The typical financial advicer lives with three core components to their advisor technology stack: CRM, portfolio management, and financial planning software. (In addition to the firm's internal document management system, such as Sharepoint/OneDrive, Google Drive, Dropbox, Box, etc.) The data that powers each of these core components lives within those respective software platforms, because it originates from different systems of record in the first place… CRM captures a wide range of client interactions and workflow data, portfolio management is typically fed by custodian or broker-dealer that holds the securities, and financial planning software houses its own unique set of goals and financial projections. While internal file systems capture the "paper" (or digital paper) that still formulates the rest of the client file.
These disparate data systems evolved into separate silos simply because they originated from different functions to begin with. CRM grew from contact management and what was originally the rolodex. Portfolio management grew from portfolio accounting data (that first powered performance reporting, then billing, and then trading). Financial planning software grew from its own specialized planning function to understand a client's needs and offer recommendations. While electronic document management emerged from the conversion of paper files to digital files over the past 25 years.
From the advisor perspective, the good news of this approach is that each system is well developed to fulfill its core function. The bad news, though, is that to the extent the client or business data overlaps or is redundant across multiple systems, the advisor must maintain and update it across multiple systems. Which in turn means servicing clients requires accessing data in multiple places to prepare for a client meeting or fulfill a client request, and as workflows expand, eventually the firm needs to fully integrate processes (and the underlying data they rely on) across multiple systems. Which is difficult when there are so many different software providers to integrate together.
But now the rise of AI seems to be putting the stress and frustration of having data spread across multiple systems to a new breaking point. Because for AI to fulfill its full potential, from building knowledge bases to especially the orchestration "take actions on your behalf" agentic layer of AI, the AI systems must be able to access all of the data. Which is difficult unless it's all organized cleanly in one place. And so the extent that advisory firms believe "the future is AI-enabled" (not to replace advisors, but to support them [and perhaps to replace some back- and mid-office staff]), it creates an imperative for advisory firms to centralize and warehouse all of their data in one place.
Over the past few years, this has led to a rising wave of providers offering various versions of "centralized data warehousing solutions" (often coupled with the advisor orchestration layers on top), from early providers like AppCrown and Skience building on top of the Salesforce environment, to Invent.us, Milemarker, Collation, and the latest newcomer (from Envestnet co-founder Bill Crager) dubbed Field. Along with a wave of larger independent advisory firms standing up their own data warehouses entirely from scratch. All mean to provide increasingly deep layers of data ingestion, cleaning, warehousing, and then surfacing the data back to the firm, so that it can begin to build the agentic AI layers on top.
The interesting dynamic of this shift to "own your data, build the AI orchestration layer on top" transition, though, is what's actually being built by the providers offering those value-added layers. Better business intelligence with more centralized data. Expedited processing of advisor payouts. Most automated client onboarding execution across multiple systems. Synchronizing data updates (e.g., address changes) in one place to propagate across all systems. Compliance monitoring of everything from client and internal communications to whether client portfolios are staying on model (and generating alerts or review actions when something is amiss).
What's significant about these is not how useful they are (these are all common multiple-data-systems pain points in advisory firms), but the fact that ultimately, they're all linear deterministic workflows… the kind that don't actually require an artificial intelligence orchestration layer to execute autonomously, they "just" need a workflow system that can facilitate a workflow that interacts with the existing APIs of multiple systems. Almost all of which a single advisor workflow solution like Hubly can accomplish for less than $150/month. Assuming the advisory firm actually has a consistent process that can be turned into an automated workflow in the first place.
Which raises the question… to what extent do advisory firms really need to warehouse their data to solve their most proximal workflow and execution efficiency problems, or is the reality that most firms simply don't have the technology know-how or support to pick the right software or customize their existing software, or lack enough standardized processes to systematize into efficient workflows in the first place. Such that the benefits coming from their "AI initiatives" may be less a function of what AI or data warehousing is actually accomplishing, versus the fact that their AI initiative may simply be the forcing function causing them to finally make the necessary (or more-than-necessary) tech investments and willingness to rebuild and systematize processes that makes it possible to develop workflows in the first place?
To be fair, there is potential for what a centralized data warehouse and AI orchestration layer may do for mega advisory firms at scale, especially for enterprises that proactively seek to displace their humans with fully-tech-automated solutions. But firms have to be very large to really have enough "Big Data" problems to need big-data solutions, while most advisory firms really just have "small data" problems (like how to use an API to synchronize data between two applications) and often pride themselves on the human touch that they use to differentiate from the mega firms pushing towards full self-service tech automation for their customers.
Which means for the typical advisory firm, the question remains: will there really be benefits for all these centralized-data-warehousing efforts that outweigh the costs (especially if and when AI solutions re-price to the levels they need to charge to be long-term viable), or in the end are advisory firms over-spending on data warehousing to make up for years of under-spending on simpler API integrations that could have facilitated better workflows with just a little more investment years earlier?
This article first appeared on the Nerd’s Eye View at Kitces.com at https://kitc.es/advisortech-july2026, and has been reprinted here with permission.
Ben Henry-Moreland
Ben Henry-Moreland is a Senior Financial Planning Nerd at Kitces.com, where he specializes in writing and speaking on financial planning topics including tax, practice management, and technology. He also co-authors the monthly Kitces #AdvisorTech column. Drawing from his experience as a financial planner and a solo advisory firm owner, Ben is passionate about fulfilling the site’s mission of making financial advicers better and more successful.
Michael Kitces
Michael Kitces is Head of Planning Strategy at Focus Partners Wealth, which provides an evidence-based approach to private wealth management for near- and current retirees, and Focus Partners Advisor Solutions, a turnkey wealth management services provider supporting thousands of independent financial advisors through the scaling phase of growth.
In addition, he is a co-founder of the XY Planning Network, AdvicePay, fpPathfinder, and New Planner Recruiting, the former Practitioner Editor of the Journal of Financial Planning, the host of the Financial Advisor Success podcast, and the publisher of the popular financial planning industry blog Nerd’s Eye View through his website Kitces.com, dedicated to advancing knowledge in financial planning. In 2010, Michael was recognized with one of the FPA’s “Heart of Financial Planning” awards for his dedication and work in advancing the profession.
New data shows most people do not have enough saved to cover costs and are not fully utilizing their accounts.
Firms announce new recruits this week, with teams overseeing hundreds of millions in client assets switching affiliations.
It’s the 12th deal for Stratos since SEI's investment and follows 11 acquisitions worth $4.8B in 2025.
Proposal to make historic shift in US digital asset policy would give crypto issuers two registration exemptions and a safe harbor from securities classification.
Allianz Life research reveals a retirement confidence gap between childless Americans and parents.
Northern Trust’s Ken Lassner shows advisors how to convert volatility into after-tax portfolio gains
Dan Biagini of American Equity says the steady decline of pensions, longer lifespans and a reset in interest rates are rewriting how advisors build retirement income
