Advisers, algorithms and the coming shake-out: 2026 wealth tech predictions

The value of Finura Group’s Australian Wealth Tech Predictions 2026 is not that it breathlessly declares “AI is coming”: advisers already know that. Its real contribution is quieter and more confronting: the report describes how technology, capital and regulation are converging to reshape the advice profession in ways that will reward discipline, punish complacency and narrow the margin for error.

The starting point is sobering. Advice technology, taken as a whole, is no longer in a growth phase. Adviser numbers have stabilised around 15,000 and average tech spend has flat-lined. For traditional software vendors, this has produced a kind of economic stasis: little revenue growth, rising costs and limited scope to innovate without lifting prices. For advisers, it means fewer genuinely new tools and more pressure to justify every dollar spent.

Against that backdrop, one clear exception stands out: AI services that save advisers time. Finura notes that the rapid adoption of AI note-takers revealed something fundamental: that advisers will pay for technology that delivers immediate, tangible value. “Time to value” has become the decisive metric. Tools that take weeks to configure or require behavioural change struggle; tools that work on day one flourish.

But the report is equally clear that this honeymoon period will not last. Many AI tools lack differentiation and face inevitable price compression as global players enter the market. Advisers enjoying early productivity gains should assume cheaper alternatives, and more aggressive competitors, are coming. The smart response is not tool-hopping, but building processes that survive vendor churn.

One of the most consequential trends identified by Finura is the acceleration of platform consolidation. Advisers are increasingly “monogamous” with platforms, directing the bulk of client flows to a single provider. HUB24 and Netwealth now dominate net inflows, and Finura argues this is no longer a platform war but an ecosystem play. Platforms don’t just hold assets; they increasingly own data, workflows and adviser attention.

For smaller practices in particular, this raises uncomfortable questions. If a platform can do 70 per cent–80 per cent of what a CRM once did, what role is left for stand-alone advice tech? The risk is not disintermediation overnight, but gradual redundancy. Advisers will need to be deliberate about what sits inside the platform and what genuinely needs to sit outside it.

Finura’s warning on AI governance may be the most important section of the report. The firm predicts ASIC’s first enforcement action tied directly to AI-related advice failures is a matter of “when, not if.” The data is confronting: most advice firms lack formal testing, documentation, rollback procedures or client disclosure around AI use. In a profession built on trust and compliance, this is a liability hiding in plain sight.

Crucially, responsibility will not rest with vendors. As Finura notes, software providers sell capability and disclaim accountability. Licensees and practices will wear the consequences. Firms treating AI as a harmless assistant, rather than a regulated drafting tool, are exposed. Governance, not clever prompting, will separate winners from casualties.

The report also reframes the future of digital advice. The long-held belief that robo-advice would convert the “unadvised 70 per cent” has proven optimistic. Instead, Finura sees growth among “prepared members”: digitally literate Australians aged 25–50 who already accept the value of advice but want it delivered differently. For advisers, this suggests hybrid models, not mass automation, will define the next phase.

Licensees, meanwhile, face pressure from unexpected directions. Managed account providers and platforms are emerging as a powerful “support stack,” offering turnkey solutions that erode traditional licensee value propositions. Finura’s benchmarking shows self-licensed advisers are materially happier with their tech arrangements, an uncomfortable statistic for AFSLs reliant on service revenue.

Cost is another unavoidable theme. Finura predicts technology spend will rise 40 per cent–60 per cent over the next three years as vendors chase sustainable margins in a static adviser market. AI will not make tech cheaper; it will make pricing more transparent and more contentious. Advisers who benchmark tech spend against last year’s invoice rather than staff costs and productivity will struggle to make rational decisions.

Looking offshore, Finura expects well-capitalised US advice-tech players to enter Australia aggressively, partnering directly with PE-backed aggregators and large advice firms. For advisers, this is both good and bad news: more competition should drive down prices, but local innovation may be crowded out by global marketing firepower.

Perhaps the most intriguing insight comes at the end of the report: the rise of general-purpose AI, particularly trusted enterprise models like Claude. Finura argues these tools may deliver greater productivity gains than bespoke advice software, provided firms have clean data and the courage to integrate properly. Waiting for a single, all-knowing “advice AI” is, in its words, a losing strategy.

Taken together, Finura’s predictions paint a profession entering a narrowing corridor. Technology will not save poorly run businesses, and AI will not compensate for weak governance or unclear value propositions. The winners will be advisers who treat tech as infrastructure, not magic, and who remember that in advice, as in markets, discipline still beats excitement.

James Dunn

James is an experienced senior journalist and editor of The Inside Network's publications.