Erez Law Files Claim for YES Losses Due to Investments with UBS Financial Services

Posted on Monday, August 19th, 2019 at 8:10 pm    

UBS Financial Services Inc. logo

Erez Law recently filed a FINRA arbitration against UBS Financial Services Inc. for Yield Enhancement Strategy (YES) program losses. The customer alleges that UBS recommended the client invest in the YES program and suffered significant losses.

The Erez Law clients, who were longtime clients UBS Financial Services Inc., allege the following in the newly filed FINRA claim:

The couple informed UBS that they could not afford to lose their irreplaceable savings entrusted to UBS. The clients wanted to preserve their principal and were not interested in high-risk investment strategies at UBS. UBS assured the couple that the investments and strategies he recommended were consistent with their desire to avoid high-risk investments and strategies at UBS Financial Services.

Regrettably, UBS recommended a speculative and unsuitable investment strategy which it misrepresented as a sage income generating strategy.

It is alleged that UBS recommended the couple enroll in UBS’S high-risk and unsuitable YES program. UBS was targeting high net worth investors to whom to sell its lucrative and fatally flawed strategy.

According to the claim, UBS’s YES program was represented to investors as a low risk strategy that allows investors to generate enhanced yield while reducing risk, all without requiring investors to deposit additional funds into their UBS account. UBS’S YES program involves using the equity in an investor’s UBS account to pursue a purportedly low-risk options strategy involving a combination of put and call options on the S&P 500 index. UBS touted its YES program as employing a “market neutral” options strategy known as an “iron condor,” named for the strategy’s profit/loss diagram.

An iron condor strategy seeks to generate income through the sale of “out-of-the-money” put and call options contracts, while providing hedging against losses through the purchase of further out-of-the-money put and call options on the same asset to limit the investor’s downside risk.

The iron condor strategy is intended to be a market neutral strategy, which means that is not a directional wager that the price of the underlying asset will increase or decrease in value, but rather the strategy seeks to profit from a relative lack of volatility in the price of the underlying asset. In other words, the investor is wagering that the underlying asset’s price will remain within a specified trading range, allowing all of the options to expire worthless, at which point the investor retains the premiums received from the sale of the options (minus the cost of purchasing the options that were used to limit the downside exposure.) In the event the price of the underlying asset increases or decreases significantly, the purchased put or call options would provide a maximum limit to the investor’s downside risk. In the case of UBS’s YES program, the investor’s profits would also be reduced by UBS’s YES program advisory fees.

UBS made numerous representations designed to communicate the safety of the YES program including but not limited to:

UBS’S marketing materials emphasized that the YES program purportedly minimized the risk of losses by providing investors with downside protection in the event of market volatility and that UBS would “manage risk” by hedging and actively monitoring positions.

Consistent with UBS’s marketing materials, UBS represented to investors that the YES program was a great investment vehicle that would allow the couple to generate increased returns with “de minimis” downside risk, all while requiring no additional investment of capital.

In fact, it is alleged that UBS represented to investors that even in the event of unfavorable market conditions, the YES program would “protect downside” and only suffer “minimal losses” of “a few thousand dollars.” This was grossly misleading and untrue.

According to the claim, UBS represented to the couple that UBS’s YES program had “excellent risk metrics and downside protection” and would allow the clients to increase returns while at the same time reducing risk.

Contrary to UBS’s representations, the YES program it recommended involved significant risk of loss of principal and was not a market neutral strategy. Furthermore, the returns were not based on time decay in options prices or the difference between realized volatility and implied volatility as claimed by UBS. The YES strategy actively engaged in market timing and took directional positions on the market and suffered significant losses as a result.

Erez Law represents investors in the United States for claims against brokers and brokerage firms for wrongdoing. If and have experienced investment losses, please call us at 888-840-1571 or complete our contact form for a free consultation. Erez Law is a nationally recognized law firm representing individuals, trusts, corporations and institutions in claims against brokerage firms, banks and insurance companies on a contingency fee basis.