The wealth management industry is being forced to reinvent itself. Firms that once focused solely on the wealthy are pivoting to the mass affluent, as the scale, growth and diversification potential of this segment becomes too great to ignore. With that change comes the need to pivot their communications and the way they ‘turn up’ – in every sense of the phrase.
Why the move? Well, the transfer of wealth from baby boomers provides a significant opportunity. On paper it’s not straight forward, however. These clients have assets (with more to come through inheritance), but not generational wealth. They are also typically financially literate, rather than sophisticated investors, often self-directed, and very comfortable managing money through digital platforms. They are not intimidated by wealth managers, but want to feel they are receiving value over and above what they can do themselves. They expect premium service, transparent pricing and a tone that avoids being patronising. Given they’ll receive less in terms of management fees than from wealthier clients, firms will need a bigger book to make their financial models stack up.
This means their communications will have to change; they must balance needing to project aspiration but not seeming too out of reach.
For this client group, value is measured in trust, clarity and experience as much as in returns, with last week’s Budget likely only driving a greater need for advice. St. James’s Place has shown how that can work in practice. After years of criticism over opaque charging, it has begun to rebuild confidence through reform. Clearer fee structures and stronger inflows have helped secure a reputational recovery (still ongoing) as well as a commercial one. Record funds under management and a rise in underlying cash profit in recent results have allowed the firm to communicate the result of the new processes and behaviours at the company.
Yet aspiration can be a double-edged sword. The same premium signals that attract one client can alienate another if the optics are wrong. Wealth brands that lean too heavily on exclusivity risk appearing elitist which can be a big turn off. SJP’s recent public communications have focused on the reform and client outcomes rather than institutional self-congratulation. It is a subtle but significant shift.
Digital-first players are reshaping expectations too. Nutmeg’s integration into J.P. Morgan Chase and subsequent rebrand as J.P. Morgan Personal Investing is notable. What began as a fintech challenger has become part of one of the world’s most recognisable banking brands. The message is that prestige and accessibility can coexist. For the mass affluent, this represents a redefinition of what wealth management looks and feels like. You no longer need a private banker, complete with wood-panelled office, to be well served.
For ‘traditional’ firms, the greatest risk is silence. In a world of online comparison tools and financial influencers, failing to address pricing or value head is now seen as evasiveness, rather than exclusivity. Those that do explain their offer clearly will win trust.
Modern investors do not want to be lectured, but informed, respected and engaged; Martin Lewis is the perfect (and granted unique) example of this approach in the broader financial services space. Firms need to update their vocabulary and tone of voice; this is not about talking down to a new segment but removing the jargon.
With consolidation rife across the industry, wealth managers will be judged in the same way consumers judge other brands in their daily lives, be that luxury, retail or tech. And their communications need to reflect this shift, otherwise they’ll find themselves being reinvented by a bigger player.
Read more Insights & News