The index analyses the views of over 200 advice firms to understand the technology systems advisers use, how they use them and rate them, as well as exploring customer relationships with their advisers.
It covers current and planned use of technology across 19 areas, including suitability reports, client portals, attitudes to risk and compliance - including looking at how different systems perform against each other. Seven leading advice technology systems - Benchmark, Dynamic Planner, intelliflo, Iress, Morningstar, Plannr Technologies Limited and Salesforce - will be explored, including analysis of where advisers see room for improvement.
Initial anaylsis shows that the areas users would most like to see improved are data management and validation; the client portal; and third-party integration.
Ian McKenna, founder of FTRC and AdviserSoftware.com, commented:
“Technology is now crucial to how every adviser firm operates. This does not just impact the firms themselves but platforms and insurers looking to do business with them. No previous research has provided this level of granular analysis of systems side by side based in the views, experiences and priorities of their users.
“This study should be an essential guide for investment platforms, life insurers, asset managers, and discretionary fund managers looking to build a business case to prioritise different requests for integration and other support. The objective is to provide real evidence on who are the leaders and laggards in different areas.
“The index also enables tech providers to understand how their users feel about the systems they work with, identifying key opportunities to do better.
“AdviserSoftware.com has been created to help advisers make more informed decisions when choosing technology. Our team is almost entirely composed of people who have worked in advice businesses in a wide range of roles so have first-hand experience of the day-to-day challenges advisers face. Our analysis is not just a collection of logos on a page, but each review has involved our experienced team putting the systems through their paces and asking difficult questions about what they can or cannot do."
