View more on these topics

Can automated risk-profiling paint the full picture?

Can automated risk profiling top human reviews?

Standing out from the crowd, single figure raising armAdvisers cannot outperform risk-profiling tools but need to ensure that they ask the right questions of clients to make their skills indispensable, say experts.

Risk-profiling tools have faced continuing scrutiny on whether they are fit for purpose, with new discussion emerging over the unconventional asset allocations they can lead to.

While risk-profiling tools can measure how much clients can objectively afford to lose relative to their capacity for risk, translating that accurately into investment advice is a job arguably better left to humans.

Experts say a one-step digital process that matches attitude-to-risk scores to risk-rated portfolios will never be accurate. Nor will following a pre-set plan protect advisers if the FCA asks questions about suitability.

As the compliance crunch pushes more advisers towards digital solutions, Money Marketing has looked at the growing appetite for risk tools and the next steps advisers should be taking to improve their approach to risk modelling.

Asking the basic questions

Dynamic Planner is the most widely-used profiling tool of 2018, according to Nucleus research, followed by Finametrica, Morningstar, eValue, Oxford Risk and Defaqto. Just 15 per cent of advisers solely use in-house systems.

Consultant and former FCA technical specialist Rory Percival says: “There are a number of tools in the market, especially the psychometric ones, that are very robust at assessing the client’s risk profile.

“There is a lot of science behind psychometrics and there’s a lot of data behind them to prove their value.”

He adds: “A good tool will be 90 per cent correct. As a financial adviser you don’t want to be sitting there in front of the one in 10 people where it’s wrong, because that is too high of a proportion that you’re giving misleading advice to.”

Psychometric risk profiling benefits

  • Results are reliable and consistent on retest
  • Questions are framed to take the emotional aspects of money into account
  • Measurement is the basis for framing and managing investment expectations
  • Questions are descriptive in nature and do not require calculations

Source: FinaMetrica

The question that remains unanswered is how the risk rating for a model portfolio or certain investments can be mapped to the same scientific accuracy as the risk profile of a client.

Percival says: “There is no single valid measurement of risk as an investment, and volatility isn’t a good metric for risk in all scenarios, so the mapping stage becomes a challenge.

Half of advisers not reviewing risk mapping tool methods

“Advisers need to be good at communication and interaction with their client, and probing questions that get to the bottom of how they would really respond to risks to get round this.”

Getting a genuine reaction as to how a client would feel about their investments in the event of a market crash requires good soft skills.

Percival says: “Building strong communicative skills that bring forward a true emotional response from clients would be the best practice approach for advisers.”

A Money Marketing poll this week asked whether respondents believe accurate risk profiling can be done by robots or a similar technology alternative. Half of the respondents agree that it can. A total of 35 per cent say no, while 15 per cent are unsure.

Wheeler-SoniaAdviser view – Sonia Wheeler, managing director, Essential Wealth

It is important to fully understand a client’s situation and to understand their objectives to a level that makes them meaningful, realistic and quantifiable as far as possible.

When you are at this stage of the relationship with clients, questions to determine their attitude to risk would cover their attitude towards financial risk, how they view their past financial decisions, and their view of risk versus return.

It’s also important to ask how others would view their attitude towards taking financial risks, how they would feel if their investments fall, and their realistic capacity for loss.

Financial & Technology Research Centre director Ian McKenna says the increasing support for automated risk tools is surprising, but overdue.

He says: “If there is recognition within the adviser community that they can start to work alongside technology, that’s going to be a huge step forward because that hasn’t always been the case.”

Digging deeper

Advisers also need to revamp their risk-profiling process to address new requirements under Mifid II.

Despite this, more than a quarter (29 per cent) of advisers at a Dynamic Planner conference in February in the immediate aftermath of the introduction of Mifid II said they did not have a consistent definition of risk.

Oxford Risk head of behavioural finance Greg Davies says there is also little effort placed on understanding how investor risk capacity needs balancing against investors’ expectations on returns.

Mid- or high-risk investors usually expect a direct pay-off for their risk score in the form of high returns.

Davies says: “No one quite understands what that risk means, and there are no good tools out there for that. Typically the industry, regulators and tool providers have just focused on the basic risk tolerance, because that is still the easy piece of the puzzle.”

Adviser view – Tim Harvey, managing director, HR Independent Financial Services

Risk profiling is integral and I can’t see how an adviser could maintain they have a robust and repeatable process without that being the starting point.

Advisers should stick to asking about how much volatility a client wants. We test drove some tools some years ago and have the Dynamic Planner tool in our process now.

If you’re a client, we go through our own questions, make a report and then mark existing funds to that, track their performance, and then determine whether the attitude to risk matches or not. It is dangerous in the extreme to pretend you can’t use a tool as your starting point.

The Oxford Risk questionnaire is used by Standard Life, Brewin Dolphin and the Bank of England, as well as the Royal Bank of Scotland, HSBC and Nutmeg.

Davies says it comprises 10 questions and provides a risk score between zero and 50.

The tool, like most, is not designed to take state of life or financial goals into account, or the capacity to deal with monetary loss.

Although Davies says working to meet suitability requirements across the industry is “rife with poor practice”, Percival says advisers cannot expect to be psychologists.

He says: “Risk profiling is a science and a single adviser wouldn’t have the extent of knowledge or data to do that. I don’t think any of the tools do the necessary quantification particularly well. That’s the area the market needs to work on better.”

McKenna adds: “Big data can do a lot comparing portfolios with outcomes, but communicating that to the customer is also where machines have a long way to go.”

Head to Head: Are digital tools more important than humans in profiling risk?

Yes – Ian McKenna, director at Finance & Technology Research Centre

Although it may sound like science fiction technology to understand consumers’ attitudes to financial products by measuring their emotions, this has been in development for some years.

Perhaps the best-known player is nViso; its system measures micro-expressions on a person’s face to understand what they are really thinking, which may not always be the same as what they are saying.
Extensive work has also been conducted in the area of emotional recognition.

A number of other organisations are developing similar technologies and are not yet talking publicly about the work, and several industry technology players are conducting research.

Like so many areas where technology enhances the advice process, these tools complement the role of the traditional adviser and so it is unwise to discount what the science can offer.

Kemp-Dan-Morningstar-2014-CUT_JPEG-CROPPED1No – Dan Kemp, chief investment officer EMEA at Morningstar Investment Management

A well-rounded judgement requires human traits and reminds us of the key role that advisers play. Advisers also need an appreciation of the behavioural biases of a client, an understanding of their attitude to money and a skill at eliciting useful answers.

It seems incredible that we are still debating how best to use a risk tolerance assessment tool. This lack of progress is due, in part, to attempts by advisers and portfolio managers to reduce their business risk via standardisation.

Regardless of the quality and flexibility of the tool being used, an accurate assessment will often require a multifaceted approach used at different stages of the process.

A mechanic would not assess engine failure risk without a regular service, nor would they complete an engine overhaul using only a Swiss army knife.

Recommended

MM-AutumnBudgetBanner
3

Lifetime allowance 2018/19 increase confirmed but pensions absent

The Government has confirmed that the lifetime allowance 2018/19 will rise in line with inflation, but savers have been offered little else in the Autumn Budget. The lifetime allowance will increase from £1m to £1,030,000 to match CPI from 2018/19.  Though the maximum amount the can be saved each year into a Junior Isa or […]

Delivering advice and guidance in the workplace

Three advisers share their ideas and experiences of helping employees with their financial decisions The workplace is instrumental in engaging people to save for retirement. How are advisers helping employers provide advice or guidance to their employees? Telephone guidance Financial education provider and advice firm Wealth at Work recently launched a telephone guidance service to […]

Pound-Sterling-GBP-Money-Currency-Andrew-Michaels-700x450.jpg

Graphic content – May; UK economic data has finally turned for the worse

In June 2016, immediately before the Brexit referendum, a curious thing happened. Despite the colossal uncertainty facing the UK, economic data actually started to come in above consensus forecasts. Citi’s economic surprise index nudged into positive territory, which meant that UK economic data had on the whole outperformed consensus forecasts over the prior three months. […]

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 5 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. I use the dynamic planner risk profiler but find that clients often make statements to the effect that their investment provides an essential income and they feel quite cautious about investments, but then the risk profiler scores them as medium risk. We inevitably agree to downgrade them from 5 to 4 (or whatever). There is no good replacement, at present, for a proper discussion.

    • Agreed… both with the anecdote which I see time and again and also the final point (on the basis the discussion is used to verify the ATR tools output).

      I’ve also seen cases where clients try ‘give the right answer’. There is also a danger of confirmation bias… “I’m medium risk and that sounds like a medium risk answer”.

  2. I am quoted as saying ‘There are a number of tools in the market … that are very robust at assessing capacity for loss.’ This meant to be ‘assessing the client’s risk profile’. The risk profiling tools are currently mostly inadequate at dealing with the client’s capacity for loss

    • Completely agree Rory.

      But good news… Oxford Risk has is just about to launch the world’s first dynamic risk capacity engine that can calculate the appropriate, adjusted risk profile taking into account clients’ financial situation, goals, and time horizon … alongside risk tolerance. Our streamlined tool will seamlessly adjusts for simplified vs full advice, as well enabling a seamless transition from accumulation to decumulation.

  3. Some other quick corrections on this article:

    1. Oxford Risk don’t provide suitability tools to the Bank of England (as they don’t use such tools), but we have done consulting work for them.

    2. Our Risk Tolerance tool comprises 8 questions (not 10), but we interleave these with questions to provide scores on other behavioural finance personality scales to provide valuable information to enhance client engagement and experience over the journey.

    3. Our Risk Tolerance tool provides a standard output into 5 risk profiles, not 50 (though the underlying scale is much more granular). We have variations on the tool for client organisations with 7 or 10 profiles. See this article for a discussion on whether risk profiling outputs should be standardised: https://www.oxfordrisk.com/our-insights/should-risk-profiling-tools-have-standardised-scales

    4. It is correct that our Risk Tolerance tool doesn’t account for cashflows, goals, or stage of life – nor should it. These are part of risk capacity, and we have just launched our dynamic risk capacity tool to account for all these, which integrates seamlessly with our risk tolerance tool.

    5. We also have new robust behavioural API tools for both a) financial personality assessment, and b) knowledge and experience.

Leave a comment

Close

Why register with Money Marketing ?

Providing trusted insight for professional advisers.  Since 1985 Money Marketing has helped promote and analyse the financial adviser community in the UK and continues to be the trusted industry brand for independent insight and advice.

News & analysis delivered directly to your inbox
Register today to receive our range of news alerts including daily and weekly briefings

Money Marketing Events
Be the first to hear about our industry leading conferences, awards, roundtables and more.

Research and insight
Take part in and see the results of Money Marketing's flagship investigations into industry trends.

Have your say
Only registered users can post comments. As the voice of the adviser community, our content generates robust debate. Sign up today and make your voice heard.

Register now

Having problems?

Contact us on +44 (0)20 7292 3712

Lines are open Monday to Friday 9:00am -5.00pm

Email: customerservices@moneymarketing.com