What does 'fair dealing' actually mean when disseminating investment recommendations?
Standard III(B) talks about dealing fairly with all clients when making recommendations. Does this mean every client must receive the recommendation at the exact same moment? How do firms handle this in practice when they have hundreds of clients?
Standard III(B) — Fair Dealing requires that members deal fairly and objectively with all clients when providing investment analysis, recommendations, or taking investment action. The key word is 'fairly' — not 'equally.'
Fair vs. Equal:
The standard does not require simultaneous dissemination to every client at the exact same millisecond. That would be impractical. Instead, it requires a systematic and reasonable process that does not systematically advantage one group over another.
Acceptable Practices:
- Establishing a dissemination protocol where institutional and retail clients receive recommendations through their respective channels at approximately the same time
- Using a rotation system so no single client always receives information first
- Sending a blast email to all clients on the coverage list simultaneously
Violations:
- Calling your three largest hedge fund clients with a rating change before publishing the research note to all clients
- Giving preferred clients advance notice of an upcoming IPO allocation before other eligible clients
- Systematically executing trades for fee-based accounts before commission-based accounts
Practical Example:
Crestline Research employs 12 analysts covering 200 stocks. When analyst Marcus Chen upgrades Pinnacle Logistics from Hold to Buy, the firm's protocol requires:
- The report goes to compliance for review
- Once approved, it is simultaneously posted to the firm's research portal
- A blast notification is sent to all subscribed clients
- The trading desk begins executing in a rotation that alternates starting points each day
If Marcus instead called three of his favorite portfolio managers 30 minutes before the report hit the portal, that would violate Standard III(B) even if Marcus had no financial incentive to do so.
| Action | Fair Dealing? | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Simultaneous email blast | Yes | All clients notified at same time |
| Calling top 5 clients first | No | Systematic advantage to select group |
| Rotating trade execution order | Yes | No client always goes first |
| Allocating hot IPO to friends | No | Preferential treatment |
Investment Action vs. Recommendations:
Fair dealing applies to both. When executing a block trade for multiple accounts, the firm should use a pro-rata allocation rather than filling the largest account first.
Exam tip: Watch for scenarios where an analyst provides 'extra service' to top clients under the guise of client relationship management. If that extra service includes early access to recommendations, it violates Standard III(B).
Explore more Ethics scenarios in our CFA Level I course on AcadiFi.
Master Level I with our CFA Course
107 lessons · 200+ hours· Expert instruction
Related Questions
What exactly is the Capital Market Expectations (CME) framework and why does it matter for asset allocation?
How do business cycle phases affect asset class return expectations?
Can someone explain the Grinold–Kroner model step by step with numbers?
How do you forecast fixed-income returns using the building-blocks approach?
PPP vs Interest Rate Parity for forecasting exchange rates — when do I use which?
Join the Discussion
Ask questions and get expert answers.