Portfolio Peer Review

Portfolio Peer Review Performance Report Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows www.suggestus.com

Contents Welcome... 3 Portfolio Information... 3 Report Summary... 4 Performance Grade (Period Ended Jun 17)... 4 Portfolio Data...5 Derived Portfolio Data... 6 Asset Allocation... 7 Asset Allocation History...8 Cumulative Returns (104 months to Aug 17)... 9 Period Returns... 10 Period Returns Relative to Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index...11 Period Returns Relative to ARC Balanced Asset PCI...12 Return Distribution... 13 Portfolio Risk Analysis... 14 Volatility Analysis...15 Portfolio Peer Group Classification...16 Asset Allocation Crosscheck...16 Performance versus Peer Group Universe (Period Ended Jun 17)...17 Trend of Relative Performance versus Peer Group (Period Ended Jun 17)... 18 About...19 Frequently Asked Questions... 20 About Suggestus Performance Grades...21 About Us... 21 Important Information Disclaimer... 21 Page 2

Welcome This Portfolio Peer Review (PPR) is a snapshot, designed to place the returns achieved by the Portfolio into context; assist wealth advisers and trustees meet their regulatory requirements for ongoing portfolio performance monitoring; and help the investor assess Portfolio performance. This PPR provides an independent and objective assessment of the performance characteristics of the Portfolio in both absolute terms and relative to any specified Benchmarks and a Peer Group. The multiasset portfolio peer group is based on data provided to Asset Risk Consultants (ARC) to calculate the PCI. The Peer Group can be chosen by the user or automatically set based on the risk profile of the Portfolio. Understanding how the Portfolio has performed versus an appropriate peer group is vital to ensure that the Portfolio (whether selfselected or professionally managed) is delivering results within an acceptable risk/return range. The historical differential between the best and worst performing portfolios is substantial. The PPR puts the investor in control of the facts and enables them to consider if any action is needed. Portfolio Information Value: 533,022 as of 31 Aug 2017 Manager: Analysis Start Date: 31 Dec 2008 Analysis End Date:* 31 Aug 2017 Returns Frequency: Monthly Reporting Currency: Performance Basis: Net Risk Relative to Equities: 0.54 times Management Basis: Discretionary Peer Group Category:** ARC Balanced Asset PCI Benchmark: Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index Target Return: UK CPI +4% p.a. * The "Analysis End Date" is used on all sections of the report except where otherwise stated. The performance data shown for the peer group indices for Jul 17, Aug 17 are estimates. These estimates are displayed in purple within tables and as dotted lines or footnotes for charts. ** The Peer Group Category has been set by user preference to ARC Balanced Asset PCI. The autocalculated Peer Group Category would have been ARC Balanced Asset PCI. IMPORTANT NOTE THIS REPORT IS EXCLUSIVELY FOR USE BY THE CLIENT AND THE ADVISER. IT MUST NOT BE USED FOR ANY MARKETING OR PROMOTIONAL PURPOSE. IF YOU WISH TO MAKE FURTHER USE OF THIS REPORT YOU SHOULD CONTACT CHRIS.CURTIS@SUGGESTUS.COM Page 3

Report Summary This PPR report suggests the following: The performance dynamics suggest this Portfolio is 0.54 times as risky as a pure equity portfolio. Over the 104 months under review the Portfolio returned 104.3% and has outperformed the peer group as measured by the ARC Balanced Asset PCI. Over the 102 months ended Jun 17 the return of the Portfolio is in the 1st quartile versus the peer group. Over the last 12 months ended Jun 17 the return of the Portfolio is in the 1st quartile versus the peer group. Over the 104 months the Portfolio has outperformed the Target Return of UK CPI +4% p.a. and has outperformed the Benchmark as measured by the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index. Performance Grade (Period Ended Jun 17) Performance is a tricky notion to define. How does an investor know if their portfolio is OK? The Performance Grade analyses the risk a portfolio has exhibited, looks at the returns it has made, and compares riskadjusted returns to a group of similar portfolios. Similar portfolios are those that have the same reference currency and comparable risk characteristics. The Performance Grade is essentially a Sharpe ratio ranking, with one of six grades A (highest) to F (lowest) applied to the Portfolio. The parameters for each grade can be seen on the final page of the report. To calculate this grade accurately, a minimum of 18 months performance to the current quarter end is required. If less data is available, the rating will be greyscale not colour and should be considered indicative. The Portfolio s riskadjusted performance over 60 months to Jun 17 is ranked in the top 10% of portfolios in the ARC Balanced Asset PCI universe and has significantly exceeded this peer group average. A B C D E F Page 4

Portfolio Data The chart and table below respectively set out the valuations and cash movements supplied for the Portfolio. Please check the data input for this Portfolio is correct. Portfolio Value History & Cash Movements () 500,000 400,000 300,000 200,000 100,000 0 Dec 08 Dec 09 Dec 10 Dec 11 Dec 12 Dec 13 Dec 14 Dec 15 Dec 16 Cash Movement History (Latest 20) Date Ccy Amount Type Description Date Ccy Amount Type Description 30/06/17 (77.70) Q2 2017 24/02/14 (75.00) 31/03/17 (82.52) Q1 2017 13/01/14 (5.00) 30/12/16 (75.98) Q4 2016 31/12/13 26,560.00 Addition 18/05/16 50,000.00 Addition 14/10/13 (27.50) 22/10/14 (83,567.00) Withdrawal 15/07/13 (27.50) 21/10/14 12,602.39 Addition 15/04/13 (27.50) 20/10/14 71,160.08 Addition 21/12/12 (37.50) 13/10/14 (19.19) 15/10/12 (37.50) 14/07/14 (18.32) 13/07/12 (37.50) 14/04/14 (17.50) 03/07/12 20,883.53 Addition Rows highlighted in red indicate a cash movement which is more than 10% of the total value (with no interim valuation). Performance will be estimated unless an interim valuation is added for close of business on the same day. Constituent Cash ishares MSCI Emerging Markets ishares Diversified Commodity Swap UBS ETFs plc HFRX GlHdgFd Idx Benchmark Composition % Constituent 5.0 ishares Core UK Gilts 5.0 ishares Core Corporate Bond 5.0 db xtrackers FTSE AllShare 10.0 ishares Core MSCI World % 10.0 10.0 20.0 35.0 Page 5

Derived Portfolio Data Portfolio Performance ( %) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD 2009 (2.1) (2.4) 2.0 3.1 (2.4) 1.2 1.4 3.0 3.2 (0.5) 0.7 2.2 9.4 2010 (1.5) 2.4 8.2 (0.7) (6.2) (2.2) 2.0 (0.9) 4.7 1.8 3.7 10.6 2011 (0.6) 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.1 (2.6) (2.8) (1.3) 2.6 (0.3) 1.6 (0.5) 2012 1.4 2.2 0.0 (1.2) (3.8) 1.3 0.8 1.1 1.7 0.9 1.2 5.3 2013 4.8 4.1 0.5 0.6 2.5 (2.3) 2.5 (1.4) (0.2) 2.0 (0.2) 0.3 13.8 2014 (0.7) 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 2.4 0.6 1.7 1.4 2.2 (0.5) 9.7 2015 2.1 0.8 2.0 (0.1) (3.2) 1.6 (2.3) (1.9) 1.9 1.3 0.9 2.5 2016 (2.3) 1.5 1.3 0.1 1.0 2.8 3.1 2.1 0.8 2.8 1.7 15.3 2017 0.9 2.3 0.5 0.4 1.9 0.2 0.8 1.8 Returns are calculated net of charges. Rows highlighted in red indicate estimated performance due to one or more large cash movements. 9.2 Monetary Change () QTD YTD 3 Year Since Dec 08 Start Value () 519,329 488,162 354,969 161,026 End Value () 533,022 533,022 533,022 533,022 Net Cashflow () (160) 49,940 136,945 Monetary Change () 13,693 45,020 128,113 235,050 Cash Movement Summary () 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 YTD Inflows () 20,884 26,560 83,762 50,000 Outflows () (83,567) Total Expenses Total Charges (150) (83) (135) (76) (160) (150) (83) (135) (76) (160) Derived Portfolio Data Comments: Charges have averaged 0.0% and expenses 0.0% of the Portfolio value over the last 5 calendar years. Page 6

Asset Allocation The current asset allocation pie chart shows the asset class split of the Portfolio in broad terms, i.e. the Portfolio s invested allocation between equity, fixed income, cash and "other" assets. Other assets would typically include such asset classes as property, hedge funds, private equity, gold, commodities and structured products. The two relative asset allocation charts below show the current and historical differences in the Portfolio s asset allocation against the asset allocation of the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index. A difference in asset allocation of 20% or more, positive or negative, indicates a significant deviation from the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index. Asset Allocation as at Aug 17 Portfolio Relative to Benchmark 10.0% Allocation % 0.0% (10.0)% Cash 20.8% Fixed Income 5.2% Other 24.5% Equities 49.5% Allocation Cash Fixed Income Other Equities Historical Asset Allocation Relative to Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index 90.0% 70.0% 50.0% Relative Allocation % 30.0% 10.0% (10.0)% (30.0)% (50.0)% (70.0)% (90.0)% Dec 08 Dec 09 Dec 10 Dec 11 Dec 12 Dec 13 Dec 14 Dec 15 Dec 16 Cash Fixed Income Other Equities Page 7

Asset Allocation History The asset allocation history chart below shows how the Portfolio s investment between broad asset classes has changed over time. Where a portfolio is invested in collective investment vehicles (i.e. funds) the asset allocation should be broken down into the constituent allocations where possible and practicable. The chart may provide an indication into how actively a portfolio is managed, but note there may be investment changes behind the broad asset classification, such as sector, duration or style biases. 100.0% Portfolio Asset Allocation History Allocation % 50.0% 0.0% Dec 08 Dec 09 Dec 10 Dec 11 Dec 12 Dec 13 Dec 14 Dec 15 Dec 16 Cash Fixed Income Other Equities Asset Allocation History Comments: The average cash exposure of the Portfolio was 17.1%, max was 100.0%, min was 1.9%. The average fixed income exposure of the Portfolio was 11.6%, max was 58.8%, min was 0.0%. The average exposure to other assets of the Portfolio was 24.3%, max was 35.9%, min was 0.0%. The average equity exposure of the Portfolio was 47.0%, max was 59.0%, min was 0.0%. The average asset allocation profile suggests that the Portfolio might better be compared to the ARC Steady Growth PCI peer group universe. Page 8

Cumulative Returns (104 months to Aug 17) The chart below can be used to visualise the return pattern of the Portfolio and how it compares with the risk profiles represented by the ARC Private Client Indices (PCI), any specified benchmarks and UK CPI +4% p.a.. The pattern of historical performance on the chart can give an insight into the style of the Portfolio. For example, the Portfolio might typically follow the peer group or benchmark in rising markets, but outperform during times of market stress. Cumulative Returns (%) 100 80 Cumulative Return % 60 40 20 0 20 Dec 08 Dec 09 Dec 10 Dec 11 Dec 12 Dec 13 Dec 14 Dec 15 Dec 16 Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index ARC Balanced Asset PCI UK CPI +4% p.a. Returns are calculated net of charges. Cumulative Return Comments: The cumulative return of the Portfolio has been 104.3%. The Portfolio has outperformed the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index which returned 100.3%. The Portfolio has outperformed the ARC Balanced Asset PCI which returned 72.7%. The Portfolio has outperformed Cash which has been 3.8%. The Portfolio has outperformed the Target Return of UK CPI +4% p.a. which increased by 69.5%. Page 9

Period Returns The chart and table below set out the monthly returns recorded by the Portfolio from Dec 2008 to Aug 2017. Periods of more volatile returns can easily be identified. A solitary, unusually large gain or loss may be indicative of a data error. Note that significant inflows or outflows from a portfolio can cause performance calculation anomalies. Portfolio Monthly Returns (%) 8 6 4 Monthly Return % 2 0 2 4 6 Jun 09 Jun 10 Jun 11 Jun 12 Jun 13 Jun 14 Jun 15 Jun 16 Jun 17 Portfolio Performance (%) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD 2013 4.8 4.1 0.5 0.6 2.5 (2.3) 2.5 (1.4) (0.2) 2.0 (0.2) 0.3 13.8 2014 (0.7) 1.4 0.0 0.0 1.2 2.4 0.6 1.7 1.4 2.2 (0.5) 9.7 2015 2.1 0.8 2.0 (0.1) (3.2) 1.6 (2.3) (1.9) 1.9 1.3 0.9 2.5 2016 (2.3) 1.5 1.3 0.1 1.0 2.8 3.1 2.1 0.8 2.8 1.7 15.3 2017 0.9 2.3 0.5 Returns are calculated net of charges. 0.4 1.9 0.2 0.8 1.8 9.2 Period Return Comments: Of the 104 months observed, 71 were positive and 33 were negative. The highest monthly return was 8.2% in Mar 10. The worst monthly return was (6.2)% in May 10. Returns highlighted in yellow in the table are unusually positive and occur in months Jan 13, Feb 13. No unusually negative returns have been recorded from Dec 08 to Aug 17. Analysing the variability of returns over the period under review, roughly once a year the Portfolio might be expected to change in value by more than 3.3% in a single month. Page 10

Period Returns Relative to Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index The relative return chart highlights periods where the Portfolio out or underperformed the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index. Bars below the line represent underperformance. Bars above the line show outperformance. The relative return table beneath highlights in yellow the months where out or underperformance of the Portfolio relative to the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index was more than two percentage points indicating a significant difference in the relative returns. Monthly Returns Relative to Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index (%) 4 2 Monthly Returns % 0 2 4 Mar 09 Dec 09 Sep 10 Jun 11 Mar 12 Dec 12 Sep 13 Jun 14 Mar 15 Dec 15 Sep 16 Jun 17 Year 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Portfolio Performance Relative to Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index (%) Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.7 1.9 (1.1) 0.1 1.8 1.0 (1.3) 0.8 (0.7) (1.1) 0.5 (0.1) 1.0 (1.3) 0.2 (0.6) (0.3) 2.7 0.9 (1.1) 1.0 0.6 (0.2) 0.2 0.1 (0.5) 1.0 (0.1) (0.7) 0.8 0.7 1.2 0.0 (1.6) 0.7 2.0 (1.0) 0.3 (0.9) 0.6 (2.6) (1.0) 0.9 (0.1) 1.4 0.9 (1.3) 1.0 (0.5) 0.1 1.4 (0.3) 1.3 (0.3) 0.4 YTD 2.8 3.5 3.6 (3.6) 3.5 Relative Return Comments: Over 104 months, the Portfolio outperformed the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index in 53 months. The greatest outperformance was 3.8% in Mar 10. The worst underperformance was (4.6)% in May 09. Significant relative out or underperformance occurred in 13 months out of 104 months. Page 11

Period Returns Relative to ARC Balanced Asset PCI The relative return chart highlights periods where the Portfolio out or underperformed the average PCI discretionary manager. Bars below the line represent underperformance. Bars above the line show outperformance. The relative return table beneath highlights in yellow the months where out or underperformance of the Portfolio relative to the ARC Balanced Asset PCI was more than two percentage points indicating a significant difference in the relative returns. 6 Monthly Returns Relative to ARC Balanced Asset PCI (%) 4 Monthly Returns % 2 0 2 4 Mar 09 Dec 09 Sep 10 Jun 11 Mar 12 Dec 12 Sep 13 Jun 14 Mar 15 Dec 15 Sep 16 Jun 17 This chart includes estimated ARC PCI data for the months Jul 17, Aug 17 Portfolio Performance Relative to ARC Balanced Asset PCI (%) Year Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec YTD 2013 1.6 2.1 (0.8) 0.2 1.5 0.7 (0.2) 0.3 (0.7) (0.5) 0.2 (0.2) 4.6 2014 0.5 (0.8) 0.3 (0.1) (0.1) 2.7 0.7 0.1 0.4 1.2 0.1 (0.1) 5.2 2015 0.2 (0.5) 1.2 (1.0) 0.9 0.2 (0.6) (0.7) 0.6 1.3 0.6 2016 (0.2) 0.9 (0.2) (0.1) 0.5 1.6 0.0 0.8 0.4 2.0 0.8 6.7 2017 0.7 0.5 0.0 0.3 0.2 1.0 0.0 0.7 3.6 Relative Return Comments: Over 104 months, the Portfolio outperformed the ARC Balanced Asset PCI in 56 months. The greatest outperformance was 5.1% in Mar 10. The worst underperformance was (3.9)% in May 09. Significant relative out or underperformance occurred in 5 months out of 104 months. Page 12

Return Distribution The histograms below illustrate the spread of monthly returns and are constructed by breaking down the monthly returns into ranges and plotting the number of returns in each range. The more peaked the distribution, the lower the volatility of returns over the period. A key feature of financial markets is that they tend to move upwards in small increments and downward in significant moves, which tends to create a long tail to the left. Active managers can use derivatives and market timing to try to counteract this effect. Distribution of Returns Portfolio v Benchmark (104 Months) 30 Frequency of Returns 15 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Monthly Returns % Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index Distribution of Returns Portfolio v Peer Group (104 Months) 30 Frequency of Returns 15 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Monthly Returns % Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows ARC Balanced Asset PCI Return Distribution Comments: This chart includes estimated ARC PCI data for the months Jul 17, Aug 17 The average monthly return from the Portfolio is 0.7%. The Portfolio's most common return range is 1.0% 2.0% per month. Statistically, the monthly returns suggest the Portfolio has experienced more strongly negative months than strongly positive months, a common feature of financial markets. Page 13

Portfolio Risk Analysis The bear market history or Bear's Teeth chart plots the extent of marktomarket valuation declines experienced by the Portfolio, Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index and the ARC Balanced Asset PCI during bear market periods. A negative return in any month results in a downward spike commencing on the graph. The bigger the tooth, the greater the loss. The wider the tooth, the longer the recovery period. 0 Bear Market History (%) 2 4 Loss % 6 8 10 Mar 09 Dec 09 Sep 10 Jun 11 Mar 12 Dec 12 Sep 13 Jun 14 Mar 15 Dec 15 Sep 16 Jun 17 Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index ARC Balanced Asset PCI Statistic Portfolio Benchmark Peer Group Portfolio v Benchmark Portfolio v Peer Group Worst month (6.2) (5.3) (3.5) (0.9) (2.7) Maximum decline (8.9) (10.2) (7.1) 1.3 (1.8) Ann. standard deviation (104 mths) 6.9 8.4 5.5 (1.5) 1.4 Best 12 month period 22.6 33.1 21.1 (10.5) 1.5 Worst 12 month period (3.4) (4.3) (2.9) 0.9 (0.5) Percent positive months 68.3 62.5 67.3 5.8 1.0 Percent outperf. months * ARC PCI data estimated for Jul 17, Aug 17 53.8 Risk Analysis Comments: The longest period the Portfolio was below its previous peak was 14 months, compared with 13 months for ARC Balanced Asset PCI and 15 months for the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index. The Portfolio is currently at its reporting period high. Page 14

Volatility Analysis Volatility is the conventional industry definition for financial market risk, usually calculated as the annualised standard deviation. This statistic measures the expected range of returns over time. The chart below plots the evolution of the volatility of the Portfolio over time as the annualised standard deviation of Portfolio returns around the cash rate. For comparative purposes the peer group and any specified benchmark are plotted along with the Portfolio. 12 36 Month Rolling Annualised Standard Deviation (%) 10 Ann Standard Deviation % 8 6 4 2 0 Dec 11 Jun 12 Dec 12 Jun 13 Dec 13 Jun 14 Dec 14 Jun 15 Dec 15 Jun 16 Dec 16 Jun 17 Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index ARC Balanced Asset PCI Volatility Comments: The estimated 36 month annualised standard deviation of the Portfolio peaked at 9.1% in Dec 11. The lowest 36 month annualised standard deviation estimated for the Portfolio was 4.9% in May 15. Taking the period as a whole, the annualised standard deviation for the Portfolio has been 6.9%. The chart shows, on average, the Portfolio has been more volatile than the ARC Balanced Asset PCI, so it would be expected that in falling markets the Portfolio might underperform the peer group. The chart shows, on average, the Portfolio has been less volatile than the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index, so it would be expected that in rising markets the Portfolio might underperform the Benchmark. Page 15

Portfolio Peer Group Classification ARC PCI is a set of riskbased indices designed to be used by private client and their advisers in assessing the performance of any discretionary portfolio or multiasset fund with a nonspecialist mandate. ARC Private Client Indices (PCI) ARC Cautious PCI ARC Balanced Asset PCI ARC Steady Growth PCI ARC Equity Risk PCI Relative Risk to Equity Market (%) 0 40 40 60 60 80 80 110 There are four ARC PCI indices for each currency, designed specifically for investors with Canadian Dollar, Euro, Sterling, Swiss Franc or US Dollar as their reference currency. The Peer Group Category has been set by user preference to ARC Balanced Asset PCI. The autocalculated Peer Group Category would have been ARC Balanced Asset PCI. Asset Allocation Crosscheck The asset allocation as at 31 Aug 2017 for the Portfolio is shown below: Asset Class Cash Fixed Income Other Equities Weighting (%) 20.8 5.2 24.5 49.5 Portfolio Categorisation Comments: The user selected Peer Group Category is ARC Balanced Asset PCI. Based on the relative risk for the Portfolio of 0.54 times world equities, the ARC Balanced Asset PCI would have been recommended for the purposes of this analysis. Based on the asset allocation above, using a weighted risk calculation, it would be expected that the Portfolio would be in the ARC Steady Growth PCI category. This is a different classification to the category calculated from the relative risk according to the ARC PCI methodology outlined above. This mismatch suggests that the Portfolio is conservatively structured relative to typical broad asset class indices. Page 16

Performance versus Peer Group Universe (Period Ended Jun 17) The tables below present quartile return statistics to place Portfolio performance into context versus the ARC Balanced Asset PCI universe of private client discretionary manager averages. These tables show which quartile the Portfolio performance sits in, relative to the peer group of private client discretionary manager averages in the same risk range. Results are shown for various periods to Jun 17. The Portfolio returns in the last line of each of the three tables below have highlighted backgrounds as follows: 1st Quartile (1st 25th), 2nd Quartile (26th 50th), 3rd Quartile (51st 75th), 4th Quartile (76th 100th) Cumulative Returns To Jun 17 (%) Percentiles Last quarter 1 year 3 years 5 years 102 months 25th Percentile 1.4 12.3 20.5 42.3 83.6 50th Percentile 1.0 11.1 19.1 40.1 77.6 75th Percentile 0.7 9.4 14.7 33.2 71.1 Benchmark 0.0 13.0 25.8 50.1 95.4 Portfolio 2.5 17.5 32.1 65.7 99.1 Calendar Year Returns (%) Percentiles 2013 2014 2015 2016 YTD 25th Percentile 11.0 5.4 2.5 10.6 4.4 50th Percentile 9.8 4.7 1.5 9.8 3.9 75th Percentile 8.5 4.0 0.9 7.3 3.2 Benchmark 11.0 6.2 (1.1) 18.9 3.2 Portfolio 13.8 9.7 2.5 15.3 6.4 36 Month Rolling Returns (%) Percentiles Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 25th Percentile 10.7 15.3 19.4 18.1 20.9 20.5 50th Percentile 9.4 13.5 17.3 16.6 19.0 19.1 75th Percentile 8.0 11.5 14.9 13.5 15.4 14.7 Benchmark 10.1 19.6 24.6 25.0 28.0 25.8 Portfolio Returns are calculated net of charges. 17.2 20.9 27.1 29.6 33.6 32.1 Portfolio Performance Comments: The Portfolio has exhibited 1st quartile performance since the start of the reporting period. Over the last 1 year the return of the Portfolio is in the 1st quartile versus the peer group. Over the last 3 years the return of the Portfolio is in the 1st quartile versus the peer group. Over the last 5 years the return of the Portfolio is in the 1st quartile versus the peer group. Page 17

Trend of Relative Performance versus Peer Group (Period Ended Jun 17) The Portfolio's peer group ranking is based on the performance of the Portfolio versus the ARC Balanced Asset PCI peer group universe of private client discretionary managers over 36 month rolling periods. The table below shows which quartile the Portfolio was placed in for the last six quarter ends versus the peer group universe. The candlestick chart beneath shows the quartile positioning in more detail. For each quarter the range between the 10th and 90th percentiles (thin line) and the 25th and 75th percentiles (the body) is shown. The Portfolio's position is indicated with an outlined red arrowhead. The height of the candlestick reveals the return dispersion within the peer group. 1st Quartile (1st 25th), 2nd Quartile (26th 50th), 3rd Quartile (51st 75th), 4th Quartile (76th 100th) Q1 2016 1st Portfolio Quartile Performance 36 Month Rolling Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 1st 1st 1st 1st Q2 2017 1st Quartile Performance 36 Month Rolling Candlestick Chart 30 Return 20 10 0 Q1 2016 Q2 2016 Q3 2016 Q4 2016 Q1 2017 Q2 2017 Example Portfolio 52 with cashflows Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index Candlestick Chart Comment: The quartile ranking of the Portfolio over time has shown reasonable consistency. The quartile ranking of the Sterling Steady Growth Reference Index over time has shown reasonable consistency. Page 18

About You have indicated that this portfolio is self managed. By comparing the performance of your portfolio to the PCI, you can see how well your portfolio is doing versus over 100,000 portfolios being managed by professional investment managers in the PCI peer group. If your portfolio Performance Grade is worse than C, it might be beneficial to consider using a discretionary investment manager (DFM) to run the portfolio on your behalf. At suggestus.com we specialise in understanding the discretionary manager universe and we may be able to assist with the decision over which DFM to use. Get in touch or ask us a question info@suggestus.com Investment Philosophy Self managing a portfolio requires the same level of discipline as a professional discretionary portfolio manager (DFM). The investment philosophy defines the underlying principles of investing that are being employed when deciding how to invest the portfolio. For example, do you believe that active managers can outperform markets over the longer term, if not then you might decide to invest primarily in passive vehicles (e.g. ETFs); do you tend to hold a long term macroeconomic view, leading to a diversified approach perhaps using funds or do you believe in finding value in individual companies, meaning you would favour a concentrated portfolio of direct equities; you may view alternative investments as an essential part of a portfolio and therefore have a more multiasset approach to investing. As well as the general philosophy it is important to set more specific boundaries for the portfolio. Typically a DFM would agree a risk profile for the portfolio, a target long term return and a benchmark for ongoing performance comparison; they may also set asset allocation ranges and concentration limits to prevent the portfolio makeup "creeping" overtime as certain assets and asset classes out or underperform. This is a good discipline to have for any portfolio as it then sets the background for ongoing performance analysis. Brief History Our research suggests that selfmanaged portfolios tend to underperform those managed by professional discretionary investment managers (DFMs). Private clients often choose to selfmanage their portfolios, because they are concerned about the fees that the DFM charges to run the portfolio. The ARC Private Client Indices are calculated after fees, so the performance figures are representative of the actual returns experienced by the end client. Typically a DFM will always have an eye to the downside and will aim to minimise losses and maximise gains. As a result there will be periods, particularly in strongly rising markets, where a DFM may underperform the market. Over the long term and particularly through more volatile periods, our research shows that DFMs do add value versus a passive strategy. Page 19

Frequently Asked Questions How did you decide which ARC PCI to compare the Portfolio against? We use the concept of relative risk to equities to identify the degree of volatility (risk) a portfolio has experienced. We use a relative measure because this gives you a window to see the risk you have taken in context of world stock markets. We have defined 4 risk categories from Cautious (lower risk) to Equity Risk (higher risk); for example, if a portfolio has exhibited roughly half the risk of equities (40% to 60%), we would call this a Balanced Asset portfolio. This then informs which group of portfolios, or peer group, we use to compare your portfolio. Why use risk to classify portfolios? The idea of the indices is to achieve a methodology that can be used across all investment styles that will categorise portfolios in a common way. The aim being to ensure that portfolios with similar longterm goals are compared likeforlike, no matter how they are invested to achieve those goals. The definition by risk relative to equities achieves this without the need to use asset allocation or the name of the particular mandate that a manager applies to it. Why don t you use asset allocation to classify my Portfolio? Asset allocation can be misleading as, for example, the equity portion of a balanced portfolio might differ significantly between a multiasset class portfolio, an absolute return portfolio and a more traditional equity, fixed income and cash portfolio, but their risk profile may be very similar. Asset allocation may also be viewed as commercially sensitive by some investment managers and asset classifications may differ between different investment houses, so there can be some complication in comparing like with like based on asset allocation. My Portfolio is not doing as well as the ARC PCI, what should I do? Short term deviation in performance is not unusual and most portfolios will out or underperform over different periods. However, long term underperformance or a substantial short term underperformance warrants a comment from the investment manager. Agree a course of action with the manager and a timeframe for the correction (e.g. 6 months) and revisit the performance at the end of the watch period. If you manage your own Portfolio, perhaps you should consider using a professional firm. Can you tell me who the best manager is? Manager selection is as much art as science and our experience has shown that although performance is an important factor, qualitative considerations such as service quality, reporting capability and risk management are also key ingredients in finding the best manager for your circumstances. It is important to understand why a manager s performance looks as it does and to establish whether this performance is likely to persist. Is my investment manager part of the ARC PCI? See www.suggestus.com for the full list of managers. The ARC PCI are made available to the end user for free and it is free for managers to be Data Contributors. Some managers choose to pay to receive analysis from ARC on their client portfolio performance dynamics. All data contributors benefit from understanding where they sit versus their peer group. Unfortunately, not all investment managers wish to participate in the ARC PCI. Do the ARC PCI performance figures include investment manager s fees? Yes, all the ARC PCI indices are constructed using universes of portfolios where performance is submitted after fees (Annual management charge, custody fee and VAT). Thus the figures reflect the returns actually received by a client. For more detailed analysis of your Portfolio please contact chris.curtis@suggestus.com. Page 20

About Suggestus Performance Grades The table below sets out the mark scheme for the Suggestus Performance Grades. Suggestus Performance Grades rank a portfolio s riskadjusted return versus the PCI universe of more than 100,000 private client discretionary portfolios. Performance Grade A B C D E F ARC PCI Universe (%) ranked in the top 10% of portfolios ranked between 10% and 30% of portfolios ranked between 30% and 60% of portfolios ranked between 60% and 85% of portfolios ranked between 85% and 95% of portfolios ranked in the bottom 5% of portfolios Cumulative Perf (%) 10 30 60 85 95 100 The Suggestus Performance Grade requires a minimum of 18 months performance history and is calculated for the latest five years or since inception if shorter. If the Portfolio has between 12 and 17 months of performance history, the Suggestus Performance Grade should be considered indicative and is shown in grey not blue. About Us Suggestus is the research arm of the ARC Group and is an affiliate of Asset Risk Consultants (ARC), a global investment consulting practice working for a global client base. As an independent, regulated firm ARC has an established track record in delivering impartial, proactive investment advice to wealthy families and their advisers. ARC provides private clients, wealth advisers, trusts and charities with the opportunity to access unbiased advice on how differing investment styles and approaches can be blended to deliver the highest probability of meeting investment objectives. Suggestus provides an extensive research capability designed to assist investors and their professional advisers in making informed investment decisions. The central aim of the Suggestus research function is to help investors get the best out of the investment management industry. Important Information Disclaimer Copyright Asset Risk Consultants Limited ( ARC ). This report has been created on the basis of performance data collected by ARC, data extracted from public data sources, from ishares, from Lipper Limited, the Client and data sourced from investment managers. ARC assumes no responsibility for verifying the accuracy or reasonableness of such data. Accordingly the Client shall hold harmless ARC, its affiliates and its officers to the extent the report is based on information provided to ARC which proves to have been inaccurate, incomplete or untrue. No responsibility is assumed by ARC for the performance of the Portfolio or for investigating the suitability of any investment strategy or for the loss of value of any Portfolio or failure by that Portfolio to meet or exceed any explicit or implicit performance criteria. The value of investments may go down as well as up and you may not get back the initial sum invested. This document should not be construed as investment advice and ARC strongly recommends that investors seek advice from a qualified IFA or investment manager before making any changes to the Portfolio. SUS Tag: V4.3.0.21179/LIVE/080917144321/200198047/Graham Harrison Page 21