Back to Blog
CSSF6 min read28 March 2025

Top 5 CSSF violations in financial marketing — and how to avoid them

Based on our analysis of 1,200+ Luxembourg fund marketing documents — the violations we see most, with real examples and fixes.

Methodology: This analysis is based on Komplync's compliance engine scanning 1,200+ marketing documents submitted by Luxembourg-regulated fund managers between January and March 2025. Violation frequencies represent the proportion of documents containing at least one instance of each issue.

01

Missing or insufficiently prominent risk warning

Found in ~68% of reviewed documents

Real-world example

"A LinkedIn post promoting a fund's 12% annual return with the risk warning buried at the bottom in grey 8pt text, indistinguishable from legal boilerplate."

How to fix it

The risk warning must appear prominently — same font size as body text, visually distinct (box, bold, or colour), and positioned near the performance claim rather than at the foot of the document.

02

Selective performance periods

Found in ~54% of performance communications

Real-world example

"A factsheet showing a bar chart of 3-year performance starting from a market trough — effectively cherry-picking a period of exceptional outperformance."

How to fix it

Always show a minimum of 5 calendar years of data (or since inception if shorter). The chart period must start from 1 January of the first full year. Year-to-date may be shown as an additional data point, never in isolation.

03

Implied capital protection or guaranteed returns

Found in ~41% of retail communications

Real-world example

"Newsletter opening line: "Invest with confidence — your capital works safely for you." No specific capital protection structure existed for this fund."

How to fix it

Remove all language that implies protection unless there is a contractual capital guarantee in the fund structure — and even then, it must be described precisely. "Safe", "secure", "protected", and "guaranteed" are red flags that trigger automatic CSSF scrutiny.

04

Inconsistency with prospectus or KIID

Found in ~37% of detailed marketing materials

Real-world example

"A fund factsheet describing the investment strategy as 'low risk, income-focused' while the KIID showed a risk indicator of 5/7 and the prospectus described a 'dynamic multi-asset approach'."

How to fix it

Establish a single source of truth for fund descriptors (strategy summary, risk level, key risks, fees) and enforce their verbatim use in all marketing materials. Any change to fund strategy must trigger a marketing content review.

05

Unsubstantiated superlatives and awards

Found in ~29% of brand communications

Real-world example

"Email subject line: "Europe's most trusted fund manager — 25 years of excellence." No Morningstar rating, no independent award citation, no verifiable source."

How to fix it

Any superlative claim ('best', 'top', 'leading', 'most trusted') must be supported by a specific, dated, independently verifiable source cited in the communication. Without a source, remove the claim entirely.

Check your content for all 5 violations automatically

Komplync's engine detects all these patterns — and 10+ more — in under 10 seconds per piece.

Book a demo