Alongside availability, advisers are asking whether data is usable, consistent and fit for the workflows they are building. Our latest research examines these challenges.

Satisfaction with platform and pension provider data

This year, we asked advisers about their satisfaction with platform and pension provider data separately. While 85% of advisers are very or somewhat satisfied with platform data, this falls to 74% for pension providers. For some pension providers, the gap between current delivery and adviser expectations is significant. Even for platforms, 61% of advisers describe themselves as only somewhat satisfied, suggesting that while the data they receive is generally adequate, there remains considerable scope for improvement.

Transaction data is the universal gap

All of our interviewees for this project raised transaction data as either the primary data gap or one of the most significant. Under Consumer Duty and the FCA’s ongoing suitability rules, advisers need to demonstrate that a client’s portfolio remains appropriate, and transaction data is the evidence trail. But availability is only half the problem. Even where it is provided, the way it is labelled, structured and interpreted often makes it hard to use. A COO at a large advice firm told us:

“There is no consistent framework in the industry on how that data is provided. So whilst you can say there should always be a date, a transaction reference, whether it’s a credit or a debit, what type of transaction it is. Every single provider labels their transactions differently.”

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 infrastructure reality

The term data lake is used across the market and talked about frequently. However, across nine interviews, no firm had built a true data lake. What firms are actually building sits on a spectrum, from manual Excel downloads, to a structured reporting layer on top of a CRM, to a dedicated data warehouse. The terms ‘data lake’ and ‘data warehouse’ are used interchangeably, which reflects genuine uncertainty about what firms have built and what the next step should be.

This matters for platforms building roadmaps around data lake connectivity. The immediate demand is not for raw data feeds. It is for better quality, more complete, more consistently formatted data, ideally delivered via API.

The commercial consequences of data

Our Consolidation of Advice report 2026 highlighted that data access is a minimum requirement for an effective commercial relationship. The firms controlling the largest and fastest-growing pools of assets are making platform decisions based on data capability. That is not a future trend, it is happening now.

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.

Get the full analysis

Data Openness Report 2026

The full report covers adviser satisfaction with platform and pension provider data across availability, quality, timeliness and delivery; the transaction data gap and why usability now matters more than availability; the data infrastructure reality across advice firms; the rise of the aggregation layer; and the commercial consequences for platforms and providers. It draws on a survey of 201 advisers, nine in-depth interviews with technology and operations leaders at advice firms, and data requests from advice firms.

Click here for more information.

Chanelle Paynter, Associate Research Director, NextWealth

FAQs

Why is data openness no longer just a supply question?
Many platforms now give access to valuation data, so the question has moved on. Alongside availability, advisers are asking whether the data is usable, consistent and fit for the workflows they are building.

How satisfied are advisers with the data they receive?
85% of advisers are very or somewhat satisfied with platform data and 74% with pension provider data. But across every factor, 61% are only somewhat satisfied with platform data, indicating the data they receive is adequate but leaves room for improvement.

Why is transaction data such a problem?
Every single interview raised transaction data as a gap. Under Consumer Duty and the FCA’s ongoing suitability rules it is the evidence trail advisers rely on. Even where it is provided, inconsistent labelling, structure and interpretation across providers often make it hard to use without significant manual work.

Do advice firms really have data lakes?
Across nine interviews, no firm had built a true data lake. What firms are building sits on a spectrum, from manual Excel downloads, to a structured reporting layer on a CRM, to a dedicated data warehouse, and the terms data lake and data warehouse are often used interchangeably.

How does data affect platform selection?
Data access has become a minimum requirement for an effective commercial relationship, no longer just a differentiator. The firms controlling the largest and fastest-growing pools of assets are making platform decisions based on data capability now, not in future.