Robo-advice firms need to manage risks

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-bg sidebar subscription

Never miss the latest news and developments in wealth management industry

Squeaky'21

My view is that after 2026 there will be quite a bit less than 10,000 'advisers' (investment advisers) and less than 100...

1 week 1 day ago
Jason Warlond

Dugald makes a great point that not everyone's definition of green is the same and gives a good example. Funds have bee...

1 week 1 day ago
Jasmin Jakupovic

How did they get the AFSL in the first place? Given the green light by ASIC. This is terrible example of ASIC's incompet...

1 week 2 days ago

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

9 months 2 weeks 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. ...

9 months ago

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

9 months 2 weeks ago

TOP PERFORMING FUNDS

ACS FIXED INT - AUSTRALIA/GLOBAL BOND