William Wong delays revising a stock recommendation to allow his brother to buy shares. He is least likely to have violated which CFA Institute Standard related to?

Prepare for the Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA) Ethics Test. Study with flashcards and multiple choice questions, each with hints and explanations. Get ready for your exam!

Multiple Choice

William Wong delays revising a stock recommendation to allow his brother to buy shares. He is least likely to have violated which CFA Institute Standard related to?

Explanation:
A professional must keep personal interests from influencing recommendations and timing. Delaying a stock revision so that a family member can buy shares shows bias and a conflict of interest, which would likely breach duties to clients and fairness in dealings, and could raise questions about prioritizing personal trades over client interests. The reason this item points to the reasonable-basis standard as the one least likely violated is that this standard focuses on whether the recommendation has a sound, adequately supported analysis. Delaying the update to assist a relative doesn’t by itself prove that the underlying analysis lacks support or data. The improvement or delay reflects a personal conflict affecting actions, not necessarily the existence or quality of the evidence backing the recommendation. In other words, the situation demonstrates compromised objectivity and fair dealing, but not necessarily a lack of reasonable, evidence-based justification for the recommendation.

A professional must keep personal interests from influencing recommendations and timing. Delaying a stock revision so that a family member can buy shares shows bias and a conflict of interest, which would likely breach duties to clients and fairness in dealings, and could raise questions about prioritizing personal trades over client interests.

The reason this item points to the reasonable-basis standard as the one least likely violated is that this standard focuses on whether the recommendation has a sound, adequately supported analysis. Delaying the update to assist a relative doesn’t by itself prove that the underlying analysis lacks support or data. The improvement or delay reflects a personal conflict affecting actions, not necessarily the existence or quality of the evidence backing the recommendation. In other words, the situation demonstrates compromised objectivity and fair dealing, but not necessarily a lack of reasonable, evidence-based justification for the recommendation.

Subscribe

Get the latest from Passetra

You can unsubscribe at any time. Read our privacy policy