
Fundamentals for Newer Directors 2014 (pdf)
The latest edition of ICI’s flagship publication shares a wealth of research and data on trends in the investment company industry.
[35516]
November 28, 2023
TO: Accounting/Treasurers Committee
Earlier this month, FINRA filed with the SEC proposed amendments to Rule 2210 (Communications with the Public) (the "rule").[[1]] If adopted, the amendments would permit a FINRA member to project the performance or provide a targeted return with respect to a security or asset allocation or other investment strategy in an institutional communication (or a communication distributed solely to qualified purchasers that promotes or recommends specified non-public offerings), subject to several investor protection-oriented conditions.
Comments are due to the SEC by December 15. ICI will comment on the proposal, and we will be discussing it with members on our Advertising Compliance Advisory Committee call on December 6 at 2:00 pm ET. If you are interested in joining this call, please register here: https://cvent.me/Q4yL51.
In 2017, FINRA issued a Regulatory Notice requesting comment on proposed amendments to the rule.[[2]] Notwithstanding the rule's general prohibition on communications that predict or project performance,[[3]] the 2017 proposal would have permitted customized hypothetical investment planning illustrations that project performance of an asset allocation or other investment strategy (but not an individual security), subject to specified conditions.[[4]]
ICI's comment letter generally supported FINRA's 2017 proposal, which we believed could help inform customers' investment decision-making process.[[5]]
This proposal is substantially different from the 2017 iteration, although to varying degrees both would provide additional flexibility for FINRA members to provide performance projections. FINRA describes the 2023 proposal as creating "a new, narrowly tailored, exception to the general prohibition of projections."[[6]]
The 2023 proposal would permit "[a] communication that projects the performance or provides a targeted return with respect to a security or asset allocation or other investment strategy," subject to several conditions. This new provision would be limited to: (i) institutional communications, or (ii) communications that are distributed or made available only to "qualified purchasers"[[7]] and that promote or recommend specified non-public offerings.[[8]]
This new exception also would require:
In connection with the proposed "reasonable basis" requirement mentioned above, proposed Supplementary Material 2210.01 would require members to consider multiple enumerated factors, with none being determinative. It lists 13 factors[[11]] and also states that members may not base projected performance or a targeted return upon (i) hypothetical, back-tested performance, or (ii) the prior performance of a portfolio or model that was created solely for the purpose of establishing a track record.
The proposal also notes the following:
Finally, the proposal compares its terms to those of FINRA Rule 2214 (Requirements for the Use of Investment Analysis Tools) and the hypothetical performance standards of the SEC's investment adviser marketing rule (Rule 206(4)-1 under the Investment Advisers Act).
Matthew Thornton
Associate General Counsel
[[1]] Notice of Filing of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend FINRA Rule 2210 (Communications With the Public) To Permit Projections of Performance of Investment Strategies or Single Securities in Institutional Communications; SEC Release No. 34-98977, 88 Fed. Reg. 82482 (Nov. 24, 2023) (the "proposal"), available at https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2023-11-24/pdf/2023-25881.pdf.
[[2]] FINRA Requests Comment on Proposed Amendments to Rules Governing Communications with the Public, FINRA Regulatory Notice 17-06 (February 2017), available at: www.finra.org/sites/default/files/notice_doc_file_ref/Regulatory-Notice-17-06.pdf. See Institute Memorandum No. 30584, dated February 16, 2017, for a more detailed summary of the 2017 proposal.
[[3]] Rule 2210(d)(1)(F) prohibits communications that "predict or project performance, imply that past performance will recur or make any exaggerated or unwarranted claim, opinion or forecast," subject to specific exceptions for: a hypothetical illustration of mathematical principles, provided that it does not predict or project the performance of an investment or investment strategy; an investment analysis tool, or a written report produced by an investment analysis tool, that meets the requirements of Rule 2214; and a price target contained in a research report on debt or equity securities, subject to certain conditions.
[[4]] Specifically, the illustration would have required a "reasonable basis" and certain disclosures, and would be subject to supervisory requirements.
[[5]] Available at https://www.finra.org/sites/default/files/notice_comment_file_ref/17-06_ICI_comment.pdf. We recommended that the proposal be enhanced further by: (i) removing the "customization" requirement; and (ii) providing guidance regarding the precise scope of the proposed and existing exceptions to the rule's general prohibition on projections, so that members can put them to wider and better use (e.g., in educational materials).
[[6]] Proposal at 82483. "The general prohibition against performance projections is intended to protect investors who may lack the capacity to understand the risks and limitations of using projected performance in making investment decisions." Id. at 82482.
[[7]] The proposal would rely on the Investment Company Act's definition of this term.
[[8]] Specifically, "either a Member Private Offering that is exempt from the requirements of Rule 5122 pursuant to Rule 5122(c)(1)(B), or a private placement that is exempt from the requirements of Rule 5123 pursuant to Rule 5123(b)(1)(B)."
[[9]] Moreover, "such a communication should only be distributed where the member reasonably believes the investors have access to resources to independently analyze this information or have the financial expertise to understand the risks and limitations of such presentations." Id. at 82484.
[[10]] "Firms would be expected…to provide a general description of the methodology used sufficient to enable the investors to understand the basis of the methodology, as well as the assumptions underlying the projection or targeted return." Id. at 82485.
[[11]] The 13 factors are: "(1) Global, regional, and country macroeconomic conditions; (2) Documented fact-based assumptions concerning the future performance of capital markets; (3) In the case of a single security issued by an operating company, the issuing company's operating and financial history; (4) The industry's and sector's current market conditions and the state of the business cycle; (5) If available, reliable multi-factor financial models based on macroeconomic, fundamental, quantitative, or statistical inputs, taking into account the assumptions and potential limitations of such models, including the source and time horizon of data inputs; (6) The quality of the assets included in a securitization; (7) The appropriateness of selected peer-group comparisons; (8) The reliability of research sources; (9) The historical performance and performance volatility of the same or similar asset classes; (10) For managed accounts or funds, the past performance of other accounts or funds managed by the same investment adviser or sub-adviser, provided such accounts or funds had substantially similar investment objectives, policies, and strategies as the account or fund for which the projected performance or targeted returns are shown; (11) For fixed income investments and holdings, the average weighted duration and maturity; (12) The impact of fees, costs, and taxes; and (13) Expected contribution and withdrawal rates by investors." The proposal notes that some of these proposed factors come from the CFA Institute's discussion of Standard V in the Institute's Standards of Practice Handbook.
[[12]] Id. at 82485-82486.
[[13]] Id. at 82486.
Latest Comment Letters:
TEST - ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Comment Letter Opposing Sales Tax on Additional Services in Maryland
ICI Response to the European Commission on the Savings and Investments Union