John P. Schwartz
About John P. Schwartz
John P. Schwartz is Chief Compliance Officer of The Royce Funds and an officer of Royce Small‑Cap Trust, Inc. (RVT). He has served as RVT’s Chief Compliance Officer since 2022 (age 54 in 2025; 53 in 2024) and has been Associate General Counsel and Compliance Officer at Royce Investment Partners since March 2013 . RVT’s proxies do not disclose officer pay or fund-level performance metrics tied to his role; officers are elected annually and serve at the pleasure of the Board .
Past Roles
| Organization | Role | Years | Strategic impact |
|---|---|---|---|
| The Royce Funds (fund complex including RVT) | Chief Compliance Officer | May 2022–present | Leads fund complex compliance oversight and reporting to the Board and auditors . |
| Royce Investment Partners | Associate General Counsel and Compliance Officer | Mar 2013–present | Provides legal and compliance leadership for adviser supporting RVT . |
External Roles
- No external directorships or outside roles are disclosed for Schwartz in RVT’s proxy materials .
Fixed Compensation
- RVT’s proxy discloses compensation solely for independent directors; it does not present any cash compensation (salary/bonus) for executive officers. Officers are employees of the adviser and are elected annually by the Board to serve at its pleasure .
Performance Compensation
- No disclosure of RSUs/PSUs, options, targets/metrics, payouts, or vesting schedules for Schwartz in RVT’s proxy materials .
Equity Ownership & Alignment
| Metric | 2024 (Record date: Jul 26, 2024) | 2025 (Record date: Aug 5, 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| Shares beneficially owned by John P. Schwartz | 0 (“None”) | 0 (“None”) |
| Shares outstanding | 115,346,161 | 119,627,857 |
| Directors and officers, total ownership | <1% of outstanding (group of 12) | <1% of outstanding (group of 12) |
- No pledging of RVT shares is disclosed for Schwartz; beneficial ownership is reported as “None” in both 2024 and 2025 .
- Stock ownership guidelines for officers and compliance status are not disclosed in the proxy .
Employment Terms
- Officer of Fund Since: 2022 (Chief Compliance Officer); officers are elected annually and serve at the pleasure of the Board .
- Section 16 compliance: The Fund reports all required Forms 3/4/5 filings were timely for officers and directors in the most recent fiscal year reviewed .
- Contract terms (non‑compete, severance, change‑of‑control, clawbacks, tax gross‑ups): Not disclosed for officers in RVT’s proxy .
- Address of adviser: One Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010 (2025); previously 745 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10151 (2024) .
- Governance role: Schwartz is named as a proxy on RVT’s 2024 proxy card, reflecting operational involvement in meeting administration .
Board Governance (context for CCO role)
- RVT’s Board comprises seven directors; six are independent. The Audit Committee includes all independent directors, chaired by Julia W. Poston; the Distribution Committee consists of the President/CEO Christopher D. Clark .
- The Board’s oversight includes regular interaction with the Fund’s and Royce’s Chief Compliance Officer, aligning with Schwartz’s reporting responsibilities .
Investment Implications
- Alignment: Schwartz holds no RVT shares, reducing direct “skin-in-the‑game” alignment but consistent with externally managed closed‑end fund structures where officers are compensated by the adviser, not the fund .
- Selling pressure: With zero beneficial ownership reported, insider selling/pledging risk from Schwartz is de minimis; Section 16 compliance was affirmed for the most recent year .
- Retention/compensation visibility: Lack of disclosed officer employment economics (salary, bonus, equity, severance/CoC) limits direct assessment of pay‑for‑performance and retention risk at the fund level; analysts should evaluate adviser‑level disclosures if available from Royce/Franklin Resources .
- Governance comfort: Robust audit and nominating committee structures and regular interaction with the CCO provide process assurance around compliance and controls, though the absence of officer ownership may temper alignment narratives for activist strategies .