Advisers Embrace Agentic AI for Back-Office Efficiency While Demanding Human Oversight for Client Assets

Financial advisers are increasingly prepared to delegate high-volume administrative tasks to agentic AI, provided human oversight remains central to decisions involving client capital. This shift signals a critical transition for wealth management professionals, as the industry balances operational efficiency against the regulatory scrutiny of automated decision-making frameworks and fiduciary responsibility.

What was announced

New research conducted by wealth management technology provider GBST and consultancy the lang cat has revealed a significant appetite among financial advisers for agentic AI integration. The survey, which gathered insights from 178 advisers, indicates that professionals are most comfortable with AI handling rules-based, administrative functions. Specifically, 80% of respondents support AI collating data for annual reviews and suitability packs, while 77% are comfortable with its use in onboarding and letters of authority. Furthermore, 76% approve of AI managing KYC and anti-money laundering checks, and 75% support its role in fees and charges reconciliation.

However, the research highlights a clear boundary regarding direct financial intervention. While 62% of advisers are comfortable with agentic AI being embedded directly into their platforms, comfort levels drop when the technology touches client money. For pension transfers, only 43% expressed comfort, with 29% remaining neutral and 29% uncomfortable. Similarly, for CIP switching and rebalancing, 53% are comfortable, while 25% are opposed. The findings also suggest a knowledge gap; 31% of advisers could not describe what agentic AI does, and 29% were unaware of its ability to break complex tasks into autonomous workflows. These results follow the Mills Review, which advised the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) to monitor systems capable of making open-ended decisions without human intervention.

"Rather than resisting AI, advisers have drawn a sensible boundary around it. They are comfortable with agentic AI taking on the high-volume administrative tasks, like reconciliation and collation of data. This is necessary work, but it takes up time without adding visible value for clients. Where client money is directly at stake, they want human oversight, but that doesn't mean doing everything manually. On more involved processes such as transfers, it's about keeping people at the decision points while the system carries out the firm's own procedure and records every step. The Mills Review makes the same distinction, recommending the FCA monitors this closely. Advisers have effectively drawn that line themselves."

Rob DeDominicis, CEO of GBST.

The companies involved

GBST is a global provider of technology solutions for the wealth management and financial services sectors. The firm is best known for its Composer platform, which provides the underlying infrastructure for investment platforms, pensions, and superannuation providers. GBST focuses on streamlining back-office operations and enhancing the digital experience for both advisers and end-investors. The company has recently focused on embedding agentic AI capabilities directly into its core architecture to ensure these tools operate within existing security and compliance controls.

The research was conducted in partnership with the lang cat, a specialist financial services consultancy based in the UK. The lang cat provides market analysis, insight, and communication services, often focusing on the platform market and the evolving needs of financial advisers. Jenette Greenwood serves as the PR Director at the lang cat. The findings also reference the regulatory landscape shaped by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), the UK’s financial regulator, which is currently evaluating how to adapt its framework to manage the risks associated with autonomous AI systems in financial services.

What FF News has reported before

FF News has previously tracked the FCA’s involvement in the UK fintech ecosystem, notably when the FCA Scale-up Unit Welcomes ClearScore, Modulr, and Zilch to Boost UK Fintech Growth. This prior coverage underscores the regulator's active role in monitoring how emerging technologies are integrated into the financial services sector to ensure market integrity and consumer protection.

What this means

This research confirms that the "black box" fear of AI is evolving into a pragmatic partnership. Advisers are not rejecting automation; they are demanding a "human-in-the-loop" architecture. This puts significant pressure on legacy platform providers to move beyond simple chatbots and integrate agentic AI that can handle complex workflows like KYC and reconciliation while providing transparent audit trails for human sign-off. The real test will be how the FCA responds to the Mills Review. If regulation becomes too prescriptive regarding "open-ended decisions," it could stifle the very efficiency gains advisers are now clearly ready to embrace. Watch for platform providers to prioritize "explainable AI" features to satisfy both advisers and regulators.