Firm profile

Chapin Davis Asset Management

BALTIMORE, MDCRD 28116Registration Status: ApprovedEffective since January 13, 2010SEC # 801-70987Latest ADV May 18, 2026

Chapin Davis Asset Management is an SEC registered investment adviser organized as a corporation with a primary office location in Baltimore, MD. Its latest Form ADV filing, dated May 18, 2026, reports $643M in regulatory assets under management, 26 employees, 14 offices, and 779 accounts.

Assets Under Management
$643M
Employees
26
Offices
14 offices
Total Clients
555

Associated firm names

7 names listed
  • CHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENT
  • PATAPSCO SECURITIES INC. D/B/A CHAPIN, DAVIS
  • PATAPSCO SECURITIES INC.
  • OAKTREE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT

Leadership

2 roles identified
CEOTalbot Jones Iv Albert
CCORobert James Kaehler

Advisory services offered

5 types reported
Financial Planning Services
Pension consulting services
Portfolio management for businesses

Fee models offered

3 types reported
Asset based fees
Fixed fees
Hourly charges

Offices & Contact

Primary office

BALTIMORE, Maryland, United States

Loading map…

Primary office regionOther reported regions

Shading shows states and countries with reported offices. Cities are listed below; shading does not indicate service coverage.

Maryland

BALTIMOREPrimary office

Illinois

PEORIA

Pennsylvania

BALA CYNWYD

4 office records listed · 14 total offices reported. 10 additional office addresses are undisclosed and are not mapped. Counts can use different reporting dates. SEC filers may list only their largest 25 additional offices.

Contact and digital presence

ADV profile links

Regulatory Assets Under Management Breakdown

Total regulatory assets under management$643Mas of May 18, 2026
Discretionary85.9%
$552M
86% of total RAUM85.9%
Non-discretionary14.1%
$91M
14% of total RAUM14.1%
Regulatory assets under management are split between discretionary and non-discretionary assets.

Client Coverage Demographics

Top client segmentIndividuals represent 94.4% of total clients.
Top client categories% of clientsClients
1
Individuals
94.4%
524
2
HNWI
3.4%
19
3
Corporations
1.3%
7
4
Pension Plans
0.9%
5

Assets under management Growth by Quarter

Quarterly points use the latest ADV filing or SEC roster snapshot available in each quarter.

Total AUM$643M
Total Accounts779
10Y AUM Change+$443M (+222.2%)

Private Funds

Private funds reported by Chapin Davis Asset Management

Loading private fund disclosures…

Employee Growth by Quarter

Quarterly points use the latest ADV filing or SEC roster snapshot available in each quarter.

Total Employees26
Clients per Employee21:1
10Y Employee Change-17 (-39.5%)

Historical AUM and employee figures reflect available SEC Form ADV filings under this CRD. Filing gaps may reflect registration status changes, dormant periods, state registration periods, firm restructuring, or other reporting changes. Rialytix does not interpolate missing periods.


Ownership

Reported direct and indirect ownership ranges

Each range applies to a separate reported relationship and should not be added together.

Reported ownership ranges

Highlighted bands show the percentage range reported in Form ADV.

0%25%50%75%100%
TALBOT JONES IV ALBERTDirect owner · Schedule AInterest in CHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENT
50% to < 75%
ELISABETH ALBERT HAYESDirect owner · Schedule AInterest in CHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENT
10% to < 25%

Bars represent the reported range at that individual ownership step, not an estimated percentage of the advisory firm. Indirect relationships may refer to intermediate entities rather than directly to Chapin Davis Asset Management.

No indirect ownership information reported in the source’s Schedule B.

Reported ownership and control details

Form ADV · Filing date 2026-05-18 · Schedules A and B

7 entries
#Owner / person & roleInterest in entityReported interestControl personTitle / status acquiredSource
1ELISABETH ALBERT HAYESDIRECTOR/SHAREHOLDERIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENT10% to less than 25%Code BYesDIRECTOR/SHAREHOLDER03/1999Schedule APDF page 28
2TALBOT JONES IV ALBERTCHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, CEOIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENT50% to less than 75%Code DYesCHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD, CEO03/2018Schedule APDF page 28
3THOMAS ALLEN BRUBAKERDIRECTORIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENTLess than 5%Code NAYesDIRECTOR02/2018Schedule APDF page 28
4MICHAEL ANTHONY GALANTINOPRESIDENT/DIRECTORIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENTLess than 5%Code NAYesPRESIDENT/DIRECTOR04/2022Schedule APDF page 28
5ROBERT JAMES KAEHLERCHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICERIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENTLess than 5%Code NAYesCHIEF COMPLIANCE OFFICER01/2024Schedule APDF page 28
6KEITH LAWRENCE MURRAYDIRECTORIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENTLess than 5%Code NAYesDIRECTOR02/2017Schedule APDF page 28
7ANA ROUMENOVA CARTERFINANCIAL PRINCIPALIndividualCHAPIN DAVIS ASSET MANAGEMENTLess than 5%Code NANoFINANCIAL PRINCIPAL05/2025Schedule APDF page 28

Less than 5% may include zero. Code F identifies a role without specifying a percentage. Reported interests may overlap and may not include every owner. Total indirect ownership is not calculated.

Compliance & Disclosures

Filing dated 5/18/2026 9:23:30 AM

Responses were selected by the RIA in its filing. Questions are shortened for readability; “you” refers to the reporting firm, and some questions also cover advisory affiliates.

RIA or supervised-person involvementThe RIA reported that one or more events below involve the firm or its supervised persons.RIA responseYes
AFelonies2 No

In the past ten years, have you or any advisory affiliate:

  • A1Been convicted of or pleaded guilty or no contest to a felony?No
  • A2Been charged with a felony?No
BMisdemeanors2 No

In the past ten years, have you or any advisory affiliate:

  • B1Been convicted of or pleaded guilty or no contest to a misdemeanor involving investments, an investment-related business, fraud, false statements or omissions, wrongful taking of property, bribery, perjury, forgery, counterfeiting, or extortion?No
  • B2Been charged with a misdemeanor of the kind listed above?No
CSEC or CFTC actions5 No

Has the SEC or CFTC ever:

  • C1Found you or an advisory affiliate made a false statement or omission?No
  • C2Found you or an advisory affiliate violated SEC or CFTC regulations or statutes?No
  • C3Found you or an advisory affiliate caused an investment-related business to have its authorization to do business denied, suspended, revoked, or restricted?No
  • C4Entered an order against you or an advisory affiliate in connection with investment-related activity?No
  • C5Imposed a civil money penalty on you or an advisory affiliate, or ordered you or an advisory affiliate to cease and desist from any activity?No
DOther regulatory actions5 No

Has any other federal regulatory agency, state regulatory agency, or foreign financial regulatory authority ever:

  • D1Found you or an advisory affiliate made a false statement or omission, or was dishonest, unfair, or unethical?No
  • D2Found you or an advisory affiliate violated investment-related regulations or statutes?No
  • D3Found you or an advisory affiliate caused an investment-related business to have its authorization to do business denied, suspended, revoked, or restricted?No
  • D4In the past ten years, entered an order against you or an advisory affiliate in connection with investment-related activity?No
  • D5Denied, suspended, or revoked your or an advisory affiliate’s registration or license, or otherwise prevented association with an investment-related business or restricted activities?No
ESelf-regulatory organization actions2 Yes2 No

Has a self-regulatory organization or commodities exchange ever:

  • E1Found you or an advisory affiliate made a false statement or omission?No
  • E2Found you or an advisory affiliate violated its rules, other than a violation designated as a minor rule violation under an SEC-approved plan?Yes
  • E3Found you or an advisory affiliate caused an investment-related business to have its authorization to do business denied, suspended, revoked, or restricted?No
  • E4Disciplined you or an advisory affiliate by expulsion, suspension, barring association with other members, or otherwise restricting activities?Yes
FProfessional authorizations1 No
  • FHas an authorization to act as an attorney, accountant, or federal contractor granted to you or an advisory affiliate ever been revoked or suspended?No
GPending regulatory proceedings1 No
  • GAre you or any advisory affiliate now the subject of a regulatory proceeding that could result in a “Yes” answer to any part of C, D, or E?No
HCivil judicial actions and proceedings4 No

(1) Court actions

Has a domestic or foreign court:

  • H(1)(a)In the past ten years, enjoined you or an advisory affiliate in connection with investment-related activity?No
  • H(1)(b)Found that you or an advisory affiliate violated investment-related statutes or regulations?No
  • H(1)(c)Dismissed, pursuant to a settlement agreement, an investment-related civil action brought against you or an advisory affiliate by a state or foreign financial regulatory authority?No

(2) Pending civil proceedings

  • H(2)Are you or any advisory affiliate now the subject of a civil proceeding that could result in a “Yes” answer to any part of H(1)?No
Additional DRP filings 2 source blocks

Verbatim excerpts from supporting DRP filings, which may concern the firm or advisory affiliates. Amounts retain their filed labels; no total or attribution is inferred.

regulatory · block 1CRAIN, JOHN, STUARTPDF pages 29–31
Advisory affiliate name — filed text
CRAIN, JOHN, STUART
Full extracted filing text

Includes form instructions and options. Options shown in this text do not identify which boxes were selected.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This Disclosure Reporting Page (DRP ADV) is an 
INITIAL OR
AMENDED response used to report details for affirmative responses to Items 11.C., 11.D.,
11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. of Form ADV.
Regulatory Action
Check item(s) being responded to:
11.C(1)
11.C(2)
11.C(3)
11.C(4)
11.C(5)
11.D(1)
11.D(2)
11.D(3)
11.D(4)
11.D(5)
11.E(1)
11.E(2)
11.E(3)
11.E(4)
11.F.
11.G.
Use a separate DRP for each event or proceeding . The same event or proceeding may be reported for more than one person or entity using one DRP. File
with a completed Execution Page. 
One event may result in more than one affirmative answer to Items 11.C., 11.D., 11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. Use only one DRP to report details related to the
same event. If an event gives rise to actions by more than one regulator, provide details for each action on a separate DRP.
PART I
A.  The person(s) or entity(ies) for whom this DRP is being filed is (are):
You (the advisory firm)
You and one or more of your advisory affiliates
One or more of your advisory affiliates
If this DRP is being filed for an advisory affiliate, give the full name of the advisory affiliate below (for individuals, Last name, First name, Middle name). 
If the advisory affiliate has a CRD number, provide that number. If not, indicate "non-registered" by checking the appropriate box.
ADV DRP - ADVISORY AFFILIATE

CRD
Number:
2748785
This advisory affiliate is 
a Firm
an Individual
Registered:
Yes
No
Name:
CRAIN, JOHN, STUART
(For individuals, Last, First,
Middle)
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because the advisory affiliate(s) is no longer associated with the adviser.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because: (1) the event or proceeding occurred more than ten years ago or (2) the adviser is
registered or applying for registration with the SEC or reporting as an exempt reporting adviser with the SEC and the event was resolved in the
adviser's or advisory affiliate's favor.
If you are registered or registering with a state securities authority , you may remove a DRP for an event you reported only in response to Item
11.D(4), and only if that event occurred more than ten years ago. If you are registered or registering with the SEC, you may remove a DRP for any
event listed in Item 11 that occurred more than ten years ago.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because it was filed in error, such as due to a clerical or data-entry mistake. Explain the
circumstances: 
B.
If the advisory affiliate is registered through the IARD system or CRD system, has the advisory affiliate submitted a DRP (with Form ADV, BD or U-4) to
the IARD or CRD for the event? If the answer is "Yes," no other information on this DRP must be provided.
 Yes
 No
NOTE: The completion of this form does not relieve the advisory affiliate of its obligation to update its IARD or CRD records.
PART II
1.  Regulatory Action initiated by:
SEC   
Other Federal   
State   
SRO
Foreign
(Full name of regulator, foreign financial regulatory authority, federal, state, or SRO) 
2.
Principal Sanction:
Other Sanctions: 
3.
Date Initiated (MM/DD/YYYY): 
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
4.
Docket/Case Number:
5.
Advisory Affiliate Employing Firm when activity occurred which led to the regulatory action (if applicable):
6.
Principal Product Type:
Other Product Types: 
7.
Describe the allegations related to this regulatory action (your response must fit within the space provided):
8.
Current Status?      
 Pending
 On Appeal
 Final
9.
If on appeal, regulatory action appealed to (SEC, SRO, Federal or State Court) and Date Appeal Filed:
If Final or On Appeal, complete all items below. For Pending Actions, complete Item 13 only.
10. How was matter resolved:
11. Resolution Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
12. Resolution Detail:
A.  Were any of the following Sanctions Ordered (check all appropriate items)?

 Monetary/Fine Amount: $
 Revocation/Expulsion/Denial
 Disgorgement/Restitution
 Censure
 Cease and Desist/Injunction
 Bar
 Suspension
B.
Other Sanctions Ordered:
Sanction detail: if suspended, enjoined or barred, provide duration including start date and capacities affected (General Securities Principal,
Financial Operations Principal, etc.). If requalification by exam/retraining was a condition of the sanction, provide length of time given to
requalify/retrain, type of exam required and whether condition has been satisfied. If disposition resulted in a fine, penalty, restitution,
disgorgement or monetary compensation, provide total amount, portion levied against you or an advisory affiliate, date paid and if any portion
of penalty was waived: 
13. Provide a brief summary of details related to the action status and (or) disposition and include relevant terms, conditions and dates (your response
must fit within the space provided).
regulatory · block 2PDF pages 31–33
Regulator name — filed text
FINRA
Monetary/Fine Amount — filed text
$ 35,000.00
How was matter resolved — filed text
Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)

Action status / disposition — filed text

CHAPIN DAVIS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH INDUSTRY REGULATIONS, HAS IN PLACE AN EXECUTED ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING PROGRAM (AML) AND CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM (CIP) WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. THE FIRM HAS DESIGNATED AN AML COMPLIANCE OFFICER, CONDUCTED BOTH ANNUAL TRAINING FOR ALL REGISTERED ASSOCIATES AND ANNUAL INDEPENDENT AUDITS. THE FIRM'S AML POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MEET THE GUIDELINES AS DEFINED BY RULE 3310(A) THAT CAN REASONABLY DETECT AND CAUSE THE REPORTING OF SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS REQUIRED UNDER TITLE 31 U.S. CODE 5813(G) FOR ALL CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS AT THE FIRM. FOR THE ACCOUNTS IN QUESTION, NEW ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS WERE COMPLETED WITH ALL INFORMATION AS REQUIRED BY RULE 2090, KNOW YOUR CUSTOMER. IN ADDITION, WITHIN TWO DAYS, THE FIRM ALSO RECEIVED PASSPORT INFORMATION FOR ALL BENEFICIAL OWNERS. COPIES OF THE PASSPORT WERE ADDED TO THE CUSTOMER NEW ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS AND UPDATED THROUGH ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE. OFAC SEARCHES WERE GENERATED FOR EACH BENEFICIAL OWNER RESULTING IN NO HITS OR MATCHES. OFAC REPORTS WERE FILED WITH CUSTOMER NEW ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS. THE DOCUMENTED PROCEDURES FOR THE FIRM'S CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM WERE FOLLOWED TO VERIFY EACH BENEFICIAL OWNER'S IDENTITY. EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S INFORMATION WAS SUBMITTED VIA EQUIFAX ON THE SAME DAY OF THE NEW ACCOUNT OPENING. EACH BENEFICIAL OWNER'S CIP REPORT WAS VERIFIED AND VALIDATED USING THEIR RESPECTIVE NON-EXPIRED PASSPORT. ADDITIONALLY, NO RED FLAGS EXISTED FOR THESE CLIENTS OF ANY SORT OR ANY INDICATION THE CUSTOMERS WERE ENGAGING OR HAD ENGAGED IN SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY. ALL BENEFICIAL OWNERS PROVIDED ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION, DID NOT ATTEMPT TO DECEIVE OR PROVIDE FRAUDULENT GOVERNMENT ISSUED DOCUMENTS. THERE WAS NO NEED TO LABEL THESE CLIENTS AS HIGH RISK OR NECESSITATE THE FILING OF A SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORT. THE FIRM DID MONITOR ALL CLIENT ACCOUNTS FOR ACTIVITY RELATED TO SIZE, VOLUME, PATTERN AND OTHER RED FLAGS. THE FIRM REVIEW REPORTS IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND DID NOT DETECT ANY SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY WITHIN THE ACCOUNTS IDENTIFIED. THERE WAS NO ACTIVITY THAT ROSE TO THE LEVEL OF NEEDING TO FILE A SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORT.
Other filed details

Description of allegations — filed text

WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FINDINGS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE SANCTIONS AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS THAT IT FAILED TO IMPLEMENT ITS WRITTEN CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM (CIP). THE FINDINGS STATED THAT THE FIRM'S PROCEDURES PERTAINING TO ITS CIP REQUIRED THE COMPLETION OF A NEW ACCOUNT FORM, AND THE COLLECTION OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION, FOR EACH ACCOUNT OPENED. THE FIRM'S PROCEDURES FURTHER REQUIRED THE VERIFICATION OF THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION PROVIDED AT ACCOUNT OPENING SUFFICIENT TO FORM A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE TRUE IDENTITY OF THE CUSTOMER IS KNOWN. HOWEVER, THE FIRM FAILED TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THESE PROCEDURES AND, AS A RESULT, FAILED TO VERIFY THE IDENTITY OF EACH CUSTOMER TO THE EXTENT REASONABLE AND PRACTICABLE. THE FINDINGS ALSO STATED THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO IMPLEMENT ITS WRITTEN AML POLICIES AND PROCEDURES RELATING TO THE DETECTION AND REPORTING OF SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS. INCONSISTENT WITH ITS OWN PROCEDURES, THE FIRM FAILED TO MONITOR ACCOUNT ACTIVITY FOR UNUSUAL SIZE, VOLUME, PATTERN, OR TYPE OF TRANSACTIONS AND OTHER RED FLAGS. THE FIRM OFTEN FAILED TO REVIEW THE DAILY EXCEPTION REPORTS PROVIDED BY ITS CLEARING FIRM AND DAILY DEPOSIT AND WITHDRAWAL ACTIVITY, OR FAILED TO REVIEW THEM UNTIL MONTHS AFTER THE POTENTIALLY SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS OCCURRED. AS A RESULT, THE FIRM FAILED TO DETECT AND INVESTIGATE CERTAIN CUSTOMER ACTIVITY THAT RAISED RED FLAGS OF POTENTIALLY SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY.

Sanction detail — filed text

$35,000 WAS PAID
Full extracted filing text

Includes form instructions and options. Options shown in this text do not identify which boxes were selected.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
This Disclosure Reporting Page (DRP ADV) is an 
INITIAL OR
AMENDED response used to report details for affirmative responses to Items 11.C., 11.D.,
11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. of Form ADV.
Regulatory Action
Check item(s) being responded to:
11.C(1)
11.C(2)
11.C(3)
11.C(4)
11.C(5)
11.D(1)
11.D(2)
11.D(3)
11.D(4)
11.D(5)
11.E(1)
11.E(2)
11.E(3)
11.E(4)
11.F.
11.G.
Use a separate DRP for each event or proceeding . The same event or proceeding may be reported for more than one person or entity using one DRP. File
with a completed Execution Page. 
One event may result in more than one affirmative answer to Items 11.C., 11.D., 11.E., 11.F. or 11.G. Use only one DRP to report details related to the
same event. If an event gives rise to actions by more than one regulator, provide details for each action on a separate DRP.
PART I
A.  The person(s) or entity(ies) for whom this DRP is being filed is (are):
You (the advisory firm)
You and one or more of your advisory affiliates
One or more of your advisory affiliates
If this DRP is being filed for an advisory affiliate, give the full name of the advisory affiliate below (for individuals, Last name, First name, Middle name). 
If the advisory affiliate has a CRD number, provide that number. If not, indicate "non-registered" by checking the appropriate box.
ADV DRP - ADVISORY AFFILIATE
No Information Filed
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because the advisory affiliate(s) is no longer associated with the adviser.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because: (1) the event or proceeding occurred more than ten years ago or (2) the adviser is
registered or applying for registration with the SEC or reporting as an exempt reporting adviser with the SEC and the event was resolved in the
adviser's or advisory affiliate's favor.
If you are registered or registering with a state securities authority , you may remove a DRP for an event you reported only in response to Item
11.D(4), and only if that event occurred more than ten years ago. If you are registered or registering with the SEC, you may remove a DRP for any
event listed in Item 11 that occurred more than ten years ago.
This DRP should be removed from the ADV record because it was filed in error, such as due to a clerical or data-entry mistake. Explain the
circumstances: 
B.
If the advisory affiliate is registered through the IARD system or CRD system, has the advisory affiliate submitted a DRP (with Form ADV, BD or U-4) to
the IARD or CRD for the event? If the answer is "Yes," no other information on this DRP must be provided.
 Yes
 No
NOTE: The completion of this form does not relieve the advisory affiliate of its obligation to update its IARD or CRD records.

PART II
1.  Regulatory Action initiated by:
SEC   
Other Federal   
State   
SRO
Foreign
(Full name of regulator, foreign financial regulatory authority, federal, state, or SRO) 
FINRA
2.
Principal Sanction:
Other
Other Sanctions: 
3.
Date Initiated (MM/DD/YYYY): 
04/08/2020
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
4.
Docket/Case Number:
2018056386601
5.
Advisory Affiliate Employing Firm when activity occurred which led to the regulatory action (if applicable):
6.
Principal Product Type:
No Product
Other Product Types: 
7.
Describe the allegations related to this regulatory action (your response must fit within the space provided):
WITHOUT ADMITTING OR DENYING THE FINDINGS, THE FIRM CONSENTED TO THE SANCTIONS AND TO THE ENTRY OF FINDINGS THAT IT FAILED TO
IMPLEMENT ITS WRITTEN CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM (CIP). THE FINDINGS STATED THAT THE FIRM'S PROCEDURES PERTAINING TO ITS CIP
REQUIRED THE COMPLETION OF A NEW ACCOUNT FORM, AND THE COLLECTION OF SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION, FOR EACH
ACCOUNT OPENED. THE FIRM'S PROCEDURES FURTHER REQUIRED THE VERIFICATION OF THE ACCURACY OF INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION
PROVIDED AT ACCOUNT OPENING SUFFICIENT TO FORM A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE TRUE IDENTITY OF THE CUSTOMER IS KNOWN. HOWEVER,
THE FIRM FAILED TO FULLY IMPLEMENT THESE PROCEDURES AND, AS A RESULT, FAILED TO VERIFY THE IDENTITY OF EACH CUSTOMER TO THE EXTENT
REASONABLE AND PRACTICABLE. THE FINDINGS ALSO STATED THAT THE FIRM FAILED TO IMPLEMENT ITS WRITTEN AML POLICIES AND PROCEDURES
RELATING TO THE DETECTION AND REPORTING OF SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS. INCONSISTENT WITH ITS OWN PROCEDURES, THE FIRM FAILED TO
MONITOR ACCOUNT ACTIVITY FOR UNUSUAL SIZE, VOLUME, PATTERN, OR TYPE OF TRANSACTIONS AND OTHER RED FLAGS. THE FIRM OFTEN FAILED TO
REVIEW THE DAILY EXCEPTION REPORTS PROVIDED BY ITS CLEARING FIRM AND DAILY DEPOSIT AND WITHDRAWAL ACTIVITY, OR FAILED TO REVIEW
THEM UNTIL MONTHS AFTER THE POTENTIALLY SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS OCCURRED. AS A RESULT, THE FIRM FAILED TO DETECT AND INVESTIGATE
CERTAIN CUSTOMER ACTIVITY THAT RAISED RED FLAGS OF POTENTIALLY SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY.
8.
Current Status?      
 Pending
 On Appeal
 Final
9.
If on appeal, regulatory action appealed to (SEC, SRO, Federal or State Court) and Date Appeal Filed:
If Final or On Appeal, complete all items below. For Pending Actions, complete Item 13 only.
10. How was matter resolved:
Acceptance, Waiver & Consent(AWC)
11. Resolution Date (MM/DD/YYYY):
04/08/2020
 Exact
 Explanation
If not exact, provide explanation:
12. Resolution Detail:
A.  Were any of the following Sanctions Ordered (check all appropriate items)?
 Monetary/Fine Amount: $ 35,000.00
 Revocation/Expulsion/Denial
 Disgorgement/Restitution
 Censure
 Cease and Desist/Injunction
 Bar
 Suspension
B.
Other Sanctions Ordered:
UNDERTAKING
Sanction detail: if suspended, enjoined or barred, provide duration including start date and capacities affected (General Securities Principal,
Financial Operations Principal, etc.). If requalification by exam/retraining was a condition of the sanction, provide length of time given to
requalify/retrain, type of exam required and whether condition has been satisfied. If disposition resulted in a fine, penalty, restitution,
disgorgement or monetary compensation, provide total amount, portion levied against you or an advisory affiliate, date paid and if any portion
of penalty was waived: 
$35,000 WAS PAID

13. Provide a brief summary of details related to the action status and (or) disposition and include relevant terms, conditions and dates (your response
must fit within the space provided).
CHAPIN DAVIS, IN ACCORDANCE WITH INDUSTRY REGULATIONS, HAS IN PLACE AN EXECUTED ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING PROGRAM (AML) AND
CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM (CIP) WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTERNAL POLICIES AND PROCEDURES. THE FIRM HAS DESIGNATED AN
AML COMPLIANCE OFFICER, CONDUCTED BOTH ANNUAL TRAINING FOR ALL REGISTERED ASSOCIATES AND ANNUAL INDEPENDENT AUDITS. THE FIRM'S
AML POLICIES AND PROCEDURES MEET THE GUIDELINES AS DEFINED BY RULE 3310(A) THAT CAN REASONABLY DETECT AND CAUSE THE REPORTING OF
SUSPICIOUS TRANSACTIONS REQUIRED UNDER TITLE 31 U.S. CODE 5813(G) FOR ALL CUSTOMER ACCOUNTS AT THE FIRM. FOR THE ACCOUNTS IN
QUESTION, NEW ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS WERE COMPLETED WITH ALL INFORMATION AS REQUIRED BY RULE 2090, KNOW YOUR CUSTOMER. IN
ADDITION, WITHIN TWO DAYS, THE FIRM ALSO RECEIVED PASSPORT INFORMATION FOR ALL BENEFICIAL OWNERS. COPIES OF THE PASSPORT WERE
ADDED TO THE CUSTOMER NEW ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS AND UPDATED THROUGH ACCOUNT MAINTENANCE. OFAC SEARCHES WERE GENERATED FOR
EACH BENEFICIAL OWNER RESULTING IN NO HITS OR MATCHES. OFAC REPORTS WERE FILED WITH CUSTOMER NEW ACCOUNT DOCUMENTS. THE
DOCUMENTED PROCEDURES FOR THE FIRM'S CUSTOMER IDENTIFICATION PROGRAM WERE FOLLOWED TO VERIFY EACH BENEFICIAL OWNER'S
IDENTITY. EACH OF THE INDIVIDUAL'S INFORMATION WAS SUBMITTED VIA EQUIFAX ON THE SAME DAY OF THE NEW ACCOUNT OPENING. EACH
BENEFICIAL OWNER'S CIP REPORT WAS VERIFIED AND VALIDATED USING THEIR RESPECTIVE NON-EXPIRED PASSPORT. ADDITIONALLY, NO RED FLAGS
EXISTED FOR THESE CLIENTS OF ANY SORT OR ANY INDICATION THE CUSTOMERS WERE ENGAGING OR HAD ENGAGED IN SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY. ALL
BENEFICIAL OWNERS PROVIDED ALL REQUIRED DOCUMENTATION, DID NOT ATTEMPT TO DECEIVE OR PROVIDE FRAUDULENT GOVERNMENT ISSUED
DOCUMENTS. THERE WAS NO NEED TO LABEL THESE CLIENTS AS HIGH RISK OR NECESSITATE THE FILING OF A SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORT. THE
FIRM DID MONITOR ALL CLIENT ACCOUNTS FOR ACTIVITY RELATED TO SIZE, VOLUME, PATTERN AND OTHER RED FLAGS. THE FIRM REVIEW REPORTS IN
A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS AND DID NOT DETECT ANY SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY WITHIN THE ACCOUNTS IDENTIFIED.
THERE WAS NO ACTIVITY THAT ROSE TO THE LEVEL OF NEEDING TO FILE A SUSPICIOUS ACTIVITY REPORT.

* Metrics are based on the latest available data, including Form ADV filings, brochures, and relationship summaries pulled from the SEC IAPD, and may be subject to change. Learn what is included in the Rialytix data. Please refer to the firm's official disclosures for the most accurate information using their CRD number. This is not investment advice.