View more on these topics

Chris Gilchrist: The rights and wrongs of IFA forecasts

Chris Gilchrist 700

I do not question for a minute the predictions of the EY team Money Marketing recently reported on about the future of independent versus restricted advice. EY’s Malcolm Kerr knows more about this market and its economics than anyone. But I want to agree to disagree and focus on where IFAs will not only be strong and successful but hip. I do not mean hip as in body replacement parts but hip as in values because independence reflects the values of IFAs’ target customers.

First, however, EY’s estimate that half the advice market will be restricted by 2021 is about right, though I do reckon its estimates for takeover of small firms – 200 to 400 per year – may be exceeded. Also, the life companies’ rush into distribution, soon to be followed by the banks, could push up the restricted market share.

Does this matter? In a technical sense, no, because the independent/restricted division is somewhat artificial, especially as regards the “whole of market” research issue. But there are two key issues wealthier and smarter investors will increasingly regard as critical.

First is independence in its primary meaning. Most people want their children to become financially independent. They know exactly what this means. Likewise, the kind of clients IFAs want – business owners, start-up entrepreneurs, high earners – know what independence means when they look at other businesses. Do the owners of these businesses have control? Can they make decisions without referring to a hierarchy of bosses? Do clients get the services of senior people, and the same senior people?

On all these counts, IFAs score highly. They are capable of adapting their service propositions to the needs of the client in a way large firms usually cannot or will not. They can be responsive and make quick decisions. As businesses, they can form relationships with other professional firms where they work together as equals. A national accountancy firm might prefer to deal with a national restricted adviser but will a regional law firm take that view? I think not.

Second is investment. Professional firms, whether independent or restricted, will have centralised investment propositions that ensure consistent outcomes in terms of suitability. But large firms will do this by becoming investment managers and taking a bigger share of profit (though not necessarily of income) from asset management than advice. Independent firms will instead have a range of propositions for different client segments, employing combinations of in house, outsourced and insourced investment solutions.

So long as buyers of advice busin-esses believe profits derived from asset management are worth more than ongoing advice fees, the trend of integrated advice and asset manage-ment will continue. Since the trend is based on this belief (as reflected in business valuations) rather than on any proven operational efficiencies or gains to clients, it is likely to end before many IFA business owners retire. I hope and believe they are taking a longer-term view.

So while the number of IFA firms may shrink quite fast, the sweet spot will be IFAs with regional strength and relationships with regional law and accountancy firms. Such firms, I believe, will account for a rising share of high-net-worth advice over the next decade.

Chris Gilchrist is director of Fiveways Financial Planning

Recommended

Lee Robertson
2

Lee Robertson: Time to move on from independent versus restricted debate

So it appears the move towards restricted is gathering a fair bit of pace, with the news more firms are being snapped up by larger, life assurance company-backed wealth managers, among others. Many of these are excellent firms too: chartered, profitable, award winning and highly admired. The cost pressures of being regulated – including the […]

adviser-clients
3

The verdict: Can advisers be independent and remain profitable?

Three quarters of advisers say it is possible to provide an independent advice service and be profitable, according to a Money Marketing poll. The survey of 256 advisers found 72 per cent backed the sustainability of IFAs despite recent deals that have seen large independent firms become restricted. However, a quarter (28 per cent) said […]

Europe: banking on a recovery

Neptune video: Europe — banking on a recovery

Arguing that the eurozone crisis is over, watch Rob Burnett, head of European equities at Neptune, discuss the sectors that he’s investing in to harness the recovery. 

In the video, Burnett addresses the following: 

• The primary drivers of the eurozone’s economic recovery
• The turnaround in individual countries’ current accounts
• Sectors best positioned to harness the recovery, without offering undue exposure to risk

Newsletter

News and expert analysis straight to your inbox

Sign up

Comments

There are 2 comments at the moment, we would love to hear your opinion too.

  1. You are so right. I think you may have missed a couple of points. The smaller firm has continuity of adviser that the large firm does not. In many cases the adviser is the owner or partner and accordingly is there for the long run. In lager firms advisers tend to come and go, so that the client is foisted with a new face every so often.

    As the owner or partner, the IFA can set their own tariffs, which advisers in larger firms certainly cannot do. This together with the likelihood of not having to charge VAT makes the IFA far more competitive than the larger firm.

    Being regional is not necessarily a given. Many small firms have clients nationwide (as I did). Not only will IFAs have relationships with law and accountancy firms, but also with independent stockbrokers, who bizarrely under current rules are classified as restricted and who now refer clients to IFAs to ensure that such matters as life cover, pensions and inheritance tax are covered.

    The future for the committed IFA has never been brighter and the move to restricted by the many is of inestimable benefit to those who remain steadfast.

  2. chris gilchrist 11th May 2016 at 3:52 pm

    Harry, I entirely agree about the owner-managed firm’s ability to set fees. On your other point, with Skype and other remote meeting technology improving all the time, being physically close to clients may not be that important. But for new clients face-to-face will still I think be a big part of most firms’ onboarding process.

Leave a comment