Advice firms are turning to third-party aggregators to bridge a gap in data as platforms and pension providers fall short, says NextWealth.
According to the firm’s Data Openness Report 2026, granular transaction data, firm-level MI and consistent formatting remain the most prominent gaps in data delivery by platforms and pension providers.
Across key measures including data availability, quality, timeliness and delivery and access, just 61% of firms said they are “somewhat satisfied” with the data platforms deliver. For pension providers, this falls to 54%.
Chanelle Paynter, associate research director at NextWealth, said: “When over half of advisers are only ‘somewhat satisfied’ with the data delivered, it speaks to the data being tolerated, not celebrated. In order to change that, the answer lies in better understanding how advisers intend to use the data – the data requirements for regulatory compliance and evidence, business management and growth, client experience, operational efficiency are all very different.
“Alongside availability, advisers are asking whether data is usable, consistent, and fit for the workflows they are building.”
The research highlights that firms are no longer waiting for platforms and pension providers to act. Instead, they are building data infrastructure and adopting aggregation services to bridge the gap.
NextWealth said data capability is no longer a preference but a must have, particularly for the largest and fastest-growing firms.
The report found that data is used for a range of purposes and called for platforms and pension providers to understand the use case and design better solutions.
For example, the firms said Consumer Duty has increased the need for firms to show a client’s portfolio remains appropriate on an ongoing basis, rather than once a year. This requires transaction data flowing into systems so the firm always has a current picture for every client.
Furthermore, advice firms want centralised MI dashboards giving management real-time visibility of key metrics: assets under advice, net new business, adviser productivity and flows into in-house products.
At the same time, the shift from an annual review cycle to a continuous, always-on service model is reshaping what firms need from data. Clients expect portfolio valuation and performance information on an ongoing basis.
The NextWealth findings show that where transaction data is being provided, inconsistent labelling, formatting, and accuracy problems undermine its usability.
Paynter added: “Expanding the volume of data shared is clearly still needed but on its own it is not enough. How that data is labelled, structured and interpreted matters as much as whether it is provided at all. A transaction feed that requires weeks of manual cleaning before it can be used is not necessarily materially better than no feed at all.
“The need is pressing and it’s growing. Advice firms need data to do their jobs. What firms are asking for is not complex. It’s broader data such as transaction data, delivered consistently, in a format they can actually use. Where platforms and providers fall short of that, firms are using aggregators to bridge the gap.”
Paynter said data gaps are feeding directly into commercial decisions, with data capability becoming a deciding factor in who makes it onto panels.
She added: “The gap between what platforms and providers deliver and what advice firms need remains too wide for advice firms to bridge alone, the aggregation layer that has grown up around this market is evidence of that.
“When we asked firms what good looks like, the answer was the same across every conversation: the same data types, in the same format, regardless of the platform or provider. Whether that requires industry standards or individual commitment is a question the market will need to answer.”
Main image: markus-spiske-hvSr_CVecVI-unsplash
