Post-Conflict of Interest Rule to Focus on Risk Over Return

New research from global analytics firm Cerulli Associates indicates that compliance with the new rule is the number one priority of managed account sponsors.

The Department of Labor (DOL)’s Conflict of Interest rule main purpose is to help plan participants and Individual Retirement Account (IRA) holders, who often lack investment knowledge, receive expert advice in their best interest. This puts managed account sponsors in a position to educate advisers on everything that could be considered a conflict of interest, as well as changes to documentation procedures and technological systems, says global research firm Cerulli Associates.

According to lawmakers, conflicts relating to financial advice cost Americans approximately $17 billion every year. To limit risk, advisers may seek to reduce the number of products available, Cerulli reports.

For more stories like this, sign up for the PLANADVISERdash daily newsletter.

“With the implementation of the new rule, sponsors will embrace a portfolio construction philosophy that seeks to reduce risk, lower fees, and use passive investment vehicles,” says Tom O’Shea, associate director at Cerulli.

O’Shea adds “Advisors report that by 2018, 58% of ETFs they use in client portfolios will be pure passive vehicles, while 21% will be active ETFs and 20% will be strategic beta ETFs. Home offices’ desire to mitigate risk presents an opportunity for actively managed funds.”

Eventually, Cerulli notes, plan sponsors may want advisers to turn over portfolios to the home office. The firm’s data indicate that home-office model portfolios often outperform adviser-driven portfolios, and pose less of a compliance risk.

While Cerulli notes that home-office personnel may find advisers resisting the risk controls placed on their accounts by parent firms, their research suggests that “very few advisers understand the risk embedded in the portfolios they create for clients.”

Cerulli cites a senior executive at a major asset manager in saying that “In some 60/40 portfolios, up to 90% of the risk is equity volatility.”

O’Shea says, “We expect asset managers to see a greater demand for passive ETFs in managed accounts, which will result in clients owning very similar, cookie-cutter portfolios. In order to set themselves apart, financial consultants will have to focus on other higher order investment advisory activities, especially goal-based planning.”

PANC 2016: Advice and Robo Advisers

Robo advisers are likely here to stay; as they proliferate, how will traditional advisers stay competitive?

In moderating a PLANADVISER National Conference panel discussion on robo-advisers, Jeb Graham, retirement plan consulting partner with CAPTRUST Advisors, asked a direct question of the attending advisers: “How big of a disruption do you expect from robo adviser competition?”

The flash poll showed most feel robo is only minimal to moderate threat today, and looking out five years it will be about the same, despite the likely entrance of more and more technology providers into the traditional financial advisory domain.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

According to panelist Jeffrey Hemker, national sales manager in the retirement division at Invesco, advisers seem to have grown at least somewhat comfortable with the idea that robo will be a source of competition. But many advisers are also coming to view robo in a fundamentally different way, he said, understanding that the best parts of robo can be folded in to support the traditional adviser.

“If you remember years ago, internet banking was really something that seemed new and different,” Hemker explained. “You may even remember the story of Netbank, which was a tech startup that was going to totally disrupt everything we knew about brick and mortar banking. Well, what’s the case now? The big traditional providers have found their own ways to embrace digital banking and basically beat the disruptors at their own game. Netback, for example, has gone out of business while many traditional banks are thriving thanks in no small part to digital technology.”

Jylanne Dunne, a senior vice president for Fidelity’s clearing and custody solutions business, agreed wholeheartedly with that assessment. She observed that, even during this time of major regulatory shifts, she actually gets far more questions on robo-advice than on any other subject. Many advisers come to the conversation with serious concern, only to come away with new ideas about how to make digital advice work for their practices and clients.

“Our partners come in and they want to know, what does the rise of robo mean for me?” Dunne said. “Where we start the discussion is by asking, what problem are you trying to solve? We let them know right from the beginning that robo-advice can be just as much an opportunity as it is a challenge or hurdle.”

NEXT: The robo-advice spectrum is wide 

Hemker observed that he has already seen many traditional retirement adviser and investment firms successfully embrace different elements of robo—including his own firm, which recently acquired the robo adviser platform Jemstep.

“We are a great example of how robo can complement the traditional services of advisers and investment providers,” he suggested. “Jemstep offers robo adviser service to advisers rather than directly taking over and managing assets. Previously it had been an online automated investment platform as well, before shifting gears to offer its software instead.”

Dunne agreed with the sentiment: “One adviser we work with has recently started bringing in digital planning tools—which many would classify as robo-advice—to enrollment meetings. It’s an opportunity to create an interactive, technology-based planning experience right from the start. A lot of wealth managers are figuring out where they want to be on this spectrum. At one end it is full self-service, and on the other end the adviser is still very much front and center, simply leveraging new pieces of technology where possible.”

Both Hemker and Dunne suggested that finding new successes via robo-implementation “will always be about leveraging the technology to support better discussions between clients and advisers.” In other words, there’s very little reason to think that robo advisers will be able to wholly disrupt the role of the traditional adviser in the way some seem to want to.

“We believe technology is changing the customer and the adviser experience for the better,” Dunne concluded. “We will continue to work with firms to consider their technology and how it’s perceived by clients. The more successful advisers are on these measures, the better their firm performance is on average. I think it goes to show we can all coexist together and together we can create more wealth and reach more investors.”

«