The world of investing might be on the verge of a fundamental shift, as AI’s role in financial advisory continues to grow. A recent survey unveils that approximately one in three US investors would be ready to trust AI-generated financial advice without double-checking it with other sources, signifying a significant leap in machine-spurred decision-making acceptance.
The results, published by the Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, demonstrated that only 31% of respondents have yet accessed AI for financial planning advice. However, those who did showed a high level of satisfaction, with 80% finding the experience gratifying.
Surprisingly, it’s the older investors who are more satisfied with AI advice compared to the younger generation. Regardless of whether they have used it or not, almost a third of those surveyed showed comfortability in taking advice without following it up. This development comes when AI-based assistants like OpenAI’s ChatGPT and Google’s Bard are grabbing popularity.
Interestingly, a closer look into the results reveals that generative AI tools have outperformed social media in terms of investor comfort levels in leaning on financial advice, even without verification. Figures showed 31% opting for AI-generated advice, compared to 26% for unverified advice from social media. However, it’s worth noting that comfort levels soared across the board if the advice was verified by a financial advisor.
While these results seem promising, there remains a notable degree of resistance. The survey highlights that just above half of the respondents expressed interest in availing AI-created financial advice in the future.
This adoption level pours a few drops of skepticism into our glass of enthusiasm. We might be moving towards a future where AI plays a dominant role in personal financial decisions, but it seems that many still maintain a wary eye. Thus, it becomes a matter of ‘how quickly’ rather than ‘if’ AI will become a reliable partner for US investors.
The big question does AI-powered financial advice genuinely offer a replacement for human expertise? Or will the need for that human touch and the complexity of interpretation maintain a wall that AI cannot scale? Only time will tell.