Why advisors really leave — and what firms keep getting wrong about recruitment

That distinction matters more now than it has in years. Regulatory changes are widening registration pathways for tens of thousands of mutual fund advisors, and a wave of senior advisors is approaching retirement without a clear succession plan in place. The combination is creating what Kulkarni calls “one of the more active windows for advisor movement we’ve seen in some time” — but he’s quick to add that opportunity and execution are two different things.

The technology tipping point

Kulkarni points to technology as the most underestimated driver of advisor attrition. What used to be considered back-office plumbing, he argues, is now something clients see and judge every day.

“An advisor’s credibility is on the line every time they log into a platform in front of a client,” Kulkarni says. “We hear this constantly from advisors in transition – telling us stories about how they’re tired of apologizing for slow reporting, or for onboarding that takes weeks instead of days. That’s not a technology problem anymore. That’s a trust problem, and it can be the type of thing that prompts an advisor to start quietly looking around.”

He notes that this shift has changed what advisors ask for when they’re being recruited. Rather than simply asking about payout grids, prospective hires want to see the platform, the reporting tools and the workflow in action.

“They want proof the firm can help them scale,” he says. “If you can’t show that in the first conversation, you’ve already lost some ground.”