Why You Should (And Shouldn't) Ditch Your Financial Advisor For A Computer

It’s no secret that technology has taken the place of humans in a number of different forms over the years. The EZPass has replaced toll booth collectors, military drones have replaced human soldiers, and technological innovations have been replacing farmers for years. Are financial advisors and active investors next?

Unlike us, software doesn’t get emotional. Software doesn’t see other people buying second homes in Florida on highly leveraged options trades or worry about losing its hard earned investment gains in a market crash. So it doesn’t try to time the market. Instead, software stays invested through market cycles, weathering the good and the bad without blinking.

Software program or human advisor: Which would you prefer to manage your money? Here are some arguments for each side:

To be fair, this article was written by TechCrunch, so it may be a little biased. Essentially, the author argues that passive investing, using Modern Portfolio Theory, is more efficient and effective than active investing using human advisors. He makes some interesting points:

  1. Software isn’t greedy or fearful.
  2. Software isn’t irrational.
  • It avoids human cognitive tendencies like overweighting losses, anchoring, confirmation and hindsight bias, and herd behavior.

  • Software loves investing.
    • “Software doesn’t have to worry about the tradeoff between investing and spending time with family and friends.”

  • Software doesn’t have a vacation home to pay for.
    • “Software doesn’t have conflicts of interest or look for ways to create and hide fees.”

    Having said that, here are three shortcomings I see with this strategy:

    First, software lacks instinct. Sure, sometimes a intuition can do more harm than good, but I can say from experience that some of my most profitable investment decisions have stemmed from a gut instinct that a company was in good hands or from a sense that the rest of the market was just a little overly optimistic. Software-based investment services lack this intuition that often serves human investors well.

    Second, these software programs invest primarily in ETFs and index funds as opposed to individual stocks. To each his own, but personally I’d rather own individual companies that I know and like. I tried out one of these software-based investment services (Wealthfront.com), and with multiple inputs it always put most of my money in Vanguard funds. Vanguard is great, but it sure didn’t give me a ton of options. I couldn’t even change the investments myself—I had to change the risk preference for my entire portfolio first, then the website would assign me new investments.

    Third, it may be true that software isn’t greedy or fearful, but it’s also true that your computer can’t sense these emotions in the rest of the market. That means it will be unable to capitalize on those investors who let greed and fear get the best of them, which to me is a major disadvantage. Instead, software sells when prices go up and buys when prices go down. Not exactly a groundbreaking strategy.

    I’ll admit that my first instinct was to discredit this article as just another piece attacking hedge funds and investment advisors. But it actually makes some good points. I’m not completely sold, but it definitely got my attention. The author insists, “Software is better at investing than 99% of active investors.” Maybe the trick is just to find that other 1%.

    So there’s a case to be made for both sides. What would it take for you to trust a computer to manage your investments?

     
    Best Response
    Hooked on LEAPS:
    Software doesn't charge 1% AUM to invest in a basket of mutual funds. Not that I trust them either, but hiring a financial adviser at that price is ridiculous.

    I recently saw an advisor that would charge 2% for a basket of etfs. His argument was that by using etfs and not mututal funds his total cost was lower than most other places. He didn't seem to understand that I could buy the same vanilla etfs without his guidance and save the 2%.

    Another advisor was going to charge me 1% to buy an asset allocation mutual fund.

    I honestly don't understand paying 1-2% for someone who doesn't even manage your money. AT MOST these people are recommending an allocation strategy.

    twitter: @CorpFin_Guy
     
    accountingbyday:
    I recently saw an advisor that would charge 2% for a basket of etfs. His argument was that by using etfs and not mututal funds his total cost was lower than most other places. He didn't seem to understand that I could buy the same vanilla etfs without his guidance and save the 2%.

    I assure you, he understood perfectly. He's a salesperson and not much more. His job is making people "understand." You'd be surprised how many people without a finance background fall for that.

    Competition is a sin. -John D. Rockefeller
     
    JulianRobertson:
    We're not talking about artificial intelligence. The software is only as good as whoever is coding it.

    /thread

    True, but you're missing the point. Software does exactly what it's programmed to do, nothing else.

    For example, if the software is programmed to buy x shares of y stock for z price, it will ALWAYS do that if, and ONLY if a specific set of conditions are met - the same is not necessarily true for a human, and that is the value add of software in this case.

     
    Babyj18777:
    JulianRobertson:
    We're not talking about artificial intelligence. The software is only as good as whoever is coding it.

    /thread

    True, but you're missing the point. Software does exactly what it's programmed to do, nothing else.

    For example, if the software is programmed to buy x shares of y stock for z price, it will ALWAYS do that if, and ONLY if a specific set of conditions are met - the same is not necessarily true for a human, and that is the value add of software in this case.

    Traders have been using computer algorithms for a while now. The second too much money is trading on the same algorithm, it becomes worthless.

    Competition is a sin. -John D. Rockefeller
     

    I donakt realy think you need a financial advisor unless your situation is particularly complex.

    If you are the average guy with a Roth, a 401k, and a brokerage account, what is the advisor going to do? Provided you are capable of managing your money (and not the guy selling everything with the DOW at 7000), you do not need one.

     
    West Coast rainmaker:
    I donakt realy think you need a financial advisor unless your situation is particularly complex.

    If you are the average guy with a Roth, a 401k, and a brokerage account, what is the advisor going to do? Provided you are capable of managing your money (and not the guy selling everything with the DOW at 7000), you do not need one.

    True. When he is saying "My assertion to him: these days, software is better at investing than 99% of active investors." you can't say that he is wrong either. They're too many PM (be it at HF or mutual funds) that are losing money and you can't say that giving your money to this guys is a good bet (assuming that you're richer than the average Joe as you said). I was (very) rich and I couldn't invest with top PM I would use software as well.

     

    Enim est vero nam totam. Ut explicabo eveniet veniam omnis neque laboriosam sint. Dignissimos nesciunt et eius dolores omnis blanditiis. Saepe in voluptas asperiores repellendus qui. Et eos alias accusamus at saepe laboriosam. Similique iure voluptate exercitationem pariatur incidunt. Ullam modi ut qui nulla.

    "You stop being an asshole when it sucks to be you." - IlliniProgrammer

    Career Advancement Opportunities

    March 2024 Investment Banking

    • Jefferies & Company 02 99.4%
    • Goldman Sachs 19 98.8%
    • Harris Williams & Co. (++) 98.3%
    • Lazard Freres 02 97.7%
    • JPMorgan Chase 03 97.1%

    Overall Employee Satisfaction

    March 2024 Investment Banking

    • Harris Williams & Co. 18 99.4%
    • JPMorgan Chase 10 98.8%
    • Lazard Freres 05 98.3%
    • Morgan Stanley 07 97.7%
    • William Blair 03 97.1%

    Professional Growth Opportunities

    March 2024 Investment Banking

    • Lazard Freres 01 99.4%
    • Jefferies & Company 02 98.8%
    • Goldman Sachs 17 98.3%
    • Moelis & Company 07 97.7%
    • JPMorgan Chase 05 97.1%

    Total Avg Compensation

    March 2024 Investment Banking

    • Director/MD (5) $648
    • Vice President (19) $385
    • Associates (85) $262
    • 3rd+ Year Analyst (12) $184
    • Intern/Summer Associate (33) $170
    • 2nd Year Analyst (65) $168
    • 1st Year Analyst (196) $159
    • Intern/Summer Analyst (143) $101
    notes
    16 IB Interviews Notes

    “... there’s no excuse to not take advantage of the resources out there available to you. Best value for your $ are the...”

    Leaderboard

    1
    redever's picture
    redever
    99.2
    2
    Betsy Massar's picture
    Betsy Massar
    99.0
    3
    BankonBanking's picture
    BankonBanking
    99.0
    4
    Secyh62's picture
    Secyh62
    98.9
    5
    dosk17's picture
    dosk17
    98.9
    6
    GameTheory's picture
    GameTheory
    98.9
    7
    CompBanker's picture
    CompBanker
    98.9
    8
    kanon's picture
    kanon
    98.9
    9
    bolo up's picture
    bolo up
    98.8
    10
    DrApeman's picture
    DrApeman
    98.8
    success
    From 10 rejections to 1 dream investment banking internship

    “... I believe it was the single biggest reason why I ended up with an offer...”