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

sub-bgsidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

MARKET INSIGHTS

So we are now underwriting criminal scams?...

2 weeks 6 days ago

Glad to see the back of you Steve. You made financial more expensive, not more affordable as you claim, and presided ...

3 weeks 3 days ago

Completely agree Peter. The definition of 'significant change is circumstances relevant to the scope of the advice' is s...

2 months 3 weeks ago

ASIC has taken action against a Queensland adviser who was sentenced last May for misappropriating $1.8 million from his clients....

2 weeks 2 days ago

AMP is to launch a digital advice service to provide retirement advice to members of its AMP Super Fund, in partnership with Bravura Solutions. ...

2 weeks 2 days ago

A former Insignia Financial C-suite exec has taken on a leadership role at MUFG Retirement Solutions as it announces chief executive Dee McGrath will depart after six yea...

2 weeks 3 days ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS