Avista Corporation (NYSE: AVA)

Transcription

1 Energy Utility Sustainability Benchmark Report Avista Corporation (NYSE: AVA) PROOF SMALL UTILITIES CAN BE SUSTAINABILITY LEADERS Avista scored above average in most areas of sustainability assessment with particularly strong performance on all Environmental measures. In addition to being an industry leader in Energy Efficiency and Demand Side Management, the company s relatively clean generation portfolio (substantially weighted towards hydro, other renewables and natural gas) contributed to its limited emissions footprint. The company scored well on most Social measures. Avista s weakest score was the Economic dimension Regulatory Quality, Risk and Diversity, which is something beyond the company s immediate control. Sustainability Economic Environmental Social High Medium High High NOVEMBER 1, 2012

2 CONTENTS WHAT S IN THIS REPORT? Section 1: The Bottom Line Executive level description of Avista's Overall sustainability and financial performance, with indicators of relative strengths and weaknesses. Section 2: Company Overview Description of Avista's operations, assets and service territory. Section 3: Sustainability Assessment Details of Avista's performance relative to»» Three Triple Bottom Line (TBL) scoring categories»» Twelve scoring dimensions»» Total stock market returns (10, 5, 3, 1 year and YTD indexes)»» Industry and peer group benchmarks Section 4: Industry Overview»» Background for the U.S. Energy Utility Industry»» Sustainability scores and rankings for the 2012 Focus Group utilities»» State-by-state sustainability performance»» Statistics comparing Avista with the rest of the industry Section 5: Target Rock Methodology Detailed description of Target Rock s assessment, scoring and ranking methodology. THE TARGET ROCK MANDATE Target Rock scores and ranks publicly traded, U.S. domiciled electric and gas utilities based on an in-depth analysis of actual sustainability-related operating and financial performance over a ten-year period. TRA assesses performance considering the Triple Bottom Line (TBL) categories economic, environmental and social as well as in more than 220 subcategories. We believe utilities need to be formally recognized within the socially responsible investment community, and by the public as having potential to do good while also providing a solid longterm investment potential. More information about our methodology can be found in Section 5: Target Rock Methodology and at targetrockadvisors.com. Section 6: About Target Rock Principal bios and contact information. This report is for the sole use of the subscriber and cannot be distributed to, or used by, other third parties without the prior written consent of Target Rock Advisors, LLC. Please contact krudden@targetrockadvisors.com. 2

3 SECTION 1: THE BOTTOM LINE The Bottom Line: Avista Corporation Sustainability Economic Environmental Social High Medium High High Avista scored above average in most areas of sustainability assessment with particularly strong performance on all Environmental measures. In addition to being an industry leader in Energy Efficiency and Demand Side Management, the company s relatively clean generation portfolio (substantially weighted towards hydro, other renewables and natural gas) contributed to its limited emissions footprint. The company scored well on most Social measures. Avista s weakest score was the Economic dimension Regulatory Quality, Risk and Diversity, which is something beyond the company s immediate control. Sustainability + Clean generation portfolio leaning towards renewables and natural gas + Industry leader in energy efficiency and demand side management + Generous philanthropic corporate culture + Superior operating efficiency + Relatively healthy service territory economy + Overall very committed to sustainability - Sometimes challenging regulatory environments Market PRICE (AVA) DIVIDEND CAPITALIZATION ($MILS) EARNINGS PER SHARE** P/E 9/28/12 YIELD PAYOUT* MKT. CAP. FIRM VALUE 2011A 2012E 2013E LTG 2011A 2012E 2013E $ % 73.4% 1, ,862.8 $ 1.73 $ 1.65 $ % Avista Corporation. Source: SNL Financial. * Latest twelve months. ** Mean FactSet estimate. Financial INCOME STATEMENT ($MILS) BALANCE SHEET ($MILS) CASH FLOWS ($MILS) TOTAL OPERATING NET GROSS NET TOTAL TOTAL DEBT/ OPERATING LEVERED REVENUES INCOME INCOME MARGIN MARGIN ASSETS DEBT TOTAL CAP. ROA ROE FCF FCF 1, % 6.2% 4, , % 2.6% 8.9% Avista Corporation. Source: SNL Financial. Income statement and Cash Flow numbers are for the 12 months ended 12/31/11. Balance sheet numbers are as of 6/30/12. 3

4 SECTION 2: COMPANY OVERVIEW Overview: Avista Corporation Avista Corp. is an energy company involved in the production, transmission and distribution of energy as well as other energy-related businesses. Its regulated utility serves 359,000 electric and 320,000 natural gas customers in a service territory of about 30,000 square miles in eastern WA, northern ID and parts of southern and eastern OR. Avista s generation portfolio is heavily weighted towards hydro, natural gas, and other renewables with very little coal. Avista s primary non-regulated subsidiary is Ecova which provides sustainable utility expense management and energy management solutions to multi-site companies in North America. PRIMARY SERVICE AREA AND ASSETS Source: SNL Financial. Does not show 222MW Colstrip coal plant in Montana FUELS MIX (NET GENERATION) Source: SNL Financial. 4

5 SECTION 3: SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT Avista Sustainability Assessment Avista is in the High Sustainability group having scored 78.9 (out of a possible 100) on Overall Sustainability. The company ranked 5th out of all 46 companies. Avista scored highest (85.9) on the Environmental TBL element followed by Social (77.4) and Economic (73.3). These scores placed it in the Medium Economic, High Social, and High Environmental groups. TBL ELEMENTS AND HIGH LEVEL DIMENSIONS HIGH AVA vs. HIGH AVA vs. SUSTAINABILITY INDUSTRY SUSTAINABILITY INDUSTRY PEER AVERAGE AVERAGE PEER AVERAGE AVERAGE TBL ELEMENT/DIMENSION AVISTA (14 COMPANIES) (46 COMPANIES) DELTA (POINTS) DELTA (POINTS) OVERALL SUSTAINABILITY ECONOMIC (2.6) 1.7 ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL (0.2) 5.5 ECONOMIC Financial Health and Stability (0.2) 3.3 Regulatory Quality, Risk and Diversity (29.1) (18.6) Electric and Gas Operating Efficiency Regional Economic Health and Development ENVIRONMENTAL Generating and Purchased Power Quality and Diversity Emissions and Emissions Reporting Energy Efficiency and Demand Side Management SOCIAL Corporate Governance Quality (8.8) (10.5) Employee Health, Safety and Development Charitable Giving and Philanthropy Customer Resilience Overall Quality of Sustainability Reporting (9.0) 3.9 Source: Target Rock Advisors, LLC. Blue = positive delta. Beige = negative delta. A deeper analysis based on approximately 220 key performance indicators that support the results shown above is available under separate consulting agreement. Contact Kyle Rudden at krudden@targetrockadvisors.com for more information. 5

6 SECTION 3: SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT Economic Element For the Economic TBL Element, Avista scored highest on the Regional Economic Health and Development dimension with a score of 83.9, followed by Electric and Gas Operating Efficiency (74.5), Financial Health and Stability (73.0), and Regulatory Quality, Risk and Diversity (52.0). ECONOMIC DIMENSIONS Environmental Element Among the three high-level Environmental dimensions Avista performed strongest in Energy Efficiency and Demand Side Management with a score of Avista s next strongest Environmental score was 88.6 for Generating and Purchased Power Quality and Diversity, followed by an Emissions and Emissions Reporting score of ENVIRONMENTAL DIMENSIONS 6

7 SECTION 3: SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT Social Element Avista s strongest Social element is Charitable Giving and Philanthropy with a score of In descending order of score the remaining four Social elements are: Customer Resilience, 89.7; Overall Quality of Sustainability Reporting, 79.0; Employee Health, Safety and Development, 73.4; and Corporate Governance Quality, SOCIAL DIMENSIONS 7

8 SECTION 3: SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT Avista Total Returns With the sole exception of year-to-date 2012 Avista has outperformed both its High Sustainability Index peers and the industry in general. For the ten-year period 12/31/01-12/31/11, Avista generated a compound annual growth rate (total return) of 6.9% compared to a High Sustainability Index average of 5.5% and an industry average of 3.8%. Avista is one of just a handful of utilities with consistently strong total return performance over long, medium and short time periods. COMPOUND ANNUAL GROWTH RATES (TOTAL RETURN) 10-YEAR 5-YEAR 3-YEAR 1-YEAR YTD Avista 6.9% 0.3% 9.9% 14.3% 2.7% High Sustainability Index 5.5% 0.4% 8.4% 10.4% 8.1% Medium Sustainability Index 3.4% -0.2% 8.1% 12.8% 2.1% Low Sustainability Index 2.5% 0.2% 10.7% 18.9% 7.4% 10-Year = 12/31/01-12/31/11, 5-Year = 12/31/06-12/31/11, 3-Year = 12/31/08-12/31/11, 1-Year = 12/31/10-12/31/11. Year-to-date is through market close on 9/28/12. Asssumes dividends are taken as cash payment and not re-invested. TOTAL RETURN PERFORMANCE 12/31/01-9/30/12 8

9 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW Industry Overview U.S. Energy Utility Sector For this discussion, the entirety of the U.S. energy utility sector, broadly defined, includes all companies that meet the following three criteria: 1. Domiciled in the United States; 2. Publicly-traded on a major exchange (e.g., excludes Pink Sheets); and 3. Predominantly involved in electricity generation and/or the transportation or distribution of electricity and natural gas (e.g., excludes exploration and production, mining, etc.) As of September 30, 2012, this group totals 151 companies with an aggregate market capitalization of $976.5 billion and total assets of $1.6 trillion. While many companies are involved in multiple lines of business, generally categorized, the power sector (including generation, transmission and distribution) is the largest at $513.7 billion in market capitalization (52.6% of the total), followed by midstream at $411.8 billion (42.2%) and pure play gas distribution at $50.9 billion (5.2%). Combination electric and natural gas utilities with a leaning towards the former are included in the power sector. In general, the energy utility business is asset intensive, but given the relative asset intensiveness of the power sector, the asset breakdown is slightly more skewed: power accounts for $1.1 trillion (71.6%) of the total $1.6 trillion in assets, while midstream accounts for $369.5 billion (23.4%) and gas distribution $78.9 billion (5.0%). TOTAL U.S. ENERGY UTILITY INDUSTRY BREAKDOWN BY MARKET CAPITALIZATION AND TOTAL ASSETS (PERCENTAGE BREAKDOWN) Market Capitalization Assets 5.2% 5.0% 42.2% 23.4% 52.6% 71.6% Gas Distribution Midstream Power 9

10 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW TOTAL U.S. ENERGY UTILITY INDUSTRY BREAKDOWN BY MARKET CAPITALIZATION AND TOTAL ASSETS (DOLLARS) MARKET CAP. ($000s)* ASSETS ($000s)** TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL AVERAGE Power 513, , ,131,765, ,801,845.5 Midstream 411, , ,543, ,991,421.7 Gas Distribution 50, , ,875, ,919,947.6 Industry 976, , ,580,184, ,464,797.2 Source: SNL Financial and Target Rock Advisors. * As of market close on 9/29/12. ** As of 6/30/12. TOTAL U.S. ENERGY UTILITY INDUSTRY VS. TRA SUSTAINABILITY FOCUS GROUP INCOME STATEMENT INDUSTRY TRA FOCUS GROUP (46) TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL AVERAGE Revenues 676,811,029 4,423, ,047,054 6,566,240 Operating Income 98,674, ,931 56,067,901 1,218,867 Operating Margin 14.6% 14.6% 18.6% 18.6% EBITDA 43,921, ,138 8,839,496 1,767,899 Net Income 52,599, ,790 28,071, ,251 Net Income Margin 7.8% 7.8% 9.3% 9.3% Return on Equity 13.5% 13.5% 10.0% 10.0% Return on Capital 5.7% 5.7% 4.6% 4.6% Source: SNL Financial and Target Rock Advisors. Income Statement data reflects 12 months ended 12/31/11. BALANCE SHEET INDUSTRY TRA FOCUS GROUP (46) TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL AVERAGE Total Assets 1,584,196,241 10,354, ,373,404 20,921,161 Total Debt 592,279,413 3,871, ,656,269 7,144,702 Total Equity 481,714,586 3,148, ,495,856 5,880,345 Debt/Equity 123.0% 123.0% 121.5% 121.5% Debt/Assets 37.4% 37.4% 34.2% 34.2% Return on Assets 4.2% 4.2% 2.9% 2.9% Pretax Interest Coverage Current Ratio Source: SNL Financial. Balance sheet data is as of 6/30/12. 10

11 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW CASH FLOWS INDUSTRY TRA FOCUS GROUP (46) TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL AVERAGE Operating Activities 124,757, ,405 70,359,036 1,529,544 Investing Activities -137,316, ,492-70,356,981-1,529,500 Financing Activities 9,678,351 63, ,810-17,431 Operating FCF 10,472,864 68,450 3,616,893 78,628 Recurring Leveraged FCF 12,565,478 82,668 11,444, ,790 Leveraged FCF Margin 2.8% 2.8% 3.4% 3.4% Operating CF/CapEx 78.1% 78.1% 87.3% 87.3% Source: SNL Financial. Cash Flow data relfects 12 months ended 12/31/11. FINANCIAL MARKETS INDUSTRY TRA FOCUS GROUP (46) TOTAL AVERAGE TOTAL AVERAGE Dividend Yield* 4.5% 4.5% 4.2% 4.2% Dividend Payout Ratio* 73.4% 73.4% 67.5% 67.5% P/E Price/EBITDA Price/Book Value Price/Assets Week Total Return 22.7% 22.7% 16.8% 16.8% Source: SNL Financial. * Median is used for Dividend Yield and Dividend Payout Ratio. 11

12 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW TRA 2012 Sustainability Assessment Focus Group For inclusion in the TRA 2012 Utility Sustainability Assessment Focus Group, all U.S. based energy utility companies, broadly defined, were screened for basic sustainable business mix and risk profile characteristics. Only those with more conservative, sustainable profiles are included in the Focus Group. These companies are more representative of traditional, regulated, stable, dividend paying utilities than the broader industry, which in some cases include lesser-regulated merchant generators and midstream natural gas companies. The 46 companies in the Focus Group are listed below under 2012 Sustainability Assessment Results. TRA 2012 SUSTAINABILITY FOCUS GROUP FINANCIAL AND MARKETS STATISTICS 12

13 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW 13

14 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW 2012 Sustainability Assessment Results 2012 SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT RESULTS - SUSTAINABILITY AND TBL ELEMENT SCORES LISTED OVERALL OVERALL TICKER COMPANY SUSTAINABILITY ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL TICKER COMPANY SUSTAINABILITY ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL SOCIAL SRE Sempra EE El Paso XEL Xcel LNT Alliant PCG PG&E GXP Great Plains EIX Edison Int HE Hawaiian Electric AVA Avista SCG SCANA PNW Pinnacle West PPL PPL SO Southern EDE Empire District AEP AEP TE TECO ETR Entergy AEE Ameren DUK Duke NWE NorthWestern UTL Unitil NI NiSource IDA IDACORP MGEE MGE Energy WEC Wisconsin Energy PNM PNM NEE NextEra FE FirstEnergy NVE NV Energy CNL Cleco PEG PSEG UIL UIL EXC Exelon VVC Vectren ALE ALLETE CHG CH Energy NU Northeast Utilities DTE DTE D Dominion POR Portland General ED Con Ed WR Westar POM Pepco BKH Black Hills UNS UniSource CMS CMS Scores are on a 100-point scale, rounded to one decimal. High Sustainability Group Medium Sustainability Group Low Sustainability Group The following maps show the revenue weighted average sustainability related scores of all companies in the Focus Group by state. They are not an analysis of the states themselves, but rather illustrate regional similarities and differences in utilities sustainability profiles and practices. Alaska, Rhode Island, and Utah are not represented in the 2012 Focus Group. For an interactive version of these maps with underlying data, please visit: www. targetrockadvisors.com/go-interactive/other-interactive-visualizations/ 2012 SUSTAINABILITY ASSESSMENT RESULTS REVENUE-WEIGHTED OVERALL SUSTAINABILITY SCORES BY STATE 14

15 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW REVENUE-WEIGHTED ECONOMIC SCORES BY STATE REVENUE-WEIGHTED ENVIRONMENTAL SCORES BY STATE REVENUE-WEIGHTED SOCIAL SCORES BY STATE 15

16 SECTION 4: INDUSTRY OVERVIEW Relationship between Sustainability and Total Returns In other research we have noted the strong positive long-term relationship between overall sustainability performance and total stock market returns (i.e., as groups, more sustainable utilities outperform less sustainable utilities). It is difficult to say just how much causality is implicit in this relationship between strong sustainability practices and higher market returns, and there are certainly other factors in play, but we believe that on the whole there is likely to be a significant element of causality in the long term. Total return results for shorter periods of time do not necessarily exhibit this higher sustainability outperforms lower sustainability rule. Further information is available in a TRA White Paper titled Case for Sustainable Utility Investing available at: TOTAL RETURN PERFORMANCE 12/31/01-9/30/12 16

17 SECTION 5: TARGET ROCK ADVISORS METHODOLOGY Target Rock Advisors Methodology TRA Sustainability Assessment Methodology Overview In Target Rock Advisors view, utilities need to be more formally recognized than they are presently within the socially responsible investment community, and by the public at large, as organizations that have as much potential to do good as most other sector sustainability leaders, while also providing a solid long-term investment base. In addition, by their very nature as regulated entities, utilities share certain characteristics that are essential building blocks of sustainability, such as disclosure and transparency, responsibility for the public interest, social and community investment, broader economic development, promotion of energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, and many others. Further, we believe that for the utility sector to achieve the recognition it deserves as socially responsible, it is necessary that a system of sustainability performance criteria and metrics be available to the industry for making assessments that are objective, consistent, and sector-specific based on actual performance. Accordingly, TRA has developed a system that provides a rigorous sustainability scoring and ranking process. More information on our methodology can be found at www. targetrockadvisors.com. In summary, the TRA utility sustainability scoring methodology bases the scoring and ranking of publicly traded, U.S. domiciled electric and gas utilities on an in-depth analysis of actual sustainability-related operating and financial performance over the last decade (ended December 31, 2011 for the 2012 results). After a preliminary screen of the entire U.S. energy utility sector including electric generation, transmission and distribution; natural gas distribution; and natural gas midstream companies TRA measured the historical performance of 46 utilities relative to each of the three traditional Triple Bottom Line (TBL) categories (i.e., economic, environmental and social), as well as in over 220 sub-categories of performance. The 46 utilities scored and ranked using our scoring methodology were divided into three performance categories: High, Medium and Low Sustainability, as well as similar categorizations for each of the TBL elements. (forty-nine utilities were included in Target Rock s initial rankings, published in February, 2012, but due to subsequent mergers, the number now stands at 46.) In a highly aggregated fashion, the diagram below lists the major subcategories considered in scoring each utility and the approximate effective weight assigned to each factor. 17

18 SECTION 5: TARGET ROCK ADVISORS METHODOLOGY TBL ELEMENTS AND HIGH LEVEL DIMENSIONS 15.0% Financial Health and Stability 9.2% Regional Economic Health and Development 4.6% Regulatory Quality, Risk, and Diversity 4.6% Electric and Gas Operating Efficiency Economic 33.3% Social 33.3% Environmental 33.3% 10.0% Employee Health, Safety and Development 6.7% Corporate Governance Quality 6.7% Customer Reslience 5.0% Charitable Giving and Philanthropy 5.0% Overall Quality of Sustainability Reporting 15.0% Emissions and Emissions Reporting 11.7% Energy Efficiency and Demand-Side Management 6.7% Generating and Purchased Power Portfolio Quality and Diversity Percentage values have been rounded Each dimension was scored independently (on a 100-point scale) and weighted based on data from numerous industry compliance filings, TRA s knowledge of the issues surrounding these factors and our judgment about their relative importance, our knowledge of the industry, input from retired and active senior utility executives and, in some cases, our personal knowledge of individual companies and their regulatory environments. Our scores considered not only the most recent year s performance and historical averages, but also 10-year historical results, trends and momentum metrics. Importantly, the scoring process does not rely in any significant degree on self-reported data that are not always subject to independent verification or might otherwise simply offer statements of policy and intent. Instead, TRA utilizes actual, historic operating data, most of which the utilities are required to report annually by law and regulation to various government agencies, such as the Department of Energy, Department of Transportation and the Occupational Health and Safety Agency. We also rely on U.S. governmental economic data and globally-recognized third-party financial databases to assure a further degree of data integrity and objectivity. The TRA scoring process does not require surveys or questionnaires to be filled out by utility management. 18

19 SECTION 6: ABOUT TARGET ROCK ADVISORS About Target Rock Advisors, LLC Target Rock is dedicated to the rigorous study and implementation of sustainability policies and practices within the utility and financial industries. The Company s mission is to provide data, information, analytical systems and deep sector-specific technical expertise that identifies areas for improved performance and helps utility companies achieve their sustainability objectives with favorable social and economic outcomes. Through its partners and associates, Target Rock has over 250 years of combined experience in sustainability and executive leadership, equities and fixed income analysis, financial management, statistics and econometrics, regulatory policy analysis and management consulting. More information on Target Rock can be found at Richard J. Rudden CO-FOUNDER, MANAGING PARTNER Richard Rudden has served in analytical, consulting, management and executive positions within the utility, financial and energy industries for over 35 years. As a senior vice president for a multi-billion dollar global consulting and engineering firm, he lead the company s energy sector management and strategy consulting practice, chaired its climate change working group, and was a member of both the Advisory Board and Sustainability Steering Committee. Richard has published and spoken widely and has testified before state, federal, and provincial regulatory bodies, as well as in bankruptcy and civil court proceedings, on natural gas and electric economic, financial and policy issues. Previously he was the founding CEO of R.J. Rudden Associates, Inc., a strategy and economics consulting firm, and R.J. Rudden Financial, LLC, a FINRA-licensed brokerdealer providing services to the energy industry; R.J. Rudden was acquired by Black & Veatch in Richard s career includes management and executive positions at Con Edison, Stone & Webster (now Shaw) and Black & Veatch. He has also served on the Boards of Directors of the North American Energy Standards Board, a non-regulated retail energy marketer and the Cornell Cooperative Extension, where he is a member of the executive committee. He has also been involved in Cornell s Marine and related environmental programs. Richard is an Organizational Sponsor representative of GRI (Global Reporting Initiative), a member of the Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment (US SIF), a signatory to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI), and a member of the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). 19

20 SECTION 6: ABOUT TARGET ROCK ADVISORS. Kyle P. Rudden CO-FOUNDER, PARTNER Kyle Rudden has 15 years of experience in equity and fixed income analysis, with an emphasis on finance and capital markets. Most recently, he was president of R. J. Rudden Financial, LLC, a registered broker-dealer and energy industry advisory boutique. Before co-founding Rudden Financial, Kyle spent nearly a decade at J.P. Morgan Securities as vice president and head of the firm s U.S. Energy and Utilities Equity Research team covering electric and natural gas utilities, pipelines, independent power and new energy technology. Prior to J.P. Morgan, he was a fixed income analyst at Fitch Ratings, also covering the U.S. electric and natural gas utility industries. At J.P. Morgan, Kyle was named in both Institutional Investor and the Wall Street Journal annual lists of top analysts and participated in a number of large domestic and international equity and equity derivative underwritings, including initial public offerings, public secondary offerings and private placements Kyle is an Organization Sponsor representative of GRI (Global Reporting Initiative), a member of the Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment (US SIF), a member of the Forum for Sustainable and Responsible Investment (US SIF), a signatory to the United Nations Principles for Responsible Investment (UNPRI), and a member of the Edison Electric Institute (EEI). 20

21 Vanderbilt Motor Parkway Suite 401 Hauppauge, NY This report is for the sole use of the subscriber and cannot be distributed to, or used by, other third parties without the prior written consent of Target Rock Advisors, LLC. Please contact Sustainability Benchmark Reports are written for informational purposes only and neither constitute recommendations to purchase or sell any security or group of securities nor do they constitute investment advice. Our reports do not provide all information material to making an informed investment decision. Information about past performance of a security or group of securities is not necessarily a guide to, indicator of, or assurance of, future performance. All information in this report is provided as is without warranties, expressed or implied, or representation of any kind to the fullest extent permissible under applicable law. Target Rock Advisors, LLC will not be liable to any person or entity for the quality, accuracy, completeness, reliability or timeliness of information contained herein.