FINRA fines broker-dealer for failing to apply Class A sales charge waivers for certain eligible customers on its mutual fund platform

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 53-56
Author(s):  
Richard F. Kerr
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Supervisory System ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Class A

Purpose – To review FINRA enforcement action taken against a broker-dealer over failure to waive mutual fund sales charges for certain eligible customers and failure to establish, maintain, and enforce a supervisory system and written procedures reasonably designed to ensure eligible accounts received sales charge waivers as set forth in the mutual funds’ prospectuses. Design/methodology/approach – Reviews and summarizes FINRA’s finding’s regarding the broker-dealer’s failure to apply applicable mutual fund sales charge waivers, deficiencies in the broker-dealer’s supervisory system and written procedures resulting in the failure, resulting violations of FINRA rules, the broker-dealer’s remedial efforts, and the sanctions imposed. Findings – This settlement provides an important reminder for FINRA member broker-dealers of the need to ensure that eligible investors receive applicable sales charger waivers or are placed in the appropriate share class, and to establish, maintain, and enforce a supervisory system and written procedures reasonably designed to ensure eligible accounts received sales charge waivers as set forth in the mutual funds’ prospectuses. Originality/value – Practical explanation from experienced financial institutions lawyers.

Director of SEC’s Division of Investment Management discusses alternative mutual funds

2014 ◽  
Vol 15 (4) ◽  
pp. 15-18
Author(s):  
Richard F. Kerr
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Investment Strategies ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Fund Industry ◽  
Mutual Fund Industry ◽  
Alternative Investment

Purpose – To alert participants in the mutual fund industry to regulatory developments in the alternative mutual fund space as articulated by the SEC’s Director of the Division of Investment Management. Design/methodology/approach – Reviews the Director’s discussion of the SEC’s concerns related to Valuation, Liquidity, Leverage and Disclosure resulting from the proliferation of alternative mutual funds. Additionally, summarizes the Director’s comments regarding Board oversight of alternative mutual funds. Findings – While the Director’s speech does not establish any new law or regulation, it is a practical summary of the SEC’s expectations for mutual fund complexes when implementing and operating mutual funds with alternative investment strategies that have historically been the province of private funds. Originality/value – Practical explanation from experienced financial institutions lawyers.

SEC publishes guidance on mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees

2016 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 39-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Adelfio ◽  
Paul J. Delligatti ◽  
Jason F. Monfort
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Investment Management ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Practical Guidance ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose To explain the guidance published on January 6, 2016 by the SEC’s Division of Investment Management containing its views and recommendations relating to mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees. Design/methodology/approach Explains the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations focus on “distribution in guise” payments, its 2013 “sweep exam,” an enforcement action against a fund’s adviser and affiliated distributor related to payments for distribution-related activities outside of a 12b-1 plan, lists SEC staff recommendations with respect to mutual fund distribution and sub-accounting fees, summarizes the SEC’s guidance on board oversight of sub-accounting fees, provides indicia that a payment may be for distribution-related activities, and points to the need for mutual funds to have policies and procedures designed to prevent violations of Section 12(b) and Rule 12b-1. Findings The guidance is an outgrowth of the staff’s observations from a three-year “distribution in guise” sweep exam of mutual fund complexes, investment advisers, broker-dealers and transfer agents conducted by the SEC’s Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations and other offices and divisions of the SEC to identify whether firms were using fund assets to directly or indirectly finance any activities primarily intended to result in the sale of fund shares outside of an approved Rule 12b-1 distribution plan. Originality/value Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

Mutual fund alpha and daily market-timing ability

2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (4) ◽  
pp. 662-681
Author(s):  
Qiang Bu
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Market Timing ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Market Return ◽  
Timing Ability

Purpose This study aims to examine whether mutual funds can earn daily alpha and time daily market return. Design/methodology/approach Based on the Treynor and Mazuy (1966) model and the Henriksson and Merton (1981) model, the author tests the daily market-timing ability of actual mutual funds and bootstrapped mutual funds. Findings The author finds that daily alpha and daily market-timing ability can come from pure luck. In addition, the relation between fund alpha and market-timing ability is at best minimal. Originality/value Using bootstrapped funds as the benchmark, this study shows that daily fund market is overall efficient.

Impact of reporting delays on profitability of front-running strategies against mutual funds

2017 ◽  
Vol 43 (9) ◽  
pp. 999-1015 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sitikantha Parida
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Front Running ◽  
Reporting Delays ◽  
Public Disclosures ◽  
Reporting Delay ◽  
Practical Implications ◽  
Illiquid Assets

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to investigate if there is any impact of reporting delays on profitability of front-running strategies against the mutual funds. Design/methodology/approach The author studies if freshness of mutual fund holding information from public disclosures affects precision of flow-based front-running strategies against the funds and if the allowed 60-day reporting delay is able to protect the funds from these front-running activities against them. Findings Assuming no reporting delay, the author finds that returns from hypothetical front-running strategies are significant, when these are based on the most recent holding information and are not significant, when based on relatively old holding information. Interestingly, these front-running returns appear to be mostly driven by anticipated forced buys by the mutual funds (rather than anticipated forced sales). The return from a front-running strategy long on anticipated forced buys is higher when it is based on relatively illiquid assets. The author also finds that return from a front-running strategy short on anticipated forced sales is significant, when it is based on illiquid assets from relatively old holding information. Practical implications Hence, it appears that the allowed 60-day reporting delay is able to protect most of the funds from front-running activities against them, except for the funds holding illiquid assets from anticipated forced sales motivated front-running activities against them. Originality/value The paper addresses an interesting question, which has not been studied before – if freshness of fund holding information helps the front-running strategies against the funds and if the allowed reporting delay is effective in protecting the funds from these activities.

SEC fines alternative mutual fund adviser for improper handling of fund assets

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (2) ◽  
pp. 35-37
Author(s):  
Michael McGrath ◽  
Pablo J. Man
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Securities And Exchange Commission ◽  
Investment Strategies ◽  
Investment Company ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Policies And Procedures ◽  
Repurchase Agreements

Purpose – To explain that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brought and settled charges against an investment adviser to several alternative mutual funds alleging, among other charges, failure to comply with the custody requirements of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). Design/methodology/approach – To explain that the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) brought and settled charges against an investment adviser to several alternative mutual funds alleging, among other charges, failure to comply with the custody requirements of the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “1940 Act”). Findings – The enforcement action serves as an important reminder for the growing number of advisers of alternative mutual funds to be mindful of specific restrictions and obligations when managing registered funds that do not apply to private funds and separate accounts. This action shows that the SEC will bring charges even when the alleged violations do not result in harm to investors. Practical implications – The 1940 Act, the rules thereunder, and SEC staff guidance relating to alternative investment strategies are complicated and not intuitive. These standards can constrain a registered fund’s ability to employ options, futures, swaps, prime brokerage, repurchase and reverse repurchase agreements, enhanced leverage through securities lending, and other facilities. As the SEC continues to examine alternative mutual funds, advisers to these funds should remain cognizant of the obligations arising under the 1940 Act and the implementation of fund policies and procedures. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced financial services lawyers.

Do mutual fund ratings provide valuable information for retail investors?

2018 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 137-152 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andreas Oehler ◽  
Andreas Höfer ◽  
Matthias Horn ◽  
Stefan Wendt
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
Investment Strategies ◽  
Monthly Basis ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Rating Agencies ◽  
Dynamic Investment ◽  
Retail Investors ◽  
Rating Changes

Purpose Retail investors use information provided by mutual fund rating agencies to make investment decisions. This paper aims to examine whether the ratings provide useful information to retail investors by analyzing the rating migration and closure risk of mutual funds that received Morningstar’s mutual fund ratings from 2005 to 2012. Design/methodology/approach The research design differentiates between buy-and-hold investment strategies and dynamic investment strategies. To assess the information content of mutual fund ratings for buy-and-hold investment strategies, the rating migration based on the first and the last mutual fund rating during two-, four-, six- and eight-year horizons is determined. With respect to dynamic investment strategies, the number of rating changes per fund on a monthly basis during these time horizons is calculated. Findings Mutual fund rating persistence is low or even inexistent, in particular, during longer time periods. Only for lower-rated funds, the rating appears to indicate higher risk of fund closure. In addition, mutual funds face a large number of up to 38 monthly rating changes in the eight-year window. Originality/value Mutual fund rating persistence has hardly been analyzed for funds offered to retail investors so far. This paper clearly points out that because of the extensive rating migration and the high number of monthly rating changes, retail investors barely benefit from using mutual fund ratings.

Business email compromise and executive impersonation: are financial institutions exposed?

2017 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-7 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Zweighaft
Keyword(s):  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
American Institute ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Original Report

Purpose To explain the fraud schemes known as business email compromise (BEC) and executive impersonation that are growing in popularity, and the threat they pose to financial institutions. Design/methodology/approach This article explains BEC and executive impersonation and how they are carried out, and discusses how regulations and practical operational steps are trying to address this fraud issue. Findings Financial institutions should understand the potential for legal and regulatory risks posed by BEC and executive impersonation, and consider taking steps to create a proactive, culture of skepticism and heightened awareness to combat this type of fraud. Originality/value This article is adapted from the original report issued by the American Institute of CPAs and has been updated to address specifics concerning financial institutions.

Recent civil and criminal enforcement action involving high frequency trading

2015 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Rossi ◽  
Greg Deis ◽  
Jerome Roche ◽  
Kathleen Przywara
Keyword(s):  
High Frequency ◽  
Design Methodology ◽  
High Frequency Trading ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
The Past ◽  
Trading Patterns ◽  
Federal Prosecutor ◽  
Enforcement Activity ◽  
Practical Implications

Purpose – To alert high frequency trading firms to the increased regulation and prosecution of manipulative trading practices during 2014 and early 2015. Design/methodology/approach – Reviews four significant proceedings against high frequency trading firms (and/or individuals employed by such firms) and other developments from the relevant government agencies as a possible preview of the enforcement and prosecution of high frequency trading practices in 2015. Provides advice to high frequency trading firms on how to decrease the risk of regulatory or criminal actions against them in this changing environment. Findings – Although the focus on high frequency trading has only recently begun to intensify, firms should be aware of the increased enforcement activity of the past year. These actions, both regulatory and criminal, have already resulted in large penalties and have helped initiate a strengthening of rules and regulations regarding manipulative trading practices, of which firms need to be aware and stay current. Practical implications – High frequency trading firms should be aware of the recent regulatory and criminal actions in order to better evaluate their own practices and controls, to ensure that their trading patterns do not resemble manipulative practices, and to avoid similar actions. Originality/value – Practical guidance from experienced litigators and securities regulatory lawyers, including a former SEC Assistant Chief Litigation Counsel and a former federal prosecutor, that consolidates and describes several recent actions and developments in one piece.

scholarly journals Innovations & Technology Based Initiatives in Mutual Fund Distribution Intermediation in India

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (2) ◽  
pp. 4747-4753
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Funds ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Financial Services ◽  
Recent Past ◽  
Indian Government ◽  
Point Of Sale ◽  
The World ◽  
Areas Of Concern ◽  
The Ideal

The world of financial services is changing in ways that are more dramatic than we would have foreseen even five years ago. Taking a leaf from evolving ecosystem around mobile telephony, many financial institutions are using smart technology to remodel their branches into smarter point of sale. This has given a genesis to a terminology of “emerging distribution intermediaries” in financial services. Mutual funds (MF) being the combiner of various savings instruments are regarded as the ideal investment vehicle for today’s complex and modern financial scenario. But its penetration is poor. One of the major levers to increase penetration is innovations in distributing MF products. Considering this, Indian government & regulator have taken many policies reforms & IT initiatives towards increasing retail participation in Mutual Funds and equity markets in recent past. Through this paper, researcher has attempted to critically analyze these initiatives. Apart from highlighting various innovations in MF distributions, this paper will also highlight the present state of online Mutual Fund trading platforms. Further, the paper attempts to highlight the areas of concern, augmentation and intervention in this space.

SEC Enforcement: Self-Reporting Share Class Selection Disclosure Initiative

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (2) ◽  
pp. 16-18
Author(s):  
Elaine Greenberg
Keyword(s):  
Mutual Fund ◽  
Conflicts Of Interest ◽  
Self Report ◽  
Complex Nature ◽  
Collateral Consequences ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Applicable Law ◽  
Enforcement Action ◽  
Business Operations ◽  
Investment Advisers

Purpose This paper aims to explain the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC’s) recent Share Class Selection Disclosure (SCSD) Initiative, which offers potentially favorable settlement terms to investment advisers who self-report to the SEC’s Enforcement Division violations of the federal securities laws relating to certain mutual fund share class selection issues and to discuss factors for consideration by investment advisers regarding their possible participation in this initiative. Design/methodology/approach This paper discusses the conditions and terms of the SEC’s SCSD Initiative, the SEC’s focus on conflicts of interest associated with mutual fund share class selection, the applicable law, the complex nature of these issues and the factors that investment advisers should consider in determining whether to participate in the initiative. Findings The assessment of the facts and the evaluation and analysis of the issues may be both time-consuming and complex. Firms need to carefully consider whether the potential benefits of self-reporting outweigh any possible downsides, including the potential collateral consequences that an SEC enforcement action may have on their business operations. Originality/value This paper contains valuable information about a recent SEC Enforcement Initiative and provides practical guidance from experienced securities counsel.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document