Conscious Investing Options for the Values Driven Investor

(1)

Conscious Investing

Options for the Values Driven Investor

The following information is of a proprietary nature. Dissemination to other parties is prohibited without prior consent of Paul Comstock Partners.

(2)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₂

Discussion Topics

Values Driven Investing

y Often investors want to consider their personal values in addition to their wealth preservation goals when

making investment decisions

{ Socially Responsible Investing (SRI)

• Negative screens allow investors to withhold capital from investments that are not aligned with

their values

{ Impact Investing

• Investors actively seek out investments which result in social or environmental change

(3)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₃

What is Socially Responsible Investing?

Socially Responsible Investing (SRI) is a broad-based approach to investing that recognizes that corporate

responsibility and societal concerns are valid parts of investment decisions

y Considers an investment’s impact on society

y Also known as: mission investing, responsible investing, double or triple bottom line investing, ethical

investing, sustainable investing, or green investing

Common methods investors utilize for SRI

y Screening

y Shareholder Advocacy

(4)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₄

How Do You Implement SRI?

Define the values the foundation wishes to express

Screens of securities can either be positive or negative

y Negative screens block companies engaged in certain undesirable activities

Examples:

{ Industry restrictions such as gambling or tobacco

{ Business dealings in the Sudan

y Positive screens attempt to identify companies with desirable attributes

Examples:

{ high levels of community involvement

{ good environmental practices

Determine screens that may be controversial to your board and/or constituency

y Example

{ Abortion/Birth Control

{ Defense/Weapons

Test restrictions if implemented on the current portfolio

y Names eliminated

(5)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₅

Common SRI Screens

Source: Luc Renneboog, Jenke ter Horst and Chendi Zhang 2007. http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=985267.

Screens Definitions

Tobacco Avoid manufacturers of tobacco products

Alcohol Avoid firms that produce, market, or otherwise promote the consumption of alcoholic beverages

Gambling Avoid casinos and suppliers of gambling equipment

Defense /Weapons Avoid firms producing weapons for domestic or foreign militaries, or firearms for personal use

Nuclear Power Avoid manufacturers of nuclear reactors or related equipment and companies that operate nuclear power plants

Irresponsible Foreign Operations

Avoid firms with investments in government-controlled or private firms located in oppressive regimes such as Burma or China, or firms which mistreat the indigenous peoples of developing countries

Pornography / Adult Enertainment and violence on television

Avoid publishers of pornographic magazines; production studios that produce offensive video and audio tapes; companies that are major sponsors of graphic sex

Abortion /Birth Control

Avoid providers of abortion; manufacturers of abortion drugs and birth control products; insurance companies that pay for elective abortions (where not mandated by law); companies that provide financial support to Planned Parenthood

Seek firms with strong union relationships, employee empowerment, and/or employee profit sharing. Avoid firms exploiting their workforce and sweatshops

Seek firms with proactive involvement in recycling, waste reduction, and environmental cleanup Avoid firms producing toxic products, and contributing to global warming

Seek companies demonstrating "best practices" related to board independence and elections, auditor independence, executive compensation, expensing of options, voting rights and/or other governance issues. Avoid firms with antitrust violations, consumer fraud, and marketing scandals.

Business Practice Seek companies committed to sustainability through investments in R&D, quality assurance, product safety Employment Diversity

Seek firms pursuing an active policy related to the employment of minorities, women, gays/lesbians, and/or disabled persons who ought to be represented amongst senior management

Human Rights Seek firms promoting human rights standards

Avoid firms which are complicit in human rights violations

Animal Testing Seek firms promoting the respectful treatment of animals

Avoid firms with animal testing and firms producing hunting/trapping equipment or using animals in end products

Renewable Energy Seek firms producing power derived form renewable energy sources

Biotechnology

Seek firms that support sustainable agriculture, biodiversity, local farmers, and industrial applications of biotechnology.

Avoid firms involved in the promotion or development of genetic engineering for agricultural applications. Community Involvement

Seek firms with proactive investments in the local community by sponsoring charitable donations, employee volunteerism, and/or housing and educational programs

Shareholder activism

The SRI funds that attempt to influence company actions through direct dialogue with management and/or voting at Annual General Meetings

Non-married Avoid insurance companies that give coverage to nonmarried couples

-Healthcare/

Pharmaceuticals Avoid healthcare industries (used by funds targeting the “Christian Scientist” religious group) Interest-based Financial

Institutions

Avoid financial institutions that derive a significant portion of their income from interest earnings (on loans or fixed income securities). (Used by funds managed according to Islamic principles)

Pork Producers

Avoid companies that derive a significant portion of their income from the manufacturing or marketing of pork products. (Used by funds managed according to Islamic principles)

Labor Relations and Workplace conditions

Corporate Governance Environment

(6)

(7)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₇

Corporate Watchdog Groups

Several different groups rate companies based on socially responsible standards

Corporate Responsibility Magazine (CRO)

y Annual “Top 100 Corporate Citizens” list ranks the world’s most socially responsible companies

Corporate Knights

y Since 2002

y Annual “Global 100” list ranks the world’s most sustainable companies

ETHISPHERE

y Annual “World’s Most Ethical Companies” list identifies companies who meet their standard for ethics

Subjectivity for standards of “Good” corporate responsibility vary such that lists of companies are wide ranging

y Corporations often demonized for poor corporate citizenship may show up on lists

{ Energy Companies (RD Shell - Corporate Knight’s Global 100)

{ Multinational clothing manufactures (Nike - CR Magazine Top 100)

(8)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₈

CR Magazine’s Top 100 Corporate Citizens

Rank Name Symbol

1 Hewlett-Packard Co. HPQ

2 Intel Corp. INTC

3 General Mills, Inc. GIS

4 International Business Machines Corp. IBM

5 Kimberly-Clark Corp. KMB

6 Abbott Laboratories ABT

7 Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. BMY

8 Coca-Cola Co KO

9 Gap, Inc. GPS

10 Hess Corporation HES

11 Cummins Inc. CMI

12 Campbell Soup Co. CPB

13 Pepsico Inc. PEP

14 Microsoft Corporation MSFT

15 Procter & Gamble Co. PG

16 Newmont Mining Corp. NEM

17 Merck & Co., Inc MRK

18 Colgate-Palmolive Co. CL

19 EMC Corp. EMC

20 Baxter International Inc. BAX

21 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. WMT

22 Johnson Controls Inc JCI

23 Nike, Inc. NKE

24 Cisco Systems, Inc. CSCO

25 PG&E Corp. PCG

26 Occidental Petroleum Corp. OWY

27 Verizon Communications VZ

28 H.J. Heinz Co. HNZ

29 Mattel, Inc. MAT

30 Xcel Energy, Inc. XEL

31 Monsanto Co. MON

32 3M Co. MMM

33 Texas Instruments Inc. TXN

34 Johnson & Johnson JNJ

35 Avon Products, Inc. AVP

36 Dominion Resources Inc D

37 Xerox Corp XRX

38 Dell Inc. DELL

39 Green Mountain Coffee Roasters, Inc. GMCR

40 Hormel Foods Corp. HRL

41 Eaton Corp. ETN

42 Brown-Forman Corp. BF.B

43 Duke Energy Corp. DUK

44 Mckesson Corporation MCK

45 Mosaic Company MOS

46 United Parcel Service, Inc. UPS

47 Wisconsin Energy Corp. WEC

48 Oracle Corp. ORCL

49 McDonald`s Corp MCD

50 J.C. Penney Inc (Holding Co.) JCP

Rank Name Symbol

51 Exxon Mobil Corp. XOM

52 Starbucks Corp. SBUX

53 Applied Materials Inc. AMAT

54 ITT Corporation ITT

55 Consolidated Edison, Inc. ED

56 Chevron Corp. CVX

57 Citigroup Inc C

58 Kellogg Co K

59 Air Products & Chemicals Inc. APD

60 Staples, Inc. SPLS

61 Sempra Energy SRE

62 Yum! Brands Inc. YUM

63 McGraw-Hill Cos., Inc. MHP

64 Albemarle Corp. ALB

65 Raytheon Co. RTN

66 Symantec Corp. SYMC

67 Weyerhaeuser Co. WY

68 Sherwin-Williams Co. SHW

69 Union Pacific Corp. UNP

70 Advanced Micro Devices Inc. AMD

71 Southern Company SO

72 JPMorgan Chase & Co. JPM

73 FPL Group, Inc. FPL

74 Pepsi Bottling Group Inc PBG

75 Accenture Ltd CAN

76 Deere & Co. DE

77 Medtronic, Inc. MDT

78 Life Technologies Corp LIFE

79 Quest Diagnostics, Inc. DGX

80 Allergan Inc. AGN

81 Walt Disney Co. DIS

82 Alcoa Inc. AA

83 Freeport-McMoran Copper & Gold Inc. FCX

84 Sara Lee Corp. SLE

85 International Paper Co. IP

86 Lubrizol Corp. LZ

87 Exelon Corp. EXC

88 Ford Motor Co. F

89 CVS Caremark Corp. CVS

90 Coca-Cola Enterprises Inc. CCE

91 State Street Corp. STT

92 E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co DD

93 Conagra Foods, Inc. CAG

94 Owens Corning OC

95 Northeast Utilities NU

96 Ball Corp. BLL

97 TJX Companies, Inc. TJX

98 Boeing Co. BA

99 Sigma-Aldrich Corp. SIAL

(9)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₉

Corporate Knight’s Global 100

Rank Name

Sales/Co2 Tonnes

Leadership Diversity

1 General Electric Company $27,878 25%

2 PG & E Corp. $8,656 38%

3 Tnt Nv $14,575 20%

4 H & M Hennes & Mauritz Ab $65,236 54%

5 Nokia Corporation $320,536 20% 6 Siemens Ag $32,741 15% 7 Unilever Plc $21,596 13% 8 Vodafone Group Plc $44,047 9% 9 Smiths Group Plc $38,047 0% 10 Geberit $26,028 0% 11 Henkel Ag $20,102 31% 12 Inditex Sa $39,934 22%

13 Procter & Gamble Company $12,803 25%

14 Toyota Motor Corp. $130,187 0%

15 Westpac Banking Corp. $243,299 33%

16 Enbridge Inc $3,782 15%

17 Koninklijke Philips Electronics Na $32,234 0%

18 Diageo Plc $21,642 30%

19 Nippon Yusen Kk $1,336 5%

20 Royal Dutch Shell Plc $5,392 20%

21 ProLogis $347,050 20%

22 Insurance Australia Group $136,069 22%

23 Johnson Controls Inc $22,209 8%

24 Stockland $14,442 15% 25 Encana Corp. $2,819 20% 26 Prudential Plc $0 20% 27 Old Mutual Plc $0 0% 28 Adidas Ag $246,995 17% 29 Bg Group Plc $2,638 9% 30 Groupe Danone $41,095 0% 31 Centrica Plc $3,560 20% 32 Taylor Wimpey Plc $344,292 22% 33 Kesko Oyj $84,084 14% 34 Atlas Copco Ab $26,047 33% 35 Bt Group Plc $52,279 19%

36 Agilent Technologies Inc $42,054 11%

37 L'Oreal S.A. $123,171 21%

38 Coca Cola Company $6,179 20%

39 Intel Corp. $13,188 36%

40 Suncor Energy $2,551 18%

41 Novozymes A/s $3,078 11%

42 Vestas Windsystems A/S $212,202 18%

43 Swisscom $398,323 22%

44 Umicore Sa $21,489 10%

45 Novo Nordisk A/s $41,797 18%

46 Kingfisher Plc $43,050 11%

47 GPT Group $4,228 25%

48 Starbucks Corp. $7,768 22%

49 Sainsbury (j) Plc $53,583 30%

50 Sun Life Financial Inc $397,663 25%

Rank Name Sales/Co2 Tonnes Leadership Diversity 51 Lafarge Sa $266 6% 52 Glaxosmithkline Plc $20,115 7%

53 Bluescope Steel Limited $613 13%

54 The Capita Group Plc $104,071 22%

55 Iberdrola Sa $927 13%

56 Origin Energy Limited $184 14%

57 Lonmin Plc $1,345 10%

58 Roche Holdings Limited $39,785 15%

59 Nexen Inc $1,953 8%

60 Credit Agricole Sa $2,545,994 9%

61 Boral Limited $1,177 11%

62 Pearson Plc $43,838 25%

63 SCA AB $3,874 13%

64 London Stock Exchange Group Plc $147,742 15%

65 Transcanada Corp. $630 15%

66 Electrocomponents Plc $82,921 0%

67 Statoilhydro Asa $8,129 40%

68 Toronto-Dominion Bank $244,577 25%

69 Baxter International Inc $16,732 15%

70 Duke Energy Corp. $123 18%

71 Royal Bank Of Canada $255,324 20%

72 Mtr Corporation Limited $2,066 18%

73 Sims Metal Management Ltd $28,277 0%

74 Abb Limited $22,294 0%

75 Trend Micro Inc $46,989 20%

76 Omv Ag $3,131 7%

77 Swiss Reinsurance Company $1,345,811 8%

78 Sembcorp Industries Limited $25,415 25%

79 SAP AG $76,007 6%

80 Smith (ds) Plc $4,960 0%

81 City Developments Limited $60,879 0%

82 Anglo Platinum Limited $1,117 13%

83 Pinnacle West Capital Corp. $139 17%

84 Dassault Systemes Sa $935,609 0%

85 Neste Oil Oyj $5,532 38%

86 Intesa Sanpaolo $301,959 5%

87 STMicroelectronics $7,179 0%

88 Telus Corp. $28,012 8%

89 F & C Asset Management Plc $741,837 0%

90 Tata Steel $2,932 0%

91 Samsung Electronics Company Limited $7,252 0%

92 Housing Development Finance Corp. Limite $451,906 7%

93 Posco $377 0%

94 Banco Bradesco Sa $869,454 14%

95 Ricoh Company Limited $57,194 0%

96 Petroleo Brasileiro Sa $2,053 11%

97 Dexus Property Group $3,367 14%

98 Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Compa $3,189 14%

99 Natura Cosmeticos Sa $0 0%

(10)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₀

ETHISPHERE

(11)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₁

ETHISPHERE

World’s Most Ethical Companies (WME)

Rank Name 1 Accenture 2 Accor 3 Aflac 4 American Express 5 AstraZeneca 6 Avaya 7 Baxter International 8 Becton Dickinson 9 Best Buy 10 BMW 11 Caterpillar 12 CH2M Hill 13 Cisco Systems 14 Cleveland Clinic 15 CRH 16 Cummins 17 Danone 18 Dell 19 Duke Energy

20 Dun & Bradstreet

21 Eaton Corporation

22 Ecolab

23 Flint Hills Resources

24 Fluor 25 FPL Group 26 Freescale Semiconductor 27 Gap 28 General Electric 29 General Mills 30 Google 31 Harris Corporation 32 Henkel 33 Hewlett-Packard 34 Holcim 35 Honeywell International 36 HSBC 37 IKEA 38 Intel 39 International Paper 40 John Deere

41 Johns Hopkins Hospital

42 Johnson Controls

43 Jones Lang LaSalle

44 Kao

45 Kellogg Company

46 Marks & Spencer

47 Marriott International 48 Mattel 49 McDonald’s 50 Milliken Rank Name 51 Nike

52 Nippon Yusen Kaisha

53 Novartis 54 Novo Nordisk 55 Novozymes 56 Oracle Corporation 57 Patagonia 58 PepsiCo 59 Petro-Canada 60 Pitney Bowes 61 Premier 62 Rabobank 63 Ricoh Company 64 Rockwell Automation 65 Royal Philips 66 Safeway 67 salesforce.com

68 SC Johnson & Son

69 Sempra Energy

70 Sodexo

71 Sompo

72 Standard Chartered Bank

73 Starbucks

74 Statkraft

75 Stonyfield Farm

76 Stora Enso

77 Svenska Cellulosa (SCA)

78 Swiss Re

79 Symantec

80 Target

81 Ten Thousand Villages

82 Texas Instruments

83 The Aerospace Corporation

84 The Hartford Financial Services 85 The Principal Financial Group

86 Thomson Reuters 87 Time Warner 88 T-Mobile 89 Toyota Motor 90 Trader Joe’s 91 Unilever

92 United Parcel Service

93 Vodafone

94 Waste Management

95 Westpac Banking Corporation

96 Weyerhaeuser

97 Wisconsin Energy

98 Xerox

(12)

(13)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₃

World’s Most Ethical Companies (WME)

Performance

(14)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₄

Does SRI Investing Compromise Returns?

To illustrate how funds typically screen and to consider the impact of screens on performance, we selected a

sample of SRI mutual funds for comparison

y All funds are considered large core holdings and easily comparable to the S&P 500

Fund Screens

Fund I

Avoids firms that violate core values and favors those with strong environmental, social and governance records.

Fund II

No alcohol, tobacco, firearms, gambling, nuclear power, or weapons contracting. Favors firms with strong records in environmental issues, workplace diversity and employee relations.

Fund III Filters out alcohol, tobacco, weapons manufacturers and polluters. Fund IV

No firms with ties to tobacco, gambling, alcohol, weapons or nuclear power. Favors the least offensive firms in sectors such as energy or materials.

(15)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₅

Manager Performance Analysis

February 2000 - January 2010: Annualized Performance Statistics

Fund I Return 2.2% Fund II -2.1% Cumulative Return 24% -19% Standard Deviation (Volatility) 13.9% 17.1% Sharpe Ratio -0.04 -0.29 Alpha 2.74% -1.16% Beta 0.83 1.04 Max Drawdown -44.1% -52.7% Fund III 6.2% 82% 13.4% 0.25 6.72% 0.77 -35.6% Tracking Error 4.5% 3.2% 6.3% Fund IV 3.2% 37% 16.1% 0.03 4.10% 0.94 -47.9% 5.5% S&P 500 -0.8% -8% 16.1% -0.22 0.00% 1.00 -50.9% 0.0% Annualized Performance Fund I Fund II Fund III YTD -2.4% -4.4% -3.5% 1 year 32.1% 42.2% 31.4% 2 years -6.0% -6.5% 0.7% 3 years -2.9% -7.2% 2.0% 4 years -0.0% -2.6% 5.0% Fund IV -2.6% 35.1% -9.8% -6.5% -1.6% S&P 500 -3.6% 33.1% -9.6% -7.2% -2.2% 5 years 0.9% -0.7% 5.7% 1.3% 0.2% 6 years 1.7% 0.1% 5.5% 2.3% 1.2% 7 years 5.5% 4.3% 7.3% 6.9% 5.4% 8 years 2.6% 0.5% 5.6% 4.2% 1.3% 9 years 1.7% -1.6% 5.9% 2.8% -0.8% 10 years 2.2% -2.1% 6.2% 3.2% -0.8% Fund I YTD -2.37% Fund II -4.42% 2009 24.52% 35.56% 2008 -31.35% -37.88% 2007 11.29% 1.46% 2006 8.77% 12.58% 2005 0.92% 2.03% 2004 10.75% 9.26% 2003 24.45% 27.13% 2002 -12.95% -20.69% Fund III -3.50% 28.75% -22.96% 14.13% 14.70% 2.62% 9.30% 15.69% -3.69% Fund IV -2.65% 30.61% -38.76% 7.48% 14.45% 7.58% 13.56% 34.48% -14.45% S&P 500 -3.60% 26.46% -37.00% 5.49% 15.79% 4.91% 10.88% 28.68% -22.10% 2001 -4.26% -12.76% 9.97% -2.57% -11.88% Manager Risk/Return February 2000 - January 2010 Re tu rn -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% Standard Deviation 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Fund I Fund II Fund III Fund IV Market B enc hmark: S & P 500 Cas h E quivalent: Citigroup 3-month T -bill

Capital Market Line

Upside / Downside February 2000 - January 2010 Up s id e % 85 90 95 100 105 110 Downside% 60 70 80 90 100 110 Fund I Fund II Fund III Fund IV S & P 500

(16)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₆

Manager Performance Analysis

Manager vs Universe: Return through January 2010 Zephyr Large Core U niverse (Morning star)

Re tu rn -10 0 10 20 30 40 50

3 months 2 quarters 1 year 3 years 5 years 10 years

Fund I Fund II Fund III

Fund IV S & P 500

Rolling 36-month Return Zephyr Large Core U niverse (Morningstar)

Re tu rn -15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20

Aug 2003 Mar 2004 Oct 2004 May 2005 Dec 2005 Jul 2006 Feb 2007 Sep 2007 Apr 2008 Nov 2008 Jun 2009 Jan 2010

Fund I Fund II Fund III

Fund IV S & P 500

Annualized Excess Return / Standard Deviation Excess Return

vs. S&P 500 February 2000 - January 2010 A n n u al iz e d O u tp er fo rm a n ce -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% Tracking Error 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% Fund I Fund II Fund III Fund IV

Zephyr Large Core Univers e (Mornings tar)

Manager Style

February 2000 - January 2010

Russell 1000 Value Russell 1000 Growth

Russell 2000 Value Russell 2000 Growth

Small -2 -1 0 1 2 Large Value -2 -1 0 1 2 Growth Fund I Fund II Fund III Fund IV

Zephyr Large Core Uni vers e (Morni ngs tar) Rus s el l Generic Corners

(17)

(18)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₈

Impact Investing

Definition: Actively placing capital in businesses and funds that generate social and/or environmental good

and a range of returns, from principal to above market, to investor.1

y The main difference in Impact Investing and Socially Responsible Investing stems from the idea of

actively seeking change through the allocation of capital

Individual investors may find it difficult to meaningfully project philanthropic ideals

y Some investment vehicles present an opportunity for investors to gain the advantages of scale when

trying to accomplish value driven goals

The main goals of such funds is to intentionally make change

y Investments which unintentionally create social good are not included in this category

Impact Investing vehicles are not charities. While the goal is to change the society for the better, some

financial return is intended on the investment

y Returns may or may not be above market returns

(19)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₁₉

Types of Investors and Vehicles

Impact First Investors

y Investors who are primarily seeking social good and make accept below market returns or only return of

capital

Financial First Investors

y Investors who seek market rate returns which also have social impact

Hybrid Structures (Layered Structures)

y Investment vehicles which combine capital from both types of investors in order to create economies of

scale and do the greatest good

y Tranches are often created to satisfy the needs of both types of investors

(20)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₂₀

Impact Investing Framework

Although Impact Investing is a relatively new idea, recent innovations have create many different opportunities

for investors to participate

y Opportunities exist in areas from very secure cash investments and senior debt offerings to private equity

and venture capital funds

y Considerations for appropriate vehicles are driven by risk tolerances and investing goals

The framework an investor chooses will drive potential returns

y As the industry has begun to mature, market returns may be reasonable considering the asset class or

(21)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₂₁

Fiduciary Issues

Evidence on whether SRI adds or detracts from investment returns is inconclusive

y Studies of screening criteria show excess returns for companies that rate highly on corporate governance

and environmental performance1

y Analysis of SRI mutual fund performance in the US and UK has shown no statistically significant

difference with other actively managed funds1

Ultimately most prohibited SRI areas represent small industries whose impact on diversification is immaterial

y Tobacco stocks, for example, represent approximately 1.5% of the S&P 500

y Exclusion of these stocks typically translates into random tracking error on portfolios

y A prohibition against a larger industry such as Pharmaceutical or Banking would have a material impact

on diversification

SRI criteria should match the mission of the foundation

y Headline risk is a material consideration

{ For example, a foundation promoting cancer research could be criticized for holding tobacco stocks

in the portfolio

It would be difficult to demonstrate, from a pure investment standpoint, that a portfolio had been harmed by

following an established SRI criteria

y Demonstrating a statistically significant difference in performance could take 10-15 years

y A three or five year performance number is not sufficient time to judge the impact of a program

1.Source: Luc Renneboog, Jenke ter Horst and Chendi Zhang 2007. http://ssrn.com/abstract_id=985267

Note: The above comments are investment and communication opinions and should not be relied upon for compliance with fiduciary standards under the law. Before embarking on a SRI program, consult with legal counsel.

(22)

Paul Comstock Partners ® ₂₂

Summary

Opportunities exist for investors looking to align their values with their investment portfolios

y There are options as to how you implement values driven investing within a portfolio

{ Socially Responsible Investing is a way to avoid participating with companies that produce products

or provide services inconsistent with your personal values

{ Impact Investing is a way to actively participate in promoting your values in emerging areas around

(23)

For More Information…

Paul Comstock Partners ® Two Riverway, Suite 1000 Houston, TX 77056

Main (713) 977 2694 Fax (713) 877 1363