Your IndustryOct 23 2015

Why robo-advice is no substitute for professional advice

twitter-iconfacebook-iconlinkedin-iconmail-iconprint-icon
Search supported by
Why robo-advice is no substitute for professional advice

Robo-advice will not change the way consumers gain access to advice anytime soon, says Ben Goss, co-founder and chief executive of Distribution Technology.

Speaking to Money Management’s Julia Faurschou, Mr Goss said perhaps in 10 or 15 year time more people will engage with their finances digitally and potentially make more decisions themselves.

But in the next five to 10 years, Mr Goss said rather than robo-advice dominating the market the role that technology can play for advisers will be in getting the cost and risk of ensuring suitable investment advice is given down.

In the latest FTAdviser video interview, Mr Goss said: “It (technology) absolutely has a role in helping advisers and financial institutions engage with customers they might otherwise not be able to engage with.

“The regulator, the FCA, now accepts that there is an advice gap. Post Retail Distribution Review (RDR) the cost and risk of accessing smaller balance clients is much tougher.”

Mr Goss said technology should be used to provide tools and guidance to help savers get “up the learning curve” and prepare them for an encounter with an adviser.

He said: “It can reduce the barriers for accessing good, quality professional advice.”

When asked could advisers lose clients to robo-advisers, he said “quite the reverse.”

Mr Goss said: “More advisers, from high net worth firms to small, local firms, are using technology to engage both during the client meeting and potentially before the meeting and also after the meeting.”

emma.hughes@ft.com