The purpose of the Churchill Management Group LinkedIn page, Facebook page and Twitter account (the “Churchill Social Media Accounts”) is to provide information about Churchill Management Group. The information that appears on the Churchill Social Media Accounts should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to sell securities or provide investment advisory or consulting services over the internet.  Services will only be provided upon execution of a written agreement with Churchill Management Group. Churchill Management Group will not be liable for any direct or indirect damages, losses or expenses arising in connection with the use or reliance on any information portrayed on any of the Churchill Social Media Accounts.  If you are a Churchill Management Group client and have questions or concerns that are specific to your account(s), please contact Churchill Management Group directly.  Churchill Management Group monitors the Churchill Social Media Accounts and removes unauthorized content or endorsements that may be deemed to be testimonial in nature.  Any deletion of comments or content should not be understood to be an approval, endorsement, or adoption of any comments and content that is not deleted. More information about Churchill Management Group can be found at www.churchillmanagement.com.

Information presented on the Churchill Social Media Accounts is believed to be factual and up-to-date, but Churchill Management Group does not guarantee its accuracy and the information presented should not be regarded as a complete analysis of the subjects discussed.  All expressions of opinion reflect the judgment of the authors as of the date of publication and are subject to change.  Churchill Management Group may post links to other websites on its Churchill Social Media Accounts. Churchill Management Group does not control or monitor these sites, nor does it assume responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the information located there.  Churchill Management Group does not necessarily endorse or recommend any commercial product or service described at any linked websites.

Churchill Management Group is not affiliated with LinkedIn, Facebook or Twitter and recommends that each user reads and understands the privacy policies and terms of service of those social media platforms and understands how such user’s information can be displayed and used throughout LinkedIn, Facebook or Twitter as well as other third-party sites that may be linked to such social media platforms.

Specific disclosures relating to content that has appeared on the Churchill Social Media Accounts from time to time are described below.

*Financial Times 300 Top Registered Investment Advisers

The Financial Times 300 Top Registered Investment Advisers is an independent listing produced annually by the Financial Times (June 2018). The FT 300 is based on data gathered from RIA firms, regulatory disclosures, and the FT’s research. The listing reflected each practice’s performance in six primary areas: assets under management, asset growth, compliance record, years in existence, credentials and online accessibility. This award does not evaluate the quality of services provided to clients and is not indicative of the practice’s future performance. Neither the RIA firms nor their employees pay a fee to The Financial Times in exchange for inclusion in the FT 300.

*FORBES TOP 250 WEALTH ADVISORS FOR 2017 / FORBES BEST IN STATE WEALTH ADVISORS FOR 2018 rankings are for Randy Conner of Churchill Management Group (“CMG”). CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the Rankings, but may purchase reprints of the Forbes articles. The rankings, which were developed by Forbes’ partner Shook Research, are each based on in-person and telephone due-diligence meetings and a ranking algorithm for advisors who have a minimum of seven years of experience.  The ranking algorithms are based on quality of practice learned through telephone and in-person interviews, client retention, industry experience, review of compliance records, firm nominations; and quantitative criteria, including: assets under management and revenue generated for their firms. Investment performance is not a criterion because client objectives and risk tolerances vary, and advisors rarely have audited performance reports. Rankings are based on the opinions of SHOOK Research, LLC which does not receive compensation from the advisors or their firms in exchange for placement on a ranking. The State Ranking is limited to advisors in the State of California..

*The Los Angeles Business Journal’s Most Influential Wealth Managers

The listing may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the listing reflects quantitative and qualitative analyses of factors that may include only a sample of the experience of Churchill’s clients. The rankings are not indicative of future performance.

The Los Angeles Business Journal’s Most Influential Wealth Managers listing is for Randy Conner of Churchill Management Group (“CMG”). CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the Listing, but may purchase reprints of the Los Angeles Business Journal article.  The Listing is based on nominations received by the Los Angeles Business Journal from members of the Los Angeles business community.  A selection board within the Los Angeles Business Journal selects the nominees to be listed based on their accomplishments in the prior 18 months.  A person listed must be based in Los Angeles County.

PSN Top Gun

Using a proprietary blend of its clients’ top priority performance screens PSN Top Guns ranks products in six propriety star categories in over 50 universes.  The PSN 6 Star Category reflects the top ten returns for the latest five year period.  The ratings are based on peer groups created using the information collected through the PSN investment manager questionnaire and uses only gross of fee returns.  PSN Top Guns investment managers must claim that they are GIPs compliant.  Products must have an R-Squared of 0.80 or greater relative to the style benchmark for the recent five year period.  Moreover, products must have returns greater than the style benchmark for the three latest three-year rolling periods..

The ranking may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the ranking reflects composite performance of multiple clients.  The ranking is not indicative of future performance.  CMG did not pay to participate in the PSN top gun rankings and is not affiliated with .

*BARRON’S RANKING – TOP INDEPENDENT FINANCIAL ADVISORS

The Barron’s ranking is for Fred Fern of Churchill Management Group (“CMG”). The rating may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the rating reflects a quantitative and qualitative analysis of factors that may include only a sample of the experience of CMG’s Clients. The rating is not indicative of future performance.  CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the Rankings, but did purchase reprints of the Barron’s article.

According to Barron’s: The formula Barron’s uses to rank advisors is proprietary. The rankings are based on data provided by individual advisors and their firms.  Advisor data is confirmed via regulatory databases, cross-checks with securities firms and conversations with individual advisors. The formula Barron’s uses to rank advisors is proprietary. It has three major components:  assets managed, revenue produced and quality of practice. Investment returns are not a component of the rankings because an advisor’s returns are dictated largely by the risk tolerance of Clients. The quality-of-practice component includes an evaluation of each advisor’s regulatory record.

*BARRON’S RANKING – TOP ADVISOR RANKINGS BY STATE

The Barron’s ranking is for Fred Fern of Churchill Management Group (“CMG”). The rating may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the rating reflects a quantitative and qualitative analysis of factors that may include only a sample of the experience of CMG’s Clients. The rating is not indicative of future performance.  CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the Rankings, but did purchase reprints of the Barron’s article.

According to Barron’s: The formula Barron’s uses to rank advisors is proprietary. In evaluating advisors, Barron’s examines regulatory records, internal company documents, and data provided by the advisors themselves. The rankings for all states are based on data provided by over 4,000 of the nation’s most productive advisors. Factors included in the rankings: assets under management, revenue produced for the firm, regulatory record, quality of practice and philanthropic work. Investment performance isn’t an explicit component because not all advisors have audited results and because performance figures often are influenced more by Clients’ risk tolerance than by an advisor’s investment-picking abilities. The quality-of-practice component includes an evaluation of each advisor’s regulatory record.

*MORNING STAR RANKING DISCLOSURE:

The overall Morningstar Rating is based on risk-adjusted gross returns, derived from a weighted average of the three-, five-, and 10-year (if applicable) Morningstar metrics. The performance data quoted represents past performance and does not guarantee future results. The investment return and principal value of an investment will fluctuate thus an investor’s separate account may be worth more or less than its original value. Actual performance of individual client accounts may vary.

The ranking may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the ranking reflects composite performance of multiple clients. The ranking is not indicative of future performance. CMG did not pay to participate in the Morningstar Ranking and is not affiliated with Morningstar.

4Q17: Based upon Morningstar’s 4th Quarter 2017 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 9th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 1,180 strategies from 182 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $123 billion through December 2017.

3Q17: Based upon Morningstar’s 3rd Quarter 2017 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it was not ranked for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 1,093 strategies from 179 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $115 billion through September 2017.

2Q17: Based upon Morningstar’s 2nd Quarter 2017 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it was not ranked for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 1,023 strategies from 178 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $107 billion through June 2017.

1Q17: Based upon Morningstar’s 1st Quarter 2017 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it was not ranked for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 950 strategies from 169 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $99.7 billion through March 2017.

4Q16: Based upon Morningstar’s 4th Quarter 2016 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it was not ranked for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 881 strategies from 162 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $84.8 billion through December 2016.

3Q16:  Based upon Morningstar’s 3rd Quarter 2016 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 10th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 838 strategies from 157 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $87.6 billion through September 2016.

2Q16:  Based upon Morningstar’s 2nd Quarter 2016 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 14th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 787 strategies from 151 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $84 billion through June 2016.

1Q16: Based upon Morningstar’s 1st Quarter 2016 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 11th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 770 strategies from 156 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $76 billion through March 2016.

4Q15: Based upon Morningstar’s 4th Quarter 2015 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 3-Year Return (it ranked 3rd for its 5-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 755 strategies from 154 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $73 billion through December 2015.

3Q15: Based upon Morningstar’s 3rd Quarter 2015 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 4th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 737 strategies from 148 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $75 billion through September 2015.

2Q15: Based upon Morningstar’s 2nd Quarter 2015 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 6th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 770 strategies from 153 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $80 billion through June 2015.

1Q15: Based upon Morningstar’s 1st Quarter 2015 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 6th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 700 strategies from 151 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $86 billion through March 2015.

4Q14: Based upon Morningstar’s 1st Quarter 2015 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 6th for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 699 strategies from 146 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $91 billion through December 2014.

3Q14: Based upon Morningstar’s 1st Quarter 2015 ETF Managed Portfolios Landscape for its 5-Year Return (it ranked 3rd for its 3-Year Return). Morningstar is tracking 677 strategies from 143 firms with total assets (AUM and AUA) of $96 billion through September 2014.

*L.A. BUSINESS JOURNAL MONEY MANAGEMENT FIRMS LIST (MAY 2016)

The L.A. Business Journal (“LABJ”) “May 2016 List of Largest Money Management First in L.A. County” includes Churchill Management Group (“CMG”). The rating is not representative of any client’s experience because the rating reflects only size of firms based on assets under management as of December 31, 2015. The rating is not indicative of future performance. CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the LABJ List.

According to LABJ: “Information for this list provided by representatives of the firms themselves. Firms are ranked by assets under management in L.A. County offices as of December 31, 2015. To the best of our (LABJ) knowledge, this information is accurate as of press time. While every effort is made to ensure the accuracy and thoroughness of the list, omissions and typographical errors sometimes occur.”

* FINANCIAL TIMES RANKING

The Financial Times (“FT”) “2016 300 Top Registered Investment Adviser List” includes Churchill Management Group (“CMG”).  The rating may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the rating reflects a quantitative and qualitative analysis of factors, but to CMG’s knowledge, not any sample of the experience of any of CMG’s Clients.  The rating is not indicative of future performance.  CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the FT list, but did pay for reprints.

According to The Financial Times: The 2016 Financial Times 300 Top Registered Investment Advisors is an independent listing produced by the Financial Times (June, 2016). The FT 300 is based on data gathered from RIA firms, regulatory disclosures, and the FT’s research. As identified by the FT, the listing reflected each practice’s performance in six primary areas, including assets under management, asset growth, compliance record, years in existence, credentials and accessibility. Neither the RIA firms nor their employees pay a fee to The Financial Times in exchange for inclusion in the FT 300.

*WEALTH MANAGEMENT RANKING DISCLOSURE:

WealthManagement.com‘s “Top100 RIAs of 2015” ranking was assembled using data from Meridian-IQ (in which Penton Media has a stake). Advisory firms are ranked by total assets under management.To land on the list, firms had to have a focus on financial and retirement planning for individual and high-net-worth Clients.  Institutional Clients do not make up a substantial portion of their businesses. Finally, none of these firms are owned by a bank, broker/dealer or investment company. The rating may not be representative of any one client’s experience because the rating reflects a quantitative and qualitative analysis of factors that may include only a sample of the experience of CMG’s Clients. The rating is not indicative of future performance.  CMG did not pay a fee to participate in the ranking.

*LINKED IN  PAGE DISCLOSURES:

The purpose of this page is to provide information about Churchill Management Group. The information provided on this page should not be construed as a solicitation or offer to sell securities or provide investment advisory or consulting services over the internet.  Services will only be provided upon execution of a written agreement with Churchill Management Group. Churchill Management Group will not be liable for any direct or indirect damages, losses or expenses arising in connection with the use or reliance on any information contained herein.  If you are a Churchill Management Group client and have questions or concerns that are specific to your account(s), please contact Churchill Management Group directly.  Churchill Management Group does not accept endorsements on this page.  More information about Churchill Management Group can be found at www.churchillmanagement.com.

Information presented on this page is believed to be factual and up-to-date, but Churchill Management Group does not guarantee its accuracy and the information presented should not be regarded as a complete analysis of the subjects discussed.  All expressions of opinion reflect the judgment of the authors as of the date of publication and are subject to change.  Churchill Management Group may post links to other websites on this page. Churchill Management Group does not control or monitor these sites, nor does it assume responsibility for the accuracy, completeness or timeliness of the information located there.  Churchill Management Group does not necessarily endorse or recommend any commercial product or service described at any linked websites.

*LINKED IN POST DISCLOSURE:

This report is meant to inform the reader of our current market opinion, which we, as professional money managers, use in our decision-making. It should be noted that stock market and bond market data are subject to varying interpretations and any one interpretation will not necessarily guarantee investment success. The information obtained from the sources specified herein and used as basis for our current market opinion is believed reliable, but we do not guarantee the accuracy of such information.

*LINKED IN POST FROM 2/3/16

Newer accounts may be even less invested as we were waiting to build up their percentage invested until they had some profits. Of course, additional factors such as whether we have full discretion, account opening date and specific client restrictions could impact the percentage invested further.

https://www.churchillmanagement.com/services-q10321-disclosures-aspx/