Most Aussies believe advisers don’t put best interests first

30 June 2020

Only 37% of Australian retail investors believe their financial adviser always puts their interest first in 2019 down 7% from the previous year, according to a survey.

The survey by CFA Societies Australia found that this dropped to 25% when it came to institutional investors and 35% of global retail investors. Another 75% believed their adviser was legally required to put their interests above their own.

While just 24% of retail investors trusted the financial services industry, down from 31% in 2018 and 47% globally, 81% of Australian investors agree that having a financial adviser can add value.

Related News:

CFA Societies Australia chief executive, Lisa Carroll, said: “With interest rates at low or negative levels in many places in the world, finding new opportunities to invest will be important to investors meeting their financial objectives, and those with an adviser are better equipped to consider these options.

“Nearly two-thirds of retail investors with an adviser are interested in accessing new investment products, compared with only about one-third of retail investors without an adviser.”

The survey also found that following the Hayne Royal Commission, 66% of Australian investors did not plan to make any changes to the way they obtained advice in response to the commission’s findings and 40% believed the commission would improve professional standards.

“CFA Societies Australia continues to promote the importance of access to quality financial advice, particularly in times of market turbulence. We advocate for and support the continuing professionalisation of the industry, including a clear best interest duty and independence of advice,” Carroll said.

Recommended for you




Of course, the vertically integrated intrafund advisers, earning nice salaries & BONUSES (without having to receive informed consent for those bonuses) are definitely working for the best interests of their fund

Firstly, the Hayne Royal Commission was supposed to look at banking, however there were no significant changes and the banks got away scot free, as always, and as always advisers were the only ones targeted.

Secondly, what Steve said above.

Thirdly it is almost impossible to comply with the Best Interests Duty in a court room. Even a rubbish lawyer can always find a way the clients best interests could be served.

Forthly, why are advisers (and no mortgage brokers) the only ones in the industry who have to abide by BID? What about bankers, property spruikers, accountants and especially lawyers.

haha, if you are in charge of drafting the law, you aren't going to subject yourself or your fraternity to what you believe will be difficult to comply with but can impose on others.

that's why lawyers draft up carve outs for themselves from everything ,they also have a established body with influence so they get the carve outs.

planners and mortgage brokers have 0 influence and so anytime the FPA and AFA advocate for it, the government and those in charge do almost the opposite to punish us

the only time anyone will think about financial planners is after 2024, when it will have whittled down to being non-existent and people will wonder why

Both comments above are 100% correct. The system is biased and corrupt to the core. In a couple of years those stupid politicians will be asking what went wrong? How did we end up with only 10,000 financial advisers or less? Idiots!

Add new comment