Skip to main content
main content, press tab to continue
Article

Tariffs, market volatility and trading errors: Key insurance considerations for asset managers

By Tim Sullivan | May 19, 2025

Insurance coverage can mitigate the risks associated with high trading volumes but understanding how and when coverage applies is critical.
Financial, Executive and Professional Risks (FINEX)
N/A

Swift changes in U.S. trade policy and uncertainty in tariff policies have led to market volatility and a significant increase in trading activity in securities markets. For asset managers, these market swings bring increased risk of trade errors. Understanding the applicability of insurance to mitigate these risks is critical for asset managers.

The impact of market volatility on trading activity and the rise of trade errors

Historically, market volatility presents a range of challenges for the asset management industry. The increased trading activity witnessed during these times can often be followed by trade errors. In 2020, for example, the fear created by the pandemic caused significant volatility in the markets and generated a costly uptick in trading errors.

Trade errors can present themselves in a myriad of ways. Common categories include, but are not limited to, data entry errors, missed deadlines, failure to execute, miscommunicated trade instructions, collateral management failures and breaches of mandate. When such errors occur, asset managers expect their insurance coverage to respond, but the implicated policies and the conditions necessary to access them, may warrant additional clarity.

Potential recovery through insurance policy provisions

When asked whether a loss is covered under a policy, a common refrain within the insurance industry is, “It depends.” That’s because it does indeed depend upon the circumstances of the loss itself, the extent to which the asset manager is legally liable, and the terms and conditions of the specific policy being reviewed. With that in mind, it’s worth commenting on a few notable insurance policies that may respond and some of the provisions that may be invoked, in the event of a trade or trading error:

This coverage is typically afforded as part of the asset manager’s errors & omissions policy. It is intended to reimburse the manager for those amounts it proactively pays to make a harmed investor whole, so long as the loss results from the manager’s error or omission (e.g., a trade error). Cost of Corrections doesn’t require a third-party demand for coverage to apply. Insurers offer this proactive loss mitigation coverage in the hope it will avoid more costly litigation.

Unlike cost of corrections, a third-party claim is required to trigger coverage under an E&O policy, and such claim must allege an error or omission in the performance of, or failure to perform, investment management services (e.g., a trade error). E&O claims are generally brought by investors or regulators, and coverage usually applies to defense and legal expenses as well as any resulting judgments or settlements.

Note: Privately held asset management firms typically include both directors’ & officers’ liability (D&O) and E&O under the same policy. If a claim also includes allegations that the directors and officers committed a wrongful act in their capacity as such (e.g., failing to implement and effectively oversee trading processes), blending the two coverages under one policy mitigates the risk of “finger pointing” between E&O and D&O insurers.

If a trade error causes a loss to a fund and a third-party claim is made against the fund and its directors/trustees alleging a breach of duty or other covered act, this may trigger coverage under the fund’s D&O/E&O liability policy (which may be blended with the asset manager’s D&O/E&O policy). As with the manager, claims are typically brought by harmed investors or regulators, and coverage applies to defense and legal expenses, as well as judgments and settlements.

Coverage considerations when reviewing your policy

Although it depends which of these policies, if any, will respond to a trade error, or to a claim arising out of the trade error, there are steps insureds can take to increase the likelihood of insurance recoveries. Conducting a proactive and thorough review of one’s insurance policies is important and will help mitigate surprises in the event of a loss. Within these policies, certain provisions are particularly relevant and worth reviewing in the context of a trade error, including but not limited to, the following:

  • Claim reporting requirements: One of the most common challenges that arises in the event of a claim is late reporting to the insurance company. All policies require claims, as defined, to be reported within a certain period of time (e.g., 60 days, 90 days) once a predetermined set of individuals (e.g., insurance risk manager, general counsel, etc.) become aware of the claim. Relevant internal stakeholders should be made aware of these reporting obligations and know how to contact those responsible for insurance within their organization.
  • Cost of Corrections reporting requirements: While the reporting requirements may be the same as the D&O/E&O, some insurers impose more restrictive parameters when it comes to Cost of Corrections coverage. In some cases, insurers may require that a trade error be reported within as little as three to five days. Taking steps to further improve internal communication, such as incorporating insurance reporting procedures into the firm’s trade error manual, will mitigate the risk of coverage challenges due to late reporting.
  • Trade error: When discussing Cost of Corrections coverage, the term “trade error” can be used liberally and may not align with the actual language found in the policy. For example, some insurers’ policies may capture many of the trade error categories previously mentioned, while others will define the term to mean data entry errors only. Knowing the parameters of this coverage ahead of time will avoid future surprises.
  • Defense/legal expenses: Most policies require insurer approval before specific law firms can be engaged and before defense and legal expenses can be incurred. Reviewing and understanding these requirements in advance will reduce friction if a loss or claim occurs.
  • Regulatory coverage: FundFire recently reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission may soon examine the resiliency of asset managers’ risk frameworks, their compliance with the marketing rule and how they performed during the tariff-driven volatility. As this may signal heightened regulatory risk, asset managers should consider the coverage available for such claims under the D&O/E&O policy.
  • Mock audit: Some D&O/E&O insurers will cover a percentage of costs associated with a mock regulatory audit of the insured organization. Such audits may strengthen the risk profile of an insured. Asset managers should take advantage of this benefit where possible.

It’s worth noting that coverage may differ depending on geography, market conditions, risk profile and claim history. Organizations should discuss with their broker the breadth of the coverage provided by their insurance policies in relation to these coverage considerations.

Disclaimer

WTW hopes you found the general information provided here informative and helpful. The information contained herein is not intended to constitute legal or other professional advice and should not be relied upon in lieu of consultation with your own legal advisors. In the event you would like more information regarding your insurance coverage, please do not hesitate to reach out to us. In North America, WTW offers insurance products through licensed entities, including Willis Towers Watson Northeast, Inc. (in the United States) and Willis Canada Inc. (in Canada).

Author


Asset Management Industry Leader, US
email Email

Contact


Global Head of FINEX Financial Institutions
email Email

Contact us