City of Atlanta General Employees Pension Fund

December 31, 2013 City of Atlanta General Employees Pension Fund

Investment Measurement Service Quarterly Review

The following report was prepared by Callan Associates Inc. ("CAI") using information from sources that include the following: fund trustee(s); fund custodian(s); investment manager(s); CAI computer software; CAI investment manager and fund sponsor database; third party data vendors; and other outside sources as directed by the client. CAI assumes no responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of the information provided, or methodologies employed, by any information providers external to CAI. Reasonable care has been taken to assure the accuracy of the CAI database and computer software. In preparing the following report, CAI has not reviewed the risks of individual security holdings or the compliance/non-compliance of individual security holdings with investment policies and guidelines of a fund sponsor, nor has it assumed any responsibility to do so. Copyright 2014 by Callan Associates Inc. Table of Contents December 31, 2013

Market Overview Domestic Equity Overview 2 Domestic Fixed Income Overview 3 International Equity Overview 4 International Fixed Income Overview 5

Asset Allocation and Performance Actual vs. Target Asset Allocation 7 Quarterly Total Fund Attribution 8 Asset Distribution Across Investment Managers 9 Manager Performance 10 Manager Performance 11 Manager Performance 12 Manager Performance 13 Total Fund 14 Total Fund Ranking 17

Large Cap Equity Composite Performance 19 Morgan Stanley 24 Rhumbline Equal - WTD S&P 500 Index 29 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund 32

Mid Cap Equity Composite Performance 36 Cornerstone Capital Management 41 Ceredex MidCap Value 46

Small Cap Equity Composite Performance 52 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 57 Jennison 62 Channing Capital Management 65

International Equity Composite Performance 69 Johnston Asset Management 72 Artisan Partners 75

Balanced Globalt Tactical ETF 79 Table of Contents December 31, 2013

Fixed Income Composite Performance 81 JP Morgan Chase 84 Mesirow Financial 87 NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index 90

Alternative Investment GrayCo Alternative Partners II 92

Callan Research/Education 93

Disclosures 99 Market Overview Market Overview Domestic Equity Active Management Overview

Domestic Equity The strong bull market of 2013 continued through the 4th quarter of the year with all major equity indices posting solid gains. By and large, domestic equity indices outpaced active management with exceptions within the mid cap space as well as the large cap and small cap value spaces, where the median separate account manager outpaced its respective index. For the one year period ending December 31, 2013, the trend was reversed with active management essentially across the domestic equity styles outpacing the indices. Small value was the exception there with modest outperformance by the index relative to the median separate account manager. For the recent quarter, large cap outpaced small cap across the style spectrum, and growth outperformed value within both large cap and small cap. Mid cap was the laggard relative to large and small cap in the 4th quarter, although the S&P Mid Cap index posted a strong 8.3% absolute return. For the 2013 calendar year, small growth was the clear winner with a 42.7% return for the S&P 600 Growth index and a return of 46.7% for the median small growth manager. Returns for the one-year period were quite strong across the domestic equity spectrum. Small cap outpaced large cap by a wide margin, and growth outperformed value within both large cap and small cap, although the spread was modest.

S&P 500: 10.51% S&P 500 Growth: 11.15% S&P 500 Value: 9.83% S&P Mid Cap: 8.33% Separate Account Style Group Median Returns S&P 600: 9.83% for Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 S&P 600 Growth: 10.06% S&P 600 Value: 9.61% 15%

10.98% 10.42% 10.00% 10.28% 10% 9.27% 9.22% 8.71% 8.35% 8.19% Returns

0% Small Cap Small Cap Small Cap Mid Cap Mid Cap Mid Cap Large Cap Large Cap Large Growth Value Broad Growth Value Broad Growth Value Cap Core

S&P 500: 32.39% S&P 500 Growth: 32.75% S&P 500 Value: 31.99% S&P Mid Cap: 33.50% Separate Account Style Group Median Returns S&P 600: 41.31% for One Year Ended December 31, 2013 S&P 600 Growth: 42.69% S&P 600 Value: 39.98% 70%

60%

50% 46.71% 42.24% 40% 38.28% 36.20% 35.84% 35.08% 35.60% 34.36% 34.34%

Returns 30%

20%

10%

0% Small Cap Small Cap Small Cap Mid Cap Mid Cap Mid Cap Large Cap Large Cap Large Growth Value Broad Growth Value Broad Growth Value Cap Core

City of Atlanta General Employees 2 Domestic Fixed Income Active Management Overview

Active vs. the Index The yield on the 10-year U.S. Treasury Note climbed 40 bps during the 4th quarter to close at 3.04%, its high for 2013 and its highest level since mid-2011. After rallying into October as the government shutdown threatened economic growth, yields climbed steadily through year-end on a fairly continuous string of encouraging economic data. The Barclays Aggregate Index posted a -0.1% result, bringing its 2013 return to -2.0%; its worst return since 1994. Corporate bonds strongly outperformed like-duration Treasuries for both the quarter and the year. High yield corporates continued to post very strong results with the Barclays High Yield Index up 3.6% for the quarter and 7.4% for the full year. Lower quality bonds outperformed among both investment grade and high yield for the quarter and the year.

For the quarter ended December 31, 2013, the median Core Bond manager returned 0.18% and the median Core Plus manager returned 0.73%, both outperforming the Barclays Aggregate Index (-0.14%). For the trailing twelve month period, the median Core Bond manager (-1.52%) underperformed the median Core Plus manager (-0.59%) while both fared better than the Barclays Aggregate Index (-2.02%). The median High Yield manager posted the best returns for both periods; 3.59% for the quarter and 7.46% for the 1-year period with both returns in line with the Barclays High Yield Index.

Intermediate vs. Long Duration Longer duration managers slightly outperformed intermediate duration managers in the 4th quarter. The median Extended Maturity manager returned 0.39% while the median Intermediate manager posted a 0.20% return. For the trailing twelve month period, the median Extended Maturity manager returned -7.28%, sharply below the median Intermediate manager’s return (-0.54%).

Barclays Universal: 0.22% Barclays Aggregate: (0.14%) Barclays Govt/Credit: (0.03%) Separate Account Style Group Median Returns Barclays Mortgage: (0.42%) for Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 Barclays High Yield: 3.58% Barclays US TIPS: (2.00%) 5%

4% 3.59%

1% 0.73% Returns 0.39% 0.27% 0.29% 0.20% 0.18% 0.19% 0% (0.31%) (1%)

(2%) Active Defensive Intermed Core Core Extended Active Mortgage High Cash Bond Plus Maturity Duration Backed Yield

Barclays Universal: (1.35%) Barclays Aggregate: (2.02%) Barclays Govt/Credit: (2.35%) Separate Account Style Group Median Returns Barclays Mortgage: (1.41%) for One Year Ended December 31, 2013 Barclays High Yield: 7.44% Barclays US TIPS: (8.61%) 15%

10% 7.46%

0.66% 0.61%

Returns 0% (0.54%) (0.59%) (1.52%) (0.88%) (1.15%) (5%)

(7.28%) (10%) Active Defensive Intermed Core Core Extended Active Mortgage High Cash Bond Plus Maturity Duration Backed Yield

City of Atlanta General Employees 3 International Equity Active Management Overview

Active vs. the Index Foreign equities lagged their U.S. counterparts in both local currency and U.S. dollar terms (MSCI EAFE US$: +5.7%, Local: +6.4%). Currency impacts were mixed in the 4th quarter as the euro and UK pound strengthened while the Japanese yen and Australian dollar weakened. Active management outperformed passive by a thin margin within both developed large core and emerging markets.

Europe The MSCI Europe Index returned 7.9% for the 4th quarter, trailing the Europe peer group median (+8.5%) by 60 bps. Europe was the top-performing region for the recent quarter, outpacing the other broad regions in some cases by several hundred basis points. MSCI Europe closed the 2013 year among the top performing non-US indices with a return of 25.2%.

Pacific The MSCI Pacific Index posted a return of 1.6% for the 4th quarter. The median of the active Pacific Basin peer group modestly outpaced the index with its 2.2% return. The median of the Japan peer group posted a return of 2.8%.

Emerging Markets Emerging market equities continued to be significant laggards relative to the rest of the developed world and widely trailed developed market results particularly for the 2013 calendar year. For the 4th quarter, active emerging market managers outpaced the Index by a narrow margin (MSCI EM: 1.9%, median 2.2%). The Index finished the year in negative territory with a -2.3% return and the separate account median eked out a 0.3% positive return.

MSCI AC World Index 7.42% MSCI ACW ex US Free: 4.81% MSCI EAFE: 5.71% Separate Account Style Group Median Returns MSCI Europe: 7.88% for Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 MSCI Pacific: 1.56% MSCI Emerging Markets: 1.86% 12%

10% 8.48% 8.46% 8% 6.82% 5.99% 6% Returns 4% 2.82% 2.23% 2.24% 2%

0% Europe Core Int’l Core Plus Pacific Japan Emerging Global Basin Only Markets Equity

MSCI AC World Index 23.44% MSCI ACW ex US Free: 15.78% MSCI EAFE: 22.78% Separate Account Style Group Median Returns MSCI Europe: 25.23% for One Year Ended December 31, 2013 MSCI Pacific: 18.27% MSCI Emerging Markets: (2.27%) 40%

35% 30.65% 30% 28.28% 28.49%

25% 24.81% 20.72% 20%

Returns 15% 14.00%

10%

5% 0.25% 0% Europe Core Int’l Core Plus Pacific Japan Emerging Global Basin Only Markets Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 4 International Fixed Income Active Management Overview

Active vs. the Index Performance among developed fixed income markets was mixed in the 4th quarter with Spain and Italy performing well and the UK and Germany posting weaker results. Hedged indices outperformed for both the quarter and the year, due largely to depreciation in the Japanese yen versus the U.S. dollar. The yen sank over 20% versus the U.S. dollar in 2013, the most since 1979, as the Bank of Japan initiated a massive stimulus program to combat its long battle with deflation. The Citi Non-US World Government Bond Index returned -1.2% for the quarter (unhedged) and the hedged version posted a 0.4% return. For the full year, the hedged index (+1.4%) outperformed the unhedged (-4.6%) by 600 bps.

Emerging Markets Emerging market debt delivered mixed results over the quarter. U.S. dollar-denominated sovereign debt performed relatively well as measured by the JPM EMBI Global Diversified Index, which returned 1.5% for the quarter, while local currency emerging market debt continued to sell off. The local debt JPM GBI-EM Global Diversified Index fell 1.5% for the quarter. Both benchmark indices remain sharply down for the full year (-5.2%; -9.0%, respectively) on worries over the impact on developing countries of a slowing and eventual cessation of Fed stimulus.

Citi World Govt: (1.09%) Separate Account Style Group Median Returns Citi Non-US Govt: (1.24%) for Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 Citi Non-US Hedged: 0.44% JPM EMBI GI Div: 1.54% 1%

0.55%

0.18%

0% Returns

(0.25%)

(0.52%)

(1%) Non-US Fixed Global Fixed Emerging Debt Domestic Income Income Core Bond

Citi World Govt: (4.00%) Separate Account Style Group Median Returns Citi Non-US Govt: (4.56%) for One Year Ended December 31, 2013 Citi Non-US Hedged: 1.42% JPM EMBI GI Div: (5.24%) 2%

(2%) (1.52%)

Returns (4%) (3.42%) (3.78%)

(6%) (6.21%)

(8%) Non-US Fixed Global Fixed Emerging Debt Domestic Income Income Core Bond

City of Atlanta General Employees 5 Asset Allocation and Performance Asset Allocation and Performance Actual vs Target Asset Allocation As of December 31, 2013

The first chart below shows the Fund’s asset allocation as of December 31, 2013. The second chart shows the Fund’s target asset allocation as outlined in the investment policy statement.

Actual Asset Allocation

Domestic Equity 61%

Cash & Cash Equivalent 2% Alternative Investment International Equity 1% 11%

Fixed Income Balanced 20% 5%

Target Asset Allocation

Domestic Equity 60%

Cash & Cash Equivalent 5% International Equity 10%

Fixed Income 25%

$000s Weight Percent $000s Asset Class Actual Actual Target Difference Difference Domestic Equity 746,779 60.5% 60.0% 0.5% 6,635 International Equity 134,553 10.9% 10.0% 0.9% 11,196 Balanced 59,095 4.8% 0.0% 4.8% 59,095 Fixed Income 248,883 20.2% 25.0% (4.8%) (59,511) Alternative Investment 17,677 1.4% 0.0% 1.4% 17,677 Cash & Cash Equivalent 26,586 2.2% 5.0% (2.8%) (35,093) Total 1,233,574 100.0% 100.0%

* Current Quarter Target = 60.0% S&P 500 Index, 25.0% Barclays Aggregate Index, 10.0% MSCI EAFE US$ Gross Div and 5.0% 3-month Treasury Bill.

City of Atlanta General Employees 7 Quarterly Total Fund Relative Attribution - December 31, 2013

The following analysis approaches Total Fund Attribution from the perspective of relative return. Relative return attribution separates and quantifies the sources of total fund excess return relative to its target. This excess return is separated into two relative attribution effects: Asset Allocation Effect and Manager Selection Effect. The Asset Allocation Effect represents the excess return due to the actual total fund asset allocation differing from the target asset allocation. Manager Selection Effect represents the total fund impact of the individual managers excess returns relative to their benchmarks.

Asset Class Under or Overweighting

Domestic Equity (1.43%)

Fixed Income (3.61%)

International Equity 0.90%

Alternative Investment 1.52%

Balanced 4.78%

Cash & Cash Equivalent (2.16%)

(6%) (4%) (2%) 0% 2% 4% 6% 8%

Actual vs Target Returns Relative Attribution by Asset Class

9.55% 10.51% Domestic Equity (0.05%) (0.14%) Fixed Income 6.11% 5.75% International Equity 0.01% 0.01% Alternative Investment 6.14% 6.14% Balanced 0.04% 0.01% Cash & Cash Equivalent 6.53% 6.85% Total

(5%) 0% 5% 10% 15% (0.8%) (0.6%) (0.4%) (0.2%) 0.0% 0.2% 0.4% 0.6% Actual Target Manager Effect Asset Allocation Total

Relative Attribution Effects for Quarter ended December 31, 2013

Effective Effective Total Actual Target Actual Target Manager Asset Relative Asset Class Weight Weight Return Return Effect Allocation Return Domestic Equity 59% 60% 9.55% 10.51% (0.56%) (0.05%) (0.62%) Fixed Income 21% 25% (0.05%) (0.14%) 0.02% 0.24% 0.26% International Equity 11% 10% 6.11% 5.75% 0.04% (0.01%) 0.03% Alternative Investment 2% 0% 0.01% 0.01% 0.00% (0.11%) (0.11%) Balanced 5% 0% 6.14% 6.14% 0.00% (0.03%) (0.03%) Cash & Cash Equivalent 3% 5% 0.04% 0.01% 0.00% 0.14% 0.14% Total 6.53%= 6.85% +(0.50%) + 0.18% (0.32%)

* Current Quarter Target = 60.0% S&P 500 Index, 25.0% Barclays Aggregate Index, 10.0% MSCI EAFE US$ Gross Div and 5.0% 3-month Treasury Bill.

City of Atlanta General Employees 8 Investment Fund Balances

The table below compares the fund’s investment fund balances as of December 31, 2013 with that of September 30, 2013. The change in asset distribution is broken down into the dollar change due to Net New Investment and the dollar change due to Investment Return.

Asset Distribution Across Investment Funds

December 31, 2013 September 30, 2013 Market Value Weight Net New Inv. Inv. Return Market Value Weight Domestic Equity $746,779,261 60.54% $12,623 $65,101,480 $681,665,159 58.25%

Large Cap Equity $349,132,560 28.30% $649 $33,159,228 $315,972,683 27.00% Morgan Stanley Large Cap Core 88,334,194 7.16% 649 8,826,391 79,507,154 6.79% Rhumbline Equal - WTD S&P 500 Index 81,870,218 6.64% 0 7,325,492 74,544,726 6.37% Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund 178,928,148 14.50% 0 17,007,345 161,920,803 13.84%

Mid Cap Equity $137,364,676 11.14% $1,984 $12,500,671 $124,862,020 10.67% Cornerstone Capital Managment 68,986,524 5.59% 1,667 7,099,754 61,885,104 5.29% Ceredex MidCap Value 68,378,151 5.54% 318 5,400,917 62,976,916 5.38%

Small Cap Equity $260,282,026 21.10% $9,990 $19,441,581 $240,830,456 20.58% Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 115,488,273 9.36% 4,929 7,021,217 108,462,127 9.27% Jennison 1 0.00% (115,294,682) 7,919,968 107,374,714 9.17% Channing Capital Management 27,174,781 2.20% 399 2,180,768 24,993,615 2.14% Ishares Russell 2000 ETF 117,618,971 9.53% 115,299,343 2,319,628 - -

International Equity $134,552,922 10.91% $0 $7,745,894 $126,807,028 10.84% Johnston Asset Management 62,802,227 5.09% 0 2,949,862 59,852,365 5.11% Artisan Partners 71,750,695 5.82% 0 4,796,032 66,954,663 5.72%

Balanced $59,095,464 4.79% $4,639 $3,420,112 $55,670,714 4.76% Globalt Tactical ETF 59,095,464 4.79% 4,639 3,420,112 55,670,714 4.76%

Fixed Income $248,882,866 20.18% $0 $(112,746) $248,995,612 21.28% JP Morgan Chase 85,080,107 6.90% 0 (220,545) 85,300,652 7.29% Mesirow Financial 85,046,027 6.89% 0 132,138 84,913,889 7.26% NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index 78,756,732 6.38% 0 (24,339) 78,781,071 6.73%

Alternative investment $17,677,427 1.43% $0 $2,071 $17,675,356 1.51% GrayCo Alternative Partners II 17,677,427 1.43% 0 2,071 17,675,356 1.51%

Cash & Cash Equivalent $26,585,970 2.16% $(12,722,053) $(175,729) $39,483,752 3.37% Certificate of Deposits - - 0 (188,925) 188,925 0.02% Enhanced Cash 11,643,848 0.94% (15,029,309) 8,369 26,664,788 2.28% Security Lending 563,514 0.05% 0 214 563,300 0.05% Cash 14,378,609 1.17% 2,307,256 4,614 12,066,739 1.03%

Total Fund $1,233,573,912 100.0% $(12,704,792) $75,981,082 $1,170,297,621 100.0%

City of Atlanta General Employees 9 Investment Manager Returns

The table below details the rates of return for the Sponsor’s investment managers over various time periods ended December 31, 2013. Negative returns are shown in red, positive returns in black. Returns for one year or greater are annualized. The first set of returns for each asset class represents the composite returns for all the fund’s accounts for that asset class. Returns for Periods Ended December 31, 2013 Market Last Last Last Value Ending Last Last 3 5 7 $(Dollars) Weight Quarter Year Years Years Years Domestic Equity $746,779,261 44.26% 9.55% - - - -

Large Cap Equity $349,132,560 20.69% 10.49% 32.84% 15.97% 18.98% 7.04% S&P 500 Index - - 10.51% 32.39% 16.18% 17.94% 6.13%

Morgan Stanley LC Core 88,334,194 25.30% 11.10% 33.44% 16.54% 17.13% 8.69% Morgan Stanley LC Core - Net 88,334,194 25.30% 11.00% 32.90% 16.06% 16.60% - S&P 500 Index - - 10.51% 32.39% 16.18% 17.94% 6.13%

Rhumbline Eq-Wtd S&P500 81,870,218 23.45% 9.83% - - - - Rhumbline Eq-Wtd S&P500 - Net 81,870,218 23.45% 9.81% - - - - S&P 500 Eq-Wtd - - 9.85% 36.16% 16.97% 23.34% 8.29%

Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund 178,928,148 51.25% 10.50% 32.34% - - - S&P 500 Index - - 10.51% 32.39% 16.18% 17.94% 6.13%

Mid Cap Equity $137,364,676 8.14% 10.01% 38.14% 16.46% 22.03% 7.29% Mid Cap Equity - Net - - 9.90% 37.46% 15.88% 21.47% - S&P Mid Cap 400 Index - - 8.33% 33.50% 15.64% 21.89% 9.21%

Cornerstone Cap Mgt 68,986,524 50.22% 11.48% 43.41% 18.25% 23.21% 8.46% Cornerstone Cap Mgt - Net 68,986,524 50.22% 11.37% 42.81% 17.77% 22.71% - Russell MidCap Index - - 8.39% 34.76% 15.88% 22.36% 7.83%

Ceredex MidCap Value 68,378,151 49.78% 8.58% 33.01% 15.18% - - Ceredex MidCap Value - Net 68,378,151 49.78% 8.41% 32.19% 14.49% - - Russell MidCap Value Idx - - 8.56% 33.46% 15.97% 21.16% 6.80%

Small Cap Equity $260,282,026 15.43% 8.07% 39.83% 16.50% 21.77% 8.76% Small Cap Equity - Net - - 8.02% 39.04% 15.74% 20.92% - S&P 600 Small Cap Index - - 9.83% 41.31% 18.42% 21.37% 8.84%

Earnest Partners SC Core 115,488,273 44.37% 6.47% 36.89% 16.56% 20.86% 7.21% Earnest Partners SC Core - Net 115,488,273 44.37% 6.34% 36.15% 15.91% 20.14% - Russell 2000 Index - - 8.72% 38.82% 15.67% 20.08% 7.20%

Jennison 1 0.00% 7.44% 40.18% 16.19% 22.35% 9.58% Jennison - Net 1 0.00% 7.21% 39.04% 15.24% 21.32% - Russell 2000 Index - - 8.72% 38.82% 15.67% 20.08% 7.20%

Channing Cap Mgt 27,174,781 10.44% 8.73% - - - - Channing Cap Mgt - Net 27,174,781 10.44% 8.50% - - - - Russell 2000 Value Index - - 9.30% 34.52% 14.49% 17.64% 5.40%

International Equity $134,552,922 7.97% 6.11% 24.45% 11.03% - - International Equity - Net - - 9.16% 27.72% 11.57% - - MSCI EAFE Index - - 5.71% 22.78% 8.17% 12.44% 1.78%

Johnston Asset Mgt 62,802,227 46.67% 4.93% 18.06% 8.15% - - Johnston Asset Mgt - Net 62,802,227 46.67% 4.72% 17.82% 8.08% - - MSCI ACWI ex US Index - - 4.81% 15.78% 5.61% 13.32% 2.62%

Artisan Partners 71,750,695 53.33% 7.16% 30.70% 13.66% - - MSCI EAFE Index - - 5.71% 22.78% 8.17% 12.44% 1.78%

Balanced $59,095,464 3.50% 6.14% - - - - Balanced - Net 59,095,464 100.00% 6.02% - - - -

Globalt Tactical ETF 59,095,464 100.00% 6.14% - - - - Globalt Tactical ETF - Net 59,095,464 100.00% 6.02% - - - -

(1) From January 1988 to December 2006 the Policy Index was composed of 55% S&P 500 and 45% Barclays U.S. Aggregate Index. From Januray 2007 to December 2011 the policy Index was composed of 25% S&P 500, 20% S&PMidCap 400 Index, 10% Russell 2000 Index, 30% Barclays U.S. Aggregate Index, and 15% Barclays Intermediate Govt/Credit Index. Since January 2011 the Policy Index has been composed of 60% S&P 500, 10% MSCI EAFE (Net) Index, 25% Barclays U.S. Aggregate Index, and 5% 3-month Treasury Bill.

City of Atlanta General Employees 10 Investment Manager Returns

Returns for Periods Ended December 31, 2013 Market Last Last Last Value Ending Last Last 3 5 7 $(Dollars) Weight Quarter Year Years Years Years Fixed Income $248,882,866 20.18% (0.05%) (1.50%) 3.54% 4.85% 5.37% Fixed Income - Net 248,882,866 100.00% (0.09%) (1.66%) 3.34% 4.65% - Barclays Aggregate Index - - (0.14%) (2.02%) 3.26% 4.44% 4.91%

JP Morgan Chase 85,080,107 34.18% (0.26%) (1.56%) 3.98% 5.22% 5.70% JP Morgan Chase - Net 85,080,107 34.18% (0.33%) (1.63%) 3.95% 5.21% 5.69% Barclays Aggregate Index - - (0.14%) (2.02%) 3.26% 4.44% 4.91%

Mesirow Financial 85,046,027 34.17% 0.16% (1.95%) 4.00% 6.09% 5.79% Mesirow Financial - Net 85,046,027 34.17% 0.09% (2.15%) 3.78% 5.88% - Barclays Aggregate Index - - (0.14%) (2.02%) 3.26% 4.44% 4.91%

NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Idx 78,756,732 31.64% (0.03%) ---- Barclays Gov/Credit Inter - - (0.02%) (0.86%) 2.91% 3.96% 4.60%

Alternative investment $17,677,427 1.43% 0.01% 5.30% - - -

GrayCo Alternative Partners II 17,677,427 100.00% 0.01% 5.30% - - -

Cash & Cash Equivalent $26,585,970 2.16% 0.04% 0.16% 0.07% 0.10% - 3-month Treasury Bill - - 0.01% 0.07% 0.10% 0.12% 1.08%

Cash 14,378,609 54.08% 0.04% 0.17% 0.07% 0.16% 1.13% Enhanced Cash 11,643,848 43.80% 0.04% 0.16% 0.07% 0.09% - Security Lending 563,514 2.12% 0.04% 0.17% 0.07% 0.10% 1.60% 3-month Treasury Bill - - 0.01% 0.07% 0.10% 0.12% 1.08% 6-month Treasury Bill - - 0.02% 0.09% 0.12% 0.20% 1.18%

Total Fund $1,233,573,912 100.00% 6.53% 23.70% 12.11% 13.71% 7.66% Policy Index (1) - - 6.85% 20.56% 11.61% 13.83% 7.40%

City of Atlanta General Employees 11 Investment Manager Returns

The table below details the rates of return for the Sponsor’s investment managers over various time periods. Negative returns are shown in red, positive returns in black. Returns for one year or greater are annualized. The first set of returns for each asset class represents the composite returns for all the fund’s accounts for that asset class.

Market Value Ending $(Dollars) Weight 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Domestic Equity $746,779,261 44.26% - - - - -

Large Cap Equity $349,132,560 20.69% 32.84% 15.84% 1.36% 16.20% 31.56% S&P 500 Index - - 32.39% 16.00% 2.11% 15.06% 26.47%

Morgan Stanley LC Core 88,334,194 25.30% 33.44% 15.50% 2.71% 14.92% 21.17% Morgan Stanley LC Core - Net 88,334,194 25.30% 32.90% 15.02% 2.28% 14.35% 20.57% S&P 500 Index - - 32.39% 16.00% 2.11% 15.06% 26.47%

Rhumbline Eq-Wtd S&P500 81,870,218 23.45% - - - - - Rhumbline Eq-Wtd S&P500 - Net 81,870,218 23.45% - - - - - S&P 500 Eq-Wtd - - 36.16% 17.65% (0.11%) 21.91% 46.31%

Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund 178,928,148 51.25% 32.34% 15.98% - - - S&P 500 Index - - 32.39% 16.00% 2.11% 15.06% 26.47%

Mid Cap Equity $137,364,676 8.14% 38.14% 20.51% (5.12%) 26.90% 35.01% S&P Mid Cap 400 Index - - 33.50% 17.88% (1.73%) 26.64% 37.38%

Cornerstone Cap Mgt 68,986,524 50.22% 43.41% 18.09% (2.36%) 24.25% 38.19% Cornerstone Cap Mgt - Net 68,986,524 50.22% 42.81% 17.62% (2.75%) 23.82% 37.54% Russell MidCap Index - - 34.76% 17.28% (1.55%) 25.48% 40.48%

Ceredex MidCap Value 68,378,151 49.78% 33.01% 22.81% (6.45%) 24.91% - Ceredex MidCap Value - Net 68,378,151 49.78% 32.19% 22.07% (7.00%) 24.27% - Russell MidCap Value Idx - - 33.46% 18.51% (1.38%) 24.75% 34.21%

Small Cap Equity $260,282,026 15.43% 39.83% 14.83% (1.53%) 26.32% 34.04% S&P 600 Small Cap Index - - 41.31% 16.33% 1.02% 26.31% 25.57%

Earnest Partners SC Core 115,488,273 44.37% 36.89% 16.48% (0.69%) 20.43% 35.22% Earnest Partners SC Core - Net 115,488,273 44.37% 36.15% 15.83% (1.24%) 19.68% 34.30% Russell 2000 Index - - 38.82% 16.35% (4.18%) 26.85% 27.17%

Jennison 1 0.00% 40.18% 13.17% (1.11%) 31.41% 32.99% Jennison - Net 1 0.00% 39.04% 12.23% (1.92%) 30.28% 31.81% Russell 2000 Index - - 38.82% 16.35% (4.18%) 26.85% 27.17%

Channing Cap Mgt 27,174,781 10.44% - - - - - Channing Cap Mgt - Net 27,174,781 10.44% - - - - - Russell 2000 Value Index - - 34.52% 18.05% (5.50%) 24.50% 20.58%

International Equity $134,552,922 7.97% 24.45% 19.91% (8.29%) -- International Equity - Net - - 27.72% 19.56% (9.04%) -- MSCI EAFE Index - - 22.78% 17.32% (12.14%) 7.75% 31.78%

Johnston Asset Mgt 62,802,227 46.67% 18.06% 16.31% (7.88%) -- Johnston Asset Mgt - Net 62,802,227 46.67% 17.82% 16.31% (7.88%) -- MSCI ACWI ex US Index - - 15.78% 17.39% (13.33%) 11.60% 42.14%

Artisan Partners 71,750,695 53.33% 30.70% 23.04% (8.68%) -- MSCI EAFE Index - - 22.78% 17.32% (12.14%) 7.75% 31.78%

Balanced $59,095,464 3.50% - - - - -

Globalt Tactical ETF 59,095,464 100.00% - - - - - Globalt Tactical ETF - Net 59,095,464 100.00% - - - - -

City of Atlanta General Employees 12 Investment Manager Returns

Market Value Ending $(Dollars) Weight 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 Fixed Income $248,882,866 20.18% (1.50%) 5.00% 7.33% 6.71% 7.01% Barclays Aggregate Index - - (2.02%) 4.21% 7.84% 6.54% 5.93%

JP Morgan Chase 85,080,107 34.18% (1.56%) 5.00% 8.75% 7.48% 6.77% JP Morgan Chase - Net 85,080,107 34.18% (1.63%) 5.00% 8.75% 7.48% 6.77% Barclays Aggregate Index - - (2.02%) 4.21% 7.84% 6.54% 5.93%

Mesirow Financial 85,046,027 34.17% (1.95%) 6.37% 7.84% 7.51% 11.12% Mesirow Financial - Net 85,046,027 34.17% (2.15%) 6.16% 7.60% 7.36% 10.92% Barclays Aggregate Index - - (2.02%) 4.21% 7.84% 6.54% 5.93%

NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index78,756,732 31.64% - - - - - Barclays Gov/Credit Inter - - (0.86%) 3.89% 5.80% 5.89% 5.24%

Alternative investment $17,677,427 1.43% 5.30% - - - -

GrayCo Alternative Partners II 17,677,427 100.00% 5.30% - - - -

Cash & Cash Equivalent $26,585,970 2.16% 0.16% 0.02% 0.02% 0.09% 0.22% 3-month Treasury Bill - - 0.07% 0.11% 0.10% 0.13% 0.21%

Cash 14,378,609 54.08% 0.17% 0.02% 0.02% 0.11% 0.46% Enhanced Cash 11,643,848 43.80% 0.16% 0.02% 0.02% 0.10% 0.15% Security Lending 563,514 2.12% 0.17% 0.02% 0.02% 0.10% 0.21% Certificate of Deposites - - - 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3-month Treasury Bill - - 0.07% 0.11% 0.10% 0.13% 0.21% 6-month Treasury Bill - - 0.09% 0.11% 0.14% 0.20% 0.47%

Total Fund $1,233,573,912 100.00% 23.70% 13.80% 0.10% 14.69% 17.62% Policy Index(1) - - 20.56% 12.53% 2.48% 15.02% 19.51%

City of Atlanta General Employees 13 Total Fund Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy The Public Fund Sponsor Database consists of public employee pension total funds including both Callan Associates client and surveyed non-client funds.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Total Fund’s portfolio posted a 6.53% return for the quarter Beginning Market Value $1,170,297,621 placing it in the 8 percentile of the Public Fund Sponsor Net New Investment $-12,704,792 Database group for the quarter and in the 1 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $75,981,082 Total Fund’s portfolio underperformed the Policy Index by Ending Market Value $1,233,573,912 0.32% for the quarter and outperformed the Policy Index for the year by 3.14%. Percent Cash: 3.1%

Performance vs Public Fund Sponsor Database (Gross)

30%

25% (1)

(10) 20%

15% (15) (17) (6) (3) 10% (27) (17) (5) (8) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 10 Years 10th Percentile 6.46 20.61 11.29 14.12 7.81 25th Percentile 6.00 18.62 10.44 13.11 7.43 Median 5.32 16.06 9.58 12.45 7.05 75th Percentile 4.53 13.80 8.57 11.04 6.56 90th Percentile 3.95 11.32 7.71 9.51 6.06 Total Fund 6.53 23.70 12.11 13.71 7.59 Policy Index 6.85 20.56 11.61 13.83 7.41

Public Fund Sponsor Database (Gross) Relative Return vs Policy Index Annualized Ten Year Risk vs Return

5% 10%

4% 9% 3%

2% 8% 1% Total Fund Policy Index 0% 7%

(1%) Returns 6%

Relative Returns (2%)

(3%) 5% (4%)

(5%) 4% 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 0 5 10 15 20 Standard Deviation Total Fund

City of Atlanta General Employees 14 Total Fund Return Analysis Summary

Return Analysis The graphs below analyze the manager’s return on both a risk-adjusted and unadjusted basis. The first chart illustrates the manager’s ranking over different periods versus the appropriate style group. The second chart shows the historical quarterly and cumulative manager returns versus the appropriate market benchmark. The last two charts illustrate the manager’s ranking relative to their style using various risk-adjusted return measures.

Performance vs Public Fund Sponsor Database (Gross)

30%

25% (1) 20% (10) (55) (67) 15% (12) (15) (55) (22) 10% 5% (17) 0% (69) (5%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 20.61 14.49 3.31 15.14 25.93 25th Percentile 18.62 13.73 1.92 14.12 22.73 Median 16.06 12.67 0.91 13.00 20.23 75th Percentile 13.80 10.92 (0.29) 11.70 16.02 90th Percentile 11.32 9.34 (1.58) 10.11 12.57 Total Fund 23.70 13.80 0.10 14.69 17.62 Policy Index 20.56 12.53 2.48 15.02 19.51

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Policy Index

(2%)

(4%)

(6%) Relative Returns

(8%)

(10%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Total Fund Pub PlnSponsor DB

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Policy Index Rankings Against Public Fund Sponsor Database (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

20 2.0 1.5 15 (15) (16) 1.0 10 0.5 (16) 5 0.0 (16) (0.5) 0 (12) (1.0) (5) (1.5) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 1.01 15.11 10th Percentile 0.42 1.32 0.09 25th Percentile 0.03 13.71 25th Percentile 0.01 1.21 (0.24) Median (0.87) 12.64 Median (0.35) 1.12 (0.46) 75th Percentile (1.70) 11.89 75th Percentile (0.68) 1.06 (0.79) 90th Percentile (2.32) 11.29 90th Percentile (0.92) 1.00 (1.02) Total Fund 0.78 14.55 Total Fund 0.23 1.26 (0.03)

City of Atlanta General Employees 15 Total Fund Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis The graphs below analyze the risk or variation of a manager’s return pattern. The first scatter chart illustrates the relationship, called Excess Return Ratio, between excess return and tracking error relative to the benchmark. The second scatter chart displays the relationship, sometimes called Information Ratio, between alpha (market-risk or "beta" adjusted return) and residual risk (non-market or "unsystematic" risk). The third chart shows tracking error patterns versus the benchmark over time. The last two charts show the ranking of the manager’s risk statistics versus the peer group.

Risk Analysis vs Public Fund Sponsor Database (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

4 8

2 6

0 Total Fund 4

(2 ) 2 Total Fund

(4 ) Alpha 0 Excess Return (6 ) (2 )

(8 ) (4 )

(10 ) (6 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Policy Index

5.0% Total Fund 4.5% Pub PlnSponsor DB 4.0%

3.5%

3.0%

2.5% Tracking Error 2.0%

1.5% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Policy Index Rankings Against Public Fund Sponsor Database (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

15% 1.30 1.20 (54) 1.10 10% 1.00 (54) (57) 0.90 (85) 5% 0.80 (12) (38) (50) 0.70 0% 0.60 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 12.89 4.12 3.41 4.43 10th Percentile 1.15 0.97 1.17 25th Percentile 12.04 3.22 2.94 3.59 25th Percentile 1.07 0.97 1.09 Median 10.95 2.38 2.34 2.94 Median 0.97 0.95 1.00 75th Percentile 9.42 1.91 1.97 2.42 75th Percentile 0.81 0.93 0.86 90th Percentile 7.82 1.62 1.60 1.94 90th Percentile 0.68 0.89 0.71 Total Fund 10.77 2.35 3.32 3.31 Total Fund 0.93 0.91 0.98

City of Atlanta General Employees 16 Total Fund Ranking

The first two charts show the ranking of the Total Fund’s performance relative to that of the Public Fund Sponsor Database for periods ended December 31, 2013. The first chart is a standard unadjusted ranking. In the second chart each fund in the database is adjusted to have the same historical asset allocation as that of the Total Fund.

Public Fund Sponsor Database

30%

25% (1)

(10) 20%

15% (15) (17) Returns (6) (3) 10%

(5) (8) 5%

0% Last Last Last Last Quarter Year 3 Years 5 Years 10th Percentile 6.46 20.61 11.29 14.12 25th Percentile 6.00 18.62 10.44 13.11 Median 5.32 16.06 9.58 12.45 75th Percentile 4.53 13.80 8.57 11.04 90th Percentile 3.95 11.32 7.71 9.51 Total Fund 6.53 23.70 12.11 13.71 Policy Target 6.85 20.56 11.61 13.83

Asset Allocation Adjusted Ranking

30%

25% (20)

(93) 20%

15% (33) (38) Returns (56) (27) 10%

(41) (81) 5%

0% Last Last Last Last Quarter Year 3 Years 5 Years 10th Percentile 7.22 24.37 12.62 15.34 25th Percentile 6.96 23.54 12.14 14.27 Median 6.81 22.65 11.69 13.37 75th Percentile 6.65 21.69 11.25 12.61 90th Percentile 6.34 20.90 10.66 11.63 Total Fund 6.53 23.70 12.11 13.71 Policy Target 6.85 20.56 11.61 13.83

* Current Quarter Target = 60.0% S&P 500 Index, 25.0% Barclays Aggregate Index, 10.0% MSCI EAFE US$ Gross Div and 5.0% 3-month Treasury Bill.

City of Atlanta General Employees 17 Large Cap Equity Large Cap Equity Large Cap Large Cap Equity Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Large Cap Equity’s portfolio posted a 10.49% return for the Beginning Market Value $315,972,683 quarter placing it in the 8 percentile of the Pub Pln- Net New Investment $649 Domestic Equity group for the quarter and in the 78 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $33,159,228 Large Cap Equity’s portfolio underperformed the S&P 500 Ending Market Value $349,132,560 Index by 0.02% for the quarter and outperformed the S&P 500 Index for the year by 0.45%. Percent Cash: 0.7%

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross)

45%

40%

35% (85) (78) 30%

25%

20% (52) (83) (43) (55) 15%

10% (7) (8) (42) (81) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 6 Years 10th Percentile 10.44 36.90 17.10 20.75 7.93 25th Percentile 10.03 35.33 16.63 19.84 7.47 Median 9.84 34.24 16.12 19.07 6.85 75th Percentile 9.62 33.04 15.56 18.18 6.34 90th Percentile 9.24 32.01 14.60 17.63 5.81 Large Cap Equity 10.49 32.84 15.97 18.98 7.07 S&P 500 Index 10.51 32.39 16.18 17.94 6.24

Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Relative Return vs S&P 500 Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

8% 30%

28% 6% 26%

24% 4% 22%

2% 20% Large Cap Equity Returns 18% S&P 500 Index 0%

Relative Returns 16%

14% (2%) 12%

(4%) 10% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 10 15 20 25 Standard Deviation Large Cap Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 19 Large Cap Equity Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross)

50% 40% (85) (78) 30% (31) (83) 20% (54) (61) (95) (83) 10% (13) 0% (25) (10%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 36.90 17.43 2.35 21.51 34.62 25th Percentile 35.33 16.83 1.37 19.60 32.55 Median 34.24 16.11 0.35 17.95 29.55 75th Percentile 33.04 15.14 (1.14) 16.92 27.35 90th Percentile 32.01 14.12 (2.55) 15.69 25.51 Large Cap Equity 32.84 15.84 1.36 16.20 31.56 S&P 500 Index 32.39 16.00 2.11 15.06 26.47

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs S&P 500 Index

10%

0% Relative Returns (2%)

(4%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Large Cap Equity Pub Pln- Dom Equity

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs S&P 500 Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25 1.4 1.2 20 (4) (3) 1.0 15 0.8 (5) 0.6 10 0.4 (58) 5 0.2 (5) 0.0 0 (0.2) (5) (0.4) Alpha Treynor (0.6) Ratio Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 1.65 19.52 25th Percentile 0.91 18.75 10th Percentile 0.60 1.09 0.78 Median 0.33 18.12 25th Percentile 0.41 1.06 0.67 75th Percentile (0.30) 17.44 Median 0.14 1.02 0.38 90th Percentile (0.92) 16.74 75th Percentile (0.15) 0.98 0.10 90th Percentile (0.30) 0.94 (0.13) Large Cap Equity 2.25 20.57 Large Cap Equity 0.74 1.15 0.27

City of Atlanta General Employees 20 Large Cap Equity Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

10 6

8 5

6 4

4 3 Large Cap Equity 2 2 Large Cap Equity

0 Alpha 1

Excess Return (2 ) 0

(4 ) (1 )

(6 ) (2 )

(8 ) (3 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs S&P 500 Index

5.0% 4.5% Large Cap Equity Pub Pln- Dom Equity 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0%

Tracking Error 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs S&P 500 Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.15

20% 1.10 (96) 15% 1.05 1.00 10% (86) 0.95 5% (96) (24) (21) (96) (71) 0.90 0% Standard Downside Residual Tracking 0.85 Deviation Risk Risk Error Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation 10th Percentile 19.64 2.76 3.75 3.90 25th Percentile 19.07 2.10 3.01 3.23 10th Percentile 1.11 0.99 1.12 Median 18.59 1.64 2.45 2.70 25th Percentile 1.07 0.99 1.08 75th Percentile 18.15 1.17 1.98 2.05 Median 1.05 0.98 1.06 90th Percentile 17.49 0.81 1.46 1.69 75th Percentile 1.02 0.98 1.03 90th Percentile 0.99 0.96 0.99 Large Cap Equity 16.41 1.25 3.06 3.31 Large Cap Equity 0.92 0.97 0.93

City of Atlanta General Employees 21 Holdings Based Style Analysis For One Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 This page analyzes and compares the investment styles of multiple portfolios using a detailed holdings-based style analysis methodology. The size component of style is measured by the weighted median market capitialization of the holdings. The value/core/growth style dimension is captured by the "Combined Z-Score" of the portfolio. This score is based on eight fundamental factors used in the MSCI stock style scoring system. The table below gives a more detailed breakdown of several relevant style metrics on the portfolios.

Style Map Holdings for One Quarter Ended December 31, 2013

Mega

Vanguard S&P 500 Index S&P 500 Index Large Morgan Stanley Large Cap Equity

Rhumbline Eq-Wtd S&P 500 Mid

Small

Micro Value Core Growth

Weight Wtd Median Combined Growth Value Number of Security % Mkt Cap Z-Score Z-Score Z-Score Securities Diversification Morgan Stanley 25.30% 49.61 0.47 0.18 (0.29) 49 16.67 Rhumbline Eq-Wtd S&P 500 23.45% 16.48 (0.08) (0.05) 0.03 501 242.89 Vanguard S&P 500 Index 51.25% 66.87 (0.04) (0.01) 0.02 502 57.00 Large Cap Equity 100.00% 42.71 0.08 0.03 (0.05) 511 66.87 S&P 500 Index - 67.05 (0.04) (0.01) 0.02 500 56.74

City of Atlanta General Employees 22 Large Cap Equity Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics This graph compares the manager’s portfolio characteristics with the range of characteristics for the portfolios which make up the manager’s style group. This analysis illustrates whether the manager’s current holdings are consistent with other managers employing the same style.

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity as of December 31, 2013

0% (1) (7) 10% (14) 20% (27) (27) 30% (30) (35) 40% (47) 50% 60% 70% (70) (70) (75)

Percentile Ranking 80% (82) 90% 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 66.30 17.13 2.71 13.48 1.97 0.26 25th Percentile 45.56 16.73 2.62 12.65 1.82 0.11 Median 35.39 16.02 2.58 12.17 1.68 0.00 75th Percentile 26.60 15.43 2.46 11.41 1.54 (0.06) 90th Percentile 16.74 15.35 2.34 11.05 1.36 (0.07) Large Cap Equity 42.71 16.03 2.86 11.57 1.82 0.08 S&P 500 Index 67.05 15.43 2.61 11.21 1.96 (0.04)

Sector Weights The graph below contrasts the manager’s sector weights with those of the benchmark and median sector weights across the members of the peer group. The magnitude of sector weight differences from the index and the manager’s sector diversification are also shown. Diversification by number and concentration of holdings are also compared to the benchmark and peer group. Issue Diversification represents by count, and Diversification Ratio by percent, the number of holdings that comprise half of the portfolio’s market value.

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 4000 18.6% 18.6% 3500 Information Technology 19.6% Diversification Ratio 14.8% 16.2% 3000 Manager 13% Financials 17.7% 13.4% Index 11% 10.9% 50% 2500

Mgr MV Style Median 9% Industrials 12.6% 13.4% 2000 12.5% Consumer Discretionary 14.7% 13.2% 1500 13.0% Health Care 50%

13.0% Mgr MV 9.6% 1000 Consumer Staples 9.8% 7.6% 500 (83) 8.9% Sector Diversification Energy 10.3% Manager 3.24 sectors 9.1% 0 (68) 3.7% Index 3.18 sectors Number of Issue 3.5% Securities Diversification Materials 4.0% 2.9% 2.9% 10th Percentile 3496 127 Utilities 25th Percentile 2233 116 1.5% Median 958 96 2.3% Telecommunications 1.7% 75th Percentile 633 58 0.0% 90th Percentile 500 55 Pooled Vehicles Large Cap Equity 511 67 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% S&P 500 Index 500 57 Large Cap Equity S&P 500 Index Pub Pln- Dom Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 23 Morgan Stanley LC Core Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Morgan Stanley LC Core’s portfolio posted a 11.10% return Beginning Market Value $79,507,154 for the quarter placing it in the 24 percentile of the CAI Large Net New Investment $649 Cap Core Style group for the quarter and in the 64 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $8,826,391 Morgan Stanley LC Core’s portfolio outperformed the S&P Ending Market Value $88,334,194 500 Index by 0.59% for the quarter and outperformed the S&P 500 Index for the year by 1.05%.

Performance vs CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross)

45%

40%

35% A(64) (76) B(70) 30%

25% A(62) (66) B(72)

20% (58) A(56) A(79) (61) B(87) 15% B(62) A(24) 10% (43) B(32) (88) A(59) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last Last 2 Years Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 10 Years Year 10th Percentile 11.55 37.44 27.00 18.44 20.05 9.10 25th Percentile 11.09 35.96 26.09 17.74 19.37 8.68 Median 10.42 34.34 24.96 16.72 18.19 8.28 75th Percentile 9.79 32.68 23.33 15.33 17.28 7.62 90th Percentile 9.44 31.15 22.16 14.54 16.18 7.27 Morgan Stanley LC Core A 11.10 33.44 24.14 16.54 17.13 7.95 Morgan Stanley LC Core - Net B 11.00 32.90 23.64 16.06 16.60 - S&P 500 Index 10.51 32.39 23.93 16.18 17.94 7.41

CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross) Relative Return vs S&P 500 Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

4% 22%

3% 21% 2% 20% 1%

0% 19%

(1%) 18%

Returns S&P 500 Index (2%)

Relative Returns 17% Morgan Stanley LC Core (3%) 16% Morgan Stanley LC Core - Net (4%)

(5%) 15% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 Standard Deviation Morgan Stanley LC Core

City of Atlanta General Employees 24 Morgan Stanley LC Core Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross)

50% 40% (76) (64) 30% (50) 20% (89) (48) (55) (43) (44) 10% (32) 0% (36) (10%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 37.44 18.81 6.19 18.65 34.98 25th Percentile 35.96 17.06 4.37 16.40 32.58 Median 34.34 15.89 1.46 14.40 26.51 75th Percentile 32.68 14.42 (1.56) 13.55 22.96 90th Percentile 31.15 11.41 (3.63) 10.96 21.05 Morgan Stanley LC Core 33.44 15.50 2.71 14.92 21.17 S&P 500 Index 32.39 16.00 2.11 15.06 26.47

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs S&P 500 Index

(2%)

(4%) Relative Returns (6%)

(8%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Morgan Stanley LC Core CAI Large Cap Core Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs S&P 500 Index Rankings Against CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25 1.4 1.2 20 (24) 1.0 (26) 15 0.8 0.6 10 0.4 (31) 0.2 5 0.0 0 (26) (0.2) (75) (0.4) (5) (0.6) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 1.85 19.97 10th Percentile 0.73 1.12 0.67 25th Percentile 1.14 18.98 25th Percentile 0.47 1.07 0.40 Median 0.33 18.21 Median 0.12 1.02 0.10 75th Percentile (0.64) 16.93 75th Percentile (0.28) 0.95 (0.20) 90th Percentile (1.35) 16.31 90th Percentile (0.41) 0.89 (0.39) Morgan Morgan Stanley LC Core 1.02 19.11 Stanley LC Core 0.33 1.07 (0.19)

City of Atlanta General Employees 25 Morgan Stanley LC Core Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

3 6

5 2 4

1 3

2 Morgan Stanley LC Core 0 Morgan Stanley LC Core

Alpha 1

Excess Return (1 ) 0

(1 ) (2 ) (2 )

(3 ) (3 ) 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs S&P 500 Index

9% Morgan Stanley LC Core 8% CAI Large Cap Core Style 7% 6% 5% 4%

Tracking Error 3% 2% 1% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs S&P 500 Index Rankings Against CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.15

20% 1.10 (93) 1.05 15% 1.00 10% (79) 0.95 5% 0.90 (93) (21) (31) (25) (93) 0% 0.85 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 19.20 3.13 4.08 4.13 10th Percentile 1.08 0.99 1.09 25th Percentile 18.55 2.52 3.41 3.59 25th Percentile 1.04 0.98 1.05 Median 17.81 1.69 2.60 2.71 Median 1.00 0.98 1.01 75th Percentile 17.30 1.36 2.24 2.20 75th Percentile 0.97 0.97 0.98 90th Percentile 16.95 0.95 1.69 1.73 90th Percentile 0.92 0.95 0.96 Morgan Morgan Stanley LC Core 15.94 2.67 3.10 3.59 Stanley LC Core 0.89 0.96 0.91

City of Atlanta General Employees 26 Morgan Stanley LC Core Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI Large Cap Core Style as of December 31, 2013

0% (1) (1) 10% (9) 20% (22) (27) 30% (31) 40% (40) (44) 50% (53) 60% (58) (59) 70%

Percentile Ranking 80% (83) 90% 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 85.44 16.40 2.93 13.50 2.05 0.42 25th Percentile 68.77 15.59 2.71 12.79 1.94 0.16 Median 54.12 14.98 2.57 11.88 1.76 (0.00) 75th Percentile 36.96 14.20 2.33 10.36 1.62 (0.22) 90th Percentile 26.07 13.72 2.13 9.93 1.42 (0.29) Morgan Stanley LC Core 49.61 17.01 4.45 12.24 1.55 0.47 S&P 500 Index 67.05 15.43 2.61 11.21 1.96 (0.04)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 350 23.6% 18.6% Information Technology 19.0% 300 Diversification Ratio 18.9%

10.9% 50% 250 Manager 34% Industrials Mgr MV 11.2% Index 11% 15.9% 13.0% 200 Style Median 26% Health Care 14.5% 12.0% 12.5% 150 Consumer Discretionary 50%

13.9% Mgr MV 11.1% 9.8% 100 Consumer Staples 8.5% 10.8% (82) Financials 16.2% 50 16.9% Sector Diversification (83) 6.2% 10.3% Manager 2.48 sectors 0 Energy 9.6% Number of Issue Index 3.18 sectors Securities Diversification 1.6% Materials 3.5% 3.5% 10th Percentile 287 49 25th Percentile 149 36 2.3% Telecommunications 1.6% Median 97 27 75th Percentile 59 18 2.9% 90th Percentile 38 15 Utilities 1.2% Morgan 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Stanley LC Core 49 17 Morgan Stanley LC Core S&P 500 Index S&P 500 Index 500 57 CAI Large Cap Core Style

City of Atlanta General Employees 27 Morgan Stanley LC Core Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Gilead Sciences Health Care $4,013,010 4.7% 19.53% 115.03 23.12 0.00% 35.00% Mastercard Inc Cl A Information Technology $3,341,840 3.9% 24.29% 96.91 26.86 0.29% 18.10% Ametek Inc New Industrials $3,212,870 3.7% 14.59% 12.86 22.51 0.46% 21.22% Oracle Corp Information Technology $3,167,928 3.7% 15.76% 177.17 12.43 0.63% 10.00% Mccormick & Co Inc Com Non Vtg Consumer Staples $2,612,068 3.0% 7.66% 8.25 19.82 2.15% 7.20% Accenture Plc Ireland Shs Class A Information Technology $2,601,605 3.0% 12.86% 53.02 17.80 2.26% 12.00% Microsoft Corp Information Technology $2,492,838 2.9% 13.33% 311.79 13.42 2.99% 8.85% Polaris Inds Inc Consumer Discretionary $2,475,880 2.9% 13.10% 10.03 21.93 1.15% 15.00% Pepsico Consumer Staples $2,330,614 2.7% 5.04% 127.91 17.61 2.74% 8.20% Nike Inc Cl B Consumer Discretionary $2,233,376 2.6% 8.60% 56.02 23.57 1.22% 12.90%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Alliant Techsystems Inc Industrials $2,165,904 2.5% 25.00% 3.90 11.95 0.85% 0.85% Mastercard Inc Cl A Information Technology $3,341,840 3.9% 24.29% 96.91 26.86 0.29% 18.10% Cognizant Tech Solutions Information Technology $2,221,560 2.6% 22.97% 30.43 21.21 0.00% 18.00% American Express Co Financials $1,052,468 1.2% 20.51% 97.89 16.74 1.01% 12.50% Gilead Sciences Health Care $4,013,010 4.7% 19.53% 115.03 23.12 0.00% 35.00% Abbvie Inc Com Health Care $1,182,944 1.4% 19.10% 83.73 16.55 3.03% 13.40% Exxon Mobil Corp Energy $2,185,920 2.5% 18.43% 445.45 12.88 2.49% 3.75% Apple Inc Information Technology $1,655,274 1.9% 18.38% 509.77 12.58 2.17% 12.30% Lockheed Martin Corp Industrials $1,739,322 2.0% 17.63% 47.71 14.56 3.58% 6.75% Toro Co Industrials $1,399,200 1.6% 17.39% 3.66 21.36 1.26% 30.43%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Altera Corp Information Technology $1,356,501 1.6% (12.06)% 10.39 21.26 1.84% 10.50% Expeditors Intl Wash. Industrials $1,539,900 1.8% 1.12% 9.13 22.46 1.36% 15.00% Philip Morris Intl Inc Consumer Staples $1,437,645 1.7% 1.73% 141.02 15.56 4.32% 6.00% IBM Corp Information Technology $1,237,962 1.4% 1.83% 205.47 10.41 2.03% 9.84% Lilly (Eli) & Co Health Care $663,000 0.8% 2.31% 57.46 18.35 3.84% (2.35)% Occidental Petroleum Energy $1,531,110 1.8% 2.37% 76.63 13.10 2.69% 6.90% Silgan Holdings Inc Materials $1,392,580 1.6% 2.48% 3.04 15.15 1.17% 11.80% Ross Stores Inc Consumer Discretionary $936,625 1.1% 3.17% 16.39 17.34 0.91% 11.90% Coach Inc Consumer Discretionary $1,448,154 1.7% 3.55% 15.82 15.38 2.41% 11.85% Chevron Corp New Energy $1,561,375 1.8% 3.67% 241.33 10.53 3.20% 6.00%

City of Atlanta General Employees 28 Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500 Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy RhumbLine’s investment objective is to produce returns that track, as closely as possible, the client specific benchmark. The proper application of quantitative techniques and computer expertise facilitates the reproduction of all published indexes as well as the creation of unique indexes customized to meet the investment needs of every client. Since the objective of an Index Fund is to track the benchmark as closely as possible, RhumbLine monitors portfolio holdings daily to keep the allocation of assets equal to the index. The team specializes in passive index-based strategies, and does not use a "top - down" or "bottom - up" style. Indexing is a quantitative model-driven approach with no active judgment.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500’s portfolio posted a 9.83% Beginning Market Value $74,544,726 return for the quarter placing it in the 74 percentile of the CAI Net New Investment $0 Large Cap Core Style group for the quarter and in the 53 percentile for the last one-half year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $7,325,492 Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500’s portfolio underperformed Ending Market Value $81,870,218 the S&P 500 Eq-Wtd by 0.03% for the quarter and underperformed the S&P 500 Eq-Wtd for the one-half year by 0.06%.

Performance vs CAI Large Cap Core Style (Gross)

22% 20% 18% (50) A(53) B(55) 16% 14% 12% 10% A(74) (73) B(74) 8% Last Quarter Last 1/2 Year 10th Percentile 11.55 19.26 25th Percentile 11.09 18.19 Median 10.42 17.24 75th Percentile 9.79 16.78 90th Percentile 9.44 14.96 Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500 A 9.83 17.14 Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500 - Net B 9.81 17.10 S&P 500 Eq-Wtd 9.85 17.21

Relative Return vs S&P 500 Eq-Wtd Cumulative Returns vs S&P 500 Eq-Wtd

0.03% 0.30%

0.02% 0.20%

0.01% 0.10%

0.00% 0.00%

(0.01%) (0.10%)

Relative Returns (0.02%) (0.20%)

(0.03%) Cumulative Relative Returns (0.30%) Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500 CAI Large Cap Core Style (0.04%) (0.40%) 2013 2013

Rhumbline Equal-Wtd S&P 500

City of Atlanta General Employees 29 Rhumbline Equal - WTD S&P 500 Index Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI Large Cap Core Style as of December 31, 2013

0% 10% (10) (10) 20% 30% 40% (43) (45) 50% (54) (54) (57) (57) 60% (67) (66) 70% 80% 90% Percentile Ranking 100% (99) (99) Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 85.44 16.40 2.93 13.50 2.05 0.42 25th Percentile 68.77 15.59 2.71 12.79 1.94 0.16 Median 54.12 14.98 2.57 11.88 1.76 (0.00) 75th Percentile 36.96 14.20 2.33 10.36 1.62 (0.22) 90th Percentile 26.07 13.72 2.13 9.93 1.42 (0.29) Rhumbline Equal - WTD S&P 500 Index 16.48 16.41 2.44 11.65 1.79 (0.08) S&P 500 Eq-Wtd 16.48 16.41 2.44 11.64 1.80 (0.09)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 600 16.6% Consumer Discretionary 16.6% 13.9% 500 (1) 16.1% Diversification Ratio 16.1% Financials 16.9% Manager 48% 13.2% 400 Index 49% 13.2% 50% Information Technology 19.0% Mgr MV Style Median 26% 13.0% 300 Industrials 12.9% 11.2% (1) 11.0% 11.0% 200 Health Care 14.5% 50% Mgr MV 8.9% 8.8% Energy 9.6% 100 7.8% Consumer Staples 7.9% Sector Diversification 8.5% 0 6.2% Manager 3.32 sectors Number of Issue 6.3% Materials 3.5% Index 3.32 sectors Securities Diversification 5.8% 6.1% Utilities 1.2% 10th Percentile 287 49 1.2% 25th Percentile 149 36 Telecommunications 1.2% Median 97 27 1.6% 75th Percentile 59 18 0.2% Pooled Vehicles 90th Percentile 38 15 Rhumbline Equal 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% - WTD S&P 500 Index 501 243 Rhumbline Equal - WTD S&P 500 Index S&P 500 Eq-Wtd S&P 500 Eq-Wtd 500 244 CAI Large Cap Core Style

City of Atlanta General Employees 30 Rhumbline Equal - WTD S&P 500 Index Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Lsi Corporation Information Technology $218,286 0.3% 41.45% 6.03 15.97 1.09% 18.00% Red Hat Inc Information Technology $188,211 0.2% 21.46% 10.61 35.99 0.00% 15.40% D.R. Horton Consumer Discretionary $184,428 0.2% 14.87% 7.21 13.46 0.67% 3.00% Textron Inc Industrials $183,121 0.2% 33.22% 10.31 16.34 0.22% 9.00% Pulte Group Inc Consumer Discretionary $182,841 0.2% 23.80% 7.91 17.56 0.98% 24.43% Vertex Pharmaceuticals Health Care $180,648 0.2% (2.00)% 17.30 (36.24) 0.00% 19.00% Allergan Inc Health Care $180,485 0.2% 22.87% 32.97 20.49 0.18% 13.00% Pentair Ltd Shs Industrials $179,823 0.2% 20.06% 15.47 19.66 1.29% 16.50% Quanta Services Common Industrials $178,548 0.2% 14.72% 6.64 17.73 0.00% 19.36% Tyco International Ltd Shs Industrials $178,491 0.2% 17.84% 18.97 18.36 1.56% 13.85%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Valero Energy Corp New Energy $171,235 0.2% 48.33% 27.32 10.66 1.79% 4.85% Us Steel Corp Materials $169,463 0.2% 43.53% 4.27 25.65 0.68% 19.10% Marathon Pete Corp Energy $168,934 0.2% 43.39% 28.72 11.01 1.83% 11.00% Lsi Corporation Information Technology $218,286 0.3% 41.45% 6.03 15.97 1.09% 18.00% Forest Labs Inc Health Care $169,044 0.2% 40.29% 16.11 26.48 0.00% 45.50% First Solar Inc Information Technology $159,715 0.2% 35.89% 5.34 16.07 0.00% (9.90)% Expedia Inc Del Consumer Discretionary $174,044 0.2% 34.84% 8.58 18.68 0.86% 11.60% Phillips 66 Energy $169,546 0.2% 34.19% 47.13 11.56 2.02% (7.05)% Hewlett-Packard Co Information Technology $163,955 0.2% 34.08% 53.96 7.61 2.08% (3.00)% Tesoro Corp Energy $163,940 0.2% 33.60% 7.90 9.26 1.71% 9.20%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Jabil Circuit Information Technology $142,935 0.2% (19.25)% 3.53 12.95 1.83% 12.00% Teradata Corp Del Information Technology $173,166 0.2% (17.95)% 7.42 14.87 0.00% 12.50% Newmont Mining Hldg Materials $154,568 0.2% (17.34)% 11.46 13.47 3.47% (20.20)% Avon Products Consumer Staples $160,269 0.2% (16.12)% 7.47 15.51 1.39% 14.20% Anadarko Petroleum Corp Energy $157,737 0.2% (14.52)% 39.87 15.28 0.91% 5.30% Quest Diagnostics Health Care $155,140 0.2% (13.35)% 8.13 12.72 2.24% 10.00% Health Care Reit Financials $156,199 0.2% (13.05)% 15.34 57.60 5.71% (16.98)% Altera Corp Information Technology $165,030 0.2% (12.06)% 10.39 21.26 1.84% 10.50% Regeneron Pharmaceutical Health Care $160,309 0.2% (12.03)% 26.62 48.80 0.00% 32.00% Denbury Res Inc Energy $160,861 0.2% (10.76)% 6.13 12.54 0.00% (3.60)%

City of Atlanta General Employees 31 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy Vanguard Institutional Index Fund is passively administered using a "full replication" approach. Under this method, the fund holds all of the 500 underlying securities in proportion to their weighting in the index. The fund remains fully invested in equities at all times and does not make judgmental calls on the direction of the S&P 500 Index.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund’s portfolio posted a 10.50% Beginning Market Value $161,920,803 return for the quarter placing it in the 40 percentile of the CAI Net New Investment $0 MF - Core Equity Style group for the quarter and in the 51 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $17,007,345 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund’s portfolio underperformed Ending Market Value $178,928,148 the S&P 500 Index by 0.01% for the quarter and underperformed the S&P 500 Index for the year by 0.05%.

Performance vs CAI MF - Core Equity Style (Net)

40%

35% (50) (51) 30% (37) (38) 25% (43) (43)

20%

15%

10% (38) (40)

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 2 Years Last 2-1/4 Years 10th Percentile 10.91 35.73 26.04 29.59 25th Percentile 10.62 34.15 24.83 27.76 Median 10.14 32.38 23.77 26.39 75th Percentile 9.14 29.54 21.50 24.15 90th Percentile 8.27 27.03 18.45 21.72 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund 10.50 32.34 23.89 27.13 S&P 500 Index 10.51 32.39 23.93 27.16

Relative Return vs S&P 500 Index Cumulative Returns vs S&P 500 Index

0.01% 3%

1% 0.00%

(1%)

(0.01%) Relative Returns (2%)

Cumulative Relative Returns (3%) Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund CAI Core Equity Mut Fds (0.02%) (4%) 2011 2012 2013 2011 2012 2013

Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund

City of Atlanta General Employees 32 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI MF - Core Equity Style as of December 31, 2013

0% 10% 20% (26) (26) 30% (30) (30) 40% (38) (38) 50% (55) (55) (58) (58) 60% (64) (64) 70% 80% Percentile Ranking 90% 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 98.95 17.79 3.47 15.96 2.41 0.84 25th Percentile 69.48 15.94 2.97 13.32 2.00 0.35 Median 59.38 15.25 2.64 11.25 1.74 0.08 75th Percentile 46.37 14.41 2.39 10.40 1.42 (0.18) 90th Percentile 39.21 13.97 2.21 9.41 1.16 (0.28) Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund 66.87 15.43 2.61 11.21 1.96 (0.04) S&P 500 Index 67.05 15.43 2.61 11.21 1.96 (0.04)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 600 18.6% Information Technology 18.6% 19.7% 500 (5) Diversification Ratio 16.2% Financials 16.2% Manager 11% 16.7% 400 Index 11% 13.0% 13.0% 50% Style Median 31% Health Care 14.9% Mgr MV 300 12.5% 12.5% Consumer Discretionary 14.1% 10.9% 200

Industrials 10.9% 50% 12.2% Mgr MV 10.3% 100 Energy 10.3% (4) 9.4% Sector Diversification 9.8% 9.8% Manager 3.18 sectors 0 Consumer Staples 8.9% Number of Issue Index 3.18 sectors Securities Diversification 3.5% Materials 3.5% 3.3% 10th Percentile 228 42 2.9% 25th Percentile 122 29 2.9% Utilities 0.1% Median 69 23 2.3% 75th Percentile 50 16 2.3% 90th Percentile 36 13 Telecommunications 0.7% Vanguard S&P 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 500 Index Fund 502 57 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund S&P 500 Index S&P 500 Index 500 57 CAI Core Equity Mut Fds

City of Atlanta General Employees 33 Vanguard S&P 500 Index Fund Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Apple Inc Information Technology $5,476,446 3.1% 18.38% 509.77 12.58 2.17% 12.30% Exxon Mobil Corp Energy $4,795,663 2.7% 18.43% 445.45 12.88 2.49% 3.75% Google Inc Cl A Information Technology $3,411,652 1.9% 27.95% 307.01 21.51 0.00% 16.00% Microsoft Corp Information Technology $3,084,434 1.7% 13.23% 311.79 13.42 2.99% 8.85% General Electric Co Industrials $3,076,271 1.7% 18.27% 285.45 16.20 3.14% 9.50% Johnson & Johnson Health Care $2,803,188 1.6% 6.38% 258.11 15.66 2.88% 6.20% Chevron Corp New Energy $2,605,836 1.5% 3.67% 241.33 10.53 3.20% 6.00% Procter & Gamble Co Consumer Staples $2,400,474 1.3% 8.53% 222.93 18.19 2.96% 7.95% JPMorgan Chase & Co Financials $2,384,705 1.3% 13.96% 220.13 9.73 2.60% 6.00% Wells Fargo & Co New Financials $2,360,710 1.3% 10.65% 241.06 11.32 2.64% 7.50%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Valero Energy Corp New Energy $294,968 0.2% 48.33% 27.32 10.66 1.79% 4.85% Us Steel Corp Materials $46,273 0.0% 43.53% 4.27 25.65 0.68% 19.10% Marathon Pete Corp Energy $299,512 0.2% 43.39% 28.72 11.01 1.83% 11.00% Lsi Corporation Information Technology $65,193 0.0% 41.45% 6.03 15.97 1.09% 18.00% Forest Labs Inc Health Care $154,426 0.1% 40.29% 16.11 26.48 0.00% 45.50% First Solar Inc Information Technology $41,885 0.0% 35.89% 5.34 16.07 0.00% (9.90)% Expedia Inc Del Consumer Discretionary $77,875 0.0% 34.84% 8.58 18.68 0.86% 11.60% Phillips 66 Energy $501,594 0.3% 34.19% 47.13 11.56 2.02% (7.05)% Hewlett-Packard Co Information Technology $583,287 0.3% 34.08% 53.96 7.61 2.08% (3.00)% Tesoro Corp Energy $84,357 0.0% 33.60% 7.90 9.26 1.71% 9.20%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Jabil Circuit Information Technology $34,976 0.0% (19.25)% 3.53 12.95 1.83% 12.00% Teradata Corp Del Information Technology $80,609 0.0% (17.95)% 7.42 14.87 0.00% 12.50% Newmont Mining Hldg Materials $124,360 0.1% (17.34)% 11.46 13.47 3.47% (20.20)% Avon Products Consumer Staples $81,089 0.0% (16.12)% 7.47 15.51 1.39% 14.20% Anadarko Petroleum Corp Energy $433,009 0.2% (14.52)% 39.87 15.28 0.91% 5.30% Quest Diagnostics Health Care $84,526 0.0% (13.35)% 8.13 12.72 2.24% 10.00% Health Care Reit Financials $167,729 0.1% (13.05)% 15.34 57.60 5.71% (16.98)% Altera Corp Information Technology $113,299 0.1% (12.06)% 10.39 21.26 1.84% 10.50% Regeneron Pharmaceutical Health Care $234,483 0.1% (12.03)% 26.62 48.80 0.00% 32.00% Denbury Res Inc Energy $65,405 0.0% (10.76)% 6.13 12.54 0.00% (3.60)%

City of Atlanta General Employees 34 Mid Cap Equity Mid Cap Equity Mid Cap Equity Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Mid Cap Equity’s portfolio posted a 10.01% return for the Beginning Market Value $124,862,020 quarter placing it in the 27 percentile of the Pub Pln- Net New Investment $1,984 Domestic Equity group for the quarter and in the 3 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $12,500,671 Mid Cap Equity’s portfolio outperformed the S&P Mid Cap Ending Market Value $137,364,676 400 Index by 1.68% for the quarter and outperformed the S&P Mid Cap 400 Index for the year by 4.64%. Percent Cash: 2.4%

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross)

45%

40% (3)

35% (65)

30%

25% (4) (4) 20%

(31) (73) 15%

10% (27) (2) (98) (5)

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 6 Years 10th Percentile 10.44 36.90 17.10 20.75 7.93 25th Percentile 10.03 35.33 16.63 19.84 7.47 Median 9.84 34.24 16.12 19.07 6.85 75th Percentile 9.62 33.04 15.56 18.18 6.34 90th Percentile 9.24 32.01 14.60 17.63 5.81 Mid Cap Equity 10.01 38.14 16.46 22.03 8.29 S&P Mid Cap 400 Index 8.33 33.50 15.64 21.89 9.41

Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Relative Return vs S&P Mid Cap 400 Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

2.5% 30%

2.0% 28%

1.5% 26%

1.0% 24%

0.5% 22% S&P Mid Cap 400 Index 0.0% 20% Mid Cap Equity

(0.5%) Returns 18%

Relative Returns (1.0%) 16%

(1.5%) 14%

(2.0%) 12%

(2.5%) 10% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 10 15 20 25 Standard Deviation Mid Cap Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 36 Mid Cap Equity Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross)

50%

40% (3) (8) (65) (10) 30% (2) (2) 20% (7) (1) 10% 0% (85) (99) (10%) (20%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 36.90 17.43 2.35 21.51 34.62 25th Percentile 35.33 16.83 1.37 19.60 32.55 Median 34.24 16.11 0.35 17.95 29.55 75th Percentile 33.04 15.14 (1.14) 16.92 27.35 90th Percentile 32.01 14.12 (2.55) 15.69 25.51 Mid Cap Equity 38.14 20.51 (5.12) 26.90 35.01 S&P Mid Cap 400 Index 33.50 17.88 (1.73) 26.64 37.38

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs S&P Mid Cap 400 Index

4% 2% 0% (2%) (4%) (6%) (8%) (10%)

Relative Returns (12%) (14%) (16%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Mid Cap Equity Pub Pln- Dom Equity

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs S&P Mid Cap 400 Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

30 1.5 25 1.0 (43) 20 (55) 0.5 15 0.0 (3) 10 (73) (0.5) 5 0 (56) (1.0) (5) (1.5) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 0.81 22.81 10th Percentile 0.21 1.09 (0.24) 25th Percentile 0.11 21.90 25th Percentile 0.03 1.06 (0.44) Median (0.46) 21.19 Median (0.14) 1.02 (0.59) 75th Percentile (1.05) 20.41 75th Percentile (0.29) 0.98 (0.72) 90th Percentile (1.72) 19.60 90th Percentile (0.46) 0.94 (0.80) Mid Cap Equity (0.59) 21.03 Mid Cap Equity (0.28) 1.03 0.05

City of Atlanta General Employees 37 Mid Cap Equity Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

5 5

0 Mid Cap Equity 2

Alpha 0 Mid Cap Equity

Excess Return (5 ) (1 )

(2 )

(3 )

(10 ) (4 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs S&P Mid Cap 400 Index

6.0% 5.5% Mid Cap Equity Pub Pln- Dom Equity 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0%

Tracking Error 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs S&P Mid Cap 400 Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.10 (3) 20% (2) (3) 1.00 (1) 15%

10% 0.90 5% (100) (100) (100) 0% 0.80 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 19.64 4.77 4.41 5.43 10th Percentile 0.95 0.98 0.96 25th Percentile 19.07 3.97 3.92 4.48 25th Percentile 0.92 0.97 0.94 Median 18.59 3.58 3.46 4.06 Median 0.90 0.97 0.91 75th Percentile 18.15 3.08 3.13 3.68 75th Percentile 0.87 0.96 0.89 90th Percentile 17.49 2.82 2.95 3.37 90th Percentile 0.84 0.94 0.86 Mid Cap Equity 21.33 1.45 2.09 2.21 Mid Cap Equity 1.04 0.99 1.05

City of Atlanta General Employees 38 Holdings Based Style Analysis For One Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 This page analyzes and compares the investment styles of multiple portfolios using a detailed holdings-based style analysis methodology. The size component of style is measured by the weighted median market capitialization of the holdings. The value/core/growth style dimension is captured by the "Combined Z-Score" of the portfolio. This score is based on eight fundamental factors used in the MSCI stock style scoring system. The table below gives a more detailed breakdown of several relevant style metrics on the portfolios.

Style Map Holdings for One Quarter Ended December 31, 2013

Mega

Large

Mid Cap Equity

Mid Ceredex MidCap Value

Cornerstone Cap Mgt

S&P Mid Cap 400 Index

Small

Micro Value Core Growth

Weight Wtd Median Combined Growth Value Number of Security % Mkt Cap Z-Score Z-Score Z-Score Securities Diversification Cornerstone Cap Mgt 50.22% 7.77 (0.07) 0.03 0.10 235 68.28 Ceredex MidCap Value 49.78% 10.48 (0.61) (0.22) 0.39 75 26.32 Mid Cap Equity 100.00% 8.40 (0.33) (0.09) 0.24 288 68.04 S&P Mid Cap 400 Index - 4.61 (0.07) (0.02) 0.04 400 122.84

City of Atlanta General Employees 39 Mid Cap Equity Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity as of December 31, 2013

0% (1) 10% (16) 20% 30% 40% 50% (57) 60% (67) 70% (76) 80% (81)

Percentile Ranking 90% (89) (89) (96) 100% (99) (98) (98)

Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 66.30 17.13 2.71 13.48 1.97 0.26 25th Percentile 45.56 16.73 2.62 12.65 1.82 0.11 Median 35.39 16.02 2.58 12.17 1.68 0.00 75th Percentile 26.60 15.43 2.46 11.41 1.54 (0.06) 90th Percentile 16.74 15.35 2.34 11.05 1.36 (0.07) Mid Cap Equity 8.40 15.74 2.09 11.28 1.95 (0.33) S&P Mid Cap 400 Index 4.61 18.51 2.43 12.03 1.40 (0.07)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 4000 24.5% 22.4% 3500 Financials 17.7% Diversification Ratio 13.9% 17.1% 3000 Industrials 50% Manager 24%

12.6% Mgr MV Index 31% 12.5% 2500 14.1% Style Median 9% Consumer Discretionary 14.7% 12.4% 2000 Information Technology 15.9% 19.6% 50%

Mgr MV 1500 10.2% 9.0% Health Care 13.0% 1000 7.8% 5.7% Energy 9.1% 500 Sector Diversification (96) 6.4% (68) 7.0% Manager 2.91 sectors 0 Materials 4.0% Number of Issue 6.3% Index 2.66 sectors Securities Diversification Utilities 4.3% 10th Percentile 3496 127 4.2% 25th Percentile 2233 116 Consumer Staples 4.0% 7.6% Median 958 96 1.0% 75th Percentile 633 58 0.5% Telecommunications 1.7% 90th Percentile 500 55 0.4% Pooled Vehicles Mid Cap Equity 288 68 S&P Mid 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Cap 400 Index 400 123 Mid Cap Equity S&P Mid Cap 400 Index Pub Pln- Dom Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 40 Cornerstone Capital Management Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy Cornerstone Capital Management Holdings believes it can achieve consistent excess returns with controlled risk by adhering to the following investment philosophy: Model rationale must be intuitive and based on sound investment principles; The time from idea conception to portfolio action must be swift; Appropriate balance of valuation and momentum metrics; Disciplined review of the model and output ensures process integrity.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Cornerstone Capital Management’s portfolio posted a Beginning Market Value $61,885,104 11.48% return for the quarter placing it in the 22 percentile Net New Investment $1,667 of the CAI Mid Cap Core Style group for the quarter and in the 11 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $7,099,754 Cornerstone Capital Management’s portfolio outperformed Ending Market Value $68,986,524 the Russell MidCap Index by 3.09% for the quarter and outperformed the Russell MidCap Index for the year by Percent Cash: 0.2% 8.65%.

Performance vs CAI Mid Cap Core Style (Gross)

50% 45% A(11) B(14) 40% 35% (63) 30% 25% A(45) (54) B(50) 20% A(36) B(46) 15% (72) A(22) 10% B(27) (83) (66) A(55) 5% 0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 6-3/4 Years 10th Percentile 11.87 43.87 20.62 24.93 11.45 25th Percentile 11.40 41.45 18.89 23.99 10.00 Median 9.40 35.89 17.65 22.66 8.45 75th Percentile 8.94 32.95 14.01 21.01 7.17 90th Percentile 6.80 30.48 10.41 16.70 5.81 Cornerstone Capital Management A 11.48 43.41 18.25 23.21 7.99 Cornerstone Capital Management - Net B 11.37 42.81 17.77 22.71 - Russell MidCap Index 8.39 34.76 15.88 22.36 7.45

CAI Mid Cap Core Style (Gross) Relative Return vs Russell MidCap Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

6% 30%

28% 4% 26% 2% Cornerstone Capital Management 24%

0% 22% Russell MidCap Index Cornerstone Capital Management - Net Returns 20% (2%) Relative Returns 18% (4%) 16%

(6%) 14% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 14 16 18 20 22 24 Standard Deviation Cornerstone Capital Management

City of Atlanta General Employees 41 Cornerstone Capital Management Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Mid Cap Core Style (Gross)

60% 50% (11) 40% (22) (63) (31) 30% (44) (56) 20% (60) (53) 10% 0% (47) (58) (10%) (20%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 43.87 21.44 5.22 29.53 44.00 25th Percentile 41.45 20.26 2.01 26.79 39.06 Median 35.89 18.22 (2.09) 24.54 35.08 75th Percentile 32.95 13.40 (6.72) 21.59 31.73 90th Percentile 30.48 10.95 (8.14) 17.03 25.75 Cornerstone Capital Management 43.41 18.09 (2.36) 24.25 38.19 Russell MidCap Index 34.76 17.28 (1.55) 25.48 40.48

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Russell MidCap Index

(2%)

(4%) Relative Returns (6%)

(8%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Cornerstone Capital Management CAI Mid Cap Core Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Russell MidCap Index Rankings Against CAI Mid Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

30 2 25 (33) (34) 20 1 15 (31) (44) 10 0 5 0 (34) (1) (5) (10) (2) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 3.25 26.04 10th Percentile 0.85 1.26 0.52 25th Percentile 1.89 24.38 25th Percentile 0.44 1.16 0.40 Median 0.30 22.48 Median 0.11 1.10 0.08 75th Percentile (1.76) 20.17 75th Percentile (0.54) 0.98 (0.25) 90th Percentile (4.81) 16.65 90th Percentile (1.16) 0.81 (1.38) Cornerstone Cornerstone Capital Management 1.24 23.64 Capital Management 0.38 1.15 0.22

City of Atlanta General Employees 42 Cornerstone Capital Management Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Mid Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

6 8

4 6

2 4 Cornerstone Capital Management 0 2 Cornerstone Capital Management

(2 ) Alpha 0 Excess Return (4 ) (2 )

(6 ) (4 )

(8 ) (6 ) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Russell MidCap Index

7% Cornerstone Capital Management 6% CAI Mid Cap Core Style

3% Tracking Error 2%

1% 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Russell MidCap Index Rankings Against CAI Mid Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.15 1.10 20% (62) 1.05 15% 1.00 (60) (50) (62) 10% 0.95 0.90 5% (65) (48) (61) 0.85 0% 0.80 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 22.31 5.09 6.03 6.25 10th Percentile 1.09 0.98 1.10 25th Percentile 21.94 4.25 4.83 5.02 25th Percentile 1.06 0.98 1.08 Median 20.52 2.92 3.04 4.05 Median 1.00 0.97 1.01 75th Percentile 19.18 1.88 2.78 2.99 75th Percentile 0.92 0.95 0.95 90th Percentile 17.21 1.63 2.72 2.83 90th Percentile 0.84 0.92 0.85 Cornerstone Cornerstone Capital Management 20.03 2.22 3.26 3.21 Capital Management 0.98 0.97 0.99

City of Atlanta General Employees 43 Cornerstone Capital Management Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI Mid Cap Core Style as of December 31, 2013

0% 10% 20% (19) (19) (24) (25) (26) 30% (35) (33) 40% 50% (51) (52) 60% (65) 70% (68) 80% Percentile Ranking 90% (89) 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 11.56 20.89 3.01 15.96 1.66 0.53 25th Percentile 8.66 16.63 2.55 14.82 1.49 0.15 Median 6.94 15.65 2.42 13.31 1.40 (0.02) 75th Percentile 4.88 14.94 2.30 12.15 1.02 (0.21) 90th Percentile 4.08 14.08 2.19 11.47 0.74 (0.29) Cornerstone Capital Management 7.77 15.22 2.41 11.58 1.48 (0.07) Russell MidCap Index 10.37 17.94 2.56 13.03 1.50 0.12

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 300 20.0% Consumer Discretionary 17.6% 16.5% 250 16.5% (13) Diversification Ratio Financials 19.4% 50% 19.1% Mgr MV Manager 29% 16.5% 200 Index 23% 13.8% Information Technology 17.1% Style Median 31% 14.1% 13.5% 150 Industrials 16.5% 50%

11.7% Mgr MV 11.1% 100 Health Care 10.4% 6.2% (6) 6.5% Energy 6.7% 50 5.8% Consumer Staples 5.6% Sector Diversification 4.3% 0 3.6% Manager 2.82 sectors Number of Issue 5.6% Materials 5.8% Index 2.94 sectors Securities Diversification 2.8% 5.7% Utilities 3.5% 10th Percentile 257 62 2.0% 25th Percentile 153 51 Telecommunications 1.1% Median 108 34 0.1% 75th Percentile 90 27 0.7% Pooled Vehicles 90th Percentile 46 18 Cornerstone 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% Capital Management 235 68 Cornerstone Capital Management Russell MidCap Index Russell MidCap Index 820 192 CAI Mid Cap Core Style

City of Atlanta General Employees 44 Cornerstone Capital Management Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Actavis Plc Shs Health Care $714,336 1.0% 7.76% 29.12 13.10 0.00% 19.30% Ameriprise Finl Inc Financials $661,538 1.0% 26.51% 22.76 14.73 1.81% 19.80% Mcgraw Hill Finl Inc Financials $644,055 0.9% 18.68% 21.52 20.97 1.43% 19.45% Cardinal Health Health Care $639,572 0.9% 28.69% 22.68 17.07 1.81% 10.00% Delta Air Lines Inc Del Industrials $637,798 0.9% 16.66% 23.57 9.99 0.87% 13.15% Western Digital Corp Information Technology $598,207 0.9% 32.84% 19.88 10.07 1.43% (2.00)% Kroger Co Consumer Staples $593,978 0.9% (1.60)% 20.49 12.82 1.67% 7.20% Lorillard Inc Com Consumer Staples $587,128 0.9% 14.37% 18.95 14.20 4.34% 12.00% Rockwell Automation Industrials $571,185 0.8% 11.06% 16.39 18.51 1.96% 11.52% Mylan Inc Health Care $568,583 0.8% 13.73% 16.57 12.80 0.00% 12.10%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Endo Intl Plc Shs Health Care $466,081 0.7% 48.44% 7.70 16.10 0.00% 3.00% Nu Skin Asia Inc Cl A Consumer Staples $503,674 0.7% 44.90% 8.11 18.43 0.87% 28.80% United Therapeutics Corp Health Care $520,960 0.8% 43.47% 5.65 16.06 0.00% 10.00% Spirit Aerosystems Hldgs Inc Com Cl Industrials $438,269 0.6% 40.54% 4.11 12.81 0.00% 8.50% Avis Budget Group Industrials $460,586 0.7% 40.15% 4.37 14.86 0.00% 12.10% Jazz Pharmaceuticals Plc Shs Usd Health Care $492,572 0.7% 36.69% 7.36 15.92 0.00% 25.00% First Solar Inc Information Technology $376,142 0.6% 36.39% 5.34 16.07 0.00% (9.90)% Aol Inc Information Technology $412,913 0.6% 34.86% 3.58 19.51 0.00% 8.00% Expedia Inc Del Consumer Discretionary $486,505 0.7% 34.82% 8.58 18.68 0.86% 11.60% United Rentals Inc Industrials $484,537 0.7% 34.56% 7.27 12.99 0.00% 18.70%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Jabil Circuit Information Technology $178,498 0.3% (20.47)% 3.53 12.95 1.83% 12.00% Wpx Energy Inc Energy $127,273 0.2% (13.92)% 4.09 (55.08) 0.00% - Big Lots Inc Consumer Discretionary $164,679 0.2% (13.63)% 1.88 12.85 0.00% 3.55% Health Care Reit Financials $54,749 0.1% (12.82)% 15.34 57.60 5.71% (16.98)% Telephone & Data Sys Inc Telecommunications $379,301 0.6% (12.36)% 2.61 (53.71) 1.98% (27.68)% Sandridge Energy Inc Energy $17,166 0.0% (10.06)% 2.98 75.88 0.00% (15.54)% Whiting Pete Corp New Energy $28,893 0.0% (8.87)% 7.34 14.84 0.00% (0.63)% United States Cellular Corp Telecommunications $175,309 0.3% (8.18)% 2.13 (4182.00) 0.00% 7.00% Laboratory Corp of Amer Health Care $256,658 0.4% (7.83)% 8.23 13.52 0.00% 11.00% Apartment Invest & Mgmt Financials $87,576 0.1% (6.95)% 3.78 66.44 3.71% 74.46%

City of Atlanta General Employees 45 Ceredex MidCap Value Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy The strategy employs a traditional value style rooted in a fundamental, bottom-up approach. The investment philosophy emphasizes three key characteristics in selecting equities for portfolios: existence of a dividend, low valuation levels, and the existence of a fundamental catalyst that will cause a stock to appreciate upon recognition by the market.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Ceredex MidCap Value’s portfolio posted a 8.58% return for Beginning Market Value $62,976,916 the quarter placing it in the 71 percentile of the CAI Mid Cap Net New Investment $318 Value Style group for the quarter and in the 81 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $5,400,917 Ceredex MidCap Value’s portfolio outperformed the Russell Ending Market Value $68,378,151 MidCap Value Idx by 0.02% for the quarter and underperformed the Russell MidCap Value Idx for the year Percent Cash: 4.6% by 0.45%.

Performance vs CAI Mid Cap Value Style (Gross)

50% 45% 40%

35% (75) A(81) B(87) 30% 25% 20% (63) A(68) (57) A(73) 15% B(76) B(84) 10% A(71) (71) B(73) 5% 0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 3-3/4 Years 10th Percentile 11.62 44.32 20.35 19.66 25th Percentile 10.85 40.07 18.74 18.85 Median 9.22 35.08 17.25 16.92 75th Percentile 8.07 33.45 14.75 16.01 90th Percentile 7.33 31.13 13.34 14.09 Ceredex MidCap Value A 8.58 33.01 15.18 16.06 Ceredex MidCap Value - Net B 8.41 32.19 14.49 15.39 Russell MidCap Value Idx 8.56 33.46 15.97 16.54

CAI Mid Cap Value Style (Gross) Relative Return vs Russell MidCap Value Idx Annualized Three and Three-Quarter Year Risk vs Return

6% 24%

4% 22%

20% 2% 18% Russell MidCap Value Idx 0% 16% (2%) Returns Ceredex MidCap Value 14% Ceredex MidCap Value - Net

Relative Returns (4%) 12%

(6%) 10%

(8%) 8% 2010 2011 2012 2013 10 15 20 25 30 Standard Deviation Ceredex MidCap Value

City of Atlanta General Employees 46 Ceredex MidCap Value Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Mid Cap Value Style (Gross)

60% 50% 40% (75) (81) 30% (11) (33) (32) 20% (43) 10% 0% (50) (88) (10%) (20%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 10th Percentile 44.32 22.84 4.84 27.07 25th Percentile 40.07 20.03 2.48 25.48 Median 35.08 17.82 (1.37) 23.13 75th Percentile 33.45 15.00 (4.73) 20.55 90th Percentile 31.13 11.40 (7.52) 19.82 Ceredex MidCap Value 33.01 22.81 (6.45) 24.91 Russell MidCap Value Idx 33.46 18.51 (1.38) 24.75

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Russell MidCap Value Idx

(2%)

(4%) Relative Returns (6%)

(8%) 2010 2011 2012 2013

Ceredex MidCap Value CAI Mid Cap Value Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Russell MidCap Value Idx Rankings Against CAI Mid Cap Value Style (Gross) Three and Three-Quarter Years Ended December 31, 2013

25 1.5 20 1.0 15 (91) (90) 10 0.5 5 0.0 (65) 0 (90) (0.5) (5) (89) (10) (1.0) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 2.82 20.33 10th Percentile 1.14 1.09 0.71 25th Percentile 1.79 18.30 25th Percentile 0.40 0.96 0.52 Median 0.88 17.30 Median 0.20 0.91 0.07 75th Percentile (1.06) 15.20 75th Percentile (0.47) 0.82 (0.20) 90th Percentile (2.29) 13.97 90th Percentile (0.69) 0.75 (0.42) Ceredex Ceredex MidCap Value (2.34) 13.85 MidCap Value (0.63) 0.74 (0.09)

City of Atlanta General Employees 47 Ceredex MidCap Value Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Mid Cap Value Style (Gross) Three and Three-Quarter Years Ended December 31, 2013

6 5

2 0 Ceredex MidCap Value Ceredex MidCap Value 0 Alpha

Excess Return (2 ) (5 )

(4 )

(6 ) (10 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Russell MidCap Value Idx

5.5% Ceredex MidCap Value 5.0% CAI Mid Cap Value Style

4.5%

4.0% Tracking Error 3.5%

3.0% 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Russell MidCap Value Idx Rankings Against CAI Mid Cap Value Style (Gross) Three and Three-Quarter Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.25 1.20 (15) (15) 20% 1.15 (13) 1.10 15% 1.05 1.00 10% (54) 0.95 5% (30) 0.90 (18) (43) 0.85 0% 0.80 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 22.12 4.14 6.20 7.19 10th Percentile 1.18 0.99 1.20 25th Percentile 20.60 3.01 4.09 5.06 25th Percentile 1.11 0.98 1.12 Median 19.33 2.11 3.08 3.54 Median 1.04 0.98 1.05 75th Percentile 18.26 1.58 2.37 2.75 75th Percentile 0.96 0.95 0.99 90th Percentile 16.08 1.17 1.67 1.98 90th Percentile 0.87 0.92 0.87 Ceredex Ceredex MidCap Value 21.53 3.34 3.71 4.54 MidCap Value 1.15 0.97 1.17

City of Atlanta General Employees 48 Ceredex MidCap Value Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI Mid Cap Value Style as of December 31, 2013

0% (5) 10% (17) 20% (22) 30% (31) (28) 40% (45) (43) 50% 60% (66) 70% (74) (72)

Percentile Ranking 80% (83) (85) 90% 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 11.22 16.77 2.26 14.04 2.19 (0.17) 25th Percentile 10.12 16.49 2.05 11.77 1.80 (0.29) Median 8.08 15.15 1.93 10.70 1.58 (0.41) 75th Percentile 6.73 14.31 1.81 10.25 1.42 (0.64) 90th Percentile 5.28 13.13 1.64 8.44 1.26 (0.77) Ceredex MidCap Value 10.48 16.34 1.85 10.96 2.45 (0.61) Russell MidCap Value Idx 9.10 16.11 1.72 9.42 2.02 (0.63)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 160 33.2% 31.9% 140 Financials 28.3% Diversification Ratio 13.7% 120 11.8% 50% Manager 35% Industrials 13.3% Mgr MV 100 Index 20% 10.0% Utilities 11.5% Style Median 35% 6.9% 80 (45) 9.6% 7.2% Energy 50% 60

7.8% Mgr MV 9.5% 40 Materials 5.4% 6.2% (47) 8.6% 20 Health Care 8.7% 9.0% Sector Diversification 0 8.1% Number of Issue Information Technology 10.9% Manager 2.31 sectors Securities Diversification 11.9% Index 2.52 sectors 4.7% Consumer Discretionary 9.1% 10th Percentile 140 39 13.0% 25th Percentile 103 34 2.5% Median 70 24 2.9% Consumer Staples 3.6% 75th Percentile 46 15 90th Percentile 36 12 Telecommunications 0.7% Ceredex MidCap Value 75 26 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Russell MidCap Ceredex MidCap Value Russell MidCap Value Idx Value Idx 534 108 CAI Mid Cap Value Style

City of Atlanta General Employees 49 Ceredex MidCap Value Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Intersil Hldg Corp Cl A Information Technology $1,814,554 2.8% 3.34% 1.46 16.62 4.18% 5.00% Hartford Finl Svcs Group Inc Financials $1,797,008 2.8% 16.96% 16.49 9.90 1.66% 9.25% Netapp Inc Information Technology $1,731,994 2.7% (2.86)% 13.99 14.09 1.46% 15.00% Cigna Corporation Health Care $1,618,380 2.5% 14.24% 24.74 11.95 0.05% 11.00% Steris Corp Health Care $1,455,915 2.2% 12.40% 2.84 17.63 1.75% 11.50% Price T Rowe Group Inc Financials $1,415,713 2.2% 17.66% 21.79 19.62 1.81% 13.40% Nrg Energy Inc Utilities $1,413,024 2.2% 5.54% 9.27 15.28 1.67% (11.92)% Maxim Integrated Prods Inc Information Technology $1,373,172 2.1% (5.02)% 7.95 14.77 3.73% 11.10% Health Care Reit Financials $1,371,392 2.1% (12.77)% 15.34 57.60 5.71% (16.98)% Lazard Ltd Shs A Financials $1,241,768 1.9% 27.58% 5.85 18.65 2.21% (12.44)%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Valero Energy Corp New Energy $1,023,120 1.6% 48.45% 27.32 10.66 1.79% 4.85% Lazard Ltd Shs A Financials $1,241,768 1.9% 27.58% 5.85 18.65 2.21% (12.44)% Ameriprise Finl Inc Financials $471,705 0.7% 26.67% 22.76 14.73 1.81% 19.80% Axiall Corp Materials $626,208 1.0% 26.15% 3.31 10.83 1.35% 7.00% Johnson Ctls Inc Consumer Discretionary $687,420 1.1% 24.90% 35.10 14.99 1.72% 15.50% Comerica Financials $679,822 1.0% 21.38% 8.79 16.12 1.43% 5.20% Cabot Corp Materials $683,620 1.0% 20.68% 3.28 13.50 1.56% 14.00% Pentair Ltd Shs Industrials $403,884 0.6% 20.56% 15.47 19.66 1.29% 16.50% Manitowoc Inc Industrials $755,568 1.2% 19.76% 3.11 15.55 0.34% 15.00% Ingersoll-Rand Plc Shs Industrials $652,960 1.0% 19.46% 17.93 19.19 1.08% 3.38%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Health Care Reit Financials $1,371,392 2.1% (12.77)% 15.34 57.60 5.71% (16.98)% Energy Xxi Bermuda Ltd Usd Unrs Shs Energy $730,620 1.1% (9.73)% 2.05 12.62 1.77% 24.06% Seadrill Limited Shs Energy $928,408 1.4% (6.14)% 19.15 11.15 6.71% 13.80% Maxim Integrated Prods Inc Information Technology $1,373,172 2.1% (5.02)% 7.95 14.77 3.73% 11.10% American Campus Cmntys Inc Financials $917,985 1.4% (4.64)% 3.37 51.13 4.47% 116.49% Taubman Centers Financials $773,432 1.2% (3.84)% 4.08 35.12 3.13% 52.92% Pinnacle West Capital Utilities $735,588 1.1% (3.83)% 5.82 14.30 4.29% 4.00% Netapp Inc Information Technology $1,731,994 2.7% (2.86)% 13.99 14.09 1.46% 15.00% Centerpoint Energy Utilities $818,254 1.3% (2.49)% 9.94 18.85 3.58% 5.00% Equity Residential Financials $783,237 1.2% (1.71)% 18.69 1296.75 5.01% 32.24%

City of Atlanta General Employees 50 Small Cap Equity Small Cap Equity Small Cap Small Cap Equity Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Small Cap Equity’s portfolio posted a 8.07% return for the Beginning Market Value $240,830,456 quarter placing it in the 98 percentile of the Pub Pln- Net New Investment $9,990 Domestic Equity group for the quarter and in the 1 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $19,441,581 Small Cap Equity’s portfolio underperformed the S&P 600 Ending Market Value $260,282,026 Small Cap Index by 1.76% for the quarter and underperformed the S&P 600 Small Cap Index for the year Percent Cash: 1.6% by 1.48%.

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross)

50%

45%

(1) 40% (1)

35%

30%

25%

(5) (5) 20% (3) (28) 15%

10% (52) (1) (2) (98) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 6 Years 10th Percentile 10.44 36.90 17.10 20.75 7.93 25th Percentile 10.03 35.33 16.63 19.84 7.47 Median 9.84 34.24 16.12 19.07 6.85 75th Percentile 9.62 33.04 15.56 18.18 6.34 90th Percentile 9.24 32.01 14.60 17.63 5.81 Small Cap Equity 8.07 39.83 16.50 21.77 9.64 S&P 600 Small Cap Index 9.83 41.31 18.42 21.37 10.45

Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Relative Return vs S&P 600 Small Cap Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

10% 30%

28%

26%

24% 5% 22% Small Cap Equity

20% S&P 600 Small Cap Index

Returns 18% 0%

Relative Returns 16%

14%

12%

(5%) 10% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 10 15 20 25 Standard Deviation Small Cap Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 52 Small Cap Equity Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross)

50% 40% (1) (1) (14) 30% (2) (2) (90) 20% (43) (82) 10% 0% (36) (83) (10%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 36.90 17.43 2.35 21.51 34.62 25th Percentile 35.33 16.83 1.37 19.60 32.55 Median 34.24 16.11 0.35 17.95 29.55 75th Percentile 33.04 15.14 (1.14) 16.92 27.35 90th Percentile 32.01 14.12 (2.55) 15.69 25.51 Small Cap Equity 39.83 14.83 (1.53) 26.32 34.04 S&P 600 Small Cap Index 41.31 16.33 1.02 26.31 25.57

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs S&P 600 Small Cap Index

15%

10%

(5%) Relative Returns (10%)

(15%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Small Cap Equity Pub Pln- Dom Equity

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs S&P 600 Small Cap Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

30 1.5

25 (43) (50) 1.0 20 0.5 (37) 15 0.0 (4) 10 5 (0.5) (36) 0 (1.0) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 2.70 24.96 10th Percentile 0.53 1.09 (0.08) 25th Percentile 1.88 23.88 25th Percentile 0.43 1.06 (0.22) Median 1.25 23.05 Median 0.29 1.02 (0.35) 75th Percentile 0.58 22.16 75th Percentile 0.14 0.98 (0.44) 90th Percentile 0.03 21.40 90th Percentile 0.01 0.94 (0.53) Small Cap Equity 1.50 23.04 Small Cap Equity 0.36 1.03 0.08

City of Atlanta General Employees 53 Small Cap Equity Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

6 7

4 6

5 2 4 0 Small Cap Equity 3 (2 )

Alpha 2 (4 ) Small Cap Equity

Excess Return 1 (6 ) 0

(8 ) (1 )

(10 ) (2 ) 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs S&P 600 Small Cap Index

9% Small Cap Equity 8% Pub Pln- Dom Equity 7% 6% 5% 4%

Tracking Error 3% 2% 1% 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs S&P 600 Small Cap Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.00 (4) (10) (4) 20% 0.95 (2)

15% 0.90 0.85 10% 0.80 5% (60) (100) (100) 0.75 0% Standard Downside Residual Tracking 0.70 Deviation Risk Risk Error Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation 10th Percentile 19.64 5.72 5.39 7.04 25th Percentile 19.07 4.94 4.77 6.35 10th Percentile 0.87 0.96 0.89 Median 18.59 4.41 4.31 5.78 25th Percentile 0.84 0.96 0.87 75th Percentile 18.15 4.04 3.99 5.34 Median 0.82 0.95 0.85 90th Percentile 17.49 3.65 3.71 4.98 75th Percentile 0.80 0.93 0.83 90th Percentile 0.77 0.92 0.80 Small Cap Equity 21.06 2.39 4.19 4.29 Small Cap Equity 0.94 0.96 0.96

City of Atlanta General Employees 54 Holdings Based Style Analysis For One Quarter Ended December 31, 2013 This page analyzes and compares the investment styles of multiple portfolios using a detailed holdings-based style analysis methodology. The size component of style is measured by the weighted median market capitialization of the holdings. The value/core/growth style dimension is captured by the "Combined Z-Score" of the portfolio. This score is based on eight fundamental factors used in the MSCI stock style scoring system. The table below gives a more detailed breakdown of several relevant style metrics on the portfolios.

Style Map Holdings for One Quarter Ended December 31, 2013

Mega

Large

Mid

Earnest Partners SC Core *Small Cap Equity Small Channing Cap Mgt S&P 600 Small Cap Index

Micro Value Core Growth

Weight Wtd Median Combined Growth Value Number of Security % Mkt Cap Z-Score Z-Score Z-Score Securities Diversification Earnest Partners SC Core 44.37% 2.80 (0.18) (0.11) 0.07 50 18.52 Channing Cap Mgt 10.44% 1.88 (0.17) (0.01) 0.16 37 16.58 *Small Cap Equity 100.00% 2.18 0.09 (0.05) (0.14) 2061 66.42 S&P 600 Small Cap Index - 1.63 (0.01) (0.02) (0.01) 600 157.59

*12/31/13 portfolio characteristics generated using most recently available holdings (9/30/13) modified based on a "buy-and-hold" assumption (repriced and adjusted for corporate actions). Analysis is then done using current market and company financial data.

City of Atlanta General Employees 55 Small Cap Equity Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Equity as of December 31, 2013

0% (1) (1) (1) 10% (8) 20% (26) 30% 40% 50% (55) 60% 70% (76) 80%

Percentile Ranking 90% (94) (97) 100% (100) (100) (99)

Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 66.30 17.13 2.71 13.48 1.97 0.26 25th Percentile 45.56 16.73 2.62 12.65 1.82 0.11 Median 35.39 16.02 2.58 12.17 1.68 0.00 75th Percentile 26.60 15.43 2.46 11.41 1.54 (0.06) 90th Percentile 16.74 15.35 2.34 11.05 1.36 (0.07) *Small Cap Equity 2.18 20.85 2.44 16.06 0.97 0.09 S&P 600 Small Cap Index 1.63 19.88 2.25 13.68 1.14 (0.01)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 4000 23.1% 21.6% 3500 Financials 17.7% 19.9% Diversification Ratio 18.5% 50% 3000 Information Technology 19.6% Mgr MV Manager 3% 16.6% Index 26% 14.7% 2500 Industrials 12.6% Style Median 9% 11.4% 2000 (26) Health Care 11.7% 13.0% 50% Mgr MV 9.4% 1500 16.0% Consumer Discretionary 14.7% 6.4% 1000 4.1% Energy 9.1% Sector Diversification 5.1% Manager 2.64 sectors 500 Materials 6.1% Index 2.62 sectors 4.0% 0 (69) 3.4% Number of Issue 3.5% Consumer Staples 7.6% Securities Diversification 3.0% Utilities 3.4% 10th Percentile 3496 127 25th Percentile 2233 116 1.7% Telecommunications 0.4% Median 958 96 1.7% 75th Percentile 633 58 90th Percentile 500 55 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% *Small Cap Equity S&P 600 Small Cap Index *Small Cap Equity 2061 66 S&P 600 Pub Pln- Dom Equity Small Cap Index 600 158

City of Atlanta General Employees 56 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy EARNEST Partners is a fundamental, bottom-up investment manager. The firm’s investment objective is to outperform the benchmark while controlling volatility and risk. EARNEST Partners implements this philosophy using a screen developed in-house called Return Pattern Recognition, thorough fundamental analysis, and risk management that minimizes the likelihood of meaningfully underperforming the benchmark.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Earnest Partners Small Cap Core’s portfolio posted a 6.47% Beginning Market Value $108,462,127 return for the quarter placing it in the 96 percentile of the CAI Net New Investment $4,929 Small Cap Core Style group for the quarter and in the 77 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $7,021,217 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core’s portfolio underperformed Ending Market Value $115,488,273 the Russell 2000 Index by 2.25% for the quarter and underperformed the Russell 2000 Index for the year by Percent Cash: 2.4% 1.93%.

Performance vs CAI Small Cap Core Style (Gross)

60%

50%

40% (63) A(77) B(83) 30%

A(71) 20% (80) A(74) B(79) (85) B(84) 10% (88) A(78) (79) A(96) (81) A(81) B(96) 0% Last Quarter Last Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 7 Years Last 10 Years Year 10th Percentile 11.09 46.34 20.95 25.97 11.07 12.90 25th Percentile 10.64 43.85 19.31 23.48 10.02 12.01 Median 9.55 39.75 17.62 21.94 8.73 10.53 75th Percentile 8.90 37.15 16.37 20.46 7.62 9.43 90th Percentile 7.78 34.62 14.40 19.28 6.29 9.05 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core A 6.47 36.89 16.56 20.86 7.21 9.25 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core - Net B 6.34 36.15 15.91 20.14 - - Russell 2000 Index 8.72 38.82 15.67 20.08 7.20 9.07

CAI Small Cap Core Style (Gross) Relative Return vs Russell 2000 Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

8% 32%

6% 30%

4% 28%

2% 26%

0% 24%

Returns Earnest Partners Small Cap Core (2%) 22% Relative Returns (4%) 20% Russell 2000 Index

(6%) 18% Earnest Partners Small Cap Core - Net

(8%) 16% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 Standard Deviation Earnest Partners Small Cap Core

City of Atlanta General Employees 57 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Small Cap Core Style (Gross)

60% 50% 40% (63) (77) (21) 30% (54) (59) (95) 20% (54) (53) 10% 0% (84) (54) (10%) (20%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 46.34 22.86 5.12 33.99 44.69 25th Percentile 43.85 19.28 1.89 30.93 34.29 Median 39.75 16.94 (0.41) 27.55 28.39 75th Percentile 37.15 14.66 (3.19) 24.64 23.36 90th Percentile 34.62 12.10 (6.74) 22.09 19.40 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 36.89 16.48 (0.69) 20.43 35.22 Russell 2000 Index 38.82 16.35 (4.18) 26.85 27.17

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Russell 2000 Index

10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% (2%)

Relative Returns (4%) (6%) (8%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Earnest Partners Small Cap Core CAI Sm Cap Core Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Russell 2000 Index Rankings Against CAI Small Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

30 2.5 25 2.0 (51) 20 1.5 15 1.0 (62) 10 0.5 (74) 5 0.0 (75) (51) 0 (0.5) (5) (1.0) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 5.83 26.43 10th Percentile 1.80 1.17 1.43 25th Percentile 3.61 24.38 25th Percentile 1.05 1.07 0.86 Median 2.13 22.53 Median 0.62 0.99 0.47 75th Percentile 0.62 20.61 75th Percentile 0.21 0.91 0.11 90th Percentile (0.54) 19.28 90th Percentile (0.16) 0.85 (0.28) Earnest Partners Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 2.01 22.37 Small Cap Core 0.37 0.97 0.12

City of Atlanta General Employees 58 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Small Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

10 8

8 6

6 4 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 4 2

2 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Alpha

Excess Return 0 0

(2 ) (2 )

(4 ) (4 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Russell 2000 Index

7.5% 7.0% Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 6.5% CAI Sm Cap Core Style 6.0% 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% Tracking Error 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Russell 2000 Index Rankings Against CAI Small Cap Core Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

30% 1.15 25% 1.10 (72) 20% 1.05 15% 1.00 10% 0.95 (72) (81) (89) (12) (16) 5% (6) 0.90 0% 0.85 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 24.60 3.38 5.60 6.08 10th Percentile 1.09 0.99 1.10 25th Percentile 23.35 2.96 4.74 5.19 25th Percentile 1.03 0.98 1.05 Median 22.19 2.12 3.40 3.70 Median 0.98 0.98 0.99 75th Percentile 21.29 1.26 2.71 2.79 75th Percentile 0.94 0.96 0.95 90th Percentile 20.43 0.65 2.11 2.11 90th Percentile 0.89 0.93 0.91 Earnest Partners Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 21.38 3.87 5.47 5.57 Small Cap Core 0.93 0.94 0.96

City of Atlanta General Employees 59 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI Small Cap Core Style as of December 31, 2013

0% (6) (5) 10% (17) 20% 30% (31) (35) 40% (45) 50% (48) (58) 60% (62) (62) 70% 80% (80)

Percentile Ranking (83) 90% 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 2.56 22.07 2.69 18.31 1.31 0.26 25th Percentile 2.11 20.37 2.36 15.86 1.15 0.10 Median 1.73 18.21 2.19 14.24 1.02 (0.04) 75th Percentile 1.45 16.84 2.06 12.31 0.89 (0.13) 90th Percentile 1.28 15.41 1.93 10.17 0.79 (0.24) Earnest Partners Small Cap Core 2.80 17.92 2.03 15.48 0.96 (0.18) Russell 2000 Index 1.61 22.93 2.22 14.53 1.24 0.03

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 500 23.4% 17.7% 450 Information Technology 18.2% 400 Diversification Ratio 21.8% 22.7% 50% Manager 37% Financials Mgr MV 350 21.0% Index 19% 19.6% 14.6% 300 Style Median 32% Industrials 16.5% 250 10.4%

Health Care 13.2% 50% 12.6% Mgr MV 200 7.8% 5.4% 150 Energy 5.6% 100 4.9% Materials 4.9% 50 (94) 5.0% Sector Diversification 3.2% (91) 3.0% Manager 2.24 sectors 0 Utilities 2.0% Number of Issue Index 2.65 sectors Securities Diversification 3.1% Consumer Staples 3.8% 3.8% 10th Percentile 444 83 3.0% 25th Percentile 238 62 0.7% Telecommunications 0.2% Median 138 41 2.7% 75th Percentile 76 28 13.7% 90th Percentile 56 19 Consumer Discretionary 15.0% Earnest Partners 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Small Cap Core 50 19 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Russell 2000 Index Russell 2000 Index 2004 376 CAI Sm Cap Core Style

City of Atlanta General Employees 60 Earnest Partners Small Cap Core Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Hexcel Corp New Industrials $4,267,895 3.8% 15.18% 4.45 21.18 0.00% 15.75% Enersys Industrials $3,763,833 3.3% 15.81% 3.34 16.83 0.71% 22.07% Raymond James Financial Inc Financials $3,758,985 3.3% 25.63% 7.30 15.96 1.23% 17.00% Whiting Pete Corp New Energy $3,520,403 3.1% 3.38% 7.34 14.84 0.00% (0.63)% United Natural Foods Consumer Staples $3,452,862 3.1% 12.08% 3.72 28.24 0.00% 13.20% Sba Communications Corp Telecommunications $3,395,952 3.0% 11.66% 11.48 (204.18) 0.00% - Monolithic Pwr Sys Inc Information Technology $3,365,486 3.0% 14.46% 1.30 24.07 0.00% 17.50% American Eqty Invt Life Hld Financials $3,042,168 2.7% 25.27% 1.71 11.62 0.68% 6.22% Franklin Elec Inc Industrials $2,981,952 2.6% 13.53% 2.12 23.13 0.69% 26.44% Snap-On Industrials $2,836,568 2.5% 10.53% 6.37 16.82 1.61% 10.00%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Global Pmts Inc Information Technology $1,879,316 1.7% 27.25% 4.91 15.32 0.12% 10.00% Raymond James Financial Inc Financials $3,758,985 3.3% 25.63% 7.30 15.96 1.23% 17.00% American Eqty Invt Life Hld Financials $3,042,168 2.7% 25.27% 1.71 11.62 0.68% 6.22% Coherent Inc Information Technology $2,410,236 2.1% 21.24% 1.82 18.24 0.00% 12.50% Protective Life Corp Financials $2,436,746 2.2% 19.58% 3.98 10.69 1.58% 8.00% Littelfuse Information Technology $2,396,665 2.1% 19.12% 2.08 18.97 0.95% 10.00% Cabot Microelectronics Corp Information Technology $1,866,525 1.7% 18.56% 1.06 17.91 0.00% 27.81% Swift Energy Co Energy $1,201,108 1.1% 18.21% 0.59 22.50 0.00% 11.40% Enersys Industrials $3,763,833 3.3% 15.81% 3.34 16.83 0.71% 22.07% Moog Inc When Issued A Industrials $2,228,432 2.0% 15.80% 2.82 16.29 0.00% 6.70%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Healthways Inc Health Care $2,460,605 2.2% (17.07)% 0.53 49.52 0.00% 25.76% Cash Amer Intl Inc Financials $1,641,844 1.5% (15.34)% 1.08 8.97 0.37% 15.00% Life Time Fitness Inc Consumer Discretionary $1,445,673 1.3% (8.77)% 2.01 14.97 0.00% 13.00% Akamai Technologies Inc Information Technology $2,778,902 2.5% (8.74)% 8.41 21.94 0.00% 13.50% Centene Corp Del Health Care $2,523,060 2.2% (7.83)% 3.22 16.38 0.00% 16.50% First Potomac Real.Tst. Financials $1,221,173 1.1% (6.32)% 0.68 (129.22) 5.16% 231.66% Checkpoint Sys Inc Information Technology $1,859,283 1.6% (5.57)% 0.65 19.71 0.00% 45.00% Wgl Hldgs Inc Utilities $1,872,685 1.7% (5.38)% 2.07 16.88 4.19% 5.00% United Fire & Cas Co Financials $1,665,777 1.5% (5.36)% 0.73 11.94 2.51% 10.00% Sanmina Corporation Information Technology $2,645,698 2.3% (4.52)% 1.40 10.04 0.00% 9.68%

City of Atlanta General Employees 61 Jennison Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy Jennison’s US Small Cap Equity is a blended small cap portfolio that holds both growth and value stocks that the team believes have above-average earnings potential and are available at reasonable prices.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Jennison’s portfolio posted a 7.44% return for the quarter Beginning Market Value $107,374,714 placing it in the 83 percentile of the CAI Small Capitalization Net New Investment $-115,294,682 Style group for the quarter and in the 61 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $7,919,968 Jennison’s portfolio underperformed the Russell 2000 Index Ending Market Value $1 by 1.28% for the quarter and outperformed the Russell 2000 Index for the year by 1.36%.

Performance vs CAI Small Capitalization Style (Gross)

60%

50%

40% A(61) (68) B(68)

30%

A(57) 20% (81) B(67) A(72) (78) B(83)

10% (62) A(83) A(34) B(86) (80)

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 7 Years 10th Percentile 11.61 52.70 21.57 28.35 11.82 25th Percentile 10.60 46.46 19.89 25.36 10.53 Median 9.27 42.24 17.40 23.10 8.80 75th Percentile 8.20 37.42 15.85 20.52 7.58 90th Percentile 6.73 34.66 13.67 19.18 5.84 Jennison A 7.44 40.18 16.19 22.35 9.58 Jennison - Net B 7.21 39.04 15.24 21.32 - Russell 2000 Index 8.72 38.82 15.67 20.08 7.20

CAI Small Capitalization Style (Gross) Relative Return vs Russell 2000 Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

6% 34%

5% 32%

4% 30%

3% 28%

2% 26%

1% 24% Jennison - Net 0% Returns 22% Jennison

Relative Returns (1%) 20% Russell 2000 Index

(2%) 18%

(3%) 16%

(4%) 14% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 10 15 20 25 30 35 Standard Deviation Jennison

City of Atlanta General Employees 62 Jennison Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Small Capitalization Style (Gross)

70% 60% 50% 40% (68) (61) (25) (54) 30% (64) (70) 20% (50) (75) 10% 0% (67) (43) (10%) (20%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 52.70 22.78 5.11 35.54 49.83 25th Percentile 46.46 19.50 1.84 31.53 44.57 Median 42.24 16.38 (1.76) 28.25 33.98 75th Percentile 37.42 13.24 (5.72) 24.99 25.24 90th Percentile 34.66 10.51 (8.64) 22.16 18.02 Jennison 40.18 13.17 (1.11) 31.41 32.99 Russell 2000 Index 38.82 16.35 (4.18) 26.85 27.17

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Russell 2000 Index

16% 14% 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2%

Relative Returns 0% (2%) (4%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Jennison CAI Small Cap Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Russell 2000 Index Rankings Against CAI Small Capitalization Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

35 1.6 30 1.4 1.2 25 (42) 1.0 (22) (36) 20 0.8 15 0.6 (40) 10 0.4 0.2 5 (43) 0.0 0 (0.2) (5) (0.4) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 7.96 30.15 10th Percentile 1.35 1.28 1.01 25th Percentile 5.39 26.34 25th Percentile 0.89 1.12 0.71 Median 2.61 22.92 Median 0.56 0.99 0.46 75th Percentile 0.93 20.73 75th Percentile 0.20 0.91 0.09 90th Percentile (0.63) 19.13 90th Percentile (0.17) 0.84 (0.17) Jennison 3.22 23.95 Jennison 0.99 1.06 0.53

City of Atlanta General Employees 63 Jennison Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Small Capitalization Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

12 20

8 15

6 10 4

2 Jennison Alpha 5

Excess Return 0 Jennison

(2 ) 0 (4 )

(6 ) (5 ) 0 5 10 15 20 0 5 10 15 20 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Russell 2000 Index

10% 9% Jennison CAI Small Cap Style 8% 7% 6% 5% 4%

Tracking Error 3% 2% 1% 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Russell 2000 Index Rankings Against CAI Small Capitalization Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

30% 1.25 1.20 25% 1.15 20% (77) 1.10 1.05 15% 1.00 (18) 10% 0.95 (69) (77) 0.90 5% (86) (84) (79) 0.85 0% 0.80 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 26.34 5.02 8.71 9.08 10th Percentile 1.14 0.98 1.18 25th Percentile 24.31 3.81 7.12 7.34 25th Percentile 1.05 0.97 1.09 Median 22.50 2.86 5.04 5.52 Median 0.98 0.95 1.01 75th Percentile 21.12 2.10 3.79 4.15 75th Percentile 0.90 0.91 0.95 90th Percentile 19.56 1.29 2.97 3.02 90th Percentile 0.85 0.85 0.88 Jennison 20.98 1.89 3.26 3.56 Jennison 0.93 0.98 0.94

City of Atlanta General Employees 64 Channing Capital Management Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy The Channing investment team utilizes a fundamental, concentrated, bottom-up value investment philosophy that focuses on undervalued and neglected small capitalization companies.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Channing Capital Management’s portfolio posted a 8.73% Beginning Market Value $24,993,615 return for the quarter placing it in the 75 percentile of the CAI Net New Investment $399 Small Cap Value Style group for the quarter and in the 9 percentile for the last one-half year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $2,180,768 Channing Capital Management’s portfolio underperformed Ending Market Value $27,174,781 the Russell 2000 Value Index by 0.58% for the quarter and outperformed the Russell 2000 Value Index for the one-half year by 4.64%.

Performance vs CAI Small Cap Value Style (Gross)

25%

A(9) B(12) 20%

(76)

15%

10% (65) A(75) B(79)

5% Last Quarter Last 1/2 Year 10th Percentile 11.95 22.05 25th Percentile 11.23 20.57 Median 10.00 19.58 75th Percentile 8.71 17.64 90th Percentile 7.56 15.73 Channing Capital Management A 8.73 22.24 Channing Capital Management - Net B 8.50 21.71 Russell 2000 Value Index 9.30 17.60

Cumulative Returns vs Relative Return vs Russell 2000 Value Index Russell 2000 Value Index

6% 6% Channing Capital Management 5% CAI Small Cap Value Style 5% 4% 4% 3%

2% 3%

1% 2% Relative Returns 0% 1% (1%) Cumulative Relative Returns

(2%) 0% 2013 2013

Channing Capital Management

City of Atlanta General Employees 65 Channing Capital Management Equity Characteristics Analysis Summary

Portfolio Characteristics Percentile Rankings Rankings Against CAI Small Cap Value Style as of December 31, 2013

0% (5) (3) (5) 10% (12) (17) 20% (24) 30% 40% 50% (48) 60% (59) 70% (68) (77) (77) 80% (81) Percentile Ranking 90% 100% Weighted Median Price/Fore- Price/Book Forecasted Dividend MSCI Market Cap casted Earnings Earnings Growth Yield Combined Z-Score 10th Percentile 2.33 18.19 1.89 13.73 2.03 (0.20) 25th Percentile 1.83 17.25 1.76 12.93 1.70 (0.39) Median 1.50 15.99 1.60 11.49 1.45 (0.52) 75th Percentile 1.07 14.95 1.53 9.84 1.18 (0.57) 90th Percentile 0.95 14.12 1.44 8.24 1.02 (0.72) Channing Capital Management 1.88 16.20 2.18 13.38 1.15 (0.17) Russell 2000 Value Index 1.39 19.13 1.51 10.34 1.92 (0.59)

Sector Allocation Diversification December 31, 2013 December 31, 2013 500 30.2% 450 39.1% Financials 33.2% 400 Diversification Ratio 18.2% 10.6% 50% Consumer Discretionary Mgr MV 350 Manager 45% 13.2% Index 16% 14.5% 300 Information Technology 10.7% Style Median 30% 13.8% 250 13.1%

Industrials 13.6% 50% 200 17.3% Mgr MV 7.2% 150 4.7% Health Care 5.9% 100 6.3% 50 (99) Materials 4.7% (92) 5.2% Sector Diversification 0 5.1% Number of Issue Energy 7.2% Manager 2.11 sectors Securities Diversification 6.1% Index 1.80 sectors 2.9% Consumer Staples 2.7% 10th Percentile 418 100 2.5% 25th Percentile 235 53 2.6% Median 117 39 6.1% Utilities 2.9% 75th Percentile 74 25 90th Percentile 53 18 Telecommunications 0.6% Channing Capital Management 37 17 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Russell 2000 Channing Capital Management Russell 2000 Value Index Value Index 1394 225 CAI Small Cap Value Style

City of Atlanta General Employees 66 Channing Capital Management Top 10 Portfolio Holdings Characteristics as of December 31, 2013

10 Largest Holdings Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Evercore Partners Inc Class A Financials $897,059 3.4% 21.98% 1.87 21.74 1.67% 40.08% Cytec Industries Materials $881,294 3.3% 14.68% 3.40 16.29 0.54% 15.00% First Amern Finl Corp Financials $848,651 3.2% 16.33% 3.02 15.24 1.70% (13.00)% Belden Inc Information Technology $821,940 3.1% 10.08% 3.07 17.35 0.28% 27.98% Iberiabank Corp Financials $817,616 3.1% 21.75% 1.87 17.56 2.16% 8.00% Encore Cap Group Inc Financials $813,358 3.1% 9.81% 1.27 11.69 0.00% 15.00% Ethan Allen Interiors Inc Consumer Discretionary $799,529 3.0% 10.50% 0.88 18.44 1.31% 4.75% Polyone Corp Materials $786,184 3.0% 15.38% 3.43 20.43 0.91% 22.00% Pacwest Bancorp Financials $782,294 3.0% 23.59% 1.87 17.16 2.37% 10.00% Mb Financial Inc New Financials $781,359 3.0% 14.20% 1.76 16.46 1.50% 6.50%

10 Best Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Pacwest Bancorp Financials $782,294 3.0% 23.59% 1.87 17.16 2.37% 10.00% Evercore Partners Inc Class A Financials $897,059 3.4% 21.98% 1.87 21.74 1.67% 40.08% Iberiabank Corp Financials $817,616 3.1% 21.75% 1.87 17.56 2.16% 8.00% Smith A O Industrials $735,957 2.8% 19.62% 4.28 23.66 0.89% 18.03% Tesco Corp Energy $729,605 2.8% 19.52% 0.77 15.10 0.00% 30.28% Littelfuse Information Technology $743,161 2.8% 19.12% 2.08 18.97 0.95% 10.00% First Amern Finl Corp Financials $848,651 3.2% 16.33% 3.02 15.24 1.70% (13.00)% Stifel Finl Cap Financials $742,425 2.8% 16.02% 3.05 17.55 0.00% 12.00% Polyone Corp Materials $786,184 3.0% 15.38% 3.43 20.43 0.91% 22.00% Hexcel Corp New Industrials $693,633 2.6% 15.20% 4.45 21.18 0.00% 15.75%

10 Worst Performers Price/ Ending Percent Forecasted Forecasted Market of Qtrly Market Earnings Dividend Growth in Stock Sector Value Portfolio Return Capital Ratio Yield Earnings Medassets Inc Health Care $703,945 2.7% (22.02)% 1.21 14.16 0.00% 12.37% Steiner Leisure Ltd Ord Consumer Discretionary $535,777 2.0% (15.81)% 0.72 13.33 0.00% 10.00% Sanchez Energy Corp Energy $606,745 2.3% (7.29)% 1.10 13.77 0.00% - Lithia Mtrs Inc Cl A Consumer Discretionary $715,443 2.7% (4.84)% 1.62 15.78 0.75% 41.90% Steelcase Inc Cl A Industrials $743,406 2.8% (3.98)% 1.40 15.28 2.52% 34.82% Iconix Brand Group Inc Consumer Discretionary $714,005 2.7% (1.36)% 2.15 15.45 0.00% 13.35% Icu Med Inc Health Care $432,336 1.6% 0.38% 0.93 23.17 0.00% 10.00% Ann Inc Consumer Discretionary $678,810 2.6% 0.91% 1.68 14.43 0.00% 11.00% Phh Corp Financials $555,497 2.1% 2.47% 1.39 14.58 0.00% 2.00% Microsemi Corp Information Technology $743,410 2.8% 2.88% 2.32 11.42 0.00% 12.00%

City of Atlanta General Employees 67 International Equity International Equity International International Equity Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth International Equity’s portfolio posted a 6.11% return for the Beginning Market Value $126,807,028 quarter placing it in the 5 percentile of the Pub Pln- Net New Investment $0 International Equity group for the quarter and in the 3 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $7,745,894 International Equity’s portfolio outperformed the MSCI EAFE Ending Market Value $134,552,922 Index by 0.40% for the quarter and outperformed the MSCI EAFE Index for the year by 1.68%.

Performance vs Pub Pln- International Equity (Gross)

30%

25% (3) (11) (5)

20% (24)

15%

(2) 10% (23)

(10) (5) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 2 Years Last 3 Years 10th Percentile 5.71 23.00 21.39 9.15 25th Percentile 5.48 20.67 19.73 7.96 Median 4.89 18.11 17.71 6.51 75th Percentile 4.34 13.98 15.48 5.29 90th Percentile 3.67 8.10 10.96 1.96 International Equity 6.11 24.45 22.16 11.03 MSCI EAFE Index 5.71 22.78 20.02 8.17

Pub Pln- International Equity (Gross) Relative Return vs MSCI EAFE Index Annualized Three Year Risk vs Return

4% 16%

14% 3% 12% International Equity 2% 10%

8% MSCI EAFE Index 1% 6% 0% Returns 4%

Relative Returns (1%) 2% 0% (2%) (2%)

(3%) (4%) 2011 2012 2013 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Standard Deviation International Equity

City of Atlanta General Employees 69 International Equity Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs Pub Pln- International Equity (Gross)

30% (11) (3) (27) 20% (75) 10% 0% (1) (10%) (33) (20%) (30%) 2013 2012 2011 10th Percentile 23.00 21.19 (9.81) 25th Percentile 20.67 20.11 (11.81) Median 18.11 18.78 (13.18) 75th Percentile 13.98 17.31 (14.44) 90th Percentile 8.10 16.12 (17.35) International Equity 24.45 19.91 (8.29) MSCI EAFE Index 22.78 17.32 (12.14)

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs MSCI EAFE Index

10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% (2%)

Relative Returns (4%) (6%) (8%) 2011 2012 2013

International Equity Pub Pln- Intl Equity

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs MSCI EAFE Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- International Equity (Gross) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

15 2 (2) (1) 10 1 (3) (2) 5 (2) 0 0

(5) (1) (10) Alpha Treynor (2) Ratio Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 0.92 9.04 25th Percentile (0.15) 7.86 10th Percentile 0.49 0.54 0.51 Median (1.38) 6.60 25th Percentile (0.07) 0.47 (0.07) 75th Percentile (2.84) 5.04 Median (0.58) 0.39 (0.53) 90th Percentile (5.63) 1.82 75th Percentile (1.08) 0.30 (1.03) 90th Percentile (1.44) 0.11 (1.28) International Equity 3.27 11.95 International Equity 1.56 0.71 1.08

City of Atlanta General Employees 70 International Equity Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs Pub Pln- International Equity (Gross) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

6 8

4 6 International Equity 4 2 International Equity 2 0 0 (2 ) (2 )

(4 ) Alpha (4 )

Excess Return (6 ) (6 )

(8 ) (8 )

(10 ) (10 )

(12 ) (12 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 4 Quarter Tracking Error vs MSCI EAFE Index

3.5% International Equity 3.0% Pub Pln- Intl Equity

2.5%

2.0% Tracking Error 1.5%

1.0% 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs MSCI EAFE Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- International Equity (Gross) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.20

20% 1.15 1.10 15% (91) 1.05 10% 1.00 (41) 5% 0.95 (55) (89) (91) (86) (69) 0.90 0% Standard Downside Residual Tracking 0.85 Deviation Risk Risk Error Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation 10th Percentile 18.89 4.91 4.92 4.75 25th Percentile 17.73 3.21 3.42 3.44 10th Percentile 1.10 0.99 1.13 Median 17.18 2.21 2.55 2.61 25th Percentile 1.05 0.99 1.06 75th Percentile 16.70 1.46 1.86 1.90 Median 1.02 0.98 1.02 90th Percentile 15.53 0.89 1.61 1.62 75th Percentile 0.98 0.96 1.00 90th Percentile 0.90 0.92 0.93 International Equity 15.48 1.04 2.09 2.46 International Equity 0.91 0.98 0.92

City of Atlanta General Employees 71 Johnston Asset Management Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy Johnston Asset Management believes that stock selection is the key to superior investment performance. In particular, growth stocks, purchased when they are trading below their fundamental value, have the greatest potential for capital appreciation over time. The firm believes that shares of high-quality, well-managed companies that can grow their earnings faster than the average company should outperform the broad market over time. Their approach is designed to take advantage of inefficiencies that occur over shorter time horizons, and to buy extraordinary high-quality growth companies when they can be purchased below their fundamental value.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Johnston Asset Management’s portfolio posted a 4.93% Beginning Market Value $59,852,365 return for the quarter placing it in the 80 percentile of the CAI Net New Investment $0 Non-U.S. Equity Style group for the quarter and in the 81 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $2,949,862 Johnston Asset Management’s portfolio outperformed the Ending Market Value $62,802,227 MSCI ACWI ex US Index by 0.12% for the quarter and outperformed the MSCI ACWI ex US Index for the year by 2.28%.

Performance vs CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style (Gross)

35% 30% 25%

20% A(81) B(82) 15% (88)

10% A(64) A(80) (91) B(78) 5% (83) B(87) 0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years 10th Percentile 8.32 28.81 12.00 25th Percentile 7.38 26.08 9.95 Median 6.37 23.29 8.94 75th Percentile 5.28 19.57 7.52 90th Percentile 4.08 15.34 5.79 Johnston Asset Management A 4.93 18.06 8.15 Johnston Asset Management - Net B 4.57 17.06 7.34 MSCI ACWI ex US Index 4.81 15.78 5.61

CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style (Gross) Relative Return vs MSCI ACWI ex US Index Annualized Three Year Risk vs Return

6% 16%

5% 14%

4% 12% 3% 10% Johnston Asset Management 2% 8% 1% Returns 6% 0% Relative Returns 4% MSCI ACWI ex US Index (1%) Johnston Asset Management - Net (2%) 2%

(3%) 0% 2011 2012 2013 5 10 15 20 25 30 Standard Deviation Johnston Asset Management

City of Atlanta General Employees 72 Johnston Asset Management Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style (Gross)

40% 30% 20% (88) (81) (68) (77) 10% 0% (16) (10%) (68) (20%) (30%) 2013 2012 2011 10th Percentile 28.81 23.54 (6.48) 25th Percentile 26.08 21.12 (9.56) Median 23.29 19.02 (11.40) 75th Percentile 19.57 16.61 (14.02) 90th Percentile 15.34 14.45 (16.87) Johnston Asset Management 18.06 16.31 (7.88) MSCI ACWI ex US Index 15.78 17.39 (13.33)

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs MSCI ACWI ex US Index

12%

10%

0% Relative Returns

(2%)

(4%) 2011 2012 2013

Johnston Asset Management CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs MSCI ACWI ex US Index Rankings Against CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style (Gross) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

15 2.5

2.0 10 (40) 1.5 (34) 1.0 5 (61) (56) 0.5 (38)

0 0.0 Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 6.31 12.70 10th Percentile 2.13 0.73 1.96 25th Percentile 4.40 10.39 25th Percentile 1.63 0.60 1.47 Median 3.30 9.17 Median 1.08 0.53 0.97 75th Percentile 1.90 7.32 75th Percentile 0.59 0.42 0.47 90th Percentile 0.05 5.38 90th Percentile 0.00 0.31 0.04 Johnston Johnston Asset Management 3.13 9.63 Asset Management 1.43 0.56 0.69

City of Atlanta General Employees 73 Johnston Asset Management Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style (Gross) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

10 12

5 6

4 Johnston Asset Management Johnston Asset Management

Alpha 2

Excess Return 0 0

(2 )

(4 )

(5 ) (6 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 4 Quarter Tracking Error vs MSCI ACWI ex US Index

6.5% 6.0% Johnston Asset Management 5.5% CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style 5.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% Tracking Error 2.5% 2.0% 1.5% 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs MSCI ACWI ex US Index Rankings Against CAI Non-U.S. Equity Style (Gross) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.20 1.15 20% 1.10 1.05 15% (90) 1.00 (28) 10% 0.95 0.90 5% 0.85 (90) (90) (44) 0.80 (56) (89) 0% 0.75 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 19.64 3.18 4.74 5.46 10th Percentile 1.13 0.99 1.15 25th Percentile 18.32 2.44 3.79 4.21 25th Percentile 1.06 0.98 1.07 Median 17.31 1.43 3.02 3.26 Median 1.00 0.97 1.01 75th Percentile 16.05 0.80 2.51 2.76 75th Percentile 0.92 0.96 0.94 90th Percentile 14.43 0.41 2.14 2.35 90th Percentile 0.82 0.93 0.85 Johnston Johnston Asset Management 14.44 1.30 2.18 3.48 Asset Management 0.84 0.98 0.85

City of Atlanta General Employees 74 Artisan Partners Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy The Artisan International Value strategy uses a bottom-up investment process to build a diversified portfolio of stocks of undervalued non-U.S. companies. The strategy is premised on the belief that, over the long-term, the price of a company’s stock will converge with the economic value of the business.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Artisan Partners’s portfolio posted a 7.16% return for the Beginning Market Value $66,954,663 quarter placing it in the 31 percentile of the CAI MF - Net New Investment $0 Non-US Equity Style group for the quarter and in the 3 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $4,796,032 Artisan Partners’s portfolio outperformed the MSCI EAFE Ending Market Value $71,750,695 Index by 1.45% for the quarter and outperformed the MSCI EAFE Index for the year by 7.92%.

Performance vs CAI MF - Non-US Equity Style (Cheapest Net)

35%

(3) 30%

25% (38) 20%

15% (1)

10% (42) (31) (66) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years 10th Percentile 8.32 28.01 11.14 25th Percentile 7.38 24.94 9.63 Median 6.38 21.38 7.76 75th Percentile 5.51 18.76 6.36 90th Percentile 4.19 14.31 5.45 Artisan Partners 7.16 30.70 13.66 MSCI EAFE Index 5.71 22.78 8.17

CAI MF - Non-US Equity Style (Cheapest Net) Relative Return vs MSCI EAFE Index Annualized Three Year Risk vs Return

5% 16%

4% 14% Artisan Partners 3% 12%

2% 10%

1% 8% MSCI EAFE Index

0% 6% Returns

(1%) 4% Relative Returns (2%) 2%

(3%) 0%

(4%) (2%) 2011 2012 2013 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 Standard Deviation Artisan Partners

City of Atlanta General Employees 75 Artisan Partners Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI MF - Non-US Equity Style (Cheapest Net)

40% 30% (3) (38) (11) 20% (72) 10% 0% (13) (10%) (36) (20%) (30%) 2013 2012 2011 10th Percentile 28.01 23.45 (7.37) 25th Percentile 24.94 21.65 (11.06) Median 21.38 18.89 (13.51) 75th Percentile 18.76 16.68 (15.25) 90th Percentile 14.31 14.42 (17.27) Artisan Partners 30.70 23.04 (8.68) MSCI EAFE Index 22.78 17.32 (12.14)

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs MSCI EAFE Index

20%

15%

10%

Relative Returns 0%

(5%) 2011 2012 2013

Artisan Partners CAI Non-U.S. Equity MF

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs MSCI EAFE Index Rankings Against CAI MF - Non-US Equity Style (Cheapest Net) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

20 2.0 (1) 1.5 (2) 15 (1) 1.0 10 (1) 0.5 5 (1) 0.0 0 (0.5) (5) (1.0) (10) (1.5) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 2.72 11.14 10th Percentile 0.64 0.64 0.64 25th Percentile 1.21 9.33 25th Percentile 0.30 0.54 0.34 Median (0.60) 7.39 Median (0.18) 0.44 (0.12) 75th Percentile (2.31) 5.65 75th Percentile (0.66) 0.33 (0.46) 90th Percentile (3.55) 4.50 90th Percentile (0.90) 0.26 (0.75) Artisan Partners 5.40 13.95 Artisan Partners 1.63 0.82 1.59

City of Atlanta General Employees 76 Artisan Partners Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI MF - Non-US Equity Style (Cheapest Net) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

8 8

6 6 Artisan Partners Artisan Partners 4 4

2 2

0 0

(2 ) Alpha (2 )

Excess Return (4 ) (4 )

(6 ) (6 )

(8 ) (8 )

(10 ) (10 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 4 Quarter Tracking Error vs MSCI EAFE Index

5.0% Artisan Partners 4.5% CAI Non-U.S. Equity MF 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 2.5%

Tracking Error 2.0% 1.5% 1.0% 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs MSCI EAFE Index Rankings Against CAI MF - Non-US Equity Style (Cheapest Net) Three Years Ended December 31, 2013

25% 1.25

20% 1.20 (87) 1.15 15% 1.10 10% 1.05 5% 1.00 (87) (55) (70) (85) (59) (90) 0.95 0% Standard Downside Residual Tracking 0.90 Deviation Risk Risk Error Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation 10th Percentile 20.25 4.02 4.86 5.44 25th Percentile 19.09 3.07 4.13 4.56 10th Percentile 1.18 0.98 1.21 Median 18.22 2.53 3.50 3.72 25th Percentile 1.12 0.98 1.14 75th Percentile 17.06 1.96 2.90 3.09 Median 1.06 0.97 1.09 90th Percentile 16.21 1.54 2.27 2.53 75th Percentile 1.00 0.95 1.02 90th Percentile 0.95 0.94 0.97 Artisan Partners 16.63 1.54 3.32 3.19 Artisan Partners 0.97 0.96 0.99

City of Atlanta General Employees 77 Balanced Balanced Globalt Tactical ETF Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy GLOBALT believes that the trend toward globalization is the single most important opportunity in today’s financial markets and attempts to capture those opportunities in a disciplined and risk-controlled manner.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Globalt Tactical ETF’s portfolio posted a 6.14% return for the Beginning Market Value $55,670,714 quarter placing it in the 15 percentile of the CAI Global - Net New Investment $4,639 Balanced DB group for the quarter and in the 16 percentile for the last one-half year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $3,420,112 Globalt Tactical ETF’s portfolio underperformed the Policy Ending Market Value $59,095,464 Index by 0.71% for the quarter and outperformed the Policy Index for the one-half year by 0.59%.

Performance vs CAI Global - Balanced DB (Gross)

15%

A(16) (21) B(20)

10%

(2) A(15) B(17) 5%

0% Last Quarter Last 1/2 Year 10th Percentile 6.30 12.84 25th Percentile 5.85 10.36 Median 4.19 8.35 75th Percentile 2.14 5.48 90th Percentile 1.20 3.22 Globalt Tactical ETF A 6.14 12.20 Globalt Tactical ETF - Net B 6.02 11.93 Policy Index 6.85 11.60

Relative Return vs Policy Index Cumulative Returns vs Policy Index

1.5% 2%

1% 1.0% 0%

0.5% (1%)

(2%) 0.0%

Relative Returns (3%) (0.5%)

Cumulative Relative Returns (4%) Globalt Tactical ETF CAI Global Balanced DB (1.0%) (5%) 2013 2013

Globalt Tactical ETF

City of Atlanta General Employees 79 Fixed Income Fixed Income Fixed Income Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Fixed Income’s portfolio posted a (0.05)% return for the Beginning Market Value $248,995,612 quarter placing it in the 83 percentile of the Pub Pln- Net New Investment $0 Domestic Fixed group for the quarter and in the 71 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $-112,746 Fixed Income’s portfolio outperformed the Barclays Ending Market Value $248,882,866 Aggregate Index by 0.09% for the quarter and outperformed the Barclays Aggregate Index for the year by 0.52%.

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Fixed (Gross)

12%

10%

6% (59) (79) (83) (73) 4% (76) (82)

0% (89) (83)

(71) (2%) (82)

(4%) Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 6 Years 10th Percentile 1.33 1.64 6.32 10.34 7.06 25th Percentile 0.84 0.06 5.51 8.50 6.04 Median 0.53 (0.82) 4.43 6.49 5.34 75th Percentile 0.10 (1.74) 3.66 5.04 4.49 90th Percentile (0.16) (2.45) 2.67 2.94 3.59 Fixed Income (0.05) (1.50) 3.54 4.85 5.12 Barclays Aggregate Index (0.14) (2.02) 3.26 4.44 4.57

Pub Pln- Domestic Fixed (Gross) Relative Return vs Barclays Aggregate Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

1.5% 14%

12% 1.0% 10%

0.5% 8%

6% Fixed Income 0.0% Returns Barclays Aggregate Index Relative Returns 4% (0.5%) 2%

(1.0%) 0% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 Standard Deviation Fixed Income

City of Atlanta General Employees 81 Fixed Income Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs Pub Pln- Domestic Fixed (Gross)

30% 25% 20% 15% 10% (35) (48) (81) (79) (76) 5% (85) (78) (80) 0% (82) (71) (5%) (10%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile 1.64 11.28 9.74 11.29 22.34 25th Percentile 0.06 9.23 8.22 9.79 17.34 Median (0.82) 7.20 7.22 8.60 12.39 75th Percentile (1.74) 5.32 5.94 6.93 7.32 90th Percentile (2.45) 3.84 4.47 5.33 1.63 Fixed Income (1.50) 5.00 7.33 6.71 7.01 Barclays Aggregate Index (2.02) 4.21 7.84 6.54 5.93

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Barclays Aggregate Index

14%

12%

10%

2% Relative Returns

(2%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Fixed Income Pub Pln- Dom Fixed

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Barclays Aggregate Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Fixed (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

16 2.5 14 2.0 12 1.5 (16) (50) 10 8 1.0 (72) 6 (65) 0.5 4 0.0 2 (67) (0.5) 0 (2) (1.0) (4) (1.5) Alpha Treynor Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 6.39 12.89 10th Percentile 1.65 2.02 1.44 25th Percentile 4.25 8.44 25th Percentile 1.37 1.85 1.21 Median 2.16 6.60 Median 0.97 1.63 0.99 75th Percentile 0.36 4.57 75th Percentile 0.38 1.31 0.50 90th Percentile (0.87) 3.27 90th Percentile (0.56) 0.92 (0.89) Fixed Income 0.92 5.40 Fixed Income 1.52 1.63 0.55

City of Atlanta General Employees 82 Fixed Income Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs Pub Pln- Domestic Fixed (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

10 14

12 8 10

6 8

6 4 4

2 Alpha 2 Fixed Income Excess Return Fixed Income 0 0 (2 ) (2 ) (4 )

(4 ) (6 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Barclays Aggregate Index

4.5% 4.0% Fixed Income Pub Pln- Dom Fixed 3.5% 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 1.5%

Tracking Error 1.0% 0.5% 0.0% 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Barclays Aggregate Index Rankings Against Pub Pln- Domestic Fixed (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

7% 2.5 6% 2.0 5% 4% 1.5 3% (88) 1.0 (59) (6) (88) 2% 0.5 1% (96) (96) (95) 0% 0.0 Standard Downside Residual Tracking Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation Risk Risk Error Deviation 10th Percentile 6.02 2.40 5.18 5.20 10th Percentile 1.37 0.92 1.86 25th Percentile 4.80 1.87 3.49 3.63 25th Percentile 1.11 0.82 1.48 Median 4.01 1.24 2.25 2.33 Median 0.96 0.67 1.24 75th Percentile 3.33 0.77 1.46 1.63 75th Percentile 0.78 0.47 1.03 90th Percentile 2.83 0.42 1.07 1.20 90th Percentile 0.65 0.23 0.87 Fixed Income 2.90 0.28 0.61 0.71 Fixed Income 0.88 0.96 0.90

City of Atlanta General Employees 83 JP Morgan Chase Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy J.P. Morgan Asset Management believes inefficiencies in the fixed income market are pervasive and will continue; however, the identification of individual undervalued securities is difficult and requires advanced analytical skills and extensive experience in order to capitalize successfully. The team strives to identify inefficiencies through a combination of active investment management and disciplined risk control. It incorporates a bottom-up, value-oriented approach to fixed income investment management. All fixed income portfolios are run using this approach. However, the maturity and duration structure can vary according to each client’s specific benchmark. In terms of issuer quality, portfolio holdings are restricted to investment grade securities at purchase, with approximately 75% of the holdings rated AAA. Portfolios are well-diversified across sectors, sub-sectors and individual security holdings in order to manage overall portfolio risk.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth JP Morgan Chase’s portfolio posted a (0.26)% return for the Beginning Market Value $85,300,652 quarter placing it in the 94 percentile of the CAI Core Bond Net New Investment $0 Fixed-Inc Style group for the quarter and in the 51 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $-220,545 JP Morgan Chase’s portfolio underperformed the Barclays Ending Market Value $85,080,107 Aggregate Index by 0.12% for the quarter and outperformed the Barclays Aggregate Index for the year by 0.46%.

Performance vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross)

10% 8% 6% A(77) A(37) A(53) B(78) (90) B(37) 4% (97) (95) B(54) 2% 0% (89) A(94) B(95) A(51) (2%) (81) B(59) (4%) Last Quarter Last Year Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 10 Years 10th Percentile 0.69 (0.50) 4.77 8.05 5.75 25th Percentile 0.42 (1.03) 4.51 6.75 5.45 Median 0.18 (1.52) 4.01 5.89 5.03 75th Percentile (0.02) (1.92) 3.60 5.32 4.88 90th Percentile (0.15) (2.46) 3.45 4.85 4.52 JP Morgan Chase A (0.26) (1.56) 3.98 5.22 5.17 JP Morgan Chase B (0.33) (1.63) 3.95 5.21 5.16 Barclays Aggregate Index (0.14) (2.02) 3.26 4.44 4.55

CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Relative Return vs Barclays Aggregate Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

2% 11%

10%

9% 1% 8%

7% Returns 6% JP Morgan Chase 0% Relative Returns JP Morgan Chase 5% Barclays Aggregate Index 4%

(1%) 3% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Standard Deviation JP Morgan Chase

City of Atlanta General Employees 84 JP Morgan Chase Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross)

20%

15%

10% (11) (63) (51) (90) (96) (91) 5% (97) (84) 0% (81) (51) (5%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile (0.50) 8.11 8.78 9.35 17.43 25th Percentile (1.03) 7.21 8.25 8.39 13.23 Median (1.52) 6.15 7.90 7.49 10.67 75th Percentile (1.92) 5.40 7.32 6.86 8.65 90th Percentile (2.46) 4.74 6.43 6.57 7.10 JP Morgan Chase (1.56) 5.00 8.75 7.48 6.77 Barclays Aggregate Index (2.02) 4.21 7.84 6.54 5.93

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Barclays Aggregate Index

12%

10%

2% Relative Returns 0%

(2%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

JP Morgan Chase CAI Core Bond Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Barclays Aggregate Index Rankings Against CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

8 2.2 7 2.0 6 1.8 1.6 5 (75) (64) 1.4 4 1.2 3 1.0 (56) (64) 2 0.8 1 (77) 0.6 0 0.4 Alpha Treynor 0.2 Ratio Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 2.97 7.08 25th Percentile 2.15 6.60 10th Percentile 1.60 1.89 1.46 Median 1.42 5.76 25th Percentile 1.29 1.75 1.31 75th Percentile 0.92 5.24 Median 1.08 1.62 1.07 90th Percentile 0.29 4.61 75th Percentile 0.70 1.47 0.80 90th Percentile 0.40 1.39 0.52 JP Morgan Chase 0.89 5.27 JP Morgan Chase 1.03 1.57 0.88

City of Atlanta General Employees 85 JP Morgan Chase Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

6 7

5 6

5 4 4 3 3

2 Alpha 2 Excess Return 1 JP Morgan Chase 1 JP Morgan Chase

0 0

(1 ) (1 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Barclays Aggregate Index

3.0% JP Morgan Chase 2.5% CAI Core Bond Style

2.0%

1.5%

1.0% Tracking Error 0.5%

0.0% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Barclays Aggregate Index Rankings Against CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

6% 1.50 1.40 5% 1.30 4% 1.20 (81) 1.10 3% 1.00 (81) (69) (24) 2% 0.90 0.80 1% (76) (77) 0.70 (65) 0% 0.60 Standard Downside Residual Tracking 0.50 Deviation Risk Risk Error Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation 10th Percentile 4.50 1.14 2.70 2.64 25th Percentile 3.84 0.71 1.90 1.92 10th Percentile 1.14 0.97 1.39 Median 3.52 0.43 1.34 1.32 25th Percentile 1.08 0.93 1.18 75th Percentile 3.30 0.19 0.87 0.88 Median 1.02 0.86 1.09 90th Percentile 3.11 0.12 0.66 0.72 75th Percentile 0.94 0.74 1.02 90th Percentile 0.90 0.62 0.96 JP Morgan Chase 3.25 0.28 0.87 0.85 JP Morgan Chase 0.97 0.93 1.00

City of Atlanta General Employees 86 Mesirow Financial Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy At Mesirow Financial, we believe the bulk of available incremental returns can be captured through careful sector rotation, yield curve management and issue selection. We believe that an emphasis on yield, keeping duration neutral to the benchmark, can produce consistent, predictable returns over time. We believe that prudent use of non-benchmark securities, when appropriate, can augment returns and often reduce volatility as a result of increased diversification. Finally, we believe independent fixed income research and trading are critical to effective risk management.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth Mesirow Financial’s portfolio posted a 0.16% return for the Beginning Market Value $84,913,889 quarter placing it in the 52 percentile of the CAI Core Bond Net New Investment $0 Fixed-Inc Style group for the quarter and in the 79 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $132,138 Mesirow Financial’s portfolio outperformed the Barclays Ending Market Value $85,046,027 Aggregate Index by 0.29% for the quarter and outperformed the Barclays Aggregate Index for the year by 0.08%.

Performance vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross)

10%

8% A(45) 6% B(51) A(34) (89) (97) 4% A(52) (95) B(66) A(61) 2% B(64) (92) A(52) 0% (89) B(61) A(79) (2%) (81) B(86) (4%) Last Quarter Last Last 2 Years Last 3 Years Last 5 Years Last 7-1/4 Year Years 10th Percentile 0.69 (0.50) 3.20 4.77 8.05 6.44 25th Percentile 0.42 (1.03) 2.99 4.51 6.75 6.00 Median 0.18 (1.52) 2.32 4.01 5.89 5.49 75th Percentile (0.02) (1.92) 1.71 3.60 5.32 5.30 90th Percentile (0.15) (2.46) 1.11 3.45 4.85 4.82 Mesirow Financial A 0.16 (1.95) 2.13 4.00 6.09 5.79 Mesirow Financial - Net B 0.09 (2.15) 1.92 3.78 5.88 - Barclays Aggregate Index (0.14) (2.02) 1.05 3.26 4.44 4.92

CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Relative Return vs Barclays Aggregate Index Annualized Five Year Risk vs Return

2.5% 11%

2.0% 10%

9% 1.5% 8% 1.0% 7% Mesirow Financial 0.5% Returns 6% Mesirow Financial - Net

Relative Returns 0.0% 5% Barclays Aggregate Index (0.5%) 4%

(1.0%) 3% 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Standard Deviation Mesirow Financial

City of Atlanta General Employees 87 Mesirow Financial Return Analysis Summary

Performance vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross)

20%

15% (43) 10% (63) (63) (49) (42) (90) (96) 5% (97) 0% (81) (79) (5%) 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 10th Percentile (0.50) 8.11 8.78 9.35 17.43 25th Percentile (1.03) 7.21 8.25 8.39 13.23 Median (1.52) 6.15 7.90 7.49 10.67 75th Percentile (1.92) 5.40 7.32 6.86 8.65 90th Percentile (2.46) 4.74 6.43 6.57 7.10 Mesirow Financial (1.95) 6.37 7.84 7.51 11.12 Barclays Aggregate Index (2.02) 4.21 7.84 6.54 5.93

Cumulative and Quarterly Relative Return vs Barclays Aggregate Index

12%

10%

2% Relative Returns 0%

(2%) 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

Mesirow Financial CAI Core Bond Style

Risk Adjusted Return Measures vs Barclays Aggregate Index Rankings Against CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

8 2.2 7 2.0 6 (44) 1.8 (33) 1.6 5 1.4 (27) 4 1.2 (32) 3 1.0 2 (43) 0.8 1 0.6 0 0.4 Alpha Treynor 0.2 Ratio Information Sharpe Excess Return Ratio Ratio Ratio 10th Percentile 2.97 7.08 25th Percentile 2.15 6.60 10th Percentile 1.60 1.89 1.46 Median 1.42 5.76 25th Percentile 1.29 1.75 1.31 75th Percentile 0.92 5.24 Median 1.08 1.62 1.07 90th Percentile 0.29 4.61 75th Percentile 0.70 1.47 0.80 90th Percentile 0.40 1.39 0.52 Mesirow Financial 1.56 5.90 Mesirow Financial 1.25 1.71 1.30

City of Atlanta General Employees 88 Mesirow Financial Risk Analysis Summary

Risk Analysis vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

6 7

5 6

5 4 4 3 3

2 Alpha Mesirow Financial 2

Excess Return Mesirow Financial 1 1

0 0

(1 ) (1 ) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10 Tracking Error Residual Risk

Rolling 12 Quarter Tracking Error vs Barclays Aggregate Index

3.0% Mesirow Financial 2.5% CAI Core Bond Style

2.0%

1.5%

1.0% Tracking Error 0.5%

0.0% 2010 2011 2012 2013

Risk Statistics Rankings vs Barclays Aggregate Index Rankings Against CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross) Five Years Ended December 31, 2013

6% 1.50 1.40 5% 1.30 4% 1.20 (52) 1.10 (52) 3% 1.00 (53) 2% 0.90 (45) (53) (55) 0.80 1% 0.70 (71) 0% 0.60 Standard Downside Residual Tracking 0.50 Deviation Risk Risk Error Beta R-Squared Rel. Std. Deviation 10th Percentile 4.50 1.14 2.70 2.64 25th Percentile 3.84 0.71 1.90 1.92 10th Percentile 1.14 0.97 1.39 Median 3.52 0.43 1.34 1.32 25th Percentile 1.08 0.93 1.18 75th Percentile 3.30 0.19 0.87 0.88 Median 1.02 0.86 1.09 90th Percentile 3.11 0.12 0.66 0.72 75th Percentile 0.94 0.74 1.02 90th Percentile 0.90 0.62 0.96 Mesirow Financial 3.50 0.23 1.24 1.21 Mesirow Financial 1.01 0.88 1.08

City of Atlanta General Employees 89 NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index Period Ended December 31, 2013

Investment Philosophy The objective of Northern Trust’s Intermediate Government Bond Index portfolio is to provide risk and return characteristics that closely approximate those of the securities in the underlying index while minimizing the "wealth erosion" for its investors.

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index’s portfolio posted a Beginning Market Value $78,781,071 (0.03)% return for the quarter placing it in the 78 percentile Net New Investment $0 of the CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style group for the quarter and in the 65 percentile for the last one-half year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $-24,339 NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index’s portfolio Ending Market Value $78,756,732 underperformed the Barclays Gov/Credit Inter by 0.01% for the quarter and outperformed the Barclays Gov/Credit Inter for the one-half year by 0.09%.

Performance vs CAI Core Bond Fixed-Inc Style (Gross)

2.0%

1.5%

1.0%

(65) (71) 0.5%

0.0% (77) (78)

(0.5%) Last Quarter Last 1/2 Year 10th Percentile 0.69 1.42 25th Percentile 0.42 1.20 Median 0.18 0.84 75th Percentile (0.02) 0.53 90th Percentile (0.15) 0.05 NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index (0.03) 0.68 Barclays Gov/Credit Inter (0.02) 0.59

Cumulative Returns vs Relative Return vs Barclays Gov/Credit Inter Barclays Gov/Credit Inter

0.12% 0.25% NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index 0.10% CAI Core Bond Style 0.20% 0.08% 0.15% 0.06%

0.04% 0.10%

0.02% 0.05% Relative Returns 0.00% 0.00% (0.02%) Cumulative Relative Returns

(0.04%) (0.05%) 2013 2013

NTGI Intermediate Govt/Credit Index

City of Atlanta General Employees 90 Alternative Investment Alternative Investment Alternative GrayCo Alternative Partners II Period Ended December 31, 2013

Quarterly Summary and Highlights Quarterly Asset Growth GrayCo Alternative Partners II’s portfolio posted a 0.01% Beginning Market Value $17,675,356 return for the quarter placing it in the 58 percentile of the CAI Net New Investment $0 Alternative Investments DB group for the quarter and in the 36 percentile for the last year. Investment Gains/(Losses) $2,071 GrayCo Alternative Partners II’s portfolio underperformed Ending Market Value $17,677,427 the 3-month Treasury Bill by 0.00% for the quarter and outperformed the 3-month Treasury Bill for the year by 5.23%.

Performance vs CAI Alternative Investments DB (Gross)

50%

40%

30%

20%

10% (36)

0% (58) (58) (49)

(10%)

(20%) Last Quarter Last Year 10th Percentile 7.12 34.90 25th Percentile 3.62 10.84 Median 0.52 (0.47) 75th Percentile (0.66) (8.48) 90th Percentile (1.51) (11.89) GrayCo Alternative Partners II 0.01 5.30 3-month Treasury Bill 0.01 0.07

Cumulative Returns vs Relative Return vs 3-month Treasury Bill 3-month Treasury Bill

4.5% 6% GrayCo Alternative Partners II 4.0% CAI Alternative Inv DB 4% 3.5%

3.0% 2% 2.5%

2.0% 0%

1.5% (2%)

Relative Returns 1.0%

0.5% (4%) Cumulative Relative Returns 0.0%

(0.5%) (6%) 2013 2013

GrayCo Alternative Partners II

City of Atlanta General Employees 92 Callan Research/Education Callan Research/Education CALLAN INVESTMENTS INSTITUTE ΦΟΥΡΤΗ ΘΤΡ 2013

Εδυχατιον

Ρεσεαρχη ανδ Εδυχατιοναλ Προγρασ Τηε Χαλλαν Ινϖεστεντσ Ινστιτυτε προϖιδεσ ρεσεαρχη τηατ κεεπσ χλιεντσ υπδατεδ ον τηε λατεστ ινδυστρψ τρενδσ ωηιλε ηελπινγ τηε λεαρν τηρουγη χαρεφυλλψ στρυχτυρεδ εδυχατιοναλ προγρασ. Βελοω αρε τηε Ινστιτυτεσ ρεχεντ πυβλιχατιονσ αλλ οφ ωηιχη χαν βε φουνδ ατ ωωω.χαλλαν.χο/ρεσεαρχη.

ηιτε Παπερσ

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ εχεβερ 2013 Τυνε Υπ Ψουρ Χ Πλαν ιν 2014 Σποτλιγητ Ρεσεαρχη

Τυνε Υπ Ψουρ Χ Πλαν ιν 2014 Deined contribution plan sponsors may wish to “tune up” their plans in 2014 to protect them

ε αλλ κνοω τηατ ουρ χαρσ νεεδ ρεγυλαρ αιντενανχε το κεεπ ρυννινγ σοοτηλψ ανδ αϖοιδ βρεακδοωνσ. Similarly, deined contribution (DC) plan sponsors may wish to tune up their plans in 2014 to protect them φρο χοον πιτφαλλσ. Αχχορδινγ το Χαλλανσ αννυαλ Χ Τρενδσ Συρϖεψ, ρεϖιεωινγ πλαν φεεσ ανδ υπδατινγ the investment policy statement were popular activities for plan sponsors in 2013 as they sought to im− prove their iduciary positioning. However, iduciary lat tires and other roadblocks to successful retirement continue to lurk undetected in many DC plans. Callan poses seven questions for DC plan sponsors to χονσιδερ ασ τηεψ χηεχκ υνδερ τηε ηοοδ ιν τηε νεω ψεαρ. φρο χοον πιτφαλλσ: ουτ οφ δατε ΙΠΣ, φεε ρεϖιεωσ, αυτο−ενρολλεντ, πλαν λεακαγε, ετχ. Ιν τηισ 1. Ισ τηε ινϖεστεντ πολιχψ στατεεντ (ΙΠΣ) τοο ηαρδ το ηανδλε? Sixty percent of DC plan sponsors updated their IPS in the past 12 months, and 95% did so within the past three years.1 DC plan invest− ment committees should review the IPS annually and update it as needed. As iduciaries at ABB, Inc. λεαρνεδ ιν α ρεχεντ φεε λαωσυιτ,2 vague language in the IPS can cause problems. Equally, an IPS that ισ τοο δεταιλεδ το ρεασοναβλψ φολλοω χαν βε α ηινδρανχε. Τηε ιδεαλ ΙΠΣ απσ χλεαρ γυιδελινεσ, χρεατεσ α σιπλε προχεσσ, προϖιδεσ α ροαδαπ φορ ακινγ ρεασοναβλε, λονγ−τερ−οριεντεδ δεχισιονσ, ανδ ουτ− λινεσ εασψ−το−φολλοω χριτερια το κεεπ τηε ινϖεστεντ χοιττεε ον τραχκ. 2. Ισ τηε φεε παψεντ αππροαχη παστ ιτσ πριε? Πλαν σπονσορσ αρε τακινγ νυερουσ στεπσ το χαλχυλατε, πιεχε, Χαλλαν ποσεσ σεϖεν θυεστιονσ φορ Χ πλαν σπονσορσ το χονσιδερ ασ τηεψ ρεϖιεω τηειρ benchmark, and reduce plan fees. However, few are revisiting the way fees are paid: Only 12.5% of πλαν σπονσορσ σαψ τηεψ αρε ϖερψ λικελψ το ρεδυχε ορ ελιινατε τηε υσε οφ ρεϖενυε σηαρινγ το παψ φορ πλαν expenses in 2014. 3 Given the increasing lexibility of DC plan recordkeepers when it comes to fee παψεντ αππροαχηεσ, πλαν σπονσορσ αψ ωιση το εϖαλυατε ωηετηερ ρεϖενυε σηαρινγ−βασεδ, βυνδλεδ φεε παψεντσ ρεαιν τηε βεστ στρυχτυρε. Φιξεδ φεε παψεντσ τηατ αρε τιεδ διρεχτλψ το σερϖιχε λεϖελσ may be more transparent and easier to manage. Either way, wise plan iduciaries will want to docu− εντ α φεε παψεντ πολιχψ, ειτηερ ασ παρτ οφ τηε ΙΠΣ ορ ασ α σεπαρατε δοχυεντ.

3. Αρε ταργετ δατε φυνδσ αλιγνεδ? In early 2013, the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) effectively threw down the gauntlet and issued “Tips for ERISA Plan Fiduciaries” for DC plan sponsors that select πλαν ιν τηε νεω ψεαρ. and monitor their plan’s target date funds. Speciically, the DOL recommended that plan iduciaries χονσιδερ ηοω ωελλ τηε ταργετ δατε φυνδσ χηαραχτεριστιχσ αλιγν ωιτη ελιγιβλε επλοψεεσ αγεσ ανδ λικελψ retirement dates,” and to consider custom target date funds. However, many plan sponsors may still

1 Callan’s 2014 DC Trends Survey. 2 Callan DC Insights. “ABB Inc. Ordered to Pay $35 Million.” April 12, 2012. http://www.callan.com/research/dcinsights/story/?id=113 3 Callan’s 2014 DC Trends Survey. Κνοωλεδγε. Εξπεριενχε. Ιντεγριτψ. Φιξεδ Ινχοε Βενχηαρκ Ρεϖιεω: Ψεαρ Ενδεδ ϑυνε 30, 2013 Τηε Φιξεδ Ινχοε Βενχηαρκ Ρεϖιεω ισ δεσιγνεδ το αιδ ιν πορτφολιο ονιτορινγ ανδ εϖαλυ−

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ Φιξεδ Ινχοε ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ Βενχηαρκ Ρεϖιεω

Ψεαρ Ενδεδ ϑυνε 30, 2013 ατιον βψ ηελπινγ ρεαδερσ ασσεσσ τηε σιιλαριτιεσ ανδ διφφερενχεσ ιν χοϖεραγε, περφορανχε,

Χοπαρινγ αρκετ χοϖεραγε, σεχτορ ωειγητσ, βονδ χηαραχτεριστιχσ, στψλε, περφορανχε, ανδ ρισκ

Βαρχλαψσ Ινδιχεσ Χιτι Ινδιχεσ ϑΠ Μοργαν Ινδιχεσ and characteristics of popular ixed income indices alongside comparable Callan Associates’ Χαλλαν Μαναγερ Στψλε ανδ αταβασε Γρουπσ

αναγερ στψλε γρουπσ.

Εξηιβιτ 5 uses the same two participant examples but with fees assessed on a percentage basis. It Βεψονδ Ρεϖενυε Σηαρινγ: Εξπλορινγ Χ Φεε Παψεντσ shows how higher-balance participants could potentially shoulder a very large fee burden. If Participant A with the $500 balance is charged 10 basis points for administration, he/she pays just $0.50 annually for plan administration—essentially getting a free ride. In contrast, Participant B with the $200,000 balance winds up paying $200 in annual fees for similar services.

Εξηιβιτ 5 Παρτιχιπαντ Α: ∃500 Παρτιχιπαντ Β: ∃200,000 Εξαπλε οφ Βασισ Ποιντ Φεε Αρρανγεεντ { Περχενταγε Φεε: 10 βπσ } Μανψ πλαν σπονσορσ αρε ρετηινκινγ ρεϖενυε σηαρινγ δυε το ρεγυλατορψ χηανγεσ, λαωσυιτσ, ανδ Fee Paid = $0.50 Fee Paid = $200

Source: Callan

An ideal solution may be to split the difference and structure the fee so that it is paid partially as a percentage of balances and partially as a lat dollar amount. However, many recordkeepers would require manual processing or custom programming to facilitate this approach, which could introduce additional costs or processing errors.

Σελεχτινγ τηε Ριγητ Φεε Παψεντ Αππροαχη φαιρνεσσ το παρτιχιπαντσ, αονγ οτηερ ρεασονσ. Λορι Λυχασ εξπλορεσ τρενδσ ιν φεε παψεντσ, Callan recommends the steps outlined in Εξηιβιτ 6 to arrive at an appropriate fee payment policy: 1. Determine the source of fee payment—the plan sponsor, participant, or a combination of both. 2. Evaluate and select the method of fee payment—ixed fee or asset-based fee. 3. Establish the payment approach—percentage fee, dollar fee, 12b-1, revenue sharing, and/or an internal allocation.

Εξηιβιτ 6 Σουρχε οφ Plan Sponsor + Plan Sponsor Plan Participant Φεε Παψεντ (lat fee) Φεε Παψεντ Participant αλτερνατιϖεσ το ρεϖενυε σηαρινγ, ανδ ιπλιχατιονσ φορ πλαν σπονσορσ ανδ παρτιχιπαντσ. Πολιχψ Οπτιονσ

Μετηοδ οφ Φιξεδ Φεε + Φιξεδ Φεε Asset Based Παψεντ Asset Based

Ρεϖενυε 12b-1 Internal Παψεντ Sharing Allocation Αππροαχη

Ρεϖενυε Internal Dollar 12b-1Percentage Sharing Allocation

Source: Callan

CALLAN INVESTMENTS INSTITUTE ϑυλψ 2013 ΓΑΣΒ Υπδατε: Τοωαρδ Τρανσπαρενχψ Σποτλιγητ Ρεσεαρχη

ΓΑΣΒ Υπδατε This paper provides a brief overview of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Τοωαρδ Τρανσπαρενχψ

This paper provides a brief overview of Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) state− ments 67 and 68, which apply to public sector pension plans (i.e., pensions for employees of state ανδ λοχαλ γοϖερνενταλ επλοψερσ).

These statements establish new standards for measuring and recognizing a pension plan’s liabili− ties, deferrals, and expenses. The revisions attempt to bring more transparency, comparability, and στατεεντσ 67 ανδ 68, ωηιχη αππλψ το πυβλιχ σεχτορ πενσιον πλανσ. Καρεν Ηαρρισ συα− accountability to state and local government reporting.

GASB 67 covers plan accounting, while GASB 68 covers employer/non-employer accounting. Effective dates are iscal years beginning after June 15, 2013 (Statement 67) and June 15, 2014 (Statement 68), ωιτη εαρλιεστ αδοπτιον ενχουραγεδ.

Callan summarizes both measurement and disclosure requirements and comments on their investment ιπλιχατιονσ. Ιντροδυχτιον ριζεσ βοτη εασυρεεντ ανδ δισχλοσυρε ρεθυιρεεντσ ανδ χοεντσ ον τηειρ ινϖεστεντ Τηε Γοϖερνενταλ Αχχουντινγ Στανδαρδσ Βοαρδ (ΓΑΣΒ) αππροϖεδ α παιρ οφ ρελατεδ στατεεντσ ιν ϑυνε 2012 that updated and expanded accounting and inancial reporting standards for public sector retire− εντ σψστεσ. ΓΑΣΒ 67 (Φινανχιαλ Ρεπορτινγ φορ Πενσιον Πλανσ, εφφεχτιϖε ϑυνε 15, 2013) χοϖερσ πλαν αχχουντινγ, ωηιλε ΓΑΣΒ 68 (Αχχουντινγ ανδ Φινανχιαλ Ρεπορτινγ φορ Πενσιονσ, εφφεχτιϖε ϑυνε 15, 2014) covers employer and non-employer accounting, with a notable impact on cost-sharing employers and non- employer contributing entities (NCEs) of deined beneit pension plans.1

“The new standards will improve the way state and local governments report their pension liabilities and expenses, resulting in a more faithful representation of the full impact of these obligations,” said GASB ιπλιχατιονσ. Chairman Robert Attmore. “Among other improvements, net pension liabilities will be reported on the balance sheet, providing citizens and other users of these inancial reports with a clearer picture of the size and nature of the inancial obligations to current and former employees for past services rendered.”2

1 Employers that provide employees with defined contribution plans are also covered by the new standard, but the changes impact these plans to a much lesser degree than defined benefit pensions.

2 GASB statement of June 2012. www.gasb.org

Κνοωλεδγε. Εξπεριενχε. Ιντεγριτψ.

Σελφ−βορροω is an alternative to the prime brokerage model. In a self-borrow structure, the internal long port− Σελφ−Βορροω Στρυχτυρεσ: Κεψ Χονσιδερατιονσ folios of the fund sponsor serve as the source of securities to cover shorts, as opposed to a prime broker. In αδδιτιον, ιν τηε σελφ−βορροω στρυχτυρε τηε φυνδ σπονσορ υτιλιζεσ ιτσ οων χυστοδιαν ορ α σελφ−βορροω αδινιστρατορ and operational infrastructure to maintain transparency, contain costs, and deploy independent risk assess − εντ τοολσ. Εξηιβιτ 2 illustrates where self-borrowing its into the securities lending process.

Εξηιβιτ 2 Fund Sponsor Σεχυριτιεσ Λενδινγ Οϖερϖιεω: Σελφ−Βορροω Στρυχτυρε Shorting Internal Strategies External Ιν α σελφ−βορροω στρυχτυρε, τηε ιντερναλ λονγ πορτφολιοσ οφ τηε φυνδ σπονσορ σερϖε ασ τηε σουρχε Σουρχεσ οφ Ινϖεντορψ

Self Internal Borrow Securities Ιντερναλ Πορτφολιοσ Administrator Inventory

Securities Other Λενδινγ Ποολ οφ τηε Fund Lending Sponsors Agent Σεχυριτιεσ Λενδινγ Αγεντ of securities to cover shorts, as opposed to a prime broker. Bo Abesami s describes best Securities Prime Inventory Ινϖεντορψ φρο τηε Στρεετ “The Box” Broker

Source: Callan

A self-borrow structure can only work if an institutional investor is comfortable with all aspects of securities λενδινγ. Αν ινϖεστορ τηατ ιπλεεντσ α σελφ−βορροω προχεσσ ηασ το: • Accept that the rules of securities lending apply to them, even if they are inancing and providing “the box” (lending inventory). πραχτιχεσ ανδ κεψ θυεστιονσ τηατ φυνδ σπονσορσ σηουλδ χονσιδερ ωηεν εξπλορινγ τηισ οδελ. • Abide by collateralization requirements, marking to market, recall processes, buy-in, substitution, etc., ιν ορδερ το αινταιν φαιρνεσσ, χονσιστενχψ οφ προχεσσ, ανδ οστ ιπορταντλψ, χοπλιανχε ωιτη ινδυστρψ ανδ ρεγυλατορψ στανδαρδσ το αϖοιδ σελφ−δεαλινγ.

• Protect the long portfolio(s) or funds that supply the short. Speciic rules may be needed in order to αχηιεϖε φαιρνεσσ ανδ χονσιστενχψ οφ προχεσσ, εσπεχιαλλψ ιν ρεϖενυε ανδ εξπενσε αττριβυτιον βετωεεν λονγ ανδ σηορτ πορτφολιοσ.

• Understand the funding requirements and where collateral would be harvested to inance the short στρατεγψ.

• Ρεαλιζε τηε φυνδ σπονσορ αψ νεεδ το βορροω φρο τηε λενδινγ αγεντ ορ ιντερεδιαρψσ ποολ. Ιν ορδερ το δο τηισ, τηε φυνδ σπονσορ ηασ το βε πρε−αππροϖεδ ασ α βορροωερ. (Τηισ αψ νοτ βε αχχεπταβλε το λενδερσ ιν τηε λενδινγ ποολ ωηερειν α φυνδ σπονσορ τηατ ισ α λενδερ οφ σεχυριτιεσ ιν τηε λενδινγ ποολ ισ also a direct borrower.)

Κνοωλεδγε. Εξπεριενχε. Ιντεγριτψ. 3 Θυαρτερλψ Πυβλιχατιονσ

Θυαρτερλψ ατα: Τηε Μαρκετ Πυλσε reference guide covers the U.S. economy and investment trends in d omestic and international equities and ixed income, and alternatives. Ou r Ινσιδε Χαλλανσ αταβασε ρεπορτ προϖιδεσ περφορανχε ινφορατιον γατηερεδ φρο Χαλλανσ προπριεταρψ δαταβασε, αλλοωινγ ψου το χοπαρε ψουρ φυνδσ ωιτη ψουρ πεερσ.

Χαπιταλ Μαρκετ Ρεϖιεω: A quarterly macroeconomic indicator newsletter that provides thoughtful insights on the economy as well as recent performance in the equity, ixed income, alternatives, international, real estate, and other χαπιταλ αρκετσ.

Πριϖατε Μαρκετσ Τρενδσ: A seasonal newsletter that discusses the market environment, recent events, performance, ανδ οτηερ ισσυεσ ινϖολϖινγ πριϖατε εθυιτψ.

Ηεδγε Φυνδ Μονιτορ: A quarterly newsletter that provides a current view of hedge fund industry trends and detailed θυαρτερλψ περφορανχε χοενταρψ.

Χ Οβσερϖερ & Χαλλαν Χ Ινδεξ: A quarterly newsletter that offers Callan’s observations on a variety of topics pertaining to the deined contribution industry. Each issue isupdated with the latest Callan DC Index™ returns.

Συρϖεψσ

CALLAN INVESTMENTS INSTITUTE Νοϖεβερ 2013 ΕΣΓ Ιντερεστ ανδ Ιπλεεντατιον Συρϖεψ Ρεσεαρχη In September 2013, Callan conducted a brief survey to assess the status of ESG, including re− ΕΣΓ Ιντερεστ ανδ Ιπλεεντατιον Συρϖεψ

Ενϖιρονενταλ, σοχιαλ, ανδ γοϖερνανχε (ΕΣΓ) στρατεγιεσ αρε θυιχκλψ εϖολϖινγ, ανδ ιν δοινγ σο αρε βεχοινγ φυρτηερ διφφερεντιατεδ φρο οτηερ ρεσπονσιβλε ινϖεστεντ στρατεγιεσ, συχη ασ σοχιαλλψ ρε− sponsible investing. The ESG strategies that have emerged in the past ive years look to maximize sponsible and sustainable investment strategies and SRI, in the U.S. institutional market. We ρετυρνσ βψ ιδεντιφψινγ χοπανιεσ ωιτη τηε ποτεντιαλ φορ λονγ−τερ, συσταιναβλε εαρνινγσ.

Ιν Σεπτεβερ 2013, Χαλλαν χονδυχτεδ α βριεφ συρϖεψ το ασσεσσ τηε στατυσ οφ ΕΣΓ, ινχλυδινγ ρεσπον− σιβλε ανδ συσταιναβλε ινϖεστεντ στρατεγιεσ ανδ ΣΡΙ, ιν τηε Υ.Σ. ινστιτυτιοναλ αρκετ. ε χολλεχτεδ responses from 129 U.S. funds representing approximately $830 billion in assets. Adoption is off to a σλοωερ σταρτ ιν τηε Υ.Σ. τηαν ιν Ευροπε ανδ οτηερ παρτσ οφ τηε ωορλδ, βυτ δατα σηοωσ α γρεατερ περχεντ− age of U.S. investors and assets lowing into ESG.

Around one-ifth of survey respondents have incorporated ESG factors into decision making, and an αδδιτιοναλ 7% αρε χονσιδερινγ ιτ. Λαργε φυνδσ ανδ φουνδατιονσ ωερε τηε ηιγηεστ αδοπτερσ ρελατιϖε το collected responses from 129 U.S. funds representing approximately $830 billion in assets. other fund sizes and types.

Τηε γρεατεστ βαρριερσ το φυνδσ ινχορπορατινγ ΕΣΓ ιντο ινϖεστεντ δεχισιον ακινγ ινχλυδε α λαχκ οφ clarity over the value proposition, and a perceived disconnect between ESG factors and inancial ουτχοεσ.

Κνοωλεδγε. Εξπεριενχε. Ιντεγριτψ.

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ 2013 Χοστ οφ οινγ Βυσινεσσ Συρϖεψ

Συρϖεψ Χαλλαν χοπαρεσ τηε χοστσ οφ αδινιστερινγ φυνδσ ανδ τρυστσ αχροσσ αλλ τψπεσ οφ ταξ−εξεπτ

2013 Χοστ οφ οινγ Βυσινεσσ Συρϖεψ and tax-qualiied organizations in the U.S., and we identify ways to help institutional inves− Υ.Σ. Φυνδσ ανδ Τρυστσ tors manage expenses. We ielded this survey in April and May of 2013. The results incor− porate responses from 49 fund sponsors representing $219 billion in assets.

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ 2013 Ρισκ Μαναγεεντ Συρϖεψ

Συρϖεψ The 2008 market crisis put risk in the spotlight and prompted fund iduciaries to look at risk

2013 Ρισκ Μαναγεεντ Συρϖεψ management in a new light. Callan ielded this survey in November 2012. Responses came Ρισκ Μαναγεεντ ιν α Νεω Λιγητ from 53 fund sponsors representing $576 billion in assets. The vast majority of this group has taken concrete steps in the past ive years to address investment risks.

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ 2012 Ινϖεστεντ Μαναγεεντ Χοπενσατιον Συρϖεψ

Συρϖεψ Callan conducted this survey of investment management irms to report on compensation

2012 Ινϖεστεντ Μαναγεεντ − Χοπενσατιον practices and trends in the U.S. institutional investment market from 2010 to 2011. This sur

Σεπτεβερ 2012 vey provides an update to Callan’s 2007 Investment Management Compensation Survey, which captured compensation practices from 2005 to 2006.

Χαλλαν Ινϖεστεντσ Ινστιτυτε Εϖεντσ

ιδ ψου ισσ ουτ ον α Χαλλαν χονφερενχε ορ ωορκσηοπ? Ιφ σο, ψου χαν χατχη υπ ον ωηατ ψου ισσεδ βψ ρεαδινγ ουρ “Event Summaries” and downloading the actual presentation slides from our website. Our most recent programs:

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ Our October 2013 Regional Workshop, Υνιτιζατιον: Τηε (Χοντινυινγ) Οδψσσεψ, χοϖερεδ Εϖεντ Συαρψ τηε βασιχσ οφ υνιτιζατιον, ρεαλ−λιφε συχχεσσεσ ανδ φαιλυρεσ, ανδ εξπλαινεδ σοε οφ τηε σιπλε things that can trip up implementation. Our speakers were Callan’s Bo Abesamis, James Υνιτιζατιον: Τηε (Χοντινυινγ) Οδψσσεψ

2013 Ρεγιοναλ ορκσηοπ Οχτοβερ 22, Νεω Ψορκ Veneruso, CFA, and Matt Shirilla. Οχτοβερ 23, Ατλαντα

ΧΑΛΛΑΝ ΙΝςΕΣΤΜΕΝΤΣ ΙΝΣΤΙΤΥΤΕ Ανχηορ το ινδωαρδ ορ Αλβατροσσ? Σεα Χηανγε ιν Εϖεντ Our June 2013 Regional Workshop, Συαρψ Φιξεδ Ινχοε, is captured in this summary. Featured in this workshop were Cal lan’s Jason Ellement, FSA, CFA, Brett Cornwell, CFA, and Bill Howard, CFA, discussing the role of ixed Ανχηορ το ινδωαρδ ορ Αλβατροσσ? Σεα Χηανγε ιν Φιξεδ Ινχοε

2013 Ρεγιοναλ ορκσηοπ ϑυνε 25, Χηιχαγο ινχοε εξποσυρε ανδ ηοω ιτ σηουλδ βε στρυχτυρεδ. ϑυνε 26, Σαν Φρανχισχο

Υπχοινγ Εδυχατιοναλ Προγρασ

Τηε 34τη Νατιοναλ Χονφερενχε January 27-29, 2014 in San Francisco

Speakers include: David Gergen, Janet Hill, Laura Carstensen, Leon Panetta, Adam Savage, and the 2014 Capital Markets Panel. Workshops on managing pension risk, real assets, and Deined Contribution.

ϑυνε ανδ Οχτοβερ 2014 Ρεγιοναλ ορκσηοπσ June 24, Atlanta June 25, San Francisco October 21, Chicago October 22, New York

Ουρ ρεσεαρχη χαν βε φουνδ ατ ωωω.χαλλαν.χο/ρεσεαρχη ορ φεελ φρεε το χονταχτ υσ φορ ηαρδ χοπιεσ.

Φορ ορε ινφορατιον αβουτ ρεσεαρχη ορ εδυχατιοναλ εϖεντσ, πλεασε χονταχτ Ραψ Χοβσ ορ Γινα Φαλσεττο ατ ινστιτυτε≅χαλλαν.χο ορ 415−974−5060.

Χαλλαν Ινϖεστεντσ Ινστιτυτε “CALLAN COLLEGE” ΦΟΥΡΤΗ ΘΤΡ 2013

Εδυχατιον

Τηε Χεντερ φορ Ινϖεστεντ Τραινινγ Εδυχατιοναλ Σεσσιονσ Τηισ εδυχατιοναλ φορυ οφφερσ βασιχ−το−ιντερεδιατε λεϖελ ινστρυχτιον ον αλλ χοπονεντσ οφ τηε ινϖεστεντ αναγε− ment process. The “Callan College” courses cover topics that are key ot understanding your responsibilities, the ρολεσ οφ εϖερψονε ινϖολϖεδ ιν τηισ προχεσσ, ηοω τηε προχεσσ ωορκσ, ανδ ηοω το ινχορπορατε τηεσε στρατεγιεσ ανδ χονχεπτσ ιντο αν ινϖεστεντ προγρα. Λιστεδ βελοω αρε τηε διφφερεντ τψπεσ οφ σεσσιονσ Χαλλαν οφφερσ.

Αν Ιντροδυχτιον το Ινϖεστεντσ

Απριλ 16−17, 2014 ιν Σαν Φρανχισχο Οχτοβερ 28−29, 2014 ιν Σαν Φρανχισχο

Τηισ ονε−ανδ−ονε−ηαλφ−δαψ σεσσιον ισ δεσιγνεδ φορ ινδιϖιδυαλσ ωηο ηαϖε λεσσ τηαν τωο ψεαρσ εξπεριενχε ωιτη ινστιτυ− τιοναλ ασσετ αναγεεντ οϖερσιγητ ανδ/ορ συππορτ ρεσπονσιβιλιτιεσ. Τηε σεσσιον ωιλλ φαιλιαριζε φυνδ σπονσορ τρυστεεσ, σταφφ, ανδ ασσετ αναγεεντ αδϖισορσ ωιτη βασιχ ινϖεστεντ τηεορψ, τερινολογψ, ανδ πραχτιχεσ.

Παρτιχιπαντσ ιν τηε ιντροδυχτορψ σεσσιον ωιλλ γαιν α βασιχ υνδερστανδινγ οφ τηε διφφερεντ τψπεσ οφ ινστιτυτιοναλ φυνδσ, including a description of their objectives and investment session structures. The session includes: • A description of the different parties involved in the investment management process, including their roles and ρεσπονσιβιλιτιεσ • A brief outline of the types and characteristics of different plans (e.g.,deined beneit, deined contribution, endowments, foundations, operating funds) • An introduction to iduciary issues as they pertain to fund management and oversight • An overview of capital market theory, characteristics of various asset classes, and the processes by which iduciaries implement their investment sessions

Tuition for the Introductory “Callan College” session is $2,350 per person. Tuition includes instruction, all materials, breakfast and lunch on each day, and dinner on the irst evening with the instructors. Στανδαρδ Σεσσιον

ϑυλψ 15−16, 2014 ιν Χηιχαγο Τηισ ισ α τωο−δαψ σεσσιον δεσιγνεδ φορ ινδιϖιδυαλσ ωιτη ορε τηαν τωο ψεαρσ εξπεριενχε ωιτη ινστιτυτιοναλ ασσετ αναγεεντ οϖερσιγητ ανδ/ορ συππορτ ρεσπονσιβιλιτιεσ. Τηε σεσσιον ωιλλ προϖιδε αττενδεεσ ωιτη α τηορουγη οϖερϖιεω of prudent investment practices for both deined beneit and deined contribution funds. We cover the key concepts needed to successfully meet a fund’s investment objectives.

The course work addresses the primary components of the investment management process: the role of the idu− χιαρψ; χαπιταλ αρκετ τηεορψ; ασσετ αλλοχατιον; αναγερ στρυχτυρε; ινϖεστεντ πολιχψ στατεεντσ; αναγερ σεαρχη; χυστοδψ, σεχυριτιεσ λενδινγ, φεεσ; ανδ περφορανχε εασυρεεντ.

This course is beneicial to anyone involved in the investment management process, including: trustees and staff members of public, corporate and Taft-Hartley retirement funds (deined beneit and/or deined contribution); trustees ανδ σταφφ εβερσ οφ ενδοωεντ ανδ φουνδατιον φυνδσ; ρεπρεσεντατιϖεσ οφ φαιλψ τρυστσ; ανδ ινϖεστεντ αναγε− εντ προφεσσιοναλσ ανδ σταφφ ινϖολϖεδ ιν χλιεντ σερϖιχε, βυσινεσσ δεϖελοπεντ, χονσυλταντ ρελατιονσ, ανδ πορτφολιο αναγεεντ.

Tuition for the Standard “Callan College” session is $2,500per person. Tuition includes instruction, all materials, breakfast and lunch on each day, and dinner on the irst evening with the instructors.

Χυστοιζεδ Σεσσιονσ

A unique feature of the “Callan College” is its ability to educate on a specialized level through its customized sessions. Τηεσε σεσσιονσ αρε ταιλορεδ το εετ τηε τραινινγ ανδ εδυχατιοναλ νεεδσ οφ τηε παρτιχιπαντσ, ωηετηερ ψου αρε α πλαν sponsor or you provide services to institutional tax-exempt plans. Past customized “Callan College” sessions have covered topics such as: custody, industry trends, sales and marketing,client service, international, ixed income, and αναγινγ τηε ΡΦΠ προχεσσ. Ινστρυχτιον χαν βε ταιλορεδ το βε βασιχ ορ αδϖανχεδ.

Φορ ορε ινφορατιον πλεασε χονταχτ Κατηλεεν Χυννιε, ατ 415.274.3029 ορ χυννιε≅χαλλαν.χο.

“Callan College” Disclosures Disclosures

Quarterly List as of December 31, 2013

List of Managers That Do Business with Callan Associates Inc.

Confidential – For Callan Client Use Only Callan Associates takes its fiduciary and disclosure responsibilities to clients very seriously. The list below is compiled and updated quarterly because we believe our fund sponsor clients should have a clear understanding of the investment management organizations that do business with our firm. As of 12/31/13, Callan provided educational, consulting, software, database, or reporting services to this list of managers through one or more of the following business units: Institutional Consulting Group, Independent Adviser Group, Fund Sponsor Consulting, the Callan Investments Institute and the “Callan College.” Per strict policy these manager relationships do not affect the outcome or process by which any of Callan’s services are conducted. Fund sponsor clients may request a copy of this list at any time. Fund sponsor clients may also request specific information regarding the fees paid to Callan by the managers employed by their fund. Per company policy, information requests regarding fees are handled exclusively by Callan’s Compliance Department. Clients should also be aware that Callan maintains an asset management division, the Trust Advisory Group (TAG). TAG specializes in the design, implementation and on-going management of multi-manager portfolios for institutional investors. Currently TAG serves as the sponsor and advisor to a multi-manager small cap equity fund and as the non-discretionary adviser to a series of Target Maturity Funds known as the Callan GlidePath® Funds. We are happy to provide clients with more specific information regarding TAG, including detail on the portfolios that it oversees. Per company policy these requests are handled by TAG’s Chief Investment Officer.

Manager Name Educational Services Consulting Services 1607 Capital Partners, LLC Y Aberdeen Asset Management Y Y Acadian Asset Management, Inc. Y Advisory Research Y Affiliated Managers Group Y AllianceBernstein Y Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC Y Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America Y American Century Investment Management Y Apollo Global Management Y AQR Capital Management Y Ares Management Y Ariel Investments Y Aronson + Johnson + Ortiz Y Atalanta Sosnoff Capital, LLC Y Atlanta Capital Management Co., L.L.C. Y Y AXA Rosenberg Investment Management Y Babson Capital Management LLC Y Baillie Gifford International LLC Y Y Baird Advisors Y Y Bank of America Y Barclays Capital Inc. Y Baring Asset Management Y Barrow, Hanley, Mewhinney & Strauss, Inc. Y Batterymarch Financial Management, Inc. Y BlackRock Y BMO Asset Management Y BNY Mellon Asset Management Y Y Boston Company Asset Management, LLC (The) Y Y Brandes Investment Partners, L.P. Y Y Brandywine Global Investment Management, LLC Y Brown Brothers Harriman & Company Y Cadence Capital Management Y Capital Group Y CastleArk Management, LLC Y

Knowledge. Experience. Integrity. 1 List of Managers That Do Business with Callan Associates Inc. (continued)

Causeway Capital Management Y Central Plains Advisors, Inc. Y Chartwell Investment Partners Y ClearBridge Investments, LLC (fka ClearBridge Advisors) Y Columbia Management Investment Advisors, LLC Y Y Columbus Circle Investors Y Y Corbin Capital Partners Y Cornerstone Capital Management Holdings (fka Madison Square) Y Cramer Rosenthal McGlynn, LLC Y Crawford Investment Council Y Y Credit Suisse Asset Management Y Crestline Investors Y Y Cutwater Asset Management Y DB Advisors Y Y Delaware Investments Y Y DePrince, Race & Zollo, Inc. Y Y Deutsche Asset & Wealth Management Y Y Diamond Hill Investments Y DSM Capital Partners Y Duff & Phelps Investment Mgmt. Y Y Eagle Asset Management, Inc. Y EARNEST Partners, LLC Y Eaton Vance Management Y Y Echo Point Investment Management Y Epoch Investment Partners Y Evanston Capital Management Y Fayez Sarofim & Company Y Federated Investors Y Fidelity Investments Y First Eagle Investment Management Y Fisher Investments Y Flag Capital Management Y Franklin Templeton Y Y Fred Alger Management Co., Inc. Y GAM (USA) Inc. Y GE Asset Management Y Y Geneva Capital Management Y Goldman Sachs Asset Management Y Y Grand-Jean Capital Management Y Y GMO (fka Grantham, Mayo, Van Otterloo & Co., LLC) Y Great Lakes Advisors, Inc. Y Guardian Capital Y The Guardian Life Insurance Company of America Y Guggenheim Investments Asset Management (fka Security Global) Y Harbor Capital Y Hartford Investment Management Co. Y Y

Knowledge. Experience. Integrity. 2 List of Managers That Do Business with Callan Associates Inc. (continued)

Henderson Global Investors Y Y Hermes Investment Management (North America) Ltd. Y Hotchkis & Wiley Y Income Research & Management Y ING Investment Management Y Y Institutional Capital LLC Y INTECH Investment Management Y Invesco Y Y Investec Asset Management Y Janus Capital Group (fka Janus Capital Management, LLC) Y Y Jensen Investment Management Y J.M. Hartwell Y J.P. Morgan Asset Management Y Y KeyCorp Y Lazard Asset Management Y Y Lee Munder Capital Group Y Lincoln National Corporation Y Logan Circle Partners, L.P. Y Longview Partners Y Loomis, Sayles & Company, L.P. Y Y Lord Abbett & Company Y Y Los Angeles Capital Management Y LSV Asset Management Y Lyrical Partners Y MacKay Shields LLC Y Y Man Investments Y Manulife Asset Management Y Marvin & Palmer Associates, Inc. Y Metropolitan West Capital Management, LLC Y MFS Investment Management Y Y Mondrian Investment Partners Limited Y Y Montag & Caldwell, Inc. Y Y Morgan Stanley Alternative Investment Partners Y Morgan Stanley Investment Management Y Y Mountain Lake Investment Management LLC Y Nationwide Financial Y Neuberger Berman, LLC (fka, Lehman Brothers) Y Y Newton Capital Management Y Northern Lights Capital Group Y Northern Trust Global Investment Services Y Y Nuveen Investments Institutional Services Group LLC Y Old Mutual Asset Management Y Y Old Mutual International Y OppenheimerFunds, Inc. Y Pacific Investment Management Company Y Palisade Capital Management LLC Y

Knowledge. Experience. Integrity. 3 List of Managers That Do Business with Callan Associates Inc. (continued)

Partners Group Y Peregrine Capital Management, Inc. Y Perkins Investment Management Y Philadelphia International Advisors, LP Y PineBridge Investments (formerly AIG) Y Pioneer Investment Management, Inc. Y PNC Capital Advisors (fka Allegiant Asset Mgmt) Y Y Principal Global Investors Y Y Private Advisors Y Prudential Fixed Income Management Y Prudential Investment Management, Inc. Y Y Putnam Investments, LLC Y Pyramis Global Advisors Y Rainier Investment Management Y RBC Global Asset Management (U.S.) Inc. Y Regions Financial Corporation Y RCM Y Robeco Investment Management Y Y Robotti & Company Advisors, LLC Y Rothschild Asset Management, Inc. Y Y Russell Investment Management Y Santander Global Facilities Y Schroder Investment Management North America Inc. Y Y Scottish Widows Investment Partnership Y SEI Investments Y SEIX Investment Advisors, Inc. Y Select Equity Group Y Smith Graham and Company Y Smith Group Asset Management Y Standard Life Investments Y Standish (fka, Standish Mellon Asset Management) Y State Street Global Advisors Y Stone Harbor Investment Partners, L.P. Y Systematic Financial Management Y T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc. Y Y Taplin, Canida & Habacht Y TCW Asset Management Company Y Thompson, Siegel & Walmsley LLC Y Turner Investment Partners Y UBP Asset Management LLC Y UBS Y Y Union Bank of California Y Van Eck Y Victory Capital Management Inc. Y Vulcan Value Partners, LLC Y

Knowledge. Experience. Integrity. 4 List of Managers That Do Business with Callan Associates Inc. (continued)

Waddell & Reed Asset Management Group Y Y WCM Investment Management Y WEDGE Capital Management Y Wellington Management Company, LLP Y Wells Capital Management Y Western Asset Management Company Y William Blair & Co., Inc. Y Y

Knowledge. Experience. Integrity. 5