In many ways, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC or Commission) Fiscal Year 2026 Examination Priorities (Priorities), published on 17 November 2025 by the Division of Examinations (Division), track the priorities of prior years, making clear that the Commission remains focused, as ever, on monitoring for risks to the investing public. But, as the first set published under the leadership of Chairman Paul Akins, the Priorities also set a tone for examinations that aligns with the shifts in the Commission’s overall direction, including efforts to engage with the industry transparently and constructively and to balance enforcement with innovation. In announcing the Priorities, Chairman Atkins summed up the SEC’s philosophy: “Examinations are an important component of accomplishing the agency’s mission, but they should not be a ‘gotcha’ exercise.”¹

In this context, the Priorities reflect a step toward coordinating this Commission’s programmatic goals across divisions, indicate a sustained examinations presence by the SEC, notwithstanding recent changes in the enforcement environment, and provide helpful focus areas for registrants as they revisit and bolster their compliance programs in preparing for potential examinations.

Overview of Key Examination Priorities

With respect to investment advisers, the Division’s examination staff will focus on: 

• Adherence to advisers’ duty of care and duty of loyalty obligations as fiduciaries, particularly with regard to services provided to retail investors;
• Consistency of disclosures and recommendations with advisers’ fiduciary obligations, such as remaining impartial in the face of conflicts of interest, considering relevant product factors in providing investment advice, and seeking best execution;
• Higher-risk or higher-cost products, such as alternative investments; complex investments, such as exchange traded funds (ETF) wrappers on less liquid underlying strategies, option-based ETFs, leveraged or inverse ETFs; and products with high commissions relative to similar products; 
• Consistency of investment recommendations with product disclosures and clients’ investment objectives, risk tolerance, and backgrounds, with emphasis on elderly investors and those saving for retirement, advisers to certain private funds, and products sensitive to market volatility;
• Advisory services and business practices with additional risks, such as dually registered advisers, advisers using third parties for account access, and advisers that have merged or consolidated with existing advisory practices; and
• Overall effectiveness, enforcement, and implementation of compliance programs.

With respect to registered investment companies, the examination staff will focus on:

• Compliance programs, disclosures, filings (e.g., summary prospectus), and governance practices;
• Fund fees and expenses, and any associated waivers and reimbursements;
• Consistency of portfolio management practices and disclosures with statements about investment strategies or approaches, fund filings, marketing materials, and the amended Names Rule (after the now-postponed compliance date);
• Funds that participate in mergers or similar transactions, use complex strategies, or have significant holdings of less liquid or illiquid investments with focus on valuation and conflicts of interest; and 
• Funds with novel strategies or investments (e.g., funds with leverage vulnerabilities).

With respect to broker-dealers, the examination staff will focus on, among other things:

• Compliance with financial responsibility rules, including the net capital rule, the consumer protection rule, and related operational resiliency programs and liquidity management;
• Trading practices, including equity and fixed income trading; order routing and execution; and Regulation SHO; and
• Retail sales practices, including compliance with Regulation Best Interest in connection with product recommendations (with respect to complex products in particular), conflict mitigation, and Form CRS disclosures.

The following specific risk areas are examination priorities, as applicable to each registrant:

• Cyber security, with focus on governance, data loss prevention, access controls, and incident response, including risks associated with artificial intelligence (AI);
• Regulation S-ID and Regulation S-P in connection with identity theft prevention, fraudulent transfers, or customer information safeguards;
• Emerging financial technology risks, including in connection with automated investment tools, AI, trading algorithms, and related disclosures and controls;
• Regulation Systems Compliance and Integrity for incident response and vendor risk management; and
• Anti-money laundering programs.

Enforcement Considerations

The Priorities suggest that actions the Division of Enforcement (Enforcement) have brought under Chairman Atkins will continue as a focus of examinations in 2026. For example, recent enforcement actions against registered actors have focused on issues affecting retail investors, including disclosure failures. Also consistent with enforcement trends, the Priorities omit prior years’ standalone section on crypto-assets, further reinforcing the pull-back in digital asset enforcement. 

At the same time, the Priorities make clear that a retreat by Enforcement in certain areas does not mean that the Commission will not focus on those areas in an examination. Specifically, the SEC recently filed dismissals of two of the more novel types of civil enforcement actions it filed under the previous administration. On 11 July 2025, the SEC announced dismissal of the first enforcement action against an investment adviser based on alleged violations of the Liquidity Rule under the Investment Advisors Act of 1940,² and on 20 November 2025, the SEC announced it would dismiss its civil enforcement action against an issuing company alleging securities law violations relating to cybersecurity vulnerabilities. Nevertheless, liquidity of investment companies and cybersecurity are noted in the Priorities.

The underlying premise of the Priorities—that examinations should be constructive and transparent rather than a “gotcha exercise”—mirrors Chairman Atkins’ statements in connection with the SEC’s enforcement approach.³ Similarly, the Chairman has expressed an intent to work with industry participants to address technical issues short of an enforcement action, focusing on remediation and dialogue. Such conversations are likely to happen in the examination context.  

Registrants should not interpret this tone as a relaxation of standards. Rather, they should use the Priorities as a guide for strengthening their compliance programs and seek to engage constructively with examiners to resolve issues before they escalate. Prompt remediation of deficiencies identified during exams may reduce the likelihood of an enforcement action.