o
Preliminary Proxy Statement
|
o Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)) | |
x Definitive Proxy
Statement o Definitive Additional Materials |
||
o Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-11(c) or §240.14a-12 |
x | No fee required. |
(3) | Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined): |
o | Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the Form or Schedule and the date of its filing. |
One Financial Way | |
Cincinnati, Ohio 45242 | |
Post Office Box 237 | |
Cincinnati, Ohio 45201-0237 | |
Telephone: 513-794-6100 |
1. | to elect directors, | |
2. | to seek your approval of an amended Investment Advisory Agreement with Ohio National Investments, Inc. permitting the allocation of expenses of the Funds Chief Compliance Officer and his staff to the Fund and requiring the Adviser to provide the Board with any materials it requests, and assist in the collection of such materials from subadvisers, for purposes of reviewing and approving advisory and subadvisory agreements, and | |
3. | to transact any other business that may properly come before the meeting. |
/s/ Marc L. Collins | |
Marc L. Collins | |
Secretary |
Percent | |||||||||
Equity Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
13,044,259 | 72.26% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
751,786 | 4.16% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
2,631,016 | 14.58% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
98,343 | 0.54% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
1,476,519 | 8.18% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
49,281 | 0.27% | |||||||
Total Shares, Equity
|
18,051,205 |
Percent | |||||||||
Money Market Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
15,681,683 | 77.04% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
205,273 | 1.01% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
3,476,747 | 17.08% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
180,823 | 0.89% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
668,999 | 3.29% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
140,613 | 0.69% | |||||||
Total Shares, Money Market
|
20,354,138 |
Percent | |||||||||
Bond Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
12,088,728 | 84.81% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
254,059 | 1.78% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,403,470 | 9.85% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
46,265 | 0.32% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
376,405 | 2.64% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
85,366 | 0.60% | |||||||
Total Shares, Bond
|
14,254,293 |
Percent | |||||||||
Omni Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
2,112,884 | 46.89% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
545,669 | 12.11% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,267,505 | 28.13% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
55,983 | 1.24% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
521,197 | 11.57% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
2,431 | 0.05% | |||||||
Total Shares, Omni
|
4,505,668 |
Percent | |||||||||
International Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
18,601,736 | 82.66% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
595,566 | 2.65% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,735,250 | 7.71% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
118,546 | 0.53% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
1,220,054 | 5.42% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
232,484 | 1.03% | |||||||
Total Shares, International
|
22,503,637 |
Percent | |||||||||
International Small Company Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,662,147 | 54.76% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
167,581 | 5.52% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
790,536 | 26.04% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
46,818 | 1.54% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
364,690 | 12.01% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
3,588 | 0.12% | |||||||
Total Shares, International Small Company
|
3,035,361 |
Percent | |||||||||
Capital Appreciation Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
8,098,191 | 73.70% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
423,838 | 3.86% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,508,595 | 13.73% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
77,071 | 0.70% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
813,953 | 7.41% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
67,038 | 0.61% | |||||||
Total Shares, Capital Appreciation
|
10,988,686 |
Percent | |||||||||
Millennium (formerly Discovery) Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,398,855 | 39.55% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
235,157 | 6.65% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,090,363 | 30.83% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
73,109 | 2.07% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
738,789 | 20.89% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
910 | 0.03% | |||||||
Total Shares, Millennium
|
3,537,183 |
Percent | |||||||||
Aggressive Growth Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
622,922 | 25.27% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
91,855 | 3.73% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,180,639 | 47.90% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
48,816 | 1.98% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
520,728 | 21.13% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
Total Shares, Aggressive Growth
|
2,464,961 |
Percent | |||||||||
Small Cap Growth Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
614,882 | 32.32% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
104,550 | 5.50% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
828,248 | 43.54% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
27,237 | 1.43% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
324,830 | 17.08% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
2,523 | 0.13% | |||||||
Total Shares, Small Cap Growth
|
1,902,270 |
Percent | |||||||||
Mid Cap Opportunity Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
2,538,740 | 52.43% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
309,307 | 6.39% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,137,655 | 23.49% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
84,950 | 1.75% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
769,044 | 15.88% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
2,486 | 0.05% | |||||||
Total Shares, Mid Cap Opportunity
|
4,842,182 |
Percent | |||||||||
Capital Growth Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,093,176 | 71.03% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
17,548 | 1.14% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
291,444 | 18.94% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
12,813 | 0.83% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
124,109 | 8.06% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
Total Shares, Capital Growth
|
1,539,090 |
Percent | |||||||||
S&P 500 Index Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
6,374,904 | 48.89% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
574,031 | 4.40% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
4,078,642 | 31.28% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
214,208 | 1.64% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
1,787,947 | 13.71% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
535 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
8,574 | 0.07% | |||||||
Total Shares, S&P 500 Index
|
13,038,841 |
Percent | |||||||||
High Income Bond Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
5,551,507 | 76.64% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
51,177 | 0.71% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,298,556 | 17.93% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
57,966 | 0.80% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
268,726 | 3.71% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
807 | 0.01% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
14,744 | 0.20% | |||||||
Total Shares, High Income Bond
|
7,243,483 |
2
Percent | |||||||||
Blue Chip Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,936,349 | 77.33% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
18,395 | 0.73% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
402,462 | 16.07% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
14,073 | 0.56% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
130,072 | 5.19% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
2,590 | 0.10% | |||||||
Total Shares, Blue Chip
|
2,503,941 |
Percent | |||||||||
Nasdaq-100 Index Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
7,058,700 | 79.90% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
21,585 | 0.24% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
1,416,144 | 16.03% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
53,639 | 0.61% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
212,343 | 2.40% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
72,227 | 0.82% | |||||||
Total Shares, Nasdaq-100 Index
|
8,834,636 |
Percent | |||||||||
Bristol Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
3,204,366 | 86.98% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
7,461 | 0.20% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
389,710 | 10.58% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
1,849 | 0.05% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
36,848 | 1.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
43,858 | 1.19% | |||||||
Total Shares, Bristol
|
3,684,092 |
Percent | |||||||||
Bryton Growth Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,189,184 | 80.25% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
4,636 | 0.31% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
215,368 | 14.53% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
3,669 | 0.25% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
46,929 | 3.17% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
22,055 | 1.49% | |||||||
Total Shares, Bryton Growth
|
1,481,841 |
Percent | |||||||||
U.S. Equity Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,319,731 | 96.33% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
7,324 | 0.53% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
21 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
42,953 | 3.14% | |||||||
Total Shares, U.S. Equity
|
1,370,028 |
Percent | |||||||||
Balanced Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
441,048 | 97.03% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
5,413 | 1.19% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
228 | 0.05% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
7,853 | 1.73% | |||||||
Total Shares, Balanced
|
454,542 |
Percent | |||||||||
Covered Call Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
436,243 | 98.34% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
4,600 | 1.04% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
752 | 0.17% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
250 | 0.06% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
1,780 | 0.40% | |||||||
Total Shares, Covered Call
|
443,625 |
Percent | |||||||||
Target VIP Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
456,046 | 98.29% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
100 | 0.02% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
7,842 | 1.69% | |||||||
Total Shares, Target VIP
|
463,988 |
Percent | |||||||||
Target Equity/Income Portfolio | Shares | of Class | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account A
|
1,280,015 | 96.89% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account B
|
11,959 | 0.91% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account C
|
100 | 0.01% | |||||||
ONLI Variable Account D
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
ONLAC Variable Account R
|
27,754 | 2.10% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account L
|
0 | 0.00% | |||||||
NSLAC Variable Account N
|
1,217 | 0.09% | |||||||
Total Shares, Target Equity/Income
|
1,321,046 |
3
1. | To elect directors. The Board of Directors consists of five directors. The nominees are listed below under Director Nominees. Each nominee will be voted on separately. The combined votes of the shareholders of all 23 portfolios will apply to the election of each nominee. | |
2. | To approve an amended Investment Advisory Agreement permitting the Adviser, upon the approval of the Funds Board of Directors, including a majority of the Directors who are not interested persons of the Fund, to allocate expenses of the Funds Chief Compliance Officer and his staff to the Fund and requiring the Adviser to provide the Board with any materials it requests, and assist in the collection of such materials from subadvisers, for purposes of reviewing and approving advisory and subadvisory agreements. The proposed changes are described below under Amended Investment Advisory Agreement. The combined votes of the shareholders of all 23 portfolios will apply to the approval of the proposal. |
| 67% of the shares represented at the Meeting (by proxy or in person) where more than half of the outstanding shares are represented, or | |
| More than half of all the outstanding shares. |
4
Director | From the Fund | From Fund Complex | ||||||
James E. Bushman
|
$ | 27,500 | $ | 28,900 | ||||
Joseph A. Campanella
|
$ | 27,500 | $ | 28,900 | ||||
L. Ross Love
|
$ | 26,000 | $ | 27,200 | ||||
John J. Palmer
|
None | None | ||||||
George M. Vredeveld
|
$ | 28,000 | $ | 29,400 |
5
6
Term Served | Number of | |||||||||||||
as Officer | Portfolios in | Principal Occupation and Other Directorships | ||||||||||||
Name and Address | Age | Position with the Fund | or Director | Fund Complex | During Past Five Years | |||||||||
Independent Directors
|
||||||||||||||
James E. Bushman 3040 Forrer Street Cincinnati, Ohio |
61 | Director, Chairman of Audit Committee and Member of Independent Directors Committee |
Since March 2000 |
31 | Director, Chairman and CEO: Cast-Fab Technologies, Inc. (a manufacturing company); Director: The Midland Company, ABX Air Inc., The Elizabeth Gamble Deaconess Home Association, The Christ Hospital and The University of Cincinnati Foundation. | |||||||||
Joseph A. Campanella 6179 Paderborne Drive Hudson, Ohio |
63 | Director, Member of Audit and Independent Directors Committees |
Since May 2002 |
31 | Retired. Until 2001, was Executive Vice President, Community Banking Division, U.S. Bank; Director: Ohio Savings Bank, Ohio Savings Financial Corporation. | |||||||||
L. Ross Love 615 Windings Way Cincinnati, Ohio |
59 | Director, Member of Audit and Independent Directors Committees |
Since October 1998 |
31 | Director, President and CEO: Blue Chip Enterprises Ltd. (a company with holdings in the automotive manufacturing, communications and medical equipment industries) Director: Radio One Inc., CBS Technologies; Trustee: Syracuse University, Greater Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce; Chairman, Board of Trustees: United Way of Greater Cincinnati. | |||||||||
George M. Vredeveld University of Cincinnati P.O. Box 210223 Cincinnati, Ohio |
63 | Lead Independent Director, Member of Audit and Independent Directors Committees |
Since March 1996 |
31 | Alpaugh Professor of Economics, University of Cincinnati; President: Economic Center for Education & Research | |||||||||
Interested Director
|
||||||||||||||
John J. Palmer One Financial Way Montgomery, Ohio |
66 | President, Chairman of the Board and Director |
Since July 1997 |
31 | Director and Vice Chairman, ONLI; Director of the Adviser and various other Ohio National Life-affiliated companies; Director and CEO of NSLAC. Trustee, Cincinnati Symphony Orchestra, Cincinnati Opera. |
Term Served | Number of | |||||||||||||
as Officer | Portfolios in | Principal Occupation and Other Directorships | ||||||||||||
Name and Address | Age | Position with the Fund | or Director | Fund Complex | During Past Five Years | |||||||||
Thomas A. Barefield One Financial Way Montgomery, Ohio |
53 | Vice President |
Since February 1998 |
31 | Senior Vice President, Institutional Sales, ONLI; Prior to November 1997 was Senior Vice President of Life Insurance Company of Virginia. | |||||||||
Christopher A. Carlson One Financial Way Montgomery, Ohio |
47 | Vice President |
Since March 2000 |
31 | Senior Vice President, Chief Investment Officer, ONLI; President and Director of the Adviser. | |||||||||
Marc L. Collins One Financial Way Montgomery, Ohio |
37 | Secretary |
Since March 2000 |
31 | Second Vice President and Counsel, ONLI; Secretary of the Adviser. | |||||||||
R. Todd Brockman One Financial Way Montgomery, Ohio |
37 | Treasurer |
Since August 2004 |
31 | Assistant Vice President, Mutual Funds Operations; Prior to June 2004 was an Assurance Manager with Grant Thornton LLP, a certified public accounting firm. | |||||||||
Dennis R. Taney One Financial Way Montgomery, Ohio |
58 | Chief Compliance Officer |
Since June 2004 |
31 | Second Vice President, Chief Compliance Officer ONLI; Prior to June 2004 was Treasurer of the Fund. |
7
Aggregate Dollar Amount of | |||||||||
Dollar Range of Beneficial Ownership | all shares in the Fund | ||||||||
Director | of each Portfolio as of 12/31/2005* | Complex as of 12/31/05* | |||||||
Independent Directors
|
|||||||||
Joseph A. Campanella
|
None | None | |||||||
James E. Bushman
|
None | None | |||||||
L. Ross Love
|
None | None | |||||||
George M. Vredeveld
|
None | None | |||||||
Interested Director
|
|||||||||
John Palmer
|
D | ||||||||
Capital Appreciation Portfolio
|
C | ||||||||
Equity Portfolio
|
C | ||||||||
S&P 500 Index Portfolio
|
C |
* Ranges: |
None A= $1 to $10,000 B= $10,001 to $50,000 C= $50,001 to $100,000 D= over $100,000 |
8
9
Total Fund | |||||||||||||
Expenses | |||||||||||||
Management | Other | without Waivers | |||||||||||
Portfolio | Fees | Expenses | or Reductions* | ||||||||||
Equity
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.80 | % | 0.08 | % | 0.88 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.80 | % | 0.08 | % | 0.88 | % | |||||||
Money Market*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.28 | % | 0.09 | % | 0.37 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.28 | % | 0.09 | % | 0.37 | % | |||||||
Bond
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.58 | % | 0.10 | % | 0.68 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.58 | % | 0.10 | % | 0.68 | % | |||||||
Omni
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.60 | % | 0.11 | % | 0.71 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.60 | % | 0.12 | % | 0.72 | % | |||||||
International*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.86 | % | 0.26 | % | 1.12 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.86 | % | 0.26 | % | 1.12 | % | |||||||
International Small Company
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
1.00 | % | 0.47 | % | 1.47 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
1.00 | % | 0.48 | % | 1.48 | % | |||||||
Capital Appreciation
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.79 | % | 0.09 | % | 0.88 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.79 | % | 0.09 | % | 0.88 | % | |||||||
Millennium (formerly Discovery)
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.80 | % | 0.10 | % | 0.90 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.80 | % | 0.11 | % | 0.91 | % | |||||||
Aggressive Growth
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.80 | % | 0.23 | % | 1.03 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.80 | % | 0.26 | % | 1.06 | % | |||||||
Small Cap Growth
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.95 | % | 0.16 | % | 1.11 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.95 | % | 0.19 | % | 1.14 | % | |||||||
Mid Cap Opportunity
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.85 | % | 0.10 | % | 0.95 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.85 | % | 0.11 | % | 0.96 | % | |||||||
Capital Growth
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.90 | % | 0.13 | % | 1.03 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.90 | % | 0.15 | % | 1.05 | % | |||||||
S&P 500 Index
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.38 | % | 0.09 | % | 0.47 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.38 | % | 0.09 | % | 0.47 | % |
10
Total Fund | |||||||||||||
Expenses | |||||||||||||
Management | Other | without Waivers | |||||||||||
Portfolio | Fees | Expenses | or Reductions* | ||||||||||
High Income Bond
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.75 | % | 0.22 | % | 0.97 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.75 | % | 0.23 | % | 0.98 | % | |||||||
Blue Chip
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.80 | % | 0.12 | % | 0.92 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.80 | % | 0.13 | % | 0.93 | % | |||||||
Nasdaq-100 Index*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.49 | % | 0.15 | % | 0.64 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.49 | % | 0.17 | % | 0.66 | % | |||||||
Bristol
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.80 | % | 0.16 | % | 0.96 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.80 | % | 0.18 | % | 0.98 | % | |||||||
Bryton Growth
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.85 | % | 0.26 | % | 1.11 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.85 | % | 0.31 | % | 1.16 | % | |||||||
U.S. Equity
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.75 | % | 0.30 | % | 1.05 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.75 | % | 0.36 | % | 1.11 | % | |||||||
Balanced*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.75 | % | 0.80 | % | 1.55 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.75 | % | 0.96 | % | 1.71 | % | |||||||
Covered Call*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.80 | % | 0.87 | % | 1.67 | % | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.80 | % | 1.01 | % | 1.81 | % | |||||||
Target VIP*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.60 | % | 6.79 | %** | 7.39 | %** | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.60 | % | 7.25 | %** | 7.85 | %** | |||||||
Target Equity/ Income*
|
|||||||||||||
Current
|
0.60 | % | 2.78 | %** | 3.38 | %** | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
0.60 | % | 2.97 | %** | 3.57 | %** |
* | In 2005, the Adviser voluntarily waived part of its management fee in order to reduce the total fund expenses of the Money Market, International and Nasdaq-100 Index portfolios. The Adviser could reduce or eliminate the voluntary fee waivers for the portfolios at any time. Waivers related to the International and Nasdaq-100 Index portfolios were discontinued on April 30, 2005. The effect of these fee waivers was to reduce the Total Fund Expenses for those portfolios. The following shows the Total Fund Expenses, giving effect to these waivers, for 2005: |
Total Fund | |||||
Expenses with | |||||
Portfolio | Waivers | ||||
Money Market
|
|||||
Current
|
0.33 | % | |||
Pro Forma
|
0.33 | % | |||
International
|
|||||
Current
|
1.11 | % | |||
Pro Forma
|
1.11 | % | |||
Nasdaq-100 Index
|
|||||
Current
|
0.54 | % | |||
Pro Forma
|
0.56 | % |
11
Percentage of | |||||||||
Average Total | |||||||||
Dollar Amount | Net Assets | ||||||||
Portfolio | Reimbursed | Reimbursed | |||||||
Balanced
|
|||||||||
Current
|
$ | 1,652 | 0.05% | ||||||
Pro Forma
|
6,247 | 0.22% | |||||||
Covered Call
|
|||||||||
Current
|
1,874 | 0.07% | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
6,469 | 0.20% | |||||||
Target VIP
|
|||||||||
Current
|
9,228 | 5.79%** | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
13,823 | 8.65%** | |||||||
Target Equity/ Income
|
|||||||||
Current
|
6,641 | 1.78%** | |||||||
Pro Forma
|
11,236 | 2.99%** |
** | Ratios annualized due to portfolios inception dates of November 2, 2005. |
Portfolio | 1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years | |||||||||||||
Equity
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
$ | 90 | $ | 281 | $ | 488 | $ | 1,084 | |||||||||
Pro Forma
|
90 | 281 | 488 | 1,084 | |||||||||||||
Money Market
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
38 | 119 | 208 | 468 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
38 | 119 | 208 | 468 | |||||||||||||
Bond
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
69 | 218 | 379 | 847 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
69 | 218 | 379 | 847 | |||||||||||||
Omni
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
73 | 227 | 395 | 883 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
74 | 230 | 401 | 894 | |||||||||||||
International
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
114 | 356 | 617 | 1,363 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
114 | 356 | 617 | 1,363 | |||||||||||||
International Small Company
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
150 | 465 | 803 | 1,757 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
151 | 468 | 808 | 1,768 | |||||||||||||
Capital Appreciation
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
90 | 281 | 488 | 1,084 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
90 | 281 | 488 | 1,084 | |||||||||||||
Millennium (formerly Discovery)
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
92 | 287 | 498 | 1,108 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
93 | 290 | 504 | 1,120 |
12
Portfolio | 1 Year | 3 Years | 5 Years | 10 Years | |||||||||||||
Aggressive Growth
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
$ | 105 | $ | 328 | $ | 569 | $ | 1,259 | |||||||||
Pro Forma
|
108 | 337 | 585 | 1,294 | |||||||||||||
Small Cap Growth
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
113 | 353 | 612 | 1,352 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
116 | 362 | 628 | 1,386 | |||||||||||||
Mid Cap Opportunity
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
97 | 303 | 525 | 1,166 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
98 | 306 | 531 | 1,178 | |||||||||||||
Capital Growth
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
105 | 328 | 569 | 1,259 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
107 | 334 | 579 | 1,283 | |||||||||||||
S&P 500 Index
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
48 | 151 | 263 | 591 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
48 | 151 | 263 | 591 | |||||||||||||
High Income Bond
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
99 | 309 | 536 | 1,190 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
100 | 312 | 542 | 1,201 | |||||||||||||
Blue Chip
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
94 | 293 | 509 | 1,131 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
95 | 296 | 515 | 1,143 | |||||||||||||
Nasdaq-100 Index
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
65 | 205 | 357 | 798 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
67 | 211 | 368 | 822 | |||||||||||||
Bristol
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
98 | 306 | 531 | 1,178 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
100 | 312 | 542 | 1,201 | |||||||||||||
Bryton Growth
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
113 | 353 | 612 | 1,352 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
118 | 368 | 638 | 1,409 | |||||||||||||
U.S. Equity
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
107 | 334 | 579 | 1,283 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
113 | 353 | 612 | 1,352 | |||||||||||||
Balanced
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
158 | 490 | 845 | 1,845 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
174 | 539 | 928 | 2,019 | |||||||||||||
Covered Call
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
170 | 526 | 907 | 1,976 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
184 | 569 | 980 | 2,127 | |||||||||||||
Target VIP Equity
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
730 | 2,139 | 3,480 | 6,564 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
774 | 2,256 | 3,655 | 6,818 | |||||||||||||
Target Equity/ Income
|
|||||||||||||||||
Current
|
341 | 1,039 | 1,760 | 3,667 | |||||||||||||
Pro Forma
|
360 | 1,094 | 1,850 | 3,836 |
13
14
Money Market
|
0.25% |
15
Equity
|
$ | 540.7 | ||
Money Market
|
169.6 | |||
Bond
|
139.0 | |||
Omni
|
66.2 | |||
International
|
212.2 | |||
International Small Company
|
49.9 | |||
Capital Appreciation
|
169.6 | |||
Millennium (formerly Discovery)
|
71.4 | |||
Aggressive Growth
|
16.6 | |||
Small Cap Growth
|
17.1 | |||
Mid Cap Opportunity
|
90.0 | |||
Capital Growth
|
28.2 | |||
S&P 500 Index
|
190.5 | |||
High Income Bond
|
54.0 | |||
Blue Chip
|
30.1 | |||
Nasdaq-100 Index
|
31.3 | |||
Bristol
|
30.0 | |||
Bryton Growth
|
11.2 | |||
U.S. Equity
|
12.7 | |||
Balanced
|
4.1 | |||
Covered Call
|
4.2 | |||
Target VIP
|
1.5 | |||
Target Equity/Income
|
3.6 | |||
Total Net Assets of Fund
|
$ | 1,943.7 |
16
Board of | ||||||||
Directors | Shareholders | |||||||
Equity (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
Equity (Sub-Advisory)
|
05-20-1999 | 07-22-1999 | ||||||
Money Market
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
Bond
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
Omni (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 |
17
Board of | ||||||||
Directors | Shareholders | |||||||
Omni (Sub-Advisory)
|
03-20-2002 | 04-30-2002 | ||||||
International (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
International (Sub-Advisory)
|
12-09-1998 | 04-05-1999 | ||||||
Capital Appreciation (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
Capital Appreciation (Sub-Advisory)
|
11-02-1999 | 04-03-2000 | ||||||
Millennium (formerly Discovery) (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
Millennium (formerly Discovery) (Sub-Advisory)
|
05-17-2006 | N/A | ||||||
International Small Company (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
International Small Company (Sub-Advisory)
|
12-09-1998 | 04-05-1999 | ||||||
Aggressive Growth (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
01-24-1996 | 03-28-1996 | ||||||
Aggressive Growth (Sub-Advisory)
|
11-07-2001 | 03-27-2002 | ||||||
Small Cap Growth (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
08-22-1996 | 01-02-1997 | ||||||
Small Cap Growth (Sub-Advisory)
|
08-23-2005 | N/A | ||||||
Mid Cap Opportunity (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
08-22-1996 | 01-02-1997 | ||||||
Mid Cap Opportunity (Sub-Advisory)
|
02-24-1999 | 04-05-1999 | ||||||
S&P 500 Index
|
08-22-1996 | 01-02-1997 | ||||||
Capital Growth (Investment Advisory and Service)
|
02-11-1998 | 04-30-1998 | ||||||
Capital Growth (Sub-Advisory)
|
05-29-2003 | N/A | ||||||
High Income Bond
|
02-11-1998 | 04-30-1998 | ||||||
Blue Chip
|
02-11-1998 | 04-30-1998 | ||||||
Nasdaq-100 Index
|
03-08-2000 | 05-01-2000 | ||||||
Bristol
|
03-20-2002 | 04-30-2002 | ||||||
Bryton Growth
|
03-20-2002 | 04-30-2002 | ||||||
U.S. Equity
|
03-08-2004 | 04-29-2004 | ||||||
Balanced
|
03-08-2004 | 04-29-2004 | ||||||
Covered Call
|
03-08-2004 | 04-29-2004 | ||||||
Target VIP
|
08-22-2005 | 10-31-2005 | ||||||
Target Equity/ Income
|
08-22-2005 | 10-31-2005 |
18
Dow Target 10 First Quarter Portfolio
|
$ | 2.3 | ||
Dow Target 10 Second Quarter Portfolio
|
3.0 | |||
Dow Target 10 Third Quarter Portfolio
|
2.9 | |||
Dow Target 10 Fourth Quarter Portfolio
|
2.1 | |||
Dow Target 5 First Quarter Portfolio
|
1.2 | |||
Dow Target 5 Second Quarter Portfolio
|
1.0 | |||
Dow Target 5 Third Quarter Portfolio
|
0.8 | |||
Dow Target 5 Fourth Quarter Portfolio
|
1.0 | |||
Total Net Assets of Dow Target
|
$ | 14.3 |
19
Fiscal year ended | Fiscal year ended | |
December 31, 2005 | December 31, 2004 | |
$220,225
|
$187,950 |
20
Fiscal year ended | Fiscal year ended | |
December 31, 2005 | December 31, 2004 | |
$ 4,300
|
$ 4,000 |
21
22
A-1
A-2
A-3
A-4
Ohio National Fund, Inc.
|
Ohio National Investments, Inc. | |
By
John Palmer, President |
By Christopher A. Carlson, President |
A-5
A-6
Equity Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Legg Mason) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.7998% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.4207%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 80th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Multi-Cap Core peer group (with the first percentile representing the lowest expenses, and the 100th percentile representing the highest expenses). The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio, which was amended in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 56th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 3rd percentile over the three-year period, and the 30th percentile over the five-year period (with the first percentile representing the highest performance and the 100th percentile representing the lowest performance). The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 35.34% and that the sub-adviser was also reporting reasonable profitability measures from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability of ONI and sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because performance of the Portfolio was satisfactory over the one-year period and very good over the three-year period, when compared to the peer group of funds; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability measures reported by ONI and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
Money Market Portfolio (Adviser ONI) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.2500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 11th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Money Market peer group. The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 10th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 22nd percentile over the three-year period, and the 19th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI had waived fees for the Portfolio during the year. The Board considered that ONI was reporting a negative profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement because performance of the Portfolio was good in comparison to the performance of the Lipper peer group, the advisory fees were low in comparison to the Lipper peer group, and ONI was reporting no profit from the management of the Portfolio. |
B-1
Bond Portfolio (Adviser ONI) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.6000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 76th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Corp. Debt BBB peer group. The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 40th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 48th percentile over the three-year period, and the 45th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting 57.98% profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement because performance of the Portfolio was above average over the one-, three-, and five-year periods in comparison to the performance of the Lipper peer group, the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds, and ONI profitability was reasonable. |
Omni Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Suffolk) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.6000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.3000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 48th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Flexible peer group. The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 26th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 52nd percentile over the three-year period, and the 100th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 24.05% with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been good; the advisory fees were at the average of fees for the peer group funds; and the profitability reported by ONI was reasonable. |
International Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Federated Global) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.4000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 38th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products International Growth peer group. The Board considered the reduction in the advisory fee in May 2005 and the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 97th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 90th percentile over the three-year period, and the 97th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 44.89%. It was noted that Federated Global computes its profitability based on overall corporate profitability, and not profitability with respect to the sub-advisory agreement with the adviser and this Portfolio. As a result, the Board concluded that the provided sub-adviser profitability information was of limited value. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. |
B-2
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the reduction in the advisory fee and the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the advisory fees were relatively low when compared to the peer group funds; the advisory fee was reduced and the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; ONI had taken steps to address the underperformance of the Portfolio and expects to take further action if performance does not improve; and the profitability reported by ONI was reasonable. |
Capital Appreciation Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Jennison) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.7970% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.3703%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 74th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Multi-Cap Value peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 83rd percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 84th percentile over the three-year period, and the 16th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 45.07% and the sub-adviser was also reporting reasonable profitability measures from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the steps ONI will take to address the under-performance by the Portfolio, (5) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (6) the profitability from ONI and sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the longer-term performance of the Portfolio had been satisfactory; ONI will closely monitor the performance of the Portfolio and will work with the Portfolio managers to address the recent under-performance by the Portfolio; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability measures reported by ONI and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
Discovery Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Founders) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 52nd percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Small-Cap Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 74th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 78th percentile over the three-year period, and the 80th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 22.96% and the sub-adviser was also reporting reasonable profitability measures from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the steps ONI will take to address the under-performance by the Portfolio, (5) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (6) the profitability from ONI and sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the year-to-date performance of the Portfolio had been good; the |
B-3
longer-term performance of the Portfolio had been satisfactory; ONI will closely monitor the performance of the Portfolio and report to the Board; the advisory fees were at the average for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability measures reported by ONI and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
International Small Company Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Federated Global) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 1.0000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.7500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 88th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products International Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 10th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 5th percentile over the three-year period, and the 16th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 18.19% from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. It was noted that Federated Global computes its profitability based on overall corporate profitability, and not profitability with respect to the sub-advisory agreement with the adviser and this Portfolio. As a result, the Board concluded that the provided sub-adviser profitability information was of limited value. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been very good compared to the peer group of funds; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability reported by ONI was reasonable. |
Aggressive Growth Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Janus) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 69th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Multi-Cap Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 33rd percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 70th percentile over the three-year period, and the 72nd percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 22.93% and the sub-adviser was also reporting reasonable profitability measures from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI and sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the year-to-date performance of the Portfolio had been very good; the performance for the one-year period had been good, reflecting an improvement from the longer-term performance of the Portfolio; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability measures reported by ONI and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
B-4
Small Cap Growth Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser at date of re-approval UBS, Sub-adviser from November 2, 2005 to December 31, 2005 Janus) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.9500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.6500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 90th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Small-Cap Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 7th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 29th percentile over the three-year period, and the 96th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 24.56% and the sub-adviser was also reporting reasonable profitability measures from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI and sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been very good; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability measures reported by ONI and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
Mid Cap Opportunity Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser RSIM) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.6000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 73rd percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Mid-Cap Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 52nd percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 11th percentile over the three-year period, and the 35th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 21.58% and the sub-adviser was also reporting reasonable profitability measures from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI and sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the longer-term performance of the Portfolio had been very good; the recent performance had been satisfactory; ONI will closely monitor performance of the Portfolio and report to the Board; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability measures reported by ONI and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
S&P 500 Index Portfolio (Adviser ONI) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.3765%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 98th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products S&P 500 Index Objective peer group. The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 82nd percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, |
B-5
the 66th percentile over the three-year period, and the 100th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting a 36.36% profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement because performance of the Portfolio was satisfactory over the one- and three-year periods; the Portfolio had tracked the index when expenses were excluded, and had performed as intended; the Portfolio had performed within the range of peer group funds; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the Portfolio will reach a breakpoint in the investment advisory fee at $250 million in assets; and ONI profitability was reasonable. |
Blue Chip Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Federated Equity) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.7500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 71st percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Large-Cap Value peer group. The Board considered the reduction in the investment advisory fee and the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 78th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 71st percentile over the three-year period, and the 71st percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 28.03% from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board noted that ONI waived fees for the Portfolio during the year. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the reduction in the advisory fee and the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been satisfactory and improving; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the advisory fee was reduced and the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability reported by ONI was reasonable. |
High Income Bond Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Federated Investment) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.7500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 83rd percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products High Current Yield peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 58th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 40th percentile over the three-year period, and the 25th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 29.21% from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been |
B-6
satisfactory; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; ONI intends to closely monitor the performance of the Portfolio; and the profitability reported by ONI was reasonable. |
Capital Growth Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Eagle) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.9000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5900%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 65th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Small-Cap Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 41st percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 63rd percentile over the three-year period, and the 80th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 27.02% from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been satisfactory; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005; and the profitability reported by ONI was reasonable. |
Nasdaq-100 Index Portfolio (Adviser ONI) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.4000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 100th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products S&P 500 Index Objective peer group (the only index fund data provided by Lipper). The Board considered the advisory fee reduction and breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio, which was implemented in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 53rd percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, the 63rd percentile over the three-year period, and the 13th percentile over the five-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting negative profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the reduction in the investment advisory fee and implementation of breakpoints in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement because performance of the Portfolio was satisfactory over the one-, three-, and five-year periods; the Portfolio had tracked the index when expenses were excluded, and had performed as intended; the Portfolio had performed within the range of the peer group funds; the advisory fees were within the range of the peer group funds; the advisory fee was reduced in May 2005, and a breakpoint schedule was implemented; the investment adviser waived advisory fees for the Portfolio during the year; and ONI reported no profitability. |
Bristol Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Suffolk) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.4500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 81st percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Large-Cap Core peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio |
B-7
in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 7th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period and the 91st percentile over the three-year period. The Board considered that ONI was reporting profitability of 19.45%. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by ONI and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability from ONI, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been very good; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005, and the profitability reported by the adviser was reasonable. |
Bryton Growth Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser Suffolk) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 56th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Small-Cap Growth peer group. The Board considered the amendment to the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio in May 2005. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 56th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period, and the 99th percentile over the three-year period. The Board considered that the adviser was reporting profitability of 14.48% with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by the adviser and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, (4) the amendment to the breakpoint schedule in May 2005, and (5) the profitability to the advisor, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the performance of the Portfolio had been good since the change in Portfolio manager in May 2004; the advisory fees were at the average of fees for the peer group funds; the breakpoint schedule was amended in May 2005, and the profitability reported by the advisor was reasonable. |
U.S. Equity Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser ICON) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.7500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 70th percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Multi-Cap Core peer group. The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 99th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period. The Board considered that the adviser was reporting profitability of 10.46% and the sub-adviser was reporting negative profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by the adviser and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability to the adviser and the sub-advisor, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the Portfolio was recently started and needed time to become established; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the adviser will closely monitor the performance |
B-8
of the Portfolio and report to the Board at future meetings; and the profitability measures reported by the adviser and sub-adviser were reasonable. |
Balanced Portfolio (Adviser ONI, Sub-adviser ICON) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.7500% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5000%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 82nd percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Flexible peer group. The Board considered the advisory fee breakpoint schedule for the Portfolio. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 12th percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period. The Board considered that the adviser and sub-adviser were reporting negative profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by the adviser and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability to the adviser and the sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the Portfolio was recently started and needed time to become established; the performance had been great; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; and each of the adviser and sub-adviser were reporting a loss from the investment management services provided to the Portfolio. |
Covered Call Portfolio (adviser ONI, Sub-adviser ICON) |
The Board reviewed and considered the net advisory fee of 0.8000% and net sub-advisory fee of 0.5500%, and compared the advisory fee to the fees charged by similar funds. The Board noted that the net advisory fee placed the Portfolio in the 81st percentile of the Lipper Variable Insurance Products Multi-Cap Core peer group. The Board considered that performance for the Portfolio placed the Portfolio in the 83rd percentile of its Lipper peer group over the one-year period. The Board considered that the adviser and sub-adviser were reporting negative profitability from investment management services with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the information and discussion with respect to the services provided to the Portfolio by the adviser and the sub-adviser, and the quality of the management and staffing with respect to the Portfolio. The Board considered the breakpoint schedule for the investment advisory and sub-advisory fees. | |
Having considered (1) the advisory fee, sub-advisory fee and ancillary benefits, (2) the advisory fee compared to the peer group of funds, (3) performance of the Portfolio compared to the peer group of funds, and (4) the profitability to the adviser and the sub-adviser, the Board, including a majority of Independent Directors, concluded it was appropriate to renew the investment advisory agreement and sub-advisory agreement because the Portfolio was recently started and needed time to become established; the performance had been satisfactory for a start-up Portfolio; the advisory fees were within the range of fees for the peer group funds; the adviser will closely monitor the performance of the Portfolio and report to the Board at future meetings; and each of the adviser and sub-adviser were reporting a loss from the investment management services provided to the Portfolio. |
B-9
B-10
1) | Read the Proxy Statement and have the Voting Instruction Form at hand. |
2) | Call toll-free 1-888-221-0697. |
3) | Follow the simple recorded instructions. |
1) | Read the Proxy Statement and have the Voting Instruction Form at hand. |
2) | Go to www.proxyweb.com. |
3) | Follow the simple on-line instructions. |
1) | Read the Proxy Statement. |
2) | Check the appropriate box on the reverse side of the Voting Instruction Form. |
3) | Sign and date the Voting Instruction Form. |
4) | Return it in the postage-paid envelope provided. |
FOR ALL |
WITHHOLD ALL |
FOR ALL EXCEPT* |
||||||||||||
1.
|
a. | To elect James A. Bushman as a Director: | o | o | o | |||||||||
b. | To elect Joseph A. Campanella as a Director: | o | o | o | ||||||||||
c. | To elect L. Ross Love as a Director: | o | o | o | ||||||||||
d. | To elect John J. Palmer as a Director: | o | o | o | ||||||||||
e. | To elect George M. Vredeveld as a Director: | o | o | o | ||||||||||
* To withhold authority to vote for any individual, mark the box FOR
ALL EXCEPT and write the Nominees number on the line
below.
|
||||||||||||||
____________________ | ||||||||||||||
FOR | AGAINST | ABSTAIN | ||||||||||||
2. | To approve an amended Investment Advisory | o | o | o | ||||||||||
Agreement with Ohio National Investments, Inc.: |