NISM Professor

Conflict of interest

Any interest of the analyst's own — a shareholding, a fee, a relationship — that could bias the research, and which the regulations require to be disclosed rather than merely avoided.

In plain language

Research is worth something only if the person reading it believes it is honest. A conflict of interest is anything that gives the analyst a reason to write something other than what they actually think.

The regulatory answer is not to pretend such interests do not exist. It is to put them on the page, so the reader can discount the opinion accordingly.

How it works

The SEBI (Research Analysts) Regulations, 2014 work on managing and disclosing rather than prohibiting. The disclosures belong in the research report itself, not merely in an internal register, and cover the holdings of the analyst and their relatives in the subject company, any compensation received from it, any material commercial relationship, whether the firm managed a public offering or acted as market maker, and any directorship held.

Alongside disclosure sit two hard restrictions: an analyst must not trade contrary to their own published recommendation, and must not deal in the securities they cover in the window running thirty days before and five days after a report is published.

A worked example

An analyst personally holds 3,000 shares of a mid-cap bought at Rs 240 — a position of Rs 7.2 lakh — and is preparing to publish a Buy with a target of Rs 320.

If the report moves the share 6%, the analyst's own position gains roughly Rs 43,000. Nothing about that makes the recommendation wrong, and nothing about it is prohibited. What is required is that the holding is disclosed prominently in the report, and that the analyst does not trade in the stock in the thirty days before or five days after publication.

A second layer runs at the firm. If the investment banking arm is pitching to manage the same company's qualified institutional placement, the research view must be separated from that process by a Chinese Wall, and the banking relationship disclosed in the report. The wall handles the firm's conflict; it does nothing about the analyst's personal one, which still has to be declared.

Why NISM asks about it

Chapter 1 (Introduction to the Research Analyst Profession) frames the ethical duty and Chapter 14 (Legal and Regulatory Environment) supplies the regulations. This is among the most heavily examined non-numerical areas of the paper, and in almost every scenario question the correct answer is disclose — not avoid, not ignore, and not resign.

Common exam traps

  • Disclosure is the requirement. Holding shares in a company you cover is not itself a violation; failing to declare it is.
  • The disclosure belongs in the report, where the client sees it, not only in the firm's internal records.
  • Relatives' holdings count as the analyst's for this purpose.
  • Trading against your own recommendation is prohibited outright — no disclosure cures it.
  • A Chinese Wall is a firm-level control. It does not remove the individual analyst's duty to disclose.

Check yourself

  1. 1.What is the purpose of having written internal policies and controls by a research analyst under Regulation 15?

    1. a)Addressing only the actual conflict of interest arising from dealings of securities of a company
    2. b)Promoting objective research that reflects the biased view of the research analyst
    3. c)Preventing the use of a research report to manipulate the securities market
    4. d)Restricting client access to research reports
    Show the answer

    Answer: (c) Preventing the use of a research report to manipulate the securities market

    Regulation 15(1) — research analyst or research entity shall have written internal policies and control procedures governing the dealing and trading by any research analyst for:

    (i) addressing actual or potential conflict of interest arising from such dealings or trading of securities of subject company; (ii) promoting objective and reliable research that reflects the unbiased view of research analyst; and (iii) preventing the use of research report or research analysis to manipulate the securities market.

    Option A is wrong on one word — the regulation covers actual or potential conflict of interest, not only actual.

    Option B reverses another — the aim is research reflecting the unbiased view, not the biased one.

    Option D contradicts a different rule entirely: a research report shall not be made available selectively to internal trading personnel or a particular client or class of clients in advance of other clients who are entitled to receive the research report.

    Regulation 15 also requires that the analyst or entity shall have in place appropriate mechanisms to ensure independence of its research activities from its other business activities.

    The reason all this exists: such advice from investment analysts is many times prone to conflicts of interest that may prevent them from offering independent and unbiased opinions. The IOSCO principle behind it: firms that employ analysts should establish written internal procedures or controls to identify and eliminate, manage or disclose actual and potential conflicts of interest on the part of analysts.

  2. 2.A research analyst must disclose beneficial ownership in the subject company when the holding is:

    1. a)Five per cent or more, measured on the date of publication
    2. b)One per cent or more, at the end of the month immediately preceding the date of publication or public appearance
    3. c)Any amount, measured on the date of publication
    4. d)Ten per cent or more, at the end of the financial year
    Show the answer

    Answer: (b) One per cent or more, at the end of the month immediately preceding the date of publication or public appearance

    Regulation 19(i)(b) — whether the research analyst or research entity or its associates or relatives, have actual/beneficial ownership of one per cent or more securities of the subject company, at the end of the month immediately preceding the date of publication of the research report or date of the public appearance.

    Both halves matter — the 1% threshold and the measurement date. The date is the end of the month immediately preceding, not the publication date itself.

    A separate disclosure has no threshold at all: whether the research analyst or research entity or his associate or his relative has any financial interest in the subject company and the nature of such financial interest. Any financial interest, however small, must be disclosed — option C mistakes this rule for the ownership one.

    And a third: whether the research analyst or research entity or his associate or his relative, has any other material conflict of interest at the time of publication of the research report or at the time of public appearance.

    All three must appear in the research report AND in public appearance.

    The compensation disclosures run on a twelve-month lookback: whether it or its associates have received any compensation from the subject company in the past twelve months · have managed or co-managed public offering of securities... in the past twelve months · have received any compensation for investment banking or merchant banking or brokerage services... in the past twelve months · have received any compensation for products or services other than those · and any compensation or other benefits from the subject company or third party in connection with the research report.

    Two more standing items: whether the research analyst has served as an officer, director or employee of the subject company, and whether the research analyst or research entity has been engaged in market making activity for the subject company.

Where this is taught

Free preparation for NISM Series XV

Related terms

← All terms
Something look wrong? Report it