Robo-advice firms need to manage risks

robo-advice alternative finance

1 September 2017
| By Jassmyn |
image
image
expand image

While robo-advice could provide financial advisers with scalability and affordability, it is not without risk, according to Marsh Australia’s financial and professional risk practice, FINPRO.

In a blogpost by FINPRO, its national development leader Andrew Dawson said there were risks involved with two choices firms looking to provide robo-advice would have to make.

The choices were either to enlist a third party to establish and operate the service on the firm’s behalf, or develop proprietary software and dedicate an internal team to running the services.

“In both instances, ASIC [the Australian Securities and Investments Commission] has mandated several requirements within RG 255 [Regulatory Guide 255] that seek to manage the risks inherent with this field,” Dawson said.

Dawson highlighted that among other rules, under RG 255 robo-advice providers must:

  • Be able to demonstrate they had adequate resources;
  • Have adequate business continuity backup and disaster recovery plans for any systems that support the delivery of digital advice to clients;
  • Ensure that when outsourcing functions that relate to digital advice:
    •  There must be measures in place to ensure that due skill and care are taken in choosing suitable outsourced providers, and these providers will be monitored;
    • The licensee that outsources any functions must remain responsible for the financial services provided; and
  • Establish and maintain adequate risk management systems and to have a structured and systemic process for identifying, evaluating and managing risks.

Dawson noted that on cyber risks and information security ASIC was mandating among other things that:

  • You are expected to assess cyber security using recognised frameworks;
  • You must assess IT security arrangements against recognised standards; and
  • You must have in place adequate security compliance measures in regard to cloud technology.

“RG 255 reiterates the need for robo-advice firms to have appropriate professional indemnity (PI) and compensation cover, matching those set out for financial advisers in RG 126,” he said.

“Insurance brokers have a key role to play in helping robo-advice firms to manage these risks.” 

Read more about:

AUTHOR

 

Recommended for you

 

MARKET INSIGHTS

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Chris Cornish

By having trustees supervise client directed payments from their pension funds, Stephen Jones and the federal Labor gove...

2 days ago
Chris Cornish

Now we now the size of Stephen Jones' CSOLR tax, I doubt anyone will be employer any new financial adviser from this poi...

2 days ago
JOHN GILLIES

Amazing ! Between the beginning of licencing Feb 2002 and 2008 this was a very good stable industry.Then the do-gooders...

2 days 20 hours ago

AustralianSuper and Australian Retirement Trust have posted the financial results for the 2022–23 financial year for their combined 5.3 million members....

10 months 1 week ago

A $34 billion fund has come out on top with a 13.3 per cent return in the last 12 months, beating out mega funds like Australian Retirement Trust and Aware Super. ...

10 months ago

The verdict in the class action case against AMP Financial Planning has been delivered in the Federal Court by Justice Moshinsky....

10 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND