{
    "type": "ETF",
    "ucits": true,
    "fund_name": "iShares S&P 500 Swap UCITS ETF Hedged GBP Dist",
    "investment_objective": "To achieve a return reflecting the net total return of the S&P 500 Index via synthetic replication using unfunded total return swaps.",
    "primary_asset_class": "Equity",
    "geographic_focus": "United States (large cap companies)",
    "replication_method": "synthetic",
    "swaps": true,
    "derivatives": true,
    "leverage": false,
    "inverse": false,
    "complex_factors": [
        "Unfunded total return swaps",
        "Synthetic replication",
        "Counterparty risk",
        "Use of other FDIs (options, non-deliverable futures)",
        "Currency hedging via FX forwards"
    ],
    "classification": "complex",
    "supporting_data": "The Fund uses unfunded total return swaps as the primary method to achieve exposure to the S&P 500 Index, confirmed by all three documents (KIID, PRIIPs KID, and factsheet). The replication is synthetic, not physical, with the Fund investing in a portfolio of equities to collateralize swap obligations rather than direct full replication. The use of swaps inherently introduces counterparty risk, explicitly disclosed in the risk sections. The Fund also uses other derivatives such as options and futures when swaps are not practicable, and FX forwards for currency hedging. The risk indicator is high (6/7 in KIID, 5/7 in PRIIPs), reflecting derivative and counterparty risks. There is no leverage or inverse exposure, but the synthetic structure and swap usage alone classify the ETF as complex under MiFID II. The Fund is UCITS compliant but the complexity arises from the synthetic replication and derivative usage, which may not be easily understood by retail investors. No capital protection or structured contingent features are present. Costs are straightforward with no performance fees, but securities lending revenue sharing is noted. The underlying index is a standard large-cap US equity index, which is not complex itself, but the synthetic method and swap counterparty risk drive the complexity classification."
}