AI-generated errors are reaching clients at most financial firms
Of those who believe an error has escaped review, 46 per cent characterised it as a “probably, but no one noticed” situation – meaning mistakes may be circulating in presentations and financial models without detection. Only 38 per cent of respondents expressed confidence that no such error had occurred on their watch.
Speed has outpaced safeguards
Adoption of generative AI in financial services has accelerated sharply. According to the Macabacus report, 87 per cent of respondents use AI daily or weekly to produce financial models and client presentations.
However, only 23 per cent of firms have comprehensive guardrails in place – defined as a combination of approved tools, accuracy checks, brand compliance, and structured review workflows. A further 36 per cent of regular AI users work at firms with no guardrails whatsoever.
Errors in client-facing materials – whether in a financial plan, an investment proposal, or a portfolio summary – can carry regulatory implications under CIRO and OSC standards. As Wealth Professional has previously reported, getting AI accuracy right is now a compliance consideration as much as a workflow one, with a wrong figure in a client recommendation potentially triggering a suitability concern.
Paul Ross, chief marketing officer at Macabacus in New York, described the problem in direct terms: “Deal teams should not slow down their use of AI. They need guardrails that let them move faster while maintaining accuracy and their clients’ trust.”
