Navigating the SEC’s 2026 Exam Priorities

Private fund managers will enter 2026 against a regulatory backdrop that is defined by heightened expectations, sharper scrutiny and a continued push for exam programs that reflect real-world risks rather than paper-based assurances. This is evident in the 2026 Examination Priorities that were recently released by SEC’s Division of Examinations. The core themes outlined by the SEC for 2026 examinations include focus areas we have seen before, such as fiduciary duty, conflicts, valuation, cybersecurity and disclosures, but the lens has tightened, and the burden for private fund advisers has grown more exacting.

For Silver, examination priorities aren’t abstract. We review them with our clients during recurring calls, focus on them as part of our forensic testing during annual reviews, help clients refine their documentation, and support them through every stage of the examination process, from preparation to resolution. In 2025, a year marked by meaningful shifts in the SEC’s enforcement landscape, our partnership with private fund advisers mattered more than ever. Although the SEC brought only 90 enforcement actions against investment advisers in FY 2025, down from more than 130 in the prior fiscal year, investment adviser-related cases remained one of the most active categories of enforcement. The dip was widely attributed to transition-related slowdowns and enforcement-staff attrition following the administration change, rather than a reduced regulatory focus.

Against this backdrop, our Compliance Team saw firsthand how theory became practice: where disclosures held up, where valuation assumptions were questioned, and where operational inconsistencies led to avoidable findings. That real-world experience gives us a ground-level perspective not just on what the SEC says it will prioritize, but how those priorities actually materialize during exams. What follows is our analysis of the 2026 landscape, paired with insights from how the 2025 priorities played out for the firms we supported.

Looking Back: How the 2025 Exam Priorities Played Out in Practice

Based on Silver’s work supporting private fund managers through examinations in 2025, several recurring patterns emerged. While the SEC does not publish granular exam-by-exam findings, our involvement across multiple engagements revealed the following consistent pressure points:

• Disclosures Must Match Reality – Examiners closely evaluated whether valuation approaches, liquidity assumptions, conflict disclosures and side-letter terms aligned with advisers’ actual practices. Even small inconsistencies triggered follow-up questions or additional document requests.

• Fee and Expense Transparency Emerged as a Key Area of Examination – Private credit and private fund managers faced targeted scrutiny around financing expenses, post-commitment-period management-fee calculations, broken-deal costs and affiliated-service-provider arrangements.

• Rapid Growth Requires Scalable Compliance Programs – Advisers launching new funds or expanding into private credit were pressed on whether their compliance infrastructure, including supervision, testing and documentation, kept pace with the firm’s evolving operations.

• Cyber and Vendor Governance Are No Longer Peripheral – Examiners placed greater weight on outdated vendor-management documentation, insufficient incident-response testing and inconsistent data-governance practices, reflecting the agency’s growing emphasis on technology-driven risks.

Silver’s Take

2025 exams rewarded firms that approached compliance as an integrated business function, one tied to valuation, operations, technology, marketing and client disclosure. Managers with strong documentation and a consistent compliance narrative fared meaningfully better. These real-world insights shape how we interpret and help firms prepare for the SEC’s 2026 Examination Priorities.

Key Themes from the SEC’s 2026 Exam Priorities

For registered investment advisers and private fund managers, the SEC’s 2026 Examination Priorities underscore the growing alignment between regulatory expectations and real-world risks. As firms diversify strategies, launch new vehicles or expand into private markets, the SEC is signaling heightened expectations across the following critical areas:

1. Fiduciary Standards Under a Sharper Lens – The SEC’s 2026 priorities reaffirm that fiduciary duty remains the anchor of adviser oversight, but the bar is rising. Examiners will scrutinize how advisers evaluate long lock-ups, liquidity constraints and complex exit assumptions, and whether conflicts are fully addressed in side-by-side structures.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: Firms should revisit disclosures, allocation policies, and liquidity analyses to ensure the rationale behind investment decisions is clearly documented and consistently applied.

2. Private Credit, Illiquid Strategies and Extended Lock-Ups in the Spotlight – The 2026 Priorities explicitly call out alternative investments – private funds, private credit vehicles and funds with long lock-ups – as areas of increased exam focus. The SEC is particularly attuned to valuation practices, stress testing, redemption rights and investor-specific terms.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: Managers should closely review valuation files, stress-testing outputs, side-letter logs and fee/expense-allocation practices for completeness, accuracy and consistency.

3. Prove Your Infrastructure Can Keep Up for Fund Launches and Side-by-Side Management – Advisers that recently launched private funds or manage both private funds and SMAs should expect closer inspection. Examiners are increasingly focused on whether new or expanding platforms have the governance and controls necessary to prevent preferential treatment, inconsistent fees or disclosure gaps.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: Robust allocation procedures, strong conflict-management controls and enhanced disclosure tracking will be critical.

4. Integration Risk Moves Front and Center for M&A and Business Restructuring – Advisers that have undergone M&A or significant organizational change will be flagged as higher risk in 2026. Integration-related inconsistencies, such as outdated disclosures, inconsistent fee billing or legacy systems, remain one of the most common challenges during examinations.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: Firms should assess whether legacy processes, investor communications and operational controls have been harmonized into a single, consistent framework.

5. The SEC Wants Proof, Not Promises, When it Comes to Technology, AI, Cybersecurity and Vendor Oversight – With a newly established Cyber and Emerging Technologies Unit and the amendments to Regulation S-P, the SEC is expanding its expectations around AI oversight, cybersecurity posture, vendor governance and data-protection protocols. Examiners will look beyond the existence of controls to evaluate whether they are tested, monitored and updated.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: AI oversight frameworks, cybersecurity testing, vendor-diligence logs and incident-response documentation are no longer optional.

6. Increased Attention on Retail Distribution Channels for Alternatives – As more retail-facing vehicles offer private-market exposure, the SEC is broadening its oversight to include liquidity mechanisms, valuation approaches, fee structures and marketing accuracy. Retail participation raises expectations and risks for advisers offering or supporting these strategies.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: Firms should reassess liquidity assumptions, investor communications and marketing materials to ensure clarity, suitability and alignment with regulatory expectations.

7. Crypto’s Absence in 2026: Why It Matters (and Why Risk Hasn’t Decreased) – One of the most notable changes in the 2026 Examination Priorities is what isn’t included: crypto-assets and digital-asset advisers no longer appear as a standalone focus area. In previous years, the SEC explicitly highlighted digital-asset custody, trading platforms, pricing and blockchain-related risks. It’s important to underscore here that their omission in 2026 signals a strategic reframing, not a retreat. Instead of treating crypto as an emerging, specialized category, regulators are now embedding digital-asset oversight within core themes such as custody, valuation, safeguarding client assets, cybersecurity, marketing accuracy and conflicts of interest.

• • Silver’s Recommendation: Crypto-native advisers and advisers with tokenized funds, digital-asset exposure or blockchain-based strategies should not interpret the omission as a reduction in scrutiny. Examiners will likely continue to evaluate digital-asset practices through traditional adviser obligations, making robust custody controls, valuation procedures, cyber governance and disclosure accuracy more critical than ever.