Not “best.” Not even close.
As Wall Street applauds the passage of the Regulation Best Interest standard, chiefs of a number of digital financial services firms are voicing concerns about the stringency of the SEC standard and the impact it may have on the future of wealth management technology.
The rule, which passed by a margin of three-to-one last week, will soon dictate how advisory firms offer investment services and, in turn, how wealthtech firms build out new technologies. But it seems to have fallen well short of its goals of increased transparency, protection for individual investors and greater, cheaper access to investment advice, critics say.
“Unfortunately, this misleadingly titled rule may best serve the marketing interests of large financial corporations to the detriment of individual investors,” said Betterment CEO Jon Stein, in an email. “It is a gift of sheep’s clothing to the wolves of Wall Street."
The head of the industry’s leading robo advisor by assets — Betterment manages some $14 billion — warned the American consumer not to mistake regulatory action for progress, adding the rule will likely harm end investors.
Others agreed.
"Ideally, everyone in the financial services industry needs to be looking at how we can improve our reputation,” said Eric Clarke, CEO of technology provider Orion Advisor Services, in an email. “Regulation Best Interest doesn’t seem to clearly define what is meant by ‘best interest.’ It certainly does not bring brokers to a fiduciary standard.”
Aaron Klein, CEO of Riskalyze, called for a higher level of transparency, whether the advisor is selling an investment product or a fiduciary standard of investment advice. “It should not take thousands of pages of rules to get that concept across," Klein said in an email.
But while regulators could have done a better job creating clarity around a suitability standard, the creators of automated investing platforms and other wealthtech will play an increasingly large role in delineating that distinction, says Anders Jones, CEO of Baltimore-based RIA, Facet Wealth.
“The challenge for the RIA industry is to make fiduciary quality advice affordable and accessible to the general investing public,” Jones says. “This must be done, because of the potential for states to enact their own legislation, which will only create further inequality and confusion among consumers."
Forty-five percent of Americans think robo advisors will have the greatest impact on financial services as opposed to other forms of technology, including cryptocurrency, blockchain and AI. Nearly 60% of Americans expect to use a robo advisor by 2025,
Disappointed by regulatory action at the federal level, industry professionals will likely call for increased action at the state level, according to many experts. That outcome could result in a regulatory patchwork with some brokers held to a fiduciary standard and others, not.
One unforeseen outcome of new litigation could be an increased demand for wealthtech, especially from firms that provide compliance technology to RIAs.
“Firms will start to do all they can to ‘suit-proof’ themselves going forward,” says Will Trout, a senior analyst at Celent. “The focus will be on showing that the advisor has taken into account all relevant factors in providing ‘advice.’ Here again, definitions can be broad, but it seems that aggregation tech and financial planning platforms will be the short-term winners.”
-
Brokerages would rather have an SEC chief appointed by a President Trump set policies than take its chances with what might happen should a Democrat win the White House in 2020.
May 30 -
With brokerage firms lining up in support of the SEC proposal, fiduciary planners aim to keep their differences from the BD channel intact.
May 17 -
The proposed rule will need substantial revisions before it wins the support of the commission's sole Democrat.
April 22
While regtech has been a hotly watched sector of wealth management in recent years, compliance technology has taken a back seat since the
This applies to large enterprises that have been focusing on rebuilding or upgrading legacy systems, says Holt. The regulation is going to move compliance back to their front burners, and may slow the momentum a lot of firms have achieved in reviving their tech tools, reprioritizing their regtech goals.
In fact, 64% of all firms surveyed in
“As with most regulation, proof will be in the pudding,” Trout says. “How much wiggle room will Reg BI allow? It seems clear that dually registered reps will be able to call themselves whatever they choose. Most likely, matters will be settled in the courts.”
Tech providers, including RIAs and wealth management firms, will ultimately be responsible for automating best practices spelled out in the regulation anywhere from servicing the end investor to custodian care, says Mark Tapling, CEO of workflow automation firm Docupace. Those lines may provide opportunities for differentiation.
“I would hope that tech companies ensure to include all of the appropriate disclaimers, but in the end, their products won’t sell if they don’t carry their share of the responsibility,” Tapling says. “On the upside, those providers that do facilitate best practices in compliance will establish a competitive advantage.”
Others disagree about the need for differentiation. “Great advisors know their value and don't resort to promoting regulation as a strategy for helping themselves or hurting their competitors,” says Klein. “Second, what we really need in this profession is transparency.”
As a handful of state and federal regulators consider varying standards, RIAs may be able to use cost effective strategies not based on commissions to provide quality advice and emerge as the real winners of the SEC suitability standard that many independents advisors have called toothless.
“As a result, RIAs continue to have a competitive advantage,” says Clarke. “They are able to give a simple, straight answer to their clients when asked: 'Are you acting as a fiduciary?' ”
