Consumers ‘disconnected’ from attitude to risk: Axa

Author: Rachel Dalton
IFAonline | 28 Nov 2011 | 12:09

Categories: TCF

Topics: risk| risk profiling| Independent Financial Advice

kellard

Around two thirds of people disagree with the attitude to risk given to them by risk profilling tools, Axa Wealth has claimed.

A study of over 2,000 people found a "disconnect" between what people thought their appetite to risk was and what it was assessed as by risk profiling tools, Axa said.

According to the study, 25% of respondents believed they were in the lowest risk category. After profiling, only 6% of this group were found to be so extremely risk averse.

A third of consumers had a stronger appetite for risk than they had thought, with 31% more cautious than they had pictured themselves to be, the Axa Wealth Self research suggested.

Mike Kellard, chief executive officer of AXA Wealth, said: "Appreciation of risk is paramount in any client-adviser relationship.

"This difference between perceived and actual self is critical to understand; if individuals get this wrong, there is likely to be a knock on effect and impact on investment behaviour, and in turn, likelihood of meeting financial goals.

The study was produced in partnership with University College London's Professor Adrian Furnham.

Respondents were asked to rate their risk appetite with a number from one to seven, before completing Axa's 14-step risk profiling process.

In October, research by network Personal Touch suggested risk profiling tools were accurate only 90% of the time.

More tcf news

Recommended reading

Categories

Topics

Comments

Will we ever learn?

I am not surprised by the view that investors’ self perception of their risk tolerance is different from their actual risk tolerance. But I am very surprised that it is significantly different. Our test results give an entirely different view. Self perception is generally accurate within 3 points in a scale of 1 to 100. Usually lower than the actual score. So why is there a difference between FinaMetrica’s conclusions after working with 450,000 plus investors in several countries over the last 12 years and the AXA report? There could be several reasons for this. Not least isare the quality of the questions and the intent of the test designer. On face value this could be another example of a test designed to encourage investors to take more equity risk than they might otherwise accept. I hope this is not the case. It would be disappointing in the light of the FSA’s Guidance on investment suitability for a major UK institution to continue the practices that led to the FSA’s rebuke that only two of eleven tests were ‘fit for purpose’.

Posted by: Paul Resnik

29 Nov 2011 | 01:01
Complain about this comment

Related articles

Most Read

Audio / Visual

Coffee Lounge

View all the winners here

PPR Structured Product Awards 2011

View all the winners here

This year we have 14 awards designed to mark out the very best products in a highly competitive and innovative market. This includes three new awards for 2011 to reflect the developments in this rapidly growing market: Best Dual/Multi-Index Product, Best Structured (Oeic) Fund and Best Structured Product Provider.

Events

event logo

International Fund & Product Awards 2012

14 Jun 2012 - 14 Jun 2012

London, UK

event logo

British Mortgage Awards 2012

03 Jul 2012 - 03 Jul 2012

London, UK

event logo

Cover Webinars

04 Jul 2012 - 04 Jul 2012

London, UK

Poll

Should there be a cap on hourly fees?

In Focus

Viewpoints