SEC’s 2026 exam priorities signal a renewed focus on core compliance and emerging risks

On November 17, 2025, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Examinations published its 2026 examination priorities, signalling a return to core compliance oversight while highlighting several sector-specific concerns that market participants should treat as near-term enforcement and supervisory focal points. According to the SEC press release, the Priorities emphasise fiduciary duties, conflicts of interest, Regulation Best Interest, and the protection of retail customers, dovetailing with Chair Gary Gensler’s successor’s stated approach toward “transparent and practical compliance” over “regulation by enforcement.”(SEC)

At the centre of the Division’s agenda is a “back-to-basics” review of adviser and broker-dealer conduct. For investment advisers, examiners will probe adherence to the duties of care and loyalty, with particular attention to advice and disclosures provided to retail investors, those saving for retirement, and older investors. The Division will also scrutinise recommendations involving alternative and complex products , for example, leveraged ETFs , and products with elevated cost structures. For broker-dealers, the Division cited four specific areas of interest: product and strategy recommendations; conflict identification and mitigation; review of reasonably available alternatives; and processes to satisfy the Care Obligation. These themes are echoed in law firm analyses of the Priorities, which warn firms to expect heightened scrutiny of recommendations involving complex or illiquid instruments. (SEC; Foley & Lardner; Willkie Farr & Gallagher)

The Division signalled that adviser compliance programmes will remain a central prism through which examinations are conducted. The Priorities identify six compliance areas for focused review: marketing; valuation, trading and portfolio management; disclosure and filing accuracy; custody; and annual reviews. “Fundamental part of the examination process,” the Division wrote of compliance programmes, and examiners will assess whether policies and procedures are not only written but implemented, enforced and designed to surface fee-related conflicts tied to account and product compensation structures. Industry commentators note the clear message: firms newly registered or previously unexamined should expect prioritised review to ensure robust programme implementation. (SEC; Simpson Thacher; Harvard Law School Forum)

Regulation S-P compliance , including firms’ preparedness for the 2024 amendments , is a discrete risk area in the Priorities. The Division will examine policies, internal controls, vendor oversight and governance practices tied to privacy and data security, and will ask firms about incident response programmes that are “reasonably designed to detect, respond to, and recover from unauthorized access to or use of customer information.” After the amendments take effect, examiners will evaluate whether firms have implemented administrative, technical and physical safeguards as required. Legal advisers caution that firms must move beyond policy drafting to demonstrable governance and testing. (SEC; Foley & Lardner)

Artificial intelligence and other emerging technologies are also prominent. The Division will review the deployment of automated investment advisory services, algorithmic trading tools and AI-driven recommendations, testing both the accuracy of AI-related disclosures and whether firms have adequate policies to monitor and supervise these systems. The guidance reflects broader regulatory and market concern about model risk, vendor reliance and the transparency of automated advice, and should prompt firms to document validation, governance and consumer-facing representations carefully. (SEC; Harvard Law School Forum)

Notably, the 2026 Priorities omit a standalone focus on digital assets and crypto, a departure from earlier years. Several law firm summaries observe that the absence does not immunise crypto-related activities from scrutiny; rather, the omission aligns with the Commission’s evolving approach to facilitating innovation while addressing investor protection issues on a case-by-case basis. Private funds likewise lack a dedicated section, but the Priorities single them out across multiple areas of review , especially advisers to newly launched private funds or advisers with no prior private fund experience, and recommendations of products investing in illiquid assets such as private equity or credit. Practitioners advise that these cross-cutting references amount to continued attention on private fund conduct without a separate programme. (SEC; Katten; Willkie Farr & Gallagher; JDSupra)

The Division also said it will prioritise examinations of newly registered advisers and investment companies, including recently registered RICs, citing concerns about fund fees and expenses (including waivers and reimbursements), portfolio management and disclosure accuracy, fund mergers and the use of complex or novel strategies. Industry commentators highlight the practical implication: expect early-life scrutiny of governance, valuation practices and disclosure frameworks for new vehicles. (SEC; Foley & Lardner; Simpson Thacher)

Taken together, the 2026 Priorities place a premium on demonstrable compliance: clear policies, active implementation, vendor oversight, incident response readiness and governance around new technologies. Legal advisers with securities enforcement and regulatory practices underscore that firms should treat the document as a roadmap for inspections rather than a static checklist, and should prioritise remediation and recordkeeping that evidences effective supervision. Firms facing examinations will likely find the Division’s approach more prescriptive in process and outcomes than in novel substantive rulemaking, but no less exacting in its expectations of operational discipline. (Foley & Lardner; Willkie Farr & Gallagher; Harvard Law School Forum)