We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (21,155)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (414)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (800)
  • Wink's Articles (353)
  • Wink's Inside Story (274)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • Two Sides of the Robo Divide

    May 23, 2016 by Mitchell H. Caplan

    As the DOL fiduciary ruling heightens the demand to serve your clients with greater transparency and greater value, it comes down to this fundamental question: How can you use technology broadly, and robos specifically, to create more value for your practice, while helping to serve your client’s best interest and maintain a fiduciary standard?

    Labor Department Secretary Thomas Perez has suggested that robo advisors are a solution for retirement planning, calling them a low cost alternative that can minimize conflicts of interest. Yet in March of 2016, just weeks before the announcement of the DOL fiduciary ruling, FINRA released guidance on robo advisors, raising concerns and calling for more governance and supervision.

    Questioning whether robos can really know their clients and provide the best recommendation, FINRA CEO Richard Ketchum went on record saying that “whether it’s a human being or an algorithm,” the issues are the same, and the same rules should apply. This wasn’t the first time regulators raised concerns about robos. In late 2015, SEC Commissioner Kara Stein publicly questioned whether a fiduciary duty could actually apply to digital advisory platforms like robos—and whether existing laws should be revised to take this into account.

    Strong Adoption Despite the Divide

    Keep in mind, robo advisors aren’t advisors at all. They are digital solutions that provide a method for low cost portfolio allocations. As with any product or solution, both regulators and advisors alike have an obligation to ensure that robos are used in the right way to align with a client’s best interest.

    There are critics and supporters lined up on both sides of the robo divide. Yet in spite of opposition, the adoption of robo advice is increasing. More advisors, Broker Dealers and even traditional channels like wirehouses have been turning to digital wealth management platforms—whether licensing, building their own or buying them outright. Aite Group estimated that digitally-driven assets would increase from $2 billion in 2013 to $53 billion by year-end 2015. Cerulli Associates estimates that the market for robo platforms used by advisors will be close to $500 billion by 2020.

    If my doctor and my lawyer are bound by law to put my best interests first, why isn’t my financial advisor?

    And while strong growth shows that they can play a role, one thing is clear: Robos alone are not the answer. Robos can never replace the value of guided advice. Make no mistake, the last thing a client wants is to call a robo – and get a busy signal. But robos combined with guided advice can help advisors efficiently serve multiple clients across their entire book of business, from the largest to the smallest.

    Many critics of the DOL ruling have argued that it would cause smaller balance accounts to be ignored because managing them would be cost prohibitive. These same critics say that commissions paid to advisors by product providers help subsidize the cost of managing these accounts. This is where robos offer another option. More advisors today are now integrating robos into their practice as a solution for efficiently and competitively serving smaller balance accounts.

    And as we learned in our 2015 Advisor Authority study, the majority of early adopters are currently using robos for their wealthier clients as well. Of advisors currently using robo, 52% report that they most often use it for clients with over $1 million in investable assets – and a full 20% say that they use it most often for clients with over $10 million in investable assets. As early adopters know, these digital advisory solutions can be effective for the low-cost and passively managed portion of any investor’s portfolio.

    A Four-Point Plan to Evaluate Robos

    While robos can simplify asset allocation and streamline portfolio management, it’s important to understand the optimal way to use them. Consider these four factors as a starting point to successfully integrate a robo solution to fit your fee-based practice – and help you keep your clients’ best interest in mind:

    1. Understand how a robo solution fits into your practice:

    • Will it affect your business process?
    • Will it integrate with your existing technology?
    • Will it fit with your overall investment process?

    2. Understand how a robo solution can serve your clients:

    • How does it evaluate your clients’ risk tolerance?
    • How does it fit into your clients’ overall portfolio?
    • How does it fit into your clients’ comprehensive
    financial plan?

    3. Understand the underlying algorithm:

    • How is the algorithm constructed?
    • Does the algorithm have the ability to adjust as
      market conditions change?
    • How did the algorithm perform during periods of
      volatility?

    4. Understand the fund lineup:

    • Is it sufficiently diversified – all asset classes and style
      boxes?
    • Low cost funds and ETFs?
    • Liquid alternatives?
    • Does it rely on proprietary funds?

    The Future is Fee-Based – and Technology is Key

    The DOL Ruling is a concrete step in an ongoing process. There has been a focus on reducing costs, empowering consumers and eliminating conflict of interest between advisors and their clients for years. Now, the evolution is moving at a much faster pace.

    Technology has been a catalyst and a great equalizer in this process – and robo advisors are just one small part. The more lasting impact may be what thought leader Michal Kitces calls the “Bionic Advisor” – an advisor using technology to magnify the power of human capital – not diminish it or take its place. Technology empowers advisors to do more and offer more – even for their smallest clients – in a way that is more profitable and more scalable. Technology is also driving a secular transformation, shifting control from manufacturing and distribution directly into the hands of consumers.

    As consumers become more empowered and better informed, they seek guided advice from unbiased advisors such as fee-based and fee-only fiduciaries. In a recent survey of more than 1,000 consumers, 77 percent said they would support legally requiring all financial advisors to put their clients’ best interests first when providing retirement investment advice. As DOL Secretary Perez said in his press conference, “If my doctor and my lawyer are bound by law to put my best interests first, why isn’t my financial advisor?”

    The fee-based future is coming. The advisory industry has been moving from commission-based sales to fee-based and fee-only advice, and the pace is accelerating. According to Cerulli, AUM managed by RIAs and fee-based advisors will increase more than 60% from $4.1 trillion in 2015 to $6.6 trillion in 2019, and RIA and fee-based advisor headcount will expand from 59,000 to 67,000.

    As more advisors shift to the fee-based and fee-only model, an increasing number of manufacturers and distributors are developing and adopting no-load and fee-based products to fit the way they work.

    Combine the power of financial technology and the convenience of tools like robo with a human advisor playing by fiduciary rules, and you have the best chance to be more competitive and more relevant to your clients. Advisors who provide holistic unbiased advice can earn clients’ trust, deepen the relationship, and – in the end – attract more assets. The industry will learn what fee-based and fee-only advisors have known for years: When you put the power back into the hands of the consumer and you sit on the same side of the table as your client, both you and your client can win. ◊

    – See more at: http://www.lifehealth.com/two-sides-robo-divide/#sthash.pJa5RuIs.dpuf

     

    by Mitchell H. Caplan

    Mr. Caplan is CEO of Jefferson National, innovator of the industry’s first flat- fee investment-only variable annuity with the largest selection of underlying funds, named to Barron’s list of Top 50 Annuities for three consecutive years. For more information, please visit www.jeffnat.com or call 1-866-WHY-FLAT (866-949-3528).

    Originally Posted at Advisor Magazine on May 23, 2016 by Mitchell H. Caplan.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency