Celent’s Innovation and Insight Day: Wealth and Asset Management Stream

Celent’s Innovation and Insight Day: Wealth and Asset Management Stream

We are only weeks away from Celent's 2017 Innovation and Insight Day where we will explore how players in the financial services market are leveraging technology in innovative ways in order to differentiate themselves in an increasingly competitive and challenging marketplace. We will be featuring a number of case studies, discussions, and deep-dives into topic areas surrounding innovation and focusing on themes, such as:

  • Customer Experience
  • Products
  • Emerging Innovation
  • Operation and Risk
  • Legacy Transformation

This is the first year we will have a Wealth and Asset Management (WAM) breakout session where we will cover a range of topics around innovative solutions and trends in WAM.  The agenda can be found here: Wealth and Asset Management (WAM) Program and will be presented by analysts from the Celent Securities & Investments and Wealth & Asset Management teams:

  • David Easthope, Senior Vice President, Securities & Investments
  • Brad Bailey, Research Director, Securities & Investments
  • Kelley Byrnes, Analyst, Wealth & Asset Management
  • John Dwyer, Senior Analyst, Securities & Investments
  • Ashley Globerman, Analyst, Wealth & Asset Management
  • Arin Ray, Analyst, Securities & Investments
  • William Trout, Senior Analyst, Wealth Management
  • James Wolstenholme, Senior Analyst, Wealth & Asset Management

I particularly look forward to sharing research around the evolving wealth management landscape as the core client base shifts from baby boomers to millennials. While much ground has been covered from the perspective of wealth managers to meet the digital needs of nextgen clients, wealth managers continue to be behind the curve in their digital offerings.

How are wealth managers and vendors responding to the paradigm shift in the development and execution of services and products to meet millennials’ distinct expectations?

This is just one example of the many topics that we will discuss at I&I day – we hope to see you there!

 

The Virtual Agent: NLP in Wealth Management

The Virtual Agent: NLP in Wealth Management

NLP has many use cases in consumer banking and is gaining adoption in wealth management. In my report, The Virtual Agent: Natural Language Processing in Wealth Management, I look at some of the more popular use cases for NLP, including for chatbots/virtual assistants and biometric identification, as well as the more cutting-edge applications, like for advisor matching and more complex virtual assistant processes.

IPSoft and Personetics are two vendors making huge strides in the field of NLP.  IPSoft is working with SEB and Personetics is working with BRD, a subsidiary of Groupe Société Générale, to explore innovative use cases for NLP.

Enterprises looking to explore NLP should consider whether a solution has a process ontology that builds best practices, works across multiple languages, detects formality, and perceives when a human should get involved.  Best practices should be tested on internal use cases before applying NLP technology to external-facing problems.

In the next 12 months, it is likely we will see many of the largest consumer banks that already have a virtual assistant rolling out new uses cases for their virtual assistants within both their consumer banking and wealth management arms. Other banks that do not yet have a virtual assistant or chatbot offering will be racing to catch up.

In the world of robo 2017, C.A.S.H. is king

In the world of robo 2017, C.A.S.H. is king
For those of you who seek yearly prognostication, here we go. I see four factors or trends driving the evolution of robo world in 2017, and attempt to capture them here with a simple, suitable acronym: C.A.S.H.
  • Cross border activity: We’re now seeing robo advisors extend their reach across national borders. This is not just the case in Europe (think German-UK robo Scalable and Italy’s Moneyfarm, which launched in the UK) but in North America as well. I comment on the planned entrance of Toronto based robo Wealthsimple into the US market in Financial Planning.
  • Asset managers will continue to seek distribution, launching robo advisory platforms that enable the advisor to market their products. They’ll also want a share of advisor profits.
  • Synergies with CRM, compliance and other tech providers will deepen, as robos become more tightly integrated into the wealth management ecosystem. It’s no coincidence that two of the portfolio optimization software providers featured in my last report offer robo advisory platforms.
  • Hedge fund-like robos will prosper in an more volatile economic environment. These robos will use passive instruments to take a position on the market, and in some cases, allow users to “steer” (or apply their own views to) investment decisions.
Taken together, these trends signal the “mainstreaming” of robo advisory capabilities. Robo advice platforms are now less a “nice to have” than a core part of the incumbent advice offer. As such, these platforms are becoming increasingly bound up in the larger industry infrastructure. Those robos that seek to keep themselves distant or apart from this ecosystem will find themselves exposed, and short of cash, once the current funding cycle dries up.

DOL or DOA? The Election and the Conflict of Interest Rule

DOL or DOA?  The Election and the Conflict of Interest Rule

It’s one of those watershed moments. Clinton wins, and the Department of Labor (DoL) conflict of interest rule takes hold and likely gets extended beyond retirement products to all types of investments. Trump wins, and DoL gets slowed down and perhaps even rolled back.

Assuming Clinton wins (which appears likely) firms will need to gear up on three fronts:

  • Platform: DoL makes paramount the ability to deliver consistent advice across digital and face to face channels. Such consistency requires a clear view of client assets held in house, which in turn implies eliminating legacy product stacks and their underlying technology silos, as I note in a recent report.
  • Product: Offering only proprietary products only is a non-starter under DoL. But too much product choice can be as bad as too little. Firms must demonstrate why programs and portfolios offered are the best for each particular client.
  • Proposition: In a best interest world, the client proposition must extend beyond price. Client education, transparent performance reporting and fee structures, as well as an easy to use digital experience, will distinguish stand outs from the broadly compliant pack.

None of the pain points above lend themselves to easy solutions. As such, the banks and brokerages most affected by DoL are struggling to develop processes that go beyond exemption compliance. I’ll discuss more comprehensive approaches in the All Hands on Deck: Technology's Role in the Scramble to Comply with the DOL Fiduciary Rule  webinar I’m co-hosting this November 14.

I hope you will join me for the webinar, and in the meantime, you will share your thoughts and comments on this post.

New Report: Changing the Landscape of Customer Experience with Advanced Analytics

New Report: Changing the Landscape of Customer Experience with Advanced Analytics

Today’s financial consumer enjoys unprecedented information and choice, both in terms of channels and access to third party or crowdsourced opinion. Higher expectations support (and in part reflect) the skepticism that to a large degree defines the Millennial generation. These expectations underscore a fundamental shift in the power balance between the client and wealth manager, one reinforced by regulation such as the US Department of Labor conflict of interest rule

The ascendance of the client should be a call to action for wealth managers. As I discuss in a new report authored with my Celent colleagues Dan Latimore and Karlyn Carnahan, wealth management firms need to operationalize insights from new data sources, and bring servicing models up to date with their more sophisticated understanding of the client.

Campaigns and next best sales approaches that have worked in the past (or at least well enough to encourage firms to invest man hours in their design and execution) must be brought into the digital age. Too often these campaigns are a blunt hammer: they are built to sell product and ignore the evolving needs of the individual client, as well as the multiplicity of digital touch points useful to reach him or her. It is hardly surprising that the client reacts negatively to the presumption inherent in these offers.

Introducing The Cognitive Advisor

Introducing The Cognitive Advisor

Last week I published a report on a topic that has interested me for some time: the application of artificial intelligence (AI) technology to the wealth management business. To date, neither Celent nor its industry peers have written much about this topic, despite clear benefits related to advisor learning and discovery. This lack of commentary, and the industry skepticism that underlines it, reflects successive waves of disappointment around AI, and more recently, competition for research bandwidth from other areas of digital disruption, such as robo advice.

Another inhibition relates to taking on an industry shibboleth. How to reconcile AI or machine intelligence to the hands on, high touch nature of traditional wealth management? This challenge is real but overstated, even when one reaches the $1 million asset level that has defined the high net worth investor. Indeed, the extent to which wealth management is a technology laggard (in general, but also when compared to other financial services verticals) highlights the opportunity for disruption.

In particular, AI offers a means to circumvent the dead weight of restrictions presented by antiquated trust platforms and other legacy tech, a weight which reinforces advisor dependence on spreadsheets and other negative behaviors. As is set out in the report, it is precisely the combination of new behaviors and technologies that can help surmount the finite capabilities of the human advisor.

Guidance, not advice

Guidance, not advice

Last week Merrill Lynch announced the launch of its long awaited Guided Investing robo advisory platform. Investors get access to a fully automated managed account for only $5,000, compared to the $20,000 required for call center driven Merrill Edge.

A new type of hybrid model

It’s interesting that Merrill Lynch would launch another managed account platform at this point, given the narrow gap between the two program minimums. But industry wide fee compression underscores the importance of cost savings, and with Merrill Edge’s best growth behind it, even a call center is expensive compared to a digital first approach.

I say “digital first” because Guided Investing clients can still get access to a human advisor. In this case, however, the advisor delivers (in the words of a Merrill spokesman) “guidance” and “education”, and not investment advice. Advisors are able to explain product choice as well as why and how a portfolio is rebalanced, for example. Such capabilities reinforce the Merrill message that its portfolio models are not just algo driven, but managed by the CIO.

Compliance friendly

The compliance friendly terms “guidance” and “education” give another clue to Merrill’s intentions. Like BlackRock and other asset managers discussed in my previous post, Merrill wants to get ahead of the DoL rule and fill the advice gap that will be left by the rollout of a uniform fiduciary standard across both the qualified (retirement) and taxable investment spaces. It’s worth pointing out that Merrill announced its decision to stop selling commission based IRA accounts the same week it launched Guided Investing.

Compliance and economics are powerful (and mutually reinforcing) motivations. Especially when the economics are not just about cost savings, but about the chance to develop a whole new client segment. Guided Investing represents not just another robo platform, in short, but an effort to lower delivery costs and fill out the range of options Merrill offers clients, particularly younger and self-directed ones.

Merrill believes (correctly, in my view) that this type of managed investment solution will be as ubiquitous as mutual funds within five years, and so it has no choice but to move forward. Vanguard finds itself at the same crossroads, which is why the firm’s plan to launch a fully automated robo platform (as a complement to its $40 billion AUM Personal Advisory Services hybrid program) is probably the industry’s worst kept secret.

 

Shining light on the thinking at BlackRock

Shining light on the thinking at BlackRock

It’s clear that there’s more than a little chutzpah behind BlackRock’s demand for tougher regulatory oversight of robo advisors. This post probes the thinking behind it.

Does BlackRock, with FutureAdvisor in hand, want to shut the door on new robo entrants? A desire to forestall such competition would suggest a level of fear that I do not think exists. (Among other things, the robo narrative has moved past the independent or 1.0 stage). BlackRock’s main concern seems to be that the sloppy hands of existing competitors might result in regulatory sanction on everyone, and so put the hegemony enjoyed by BlackRock and its asset manager competitors at risk.

Neither faster, nor better, nor cheaper

While BlackRock may have paid $150 million for FutureAdvisor, I don’t think the firm believes it owns a better mousetrap. FutureAdvisor may have an innovative glide path feature (which may explain why FutureAdvisor has an older clientele than its robo competitors), but tax loss harvesting, 401(k) advice, “try before you buy” functionality and other core capabilities have become table stakes in robo world. If anything, BlackRock may believe that its proprietary ETFs (characterized by low tracking error and a broad product base, e.g., Japanese fixed income) outshine the plain vanilla offerings of Schwab and Vanguard, although this argument is undercut somewhat by the firm’s recent decision to drop fees.

Asset managers in the catbird seat  

Like the ETF business, robo advisory services have become increasingly commoditized, even as the DoL conflict of interest rule presents a massive tailwind for both. It’s a tricky time for asset managers seeking to shift their offer from manufactured product to advice based solutions.  BlackRock appears to feel it is in the catbird seat, and is perfectly happy to secure its hand and that of its asset manager competitors, all of whom have done well by automating their investments platforms. I’m not saying there’s collusion here, just a noteworthy confluence of interests.  

I’ll talk about the motivations behind the launch of another asset manager-backed robo in my next post.

In robo world, B2B = buyer beware

In robo world, B2B = buyer beware

The success of robo advisors in commoditizing the historically manual portfolio management process is proving their Achilles heel, as I noted in my last post. Incumbents have taken over the narrative. Yet the efforts of these incumbents to build, buy and partner with the robos comes with its own risks.

Foremost among these is how to implement robo advice within a multichannel ecosystem. As discussed in the report, Getting the House in Order: Consolidating Investment Platforms in the Wake of the Department of Labor Conflict of Interest Rule, the ability to deliver consistent advice across channels has become paramount in the new regulatory environment.

This consistency requires a clear view of assets held in house, which in turn implies eliminating product stacks and their underlying technology silos. Of the big four US wirehouses, Bank of America Merrill Lynch has led the way by consolidating five platforms into one. Their competitors are still trying to solve the problem.

Regional banks, with their legacy tech and limited budgets, are going to have a hard time getting this right. Asset managers are eager to help them launch robo platforms, despite the “me too” nature of the banks’ efforts. 

It’s hard to blame these asset managers for wanting to distribute their wares. B2B sales are in their DNA. But I’d point out that their headlong rush to abet bank robo contrasts with their cautious efforts to roll out on their own platforms.

Schwab spent months and millions to launch Intelligent Portfolios. UBS has moved much more slowly, and appears to be using SigFig as a placeholder until it can achieve the technological and service clarity demanded by clients and regulators alike. Fidelity danced with Betterment before rolling out Go through its retail branches. It's tepid if not touch and go.   

I don’t begrudge asset managers for taking their time. They have their own considerations, foremost distribution. That’s why they are enabling bank robo capabilities, even if it's not clear exactly how the banks will manage this. Why not give the teenager the keys to the Audi? But with their own clients, they have to get things right. They have shareholders to answer to, and the stakes are much higher.

Capital One Rolls Out a Bank Built Robo

Capital One Rolls Out a Bank Built Robo

In a blog post yesterday I took automated advisors to task for the black and white way (advisor-assisted “hybrid” model versus “digital only”) they have framed the robo debate. Imagine my surprise when I saw that Capital One’s brokerage arm had launched a platform addressing this very complaint.

The Capital One robo combines a digital interface with telephone access to advisors. It’s an advanced take on the hybrid models offered by Personal Capital and Vanguard, both of which use digital technology (iPads, smartphones and other interfaces) to enhance and scale the contribution of the individual advisor.

What these models do not do is digitize advice delivery. Yes, they deploy algorithms to develop risk based portfolios, but firms have been doing this for ages. The defining characteristic of robo (as opposed to automated) advice is the removal of the real life advisor.

Robot with Benefits

The Capital One robo or robot is a step in that direction in that it automates the entire portfolio manufacturing process, while giving investors the options of getting a wise uncle (or aunt) on the phone to discuss it. This process spans risk profiling and portfolio construction on the front end to compliance and funding at the back.

Needless to say, clients pay for the privilege, to the tune of 90 basis points. This is not much less than the average US advisor charges for his services, and it is a given that other firms will replicate this model, and at half the price. In the meantime, give Capital One kudos for being the first US based bank (Bank of Montreal, whom I discuss in a recent report, was the first in North America) to roll out a homegrown, pure play robo advisory platform.