Wouldn’t it be great if you could assemble your own Frankenadvisor — part efficient, passionless robot, and part intuitive, caring human financial advisor?
You might get your chance. In the few short years robo-advisors (digital advisory services) have been around, they’ve typically been positioned as the polar opposite of human advisors, who work with affluent clients. The middle of the spectrum is starting to fill in with hybrid services. That means the “mass affluent” — consumers with portfolios worth several hundred thousand dollars — have a chance to get custom advice when they need it and rely on algorithms the rest of the time, financial consultants say.
Although robo-advisors, such as Betterment, present a public facade of totally automated services, their business models include introducing account holders to real-life advisors. Meanwhile, traditional investment firms such as Charles Schwab and Vanguard are offering entry-level automated investing services that are also intended to funnel new clients to human advisors. And independent advisors are joining industry networks that equip their operations with many of the functions and efficiencies of robo-advisors.
Even staunchly traditional wealth managers are warming up to backroom robo-advisor-like services, says Stuart DePina, group vice president for Envestnet, a Chicago-based investment platform that is used by 40,000 advisory firms. While retired clients probably won’t cotton to getting their investment advice mainly through an online portal, those clients’ less wealthy children and grandchildren might love the digital service, DePina says. Traditional advisors view the automated services as a way to “scale their business,” he says. “Smart firms are realizing that this is a way for me to get a foot in the door with clients that are building assets.”
That means a well-established advisor might be very open to a hybrid approach for clients with several hundred thousand dollars in assets, DePina says.
One way to open the conversation and signal that you are looking for more than a robo-advisor but less than a full-fledged traditional relationship is to ask, “Does your firm offer a function that helps me self-manage my account?” DePina recommends.
Use terms like “digital advice platform” to talk the advisor’s industry lingo. Or just come right out and say that you have or are considering an account with a robo-advisor but still need some guidance from a human advisor.
Meanwhile, some advisors and industry experts have reservations about the short track record and less-than-universal relevance of robo-advisors. In early May, the Securities and Exchange Commission issued an investor warning about automated investment services, advising individuals to scrutinize the underlying assumptions about projected returns.
Some experts point out that robo-advisors have only been operating in a bull market and haven’t yet been tested during a downturn.
And robo-advisors assume a substantial amount of investor knowledge and confidence, experts say. Robo-advisors are great if you already know what you’re doing and just need an efficient technology to put your plan into action, says John Diehl, senior vice president of strategic markets for Hartford Funds.
But if you aren’t sure what you need — either now or in the future — you are on your own. “The robo-advisor platform gives people information, but it doesn’t give them conversation,” Diehl says. “You need a conversation with a person to either challenge or confirm what you’re thinking. The robo-advisor will ask you questions and make recommendations accordingly. But are you asking the right questions? And what if you have questions that it can’t answer? Who do you talk with?”
A recent survey of 500 consumers sponsored by Hartford Funds found that most clients of financial advisors want more, rather than less, information. For instance, 22 percent reported that they wanted advisors to spend more time explaining financial planning strategy and how to improve lagging investments.
Robo-advisors are already changing clients’ expectations, says Steve Scanlon, co-founder of Dallas-based Guardvest, an online consumer feedback service for investment advisors. The robo-advisors openly discuss fees and options for additional services, he says. “You’ll get a look into your portfolio that you don’t get with an advisor. The downside is that they’ll try to sell you on other services,” Scanlon says.
Potential clients are realizing that they need to ask both robo-advisors and human advisors the same questions before handing over their portfolios, Scanlon adds. “If you’re facing significant life changes, can you trust any advisor for the first time with your assets?” he asks.
And, Scanlon says, it’s also reasonable to ask a human advisor to disclose fees and projected fees to the same degree as the robo-advisors. “Most investment advisors can’t tell you exactly what it’s going to pay,” he says. “They’ll say that the base fee is, say, 1 percent of assets under management, but there are loads, markups, markdowns and transaction fees as well. The real question is what are you paying in total to have your money managed? It could be as much as 2.7 percent. That’s why you have to look at your actual return, not the market averages for fees.”
More from U.S. News
Your 7-Step Checklist to Choosing a Financial Advisor
10 Ways to Build a $1 Million Nest Egg
8 Hacks to Ease Your Financial Life
The Ideal Financial Advisor: Part Human, Part Droid? originally appeared on usnews.com
