Long-term capital appreciation


Focus on mid- and large-cap stocks that exhibit sustainable, above-average earnings growth; blends a quantitative manager that seeks to identify key investment risks and capture alpha through dynamic modeling with a bottom-up fundamental manager to deliver a portfolio with balanced growth, valuation, and quality attributes.

Fund Facts
Asset Manager
  • Wellington Management(Since 12/31/04)
  • Los Angeles Capital Management(Since 4/1/09)
Benchmark Russell 1000 Growth Index
Fund Inception Date Class A: January 1, 1991; Class B: January 1, 2003
Mimimum Investment Class A: No minimum; Class B: $5 million
Expense Ratio Class A: 1.15%; Class B: 0.85%

Annual Average Total Returns
(%) as of 03/31/2020

Trailing 3 Months 1 Year 3 Years 5 Years 10 Years
CUIT Growth Fund Class A -14.91 -2.35 9.57 8.85 11.35
CUIT Growth Fund Class B -14.85 -2.05 9.90 9.18 11.69
Russell 1000 Growth Index **** -14.10 0.91 11.32 10.36 12.97
Calendar Year 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014
CUIT Growth Fund Class A 33.46 -0.45 25.38 5.37 5.29 11.65
CUIT Growth Fund Class B 33.87 -0.16 25.77 5.69 5.63 12.06
Russell 1000 Growth Index **** 36.39 -1.51 30.21 7.08 5.67 13.05


Source: BNY Mellon, SS&C

**** Benchmark Index: Russell 1000 Growth Index effective June 1, 2000; prior to this date, historical returns reflect Russell Mid-Cap Growth Index.

Characteristics as of 03/31/2020

Statistics Fund Index
Weighted Median Market Cap $139.1B $129.0B
Price/Book 6.2x 6.5x
Price/Earnings 24.9x 24.2x
Return on Equity 31.9% 31.0%
Dividend Yield 1.1% 1.3%
5-year Earnings Growth 25.2% 24.9%
Beta 1.0 0.0
10 Largest Holdings 44.9% 38.6%
# of Equity Securities 185 532
Turnover Rate 80.3 N/A
Market Sector Analysis Fund Index
Communication Services 11.0 11.7
Consumer Discretionary 14.7 14.1
Consumer Staples 4.5 4.6
Energy 0.0 0.1
Financials 4.6 2.9
Health Care 10.0 15.1
Industrials 7.0 8.0
Information Technology 43.0 39.8
Materials 1.8 1.2
Real Estate 2.2 2.5
Utilities 0.0 0.0
Cash 1.2 0.0
Risk Metrics Fund
(5 YR)
(5 YR)
Standard Deviation 13.3 13.9
Tracking Error 1.7 N/A
Sharpe Ratio 0.7 0.7
Information Ratio 0.0 N/A
Upside Capture 96.4 100.0
Downside Capture 94.9 100.0
Top Ten Holdings %
Microsoft Corporation 10.3
Apple Inc. 8.5
Alphabet Inc. 6.3
Amazon.com, Inc. 6.1
Facebook, Inc. 3.4
Visa Inc. 2.8
Mastercard Incorporated 2.1
Adobe Incorporated 2.0
American Tower Corporation 1.7
salesforce.com, inc. 1.6


Source: FactSet, eVestment

The securities identified and described do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold or recommended for investor accounts. The reader should not assume that an investment in the securities identified was or will be profitable. For a complete list of securities offered during the period, please contact CBIS.

  • Q1 2020 Performance Review

    12-Month Review

    • The 12-month results were modestly negative, a sharp contrast to 2019 full year results.
    • Sector allocation detracted. The overweight to Financials, Consumer Discretionary, and underweight to Health Care were the biggest detractors. The zero weight to Energy and overweight to Information Technology, the best performing sector, helped. Sector allocation decisions are a fallout of the stock selection process and that from quarter to quarter, sector allocations may have significant impacts on relative performance, but over the long-term, we expect performance to be driven by stock selection.
    • Security selection was a detractor. Information Technology was the biggest detractor. Within Consumer Services, underweight detracted and within Health Care the overweight detracted.

    3-Month Review

    • One of the top performing sectors was Information Technology. The worst performing sectors were Energy and Industrials.
    • Sector allocation decisions benefited relative results. Holding transactional cash had a positive impact on relative performance as did the overweight to Information Technology and underweight to Industrials.
    • Within Information Technology, the overweights to two names hurt relative performance. In Communication Services, the underweight to a name hurt. In the Industrials sector, the Fund was helped by not having any exposure to one name.

    Current Positioning

    • Sector weights are close to those of the benchmark.
    • Historically the Fund has a very low Tracking Error product relative to peers.
    • The aim is to have 75% or more of excess returns come from stock selection.
    • The Fund place a premium on companies that are reasonably valued. As such, the Fund should provide some downside protection in rapidly declining markets and this was put to the test this past quarter. While the outperformance was modest, it is notable.


All attribution is based on gross portfolio performance.

  • Fund Fact Sheet

Please review our important disclosures.