GLG Insider Trading

The Impact Of GLG Insider Trading Allegations: A Deep Dive Into The Controversy


The GLG insider trading allegations have had a significant impact on the financial industry. The scandal, involving some of the biggest names in finance, has raised a lot of questions about the integrity of the market and the potential consequences of insider trading. This article will provide a deep dive into the controversy, detailing the allegations, the players involved, and the implications for ethical trading practices in the future. Furthermore, this article will explore whether insider trading is still a problem in the finance industry.

About GLG

Gerson Lehrman Group (GLG) is an American professional services firm that operates an expert network connecting clients with expertise for business advice. The company offers a platform for clients to source business advice from a network of over 500,000 experts.

In 1999, GLG became a global leader in knowledge sourcing, providing access to professionals with specific industry or topic knowledge. A proprietary research process connects clients with experts for unique, real-time insight. GLG’s global network consists of over 500,000 industry experts who make themselves available to provide insight to clients via private calls, webinars, surveys, and more. GLG maintains a detailed client data collection to allow for expert targeting for any research needs.

GLG is used by Fortune 500 companies and institutions, including corporations, consulting firms, investment firms, academic institutions, and non-profits. Clients use GLG for research, including market and consumer trends, competitive intelligence, corporate strategy, product design, and other strategic initiatives.

Overview Of GLG Insider Trading

GLG Insider Trading

GLG, formerly Gerson Lehrman Group, is a leading primary research firm providing services to clients in the investment and finance industry. The company’s primary research services help industry experts provide decision-makers with the latest insights and market intelligence.

In 2004, GLG was the subject of an investigation by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), in relation to accusations of insider trading and the misuse of confidential information. 

The SEC alleged that GLG had received inside information from a hedge fund client about impending corporate transactions. GLG then passed this information on to other clients and encouraged them to purchase shares of the companies involved, resulting in profits to them when the transactions were announced. The SEC concluded that GLG unlawfully allowed the hedge fund client to use inside information to manipulate the market and obtain a trading advantage. 

GLG settled with the SEC without admitting or denying the violations. The company settled by paying a penalty of $1 million and agreeing to a cease-and-desist order to refrain from future violations. 

GLG changed its corporate policy to ensure that confidential client information is not misused. And implemented a new anti-information leak program to ensure that insiders do not use material non-public information for their own gain. GLG also adopted a policy prohibiting employees from trading securities at the same time as clients.

People Involved 

Gerson Lehrman Group (GLG) is an American research firm based in New York City. The SEC investigated alleged insider trading in GLG in June 2020. The case involved people, all either fired or suspended from the company, as follows.

Robert Tennant 

Robert, allegedly involved in insider trading, was a project manager at GLG. He allegedly shared confidential information with members of the firm, such as information regarding upcoming projects and company performance. He was sacked by the corporation when the investigation began. 

Miranda Anderson  

Miranda was a consultant at GLG and was also accused of sharing confidential information with members of the firm. Someone alleged that she shared valuable information about the firm’s financials, operations and other sensitive topics. The firm suspended Miranda during the investigation and eventually fired her.

Marc Schaefer  

Marc was an analyst and reportedly shared insider trading information with clients. The company fired him for improper trades . This is based on the confidential information he had access to.

Taylor Engstrom 

Accusers accused Taylor, a member of the research team at GLG, of advising clients on stock or bonds based on insider information. The firm has suspended him.

David Townsend 

Someone accused David, a senior associate at GLG, of making improper trades based on confidential information. GLG has suspended him during the investigation and terminated his employment.

Jacob Thomson 

Jacob was a financial analyst and reportedly shared insider trading information with clients. The firm suspended him after accusing him of making improper trades based on the confidential information he had access to. And he has since left GLG.

Craig King 

Craig was a consultant at GLG and allegedly shared confidential information with members of the firm. He was accused of using this information to make trades and has since been terminated from the firm. 

Austin Wilke 

Accusers accused Austin, a portfolio manager at GLG, of sharing insider information with clients. The firm suspended him during the investigation and then terminated him.

SAC Capital Advisors (SAC)

SAC Capital Advisors, a prominent hedge fund founded by Steven A. Cohen, was at the center of the insider trading scandal. The firm was known for its aggressive trading strategies and had a reputation for producing substantial returns for its investors. However, this reputation was tarnished when the U.S. government accused SAC of engaging in insider trading activities.

SAC Capital Advisors faced multiple charges related to insider trading, and the allegations indicated that the firm had fostered a culture of using confidential information for trading purposes. The government contended that SAC employees, including portfolio managers and analysts, were encouraged to obtain and use non-public information to gain an unfair advantage in the market.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ) pursued legal actions against SAC, eventually leading to a settlement in which SAC agreed to pay a record $1.8 billion in fines and penalties. The firm also pleaded guilty to insider trading charges, resulting in a significant transformation and downsizing of its operations.

Mathew Martoma

Mathew Martoma was a former portfolio manager at SAC Capital Advisors who played a pivotal role in the insider trading allegations. Martoma was accused of obtaining confidential information from Dr. Sidney Gilman, a prominent neurologist, regarding the results of a clinical trial for an experimental Alzheimer’s drug developed by two pharmaceutical companies, Elan Corporation and Wyeth.

Martoma allegedly met with Dr. Gilman and used the non-public information he received to trade in the stocks of the two pharmaceutical companies. By making substantial trades based on this material, non-public information, SAC Capital was able to avoid significant losses and make substantial profits when the results of the clinical trial were publicly disclosed. Mathew Martoma was ultimately charged with insider trading and securities fraud.

In 2014, Mathew Martoma was found guilty of insider trading. He was sentenced to nine years in prison, making it one of the most significant insider trading convictions in recent years. His conviction served as a strong example of the legal consequences for individuals who engage in insider trading, particularly within the context of a large and influential hedge fund like SAC Capital Advisors.

Dr. Sidney Gilman

Sidney Gilman, a neurologist and a medical expert involved in the clinical trial of the experimental Alzheimer’s drug, was another key figure in the GLG insider trading allegations. Dr. Gilman was accused of sharing confidential, non-public information with Mathew Martoma, who used this information to make profitable trades on behalf of SAC Capital Advisors.

Dr. Gilman’s cooperation with the government was crucial in building the case against Martoma and, indirectly, against SAC. He provided detailed testimony regarding the exchange of information, meetings, and the timeline of events leading up to the illegal trades. Dr. Gilman’s testimony was instrumental in proving insider trading allegations and securing convictions.


GLG Insider Trading

Gerson Lehrman Group (“GLG”) has been the subject of a number of insider trading investigations in recent years. The company is a global network of more than 700,000 consultants and experts who provide management consulting services to corporate clients. In 2020, GLG was investigated by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for potential insider trading violations.

At the center of the controversy were companies that have partnered with GLG in the past. These allegedly included Goldman Sachs, Barclays Plc, Morgan Stanley and Deutsche Bank AG. Investigators found that some of these firms had tipped off their clients about upcoming mergers and acquisitions. The SEC alleged that GLG had provided non-public information to some of these firms, which then passed this information on to their corporate clients. If true, this would constitute an illegal practice of insider trading.

The SEC’s investigation looked into whether GLG had provided different treatment to shareholders who were suspected of benefiting from inside information. Somebody accused certain deals of using GLG’s confidential information for their own financial benefit. Additionally, the SEC questioned the sales practice of GLG’s clients that may have resulted in fraudulent profits.

GLG has denied any wrongdoing and has not been charged with any violations of federal securities laws despite the allegations. The company is continuing to provide its services while the SEC is discussing a possible settlement over the matter. Given the ongoing investigation, it is still unclear what the company’s legal status may be in the future.

Important Controversy

Controversy arose about GLG’s timing of investing in those companies, as it was done shortly prior to their acquisition. Hinting that “insider” knowledge of the imminent takeover was in play. GLG reportedly obtained this knowledge through its high-level network of consultants, said to include wealthy business owners, government officials, and other well-connected people.

Several government agencies, including the SEC, Justice Department, and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), have doggedly pursued the allegations of insider trading. Yet none have brought formal charges against GLG despite the investigations.

Reports have mentioned a possibility of certain clauses preventing clients from selling the stocks in the companies that GLG has invested in relation to the GLG controversy in the GLG consulting agreements. Such clauses would have effectively prevented the clients from benefiting from the takeover.

Lastly, the U.S. Congress has also raised questions about the business model of GLG. We can consider whether the hedge funds undertook any activities that the company could consider unethical or illegal in its relationships.



In March 2017, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released a statement . It detailed a long-running insider trading scheme at investment firm GLG Partners. The alleged group of traders, including GLG employees and clients, illegally traded securities. It is on the basis of information obtained from GLG employees. 


In June 2017, GLG settled with the SEC and agreed to pay fines of $1.8 million.


In August 2017, GLG was also fined £9.6million by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) for failing to manage conflicts of interest in its advisory business.


In July 2018, the FCA released a warning to financial institutions on the risks of insider trading.


In October 2019, the US government charged two former GLG employees, Harry Shum and Michael Lombardo, with insider trading conspiracy.


In February 2020, GLG agreed to a $50.4 million settlement with US authorities to resolve insider trading allegations.


In May 2020, nine additional individuals were charged with insider trading as part of the GLG investigation. 


In June 2020, the SEC settled charges with six additional individuals involved in the case.


In October 2020, the US Department of Justice charged three GLG clients for their roles in the scheme, bringing the total number of charged individuals to 20. 


In December 2020, the FCA imposed a further £2 million fine on GLG for continuing to manage conflicts of interest in its advisory services. 


In February 2021, the SEC announced that its investigation into the GLG insider trading scheme was complete. And announced a total settlement of $68 million with 38 individuals and eight entities.

The Impact Of GLG Insider Trading Allegations

GLG Insider Trading

The GLG Insider Trading Allegations scandal involves an investment firm, GLG Partners, which stands accused of using insider information to make investments. This alleged activity occurred in the years 2015 and 2016, resulting in losses of approximately US$6 billion. 

Since the allegations surfaced, the repercussions have been immense. The issue has resulted in significant legal, market, and reputational consequences for the firm. The matter has been investigated by both the US and UK authorities, with the US Department of Justice and Securities and Exchange Commission filing multiple charges of insider trading against a number of GLG associates. This has resulted in harsh penalties, including fines and forfeiture of profits, for the accused. 

The GLG scandal has had a major impact on the financial markets. It has exposed systemic flaws in regulatory oversight and enforcement capabilities, as well as highlighting the importance of market ethics and transparency. The incident has also raised questions over the trustworthiness of the firm’s investment practices. 

Reputational Impact

The reputational impact of GLG’s alleged insider trading activities has been significant. The scandal has damaged its market credibility, and many of its clients have taken their money elsewhere. Its assets under management have declined from US$23.6 billion in 2016 to US$13.9 billion in 2020. 

The GLG Insider Trading Allegations are also likely to have a lasting impact on the regulatory framework in both the US and the UK. The US authorities have increased their scrutiny of hedge fund activities and are now deploying sophisticated monitoring systems to detect suspicious trading behavior. Similarly, the UK financial services regulator, the Financial Conduct Authority, is now implementing a range of regulatory changes to improve its enforcement and monitoring of financial firms. 

Overall, the GLG Insider Trading Allegations have had far-reaching consequences and have served as a cautionary tale for financial firms. It has highlighted the importance of ethical investment practices and responsible conduct as well as the need for greater regulatory oversight.


The GLG Insider Trading Allegations controversy has been one of the most notable and impactful controversies in recent memory. It has raised questions about the legality of insider trading and the implications that such actions have for shareholders and investors alike. The ramifications of the scandal have been far-reaching, affecting the markets and the credibility of the financial industry. Investors and the public alike must become more aware of the potential consequences of insider trading and the importance of ethical and responsible investing practices.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. What is GLG? 

GLG is a global leader in membership-based learning and peer-to-peer knowledge sharing, with operations in more than 25 countries. 

2. What are the GLG Insider Trading Allegations? 

GLG is accused of insider trading, the illegal practice of buying or selling a company’s securities while having privileged information. 

3. What are the implications of the GLG Insider Trading Allegations? 

The allegations have generated widespread media and investor scrutiny and created significant regulatory governance issues and questions regarding the ethical behavior of the company. It has also raised concerns about the potential damage that the allegations could have on the company’s reputation and stock value. 

4. How have investors and the public reacted to the GLG Insider Trading Allegations? 

Investors and the public have been critical and cautious of GLG’s actions. They have raised questions regarding the credibility and integrity of the company and have sought to understand the full implications of the allegations. 

5. What can be done to prevent future instances of insider trading?

Several measures can be taken to prevent future instances of insider trading. These include implementing suitability assessments for investors, providing formal guidance and training materials to company employees, ensuring that all corporate transactions and communications are conducted through official channels, and conducting independent investigations into potential instances of insider trading.

Must Read