SEI Investments Company (SEIC) Risk Analysis

. As part of our strategy, we may pursue new business models or distribution channels to drive growth, and these strategic shifts carry their own risks. For example, while we have explored and in some cases engage in direct-to-consumer (B2C) offerings, serving individual investors directly can increase operational and regulatory complexity: it entails handling a much larger number of client accounts and transactions, which raises the possibility of processing errors or fraud and generally drives higher servicing costs. Direct consumer engagement also heightens exposure to cybersecurity threats and data privacy concerns, since a breach or service disruption could impact a broad retail client base and attract greater scrutiny from regulators and the public. Participating in consumer markets may require substantial investments in marketing, support infrastructure, and compliance capabilities that differ from our institutional business, and we face established competitors in the retail financial services space. More broadly, any significant shift in our business model, broadening our offerings or presence in existing markets or geographies, or entry into a new market segment or geography, technology-driven platforms, or partnerships, can take considerable time to yield results, and there is no guarantee of success. These initiatives might not generate meaningful revenue or profit for several years, if at all, and their ultimate viability is uncertain. If our strategic expansions or innovations are not executed effectively, or if they fail to resonate with target customers, we could divert management attention and capital without adequate return. In turn, an unsuccessful business model innovation could undermine our growth prospects and earnings. Conversely, if we were to misjudge or hesitate in adapting to industry changes, for instance, failing to offer services in channels that clients prefer, we could lose relevance. Overall, managing the evolution of our business model in response to technological change and market trends is a delicate task; failure to balance innovation with effective execution and risk control in this area could adversely affect our competitive position and financial performance.

Our businesses are subject to privacy and data protection laws, including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act in the U.S., the EU's General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Canada's PIPEDA, and similar laws in other jurisdictions. These laws impose strict requirements on data handling, cross-border transfers, and cybersecurity, with significant fines and litigation risk for noncompliance. Increasing global scrutiny of personal data practices may lead to stricter regulations, limiting information sharing among affiliates or with third parties and increasing compliance costs.

We rely on open-source software components in the development and operation of certain products and services. While open-source software offers flexibility and cost advantages, it also introduces risks, including security vulnerabilities, inconsistent maintenance, and potential exposure to malicious code. Open-source components may not be subject to the same rigorous testing and security standards as proprietary software, increasing the risk of exploitation by cyber attackers. In addition, failure to comply with open-source license terms could result in legal liability, reputational harm, or restrictions on our ability to use or distribute certain technologies. The widespread use of open-source software in the financial services industry also creates systemic risk, as vulnerabilities in widely adopted libraries can propagate across multiple platforms. We may be required to expend significant resources to monitor, patch, and remediate vulnerabilities in open-source components. Failure to adequately manage these risks could adversely affect our operations, regulatory compliance, and financial performance.

The financial services industry is subject to extensive and evolving regulations that impact our business globally. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations, rules, and codes of conduct could result in legal or regulatory sanctions, material financial loss (including fines, penalties, judgments, damages, or settlements), and reputational harm. Compliance obligations include privacy, anti-money laundering ("AML"), anti-corruption, and sanctions requirements, as well as operational resilience and consumer protection standards. We operate under the oversight of multiple U.S. regulators, including the SEC, FINRA, CFTC, NFA, DOL, OCC, and state banking authorities, and our parent company is regulated by the FFIEC and subject to SEC oversight. Our foreign subsidiaries are regulated in jurisdictions such as the United Kingdom, Ireland, Canada, Luxembourg, South Africa, and the Cayman Islands. Regulatory initiatives often differ across jurisdictions, creating complexity and potential competitive disadvantages for multi-jurisdictional operations. Compliance with existing and emerging regulations, responding to examinations, and adapting to supervisory activities can significantly impact our operations, increase costs, and affect our ability to provide certain products or services. Rapid regulatory change also creates staffing challenges, as specialized expertise is required to manage compliance effectively.

. Our operations involve complex processes that require accuracy and judgment, particularly in fund accounting, investment operations, and pricing services. These activities include manual trade placement and other transaction processing steps, which carry inherent risk of human error. Mistakes in trade execution or manual processing could result in financial losses, regulatory issues, and reputational harm. Valuations of certain assets depend on active markets and involve considerable judgment. If these valuations prove inaccurate, our revenues and earnings from assets under management could be adversely affected.

We provide fiduciary management services to institutional clients, including defined benefit and defined contribution plans. The ongoing decline in defined benefit plans in the U.S., U.K., and Canada has reduced revenue opportunities in this segment. Fee sensitivity and competition for fiduciary services have intensified, particularly as clients shift toward passive strategies and lower-cost solutions. Our growth strategy includes expanding into global markets and focusing on not-for-profit organizations, but these initiatives may not fully offset revenue declines.

Climate change and ESG considerations present additional risks that could affect our operations, financial performance, and reputation. Extreme weather events may disrupt our operations or damage assets, including real estate investments, while the transition to a low-carbon economy may affect client financial health, reduce revenues, and increase credit risk. Our reputation and client relationships may also be harmed by our involvement-or perceived involvement-in industries linked to climate change. Regulatory developments, such as the EU's ESG fund naming guidelines and U.S. state-level ESG enforcement actions, increase compliance complexity, and the lack of global harmonization in ESG standards creates fragmentation and competitive challenges. Stakeholder expectations regarding ESG commitments are evolving rapidly, and failure to meet ESG targets or allegations of "greenwashing" could lead to litigation, regulatory enforcement, and reputational damage. The politicization of ESG practices amplifies these risks.

The financial services industry is highly competitive and is being reshaped by consolidation and technological disruption, including the changes in the technology development and the delivery of services related to automation, artificial intelligence and machine learning. These dynamics continue to pressure our fees, challenge our market share, and could adversely affect our revenues and earnings. The investment management business has relatively low barriers to entry, and in recent years we have faced persistent pricing pressure. New competitors (including fintech startups and automated "robo-advisors") have introduced lower-cost investment products and services, while investor preferences have shifted toward low-fee passive strategies. These trends have driven a general decline in fee levels across many market segments. We expect this price competition to continue; investors are demanding more value for less cost and established firms and new entrants alike are cutting fees or margins to win business. If we are forced to reduce the fees for our services or cannot match the pricing of competitors, our profit margins and earnings will likely suffer. Moreover, advances in technology are accelerating this trend. For example, some competitors are beginning to deploy artificial intelligence-driven pricing and portfolio management, which could enable them to optimize service pricing or investment performance in ways that attract clients. Firms that successfully leverage these innovations may gain a significant competitive advantage, making it harder for us to retain or grow our client base. Beyond pricing pressure, the competitive landscape is evolving with the entry of non-traditional players, including fintech firms and large technology companies ("big tech"), into asset management and processing services. Many of these new entrants boast superior technological capabilities or well-known consumer brands, and in some cases, they operate under lighter regulatory constraints than diversified financial institutions like SEI. Additionally, advances in artificial intelligence have also made the development of technology solutions more attainable to a broader range of firms and potentially require less capital-intensive business models. These differences can give competitors a cost or agility advantage. A tech-driven rival with lower compliance costs or a disruptive business model can potentially offer services at a lower price point or deliver innovative client experiences that we might find difficult to match under our existing cost, regulatory and operating framework. If we fail to compete effectively against these emerging players, we could lose market share to firms that are not as burdened by regulation or that benefit from technology-based advantages. At the same time, consolidation in the financial services industry is altering the competitive environment. Over the past several years, numerous firms in our space have merged, been acquired, or exited the business. As competitors combine, the survivors often emerge larger and with more resources, including broader product lines and more geographically diverse client bases. We could increasingly find ourselves up against a smaller number of much larger competitors with greater capital, scale, and range of services. These consolidated firms might be able to invest more heavily in technology, withstand fee reductions, or bundle a wider array of services, making competition more intense in the segments we serve. There is also the possibility of entirely new competitors arising from consolidation or realignment in adjacent industries (for example, a large technology or consulting firm acquiring capabilities to enter our markets). Heightened competition from any of these sources, whether traditional peers, fintech/big tech entrants, or enlarged consolidated institutions, puts pressure on the key factors by which we differentiate ourselves and could impair our growth. We compete across multiple dimensions. SEI's business model offers a broad suite of integrated investment management programs and back-office processing services, often delivered on a bundled basis through our proprietary platforms (such as the SEI Wealth Platform ?and TRUST 3000 ). The breadth of this offering allows us to contend on a number of factors, including the performance of our investment products, the value of our fee structure, the quality and reliability of our operational services, our reputation and track record in the industry, and our ability to innovate and adapt to clients' changing needs (including adopting new technologies when appropriate). Our success has been built on excelling in these areas simultaneously. However, increased competition on any of these fronts could erode our advantages. Any such competitive erosion would likely lead to a decline in our revenues and earnings. Finally, market consolidation among our own clients poses a strategic risk to our business. Many of SEI's clients are financial institutions and investment managers themselves, and if they engage in mergers or acquisitions, the pool of potential clients can shrink. A merger of two firms that each use our services might result in one combined entity that requires fewer of our solutions (or has duplicate services that get rationalized). In some cases, a larger combined client may decide to internalize functions that we previously provided, using their greater scale to build in-house capabilities instead of outsourcing to SEI. Consequently, consolidation in the markets we serve could reduce the number of clients or the scope of services they outsource, which may limit our opportunities for revenue growth. We may face the dual challenge of winning business from a consolidating client base while also contending with ever-stronger competitors in the marketplace. If we cannot offset these consolidation effects by attracting new business, our future revenue and earnings growth could be negatively impacted. In sum, intensifying competition, whether through fee compression, technology development advantages, disruptive new entrants, or industry consolidation, is an ongoing reality of our industry. We must continue to adapt, invest in innovation, and demonstrate the value of our platforms and services to clients. If we fail to keep pace with these competitive and structural changes, our business and financial results could be adversely affected.