Connect with us

Finance

How AI will change the ways financial advisers manage your money

Published

on

How AI will change the ways financial advisers manage your money

Innovation in financial advice is sometimes met with this feeling of existential anxiety from financial advisers who worry that new technology will negatively affect their jobs — or at the very least, reduce their value. We’ve experienced this hype cycle repeatedly in financial advice, as fledgling technologies tend to create anxiety for advisers by automating or modifying legacy processes and services they historically managed.

While the concerns around job security are understandable, advisers can’t let that unease cloud the good that technology has brought to the advice industry — especially the ways it’s enhanced how advisers serve their clients. Technology has helped lower advisers’ costs and overhead by delivering efficiencies, including streamlining client onboarding and portfolio construction. And it has fundamentally improved their ability to deliver a more personalized experience for clients — cementing the durable value of coaching and guidance from human advisers. 

Fast forward to today, and the technology driving headlines is generative AI. This rapidly evolving technology has the promise and potential to change the ways we interact with nearly everything, including financial advice. As GenAI becomes prevalent in technology solutions across the industry, advisers would be well-served to consider its meaningful benefits and the accompanying risks, instead of viewing it as a fad or threat.  

Evaluating GenAI’s potential for advisers

There are many ways GenAI can provide value, but for advisers, most notable are the ways in which the technology can help streamline and augment administrative tasks. Here are three time-scaling benefits GenAI can provide advisers so they can prioritize more valuable tasks to help their clients reach their goals:

1. Content generation: GenAI can lend a hand with content generation for the routine communications that advisers often spend their time agonizing over — helping deliver personalized communications like standard client check-ins, meeting reminders and market updates.

Advertisement

2. Knowledge management: Another of GenAI’s core use cases for advisers is in synthesizing and distilling a lot of information quickly. For example, GenAI can summarize comparisons between products, helping advisers make educated decisions more quickly for their clients. And rather than spending hours parsing through projections, lengthy annual reports and commentary to understand the latest market conditions or outlook, advisers can use GenAI to immediately summarize key takeaways and translate those insights into value for clients. GenAI can even help to distill prior client correspondence into more easily digestible notes and prompts as advisers prepare for upcoming meetings.   

3. Code generation: Just as GenAI can help develop and draft routine content, it can also generate web-page coding, helping advisers upload content on their websites for clients more quickly. And for larger advisory firms, GenAI-assisted code generation can help advisers and their software developers expedite custom technology solutions that assist with client onboarding and back-office tasks like data analysis, trading and operations. It can also support their ability to more seamlessly integrate internal systems for CRM, trading and portfolio management. 

Evolving technology has its risks

GenAI carries several risks if left unchecked, further reinforcing the importance of having a human adviser in the loop. While the time-scaling benefits of GenAI are attractive, advisers must have a framework in place to address risks, both to protect their practice and to safeguard private client information. 

One risk, for example, is jumping into a GenAI-focused partnership without conducting sufficient due diligence. We’ve witnessed explosive growth in GenAI technology, and new tools and platforms are popping up every day that may, at face value, seem like a good fit. It’s critical that advisers develop guidelines to vet potential partners and their technology, focusing on expertise, experience, client set and information-security measures. 

Another important risk advisers will need to guard against is any lack of awareness around the parameters of the GenAI platform they’re operating in. GenAI technology can be private, but some platforms are open to the public — like ChatGPT, for example — and advisers should consider oversight measures to ensure no confidential, proprietary or client information is shared. 

Advertisement

Lastly, advisers should develop processes to spot risks related to hallucinations and biases. Hallucinations can occur when AI is prompted to provide a response to a question it hasn’t been trained to answer. Instead of not answering the question, AI can hallucinate and provide an incorrect response that sounds convincing. Additionally, GenAI tools can also suffer from racial and gender biases. For example, GenAI could recommend a lower investment-risk tolerance for women regardless of their actual appetite for risk. It is crucial that advisers understand the source data behind the AI they’re using, and have plans in place to check against unexpected hallucinations and biases that may perpetuate prejudices or stereotypes.  

With GenAI, advisers can more effectively manage their time — their most scarce and valuable asset — and devote more energy to creating personalized experiences and building deeper relationships with clients. Vanguard research shows that relationship-oriented services are a key differentiator in delivering value for clients, and that value increases as advisers establish emotional trust. Advisers who welcome technology and incorporate it judiciously have the potential to deliver better results for clients. 

Lauren Wilkinson is a principal at Vanguard and chief information officer for the firm’s Financial Advisor Services (FAS) division.

More: Saving too little? Spending too much? How to know if your money worries are rational (or not).

Also read: A rude awakening: Lack of financial literacy hurts the young. What about older people?

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

Leaders discuss sustainable finance and green investment | India News – The Times of India

Published

on

Leaders discuss sustainable finance and green investment | India News – The Times of India

Industry leaders, policymakers, and financial institutions gathered to discuss sustainable finance and investment strategies aimed at integrating environmental considerations into economic decision-making. The discussions, held at AFAI national summit and Indian climate leader awards 2025, focused on improving access to green finance, strengthening regulatory frameworks, and fostering private sector participation in sustainable projects.
Speakers included Vivek Kumar Dewangan (CMD, REC Ltd.), Dr Padmanabhan Raja Jaishankar (MD, IIFCL), Sudhendu J Sinha (Advisor, NITI Aayog), and other industry leaders. They stressed the need for green bonds and credit enhancements to support low-impact infrastructure projects.
Panelists highlighted the role of non-banking financial companies (NBFCs) in funding sustainable projects. While the government is the main source of green financing, they emphasized the need for more private investment for long-term sustainability.
Experts also called for businesses to follow environmental, social, and governance (ESG) standards to ensure transparency in green investments.

Continue Reading

Finance

The Home Equity Partners Completes First Round of Financing

Published

on

The Home Equity Partners Completes First Round of Financing

“Funding will introduce a new equity solution for homeowners that want to unlock equity in their homes.”

TORONTO, March 6, 2025 /CNW/ – The Home Equity Partners (HEQ), a Toronto-based financial solutions provider, has successfully completed its first round of financing. This milestone marks HEQ’s official debut, allowing the company to help homeowners across the Greater Toronto Area access their home equity without taking on new debt.

Unlock your home’s value with a home equity sharing agreement. No monthly payments, no interest charges, no surprises. (CNW Group/The Home Equity Partners)

HEQ specializes in Home Equity Sharing Agreements (HESA)—an innovative solution that enables homeowners to unlock a portion of their home equity without monthly payments or interest charges. A proven model in the United States since the early 2000s, a HESA provides homeowners with immediate financial flexibility by exchanging a share of their property’s future change in value for upfront cash.

“Rising property taxes, increasing cost-of-living pressures, and stagnant wage growth have made it harder for families to stay ahead financially,” said Shael Weinreb, CEO and Founder of The Home Equity Partners. “This financing round allows us to introduce HESA financing, giving Canadian homeowners a debt-free way to access their home equity. We look forward to educating homeowners, addressing growing demand, and building strategic partnerships to maximize our impact.”

Since its inception, HEQ has built a strong pipeline of interested homeowners, demonstrating a significant demand for alternative financial solutions. By offering a debt-free way to tap into home equity, a HESA empowers homeowners to consolidate high-interest debt, fund home renovations, provide a post-secondary education for a child or grandchild, start a business or achieve other financial goals.

Advertisement

Opportunities for Collaboration

  • For Strategic Partners: HEQ is seeking collaborations with real estate professionals, investors, and home improvement companies to expand its impact.

  • For Homeowners: To learn more about HESA and how The Home Equity Partners can help you unlock your home equity, visit The Home Equity Partners to register today or contact info@theheqpartners.com

About The Home Equity Partners

The Home Equity Partners is a Toronto-based financial solutions company dedicated to helping homeowners access their home equity with transparency and flexibility. Through its signature Home Equity Sharing Agreement (HESA), HEQ provides homeowners with a unique opportunity to achieve their financial goals while securing a brighter, debt-free future.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Finance

Gender bias in access to finance and implications for capital misallocation

Published

on

Access to finance is essential for firm growth, yet women-led businesses often face significant barriers. Both demand-side barriers, such as social and cultural norms affecting female entrepreneurs’ ability to apply for credit, and supply-side barriers, including loan officers’ implicit biases against women, contribute to these gender gaps (Asiedu et al. 2013, Alesina et al. 2013). Additionally, contextual factors such as regulatory and legal restrictions, social perceptions, and gender-based violence further constrain the growth of women-led firms (Ubfal 2023). This column summarises the findings of our recent paper (Grover and Viollaz 2025) that systematically documents the financial constraints faced by women-managed firms and their broader implications for capital misallocation.

Using micro-data from the World Bank Enterprise Surveys (2008–2023) covering 61 countries, our analysis examines formal firms with at least five employees, focusing on both extensive and intensive margins of credit access. Countries are classified as ‘more traditional’ or ‘less traditional’ based on social perceptions about women’s roles from the World Values Survey. Specifically, countries where more adults agree that “[w]hen jobs are scarce, men should have more right to a job than women” are deemed more traditional.

Gender differences in opportunities and constraints breed inequalities, which have significant implications for allocative efficiency (Pan et al. 2025), capital misallocation (Morazzoni and Sy 2022, Ranasinghe 2024), and aggregate productivity (Goldberg and Chiplunker 2021). Following this literature, we construct two empirical indicators of capital misallocation – average return to capital and a measure based on the marginal revenue product of capital – to help assess whether women-led firms operate with sub-optimal levels of capital compared to their male counterparts.

There are no gender gaps in financial access on the extensive margin

Women-managed formal firms do not face credit constraints on the extensive margin, as they are equally likely to apply for credit and are 5 percentage points less likely to have their applications rejected compared to firms mamanged by men (Panel A of Figure 1). This lack of a gender gap in the likelihood of applying for credit holds across different social and cultural norms. However, in traditional countries, women-led firms are 12 percentage points less likely to face credit application rejection.

Prima facie, this is a surprising finding. However, this may be the result of a stronger selection process, where only the most capable women in traditional countries become managers of formal firms. This aligns with the findings of Morazzoni and Sy (2022) for the US, who show that only the most capable women enter entrepreneurship.

Advertisement

Figure 1 Gender gaps in financial access

Notes: Panel A shows the estimated gender gap in credit application and credit rejection in percentage points, while Panel B shows the gender gap in the amount of debt in percentages. Dark colours reflect results that are statistically significant at the 10% or lower level; light colours, those that are not.

Gender gaps in financial access are significant on the intensive margin, especially in countries with stringent social norms

Women-managed firms are credit-constrained on the intensive margin, receiving 39% lower loan amounts than firms managed by men, conditional on credit applications being approved (Panel B of Figure 1). In traditional countries with stricter social and cultural norms, this gender gap increases to 54%, while in less traditional countries, the gap is 32%. Cultural barriers, including explicit discrimination in credit allocation and implicit biases that demand additional guarantors (e.g. Brock and De Haas 2023) or limit access to information and networks, may explain these results.

These differences are not explained by underlying performance metrics or risk profile

This disparity in the amount of credit received is not explained by gender differences in firms’ risk profiles, profitability, or productivity. In fact, women-managed firms are, on average, more profitable than those managed by men, which may help explain the lower credit-application rejection rates for women-managed firms (Figure 2). Women-managed firms do have lower sales per worker, thereby suggesting higher friction in accessing product and labour markets for better firm-to-worker matches.

Figure 2 Gender gaps in risk appetite and performance

Notes: Estimated gender gaps in leverage and profits-to-revenue ratio, in standard deviations from each country’s mean value. Estimated gender gap in sales per worker in percentages. Dark colours reflect results that are statistically significant at the 10% or lower level; light colours, those that are not.

Gender gaps in credit may breed capital misallocation

Despite women-managed firms being comparably risky and productive and, in fact, more profitable than their counterparts managed by men, they operate with lower credit levels, indicating potential sub-optimal credit allocation. While our data do not allow us to precisely identify the source of sub-optimal credit allocation, they suggest a potential misallocation of capital, particularly when considering the higher profitability of firms managed by females compared to male-managed firms.

Advertisement

We examine empirical indicators of capital misallocation to test whether accessing lower amounts of credit has an impact on the allocation of resources between firms managed by women and men. Our results show that women-managed firms have a 14.7% higher average return to capital, an empirical measure of capital misallocation (Figure 3). By comparison, Morazzoni and Sy (2022) estimate this difference to be 12% for the US.

Figure 3 Gender gaps in capital misallocation

Notes: The figure shows the estimated gender gap in the average return to capital in percentages. Dark colours reflect results that are statistically significant at the 10% or lower level; light colours, those that are not.

The gender difference in the average return to capital is heightened in more traditional countries, where women-managed firms have a 29.6% higher return to capital compared firms managed by men. Our findings may be interpreted as a sign of capital misallocation; that is, women-managed firms could potentially benefit from increased levels of capital to align their relative returns with those of firms managed by men.

If discrimination on the intensive margin partly explains the extent of capital misallocation, then the difference in the empirical indicator would be stronger for firms that receive credit. In fact, this appears to be particularly true for traditional countries (Figure 3). We show that being able to borrow more could relax the credit constraint of firms and reduce capital misallocation for women-managed firms in more traditional countries.

Discussion

Our results show that women-led firms are not any less profitable or riskier than firms managed by men and yet are discriminated in allocation to credit. Policy options to address these disparities include blended finance solutions that mitigate inequalities in lending to female entrepreneurs (Aydin et al. 2024), gender-inclusive financial products, enhanced market access for women entrepreneurs, and fair lending practices. Legal and regulatory reforms that address the barriers women entrepreneurs face are also crucial. Fostering an inclusive financial environment can unlock the full potential of women-led firms, contributing to more efficient resource allocation.

Advertisement

Editors’ note: This column is published in collaboration with the International Economic Associations’ Women in Leadership in Economics initiative, which aims to enhance the role of women in economics through research, building partnerships, and amplifying voices.

References

Alesina, A, F Lotti, and P Mistrulli (2013), “Do women pay more for credit? Evidence from Italy”, Journal of the European Economic Association 11: 45–66.

Asiedu, E, I Kalonda-Kanyama, N Leonce, and A Nti-Addae (2013), “Access to credit by firms in sub-Saharan Africa: How relevant is gender?”, American Economic Review 103: 293–97.

Aydin, H I, C Bircan, and R De Haas (2024), “Blended finance and female entrepreneurs”, VoxEU.org, 30 January.

Brock, J M, and R De Haas (2023), “Discriminatory lending: Evidence from bankers in the lab”, American Economic Journal: Applied Economics 15: 31–68.

Advertisement

Goldberg, P, and G Chiplunkar (2021), “Aggregate implications of barriers to female entrepreneurship”, VoxEU.org, 19 April.

Grover, A, and M Viollaz (2025), “The gendered impact of social norms on financial access and capital misallocation”, World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 11041.

Morazzoni, M, and A Sy (2022), “Female entrepreneurship, financial frictions and capital misallocation in the US”, Journal of Monetary Economics 129: 93–118.

Pan, J, C Olivetti, and B Petrangolo (2025), “The evolution of gender in the labour market”, VoxEU.org, 20 January.

Ranasinghe, A (2024), “Misallocation across establishment gender”, Journal of Comparative Economics.

Advertisement

Ubfal, D J (2023), “What works in supporting women-led businesses?”, World Bank Gender Thematic Policy Notes Series: Evidence and Practice Note.

Continue Reading

Trending