What Recent Research Reveals About Client Satisfaction in Financial Advice

Financial advice is most valuable when it helps people make confident, informed decisions about their money. Yet, research continues to show that many clients do not feel fully served, while large numbers of potential clients remain hesitant to seek regulated advice at all. Recent findings from the FSCS, the FCA, and European research on MiFID II and the IDD, offer a detailed picture of why client satisfaction can rise or fall, and more importantly, what financial advisers can do about it.

Why does client satisfaction matter for financial advisers?

For many people, their financial future is tied to complex decisions about pensions, investments and mortgages. The FSCS, or Financial Services Compensation Scheme is a UK government-backed body that protects consumers when financial firms fail. Their consumer research report highlights that claims for unsuitable advice remain significant, with more than £400 million paid out for poor investment advice in a single year. Similar consumer reporting from the FCA’s latest Financial Lives Survey shows that while 8.6% of UK adults (~ 4.6 million people) received regulated financial advice in the past year, trust and satisfaction are not universal. Among those advised, 12% reported low trust and 16% reported low satisfaction with their adviser.

At the same time, barriers keep many consumers from seeking help. The FSCS research found that 23% of people who sought advice outside regulation did so because they believed their savings were not large enough, and the same proportion said advice felt too expensive. Furthermore, eight in ten adults with financial products think there should be more affordable ways to access professional advice. The advice gap remains risky, as those who stay outside regulated channels are more vulnerable to poor outcomes and lack the protection the FSCS offers.

Communication are decisive factors

The quality of communication is central to client satisfaction. The FCA reports that 13% of advised consumers rated the clarity of the advice they received as low, and 15% lacked confidence in it. When advice feels opaque or overly technical, clients lose trust, and are more likely to switch providers.

The Hanken School of Economics study on MiFID II and IDD reinforces this. They found that while stricter disclosure and documentation requirements were introduced in 2018 to improve transparency, many clients, particularly those newer to investing, felt overwhelmed by the volume and complexity of information they were required to process. Rather than reassuring, this level of detail sometimes generated stress and uncertainty, leading to a sense that the process was burdensome rather than protective.

For advisers, fulfilling disclosure obligations to their clients is just not enough. Clients want information they can truly understand and use. Explaining recommendations in plain language, checking understanding throughout a meeting, and summarising key actions can offset regulatory complexity.

Adviser responsiveness and practical support influence trust

Satisfaction is shaped not only by what advisers say but how they respond to clients’ needs in real time. The FCA’s Financial Lives data show that clients who felt their adviser was responsive and accessible were more likely to express trust and say they would use the same firm again. Conversely, slow follow-up or difficulty in accessing help when circumstances change can erode confidence.

Advisers who create clear service promises, for example, expected turnaround times for follow-up questions, policy documents, or portfolio reviews, give clients a tangible measure of reliability. This matters especially in uncertain markets or during personal financial transitions, when emotions run high and reassurance is vital.

Cost transparency and perceived value remain sensitive

The research shows persistent concern about cost and value for money. FSCS found that one in five adults with savings or investments did not know how much wealth they would need to make paying for advice feel worthwhile. Meanwhile, European findings under MiFID II/IDD suggest that although cost reporting is more detailed than ever, many clients do not feel this detail makes value clearer. Instead, extensive cost breakdowns can add confusion if not paired with an explanation of benefits.

This suggests advisers should frame their fee conversations around what the client gains: protection, time saved, behavioural coaching, and access to regulated support. Demonstrating the impact of advice, for example, helping avoid unsuitable products, optimising tax efficiency, or creating a long-term plan that adapts as life changes, helps to justify costs in a way raw numbers cannot.

Suitability and personalisation underpin positive outcomes

A consistent thread in all three studies is the importance of suitability. FSCS data show that unsuitable recommendations are a major driver of claims and compensation. The FCA likewise asks about confidence in the advice being right for the individual, an area where a meaningful minority still report concern.

MiFID II was designed to strengthen suitability by requiring firms to assess each client’s knowledge, experience, financial situation and objectives in greater depth. Yet, the Hanken research indicates that the suitability process can feel intrusive or excessively complex if not well explained. Newer investors, in particular, reported feeling daunted by the number of forms and assessments involved.

Advisers can improve this experience by making suitability a collaborative discussion rather than a compliance exercise. Explaining why certain questions are asked, how risk profiles translate into recommendations, and what protections the process offers can turn a regulatory requirement into a trust-building moment.

Key actions advisers can take now to improve client satisfaction

Drawing from these studies, advisers who want to increase client satisfaction can focus on:

• Explaining regulation in human terms – Help clients understand why disclosures and suitability checks exist and what they safeguard against.
• Delivering clear, concise documentation – Summaries and action points can make mandatory paperwork less overwhelming.
• Setting expectations for response times and service – Clients equate accessibility with professionalism.
• Framing costs around tangible value – Move beyond raw fee numbers to show outcomes and protection.
• Tracking satisfaction actively – Periodic feedback, rather than waiting for complaints, helps spot early signs of confusion or frustration.

Moving the advice profession forward

Clients value regulated advice, but satisfaction is fragile when cost feels opaque, paperwork overwhelms, or communication lacks clarity or responsiveness. Regulation like MiFID II and Consumer Duty frameworks seek to protect investors, but advisers themselves must translate these safeguards into an experience that feels transparent, personalised and responsive.

By aligning service delivery with what research shows matters most, trust, clarity, responsiveness and suitability, advisers can not only retain clients but also encourage more of the unadvised population to seek the support they need. This, in turn, strengthens the profession’s reputation and helps close the advice gap that still leaves too many people exposed.

However, meeting rising expectations for clarity, responsiveness and compliant documentation does not need to add to an adviser’s workload. Automwrite enables regulated firms to produce fully branded, FCA-compliant suitability reports in seconds, reducing the time spent on paperwork and freeing up that time to focus on meaningful conversations with clients. By streamlining reporting and ensuring advice is clearly documented, it helps strengthen trust and satisfaction while meeting Consumer Duty standards. To explore how Automwrite can support your practice, get in touch with our team and discover a faster, more reliable way to deliver advice.