Management mandate: a missed capital gain does not, in itself, constitute a regulatory breach on the part of the manager

The focus is on conduct: whether the manager followed the agreed mandate, acted with due skill and care, managed conflicts, documented investment decisions, and communicated risks and performance clearly. For compliance teams, this is a useful reminder that outcome-based complaints should be assessed against process, suitability, and contractual obligations rather than investment results alone. Firms with French clients or AMF-authorized portfolio management activity should review mandate documentation, investment policy statements, client risk profiles, and complaint-handling procedures.

They should ensure advisers and portfolio managers can evidence the rationale for investment decisions, including why a particular gain was not captured, and that client communications avoid implying guaranteed returns. The decision also reinforces the need to distinguish regulatory breach from commercial disappointment. Action items: refresh complaint triage for performance-related claims; strengthen record-keeping around discretionary decisions; train staff on explaining opportunity cost and market risk; and monitor ombudsman themes for escalation triggers.

UK firms with cross-border exposure should consider whether similar conduct expectations apply under FCA rules, particularly where clients receive personal recommendations or discretionary management. Overall, the publication is not a new rule, but it provides useful supervisory intelligence for managing expectations and defending conduct-based complaints.