1 

By the Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations1

Volume VI, Issue 6 September 14, 2017 

The Most Frequent Advertising Rule Compliance Issues 

Identified in OCIE Examinations of Investment Advisers 

I. Introduction

The Office of Compliance Inspections and Examinations (“OCIE”) is 

providing a list of compliance issues relating to Rule 206(4)-1 (the 

“Advertising Rule”) under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the 

“Advisers Act”).

2

 These compliance issues were most frequently 

identified in deficiency letters recently sent to SEC-registered 

investment advisers (“advisers”) and as part of an examination initiative 

that focused on advisers’ use of accolades in their marketing materials

(“Touting Initiative”).

3

 This Risk Alert includes observations by OCIE 

staff and is intended to highlight the risks and issues associated with 

Advertising Rule compliance. This information is intended to assist 

advisers in adopting and implementing effective compliance programs.

4

 

The Advertising Rule prohibits an adviser, directly or indirectly, from 

publishing, circulating, or distributing any advertisement that contains any untrue statement of 

material fact, or that is otherwise false or misleading.5

 The Advertising Rule also includes four 

1 The views expressed herein are those of the staff of OCIE. The Securities and Exchange Commission (the 

“SEC” or the “Commission”) has expressed no view on the contents of this Risk Alert. This document was 

prepared by SEC staff and is not legal advice. 

2 This Risk Alert reflects issues identified in deficiency letters from over 1,000 adviser examinations. See also

National Exam Program Risk Alert, The Five Most Frequent Compliance Topics Identified in OCIE 

Examinations of Investment Advisers, (Feb. 7, 2017).

3 OCIE conducted nearly 70 examinations under the Touting Initiative, which took place in 2016. 

4 This Risk Alert does not address all types of deficiencies or weaknesses related to the Advertising Rule. Nor 

does it address advertising or advertising-related deficiencies or weaknesses related more generally to Advisers 

Act Sections 206(1), 206(2), Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-8, or to registered investment companies. 

5 Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(5). 

In this Alert: 

Topic: Advertising Rule 

compliance issues

identified in deficiency

letters sent to SECregistered investment 

advisers. 

Key Takeaways: 

Advisers should review 

their compliance 

programs and practices in 

light of the topics noted in 

this Risk Alert. This 

information is intended to 

assist advisers in adopting 

and implementing 

effective compliance 

programs.

Effective November 4, 2022, this Risk Alert discusses a rule that is no longer effective. Please see the 

following for more information: Investment Adviser Marketing Adopting Release.
2 

specific prohibitions.6 In addition, relevant advertising guidance and principles are often 

discussed in Commission opinions, court decisions, and Commission orders in settled 

enforcement proceedings and in no-action letters and guidance updates issued by the SEC’s

Division of Investment Management (“IM”).

7

 

Advertisements, as defined in the Advertising Rule, can encompass a broad array of statements. 

The Advertising Rule states that an “advertisement shall include any notice, circular, letter or 

other written communication addressed to more than one person, or any notice or other 

announcement in any publication or by radio or television, which offers (1) any analysis, report, 

or publication concerning securities, or which is to be used in making any determination as to 

when to buy or sell any security, or which security to buy or sell, or (2) any graph, chart, 

formula, or other device to be used in making any determination as to when to buy or sell any 

security, or which security to buy or sell, or (3) any other investment advisory service with 

regard to securities.”8 Adviser statements made through electronic media, or other nontraditional styles of presentation may fall within the purview of the Advertising Rule.9

 

II. Most Frequent Advertising Rule Compliance Issues

Below are the most frequent deficiencies that OCIE staff has identified in connection with failure 

to comply with the Advertising Rule: 

● Misleading Performance Results. OCIE staff has observed advertisements that staff

believe contain misleading performance results.10 For example, staff observed advisers

that presented performance results without deducting advisory fees.

11 Staff also observed

adviser advertisements that compared results to a benchmark but did not include

6

 Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(1) (prohibiting advertisements that refer, directly or indirectly, to any testimonial 

concerning the adviser or any advice, analysis, report or other service rendered by the adviser); Advisers Act 

Rule 206(4)-1(a)(2) (generally prohibiting an adviser from advertising past specific recommendations of the 

adviser that were or would have been profitable to any person); Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(3) (prohibiting 

advertisements claiming that any graph, chart, formula or other device can by itself determine whether to buy or 

sell a security); and Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(4) (prohibiting advertisements that offer purportedly free 

reports, analyses, or services). 

7 No-action letters and guidance updates issued by IM staff provide informal interpretive and advisory assistance 

and represent the views of members of the Commission staff who are continuously working with the provisions 

of the Advisers Act. Opinions expressed by IM staff, however, are not an official expression of the 

Commission’s views. 

8

 Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(b). 

9

 Id. IM staff has provided guidance on the testimonial provision of the Advertising Rule and social media. See 

IM Guidance Update No. 2014-04, Guidance on the Testimonial Rule and Social Media, (Mar. 2014); see also

National Exam Program Risk Alert, Investment Adviser Use of Social Media, (Jan. 4, 2012); see also IM 

Guidance Update 2017-02, Robo-Advisers, (Feb. 2017), at note 34 and accompanying text. 

10 See Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(5). IM staff has issued several no-action letters that discuss the application 

of Subsection (a)(5) and advertisements that may be misleading. 

11 See Clover Capital Mgmt., Inc., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Oct. 28, 1986) (IM staff indicating that an 

advertisement that includes results that do not reflect the deduction of advisory fees, brokerage or other 

commissions, and any other expenses that a client would have paid or actually paid may be misleading). 

Effective November 4, 2022, this Risk Alert discusses a rule that is no longer effective. Please see the 

following for more information: Investment Adviser Marketing Adopting Release.
3 

disclosures about the limitations inherent in such comparisons, including instances where, 

for example, an advertisement did not disclose that the advertised strategy materially 

differed from the composition of the benchmark to which it was compared.

12 

Additionally, staff observed adviser advertisements that contained hypothetical and backtested performance results, but did not explain how these returns were derived and did 

not include other potentially material information regarding the performance results.

13 

● Misleading One-on-One Presentations. OCIE staff has observed advertisements that

staff believe contain misleading one-on-one presentations.14 For example, staff observed

advisers that advertised performance results (gross of fees) in certain one-on-one

presentations, but did not include potentially relevant disclosures.15 In addition, some

one-on-one presentations (that are subject to the Advertising Rule) did not disclose that

the advertised performance results did not reflect the deduction of advisory fees and that

client returns would be reduced by such fees and other expenses.

16

● Misleading Claim of Compliance with Voluntary Performance Standards. OCIE staff has

observed advertisements that staff believe contain misleading claims of compliance with

voluntary performance standards.17 For example, staff observed advisers that claimed

that their advertised performance results complied with a certain voluntary performance

standard, when it was not clear to staff that the performance results in fact adhered to the

performance standard’s guidelines.

18

● Cherry-Picked Profitable Stock Selections. OCIE staff has observed advertisements that

staff believe contain cherry-picked stock selections.19 For example, staff observed

12 See id. (IM staff indicating that an advertisement comparing performance results to a benchmark may be 

misleading if the advertisement does not disclose the material limitations inherent in such a comparison).

13 See, e.g., In the Matter of Jeffrey Slocum & Assocs., Inc. & Jeffrey C. Slocum, Respondents, Advisers Act Rel. 

No. 4647 (Feb. 8, 2017) (use of misleading performance results).

14 See Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(5).

15 See Investment Co. Institute, SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Sept. 23, 1988) (IM staff indicating that performance 

results presented on a gross basis in a one-on-one presentation with certain disclosures may not be misleading). 

16 See, e.g., In the Matter of Trust & Inv. Advisors, Inc., Larry K. Pitts, & George M. Prugh Respondents, 

Advisers Act Rel. No. 4087 (May 18, 2015).

17 See Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(5). 

18 A common example of a voluntary performance standard is the Global Investment Performance Standards 

(“GIPS®”). The Commission has found a violation of the Advertising Rule when an adviser’s advertisement 

falsely claimed it complied with GIPS®. See, e.g., ZPR Investment Mgmt., Inc., Advisers Act Rel. No. 4249 

(Oct. 30, 2015) (SEC Opinion). 

19 See Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(2). Subsection (a)(2) of the Advertising Rule provides that it shall constitute 

a fraudulent, deceptive, or manipulative act, practice, or course of business to, directly or indirectly, publish, 

circulate, or distribute any advertisement that refers to past specific recommendations of an adviser, which were 

or would have been profitable to any person. Rule 206(4)-1(a)(2), however, does not prohibit an advertisement 

which sets out or offers to furnish a list of all recommendations made by such investment adviser during the 

preceding year, provided that the advertisement or the list contains certain specific disclosures about the 

recommendations. 

Effective November 4, 2022, this Risk Alert discusses a rule that is no longer effective. Please see the 

following for more information: Investment Adviser Marketing Adopting Release.
4 

advisers that included only profitable stock selections or recommendations in 

presentations, client newsletters, or on their websites, without meeting the conditions set 

forth in Subsection (a)(2) of the Advertising Rule.20 

 

● Misleading Selection of Recommendations. OCIE staff has observed advertisements that 

staff believe contain misleading selections of investment recommendations.21 For 

example, staff observed advisers that disclosed past specific investment recommendations 

that may have been misleading because they included only certain, and not all, 

recommendations, in order to illustrate a particular investment strategy, and they did not 

meet the conditions set forth in Subsection (a)(2) of the Advertising Rule. In addition, 

they did not satisfy the representations upon which IM staff based certain no-action 

assurances as provided in the TCW Group and Franklin no-action letters. 

o In the TCW Group no-action letter, IM staff stated that it would not recommend 

enforcement action against an adviser that advertised to consultants, prospective 

clients, and existing clients who were not currently invested in the relevant 

investment strategy, the five (or more) best performing holdings along with an equal 

number of worst performers if several representations were met.22 OCIE staff has 

observed advertisements that may not have been consistent with these 

representations, including the use of advertisements that included the best performing 

holdings, but did not simultaneously include an equal number of the worst performing 

holdings. 

o In the Franklin no-action letter, IM staff stated that it would not recommend 

enforcement action against an adviser for advertising past specific recommendations 

that were selected using consistently applied, objective, non-performance based 

selection criteria, provided that certain representations were met.23 OCIE staff has 

observed advertisements that may have not been consistent with these 

representations, including, for example, not disclosing that the specific 

recommendations did not represent all securities purchased, sold, or recommended to 

clients during that period and discussing in advertisements the profits realized by the 

specific recommendations.

• Compliance Policies and Procedures. OCIE staff observed advisers that did not appear 

to have compliance policies and procedures reasonably designed to prevent deficient 

advertising practices.24 For example, the staff observed advisers that did not have, or did 

 

20 See id. 

21 See id. 

22 The TCW Group, SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Nov. 7, 2008). 

23 Franklin Management, Inc., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Dec. 10, 1998); see also Investment Counsel Ass’n of 

America, Inc., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Mar. 1, 2004). 

24 Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-7(a) (requiring advisers to adopt and implement written policies and procedures 

reasonably designed to prevent violation of the Act and the rules that the Commission has adopted under the 

Act). 

Effective November 4, 2022, this Risk Alert discusses a rule that is no longer effective. Please see the 

following for more information: Investment Adviser Marketing Adopting Release.
5 

not implement, policies and procedures pertaining to the following issues: the process for 

reviewing and approving advertising materials prior to their publication or dissemination; 

when using composites, determining the parameters for which accounts were included or 

excluded from performance calculations; and confirming the accuracy of performance 

results in compliance with the Advertising Rule.

III. Summary of Examination Observations from Touting Initiative

OCIE launched the Touting Initiative in 2016 to examine the adequacy of disclosures that 

advisers provided to their clients when touting awards, promoting ranking lists, and/or 

identifying professional designations (collectively “accolades”) in their marketing materials. 

OCIE launched its Touting Initiative in response to the regularity with which staff encounters 

advisers that advertise these accolades without disclosing material facts about them. 

● Misleading Use of Third Party Rankings or Awards. OCIE staff observed advertisements

containing the potentially misleading use of third party rankings or awards.25 Staff

observed advisers that published potentially misleading advertisements containing

references to awards or rankings conferred by third parties that failed to disclose facts,

which staff believes were material under the circumstances, about such awards or

rankings.26 For example:

o Advisers advertised accolades that had been obtained by submitting potentially false

or misleading information in the applications for such accolades.27

o Advisers published marketing materials that referenced stale ranking or evaluation

information, thus potentially misrepresenting the adviser’s current status. For

example, OCIE staff observed advertisements that referred to advisers receiving high

rankings in various publications, but those publications were issued several years

prior, and the rankings were no longer applicable.

o Advisers published potentially misleading advertisements that did not disclose the

relevant selection criteria for the awards or rankings, or who created and conducted

the survey and the fact that advisers paid a fee to participate in or distribute the results

of the survey.

25 See Advisers Act Rule 206(4)-1(a)(5).

26 See DALBAR, Inc., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Mar. 24, 1998) (IM staff providing guidance regarding factors 

advisers should consider when determining whether an advertisement containing a rating is false or misleading); 

see also Investment Adviser Ass’n., SEC Staff No-Action Letter (Dec. 2, 2005) (IM staff reiterating guidance 

presented in DALBAR regarding factors that advisers should consider when determining whether an 

advertisement containing a third-party rating is false or misleading). 

27 The Commission has found a violation of the Advertising Rule when an adviser’s advertisement contained a

favorable industry ranking that had been obtained through the adviser’s misrepresentations. See, e.g, In the 

Matter of Bennett Grp. Fin. Servs., LLC & Dawn J. Bennett, Advisers Act Rel. No. 4676 (Mar. 30, 2017) (SEC 

Opinion). 

Effective November 4, 2022, this Risk Alert discusses a rule that is no longer effective. Please see the 

following for more information: Investment Adviser Marketing Adopting Release.
6 

• Misleading Use of Professional Designations. OCIE staff observed advertisements and

disclosures made in advisers’ Form ADV Part 2B Brochure Supplements that contained

potentially false or misleading references to employee professional designations, such as,

for example, references to professional designations that have lapsed or that did not

explain the minimum qualifications required to attain such designations.28

• Testimonials. OCIE staff observed advisers that had published statements of clients

attesting to their services or otherwise endorsing the adviser that may be prohibited

testimonials (e.g., client endorsements published in firm websites, social media pages,

reprints of third party articles, or pitch books).29

IV. Conclusion

In response to OCIE staff’s observations, advisers elected to either remove misleading language 

from their advertisements, or to add disclosures designed to prevent the advertisements from 

being misleading. OCIE’s objective in providing this guidance is to encourage advisers to assess 

the full scope of their advertisements and consider whether those advertisements are consistent 

with the Advertising Rule, the prohibitions of Section 206, and their fiduciary duties, and review 

the adequacy and effectiveness of their compliance programs. 

28 See Item 2 of Form ADV Part 2B Brochure Supplement (Educational Background and Business Experience), 

which states that the adviser may list any professional designations held by a supervised person, but if the 

adviser does so, the adviser must provide a sufficient explanation of the minimum qualifications required for 

each designation to allow clients to understand the value of the designation. 

29 Subsection (a)(1) of the Advertising Rule provides that it shall constitute a fraudulent, deceptive, or 

manipulative act, practice, or course of business to, directly or indirectly, publish, circulate or distribute any 

advertisement that refers, directly or indirectly, to any testimonial of any kind concerning the adviser or 

concerning any advice, analysis, report or other rendered service. 

This Risk Alert is intended to highlight for firms risks and issues that OCIE staff has identified. In addition, this Risk 

Alert describes risks that firms may consider to (i) assess their supervisory, compliance, and/or other risk management 

systems related to these risks, and (ii) make any changes, as may be appropriate, to address or strengthen such systems. 

Other risks besides those described in this Risk Alert may be appropriate to consider, and some may not be applicable to 

a particular firm’s business. The adequacy of supervisory, compliance and other risk management systems can be 

determined only with reference to the profile of each specific firm and other facts and circumstances.

Effective November 4, 2022, this Risk Alert discusses a rule that is no longer effective. Please see the 

following for more information: Investment Adviser Marketing Adopting Release.