AI is already advising millions of people on their finances, despite 42% of consumers preferring to speak to a human.
The FCA published two significant documents in the past few weeks as part of the Mills Review. It is an ongoing examination of AI's long-term impact on retail financial services. The first release sets out the regulatory direction of travel, the second surveyed over 5,000 UK consumers about what they're actually doing with AI when it comes to their money.
We've explored and pulled out some of the key talking points from the consumer research, as this is where the real insight lies and the findings are already shifting that way in which advice is going to be provided in the future.
What people are actually doing
16% of UK consumers already use AI to help with personal finance. That rises to 23% among people who use AI for anything at all. It's highest in the areas where advice has traditionally been hardest to access, with debt management, investing, and pension planning topping the bill.
These may seem like modest figures, but it's almost double the amount who receive regulated advice (8.6%, FCA). Those using AI however are not handing over control and most people use AI to summarise information, understand options, or sense-check their thinking before making a decision themselves. Around one in five follows AI suggestions outright without checking elsewhere first. This extra validation is essential, as should something go awry there could be serious implications without the protections you get from regulated advice.
The protection gap
Only 40% of consumers correctly understand that there is no formal route for recourse if you act on financial advice from AI and it goes badly.
The rest either don't know, or actively believe protections exist that don't. Among people who already use AI for personal finance, it's marginally higher with 41% holding this belief. This is a concern, as the more frequent users are the most likely to be harmed.
This is the central problem the Mills Review needs to address: as AI becomes more embedded in how people manage money, who is responsible when it gets something wrong? Right now, the answer is largely "you are".
Accessibility is a driver
The research also confirms something that's felt true for a while: people turn to AI in exactly the areas where regulated advice has historically been expensive or difficult to access, namely pensions, investing and debt. These are the areas where the consequences of bad decisions are highest, and also where AI adoption is also highest.
Furthermore, 35% of consumers believe AI could make financial advice more accessible and whilst we are already seeing an uptake, the more visibility, usage and trust builds these numbers are likely to continue to grow for the foreseeable future.
What consumers actually want
When asked what would make them more likely to use AI for financial decisions, the top two answers were:
Clear rules protecting them if something went wrong (32%)
A proven track record of accuracy and reliability (30%)
Most notably, following the above point around accessibility, cost is not the main driver nor the speed of the response. People want to feel protected and see proof of past performance to build trust in the tools available to them.
The Future Finance perspective and opportunity
AI can be a genuinely useful tool for understanding options, and with the right prompting can provide the similar guidance to what an adviser might say (and as one FT columnist says, exceeds it). But AI is not a regulated adviser. There is currently no formal complaint route and no compensation scheme if it points you in the wrong direction.
The data shows demand for AI-enabled financial services is real and growing, but so is scepticism. 42% of consumers still prefer speaking to a human about financial matters, and making that final decision when it comes to your finances is, for many, still a sensitive and frightening thing to do alone. In increasing accessibility, it has the potential to be gamechanging and support millions who aren't sure where to turn, but without the correct AI and financial education will everybody make the sensible choice to validate and research before making significant financial decisions?
For advisers, to stay ahead you have to consider the changing customer experience and think about how you build your services around what can clearly be a complimentary tool, and what many of your clients are already using. The inbuild trust you have is something that AI is a long way from, and for many will never achieve. Leverage this show how you can build and deliver a trustworthy service regardless of the noise going on more widely.
Understanding what your customers are doing, how they are using technology, and how your services can complement the AI juggernaut that will continue to power on is essential. The FCA has put a serious body of evidence on the table about where consumers are and what they need. We can support you with the skills, knowledge and innovation capability to build your products and services to meet this need.
Reach out to us at hello@future-finance.tech to elevate your services.
Sources: FCA Mills Review (2026); Yonder / FCA AI Consumer Research, n=5,026 UK retail finance consumers, April 2026.
