IFA Magazine’s 2025 Managed Portfolio Service (MPS) Adviser Survey reveals just how deeply embedded MPS solutions have become in advice firms across the UK, but also highlights where frustrations remain. But how exactly are advisers using them, what’s driving their decision-making, and what would tempt them to switch providers?
We set out to find out with IFA Magazine’s 2025 MPS Adviser Survey, and the results are fascinating. With almost 100 financial advisers, paraplanners and wealth managers taking part, this year’s survey offers a comprehensive snapshot of where the market stands.
It seems that MPS are no longer the shiny new tool in the adviser toolkit; they’ve become a central pillar of advice propositions up and down the country. Here’s what advisers told us.
MPS is mainstream
First things first: from our survey results it seems that MPS really has gone mainstream. A huge 76% of respondents said they currently recommend or use MPS for their clients, leaving just 18% saying they don’t. Of those who do use MPS, they are far from dabblers: 62% said they recommend or place client assets into MPS ‘very often’, with a further 29% saying they do so ‘often’. Only 9% told us that they recommend or use MPS ‘occasionally’ or ‘rarely’.
That means more than nine in ten MPS users are using them as a core part of their investment proposition, not just for niche cases.
And they’re not just dipping their toes in. When asked what proportion of a typical client’s investable assets they allocate into MPS, 47% said it was more than 80%, with 26% allocating between 61-80% and only 1.45% allocating less than 20%. For many firms, this now therefore appears to be more of a default solution.
Why advisers love MPS
So, what’s behind this surge? The reasons advisers are increasingly recommending MPS solutions to clients are crystal clear and can be seen in Fig.1. 85% cited access to professional investment management, which remains the number one draw. For many respondents, MPS allows them to delegate portfolio construction and focus more time on building client relationships and on the core financial planning process.
Other top reasons for the growth in MPS usage include risk-rated solutions aligned to client profiles (85%), investment consistency and discipline (62%), cost-effectiveness compared with bespoke discretionary solutions (63%) and regulatory suitability including PROD and Consumer Duty compliance (56%).
The point about cost-effectiveness is interesting. With bespoke discretionary portfolio management services being an obvious competitor in this space, the appeal of a lower cost alternative in MPS seems to be a factor in driving the popularity of MPS – and with an easier audit trail too.
Figure 1
Figure 1 highlights the main reasons for recommending MPS to clients
What types of MPS are advisers using?
When it comes to types of MPS, there’s a clear winner: 81% said they use risk-rated MPS, making it the dominant option. That’s followed by centralised investment propositions at 30%, ESG-focused MPS at 26%, and income-generating MPS at just under 9%.
ESG is clearly still important, but it seems not to be dominating the conversation in the way it did just a couple of years ago. Thematic and volatility-managed solutions were used by fewer than one in five respondents.
Which asset managers do advisers favour?
We also asked our survey audience which MPS providers they use or trusted the most. The list was long, but several names stood out for their popularity: Quilter, Brooks Macdonald, Tatton, RBC Brewin Dolphin, AJ Bell, Parmenion, Morningstar and Vanguard all received significant mentions.
Interestingly, our survey respondents indicated that there’s no single provider dominating the market, which tends to suggest that many might be shopping around, selecting different MPS providers for different client segments or preferences.
Due diligence is key
Encouragingly, one element that advisers seem to be taking very seriously is due diligence. 63% said they rely on third-party research into MPS solutions from the likes of FE fundinfo, Defaqto and ARC, while more than a third conduct in-person or virtual meetings with portfolio managers.
Performance and risk metrics reviews are undertaken by 34%, Provider due diligence questionnaires are used by 27% and compliance or consultancy assessments are used by a quarter of respondents. Interestingly, peer recommendations still play a role, with 17% saying they turn to their peers or industry networks for insights.
Adviser sentiment is warming
It’s also clear that adviser sentiment towards MPS has improved in the past couple of years. When asked whether their views had changed over the past 12–24 months, 31% said they were now more favourable towards MPS. Almost 57% told us their views on MPS haven’t changed over the period.
Only a tiny minority, just over 5%, said they were now less favourable, with more than half reporting no change.
The sticking points
But it’s not all plain sailing. Advisers were refreshingly honest about some of their frustrations with MPS.
The biggest concerns? Performance concerns were at the top of the pile for 32% of respondents, closely followed by fees or charges (30%) with the same number (30%) concerned by platform restrictions or compatibility issues. Other gripes include the lack of transparency in holdings or changes (16%) and complexity in explaining to clients (15%)
It appears that a lack of transparency in holdings or changes is still a sticking point for many. Other gripes include difficulty aligning risk ratings with client expectations, complexity in explaining MPS to clients, and platform restrictions or compatibility issues.
Figure 2
Fig 2 indicates biggest challenges or concerns with recommending or using MPS.
What matters most when choosing an MPS provider
When we asked advisers which factors drive their choice of MPS provider, the answers reinforced the theme of pragmatism. Cost and charges came out top with 74.68%, followed by performance track record (63.29%) and investment philosophy and process (50.63%).
Other key factors included service quality, adviser support, and provider reputation. ESG considerations, while not irrelevant, ranked much lower at just over 10%.
Figure 3
Fig 3 shows most important factors influencing choice of MPS provider
What support do advisers want?
If MPS providers are looking for ways to win over advisers, our survey offers them a handy roadmap.
We asked our survey audience to identify which kinds of support they would like to receive from an MPS provider to help them recommend or use their solutions more effectively. The most requested support? Regular, easy-to-understand performance and market commentary, chosen by 67% of respondents.
Other popular requests included customisable client reporting materials (46%), training sessions or webinars on investment process and positioning (31%), help with Consumer Duty and regulatory compliance (26%), risk profiling tools aligned to the models (39%) and due diligence packs with detailed methodology (34%).
There’s a clear message here: make it easier for advisers to articulate the value of MPS to clients and to meet regulatory obligations.
Platform preferences
The use of investment platforms has also been a growing trend over many years. Quilter was the most widely used at 39%, followed by Aviva at 28% and Transact at 19%. AJ Bell Investcentre, Fidelity Adviser Solutions also featured prominently.
Given the clear benefits which the use of platforms offer, this must be an important consideration for providers seeking to grow market share in future.
How satisfied are advisers?
The good news for MPS providers is that satisfaction levels with the service and support they receive from asset managers are high, as shown in Fig 4. Almost 70% of advisers said they are either very satisfied (31%) or satisfied (38%) with the service, support, and client reporting they receive.
Only a tiny proportion, just over 1%, said they were very dissatisfied.
Figure 4
Fig 4 shows satisfaction levels with the service and support, the client reporting and communication provided, by current MPS providers
What would tempt advisers to switch MPS provider?
Finally, we asked our survey audience what would make them consider switching to another MPS provider.
Here’s what they told us: lower fees (50%), better performance (45%), superior adviser support (34%) greater platform availability (31%), more tailored risk profiles (20%) and more comprehensive reporting (17%). There are probably few surprises in this list but it does focus the mind that whilst cost and performance are key, service and support are increasingly important factors too.
Stronger ESG credentials were cited by just 2.7%, reinforcing the message that cost, performance, and service are the primary battlegrounds.
Figure 5
Fig 5. Factors that would encourage advisers to consider switching to or adding another MPS provider
A mature market, but no room for complacency
So, where does this leave us? The big takeaway from this year’s adviser survey is that MPS is no longer a niche solution; it’s the backbone of most advisers’ investment propositions.
But that doesn’t mean that MPS providers can rest on their laurels. Advisers are sophisticated, well-informed, and not afraid to switch if performance dips or service standards slide.
As one adviser told us, what they really want is “regular, easy-to-understand performance and market commentary” that helps them keep clients informed and engaged.
In other words, MPS providers who continue to invest in transparency, reporting, and adviser support will win hearts and minds. Those who don’t risk losing market share. And in a mature market, that can happen fast
By Jenny Hunter, IFA Magazine’s Deputy Editor
This feature was part of our MPS Insights 2025 publication – designed with advisers’ needs in mind. You can download your copy of the publication here…. https://ifamagazine.com/2025-managed-portfolio-services-mps-insights/
About the survey
‘Understanding advisers’ use of MPS Solutions’: IFA Magazine’s 2025 MPS Adviser Survey was carried out online in August 2025 had 98 responses.
