1. Ongoing advice is now the operating model

The data from the survey says:

• 90% of clients are on ongoing advice  

• Average adviser manages around 150 clients  

• Average client has around £250,000 assets under advice  

Most firms aren’t delivering one-off advice; they’re running continuous advice businesses where every client relationship is effectively a long-term commitment.

That changes the risk profile significantly. ‍

‍Potential actions for firms:

• Review how consistent your ongoing review process is (not just how it’s documented)  

• Make sure file quality is repeatable and not adviser-dependent  

• Strengthen governance around ongoing suitability (where the risk sits now)

If 90% of your business is ongoing advice, your controls need to reflect that reality. ‍

‍

2. Small firms are carrying a lot of operational weight

The FCA survey shows a structural gap in support functions:

• 36% of small firms neither employ nor outsource paraplanning  

• Only 31% employ paraplanners  

• By contrast, 89% of large firms do  

For smaller firms, that can mean inefficiency and limited capacity if advisers are still doing a significant proportion of administration, reporting writing, file prep and compliance-heavy tasks.

Potential actions for firms:

• Review how much adviser time is spent on non-advice activity  

• Consider outsourcing paraplanning or compliance support where internal scale doesn’t justify hiring  

• Identify where operational bottlenecks are restricting growth

Don’t be afraid to ask, “Is this the best use of adviser time?”

‍

‍3. AI and technology adoption is widening the efficiency gap

Firms are mainly exploring AI for meeting notes and documentation, compliance and monitoring, and efficiency or automation tasks.

But the data shows that AI adoption remains uneven:

• 14% of small firms  

• 38% of medium firms  

• just over 50% of large firms  

The current gap could point to a wider, future disparity in ‘efficiency’ capabilities when it comes to costs, adviser capacity and scalability – giving larger firms who are early adopters another ‘efficiency’ advantage.

‍Potential actions for firms:

• Start with low-risk, high-value use like AI meeting summaries and admin automation  

• Focus on freeing adviser time, not replacing advice processes  

• Build internal comfort with tools before trying to overhaul systems  

It’s better to start with what’s available than to wait for ‘perfect’, as also advised by Cathi Harrison! ‍

‍

4. Vulnerability processes need to become more consistent and structured

Around 12% of clients are identified as vulnerable, according to the FCA survey data.

But the approach varies. Larger firms use structured frameworks and MI, while smaller firms rely more on adviser judgement and relationship knowledge.

This creates inconsistency in outcomes, and with increasing regulatory focus, consistency matters as much as identification.

Potential actions for firms:

• Introduce or formalise vulnerability identification frameworks  

• Ensure consistent recording and monitoring across advisers  

• Link vulnerability processes to management information, not just individual awareness  

Remember that strong outcomes for vulnerable clients come from structured systems. ‍

‍

5. Retirement advice concentration needs stronger frameworks

The survey highlights:

• 69% of clients are focused on pensions and retirement planning  

• Driven largely by the Defined Benefit > Defined Contribution transition and aging client base  

Most firms are highly exposed to one advice theme – one which is becoming more complex.

‍Potential actions for firms:

• Ensure retirement income strategies are clearly defined and consistently applied – consider a Centralised Retirement Proposition

• Strengthen sustainability and drawdown modelling approaches  

• Review how ongoing advice frameworks support long-term retirement outcomes  

The goal is to make sure retirement planning can done at scale, consistently.  ‍

‍

‍6. Governance is now directly linked to client outcome

One of the clearest findings from the data is the link between stronger governance structures and better identification and support of vulnerable clients – making good governance a compliance requirement, and a client outcome driver.

Potential actions for firms:

• Treat governance as part of service quality, not a separate function  

• Actively use MI is to monitor advice quality trends  

• Align compliance oversight with operational decision-making  

Governance is increasingly what separates “good intent” from consistent delivery.

‍

Drawing conclusions

Across all of these findings, a consistent pattern emerges.

Advice firms are operating in environments where:

• ongoing advice is the default model  

• operational load is unevenly distributed  

• technology adoption is fragmented  

• governance expectations are rising steadily  

‍

Our view is that the most resilient firms will use this data to inform continuous improvements that:

• reduce unnecessary adviser workload  

• build repeatable processes for ongoing advice  

• invest in scalable support structures  

• bring consistency to governance and vulnerability processes  

‍

This kind of operational consistency at scale can feel out of reach for smaller firms, but is entirely achievable.

Our team here at Verve is well-placed to support with the parts of your business that are most resource heavy but also the least scalable: compliance support, paraplanning, and business consultancy around structure, efficiency and governance.  

If you need to chat through your support needs, book a chat or drop us a line any time – our friendly team will be happy to help.

‍