Why AI is sending investors to advisors

About one-third of Vanguard investors surveyed report turning to AI for financial guidance, for everything from retirement planning to investment decisions. Yet here's the twist: Both advised and self-directed investors say AI has increased, not diminished, the value they place on human advice. In fact, just 2% of advised clients and 3% of self-directed clients say AI has reduced the value of working with a human advisor.

“Investors are defying the popular narrative that AI’s convenience and accessibility are ‘crowding out’ professional guidance,” said Andy Reed, Vanguard head of behavioral economics research. Instead, they’re discovering that exploring financial questions through AI exposes the true complexity of wealth management. This includes the trade-offs between competing goals, the long-term implications of consequential decisions, and the discipline required to sustain a plan through volatile markets. Faced with an abundance of information, many investors are gaining a greater appreciation for financial professionals.

There’s a clear gap between investors’ use of AI for financial tasks and their trust in its guidance. Among Gen Z, millennial, and Gen X investors, 63% report low or no trust in AI, and only 5%–6% express high trust. Baby boomers and older generations are even more skeptical: 78% report low trust, with just 2% placing high confidence in AI guidance.

The contrast with human advisors is striking. Most investors across all generations maintain high trust in financial professionals, with fewer than 10% expressing low confidence in human guidance. More than 80% of investors say they aren’t comfortable with AI taking action on their behalf—hardly surprising given that just 19% are confident the information they receive from AI is accurate. “Many investors are comfortable taking AI for a test drive, but few are letting it self-drive,” said Reed.

Human advisors retain distinct advantages where judgment matters most. They understand a client's complete financial picture, weigh trade-offs between competing priorities, help navigate decisions with lasting implications, and provide the support and accountability that sustain financial discipline over time. These capabilities—rooted in empathy, experience, and understanding—have proven difficult for AI to replicate.

Interestingly, greater familiarity with AI does strengthen trust. 31% of investors with high AI literacy report having confidence in AI compared with 19% of those less familiar with the technology. This suggests understanding AI plays an important role but doesn’t translate to complete trust. “Investors of all ages tend to agree that high-stakes decisions belong with humans,” said Reed. “There’s an emerging consensus that AI serves best as an exploratory tool rather than a decision-maker.”

General-purpose AI tools will continue to improve, but closing the trust gap will take time—especially if investor protections aren’t enacted. The technology has proven useful for starting conversations. Human advisors can then provide the judgment, relationships, and holistic guidance needed for consequential decisions. Rather than competing, human advisors and AI may be settling into a complementary dynamic—one that recognizes both the promise of technology and the enduring value of human expertise in navigating financial complexity.

Read the full report