantitative Traders Could Reduce the Managing Owner’s Profitability
A substantial number of CTAs use technical trading systems, statistical learning, that may be similar to a portion of the Managing Owner’s systems. As the amount of money under the management of such systems increases, competition for the same positions increases, making the positions more costly and more difficult to acquire.
The Trust Is Subject to Conflicts of Interest
The Trust is subject to numerous actual and potential conflicts of interest, including: (1) the compensation that the Trust’s selling agents receive gives them an incentive to promote the sale of Units as well as to discourage redemptions; (2) the brokerage commissions that selling agents receive if they also serve as clearing brokers for the Trust gives an additional incentive to promote the sale of Units as well as to discourage redemptions; (3) the Managing Owner has significant financial incentives both to promote the sale of the Units and to discourage their redemption; and (4) the Managing Owner of the Trust will not select any other trading advisor even if doing so would be in the best interests of the Trust.
The Managing Owner Has Not Established Formal Procedures to Resolve Conflicts of Interest
Because the Managing Owner has not established any formal procedures for resolving conflicts of interest, investors will be dependent on the good faith of the parties with conflicts to resolve the conflicts equitably. The Managing Owner cannot assure that conflicts of interest will not result in losses for the Trust.
Each Investor Will Be Taxed Each Year on Its Share of Trust Profits
An investor that is an individual or entity subject to U.S. taxes (e.g., not a tax-exempt entity such as an IRA or pension plan) will be taxed on its share of Trust income or gain each year, whether or not it redeems Units or receives distributions from the Trust.
A 3.8% tax is imposed on some or all of the net investment income of certain individuals with modified adjusted gross income of over $200,000 ($250,000 in the case of joint filers) and the undistributed net investment income of certain estates and trusts. For these purposes, it is expected that all or a substantial portion of the Unitholder’s share of Trust income will be net investment income. In addition, certain Trust expenses may not be deducted in calculating a Unitholder’s net investment income.
Because a substantial portion of the Trust’s open positions are “marked-to-market” at the end of each year, some of an investor’s tax liability will be based on unrealized gains which the Trust may, in fact, never realize.
40% of any trading profits on certain U.S. exchange-traded futures contracts and certain foreign currency forward contracts are taxed as short-term capital gains at ordinary income rates (unless offset by capital losses), while 60% of any such trading profits are taxed as long-term capital gains at a lower maximum rate for individuals. 100% of any trading profits from certain bank forward contracts or foreign currency futures contracts traded on a non-U.S. exchange are “marked-to-market” at the end of each year and taxed as short-term capital gains at ordinary income rates (unless offset by capital losses). These rates apply regardless of how long the Trust holds a contract, or an investor his or her Units.
Due to the different tax rates for long-term and short-term capital gains and limitations on the deductibility of capital losses, and depending on the tax character of income and loss an investor receives on other investments in your portfolio, it is possible for an investor to have a pre-tax economic gain on its investment in the Trust but an after-tax loss.
Over time, the compounding effects of the annual taxation of the Trust’s income are material to the economic consequences of investing in the Trust. For example, a 10% compound annual rate of return over five years would result in an initial $10,000 investment compounding to $16,105. However, if one factors in a 30% tax rate each year, the result would be $14,025.
Investors Will Be Taxed on the Trust’s Interest Income Even if the Trust Suffers Trading Losses
Losses on the Trust’s trading are almost exclusively capital losses. Non-corporate investors may use net capital losses to offset up to $3,000 of ordinary income each year. So, for example, if an investor’s share of the Trust’s trading (i.e., capital) loss was $10,000 in a given fiscal year and the investor’s share of interest income was $5,000, the investor would incur a net loss in the net asset value of the investor’s Units equal to $5,000, but would nevertheless recognize taxable income of $2,000.
No Deduction for “Investment Advisory Fees”
The Managing Owner does not intend to treat the ordinary expenses of the Trust as “investment advisory fees” for federal income tax purposes. The Managing Owner believes that this is the position adopted by virtually all U.S. futures fund sponsors. However, were the ordinary expenses of the Trust characterized as “investment advisory fees,” non-corporate taxpayers would be unable to deduct those expenses, would pay increased taxes in respect of an investment in the Trust and could actually recognize taxable income despite having incurred a financial loss.
The IRS Could Audit Both the Trust and Individual Unitholders
The Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) could audit the Trust’s tax returns and require the Trust to adjust such returns. If an audit results in an adjustment, you could be audited and required to pay additional taxes, plus interest and possibly penalties.
Absent an election by the Trust under rules to be finalized by the IRS, the Trust will be required to determine and pay any imputed underpayment of tax (including interest and penalties) resulting from an adjustment of the Trust’s items of income, gain, loss, deduction or credit at the Trust level without the benefit of Unitholder-level tax items that could otherwise reduce tax due on any adjustment and, where the adjustment reallocates any such item from one Unitholder to another, without the benefit of any decrease in any item of income or gain (or increase in any item of deduction, loss or credit). Absent this election, the cost of such imputed underpayment (including interest and penalties) will be borne by Unitholders in the year of adjustment, without any Trust or Unitholder-level tax deduction or credit for the Trust’s payments, rather than by those who were Unitholders in the taxable year to which the adjustment relates.
Accounting for Uncertain Tax Positions
Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification Topic No. 740, “Income Taxes” (“ASC 740,” in part formerly known as “FIN 48”), provides guidance on the recognition of uncertain tax positions. ASC 740 prescribes the minimum recognition threshold that a tax position is required to meet before being recognized in an entity’s financial statements. It also provides guidance on recognition, measurement, classification, interest and penalties with respect to tax positions. A prospective investor should be aware that, among other things, ASC 740 could have a material adverse effect on the periodic calculations of the net asset value of the Trust, including reducing the net asset value of the Trust to reflect reserves for income or other taxes, such as foreign withholding taxes, that may be payable by the Trust. This could cause benefits or detriments to certain Unitholders, depending upon the timing of their subscriptions and withdrawals from the Trust.
The Bankruptcy of a Clearing Broker or Currency Dealer Could Cause Losses
The Managing Owner must assess the credit-worthiness of the clearing brokers and foreign currency counterparties it selects for the Trust. If one of the Trust’s clearing brokers or foreign currency counterparties becomes bankrupt, the Trust will be limited to recovering none or only its pro rata share, of all available customer funds segregated by the clearing broker or counterparty. In some jurisdictions, the Trust may only be an unsecured creditor of its brokers in the event of bankruptcy or administration of such brokers. The Managing Owner attempts to mitigate this risk by selecting only well-capitalized, major financial institutions as clearing brokers and foreign currency counterparties, but there can be no assurance that even a well-capitalized, major institution will not become bankrupt, and recent events have demonstrated that even major financial institutions of the type with which the Trust may deal in the financial markets can and do fail.
The Trust Is Not Regulated as an Investment Company or Mutual Fund
Although the Managing Owner is subject to regulation by the CFTC and the Trust itself is subject to reporting requirements and other regulation applicable to public companies in the U.S., the Trust is not an investment company or mutual fund registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. Accordingly, investors in the Trust are not accorded the protections of such legislation.
Certain Special Considerations Related to Forward and Spot Trading
The Trust will conduct all or substantially all of its currency forward and related options trading in lightly regulated markets rather than on futures exchanges or through “retail” foreign exchange markets that are subject to more rigorous regulation of the CFTC or other regulatory bodies. In such markets, a counterparty may not settle a transaction with the Trust in accordance with its terms because the counterparty is either unwilling or unable to do so (for example, because of a credit or liquidity problem affecting the counterparty), potentially resulting in significant loss. In addition, counterparties generally have the right to terminate trades under a number of circumstances, including, for example, declines in the Trust’s net assets and certain “key person” events. Any premature termination of the Trust’s currency forward trades could result in material losses for the Trust, as the Trust may be unable to quickly re-establish those trades and may only be able to do so at disadvantageous prices.
Trust funds on deposit with the currency forward and spot counterparties with which the Trust trades are not protected by the same segregation requirements imposed on CFTC-regulated commodity brokers in respect of customer funds deposited with them. Although the Trust deals only with major financial institutions as currency forward and spot counterparties, the insolvency or bankruptcy of a currency forward or spot counterparty could subject the Trust to the loss of its entire deposit with such counterparty. The forward and spot markets are well established. However, it is impossible to predict how, given certain unusual market scenarios, the evolving regulatory environment for these markets might affect the Trust, and the events underlying the bankruptcies of various counterparties have underscored, among other things, the risks of maintaining capital at unregulated entities. Further, as demonstrated by the insolvency and liquidation of MF Global Inc., customer funds held by a broker in bankruptcy may not be distributed promptly and may be subject to a lengthy claims process. Commodity broker bankruptcies are not insured by any governmental agency, and investors would not have the benefit of any protection such as that afforded customers of bankrupt securities broker-dealers by the Securities Investors Protection Corporation.
Various national governments have expressed concern regarding the disruptive effects of speculative trading in the currency markets and the need to regulate the “derivatives” markets in general. Future regulatory changes may limit the Trust’s ability to trade in certain markets. Furthermore, the inter-bank currency markets may in the future become subject to increased regulation under the Reform Act, a development which may entail increased costs and result in burdensome reporting requirements. The imposition of credit controls by governmental authorities or the implementation of regulations pursuant to the Reform Act might limit such forward trading to less than that which the Managing Owner would otherwise recommend, to the possible detriment of the Trust.
Regulation of Swap Trading Is Evolving and May Involve Counterparty Risk
The Trust may engage in trading commodity swaps. Swaps involve many of the same risks as those described above with respect to forward contracts. Many swap contracts are not currently required to be cleared by a centralized clearinghouse; rather, banks and dealers act as principals in much of the swap market. As a result, the Trust may be subject to the risk of the inability or refusal to perform with respect to such contracts on the part of the counterparties with which the Trust trades. The Managing Owner intends to enter into swaps on behalf of the Trust only with highly creditworthy banks and dealers, but there can be no assurance that even highly creditworthy banks and dealers will have the ability to, or will not refuse to, perform with respect to such contracts. Regulation of the swap market is evolving, both in the U.S. and internationally. The CFTC has, for example, adopted various regulations which may restrict the Trust’s ability to utilize swaps or may make swap contracts more costly to trade with respect to certain non-security based swaps. Finally, swaps may be illiquid and participants in the swap market are not required to make continuous markets in the swap contracts they trade.
Forwards, Swaps and Other Derivatives Are Subject to Varying CFTC Regulation
The Reform Act mandates that a substantial portion of OTC derivatives must be executed in regulated markets and be submitted for clearing to regulated clearinghouses, subject to margin requirements. The CFTC has broad discretion to impose margin requirements on non-cleared OTC derivatives.
OTC derivative dealers also are required to post margin to the clearinghouses through which they clear their customers’ trades instead of using such margin in their operations, as was widely permitted before the Reform Act. This has increased and will continue to increase the dealers’ costs, which costs are generally passed through to other market participants in the form of new and higher fees, including clearing account maintenance fees, and less favorable dealer marks.
The CFTC also requires certain derivative transactions that were previously executed on a bi-lateral basis in the OTC markets to be executed through a regulated futures exchange or swap execution facility. Such requirements may make it more difficult and costly for investment funds, including the Trust, to enter into highly tailored or customized transactions.
OTC derivative dealers are required to register with the CFTC and will ultimately be required to register with the SEC. Registration and the attendant regulatory requirements further increase the overall costs for OTC derivative dealers, which may be passed along to market participants as market changes continue to be implemented.
Although the Reform Act requires many OTC derivative transactions previously entered into on a principal-to-principal basis to be submitted for clearing by a regulated clearinghouse, certain of the derivatives that may be traded by the Trust may remain principal-to-principal or OTC contracts between the Trust and third parties entered into privately. The risk of counterparty nonperformance can be significant in the case of these OTC instruments, and “bid-ask” spreads may be unusually wide in these heretofore substantially unregulated markets. While the Reform Act is intended in part to reduce these risks, its success in this respect may not be evident for some time after the Reform Act is fully implemented. To the extent not mitigated by implementation of the Reform Act, if at all, the risks posed by such instruments and techniques, which can be extremely complex and may involve leveraging of the Trust’s assets, include: (1) credit risks (the exposure to the possibility of loss resulting from a counterparty’s failure to meet its financial obligations); (2) market risk (adverse movements in the price of a financial asset or commodity); (3) legal risks (the characterization of a transaction or a party’s legal capacity to enter into it could render the financial contract unenforceable, and the insolvency or bankruptcy of a counterparty could preempt otherwise enforceable contract rights); (4) operational risk (inadequate controls, deficient procedures, human error, system failure or fraud); (5) documentation risk (exposure to losses resulting from inadequate documentation); (6) liquidity risk (exposure to losses created by inability to prematurely terminate the derivative); (7) systemic risk (the risk that financial difficulties in one institution or a major market disruption will cause uncontrollable financial harm to the financial system); (8) concentration risk (exposure to losses from the concentration of closely related risks such as exposure to a particular industry or exposure linked to a particular entity); and (9) settlement risk (the risk faced when one party to a transaction has performed its obligations under a contract but has not yet received value from its counterparty).
Trading in Options Requires an Assessment of Market Volatility as Well as Direction
The Managing Owner may trade futures and forward options on behalf of the Trust. Although successful options trading requires many of the same skills as successful futures and forward trading, the risks involved are somewhat different. For example, the assessment of near-term market volatility - which is directly reflected in the price of outstanding options - can be of much greater significance in trading options than it is in many long-term futures strategies. The use of options can be extremely expensive if market volatility is incorrectly predicted.
Inaccurate or Incomplete Third-Party Data Could Affect Trust Profitability
The strategies of the Managing Owner are dependent to a significant degree on the receipt of timely and accurate market data from third parties including, but not limited to, exchanges and clearing houses, futures commission merchants, prime brokers and other market counterparties and service providers. The receipt of inaccurate data or the failure to receive data in a timely manner could disrupt the Trust’s trading and cause the Trust to experience significant trading losses or miss opportunities for profitable trading.
The Failure of Computer Systems Could Result in Losses for the Trust
The Managing Owner relies heavily on computer hardware and software, online services and other computer-related or electronic technology and equipment to facilitate the Trust’s investment activities and may trade financial instruments through electronic trading or order routing systems. Electronic trading exposes the Trust to the risk of system or component failure. Should events beyond the Managing Owner’s control cause a disruption in the operation of any technology or equipment, the Trust’s investment program may be severely impaired, causing it to experience substantial losses or other adverse effects.
Additionally, the computer systems, networks and devices used by the Managing Owner, the Trust and service providers that carry out routine business operations employ a variety of protections designed to prevent damage or interruption from computer viruses, network failures, computer and telecommunication failures, infiltration by unauthorized persons and security breaches. Cybersecurity breaches can include unauthorized access to systems, networks or devices; infection from computer viruses or other malicious software code; and attacks that shut down, disable, slow or otherwise disrupt operations, business processes or website access and/or functionality.
Despite the various protections utilized to protect against cybersecurity threats, systems, networks and/or devices potentially can be breached. Such cybersecurity breaches may cause disruptions and impact business operations, potentially resulting in financial losses to the Trust and Unitholders; interference with the Managing Owner’s ability to calculate the value of an investment; impediments to trading; the inability of the Trust and its service providers to transact business; violations of applicable privacy and other laws; regulatory fines, penalties, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensation costs or additional compliance costs; as well as the inadvertent release of confidential information.
Similar adverse consequences could result from cybersecurity breaches affecting counterparties with which the Trust engages in transactions; governmental and other regulatory authorities; exchange and other financial market operators, banks, brokers, dealers, insurance companies and other financial institutions; and other parties. In addition, substantial costs may be incurred by these entities in order to prevent any cybersecurity breaches in the future.
Epidemics and Pandemics May Lead to Severe Market Disruptions and May Impair the Operational Capabilities of the Managing Owner and the Trust’s Service Providers
Since the mid-1990s, the world has seen a number of outbreaks of new viral illnesses of varying severity, including avian flus, Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS), the H1N1 Flu (Swine Flu), and COVID-19 caused by the novel Coronavirus known as SARS-CoV-2. The responses to these outbreaks have varied as has their impact on human health, local economies and the global economy, and it is impossible at the outset of any such outbreak to estimate accurately what the ultimate impact of any such outbreak will be. Protective measures taken by governments and the private sector, including the Managing Owner, to mitigate the spread of any such illness, including travel restrictions and outright bans, mandatory business closures, quarantines, and work-from-home arrangements, may lead to, or may be expected to lead to, wide spread economic damage, resulting in severe disruptions in the markets in which the Trust trades and, potentially, adversely affecting the Trust’s profit potential; and the spread of any such illness within the offices of the Managing Owner, the Trust’s service providers, and/or the exchanges and other components of market infrastructure could severely impair the operational capabilities of the Managing Owner, the Trust’s service providers or various markets themselves resulting in harm to the Trust’s business and its operating results.
Item 1B.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
Not required.
Item 2.
Item 2. Properties
The Trust does not own or use any physical properties in the conduct of its business. The Managing Owner performs administrative services for the Trust from its offices.
Item 3.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
The Managing Owner is not aware of any pending legal proceedings to which either the Trust is a party or to which any of its assets are subject. In addition there are no pending material legal proceedings involving the Managing Owner.
Item 4.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
Not required.
PART II
Item 5.
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
(a) Market Information
There is no trading market for the Units, and none is likely to develop. Units may be redeemed upon 10 days’ written notice to the Managing Owner at their net asset value as of the last day of any month.
(b) Holders
As of December 31, 2020, there were 2,648 holders of Series 1 Units, 375 holders of Series 3 Units, 1 holder of Series 4 Units and 78 holders of Series 5 Units.
(c) Dividends
No distributions or dividends have been made on the Units, and the Managing Owner has no present intention to make any.
(d) Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
None.
(e) Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities; Use of Proceeds from Registered Securities
There have been no sales of unregistered securities of the Trust during 2018, 2019 or 2020.
(f) Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer
Pursuant to the Trust Agreement, Unitholders may redeem their Units at the end of each calendar month at the then current month-end net asset value per Unit. The redemption of Units has no impact on the value of Units that remain outstanding, and Units are not reissued once redeemed.
The following table summarizes the redemptions by Series 1, Series 3 and Series 5 Unitholders during the fourth calendar quarter of 2020. There were no redemptions by Series 4 Unitholders during the fourth calendar quarter of 2020.
Item 6.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
The following is a summary of operations for the fiscal years 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016 and total assets of the Trust at December 31, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, and 2016.
*From trading of futures, forward and swap contracts, foreign exchange transactions and U.S. Treasury obligations.
**Includes custody fees and other expenses.
***Net of Managing Owner commission rebate to Unitholders for the years ended December 31, 2020 (567,734), 2019 ($560,036), 2018 ($627,923), 2017 ($745,218), and 2016 ($777,662).
****All Series 2 Units have been redeemed as of August 31, 2017.
*****Series 5 Units were first issued on April 1, 2018.
Item 7.
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Reference is made to “Item 6. Selected Financial Data” and “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” The information contained therein is essential to, and should be read in conjunction with, the following analysis.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Units may be offered for sale as of the beginning, and may be redeemed as of the end, of each month.
The amount of capital raised for the Trust should not have a significant impact on its operations, as the Trust has no significant capital expenditure or working capital requirements other than for monies to pay trading losses, brokerage commissions and charges. Within broad ranges of capitalization, the Managing Owner’s trading positions should increase or decrease in approximate proportion to the size of the Trust.
The Trust raises additional capital only through the sale of Units and capital is increased through trading profits (if any). The Trust does not engage in borrowing.
The Trust trades futures, forward and spot contracts, and may trade swap and options contracts, on interest rates, agricultural commodities, currencies, metals, energy and stock indices and forward contracts on currencies. Risk arises from changes in the value of these contracts (market risk) and the potential inability of counterparties or brokers to perform under the terms of their contracts (credit risk). Market risk is generally to be measured by the face amount of the futures positions acquired and the volatility of the markets traded. The credit risk from counterparty non-performance associated with these instruments is the net unrealized gain, if any, on these positions plus the value of the margin or collateral held by the counterparty. The risks associated with exchange-traded contracts are generally perceived to be less than those associated with OTC transactions, because exchanges typically (but not universally) provide clearinghouse arrangements in which the collective credit (in some cases limited in amount, in some cases not) of the members of the exchange is pledged to support the financial integrity of the exchange. In most OTC transactions, on the other hand, traders must rely (typically but not universally) solely on the credit of their respective individual counterparties. Margins which may be subject to loss in the event of a default, are generally required in exchange trading, and counterparties may require margin or collateral in the OTC markets.
The Managing Owner has procedures in place to control market risk, although there can be no assurance that they will, in fact, succeed in doing so. These procedures primarily focus on: (1) real time monitoring of open positions; (2) diversifying positions among various markets; (3) limiting the assets committed as margin or collateral, generally within a range of 5% to 35% of an account’s net assets, though the amount may at any time be substantially higher; and (4) prohibiting pyramiding - that is, using unrealized profits in a particular market as margin for additional positions in the same market. The Trust controls credit risk by dealing exclusively with large, well-capitalized financial institutions as brokers and counterparties.
The financial instruments traded by the Trust contain varying degrees of off-balance sheet risk whereby changes in the market values of the futures, forward and spot contracts or the Trust’s satisfaction of the obligations may exceed the amount recognized in the Statements of Financial Condition of the Trust.
Due to the nature of the Trust’s business, substantially all its assets are represented by cash, cash equivalents and U.S. government obligations, while the Trust maintains its market exposure through open futures, forward and spot contract positions.
The Trust’s futures contracts are settled by offset and are cleared by the exchange clearinghouse function. Open futures positions are marked-to-market each trading day and the Trust’s trading accounts are debited or credited accordingly. Options on futures contracts are settled either by offset or by exercise. If an option on a future is exercised, the Trust is assigned a position in the underlying future which is then settled by offset. The Trust’s spot and forward currency transactions conducted in the interbank market are settled by netting offsetting positions or payment obligations and by cash payments.
The value of the Trust’s cash and financial instruments is not materially affected by inflation. Changes in interest rates, which are often associated with inflation, could cause the value of certain of the Trust’s debt securities to decline, but only to a limited extent. More important, changes in interest rates could cause periods of strong up or down market price trends, during which the Trust’s profit potential generally increases. However, inflation can also give rise to markets which have numerous short price trends followed by rapid reversals, markets in which the Trust is likely to suffer losses.
The Trust’s assets are generally held as cash or cash equivalents, including short-term U.S. government obligations, which are used to margin the Trust’s futures, forward and spot currency positions and withdrawn, as necessary, to pay redemptions and expenses. Other than potential market-imposed limitations on liquidity, due, for example, to limited open interest in certain futures markets or to daily price fluctuation limits, which are inherent in the Trust’s futures, forward and spot trading, the Trust’s assets are highly liquid and are expected to remain so. During its operations through December 31, 2020, the Trust experienced no meaningful periods of illiquidity in any of the numerous markets traded by the Managing Owner.
Results of Operations
The Trust’s success depends on the Managing Owner’s ability to recognize and capitalize on trends and other profit opportunities in different sectors of the global capital and commodity markets. The Managing Owner’s investment and trading methods are confidential, so that substantially the only information that can be furnished regarding the Trust’s results of operations is its performance record. Unlike most operating businesses, general economic or seasonal conditions have no direct effect on the profit potential of the Trust, while, at the same time, its past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. Because of the speculative nature of its trading, operational or economic trends have little relevance to the Trust’s results. The Managing Owner believes, however, that there are certain market conditions - for example, markets with strong price trends - in which the Trust has a better opportunity of being profitable than in others.
The performance summary set forth below is an outline description of how the Trust performed in the past trading in a wide variety of markets. The Trust’s futures and currency forward contract prices are marked-to-market every trading day, and the Trust’s trading accounts are credited or debited with its daily gains or losses. Accordingly, there is no material economic distinction between realized gains or losses on closed positions and unrealized gains or losses on open positions.
Series 1 Units, which were initially issued simply as “Units” beginning in July 2002, were the only Series of Units available prior to 2009. Series 3 Units were first issued on September 1, 2009, Series 4 Units were first issued on November 1, 2010, and Series 5 Units were first issued on April 1, 2018. The Trust’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of how it will perform in the future.
During 2020, the Trust achieved net realized and unrealized losses of $14,955,587 from its trading operations (including foreign exchange transactions and translations). Brokerage fees of $5,839,901, management fees of $594,605, administrative expenses of $904,901 and custody fees and other expenses of $26,622 were paid or accrued. Interest income of $1,327,184 and Managing Owner commission rebate to Unitholders of $567,734 partially offset the Trust’s expenses resulting in a net loss after profit share to the Managing Owner of $20,426,698.
An analysis of the trading gain (loss) by sector is as follows:
The Trust was unprofitable in 2020 as losses from trading equity, interest rate and soft commodity futures outdistanced profits from trading currency forwards and energy, grain, metal and livestock futures.
Economic activity and financial and commodity markets, which had been underpinned early in the year by the U.S.-China trade deal, accommodative global monetary policy and the election in Great Britain, collapsed as COVID-19 became a global pandemic. Market participants came to the realization that the measures to contain the disease would not last weeks or months, but would last for at least several quarters. As the scope and duration of the damage to global demand became evident, the selling of financial and commodity investments cascaded towards the end of the first quarter.
In response, strong, coordinated and unprecedented monetary and fiscal measures were implemented by countries across the globe. For example, in the U.S., the Federal Reserve (the “Fed”), during two emergency meetings in March, cut interest rates by 1.5% to nearly zero. At its September meeting, the Fed shifted to an average inflation targeting regime that set a higher bar for rates to be raised. The Fed also expanded its Quantitative Easing (“QE”), swap lines and other lending facilities beyond that seen during the Global Financial Crisis of 2008. A U.S. fiscal stimulus package measured at about 10% of gross domestic product (“GDP”) was approved on March 25 and added to two smaller packages announced early in March. In December, Congress approved further fiscal stimulus worth $900 million or 4% of GDP. A steady stream of similar policy actions were announced by monetary and fiscal authorities worldwide beginning in March and throughout the final three quarters of 2020. In 2020, there were 207 central bank interest rate cuts according to CBRates.com. According to Morgan Stanley, G4 Central bank balance sheets expanded by $13 trillion (29% of GDP) to $29 trillion and G4+BRIC government deficits expanded to 13.3% of GDP from 5.2% in 2019.
During the last three quarters of 2020, market sentiment improved significantly, coinciding with improvements in economic activity as economies cautiously reopened, and sporadic but increasingly encouraging news concerning the rapid development of COVID-19 therapies and vaccines, which culminated with initial vaccinations in the U.S. and Europe in December. However, this overall attitude improvement was muted periodically by: outbreaks of new COVID-19 variants, hotspots and lockdowns (such as the U.K. in December), the continuing statistical reports on unemployment and travel and tourism, persistent tensions between the U.S. and other western countries with China, uncertainty around the U.S. presidential and congressional elections, and Brexit talks, as markets saw episodic decelerations in economic momentum and turbulence.
During the first quarter, broad-based losses were sustained on long positions in U.S., Canadian, European, British, Japanese, non-Japanese Asian and emerging markets equity index futures and on a short VIX trade. While equity futures gains were widespread over the final three quarters of the year, those gains fell short of the first quarter losses. Overall, trading of European, British, non-tech U.S., Japanese, Australian, Korean, Singaporean, Thai, Indian and VIX index futures were unprofitable. On the other hand, long Chinese, Taiwanese and NASDAQ index futures positions were profitable.
Entering 2020, interest rates had been firming on the basis of a modest improvement in the economic outlook. For example, the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield was near 1.90%. Then, as the pandemic struck, volatility soared and returns on government debt plunged erratically as market participants were buffeted by a variety of cross currents including: the pandemic’s actual and anticipated negative impact on global growth and inflation; increased demand for government debt; a rush for liquidity and U.S. dollars that at times led to a forced liquidation of government debt; central bank official rate cuts during March; and creation of numerous liquidity provision and QE programs designed to stabilize struggling financial markets globally. The U.S. 10-year yield fell to 0.54% on March 9, jumped to 1.19% nine days later, and closed at the end of March at 0.70%. Losses were sustained trading global note and bond interest rate futures. During the second quarter and the beginning of the third quarter, long interest rate futures positions were profitable as accommodative monetary policy, safe haven buying, declining inflation and shrinking economies kept downward pressure on interest rates. Then, after briefly dipping to a 2020 low just under 0.50% in early August, the U.S. 10-year yield moved higher in a saw-toothed manner through year-end, producing losses from trading interest rate futures. Concern about the ability of governments to trust fiscal deficits and debt, worries about the potential for future increases in inflation (underscored by the announcement of the Fed’s new average inflation targeting policy), and hope for a strong global economic rebound as vaccinations become widespread raised concerns about increasing inflation, rising long-term interest rates, and steepening yield curves. The U.S. 10-year yield closed 2020 at 0.93%. Overall for the year, trading of U.S., German, British, French, Australian and Canadian note and bond futures was unprofitable. On the other hand, long positions in short-term Eurodollar, U.K. sterling, Italian and Australian interest rate futures and in Italian bond futures produced profits partially offsetting losses, especially from early in 2020.
The U.S. dollar vacillated narrowly before spiking higher by 8-9% in mid-March corresponding to a pandemic-driven safe haven demand. Thereafter, from late March through year-end, the U.S. dollar fell about 13-15% in volatile trading, as market participants saw the pillars of dollar strength eroded. The interest rate differential that had previously favored the U.S. dollar collapsed and the Fed cut policy rates to nearly zero. Numerous other Fed programs, including expanded swap lines, reduced fears of a U.S. dollar shortage. The discussion and passage of a joint European fiscal program led to euro strength versus the U.S. dollar. Growth in China and throughout Asia led to gains for the renminbi and Asian currencies more generally. Uncertainty around the U.S. Presidential and Congressional elections also affected enthusiasm for the U.S. dollar. The Brexit agreement was a fillip for the pound. The November vaccine approvals and December start of vaccine distribution failed to stem the U.S. dollar decline. For the year, short U.S. dollar trades versus the euro, Singapore dollar, South African rand and a few other currencies were profitable. Long U.S. dollar positions against the Brazilian real and Turkish lira were profitable: both countries faced currency crises during the first half of 2020. Both long and short U.S. dollar positions relative to the Swiss franc, Russian ruble and British pound sterling were periodically profitable. A long euro/short Norway trade was profitable during the March collapse of oil. On the other hand, long U.S. dollar trades against the Japanese yen, Australian dollar, Canadian dollar, Norwegian kroner and Mexican peso registered partially offsetting losses, as did trading the U.S. dollar against the currencies of Poland, Sweden and Colombia.
Oil prices fell to their lowest levels in more than 20 years as demand collapsed as the pandemic spiked and supply surged in the face of the unrelenting price war between Saudi Arabia and Russia. The price of WTI crude oil, which had eased down from $61/barrel at the end of 2019 to about $54/barrel on February 20, plunged precipitously thereafter, dropping below $12/barrel near the end of April-after briefly falling below zero in mid-April. Consequently, short positions in Brent crude, WTI crude, RBOB gasoline, London gas oil, heating oil and natural gas were highly profitable, particularly in March. During the final three quarters of the year, trading of energy futures produced partially offsetting losses. Supply reductions from Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC+”) via agreement and from non-OPEC+ producers put a floor under the market and helped the price rise sharply to nearly $40/barrel in early June. From June through October, crude oil prices vacillated in the $36-43/barrel range as production control efforts and signs of economic reopening undergirded prices while the demand destruction partially caused by the COVID-19 pandemic restrained any upward impulse. However, during November and December, the development, approval and start of COVID-19 vaccinations globally, the passage of a relief package in the U.S., a final Brexit Trade agreement and U.S. election results drove prices toward $50/barrel, even as OPEC+ slightly loosened its production constraints. On balance, trading of Brent crude oil, WTI crude oil, RBOB gasoline, and London gas oil was profitable. Short natural gas positions were profitable early in 2020 as the pandemic reduced demand and again later in the year as warmer than normal weather impacted prices. Meanwhile, trading of heating oil posted partially offsetting losses.
Grain trading was fractionally profitable despite volatile prices influenced by the pandemic, the weakening U.S. dollar, inventory questions and drought worries late in year. Early in the year, a short soybean position was profitable as prices fell in response to sizable inventories and a pandemic-related China trade slowdown. During the fourth quarter, long soybean, soybean meal and soybean oil trades were profitable when revived Chinese demand, the falling U.S. dollar and weather concerns impacted grain prices. Meanwhile, short wheat trades produced partially offsetting losses, particularly late in the year when prices jumped higher on drought worries for Brazil, Argentina, the Black Sea region and parts of the U.S.
Trading of metal futures was fractionally profitable. A long gold trade was profitable during the January-April period due to safe haven demand and again at year end in response to a weakening U.S. dollar. Long London zinc and copper trades during the fourth quarter were also somewhat profitable. On the other hand, trading of silver and a short New York copper position during the April-August time frame produced partially offsetting losses.
Finally, the small profit from trading live cattle largely offset the small losses sustained from a short sugar position and trading coffee.
During 2019, the Trust achieved net realized and unrealized gains of $12,434,370 from its trading operations (including foreign exchange transactions and translations). Brokerage and custodial fees of $8,081,248, management fees of $637,980, administrative expenses of $1,178,834 and custody fees of $30,206 were paid or accrued. The Trust allocated $348,815 in profit share to the New Profits Memo Account for the benefit of the Managing Owner. Interest income of $3,656,672 and Managing Owner commission rebate to Unitholders of $560,036 partially offset the Trust expenses resulting in net income after profit share to the Managing Owner of $6,373,995.
An analysis of the trading gain (loss) by sector is as follows:
The Trust was profitable during 2019 as gains from trading equity futures, interest rate futures and, to a lesser extent, grain futures far outdistanced losses from trading energy futures and foreign exchange forwards. Trading of metal and soft commodity futures was also slightly unprofitable.
Financial and commodity market participants rode a risk roller coaster during the year. Risk appetites receded in the face of an escalation of the U.S.-China trade war, evidence of slowing global growth and trade, rising Brexit uncertainty, mounting political confrontation in the U.S., and increasing geopolitical tension-e.g. in Hong Kong, Japan, Korea, India, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Russia, and across South America and Continental Europe. On the other hand, whenever these factors calmed or whenever global central banks, led by the Federal Reserve and European Central Bank (“ECB”), would ease their policy stances, risk appetites would expand.
During the first eight months of 2019 indications of slowing growth globally, slackening inflation pressures in Europe, China and the U.S. and persistent uncertainties around Brexit and U.S.-China trade negotiations led to a dovish policy pivot by global central banks-especially the Federal Reserve and ECB. Indeed, in 2019 there were 130 official rate cuts versus just 21 rate increases. The Trust saw an increased demand for government notes and bonds, declining yields, and profits from long interest rate futures positions, even though during August some model-driven countertrend trades generated sizable losses. The U.S. 10-year government bond yield fell from 2.69% on 12/31/2018 to 1.47% on 9/3/2019. Subsequently, however, as the trade war between the U.S. and China calmed and a phase one deal was reached; as Boris Johnson led a Conservative landslide victory in the U.K. and the fear of a “no deal” Brexit receded; and as the world growth outlook steadied, global interest rates recovered in a saw-toothed manner from the lows reached late in the summer, closing the year at 1.92%. Ultimately, short interest rate futures positions were profitable. Overall, trading of German, French, Italian, British, and, to a lesser extent, Japanese and Australian interest rate futures were profitable.
Trading of equity futures was profitable in 2019 even though equity markets were buffeted by opposing forces during the year. On the one hand, there was the persistent positive influence from more accommodative global monetary policy and, late in the year, from supportive fiscal policy initiatives, particularly out of Asia. On the other hand, there were negative influences periodically from global growth worries, trade tensions, Brexit uncertainty and geopolitical unrest, although these negative influences did abate in the fourth quarter. Overall, long positions in U.S., U.K., European, Japanese, Australian, Taiwanese, Singaporean and Korean stock index futures were profitable, particularly later in the year. A short vix trade was also quite profitable. Meanwhile, long positions in Hong Kong and Chinese futures and trading of the U.S. Russell and mid-cap indices posted losses.
Ample supplies, trade disputes, and African swine fever reduced the demand for feed grains and weighed on grain prices for much of 2019. Short corn and soybean positions were profitable, especially in July and August. Corn and soybean prices were lifted for a time in May and June and long soybean and corn positions were profitable in those months. Meanwhile, a short wheat trade and a long soybean meal position each registered small losses.
The U.S. dollar traded fitfully in a 3 ½% range during 2019, and performance was mixed but overall unprofitable. At times, the dollar was supported by solid U.S. growth, safe haven demand, high relative interest rates, and global political uncertainties. At other times, however, worries that growth was slowing, declines in U.S. market interest rates, Federal Reserve cuts to official interest rates, and a favorable resolution of the aforementioned political difficulties would weigh on the U.S. currency. The stabilization of the global economic outlook during the last four months of 2019 coincided with a reduced demand for the U.S. dollar which fell from its 2019 high reached in September. On balance, trading the dollar versus the currencies of Australia, Great Britain, Brazil, Canada, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Norway, South Africa and the euro were unprofitable. Conversely, dollar trading against the Chilean, Indian, Swiss, Swedish, Turkish and Singaporean currencies was profitable.
Energy prices, as represented by WTI crude oil, were quite volatile throughout 2019. WTI crude, which had closed 2018 near $45/barrel, rebounded over the first four months of 2019 to about $66/barrel on April 23. Prices were underpinned by news that the U.S. would end waivers on Iranian crude oil exports, by the continued OPEC+ effort to curtail production, and by the impact of the Libyan crisis on oil production. However, as the economic outlook deteriorated and as U.S. shale production pushed U.S. crude inventories to 2 year highs, the WTI price fell over 20% to a 5-month low near $51/barrel in mid-June. Thereafter, WTI experienced numerous sharp swings in a $51-61/barrel range. Heightened U.S.-Iran tensions pushed prices sharply higher at the start of the summer; then in August, prices depressed among increased U.S.-China trade tensions and global growth worries; they soared again in mid-September after the apparently devastating attack on Saudi production and export facilities; and collapsed later that month when after-attack reports showed the actual damage to be easily managed. Finally during the fourth quarter, crude prices rose once more among improved U.S.-China prospects. Consequently, trading of WTI crude, Brent crude, London gas oil, and heating oil were unprofitable. On the other hand, a short natural gas position was slightly profitable-largely in Nov-as ample supplies, evidenced by an 8-year high in European inventories, depressed prices even as we entered the winter heating season.
Trading of metal futures was slightly unprofitable as small losses from trading copper, gold and nickel outweighed small gains from trading aluminum, zinc, platinum and silver. Trading of soft commodity futures was also marginally unprofitable with small losses from trading coffee, sugar and cotton.
During 2018, the Trust achieved net realized and unrealized gains of $3,620,317 from its trading operations (including foreign exchange transactions and translations). Brokerage and custodial fees of $9,946,220, management fees of $560,465, administrative expenses of $1,041,158 and custody fees of $34,453 were paid or accrued. The Trust allocated $68,133 in profit share to the New Profits Memo Account for the benefit of the Managing Owner. Interest income of $3,066,530 and Managing Owner commission rebate to Unitholders of $627,923 partially offset the Trust expenses resulting in a net loss after profit share to the Managing Owner of $4,335,659.
An analysis of the trading gain (loss) by sector is as follows:
Although experiencing a net loss in 2018 after taking into account Trust expenses and after profit share to the Managing owner, the Trust realized modest gains from its trading operations in 2018 as first quarter losses, driven largely by the January - February global equity selloff, were outweighed by gains realized during the last ten months of the year. Sizable profits from trading energy futures and, to a lesser extent, from trading interest rate, soft and agricultural commodity futures and currency forwards outdistanced losses from trading stock index and metal futures.
The year opened optimistically with signs of expanding, synchronized global growth, but closed pessimistically amid mounting concerns about a synchronized growth deceleration. Indicative of this change were readings from the composite index of global manufacturing activity produced by JPMorgan Chase & Co. and IHS Markit that stood at a 27-month low of 51.5 in December after reaching a six year high of 54.5 in January 2018. The dramatic change in outlook reflected several shifts that emerged during the year including: a move from quantitative easing toward quantitative tightening by global monetary authorities; the rising tide of trade protectionism, especially between the U.S. and China; mounting political turmoil in Europe including Brexit, the European Union-Italy deficit squabble, France’s “yellow vests” demonstrations, Germany’s leadership changes, and the simmering Spain-Catalonia independence struggle; and increasing tensions between the Trump administration and the U.S. Congress following the November elections in the U.S. Unsettled conditions in world energy markets also contributed to the deterioration of the growth outlook. These factors, combined with reduced global liquidity, increased high frequency algorithmic trading and the declining role of traditional market makers, led to increasing volatility during the year across most, if not all, financial and commodity markets.
Energy trading was highly profitable during the year even as energy prices swung wildly. For example, Brent crude prices started the year at about $66/barrel, climbed to nearly $80/barrel in late May, fell to $71/barrel in mid-August, rose again to more than $86/barrel on October 3rd and then plunged under $50/barrel in December. Conflicting forces were at work throughout the year. The production control agreement signed by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (“OPEC”), the U.S. decision to pull out of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action agreement with Iran, the implosion of the Venezuelan economy, Libyan oil production difficulties, and the January - September decline in U.S. inventories negatively impacted energy supplies and underpinned prices. Alternatively, rising shale production that pushed U.S. output to a record 11.7 million barrels per day (mb/d) by late in the year; the June relaxation of OPEC’s production restraint agreement that allowed Saudi Arabia and Russia to push their outputs to record levels of 11.2 and 11.4 mb/d, respectively; and the surprising U.S. announcement in November of 6-month waivers of sanctions for purchasers of Iranian crude flooded the market with supply, at first constraining price increases but ultimately leading to the fourth quarter price collapse. Evidence of slowing global growth also depressed prices. Not even the announcement in December that OPEC would re-impose production cuts in January arrested the declines. Generally speaking, long positions in Brent crude, WTI crude, RBOB gasoline and London gas oil during the first three quarters of 2018 and short positions in these markets in November and December were highly profitable. A long U.S. natural gas position was also very profitable in November as seasonal demand pushed prices higher. Trading of heating oil was slightly unprofitable due to a long position in October and November.
Interest rate futures were buffeted by clashing forces during the year. On the one hand, indications that global central banks, especially the U.S. Federal Reserve (the “Fed”), European Central Bank (the “ECB”), Bank of England and Bank of Japan, were pulling back on monetary accommodation led to firming interest rates and falling prices of interest rate futures. On the other hand, higher U.S. interest rates, a rising U.S. dollar, global trade frictions, and political uncertainties sparked tumult in emerging markets, including Turkey, Brazil Argentina, Mexico and Indonesia, triggering growth concerns, capital flight and safe haven demand for government securities. Similarly, worries that political turmoil in Europe could impede European growth triggered periodic safe haven demand that drove interest rates off their highs. Strong demand from central banks, pension funds and insurance-related buyers for high quality government debt, particularly when yields reached attractive levels, added to the price rallies. Finally, increased equity and credit market volatility globally, and subdued actual inflation statistics also underpinned demand for government securities. Overall, long positions in German, French, Japanese, Australian and Canadian note and bond futures were profitable. Trading the U.S. ultra-bond was fractionally positive too. On the other hand, trading of U.S. 2-, 5- and 10-year notes and short-term Eurodollar futures produced partially offsetting losses. A long Italian bond trade was unprofitable in May when yields rose sharply in the wake of post-election turmoil. Long positions in British interest rate futures were unprofitable, particularly early in the year when rates increased due to rising global growth.
Short soybean, wheat and corn trades were profitable, especially in June as Chinese tariffs and ample supplies weighed on prices. Short coffee and sugar positions were each slightly profitable during the January - August time frame, while trading of cocoa produced a partially offsetting loss.
While the U.S. dollar did advance during 2018, the gain did not occur in a straight line, but rather, was interspersed with periods of volatile sideways market action. The U.S. dollar, which had been on an upswing entering 2018-as measured by the Bloomberg dollar index (BBDXY) -fell about 4% from January 1 through mid-April, then strengthened in a halting manner by about 8% during the final eight months of the year. In general, the more hawkish stance by the Fed relative to other major central banks and solid U.S. growth and corporate profits underpinned the U.S. dollar. Idiosyncratic trade, current account deficit, fiscal deficit, foreign debt and political problems in a number of emerging economies, including Turkey, Brazil, India and Argentina among others, further buoyed the U.S. dollar. Increased demand in the wake of periodic European political uncertainties also supported the U.S. currency. Long U.S. dollar trades versus the Brazilian real, British pound, euro, Norwegian krone, Swedish krona, Korean won, and Israeli shekel were profitable. A long U.S. dollar/short Turkish lira position was profitable through August, and a short U.S. dollar/long Turkish lira trade was profitable after Turkish interest rates were boosted to support the currency. On the other hand, there were a number of idiosyncratic currency movements that produced losses. Long U.S. dollar trades versus the Japanese yen and Swiss franc-perhaps safer safe havens than the U.S. dollar-were unprofitable. The New Zealand and Australian dollars, which had been shorted significantly as trade tensions between the U.S. and China escalated, rebounded sharply on short covering prior to the November G-20 conference in hopes that the Trump-Xi talks would lead to reduced tensions going forward. Somewhat better than expected economic data from both countries and less dovish local central bank statements supported the short covering during the fourth quarter. As a result, long U.S. dollar positions against both these currencies were unprofitable. Trading the U.S. dollar against the Mexican peso was unprofitable, particularly around the Mexican election in July, and after the United States-Mexico-Canada Agreement or “USMCA” was agreed in October. Trading of the South African rand versus the U.S. dollar and of the euro against other European currencies was also unprofitable.
Equity markets were increasingly volatile in 2018 due to decreased global liquidity, increased algorithmic trading, increasing trade protectionism and signs of slowing global growth, particularly late in the year. Rising U.S. interest rates and a strong U.S. dollar dented enthusiasm for emerging market equities. Mounting political turmoil dampened investor interest in European equities. Escalating trade tension between the U.S. and China, and Chinese government efforts to rein in excessive debt and to control environmental damage combined to slow China’s growth and led to sharp selloffs in Chinese and other Asian equities. U.S. equities wilted, especially late in the year, under the weight of worsening trade tensions and persistent Fed tightening. In this environment, long positions in U.S., Canadian, British, German, Swedish, Japanese, and Australian stock futures were unprofitable, particularly during the sharp January - February and fourth quarter declines. Trading of the VIX future and Spanish, Korean and Indian equity futures were also unprofitable. Meanwhile, short positions Dutch, French, Italian, Chinese, Hong Kong, Taiwanese, South African and MSCI EAFE stock index futures posted partially offsetting gains, especially during the year-end selloff. At times, long positions in Dutch, French and Taiwanese equity futures also posted gains.
During 2018, metals prices were impacted by a variety of factors including tariffs and other trade disruptions, U.S. sanctions on Russia, political turmoil in producing regions, a shifting mix of the number of cars powered by gas, diesel and electric motors, a generally rising dollar and the shift from global growth to global slowdown. Trading of industrial metals, especially copper and aluminum, was unprofitable. In addition, late in the year, short gold and silver positions were unprofitable and were reduced as a slightly weaker dollar and global economic and political uncertainties boosted the prices of precious metals.
Critical Accounting Estimates
The Trust records its transactions in futures, forward and spot contracts, including related income and expenses, on a trade date basis. Open futures contracts traded on an exchange are valued at fair value, which is based on the closing settlement price on the exchange where the futures contract is traded by the Trust on the day with respect to which net assets are being determined. Open spot contracts are recorded at fair value based on current market prices (“spot prices”). Open forward currency contracts are recorded at fair value, based on pricing models that consider the current market prices plus the time value of money (“forward points”) and contractual prices of the underlying financial instruments. The spot prices and forward points for open forward currency contracts are generally based on the 3:00 P.M. New York time prices provided by widely used quotation service providers on the day with respect to which net assets are being determined. The forward points from the quotation service providers are generally in periods of one month, two months, three months and six months forward while the contractual forward delivery dates for the foreign currency contracts traded by the Trust may be in between these periods.
The Managing Owner’s policy is to calculate the forward points for each contract being valued by determining the number of days from the date the forward currency contract is being valued to its maturity date and then using straight-line interpolation to calculate the valuation of forward points for the applicable forward currency contract. The Managing Owner will also compare the calculated price to the forward currency prices provided by dealers to determine whether the calculated price is fair and reasonable.
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (“U.S. GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions, such as accrual of expenses, that affect the amounts and disclosures reported in the financial statements. Based on the nature of the business and operations of the Trust, the Managing Owner believes that the estimates utilized in preparing the Trust’s financial statements are appropriate and reasonable, however actual results could differ from these estimates. The estimates used do not provide a range of possible results that would require the exercise of subjective judgment. The Managing Owner further believes that, based on the nature of the business and operations of the Trust, no other reasonable assumptions relating to the application of the Trust’s critical accounting estimates other than those currently used would likely result in materially different amounts from those reported.
Item 7A.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Introduction
Past Results Are Not Necessarily Indicative of Future Performance
The Trust is a speculative commodity pool. Unlike an operating company, the risk of market sensitive instruments is integral, not incidental, to the Trust’s main line of business.
Market movements result in frequent changes in the fair market value of the Trust’s open positions and, consequently, in its earnings and cash flow. The Trust’s market risk is influenced by a wide variety of factors, including the level and volatility of interest rates, exchange rates, equity price levels, the market value of financial instruments and contracts, the diversification effects among the Trust’s open positions and the liquidity of the markets in which it trades.
The Trust can rapidly acquire and/or liquidate both long and short positions in a wide range of different markets. Consequently, it is not possible to predict how a particular future market scenario will affect performance, and the Trust’s past performance is not necessarily indicative of its future results.
Value at Risk is a measure of the maximum amount which the Trust could reasonably be expected to lose in a given market sector. However, the inherent uncertainty of the Trust’s speculative trading and the recurrence in the markets traded by the Trust of market movements far exceeding expectations could result in actual trading or non-trading losses far beyond the indicated Value at Risk or the Trust’s experience to date (i.e., “risk of ruin”). In light of the foregoing as well as the risks and uncertainties intrinsic to all future projections, the inclusion of the quantification included in this section should not be considered to constitute any assurance or representation that the Trust’s losses in any market sector will be limited to Value at Risk or by the Trust’s attempts to manage its market risk.
Materiality, as used in this section “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk,” is based on an assessment of reasonably possible market movements and the potential losses caused by such movements, taking into account the leverage, optionality and multiplier features of the Trust’s market sensitive instruments.
Quantifying the Trust’s Trading Value at Risk
Quantitative Forward-Looking Statements
The following quantitative disclosures regarding the Trust’s market risk exposures contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the safe harbor from civil liability provided for such statements by the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (set forth in Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)). All quantitative disclosures in this section are deemed to be forward-looking statements for purposes of the safe harbor, except for statements of historical fact.
The Trust’s risk exposure in the various market sectors traded by the Managing Owner is quantified below in terms of Value at Risk. Due to the Trust’s mark-to-market accounting, any loss in the fair value of the Trust’s open positions is directly reflected in the Trust’s earnings (realized or unrealized) and cash flow (at least in the case of exchange-traded contracts in which profits and losses on open positions are settled daily through variation margin).
Exchange maintenance margin requirements have been used by the Trust as the measure of its Value at Risk. Maintenance margin requirements are set by exchanges to equal or exceed 95-99% of the maximum one day losses in the fair value of any given contract incurred during the time period over which historical price fluctuations are researched for purposes of establishing margin levels. The maintenance margin levels are established by dealers and exchanges using historical price studies as well as an assessment of current market volatility (including the implied volatility of the options on a given futures contract) and economic fundamentals to provide a probabilistic estimate of the maximum expected near-term one day price fluctuation.
The Trust calculates Value at Risk for forward currency contracts that are not exchange traded using exchange maintenance margin requirements for equivalent or similar futures positions as the measure of Value at Risk.
In quantifying the Trust’s Value at Risk, 100% positive correlation in the different positions held in each market risk category has been assumed. Consequently, the margin requirements applicable to the open contracts have simply been aggregated to determine each trading category’s aggregate Value at Risk. The diversification effects resulting from the fact that the Trust’s positions are rarely, if ever, 100% positively correlated have not been reflected.
The Trust’s Trading Value at Risk in Different Market Sectors
The following tables indicate the average, highest and lowest amounts of trading Value at Risk associated with the Trust’s open positions by market category for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019. During fiscal years 2020 and 2019, the Trust’s average total capitalization was approximately $128 million and $165 million, respectively.
Average, highest and lowest Value at Risk amounts relate to the quarter-end amounts during the fiscal year. Average Capitalization is the average of the Trust’s approximate capitalization at the end of each month during the fiscal years 2020 and 2019. Dollar amounts represent millions of dollars.
Material Limitations on Value at Risk as an Assessment of Market Risk
The face value of the market sector instruments held by the Trust is typically many times the applicable maintenance margin requirement (maintenance margin requirements generally range between approximately 1% and 10% of contract face value) as well as many times the capitalization of the Trust. The magnitude of the Trust’s open positions creates a “risk of ruin” not typically found in most other investment vehicles. Because of the size of its positions, certain market conditions - unusual, but historically recurring from time to time - could cause the Trust to incur severe losses over a short period of time. The foregoing Value at Risk table - as well as the past performance of the Trust - give no indication of this “risk of ruin.”
Non-Trading Risk
The Trust has non-trading market risk on its foreign cash balances not needed for margin. However, these balances (as well as any market risk they represent) are immaterial.
The Trust also has non-trading cash flow risk as a result of holding a substantial portion (approximately 90%) of its assets in U.S. Treasury notes and other short-term debt instruments (as well as any market risk they represent) for margin and cash management purposes. Although the Managing Owner does not anticipate that, even in the case of major interest rate movements, the Trust would sustain a material mark-to-market loss on its securities positions, if short-term interest rates decline so will the Trust’s cash management income. The Trust also maintains a portion (approximately between 5% and 10%) of its assets in cash and in a U.S. government securities and related instruments money market fund. These cash balances are also subject (as well as any market risk they represent) to cash flow risk, which is not material.
Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Primary Trading Risk Exposures
The following qualitative disclosures regarding the Trust’s market risk exposures - except for (i) those disclosures that are statements of historical fact and (ii) the descriptions of how the Managing Owner manages the Trust’s primary market risk exposures - constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act and Section 21E of the Exchange Act. The Trust’s primary market risk exposures as well as the strategies used and to be used by the Managing Owner for managing such exposures are subject to numerous uncertainties, contingencies and risks, any one of which could cause the actual results of the Trust’s risk controls to differ materially from the objectives of such strategies. Government interventions, defaults and expropriations, illiquid markets, the emergence of dominant fundamental factors, political upheavals, changes in historical price relationships, an influx of new market participants, increased regulation and many other factors could result in material losses as well as in material changes to the risk exposures and the risk management strategies of the Trust. There can be no assurance that the Trust’s current market exposure and/or risk management strategies will not change materially or that any such strategies will be effective in either the short- or long-term. Investors must be prepared to lose all or substantially all of their investment in the Trust.
The following were the primary trading risk exposures of the Trust as of December 31, 2020, by market sector.
Interest Rates. Interest rate movements directly affect the price of the sovereign bond futures positions held by the Trust and indirectly the value of its stock index and currency positions. Interest rate movements in one country as well as relative interest rate movements between countries may materially impact the Trust’s profitability. The Trust’s primary interest rate exposure is to interest rate fluctuations in countries or regions including Australia, Canada, Japan, Switzerland, the U.K., the U.S. and the Eurozone. However, the Trust also may take positions in futures contracts on the government debt of other nations. The Managing Owner anticipates that interest rates in these industrialized countries or areas, both long-term and short-term, will remain the primary interest rate market exposure of the Trust for the foreseeable future.
Currencies. Exchange rate risk is a principal market exposure of the Trust. The Trust’s currency exposure is to exchange rate fluctuations, primarily fluctuations which disrupt the historical pricing relationships between different currencies and currency pairs. The fluctuations are influenced by interest rate changes as well as political and general economic conditions. The Trust trades in a large number of currencies, including cross-rates- e.g., positions between two currencies other than the U.S. dollar.
Stock Indices. The Trust’s equity exposure, through stock index futures, is to equity price risk in the major industrialized countries as well as other countries.
Metals. The Trust’s metals market exposure is to fluctuations in the price of aluminum, copper, gold, lead, nickel, palladium, platinum, silver, tin and zinc.
Agricultural. The Trust’s primary commodities exposure is to agricultural price movements, which are often directly affected by severe or unexpected weather conditions as well as supply and demand factors.
Energy. The Trust’s primary energy market exposure is to gas and oil price movements, often resulting from political developments in the Middle East and economic conditions worldwide. Energy prices are volatile and substantial profits and losses have been and are expected to continue to be experienced in this market.
Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Non-Trading Risk Exposure
The following were the only non-trading risk exposures of the Trust as of December 31, 2020.
Foreign Currency Balances. The Trust’s primary foreign currency balances are in Australian Dollars, British Pounds, Canadian Dollars, Euros, Japanese Yen, Korean Won, Malaysian Ringgit, Swiss Francs and Thai Bhat. To the extent possible, the Trust controls the non-trading risk of these balances by regularly converting these balances back into U.S. dollars (no less frequently than twice a month).
Securities Positions. The Trust’s only market exposure in instruments held other than for trading is in its securities portfolio. The Trust holds only cash or interest-bearing, credit risk-free, short-term paper - typically U.S. Treasury instruments with durations no longer than 1 year. Violent fluctuations in prevailing interest rates could cause immaterial mark-to-market losses on the Trust’s securities, although substantially all of these short-term instruments are held to maturity.
Qualitative Disclosures Regarding Means of Managing Risk Exposure
The Managing Owner attempts to control risk through the systematic application of its trading method, which includes a multi-system approach to price trend recognition, an analysis of market volatility, the application of certain money management principles, which may be revised from time to time, and adjusting leverage or portfolio size. In addition, the Managing Owner limits its trading to markets which it believes are sufficiently liquid in respect of the amount of trading it contemplates conducting.
The goal of the Managing Owner’s research has been to develop and select a mix of systems in each market and to allocate risk across a wide array of markets, so as to contain overall portfolio risk within a targeted range, while allowing exposure to profitable trend opportunities. Over more than 49 years, the Managing Owner has developed hundreds of trading systems. These trading systems generate buy or sell decisions in a particular market based on the direction of price movements in the market, some non-price information or a combination of both.
Of course, systems can be materially different - better in some periods and worse in others. The main distinguishing features are: the time frame over which systems work (intra-day to long-term); the granularity of data fed into them (tick data to daily, weekly or monthly frequencies); the amount of data used to learn the market structure; the statistical or technical methods used to make forecasts; the type of data (market or economic statistics); and the source of data (cash, futures, forward or option markets-generated data or government and industry-generated statistical information). No single approach will work all the time. Therefore, the Managing Owner’s objective is to have several approaches operating simultaneously.
When arriving at the portfolio allocation, the Managing Owner generally seeks maximum diversification subject to liquidity and sector concentration constraints and subject to the mandate of the strategy. Each market is traded using a diversified (but generally not optimized for each particular market) set of model inputs. The markets traded and allocations are reviewed at least monthly, although changes may occur more or less frequently. The following factors, among others, are considered in constructing a universe of markets to trade for the Trust: profitability, liquidity of markets, professional judgment, desired diversification, transaction costs, exchange regulations and depth of market. The current allocation to any market in the Trust’s portfolio does not exceed 3% of total market exposure, measured by risk allocation.
Risk is a function of both price level and price volatility. The Managing Owner sizes the position in each market taking into account its measurement of risk based on price level and volatility in that market. Market exposure is then managed by the position-sizing models which measure the risk in the portfolio’s position in each market. In the event the model determines that the risk has changed beyond an acceptable threshold, it will signal a change in the position - a decrease in position size when risk increases and an increase in position size when risk decreases. The Managing Owner’s position-sizing models maintain overall portfolio risk and distribution of risk across markets within designated ranges. The position-sizing model manages the position traded by each of the (directional) trading systems discussed above. A secondary benefit of the position-sizing model can be timely profit taking. Because markets tend to become more volatile after a profitable trend has been long underway, the position-sizing model often signals position reductions before trend reversals.
In addition, the Managing Owner’s risk management focuses on money management principles applicable to the portfolio as a whole rather than to individual markets. The first principle is portfolio diversification, which attempts to improve the quality of profits by reducing volatility.
Additional money management principles applicable to the portfolio as a whole include: (1) limiting the assets committed as margin or collateral, generally within a range of 5% to 35% of an account’s net assets, though the amount may at any time be substantially higher or lower and (2) prohibiting pyramiding - that is, using unrealized profits in a particular market as margin for additional positions solely in the same market.
Another important risk management function is the careful control of leverage or total portfolio exposure. Leverage levels are determined by simulating the entire portfolio - all markets, all systems, all risk control models, the exact weightings of the markets in the portfolio and the proposed level of leverage - over the past five or ten years to determine the portfolio’s simulated risk and return characteristics as well as the worst case experienced by the portfolio in the simulation period. The worst case, or peak-to-trough drawdown, is measured from a daily high in portfolio assets to the subsequent daily low whether that occurs days, weeks or months after the daily high. If the Managing Owner considers the drawdown too severe or the portfolio’s simulated volatility too high, it can reduce the leverage or total portfolio exposure. There are, however, no restrictions on the amount of leverage the Trust may use at any given time.
Item 8.
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Financial statements required by this item, including the report of Deloitte & Touche LLP for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018, are included as Exhibit 13.01 to this report.
The following summarized quarterly financial information presents the results of operations for the three month periods ended March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31, 2020 and 2019. This information has not been audited.
*Expenses are inclusive of accruals and reversals of accruals of profit share to the Managing Owner.
There were no extraordinary, unusual or infrequently occurring items recognized in any quarter within the two most recent fiscal years, and the Trust has not disposed of any segments of its business. There have been no year-end adjustments that are material to the results of any fiscal quarter reported above.
Item 9.
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
The Managing Owner, with the participation of the Managing Owner’s principal executive officers and principal financial officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of its disclosure controls and procedures with respect to the Trust as of the end of the fiscal year for which this Annual Report on Form 10-K is being filed, and, based on its evaluation, has concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective. There were no significant changes in the Managing Owner’s internal controls with respect to the Trust or in other factors applicable to the Trust that could significantly affect these controls subsequent to the date of their evaluation.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
The Managing Owner is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over the Trust’s financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act as a process designed by, or under the supervision of, a company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by a company’s board of directors, management and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The Managing Owner’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
●pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the Trust’s assets;
●provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of the Trust’s financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, and that the Trust’s receipts and expenditures are being made only in accordance with authorizations of the Managing Owner’s management and directors; and
●provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the Trust’s assets that could have a material effect on the Trust’s financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The Managing Owner assessed the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting with respect to the Trust as of December 31, 2020. In making this assessment, management used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013). Based on its assessment, management has concluded that, as of December 31, 2020, the Managing Owner’s internal control over financial reporting with respect to the Trust is effective based on those criteria.
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 requires the Managing Owner to evaluate annually the effectiveness of its internal controls over financial reporting as of the end of each fiscal year, and to include a management report assessing the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting in all annual reports. There were no changes in the Trust’s internal control over financial reporting during the quarter ended December 31, 2020 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
Item 9B.
Item 9B. Other Information
None.
PART III
Item 10.
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
(a, b) Identification of Directors and Executive Officers
The Trust has no directors or executive officers. The Trust is controlled and managed by the Managing Owner under a delegation of authority by Wilmington Trust Company (the “Trustee”).
Millburn Ridgefield Corporation, the Managing Owner, is a Delaware corporation operating in New York, New York, organized in May 1982 to manage discretionary accounts primarily in futures, forward and spot markets. It is the corporate successor to a futures trading and advisory organization which has been continuously managing assets in the currency and futures markets using quantitative, systematic techniques since 1971.
The principals and senior officers of the Managing Owner as of December 31, 2020 are as follows:
Harvey Beker, age 67. Mr. Beker is Chairman of the Managing Owner and serves as a member of the Managing Owner’s Investment Committee. He received a Bachelor of Arts degree in economics from New York University (“NYU”) in 1974 and a Master of Business Administration degree in finance from NYU in 1975. From June 1975 to July 1977, Mr. Beker was employed by the investment bank Loeb Rhoades, Inc. where he developed and traded silver arbitrage strategies. From July 1977 to June 1978, Mr. Beker was a futures trader at the commodities and securities brokerage firm of Clayton Brokerage Co. of St. Louis. Mr. Beker joined The Millburn Corporation in June 1978. He initially served as the Director of Operations for its affiliate, Millburn Partners, and most recently thereafter served as Co-Chief Executive Officer of the Managing Owner and Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of The Millburn Corporation until November 1, 2015. During his tenure at the Managing Owner (including its former affiliates, The Millburn Corporation, Millburn Partners and CommInVest Research Limited Partnership (“CommInVest”)), he has been instrumental in the development of the research, trading and operations areas. Mr. Beker became a principal of the firm in June 1982, and a partner in the predecessor to ShareInVest Research L.P. (“ShareInVest”) in April 1982. Mr. Beker became registered as an Associated Person and a Swap Associated Person of the Managing Owner effective November 25, 1986 and March 8, 2013, respectively. He was also listed as a Principal and registered as an Associated Person of ShareInVest effective February 20, 1986 until February 25, 2007. Since March 20, 2020 Mr. Beker has also served as Chairman of Millburn Asia, LLC and Millburn International, LLC (collectively, “Millburn International Group”) and prior to that date served as Co-Chairman of each such entity since its inception.
Gregg R. Buckbinder, age 62. Mr. Buckbinder is President and Chief Operating Officer of the Managing Owner. He joined the Managing Owner and The Millburn Corporation in January 1998 from Odyssey Partners, L.P., an investment management firm, where he was responsible for the operation, administration and accounting of the firm’s merchant banking and managed account businesses from July 1990 through December 1997. Mr. Buckbinder was employed by Tucker Anthony, a securities broker and dealer, from June 1985 to July 1990 where he was First Vice President and Controller, and from August 1983 to June 1984 where he designed and implemented various operations and accounting systems. He was with the public accounting firm of Ernst & Whinney from June 1984 to June 1985 as a manager in the tax department and from September 1980 to August 1983 as a senior auditor, with an emphasis on clients in the financial services business. Mr. Buckbinder graduated cum laude from Pace University (“Pace”) in 1980 with a B.B.A. in accounting and received an M.S. in taxation from Pace in 1988. He is a Certified Public Accountant and a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. Mr. Buckbinder served as Senior Vice-President of the Managing Owner and The Millburn Corporation until November 1, 2015, the Chief Financial Officer of the Managing Owner until February 1, 2020, and has since served as the President and Chief Operating Officer of both entities with his affiliation with The Millburn Corporation ceasing on December 31, 2018 upon The Millburn Corporation’s merger into the Managing Owner. Mr. Buckbinder has also served as Senior Vice President, Chief Operating Officer and a Director of each entity in Millburn International Group since inception. Mr. Buckbinder became listed as a Principal of the Managing Owner effective February 5, 1999. He became listed as a Principal of The Millburn Corporation effective March 23, 1998 until January 17, 2019 following The Millburn Corporation’s merger into the Managing Owner. Mr. Buckbinder became a partner in ShareInVest in January 2000. He was also listed as a Principal of ShareInVest effective February 28, 2001 until February 25, 2007.
Michael W. Carter, age 51. Mr. Carter is a Vice President, Director of Operations and Principal Accounting Officer of the Managing Owner. He is responsible for overseeing operations and accounting for the firm’s commodity pools. Mr. Carter has served as Principal Accounting Officer of the Managing Owner since May 2014, and prior to the merger of The Millburn Corporation into the Managing Owner on December 31, 2018, also served as Vice President and Director of Operations of The Millburn Corporation since January 2011, maintaining responsibility for the entity’s operations. Mr. Carter previously held the positions of Fund Controller (February 2001 until February 2011) and Senior Accountant (March 2000 until February 2001) with The Millburn Corporation. He graduated from Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey - Newark in May 1997 with a B.S. in Accounting. Prior to joining the Managing Owner and its affiliates in March 2000, he was employed with the accounting firm Rothstein Kass & Company, P.C., as a fund accountant from March 1997 until September 1997 and as a staff auditor from September 1997 until June 1999, and then an equity analyst covering restaurants with the brokerage firm of Sidoti & Company, LLC, which conducts independent small-cap equity research for institutional investors, from June 1999 until February 2000. He is a Certified Public Accountant. Mr. Carter became listed as Principal of the Managing Owner effective April 22, 2014. Mr. Carter’s affiliation with The Millburn Corporation ceased on December 31, 2018 upon its merger into the Managing Owner.
Steven M. Felsenthal, age 51. Mr. Felsenthal is General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer of the Managing Owner. Prior to joining the Managing Owner and its affiliates (including its former affiliate The Millburn Corporation) in January 2004, Mr. Felsenthal was a senior associate in the investment management group at the law firm of Schulte Roth & Zabel LLP (September 1999 to January 2004), where he represented and advised hedge funds, registered investment companies, investment advisers, broker-dealers and banks in connection with all facets of their asset management businesses, and a member of the tax department of the law firm of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel LLP (October 1996 to September 1999). He graduated cum laude from Yeshiva University in 1991 with a B.A. in political science, and order of the coif from Fordham University School of Law in 1996, where he also served as an editor of the Fordham Environmental Law Journal. Mr. Felsenthal received an LL.M degree in taxation from NYU School of Law in 2001 and has written and been quoted in numerous published articles, and frequently speaks at conferences, on various topics related to investment management. Mr. Felsenthal is a member of the New York State Bar (since August 1997), a member of NFA’s Compliance and Risk Committee (since May 2014), a member of MFA’s CTA, CPO and Futures Committee, serving as a Chair (since April 2018) and Vice Chair (February 2017 to April 2018), a former member of the Steering Committee of MFA’s Chief Compliance Officer Forum (June 2014 to December 2015), former Chairman of MFA’s CPO/CTA Advisory Committee (November 2006 to June 2010) and former Co-Chairman of the Steering Committee of MFA’s CPO/CTA Forum (June 2010 to January 2013), is currently a member of the Editorial Boards of the Journal of Securities Operations & Custody (formerly known as the Journal of Securities Law, Regulation and Compliance) (since February 2007) and the Journal of Financial Compliance (since August 2017) and a regular lecturer for the Regulatory Compliance Association’s Chief Compliance Officer University (since May 2009). Mr. Felsenthal also served as General Counsel, Chief Compliance Officer and Secretary of each entity in Millburn International Group since inception. Mr. Felsenthal became listed as a Principal of the Managing Owner effective June 24, 2004. Mr. Felsenthal also served as General Counsel and Chief Compliance Officer of ShareInVest. Mr. Felsenthal’s affiliation with The Millburn Corporation ceased on December 31, 2018 upon its merger into the Managing Owner.
Mark B. Fitzsimmons, age 73. Mr. Fitzsimmons is a Senior Vice President of the Managing Owner. His responsibilities mainly involve business development. He joined the Managing Owner and its affiliates (including its former affiliate The Millburn Corporation) in January 1990 from the brokerage firm of Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated, a global financial services firm, where he was a Principal and Manager of institutional foreign exchange sales and was involved in strategic trading for the firm from October 1987 until January 1990. From September 1977 to October 1987, he was with the financial institution Chemical Bank New York Corporation (“Chemical”), first as a Senior Economist in Chemical’s Foreign Exchange Advisory Service and later as a Vice President and Manager of Chemical’s Corporate Trading Group. While at Chemical he also traded both foreign exchange and fixed income products. From September 1973 to September 1977, Mr. Fitzsimmons was employed by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, dividing his time between the International Research Department and the Foreign Exchange Department. He graduated summa cum laude from the University of Bridgeport, Connecticut in 1970 with a B.S. degree in economics. His graduate work was done at the University of Virginia, where he received a certificate of candidacy for a Ph.D. in economics in 1973. Mr. Fitzsimmons became listed as a Principal and registered as an Associated Person and a Swap Associated Person of the Managing Owner effective July 2, 1993, April 15, 2009, and March 8, 2013, respectively. Mr. Fitzsimmons was a partner in ShareInVest beginning in January 2000. He was also a listed Principal of ShareInVest effective May 19, 1999 until February 25, 2007. Mr. Fitzsimmons also served as a Senior Vice President of The Millburn Corporation until December 31, 2011 with his main responsibilities including business development and investment strategy.
Barry Goodman, age 63. Mr. Goodman is Co-Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director of Trading of the Managing Owner, and serves as a member of the Managing Owner’s Investment Committee. Mr. Goodman plays an integral role in business and product development, and in the strategic direction of the firm as a whole. Mr. Goodman joined the Managing Owner (including its former affiliate The Millburn Corporation) and Millburn Partners in November 1982 as Assistant Director of Trading and thereafter served as Executive Vice President of the Managing Owner and The Millburn Corporation until November 1, 2015. Mr. Goodman has since served as Co-Chief Executive Officer and Executive Director of Trading of both entities with his affiliation with The Millburn Corporation ceasing on December 31, 2018 upon the merger of The Millburn Corporation into the Managing Owner. His responsibilities include overseeing the firm’s trading operations and managing its trading relationships, as well as the design and implementation of trading systems. From September 1980 through October 1982, he was a commodity trader at the brokerage firm of E. F. Hutton & Co., Inc. (“E.F. Hutton”). At E.F. Hutton, he also designed and maintained various technical indicators and coordinated research projects pertaining to the futures markets. Mr. Goodman graduated magna cum laude from Harpur College of the State University of New York in 1979 with a B.A. in economics. Mr. Goodman has also served as President and a Director of each entity in Millburn International Group since inception. Mr. Goodman became listed as a Principal and registered as an Associated Person and a Swap Associated Person of the Managing Owner effective December 19, 1991, May 23, 1989 and January 14, 2013, respectively. He became a partner in ShareInVest in January 1994. Mr. Goodman was a listed Principal of ShareInVest, effective May 19, 1999 until February 25, 2007.
Grant N. Smith, age 69. Mr. Smith is Co-Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer of the Managing Owner, and serves as a member of the Managing Owner’s Investment Committee. He is responsible for the design, testing and implementation of quantitative trading strategies, as well as for planning and overseeing the computerized decision-support systems of the firm. He received a B.S. degree from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (“MIT”) in 1974 and an M.S. degree from MIT in 1975. While at MIT, he held several teaching and research positions in the computer science field and participated in various projects relating to database management. He joined the predecessor entity to The Millburn Corporation in June 1975, and has been continuously associated with the Managing Owner and its affiliates since that time. Mr. Smith served as the Executive Vice President of the Managing Owner and The Millburn Corporation until November 1, 2015 and as the Director of Research of both such entities until May 31, 2016. He has since served as the Co-Chief Executive Officer and Chief Investment Officer of both entities with his affiliation with The Millburn Corporation ceasing on December 31, 2018 upon the merger of The Millburn Corporation into the Managing Owner. He has also served as a Director of each entity in Millburn International Group since inception, where he, along with the other Directors of each of those entities, is responsible for its overall management. Mr. Smith became listed as a Principal and registered as an Associated Person and Swap Associated Person of the Managing Owner, effective December 19, 1991, April 15, 2009 and March 8, 2013, respectively. Mr. Smith also became a partner in ShareInVest in January 1994. He also was listed as a Principal of ShareInVest, effective May 19, 1999 until February 25, 2007.
Ilon Wu, age 44. Ms. Wu is a Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Managing Owner. Her areas of responsibility include overseeing the accounting and finance for the Managing Owner and accounting and administration of many of the investment vehicles managed by the Managing Owner. Ms. Wu has served as Chief Financial Officer of the Managing Owner since January 2020, before which she served as Controller of The Millburn Corporation (since January 2011), a position she held prior to the merger of The Millburn Corporation into the Managing Owner on December 31, 2018, and then in the same capacity at the Managing Owner. Ms. Wu previously held the positions of Assistant Controller (August 2005 until December 2010) and Senior Financial Accountant (June 2000 until August 2006) with The Millburn Corporation. She graduated from Baruch College, The City University of New York in May 1998 with a B.B.A. in Accounting. Prior to joining the Managing Owner and its affiliates in June 2000, she was employed with the accounting firm Grant Thornton LLP, as a staff accountant from October 1998 to June 2000. She is a Certified Public Accountant. Ms. Wu became listed as Principal of the Managing Owner effective March 9, 2020. Ms. Wu’s affiliation with The Millburn Corporation ceased on December 31, 2018 upon its merger into the Managing Owner.
None of the individuals listed above currently serves as a director of a public company.
(c) Identification of Certain Significant Employees
None.
(d) Family Relationships
None.
(e) Business Experience
See Item 10 (a, b) above.
(f) Involvement in Certain Legal Proceedings
None.
(g) Code of Ethics
The Trust has no employees, officers or directors and is managed by the Managing Owner. The Managing Owner has adopted an Executive Code of Ethics that applies to its principal executive officers, principal financial officer and principal accounting officer. A copy of this Executive Code of Ethics may be obtained at no charge by written request to Millburn Ridgefield Corporation, 55 West 46th Street, 31st Floor, New York, New York 10036 or by calling 212-332-7300 (ask for Client Services).
(h) Audit Committee Financial Expert
Because the Trust has no employees, officers or directors, the Trust has no audit committee. The Trust is managed by the Managing Owner. Gregg Buckbinder serves as the Managing Owner’s “audit committee financial expert.” Mr. Buckbinder is not independent of the management of the Managing Owner. The Managing Owner is a privately owned corporation managed by its shareholders. It has no independent directors.
Item 11.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
The Trust has no directors, officers or employees. None of the directors, officers or employees of the Managing Owner receive compensation from the Trust. The Managing Owner makes all investment decisions on behalf of the Trust. The Managing Owner receives monthly brokerage commissions of 0.5833 of 1% of the Trust’s net assets attributable to Series 1 Units (which is reduced to 0.542 of 1%, 0.5 of 1% or 0.458 of 1% of net assets for Series 1 Unitholders who invest amounts of $100,000, $500,000 or $1,000,000 or more, respectively, in the Trust and to 0.33 of 1% of Unitholders who invested through selling agent fee based accounts) and an annual profit share of 20% of any new trading profits (net of brokerage commissions and administrative expenses and excluding interest income). The Managing Owner receives a monthly management fee of 0.14583 of 1% of the Trust’s net assets attributable to Series 3 Units. The Managing Owner also receives a Series 3 profit share equal to 20% of any cumulative new trading profit of the Series 3 Units in the aggregate, determined as of the end of each calendar year. The Managing Owner receives a monthly management fee of 0.20833 of 1% of the Trust’s net assets attributable to Series 5 Units and a Series 5 profit share equal to 20% of any cumulative new trading profit of the Series 5 Units in the aggregate, determined as of the end of each calendar year. The annual profit share attributed to the Series 3 Units and Series 5 Units is calculated net of such Series respective management fees, execution and clearing costs, custodial fees, and ongoing offering and administrative expenses and excluding interest income.
Item 12.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
(a) Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners
All of the Trust’s managing owner interest is held by the Managing Owner.
(b) Security Ownership of Management
Under the terms of the Trust Agreement, the Trust’s affairs are managed by the Managing Owner, which has discretionary authority over the Trust’s trading. The Managing Owner’s managing owner interest was valued at $2,775,067 as of December 31, 2020, 2.43% of the Trust’s total capital.
(c) Changes in Control
None.
(d) Securities Authorized for Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans
None.
Item 13.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
See “Item 11. Executive Compensation” and “Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.” The Trust allocated to the Managing Owner $5,272,167 (net of $567,734 Managing Owner commission rebate to Unitholders) in brokerage and custodial fees and $594,605 in management fees for the year ended December 31, 2020. The Managing Owner’s capital interest was allocated net loss of $255,743 for the year ended December 31, 2020. The Managing Owner has paid certain administrative expenses to third-parties on behalf of the Trust, related to legal, accounting, auditing, printing, postage and similar administrative expenses, and has been or will be reimbursed without interest by the Trust. The Trust is prohibited from making any loans.
Item 14.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
(1) Audit Fees
The aggregate fees for professional services rendered by Deloitte & Touche LLP in connection with their audit of the Trust’s financial statements and reviews of the financial statements included in the quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and in connection with the statutory and regulatory filings for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 were approximately $150,000 and $195,000, respectively.
(2) Audit-Related Fees
The Trust did not engage Deloitte & Touche LLP for internal control consulting services.
(3) Tax Fees
The Trust did not engage Deloitte & Touche LLP for professional services for tax compliance, advice or planning services.
(4) All Other Fees
There were no other fees for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019.
(5) Pre-Approval Policies
The board of directors of the Managing Owner pre-approves the engagement of the Trust’s auditor for all services to be provided by the auditor.
PART IV
Item 15.
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
(a)(1) Financial Statements
The following are included with the 2020 Annual Report to Security Holders, a copy of which is filed herewith as Exhibit 13.01.
Affirmation of Millburn Ridgefield Corporation
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Statements of Financial Condition
Condensed Schedules of Investments
Statements of Operations
Statements of Changes in Trust Capital
Statements of Financial Highlights
Notes to Financial Statements
(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules
All Schedules are omitted for the reason that they are not required or are not applicable because equivalent information has been included in the financial statements or the notes thereto.
(a)(3) Exhibits as required by Item 601 of Regulation S-K
The following exhibits are included herewith.
The following exhibits are incorporated by reference from the exhibits of the same number and description filed with the Trust’s Registration Statement (File. No. 333-229651) filed on February 12, 2021 on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933.
Item 16. Form 10-K Summary
None.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized, on the 30th day of March, 2021.
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the Managing Owner of the Registrant and in the capacities and on the date indicated.
Signature
Title with Managing Owner
Date
/s/ Harvey Beker
Chairman
March 30, 2021
Harvey Beker
(Director)
/s/ Barry Goodman
Co-Chief Executive Officer
March 30, 2021
Barry Goodman
(Principal Executive Officer)
/s/ Grant N. Smith
Co-Chief Executive Officer
March 30, 2021
Grant N. Smith
(Principal Executive Officer)
/s/ Gregg Buckbinder
President and Chief Operating Officer
March 30, 2021
Gregg Buckbinder
(Principal Executive Officer)
/s/ Michael W. Carter
Vice President
March 30, 2021
Michael W. Carter
(Principal Accounting Officer)
/s/ Ilon Wu
Chief Financial Officer
March 30, 2021
Ilon Wu
(Principal Financial Officer)
(Being the principal executive officers, the principal financial officer and principal accounting officer, and a majority of the directors of Millburn Ridgefield Corporation)
EXHIBIT INDEX
The following exhibits are included herewith
The following exhibits are incorporated by reference from the exhibits of the same number and description filed with the Trust’s Registration Statement (File. No. 333-229651) filed on February 12, 2021 on Form S-1 under the Securities Act of 1933.