OSC v. Matthew Schloen (insider trading, 2014)

Settled

✓ Checked against the primary document on October 2, 2026. The library's summary, tags and figures for this record were compared with the regulator's own document by an AI model (Claude) following written instructions, with sampled and disputed records read a second time. No lawyer has reviewed them. A checked record can still contain errors, and checked does not mean endorsed. See how we check records or report a correction.

Report an error in this record (osc-matthew-schloen-insider-trading-2014) by email

In 2014 the Ontario Securities Commission approved a settlement with Matthew Schloen, who traded in Bridgewater Systems shares in 2011 after deducing from information inadvertently passed on by a Bridgewater employee that the company was an imminent takeover target. He agreed to disgorge C$23,000, pay a C$5,000 penalty and C$5,000 in costs.

The record

What was ordered

Civil penalty

—

Disgorgement

—

Prejudgment interest

—

Total relief

—

Alleged gain

—

Penalty as published

C$5k

A dash means the release did not state a figure we could extract, not that the figure is zero. Penalty and disgorgement are stored separately so aggregates across the library do not double-count the same dollars. This regulator states penalties in CAD. The figure is recorded as published and is not converted, so it does not appear in the USD totals or medians used elsewhere on this site.

What is alleged to have happened

The Ontario Securities Commission issued its statement of allegations on April 3, 2014 and approved the settlement later that month.

Staff alleged that between May 30 and June 15, 2011 Schloen learned of undisclosed information inside Bridgewater Systems Corp. that he took to mean the company was about to be acquired, and that he bought and sold its shares on that basis.

The settlement requires disgorgement of C$23,000, a C$5,000 administrative penalty and C$5,000 toward investigation costs, together with trading restrictions.

For the regulator's own account of the facts, read the primary document linked above. This page deliberately summarises the structured record rather than reproducing the release.

What technique is this, and how does it work?

This action is tagged with one technique in our taxonomy. The tagging is ours: regulators charge statutory provisions, not technique names, so the mapping is an editorial judgement described in our editorial policy.

• Insider trading — see how it works, what statute it engages, and every other action tagged the same way.

Timeline

1. 2014-03-30 Settlement Agreement
2. 2014-04-03 Notice of Hearing
3. 2014-04-03 Statement of Allegations
4. 2014-04-17 Reasons and Decision
5. 2014-04-23 Reasons and Decision

Primary documents

Everything on this page derives from the documents below. Where our summary and the primary document disagree, the primary document is right.

• Tribunal proceeding
• Settlement Agreement
• Notice of Hearing
• Statement of Allegations
• Reasons and Decision
• Reasons and Decision

The linked release is published by the issuing regulator under its own terms. Our summary and narrative above are our own writing.

Related actions

Other actions in the library sharing at least one technique tag with this one.

Record added September 10, 2026. submit a correction.