Hybrid Service Scores Nearly As High As Adviser Support
Investors who combine self-directed access with an adviser reported 87% satisfaction, close to the 88% among people relying on advisers. The distinction suggests that satisfaction is not determined solely by whether a person makes every decision themselves or delegates to a professional. Many investors may want digital access to information and accounts while retaining a human relationship for questions involving risk, long-term planning or more complex products.
The study also found that trust in financial advisers as a primary source of investment advice rose to 52%. At the same time, trust in AI-only advice fell among Gen Z respondents from 20% to 10%. Gen Z increased its reliance on advisers from 39% to 42% as a primary source of advice, while Millennials appeared especially positive about adviser-supported relationships: 92% were satisfied with the industry’s ability to meet their needs and 85% trusted it to act in their best interest, up from 77% in the previous year.
These numbers complicate the common assumption that younger investors will naturally prefer automated advice. They may welcome apps and online tools but still want a person to explain risks or provide accountability. The data also suggests that product design focused only on speed or novelty could miss what customers value. Respondents said transparency matters, and Gen Z now weighs transparency equally with investment returns.
FinanceFeeds has covered related questions about how investors interpret technology, including UK research finding that many younger investors trust AI but misunderstand whether its outputs are regulated. That survey involved a different population and cannot be directly compared with VISTA. It nevertheless reinforces the need to distinguish user comfort with a tool from understanding of its status, limitations and accountability.
Interest In New Assets Does Not Guarantee Participation
For the first time, VISTA examined interest in private markets, digital assets and prediction markets. Younger respondents showed greater familiarity and interest than older groups. Among Millennials, 65% said they were very or somewhat interested in investing retirement savings in private markets, compared with 57% of Gen Z. The study says risk, security and unfamiliarity remain barriers, which means stated interest should not be mistaken for actual investment demand.
Interest in private markets can reflect a search for diversification or access to products that have historically been limited to institutional and high-net-worth investors. But private assets often involve limited liquidity, less frequent valuation and different disclosure arrangements from publicly listed securities. Retirement savers considering them need to understand when funds can be withdrawn, how assets are valued and what fees apply. The survey measures willingness and interest; it does not establish that respondents understand these terms or that private-market exposure improves retirement outcomes.
The growth of tokenized securities has also brought new formats into investor conversations. FinanceFeeds has reported on the tokenized Treasury market and on-chain settlement of government securities. Those developments show how technology can broaden access or alter settlement, but they do not remove product-specific risks. The investor’s demand for transparency and guidance remains relevant as products become more complex.
Digital access can lower friction while increasing the number of choices customers must evaluate. In a platform environment, users may see private-market products, digital assets or AI-generated commentary beside conventional funds. The user experience must convey the material differences in liquidity, valuation and legal rights, not just provide a consistent interface.
Satisfaction Measures Sentiment, Not Investment Results
The VISTA findings are useful for understanding consumer attitudes, but satisfaction and trust are not performance metrics. A respondent can trust a firm without achieving a desired investment outcome, and strong satisfaction does not establish that advice is suitable for every client. The headline results also do not reveal how satisfaction varies by firm size, account balance, investment objective or specific product.
Because the study is sponsored by SIFMA and conducted by KPMG, readers should consult the complete report for survey questions, sampling and methodology. The press release states the sample included more than 2,100 individual investors, but the summary alone does not provide all details needed to assess representativeness. It is also a snapshot of responses, not a longitudinal study showing how the same investors change their views over time.
The finding that 43% of investors are unlikely to switch firms because of improved digital or AI capabilities, up from 35%, is a warning against overestimating AI as a retention tool. Technology may support an existing relationship, but many customers say it alone is not enough to move providers. Firms may need to improve service and transparency rather than compete on feature count. FinanceFeeds has examined similar questions in coverage of AI-powered market research embedded in a broker platform and AI explanations of market moves.
For financial firms, the practical challenge is combining digital convenience with a clear escalation path to knowledgeable staff. For regulators, the challenge is making sure investors understand whether a tool is general information, guidance or regulated advice. VISTA’s strongest contribution is to show that investors do not necessarily see those priorities as competing: they can welcome new choices while still expecting trust, transparency and human expertise.
Advice And Technology Will Need To Work Together
Financial firms may use the findings to shape service models that are neither fully manual nor entirely automated. Hybrid arrangements can give consumers control over routine account tasks while allowing human support for decisions with long-term consequences. That approach could be more scalable than providing a dedicated adviser for every interaction, though the study does not test the cost or effectiveness of such models.
The digital advice market itself continues to develop. J.P. Morgan’s UK digital wealth offering combines self-directed investing with planning tools and optional human support, a different model from full-service wealth management. The comparison is relevant because the Mattioli survey points to a population that may value help but not always seek a traditional adviser. The results also suggest that firms should be careful about generational stereotypes. Gen Z’s rising reliance on advisers and falling trust in AI-only guidance challenge the idea that younger customers will adopt automation without question. Millennials’ high satisfaction among adviser-supported clients may point to the value of combining digital access with personal support. These are patterns in a survey, not rules for every individual.
More evidence is needed on how firms translate trust into outcomes. Useful follow-up measures would include complaint levels, advice suitability, customer understanding, the accuracy of AI tools and whether people can identify when a recommendation is not personalized. Satisfaction is an important signal, but firms and regulators should pair it with measures of comprehension and consumer welfare.
Takeaway: VISTA finds that investors remain satisfied with financial firms and are most positive when human advice is available alongside digital access. Interest in newer investments is growing, especially among younger respondents, but the survey does not show that curiosity has become participation or improved outcomes.