The Alerian MLP ETF delivered a total return of 0.79% for the Period. This compares to the Alerian MLP Infrastructure Index (the "Underlying Index"), which lost 5.51% on a price-return basis and gained 1.87% on a total-return basis. The difference in performance between the Fund and its Underlying Index is primarily attributable to the Fund's operating expenses and the tax impact of the Fund's C-Corporation structure, including the accrual of approximately $17.5 million in income tax expense during the Period.

During the Period, energy lagged the S&P 500 as West Texas Intermediate ("WTI") oil prices fell 18.36% and dipped below the $60 per barrel mark on multiple occasions starting in late April 2025. Lower oil prices raised concerns about US oil production growth and volumes for midstream, creating an overhang on the space. MLPs' fee-based business models and long-term contracts typically provide some insulation from commodity price volatility.

Pipeline Transportation | Petroleum was the best-performing subsector in AMLP for the Period. The worst-performing subsector was Pipeline Transportation | Natural Gas, which only includes Energy Transfer (ET) and Enterprise Products Partners (EPD).

The Fund delivered a total return of -0.16% for the Period. This compares to the Alerian Midstream Energy Select Index (the "Underlying Index"), which lost 4.85% on a price-return basis and gained 0.47% on a total-return basis.

During the Period, energy lagged the S&P 500 as West Texas Intermediate ("WTI") oil prices fell 18.36% and dipped below the $60 per barrel mark on multiple occasions starting in late April 2025. Lower oil prices raised concerns about US oil production growth and volumes for midstream, creating an overhang on the space. Midstream's fee-based business models and long-term contracts typically provide some insulation from commodity price volatility. Additionally, 70% of the Underlying Index as of November 30 was predominantly focused on natural gas infrastructure.

Three of ENFR's five subsectors saw positive total returns during the Period. The best-performing subsector in the portfolio was Pipeline Transportation | Petroleum. The worst-performing subsector was Pipeline Transportation | Natural Gas.

Performance Overview

The ALPS Active Equity Opportunity ETF (RFFC), for the trailing twelve-month period ended November 30, 2025, generated a NAV total return of 11.84%. The Fund underperformed the S&P Composite 1500^® Index, which returned 13.67% for the same period.

Attribution

Top contributors to relative performance:

• Underweight allocation to the Consumer Staples sector.

• Security selection of names within the Financials sector, which outperformed.

• Internet services and digital advertising company, Alphabet Inc. (GOOGL, 5.46% weight*), provided the best individual contribution to RFFC's performance over the 1-year period (+2.70%).

Top detractors from relative performance:

• Underweight allocation to the Information Technology sector.

• Security selection of names within the Information Technology sector, which underperformed.

• Health insurance and healthcare services company, United Healthcare (UNH, dropped during the period), provided the worst individual contribution to RFFC's performance over the 1-year period (-1.27%).

* Weights as of 11/30/2025, Bloomberg

• In the midst of volatility driven by high levels of economic uncertainty centered around fiscal and trade policy, the recovery in REIT share prices from their trough in October of 2023 was delayed. The S&P United States REIT Index was down -2.34% for the fiscal year. The Fund was down -6.06% for the fiscal year, net of all fees and expenses, lagging the benchmark in an environment dominated by momentum-driven stock prices and returns. The continued lack of clarity concerning tariffs and global trade policy, combined with frequently changing news headlines, has made for a difficult environment to implement the Fund's investment strategy.

• The Fund benefited from strong fundamentals and excellent returns from its positions in the healthcare property sector, particularly in companies focused on senior housing. The property sector's strong returns were driven by a combination of increasing rents, growth in net operating income, and earnings growth from investment activity fueled by attractive expected returns financed with a favorable cost of capital, as the sector is trading at a significant premium to net asset value.

• The Fund also had positive total returns from its investments in the industrial and net lease property sectors. Industrial property returns were driven by better-than-expected earnings results and guidance. Positive returns in net lease property were fueled by high income and dividend levels, high occupancy rates, and stable operating cash flow. The largest contributions to the Fund's total returns were produced by significant position weights from certain key holdings in the senior housing, industrial, net lease, and regional mall property sectors.

• Total returns were negatively impacted by the Fund's investments in the underperforming sectors of data centers, office and lab space, and residential property. These sectors delivered negative returns for the fiscal year. Data centers were impacted by concerns over the dramatic increase in planned property development and profitability levels from companies focused on artificial intelligence. Office and lab space continue to be negatively impacted by weak property fundamentals. Residential property fundamentals suffered from headwinds fueled by excess supply and affordability issues from its tenants. The weakness in the residential sector also negatively impacted the self-storage property sector which derives much of its revenue from housing related business.

• The largest detractors of relative returns were the Fund's underweight position in the best performing health care sector, combined with stock selection in the sector which was overweight lab space and underweight senior housing, and its investments in companies in the discounted cold storage and lab space property sectors. These sectors have suffered from weakening demand and operating results but may be poised for a recovery as both are trading at severely discounted valuation levels that could provide the potential for favorable returns should business and sentiment recover.

Performance Overview

The ALPS Equal Sector Weight ETF (EQL), for the twelve-month period ended November 30, 2025, generated a NAV total return of 6.91%. The Fund underperformed the S&P 500 Index, which returned 15.00% for the same period.

Attribution

Top contributors to relative performance:

• Underweight allocation to the Financials sector.

• Security selection of names within the Financials sector, which outperformed.

• The Information Technology Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLF US, 9.18% weight*), provided the best individual contribution to EQL's performance over the 1-year period (+2.19%).

Top detractors from relative performance:

• Underweight allocation to the Information Technology sector.

• Security selection of names within the Communication Services sector, which underperformed.

• The Real Estate Select Sector SPDR ETF (XLRE US, 8.91% weight*), provided the worst individual contribution to EQL's performance over the 1-year period (-0.45%).

*Weights as of 11/30/2025, Bloomberg