Imagine you are finalizing an investment memorandum for a portfolio that includes a significant stake in a logistics firm. During your due diligence, you discover that the parent company of your Portfolio Manager (PM) is a major supplier to this logistics firm, providing it with essential IT infrastructure services. As an analyst, you must decide how this structural relationship influences the investment thesis and, more importantly, how it must be communicated to the client to remain compliant with SEBI regulations.
Related party disclosures are not merely a regulatory checkbox; they are the primary mechanism for maintaining the fiduciary integrity of a Portfolio Manager. Under the SEBI (Portfolio Managers) Regulations, these disclosures must explicitly identify any entity or individual linked to the manager that could potentially benefit from the investment decisions made on behalf of the client. By formalizing these disclosures in the Disclosure Document, the PM acknowledges that objective analysis might be clouded by personal or group-level financial interests.
These disclosures matter because they address the inherent agency problem where a manager’s firm could profit at the expense of the portfolio’s performance. For instance, if a PM directs client capital into a fund or a business owned by a brother or a subsidiary of their own parent company, the client assumes an ‘hidden’ risk that the investment was chosen for convenience or mutual gain rather than superior risk-adjusted returns.
When these relationships are disclosed, the client is empowered to judge whether the potential for conflict undermines the integrity of the investment process.
Consider the practical application during the selection of a third-party brokerage or custodian. If a Portfolio Manager chooses a brokerage firm that happens to be an associate of the PM’s parent company, they must disclose whether this selection was made purely on the basis of competitive execution quality or due to the ‘related party’ connection. Failure to detail these arrangements effectively hides a potential bias in transaction costs and service reliability.
Consequently, an analyst assessing a fund must treat a lack of specific, granular disclosures as a significant qualitative risk factor that could lower the overall governance rating of the strategy.
Ultimately, transparent communication regarding these parties allows for a ‘sunlight is the best disinfectant’ approach to capital management. By ensuring all potential conflicts are documented, the Portfolio Manager shifts the burden of risk acceptance to the client, who can make an informed decision based on the full scope of the manager’s ecosystem. For those preparing for the SEBI exam, remember that the goal is not to eliminate all potential conflicts, but to bring them into the open where they can be scrutinized by the investor and the regulator alike.
Nuance
Check Your Understanding
A Portfolio Manager frequently executes trades through a brokerage firm that is a subsidiary of the manager’s own investment firm. According to SEBI regulations, how should this arrangement be handled?
Which of the following scenarios constitutes a related party disclosure requirement for a Portfolio Manager under the 2020 Regulations?
This is a companion read for Section 12.8 — SEBI requirements on performance disclosure from PASS Investment Adviser (Level 1) by Akhilesh Gururani, available on Amazon Kindle.
Copyright © 2026 HABSG Consulting