The real reason young people don’t want to be financial advisers and why you should be worried about it NOW

Financial advice has an image problem. Among young people in particular. That is a problem for a profession whose average age still sits stubbornly in the 50–59 bracket and shows little sign of getting younger.

New blood is clearly needed. So what does the data say?

New research from financial consultancy the lang cat, in collaboration with Morningstar Wealth, offers some uncomfortable answers. Its paper, New Blood. Creating career routes and removing barriers between young people and financial services, asked more than 500 people aged 17 to 23 what they think financial planners actually do.

The picture is not flattering.

Most likened the role to accountancy. Very few mentioned the emotional, creative or interpersonal aspects of the job. Almost three quarters, 74 per cent, believed being “good with numbers” was essential.

Financial planners were typically seen as suited, corporate and formal. Predominantly male. Predominantly middle class. A perception that quietly excludes a large amount of potential talent before the conversation has even started.

Only 28 per cent of respondents said they found a career in finance appealing. Only hospitality and accounting scored lower. When asked specifically about financial planning, interest fell further to 21 per cent, just two points ahead of nursing, the lowest-rated option.

This matters, because FCA data shows the number of advisers aged under 25 has dropped below 200 for the first time since 2022. The profession is ageing faster than it is renewing, and the pipeline is thinning.

And yet, there is a contradiction running through the data.

While only 17 per cent of young people say they received a good level of financial education at school, a striking 86 per cent believe it should be taught.

Ask them what they want from a career, and the answers look remarkably like a job description for a good adviser. Four in five want interesting work. Nearly two thirds value salary potential. More than half want job security. Over half are motivated by roles that help people or society.

The problem, then, is not that young people dislike money, or even that they dislike helping others make financial decisions. It is that they do not recognise financial advice as the place where those things happen.

Into that gap has stepped the finfluencer.

Emplifi, a social analytics firm, analysed finance creators across major platforms and identified around 109,000 financial influencer accounts on Instagram and roughly 31,000 on YouTube, using a modest definition of influence. That is before TikTok, X or Facebook are even counted.

In the UK, while there is no official census, curated directories suggest a large and highly active personal finance creator community. Feedspot’s list of the “Top 70 UK Personal Finance Influencers in 2026” identifies at least 70 UK-based creators on Instagram alone.

Regulatory response has not kept pace.

According to Financial Planning Today, FCA enforcement action against finfluencers rose by 174 per cent in 2025. That sounds dramatic until you see the number. Seventy-four actions in total.

Only 13 per cent involved criminal action or arrests. Most were warning alerts or interviews. The FCA says its crackdown will result in around 650 takedown requests.

For context, Canada recorded more than double the number of enforcement actions in the same period, despite having a smaller population.

Broker Chooser’s analysis of TikTok finance videos found that just 6 per cent encouraged viewers to do their own research, while 80 per cent contained potentially misleading information.

This is the asymmetry young people see.

On one side, advisers are older, qualified, regulated, insured, fee-transparent, accountable, personally liable, and subject to intense scrutiny. They train for years, take exams, maintain CPD, pay levies, and carry the consequences when things go wrong.

On the other, finfluencers are younger, charismatic, lightly regulated, often paid opaquely, offer no personalised advice, accept no responsibility, and disappear quietly when their content causes harm.

Guess which one looks more accessible to a 22-year-old scrolling on their phone.

So what is the answer?

First, the profession needs to reclaim the story of what advice actually is. Financial planning is not accountancy with better suits. It is behavioural coaching, ethical judgement, life planning and long-term relationship building. Until that is clearly communicated, young people will continue to assume the job is about spreadsheets rather than people.

Second, career routes need to look like routes, not endurance tests. The lang cat research shows barriers are perceived as high and opaque. Clear apprenticeships, paid training pathways and visible progression would make a material difference. Other professions have solved this. Financial advice has not, at least not at scale.

Third, regulation needs to be credible, consistent and visible. Advisers operate in one of the most tightly regulated professional environments in the UK. Finfluencers operate in something closer to a suggestion. If regulators believe finfluencers pose real consumer harm, enforcement needs to reflect that belief in volume and visibility.

Fourth, the industry needs to meet younger audiences where they already are, without becoming what it criticises. That does not mean turning advisers into TikTok personalities. It does mean using modern channels to explain what advisers actually do, how they help people, and why professionalism matters.

Finally, there is a collective choice to be made. Either financial advice invests in renewal, communication and proportional regulation, or it accepts a future in which growing numbers of consumers take financial guidance from unqualified influencers whose incentives are opaque and whose accountability ends at the edge of a screen.

If nothing changes, the outcome should not surprise us.

The next generation will not reject financial advice because it lacks value. They will reject it because nobody explained why it mattered, while finfluencers were only a swipe away.

‍