(MONEY Magazine) – In mid-April, the Washington Post set off a bombshell on its front page. The newspaper reported that the Securities and Exchange Commission is investigating Fidelity Magellan manager Jeffrey Vinik and at least six other current and former Fidelity managers or research analysts to see whether, in the Post's words, they "traded stocks for themselves to benefit from subsequent buying or selling by Fidelity mutual funds." Such activity, called front-running on Wall Street, would not just be disturbing but illegal. In response, Fidelity's general counsel, Robert Pozen, thundered in a letter to Post executive editor Leonard Downie, "The story is flat-out wrong. The Securities and Exchange Commission is not, repeat not, currently conducting an investigation of personal trading by Fidelity or its portfolio managers...Fidelity operates under a strict code of ethics that is designed to preclude the kind of activity that the Post alleges. Our portfolio managers operate at the highest level of integrity and professionalism." And in a highly unusual step, the SEC deviated from the agency's strict policy of never commenting on actual or potential investigations to state that "The article contains inaccuracies which have led to erroneous impressions." What does all this mean for you? Right now, to be blunt, very little. And that's true whether you're a Fidelity shareholder now or might consider being one someday. First, no evidence at all has come forth indicating that any Fidelity employees traded improperly. Second, because of Fidelity's high profile and the brouhaha raised by the Post article, the SEC is likely to keep the giant firm (total assets: $399 billion) under even closer scrutiny in the future. Third, you can be sure Fidelity, already strict, will be even more vigilant about managers' trading from now on. The bottom line: Unconfirmed assertions are not proof of wrongdoing. Fidelity shareholders should sit tight. Fidelity aside, how big a problem is personal trading by fund managers? In an industry as big as the fund business, a few rogue operators will inevitably break the rules. But there are no signs of rampant abuse, and regulators and the fund companies themselves seem to be doing a good job of policing the personal trading of the people who manage your money. Our advice: You've got more important things to worry about--like your fund's expenses and performance.

--Jason Zweig