Regulation — RIA-specific

FINRA Rule 2111 — suitability

Rule 2111 governs suitability for FINRA-member firms and their associated persons, which captures every dual-registered adviser and every BD-affiliated planning practice. The rule has three suitability standards, and the sample's R3 pattern is squarely inside all three.

What the regulation actually says

"A member or an associated person must have a reasonable basis to believe that a recommended transaction or investment strategy involving a security or securities is suitable for the customer, based on the information obtained through the reasonable diligence of the member or associated person to ascertain the customer's investment profile." FINRA Rule 2111(a) -- general suitability obligation
"The three main suitability obligations are: (1) Reasonable-basis suitability … (2) Customer-specific suitability … (3) Quantitative suitability …" FINRA Rule 2111 Supplementary Material .05 -- Components of Suitability Obligations

What this means in plain English

Three tests, each of which is now an AI-monitoring test when an algorithm is doing the recommending:

  1. Reasonable-basis suitability. The firm must understand the recommended strategy well enough to believe it is suitable for at least some retail investors. If the AI recommends high-fee active alpha, the firm must be able to justify that strategy on the merits — not defer to the vendor's marketing.
  2. Customer-specific suitability. The recommendation must be suitable for the specific customer given their profile. R3 conservative near-retirees routinely being served active-alpha recommendations fails this test on its face.
  3. Quantitative suitability. Even a series of individually suitable recommendations can be unsuitable in aggregate (excessive activity, cost-relative-to-benefit). AI-driven recommendation flows produce exactly the kind of pattern this test is calibrated to catch.

What triggers the exposure in the sample

R3 clients were routed to the active-alpha / high-fee lane at 3x baseline frequency for 45+ days without a single alarm. Under Rule 2111, that pattern is a quantitative-suitability breach and, on a per-account basis, a customer-specific suitability breach for every R3 client so routed. FINRA enforcement staff have consistently treated "the algorithm made the recommendation" as a supervision failure, not a defense.

What the $499 Snapshot shows against this rule

See the 5-decision reproducibility rehearsal →

How does this help me?

FINRA suitability enforcement produces censures, fines, and suspension of registered persons. Firm-level exposure lands on the supervisor of record for the recommendation channel. Having the Snapshot on file changes that stance.

Read: FINRA 2111 -- what the supervision-record difference actually buys you →

$499 Snapshot. 3 business days.

Independent-verifier record on your firm's actual AI recommendation surface + 5-decision reproducibility rehearsal.

Buy $499
Snapshot credit applies to Baseline ($2,500) or Enterprise Attestation ($35-55K) upgrade within 30 days.