SEC Postpones Mutual Fund Swing Pricing and Hard Close Proposals

The regulator's decision offers relief to mutual fund managers, despite some added reporting requirements.




The Securities and Exchange Commission this week decided not to pass a controversial proposal that would have required swing pricing and a related hard-close pricing policy for mutual funds that are popular in employer-sponsored retirement plans.

The SEC Wednesday did approve, by a 3-to-2 margin, amendments to require timelier reporting of portfolio holdings, monthly instead of quarterly, filing for open-end and closed-end funds, as well as exchange-traded funds. It did not move ahead with previously related swing pricing and hard close mandates for open-end funds. Though it also did not say it would never implement them, mutual fund managers and 401(k) investment providers should be feeling relief, according to Jay Baris, a partner in Sidley Austin LLP’s investment funds group.

“The headline here is what they didn’t do,” Baris says of the ruling. “In that sense, the industry dodged a bullet.”

Baris notes widespread industry opposition to the proposal in the form of letters and pushback the SEC received throughout its information-gathering process. The swing pricing proposal would have required funds to report pricing information related to the size and frequency of price adjustments with the goal of protecting investors from major swings, along with implementing a hard close of trading for funds at 4 p.m. ET.

Opponents of the proposal included the Investment Company Institute and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, both of which noted that the proposal would significantly limit investment management discretion and be both costly and challenging for mutual funds and intermediaries to implement—costs that would then be passed on to investors.

The SEC and its chairman, Gary Gensler, however, have argued for the provisions to protect investors from market volatility. Gensler has noted that the 2020 market hit from the COVID-19 pandemic caused concern that funds might not be able to meet redemption requests due to the heavy flow of traffic.

Gensler has alsosuggested in public remarks, however, that the SEC may opt for a liquidity fee to be imposed for open-end funds, instead of the swing pricing and hard close proposal. The regulator instituted a liquidity fee on money markets in 2023, going into effect in October, to combat runs on those investments.

Pushback Noticed

Baris says the industry pushback was so widespread that the SEC may have been “surprised by the intensity of the opposition.” While the proposals were not taken off the table, Baris notes it is telling that the SEC specifically said it was avoiding implementation in its 136-page final ruling.

“We also are not adopting proposed reporting amendments relating to funds’ use of swing pricing or to liquidity classifications in this release, as we are not adopting amendments to the underlying rules at this time,” the regulators wrote.

Baris said he would be “surprised” if the SEC moved ahead with the proposals again without some kind of public comment period.

In Wednesday’s voting, the SEC opted to amend the requirements for filings known as Form N-PORT and N-CEN, which will go into effect on November 17, 2025.

The Form N-PORT amendments require funds to report monthly within 30 days of the end of the month, as opposed to within 60 days of the end of each quarter. Form N-PORT also now requires funds’ monthly reports be made available to the public within 60 days of the end of each month, as opposed to on a quarterly basis.

This reporting will give the SEC more information on funds, particularly during times of market volatility, according to Douglas McCormack, a counsel in Sidley Austin’s investments funds group. That will add additional time and cost for fund managers.

Related Stories:

Gensler Defends SEC Proposals at House Oversight Hearing

Gensler Defends Swing Pricing Proposal Despite Growing Bipartisan Pushback

Never miss a story — sign up for CIO newsletters to stay up-to-date on the latest institutional investment industry news.

Tags: , , ,

Active Investing Will Boost Endowment Growth Over Other Institutional Investors, Cerulli Forecasts

A new report projects endowment assets will grow 7.9% over the next five years, compared with 4.7% and 4.2%, respectively, for public and corporate defined benefit plans.



Endowments are expected to have the highest asset growth rate among institutional investors annually over the next five years, thanks in part to a “strong appetite for actively managed strategies,” according to a recent report from Cerulli Associates.

Cerulli forecasts endowment assets will grow 7.9% over the next five years, compared with estimated annual growth of 4.7% for public defined benefit plans and 4.2% for corporate defined benefit plans during the same period.

“The growth in endowment assets can be intriguing for traditional managers looking to expand their institutional footprint,” said Chris Swansey, an associate director at Cerulli, in a statement. “However, managers will have to overcome several challenges to make headway, including increased demand for alternative investments and establishing relationships with hard-to-reach OCIO providers.”

According to the report, based on a survey conducted in the second quarter, “most of endowments’ rapid growth can be linked to their high allocations to alternative investments.” It also noted that 42% of endowments responded they prefer to invest in active strategies in public markets, compared with 23% who reported preferring public defined benefit plans. Along the same lines, 23% of endowments reported a preference for passive strategies in public markets, compared with 33% of defined benefit plans.

For more stories like this, sign up for the CIO Alert newsletter.

The survey also found that 35% of endowments with more than $100 million in investable assets expect to increase their allocations to developed non-U.S. equities over the next 24 months, while 23% expect to increase their emerging markets equity allocations over the same period.

Meanwhile, most public defined benefit plan respondents indicated they expect to increase allocations to fixed-income asset classes, including investment-grade bonds and municipal bonds, as well as alternative assets, such as private equity, real estate and infrastructure.

“Many plans are looking to add duration to their portfolios in order to lock in long-term yields and exploit any price appreciation that will come with lower rates,” according to Cerulli’s report.

Outsourced CIO providers also strongly prefer active investing, according to the report, with 63% of those surveyed saying their assets are invested in actively managed strategies.

“This can create efficiencies for both asset managers that target large endowments via direct relationships and OCIO providers that manage smaller endowment assets, as they both seek similar products for their traditional asset allocations,” the report stated.

Despite expectations to outperform other institutional investors over the next five years, endowments remain the smallest institutional channel, according to Cerulli.

“While the growth of the assets is promising, the overall size of the channel limits opportunities for asset managers,” the report stated. “Despite this limited opportunity, asset managers still can effectively grow endowment asset market share by creating targeted distribution strategies and offering high-performing products in in-demand asset classes such as non-U.S. equities and investment-grade fixed income.”


Related Stories:

Public Equities Drove University Endowment Returns in 2023

How Endowments Can Evaluate Their Sustainability Levels

Passive Strategies Poised to Take Mutual Fund, ETF Market Lead

 

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

«