More than 60 licensees report net adviser loss

More than 60 licensees posted net adviser losses this week which translates into a total of 98 adviser roles, according to the weekly analysis of the Australian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC’s) Financial Adviser Register (FAR) by HFS Consulting. 

Bell Potter and SMSF Advisers Network both reported a loss of seven advisers, while Financial Services Partners was down six. At the same time, both Garvan Financial Planning (GWM) (MLC) and Interprac down five adviser roles.  

Following this, nine licensees had reported having lost two adviser roles each which was followed by a long tail of 46 licensees losing net one adviser roles, the firm said. 

On top of that, eight licensees closed up this week effectively reducing their numbers to zero. 

HFS’ director, Colin Williams, confirmed that again this week the majority of licensees that ceased operations were associated with accountants. 

“At the licensee owner level, 48 licensee owners had net losses for a total of 91 adviser roles, with MLC Group having the greatest loss at eight(-8) followed by Bell Potter and NTAA (SMSF Advisers Network) both (-7). Easton Group and IOOF were both down (-6),” he added. 

By contrast, looking at year-to-date numbers for the larger licensee owners, with more than 50 advisers on their books, MLC led the way for the adviser roles losses with (-97) and was followed by AMP Group (-93) and IOOF at (-88). 

As far as the gains for the week were concerned, 27 licensees reported net adviser role gains of 36 roles, with RI Advice which continues its “switch” within the IOOF Group, leading the way. 

Also, this week five new licensees, which accounted jointly for seven adviser roles, commenced their operations this week. 

All in all, as of 22 April the number of actual advisers dropped to 20,241, while the number of adviser roles moved down to 20,617. 




Recommended for you

Author

Comments

Comments

What do you expect? It's just not fun anymore, let alone profitable.

It's an even bigger week if you count the Aware Super redundancies

Dear LNP, MIA Jane Hume, FARSEA, ASIC,
Please be advised you will not have a job soon as ALL Advisers will have left the building.
Bye :-/

This is a trickle of exits compared to the tsunami coming from Jan 1 after the FASEA exam cut off, thousands more going. Over regulated, exhorbitant ASIC levies, PI costs, etc. It is no longer worth the time, effort and stress. There will be no need for many of the jobs in ASIC in the FP area, TPB, AFCA, etc.

Absolutely correct... overnight on the 31st December, thousands of advisers will no longer be qualified, and we will see those deregistrations manifest quickly into the new year...

I am the only one for over 2 years who has been - correctly predicting that we will have no more than 5,000 registered financial planners by 2026, everyone else had the number around 20,000, a milestone we have now passed even Adviser ratings which monitor adviser data on a granular level has revised down their forecast to 13,000 less than half of the long term average of 28,000.

but, 13,000 is way too optimistic. there will be a huge drop off first quarter of Jan 2022, this won't be apparent until the second quarter of 2022.

then it will be a steady decline with a huge drop off the first quarter of 2026.

it's adios muchachos time. most won't survive. 5,000 it will be. it's way too difficult to run a business over the top regulations.

I don't think you're the only one who has predicted that level. I'm sure there are more of us who believe the number will be that low, and have believed it for at least the last two years, but not publicised it.

However, I have a feeling you may be too generous. I personally believe that while ASIC continue to persecute the adviser and licensee population, PI cover will become more expensive to a degree of unaffordability, excepting for a select few, and this will be the biggest killer even before the end of 2025.

Personally, I doubt there will be 5,000 advisers left standing.

yeah, but no one has put it out there like me.

5,000 probably less by 2026. it's gonna happen.

i'll come back to post it. #5,000

I find it hard to think that advisers will drop off if they have done the exam, but perhaps for many passing the exam will get them through to 2026 and that will be enough...no need to undertake further education, slip quietly away then...there doesn't seem to be too many booked in for July exam, and lets face it if you haven't done it by now you are not serious on staying in the industry or are supremely confident of passing!

If there's 5,000 registered on the FAR, that would be about 3,000 practising advisers.

There will be lots of paraplanners and compliance bureaucrats on the FAR who are good at exams and assignments, but hopeless at dealing with people or running a business.

So with 5,000 to 13,000 advisers left basically we could and should all double our Advice fees.
Basic Economics 101 that I learnt at Macquarie Uni (not that FARSEA wanted to recognise my degree from Govt Uni), says supply and demand.
Demand for advice continues to grow.
Population grows.
Super Assets grow to nearly $3Trill
And Adviser numbers / supply decimated by at least half.
Basic economics says that Advice fees can double.
Would seem like Great days ahead for those Advisers that survive.
But let’s not forget that any increase in profit is more than offset by ever increasing BS REGS costs and RED TAPE madness.
Great job LNP, ASIC, FARSEA, AFCA, etc

While there may be only 5,000 professional advisers left, there will be huge growth in unqualified, unlicensed, unregulated advice to fill the gap. Consumers don't know the difference, and in most cases will just go with the simplest, cheapest option.

Ideally our so called "consumer protection" regulators should be cracking down on unlicensed advice, and educating consumers on the benefits of dealing with a professional. But instead they persecute licensed advisers for minor administrative issues in an attempt to drive them out of business, and ignore harmful unlicensed advice. They have failed in their role of consumer protection. If only Australian consumers had a genuine consumer association to stand up for their interests.

Add new comment