After the agency sent out a risk alert in mid-December, the ACA Group, a firm made up of ex-regulators that assists advisors with compliance issues, posted a blog warning that examiners continue to flag advisors for sloppy disclosures, for the weak oversight of promoters and for the improper use of third-party ratings. The findings come as the SEC has made marketing rule compliance a top examination priority for 2026.

The ACA Group said in its blog:“ Examiners are continuing to identify the same deficiencies, often in firms that believed they had already addressed them.” The SEC has already charged dozens of registered investment advisors for violations. In one recent case, nine firms agreed to pay $ 1.2 million to settle with the agency.

The marketing rule, which went into effect May 4, 2021, governs how advisors use testimonials, endorsements and third-party ratings in advertising. While the rule opened the door to modern marketing practices, it also imposed detailed disclosure and supervision require- ments that many firms are still getting wrong.

The most serious violations involve testimonials and endorsements that lack clear, timely disclosures. SEC examiners repeatedly found that firms failed to disclose whether someone promoting them was a current client, whether compensation was paid for the promotion, or whether conflicts of interest existed.

‘ Avoidable Errors’ Examiners also continue to see advisors misclassify referral arrangements. Lead-generation firms, social media influencers and even informal“ refer-a-friend” programs are all subject to endorsement rules. In many cases, advisors failed to recognize that small or de minimis payments to people plugging their firms still count as compensation under the rule.

The ACA Group noted that some firms had no written agreements with the people boosting them at all. Others had agreements but lacked a reasonable basis to believe required disclosures were actually being made. In more serious cases, advisors engaged people who were ineligible under the rule to promote them, a violation the SEC treats as particularly problematic.

“ These are avoidable errors,” the ACA Group said, adding that many stem from outdated policies or training that has not kept pace with how marketing teams actually operate.

Third-party ratings remain another persistent trouble spot. The SEC’ s risk alert emphasized that advisors must conduct meaningful due diligence on how ratings are created. Many firms failed to do so.

Examiners found advisors using rankings without reviewing the underlying questionnaires or survey methodologies. Others relied on logos or badges without disclosing who created the rating, what period of time it covered, or whether the advisor had paid to be considered.

“ Logos alone are not disclosures,” the ACA Group said.“ Examiners are insisting on exact dates, full provider names and clear explanations of compensation.”

Some firms did disclose the payments they had made to rating providers— but only in fine print or on separate web pages. Others relied on hyperlinks that did not actually lead investors to the required information. The SEC has consistently said those approaches do not meet the standard for clear and prominent disclosure.

The alert also highlighted a gap between written policies and real-world practices. Some advisors updated their compliance manuals after the rule took effect but never implemented the procedures. Others updated policies but failed to train marketing staff, vendors or affiliates.

“ Marketing rule compliance often breaks down where multiple teams are involved,” the ACA Group noted.“ Digital, marketing, business development and compliance are not always aligned.”

Corrective Steps

As part of its enforcement actions, the SEC has levied more than $ 2 million in fines and required firms to revise advertising, enhance supervision and retain compliance consul-

Continued on page 12

JANUARY / FEBRUARY 2026 | FINANCIAL ADVISOR MAGAZINE | 9