The Risk of AI in Wealth Management Tech Stacks

Artificial intelligence is reshaping wealth management. But as adoption grows, so do the risks.

According to the 2025 Investment Management Compliance Testing Survey, AI and predictive analytics have overtaken anti–money laundering and cybersecurity as the top compliance concern for registered investment advisers.

Firms report:

• 40% now use AI internally
• Only 5% use it to support client interactions
• Just 15% have formal policies governing employee AI use
• Only 4% have a dedicated AI governance group
• Nearly half of AI-using firms have not implemented formal testing or validation of their tools

“AI has rapidly ascended to the top of the agenda, while cybersecurity and AML remain critical areas of focus. The data shows that firms are responding with increased testing and mock exams, but gaps remain, particularly in AI governance, vendor oversight, and whistleblower protections.” – Carlo di Florio, president of ACA Group. 

Advisory firms are under pressure to act quickly. But faster adoption without adequate control increases exposure to compliance, reputational, and regulatory risk.

Questions every firm should be asking:

• Where is AI already being used across our teams or systems?
• Have we tested tools for accuracy, fairness, and bias?
• Do we have employee guidelines for tools like ChatGPT or Gemini?
• Are our vendors utilizing AI, and how are we overseeing their use?
• Would our document withstand an up under audit?

Without answers, firms may unknowingly leave themselves vulnerable.

A Powerful Tool with Real Consequences

AI offers enormous potential: efficiency, insight, scalability. But it’s not without risk. The same tools transforming operations are also being used by bad actors to exploit firms. Awareness and robust training are essential.

Why the Human Element Still Matters

In the evolving world of AI and human intelligence, relying solely on technology is risky. A recent analysis comparing AI-generated and human-provided financial advice found that while AI could offer plausible suggestions, it lacked empathy, context, and follow-through. Analysts also warned of hallucinated results and stressed that human oversight is still essential. 

• Many advisors cite data limitations and client trust as barriers to adoption. In one survey, 43% of respondents flagged these concerns.
• 77% of advisors cited concerns around data quality, transparency, and bias as reasons for caution.

The CFP Board’s ethics guidance notes that generative AI does not replace professional expertise. Users must take care when working with opaque, black-box platforms.

Don’t Overlook the Risks Hiding in Your Vendor Stack

It’s not just your internal tools that need scrutiny. As AI adoption grows, it’s critical to understand how your third-party vendors are using — or misusing — these technologies. Weak links in your vendor relationships can introduce serious compliance and security gaps, especially when AI-driven tools operate without transparency.

If you’re unsure how your vendors stack up, or whether they’re introducing new risks into your environment, it might be time for a closer look.

Start with a Vendor Assessment

Use our Vendor Assessment Worksheet to ask the right questions, document your findings, and better understand where your potential exposures lie. Whether you’re reviewing current partners or evaluating new ones, this tool can help ensure your third-party providers meet the standards your clients — and regulators — expect.

Download Visory’s Vendor Assessment Worksheet