Swiss wealth management has, of course, undergone a significant transformation since the introduction of the LEFin and LSFin. Far from weakening the model, the new requirements have accelerated the professionalisation of the sector and clarified the roles of its key players. Vivien Jain looks back at the developments that are currently reshaping the profession – from new client profiles to technological transformations – and at the ASG’s commitment to strengthening its role in supporting wealth managers.
Two years after the implementation of the LEFin, how do you see independent wealth managers in Switzerland evolving?
Vivien Jain: If there is one thing to take away, it is the resilience of the Swiss wealth management model. When the LEFin was introduced, many observers predicted that the smallest firms would disappear under the weight of the new regulatory requirements, as had been seen in other jurisdictions.
That simply did not happen. The latest figures show that the median asset manager still employs just over three people. The sector therefore remains largely made up of small firms with just one, two or three professionals on the payroll. This is quite remarkable. The regulatory framework is significantly more demanding, but very small firms can still be highly successful in Switzerland.
Of course, the number of firms has fallen compared with estimates made several years ago. However, this trend is due more to a clarification of the scope of the profession than to a decline in the independent model. The regulations have made it possible to better identify those who actually carry out wealth management activities. Before the Financial Market Act (LEFin), many presented themselves as portfolio managers without actually carrying out the discretionary management activities subject to supervision. Today, the boundaries of the profession are more clearly defined and its level of professionalisation has increased considerably. The LEFin has therefore not disrupted the market. Above all, it has helped to strengthen the sector’s credibility.
The figures also need to be put into context. The 2,500 firms registered with FINMA in 2020 are often compared with the approximately 1,400 asset managers currently authorised. Two factors explain this discrepancy. On the one hand, nearly 500 of these entities were in fact trustees. On the other hand, the decline in the number of asset managers reflects a wave of retirements since 2020, which was not initially offset by the arrival of new entrants. However, this trend appears to be reversing, as FINMA recorded 61 new applications for authorisation in 2025.
What are the major structural forces shaping the sector today?
Several long-term trends are now converging. The first concerns generational change, both within asset management firms and amongst their clients. Many wealth managers now advise several generations of the same family. As this phenomenon gathers pace, advisers must learn to meet the expectations of an increasingly diverse range of clients. At the same time, technological transformation is accelerating.
Digitalisation is no longer a medium-term prospect, as it is already redefining industry practices. Artificial intelligence is, of course, one of the major developments. Everyone is talking about it, but the real question is who will be able to integrate it effectively into their business model in order to improve efficiency without compromising the quality of service.
Regulation will also remain a key factor. The role of an association is not to oppose regulation, but to ensure that it evolves in a way that preserves the entrepreneurial dynamism that has always characterised wealth management in Switzerland.
Where do you see the main growth opportunities for independent wealth managers?
The transfer of wealth between generations is probably the greatest opportunity at present. Today’s wealth creators are very different from previous generations. We are seeing more and more entrepreneurs, founders, cryptocurrency investors and content creators amassing significant fortunes at a much younger age. It is no longer unusual to see young entrepreneurs building their fortunes before they even reach the age of thirty. To support them, we therefore need to adopt entirely different approaches. Their expectations, communication habits and investment culture are not the same as those of traditional private banking clients.
That said, I remain convinced that the greatest opportunity lies with families we already serve. The wealth managers who currently advise parents are ideally placed to build a relationship with the next generation even before the wealth transfer process begins. This ensures continuity and strengthens client relationships in the long term.
Artificial intelligence also represents a tremendous growth opportunity, as it will enable firms to improve their efficiency whilst maintaining the highly personalised service that sets wealth managers apart.
In the light of your experience at Aquila, which players are currently facing the greatest pressures, whether operational or economic?
Curiously, it is neither the smallest nor the largest firms. Smaller firms remain remarkably agile. They operate with lean cost structures, often without complex IT infrastructure or large support functions. They can remain profitable with relatively limited resources. Large organisations, for their part, have already reached a size sufficient to absorb the costs associated with compliance, technology and operations.
The real challenge lies with mid-sized firms. When they reach four, five or six relationship managers, their complexity generally increases significantly. Processes become more complex, investment in technology becomes essential and compliance requirements gradually rise. Firms must then choose between maintaining a deliberately lean model or investing in their growth to reach a scale that allows them to better absorb their costs. This transition phase is probably one of the main economic pressures facing the sector today.
Would you say that FINMA’s regulatory approach has become too uniform?
Yes, and this is probably one of the most important issues we continue to discuss with FINMA. Asset managers are fundamentally different from banks. They do not hold assets on their balance sheets, work with custodian banks and have a completely different risk profile. Regulation should therefore reflect these differences.
The key principle should always be that of proportionality and a risk-based approach. Numerous concrete examples show that certain current expectations do not always correspond to the operational reality of these managers. A recent discussion focused in particular on sanctions screening, with the requirement for firms to update sanctions lists within twenty-four hours of their publication. This timeframe is obviously essential for banks executing transactions, but it is far less relevant for asset managers whose assets are held with regulated banks.
The same logic applies to areas such as best execution. Certain requirements are now tending to align more closely with those imposed on banks, even though the operational realities are very different. Risk-based supervision has the great merit of concentrating resources where risks are actually present, rather than applying the same standards to all business models.
What are the ASG’s strategic priorities for the coming years?
There are two. The first is to increase our visibility and influence. We wish to expand our membership base in order to better represent the sector’s interests to the regulator and political authorities. We already represent over 60 per cent of the market today. My ambition is to get closer to 80 per cent, as a broader base will give us greater weight in discussions.
The second priority is to significantly expand the services we offer our members. When an asset manager faces a regulatory, operational or technological issue, the ASG must be their first port of call.
This involves developing practical guides, sector-specific standards, templates and concrete recommendations. Representing the profession’s interests remains essential, but an association must also provide practical solutions to its members’ day-to-day concerns. This is the direction in which we wish to take the ASG.
How can the ASG position itself more effectively as a service provider?
Advocating for the profession’s interests will remain at the heart of our mission, but members’ expectations have changed. They also want practical support in dealing with the issues they face on a day-to-day basis. When a new regulation or a FINMA circular comes into force, they expect clear answers on its practical implications, how to prepare for it and what measures to put in place.
The aim is to ensure that individual firms do not have to develop their own solutions on their own. The association must be able to provide practical guides, templates, common standards and concrete recommendations. We have already taken steps in this direction through various initiatives, including round-table discussions on audits, recommendations on cyber security and tools designed to facilitate compliance with regulatory requirements. Ultimately, we want the ASG to become the go-to resource for wealth managers when they are seeking an answer to an operational or regulatory question.
What is the current size of the Swiss independent wealth management market?
Based on data collected from supervisory bodies and FINMA, and subsequently published in our Yearbook, we estimate that asset managers currently manage assets worth nearly 500 billion Swiss francs.
Estimates may, of course, vary. Some players cite figures ranging from 200 to 800 billion Swiss francs, but we consider the figure of 500 billion to be the most credible estimate to date. Beyond these figures, the market continues to grow, and I remain convinced of the growth potential of wealth management in Switzerland.