Proxy Voting Policy

I. General Policies and Potential Conflicts of Interest

A. General Policies
Axiom International Investors, LLC (“Axiom”) has adopted these proxy voting policies and guidelines (the “Policies”) with respect to securities owned by clients for which Axiom serves as investment adviser and has the power to vote proxies. Rule 206(4)-6 under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the “Advisers Act”) requires investment advisers that have voting authority with respect to securities held in their clients’ accounts to exercise a duty of care by monitoring corporate actions and voting proxies. To satisfy its duty of loyalty, an adviser must cast proxy votes in the best interests of its clients and not in a way that advances the adviser’s interests above those of its clients. In addition to these SEC requirements governing registered investment advisers, our proxy voting policies reflect the long-standing fiduciary standards and responsibilities for ERISA accounts set out in Department of Labor Bulletin 94-2, 29 C.F.R. 2509.94-2 (July 29, 1994), as well as the 2019 SEC guidance regarding proxy voting.

The Policies are designed to reasonably ensure that Axiom votes proxies in the best interest of clients for which it has voting authority and describe how Axiom addresses material conflicts between its interests and those of its clients with respect to proxy voting. Under the Policies, Axiom will generally vote proxies by considering those factors that would affect the value of the securities held in clients’ accounts.

As a general matter, Axiom considers, but is not required to adhere to, the proxy voting guidelines established by Institutional Shareholder Services Inc. (“ISS”) when casting proxy votes on behalf of clients.

ISS is an independent third party that specializes in providing a variety of fiduciary-level proxy related services to institutional investment managers. ISS provides Axiom with in-depth research, voting recommendations, vote execution and recordkeeping. However, Axiom recognizes that there are certain types of proposals that may result in different voting positions being taken with respect to the different issuers. Some items that otherwise would be acceptable will be voted against the proponent when it is seeking extremely broad flexibility without offering adequate justification. In addition, Axiom generally votes consistently on the same matter when securities of an issuer are held by multiple client accounts. Axiom reviews proxy issues on a case-by-case basis, and there are instances when our judgment of the anticipated effect on the best interests of our clients may warrant exceptions to the policies on specific issues set forth in Section II.

B. Conflicts of Interest
Axiom is responsible for identifying potential conflicts of interest in the process of voting proxies on behalf of its clients. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include situations where Axiom or personnel of Axiom: (1) provide services to a company whose management is soliciting proxies; (2) have a material business relationship with a proponent of a proxy proposal and this business relationship may influence how the proxy vote is cast; or (3) have a business or personal relationship with participants in a proxy contest, corporate directors or candidates for directorships.

Axiom may address material conflicts between its interests and those of its advisory clients by using any of the following methods: (1) adopting a policy of disclosing the conflict to clients and obtaining their consent before voting; (2) basing the proxy vote on pre-determined voting guidelines if the application of the guidelines to the matter presented to clients involves minimal discretion on the part of Axiom; or (3) using the recommendations of an independent third party.

In the event that Axiom becomes aware of a conflict of interest between Axiom and ISS, Axiom will make an independent decision on how to vote, which may or may not be consistent with ISS guidelines. ISS will then execute the vote as directed by Axiom.

II. Axiom’s Policies on Specific Issues

A. Management Proposals
Axiom will typically support ISS’s recommendation on management proposals. However, in the event that Axiom decide to vote a proxy (or a particular proposal within a proxy) in a manner different from the ISS recommendation, Axiom will document the reasons supporting the decision.

B. Shareholder Proposals
Axiom will typically support ISS’s recommendation on shareholder proposals. However, in the event that Axiom decides to vote a proxy (or a particular proposal within a proxy) in a manner different from the ISS recommendation, Axiom will document the reasons supporting the decision.

C. Deviation from ISS Guidelines
If ISS is (i) unable to complete or provide its research and analysis regarding a security on a timely basis, or (ii) Axiom determines that voting in accordance with ISS guidelines is not in the best interest of the client, Axiom will not vote in accordance with ISS guidelines. In such cases, Axiom will make an independent decision on how to vote, which may or may not be consistent with ISS guidelines. ISS will then execute the vote as directed by Axiom.

D. Foreign Issuers – Share Blocking
In accordance with local law or business practices, many foreign companies prevent the sales of shares that have been voted for a certain period beginning prior to the shareholder meeting and ending on the day following the meeting (“share blocking”). Depending on the country in which a company is domiciled, the blocking period may begin a stated number of days prior to the meeting (e.g., one, three or five days) or on a date established by the company. While practices vary, in many countries the block period can be continued for a longer period if the shareholder meeting is adjourned and postponed to a later date. Similarly, practices vary widely as to the ability of a shareholder to have the “block” restriction lifted early (e.g., in some countries shares generally can be “unblocked” up to two days prior to the meeting whereas in other countries the removal of the block appears to be discretionary with the issuer’s transfer agent). Due to these restrictions, Axiom must balance the benefits to its clients of voting proxies against the potentially serious portfolio management consequences of a reduced flexibility to sell the underlying shares at the most advantageous time. In many cases, the disadvantage of being unable to sell the stock regardless of changing conditions outweighs the advantages of voting at the shareholder meeting for routine items. Accordingly, Axiom generally will not vote those proxies in the absence of an unusual, highly material vote.

E. Foreign Issuers – Beneficial Owner Meeting Attendance Requirement
Some foreign markets require the Beneficial Owner to attend a meeting in order to cast a vote. Accordingly, Axiom will generally not vote those proxies.

F. Share Lending
At times, Axiom and/or ISS may not be able to vote proxies on behalf of clients when our clients lend securities to third parties beyond our control.

III. Procedures for Reviewing and Voting Proxies

A. Procedures
Whenever possible proxy solicitations from securities held for client accounts who have delegated proxy voting responsibility to Axiom are sent directly by the client’s custodian to Axiom’s proxy voting vendor, ISS, Axiom will use its best judgment to vote proxies in the best interests of its clients and will typically follow the recommendations of ISS. In the event that Axiom decides to vote a proxy (or a particular proposal within a proxy) in a manner different from the ISS recommendation, Axiom will document the reasons supporting the decision.

Any proposal where Axiom has decided to vote differently than the ISS recommendation and it is determined a material conflict of interest exists between Axiom and its clients as a result of voting differently on such proposal, that proposal will be directed to the Chief Compliance Officer for consideration. The Chief Compliance Officer will recommend to the Chief Investment Officer and Portfolio Manager the appropriate voting response for such proposal by applying one of the methods identified in Section I.B. of the Policies. For each proposal for which a material conflict of interest exists and Axiom votes contrary to ISS, the Chief Compliance Officer shall prepare a memorandum (a “Material Conflict Memorandum”), to be kept with the record of the proxy vote, that identifies the material conflict of interest and the method used for determining how to vote on the proposal.

B. Amending Axiom’s Policies on Specific Issues
Axiom will periodically review Axiom’s Policies on Specific Issues to ensure that they contain appropriate guidance for determining how votes will be cast on a variety of matters and the underlying rationale for such determination.

C. Supplemental Information of Issuers
In the event that Axiom becomes aware that an issuer intends to file or has filed with the SEC supplemental information in response to ISS’ voting recommendation, whether or not Axiom received or intends to follow such recommendation, the Chief Compliance Officer will review such supplemental information. If Axiom has not yet executed the related proxy vote(s) or provided instructions to ISS, the Chief Compliance Officer will provide the supplemental information to the relevant Portfolio Manager(s). If Axiom has already executed the related proxy vote(s) or provided instructions to ISS, the Chief Compliance Officer will review the supplemental information and, if determined to be material to the related proxy vote(s), will provide the supplemental information to the relevant Portfolio Manager(s) in order to permit reconsideration of the related proxy vote(s). The Portfolio Manager shall communicate to the Chief Compliance Officer whether or not the previously provided voting instructions should be changed.

IV. Proxy Voting Audit Procedures and Oversight of Third-Party Proxy Voting

When Axiom is voting in accordance with ISS guidelines, Axiom will review a sampling of the “pre-populated” votes on the ISS’ electronic voting platform before ISS executes the vote. In instances of voting not in accordance with ISS guidelines, Axiom will itself “pre-populate” votes on the ISS’ electronic voting platform before ISS executes the vote.

Periodically, a random sample of the proxies voted by ISS will be audited by Axiom to ensure ISS is voting in accordance with applicable ISS guidelines or consistent with Axiom’s direction, as applicable, and in order to further evaluate whether Axiom’s voting determinations were consistent with the Policies and in its clients’ best interest.

Axiom will review, no less frequently than annually, ISS, (or any other third-party proxy voting service, as applicable) its policies and methodologies. This review will include, among others, the following topics and determinations:

whether ISS has the capacity and competence to adequately analyze proxy issues, including the adequacy and quality of its staffing, personnel and/or technology and any material changes in the ISS staffing and technology since the last review;
whether ISS has an effective process for seeking timely input from issuers and its clients with respect to its proxy voting policies, methodologies and peer group constructions;
whether ISS engages with issuers, including its process for ensuring that it has complete and accurate information about the issuer and each particular matter, and ISS’ process, if any, for investment advisers to access the issuers’ views about ISS’ voting recommendations;
whether Axiom has sufficient information on and understanding of ISS’ methodologies and the factors underlying ISS’ voting recommendations, including an understanding of how ISS obtains information relevant to its voting recommendations and how it engages with issuers and third parties;
whether ISS is independent and can make recommendations in an impartial manner in the best interest of Axiom’s clients. This analysis will include a review of (i) any ISS actual or potential conflicts known to Axiom, (ii) ISS’ policies and procedures on identifying, disclosing and addressing conflicts of interest, and (iii) whether ISS is disclosing its actual or potential conflicts to Axiom in a timely, transparent and accessible manner;
ISS’ internal controls, including but not limited to a review of ISS’ business continuity plan, methodologies with respect to implementing Axiom’s voting instructions, proxy record keeping and internal and independent third-party audit certifications;
the extent to which ISS has access to non-public information regarding how Axiom intends to vote a Client’s securities and would be permitted to utilize this information in a manner that would not be in the best interest of Axiom’s Clients (e.g., Axiom may consider the extent to which ISS would be permitted to share such information (including information on aggregated voting intentions of ISS’ clients) with third parties);
any factual errors, potential incompleteness, or potential methodological weaknesses in the ISS’ analysis known to Axiom and whether such errors, incompleteness or weaknesses materially affected ISS’ voting recommendations. Axiom will also access ISS’ process for disclosure to Axiom and efforts to correct any such identified errors, incompleteness or weaknesses.

In connection with this oversight function, Axiom will ensue that ISS (or any other third-party proxy voting service, as applicable), is prepared to provide additional information to Axiom to assist it with gaining a better understanding of the services that the proxy advisory firm provides, as well as confirming that these services align with Axiom’s own fiduciary duties. Further in connection with this oversight function, Axiom will obtain information about and possibly consider alternative service providers.

V. Annual Review of Policies

Axiom will review, no less frequently than annually, the adequacy of the Policies and the effectiveness of the implementation and determination whether the Policies are reasonably designed to ensure that Axiom casts proxy votes on behalf of its clients in the best interest of such clients.

VI. Disclosure

Axiom will disclose in its Form ADV Part 2A that clients may contact Axiom in order to obtain information on how Axiom voted such client’s proxies, and to request a copy of the Policies. If a client requests this information, the Axiom will prepare a written response to the client that lists, with respect to each voted proxy that the client has inquired: (i) the name of the issuer, (ii) the proposal voted upon and (iii) how Axiom voted the client’s proxy. A summary of the Policies will be included in Axiom’s Form ADV Part 2, which is delivered to all clients. The summary will be updated whenever the Policies are updated.

VII. Recordkeeping and Client Reporting

In accordance with Rule 204-2 under the Advisers Act, Axiom shall retain the following documents for not less than five years from the end of the year in which the proxies were voted, the first two years in Axiom’s office:

The Policies and any additional procedures created pursuant to the Policies;
a copy of each proxy statement Axiom receives regarding securities held on behalf of its clients, including any supplemental information an issuer files with the SEC that Axiom becomes aware of;
a record of each vote cast by Axiom on behalf of its clients;
a copy of any document created by Axiom that was material to making its voting decision or that memorializes the basis for such decision; and
a copy of each written request from a client, and response to the client, for information on how Axiom voted the client’s proxies.

¹ Commission Guidance Regarding Proxy Voting Responsibilities of Investment Advisers, Release Nos. IA-5325; IC-33605 (Aug. 21, 2019); Commission Interpretation and Guidance Regarding Applicability of the Proxy Rules to Proxy Voting Advice, Release No. 34-86721 (Aug. 21, 2019).

ESG at Axiom