Performance Time Period Presentation

The SEC Marketing Rule requires that any performance results you present include standardized time periods of 1, 5, and 10 years (or since inception if the track record is shorter), with each period shown with equal prominence and ending no earlier than the most recent calendar year-end. Build a repeatable process that forces these periods into every advertisement and retains backup for dates, calculations, and approvals. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Key takeaways:

• Always show 1-, 5-, and 10-year performance (or since inception), with equal prominence. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• The reporting “as of” date must be no less recent than the latest calendar year-end. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• Operationalize with templates, pre-trade review checklists, and evidence packages tied to each ad’s final output. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

“Performance time period presentation” is one of the easiest Marketing Rule issues to get wrong because it looks like a formatting detail but functions like an anti-cherry-picking control. If marketing shows “1-year” returns because it looks good, or shows “since inception” only because it’s flattering, the SEC expects your process to force the standard periods into the ad, at the same visual weight, and as of an acceptable date.

For a CCO or GRC lead, the goal is operational clarity: define what counts as “performance results,” define what “equal prominence” means for your channels, standardize the “as of” dating rule, and build review steps that stop non-compliant materials before they publish. Then retain an evidence pack that allows an examiner to recreate what you ran, why the periods were compliant, and how the numbers were calculated.

This page translates the requirement into a workflow you can implement across factsheets, pitchbooks, RFP decks, websites, social posts, and third-party distributor materials—without relying on ad hoc judgment calls. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Regulatory text

Requirement (operator summary): If you present performance results, you must include 1-, 5-, and 10-year performance results, or since inception if the track record is less than 10 years. Each period must be presented with equal prominence and must end on a date no less recent than the most recent calendar year-end. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

What this means in practice:

• You cannot “headline” only the best time horizon (for example, only 1-year) if you are presenting performance results. You must show the full set of required periods together. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• “Equal prominence” is a presentation standard, not a math standard. Examiners will look at font size, placement, order, and whether one period is highlighted while others are buried. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• The “as of” date cannot be stale relative to the most recent calendar year-end. If you are past year-end, your performance table cannot end before that year-end date. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Plain-English interpretation (what you’re being asked to do)

If your firm shows performance, you must show a balanced picture over multiple standard horizons so a reader can assess consistency and cyclicality. The SEC wants the audience to see short-, mid-, and long-term results together, presented fairly, with a current-enough ending date. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Who it applies to

Entity scope

• Registered investment advisers and managers preparing advertisements that contain performance results. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Operational scope (where this shows up)

You should apply this control to any channel that can be an “advertisement” with performance results, including:

• Pitchbooks, factsheets, tear sheets, strategy brochures
• RFP/RFI responses and “capabilities” decks with performance pages
• Website performance pages, client portals used for marketing, and downloadable PDFs
• Social posts, email marketing, and one-page “highlights” if they include performance results
• Materials prepared by third parties on your behalf (placement agents, distributors, marketing agencies) if you approve or are involved in dissemination

What you actually need to do (step-by-step)

1) Define “performance results” for your review perimeter

Create a short internal definition used by Marketing, Investor Relations, and Compliance. Include:

• Gross and net returns
• Model, strategy, composite, portfolio, or account-level returns
• Benchmarks shown side-by-side with strategy returns
• Any chart, table, or “since inception” statement that implies performance

Control outcome: reviewers should not debate whether a page “counts.” If it’s performance, the time-period rule triggers. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

2) Standardize the required periods and “as of” date logic

Implement a single rule that marketing cannot override:

• Default display: 1-, 5-, and 10-year
• If track record is shorter than 10 years: show since inception in place of 10-year, and still include 1- and 5-year where available (or since inception if even shorter)
• Ending date: no less recent than the most recent calendar year-end

Operational tip: bake these into performance tables in your reporting system and into PowerPoint/HTML templates so the periods appear automatically. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

3) Set an “equal prominence” house standard you can audit

Write a one-page style standard that defines “equal prominence” by channel. Examples:

• Tables: all required periods in the same table, same font size, same row/column styling; no conditional coloring that highlights only one period.
• Charts: if you label 1-year prominently, label 5- and 10-year/since inception in the same visual field and comparable type size.
• Executive summary pages: if you show a callout number, it must either (a) include all required periods in the callout area, or (b) avoid performance callouts and direct readers to the standardized table.

Make it concrete enough that a reviewer can say “pass/fail” without subjective debate. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

4) Build a pre-publication checklist that forces compliance

Add required questions to your ad review workflow (email, ticketing system, or a tool like Daydream):

• Does the material include performance results?
• Are 1-, 5-, and 10-year (or since inception) included?
• Are all required periods equally prominent?
• Does the “as of” date end no earlier than the most recent calendar year-end?
• Is calculation methodology disclosure included where required by your internal standard (align this with your broader Marketing Rule disclosures program)?

The checklist should be mandatory for approval, not “guidance.” (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

5) Control third-party-created content

If a third party drafts marketing pieces, require:

• Use of your locked templates
• Submission of working files (not just PDFs) for review
• A written instruction that performance pages must not be modified outside the standardized tables/blocks

Daydream can help here by centralizing intake, versioning, and approval evidence so third-party drafts do not bypass the same controls you apply internally.

6) Spot-check what actually got published

Your risk is not only “what got approved,” but “what went live.”

• Periodically sample the website, outbound emails, and distributor portals for performance pages
• Confirm the published version matches the approved version (same “as of” date and table)

Required evidence and artifacts to retain

Retain an “evidence pack” per advertisement containing performance results:

1. Final approved version (PDF, PPT, HTML capture)
2. Backup performance report showing 1-, 5-, 10-year/since inception results and the ending date
3. Calculation methodology support (the specific report settings or calculation memo your team uses to generate returns, plus any disclosures you attach)
4. Review and approval record: who reviewed, when, and what changes were required
5. Version history: drafts that show how non-compliant presentations were corrected (useful in exams to prove the control works)

If you use Daydream for ad review, the goal is simple: one system of record that ties the artifact, comments, approvals, and final output together.

Common exam/audit questions and hangups

Expect questions like:

• “Show me your policy for performance time periods and equal prominence.” (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• “How do you prevent marketing from highlighting only the best period?” (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• “How do you determine the ‘as of’ date for performance tables, and what happens after year-end?” (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• “Give me a sample of ads where performance appears outside the main fact sheet page (email snippets, social, website banners). How did you apply the rule there?” (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• “How do you supervise third-party distributors using your materials?” (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Hangup to plan for: teams often have strong controls for the full factsheet, but weaker controls for excerpts, “highlight” slides, and web snippets that still contain performance.

Frequent implementation mistakes (and how to avoid them)

1. Mistake: Callout boxes that feature only 1-year performance.
   Fix: Either remove performance from callouts or include all required periods in the callout in the same styling as the main table. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

2. Mistake: “Since inception” shown even when a 10-year period exists, because it looks better.
   Fix: Use since inception only when the track record is less than 10 years for the required long period presentation. If you also want since inception, present it without crowding out the required set and keep prominence balanced. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

3. Mistake: Performance table ends at quarter-end while the firm is already past year-end, but no one updates the template.
   Fix: Add a year-end “hard stop” in your performance reporting calendar and block publication of any performance pages with an “as of” date earlier than the most recent calendar year-end. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

4. Mistake: Equal prominence interpreted narrowly as “same page,” but 5- and 10-year are in tiny footnotes.
   Fix: Document your equal prominence standard for each channel, then test it with real samples. If a neutral reader would miss a period, it is not equally prominent. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Enforcement context and risk implications

No public enforcement cases were provided in the supplied sources for this specific requirement. Your practical risk is examination deficiency findings and remediation work if your materials systematically omit required periods, present them with unequal prominence, or use stale end dates. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Treat this requirement as a preventative control against misleading performance presentation. Operationally, it reduces “marketing drift,” where teams gradually simplify performance disclosures for conversion or aesthetics.

Practical execution plan (30/60/90)

First 30 days (stabilize and stop the bleeding)

• Inventory all active channels where performance appears (factsheets, decks, website pages, email templates, distributor portals).
• Freeze non-standard templates; require use of a single approved performance table format.
• Publish an “equal prominence” style guide and a one-page rule summary for Marketing and IR. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Days 31–60 (build durable workflow)

• Implement a mandatory checklist in your ad review process that includes required periods, equal prominence, and year-end dating. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)
• Create an evidence-pack standard and train reviewers on what must be saved.
• Add third-party instructions and require third-party drafts to flow through the same review queue (Daydream or your existing GRC workflow).

Days 61–90 (test and prove)

• Run a lookback sample of recently used materials and document any remediations.
• Perform a publication spot-check (approved vs published) and document results.
• Tighten controls for “performance excerpts” (one-pagers, summary slides, social/email snippets) where defects are most common. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Frequently Asked Questions

If our strategy has only a 7-year track record, what periods must we show?

Show 1-year, 5-year, and since inception, presented with equal prominence. The long period becomes “since inception” because the track record is less than 10 years. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

What does “equal prominence” mean for a pitch deck where the first slide shows a single performance number?

A single-number performance headline is high risk. Either redesign the slide to show the full 1-/5-/10-year (or since inception) set together in the same visual treatment, or remove performance from the headline and point to the standardized table. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Do we need to update materials at every quarter-end?

The rule sets a minimum freshness requirement tied to the most recent calendar year-end. You can update more frequently, but you must not present performance ending earlier than the most recent calendar year-end once that date has passed. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Our website shows a performance chart, and the user can change date ranges. How do we comply?

Ensure the default view (and any “featured” view) includes the required standardized periods with equal prominence and an acceptable ending date. Keep evidence of the default settings and the data source used to render the chart. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

Can we show “since inception” even if we have 10 years of data?

The requirement is to include 1-, 5-, and 10-year periods (or since inception if less than 10 years). If you also show since inception as supplemental, keep prominence balanced so the required periods are not visually subordinated. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)

What’s the minimum evidence we should retain for an exam?

Keep the final disseminated version, the backup performance calculation output showing the required periods and “as of” date, and a dated approval record showing compliance review. A version trail is helpful if changes were made to correct prominence or missing periods. (17 CFR § 275.206(4)-1)