Every two years, Kitces Research publishes one of the most rigorous studies of how financial advisors actually market their practices, and what each tactic really costs once you count the advisor’s own time. The 2026 edition, The Kitces Report: How Advisors Actually Market Their Services, deserves a careful read from any advisor who wants to grow.

For advisors investing in digital marketing, the headline is encouraging. Advisors became markedly more efficient over the past two years. The typical revenue acquisition cost fell from $1.09 in 2024 to $0.70 in 2026, and the typical client acquisition cost dropped from $3,800 to $2,551. A big reason, according to Kitces, is that advisors pruned time-heavy tactics that rarely produce clients and leaned into tactics that help prospects find them and trust them.

Below, we focus on the findings most relevant to your online presence (reviews, directory listings, SEO and AEO) and pair each one with practical guidance you can implement in 2027. Where the research mentions Wealthtender, we say so plainly, including the numbers that are less flattering.

What the 2026 Kitces Report Reveals About Where Advisor Marketing Is Heading

Kitces found that marketing costs the typical advisory practice about 7% of annual revenue, and roughly two-thirds of that (68%) is the “soft cost” of advisor and staff time rather than hard-dollar spending. That single insight explains most of the trends in this year’s report: the tactics losing ground are the ones that consume the most advisor time for the least return.

Tactics that declined in usage between 2024 and 2026 carried an average revenue acquisition cost of $1.86, while tactics gaining adoption averaged just $0.72. Content-heavy tactics such as newsletters and blogging fell, and social media remains the least efficient tactic in the study, with a $4.88 RAC and 82% of advisors using it reporting zero new clients from it in the prior 12 months.

Meanwhile, the tactics that help prospects find and evaluate an advisor grew. Third-party review sites posted the largest increase of any tactic, SEO usage rose to 32% of advisors, and answer engine optimization (AEO) appeared in the study for the first time at 10% usage. Kitces describes this as a growing emphasis on advisor findability among prospects searching for financial advice.

That doesn’t mean any tactic should be judged in isolation. As the research shows throughout, many of the most efficient tactics earn their keep by building trust and credibility that make other tactics work better: SEO lifts the success of blogging and podcasts, reviews and directory profiles validate advisors that prospects first hear about through a referral, and high-growth firms are far more likely to design their tactics to complement one another.

Do Online Reviews Help Financial Advisors Win Clients? What the Kitces Data Shows

The share of advisors using third-party review sites rose from 8% in the 2024 report to 13% in 2026, the single largest increase among all marketing tactics. Kitces attributes the growth in part to the SEC’s updated Marketing Rule, which took effect in November 2022 and opened the door for advisors to use testimonials and engage with review platforms.

The economics are compelling. Review sites showed a 61% success rate (the share of advisors who gained at least one client from the tactic) compared with a 55% average across all tactics, and a revenue acquisition cost of $0.67 compared with the $2.01 all-tactic average. Among advisors who monitor review platforms, Google is used by 89%, followed by Wealthtender at 15% and Yelp at 13%.

The finding most advisors are missing: put your reviews where prospects can see them

The most striking data point is what happens when reviews show up on an advisor’s own website. Among practices that collect Google reviews, those that also display reviews on their website had a revenue acquisition cost of just $0.13 for this tactic, compared with roughly $0.85 for those that collect reviews but don’t use them on their site. The share of high-growth practices also climbs at each step: 25% among practices not using review sites, 29% among those collecting Google reviews, and 33% among those displaying reviews on their website.

Yet few advisors take that step. Among advisors using review platforms, only 34% incorporate reviews or testimonials on their website and just 18% display ratings. High-growth firms are nearly twice as likely to display ratings (13% versus 7%).

This lines up with how prospects say they choose an advisor. In a recent Nerd’s Eye View article built on the 2026 research, Kitces’ Sydney Squires wrote:

Reviews are a powerful tool – a demonstration of social proof that other people have worked with and enjoyed this advisor. Research from Wealthtender has indicated that more than 80% of clients surveyed wanted to read reviews before contacting an advisor.

Source: Sydney Squires, Senior Financial Planning Nerd, “What Information Prospects Actually Seek When Choosing An Advisor”, Michael Kitces at Nerd’s Eye View

Kitces also notes two limits. Clients acquired through review sites generated less annual revenue on average ($3,144 versus $11,087 across all tactics), and Kitces suggests review sites are particularly well suited to larger, established practices whose client bases can generate meaningful review volume.

A Wealthtender perspective: reviews work alongside other tactics, and quality beats quantity

We appreciate the Kitces perspective, and we see both points a little differently.

Reviews rarely win a client on their own. For most prospects, reading reviews is one step in a longer decision, not the moment a client is “acquired.” In our 2025 study of $100K+ households seeking financial advice, 96% of people referred to an advisor said they research that advisor online before making contact, and 83% specifically look for online reviews. When a referral, a website visit and a set of reviews all contribute to one hiring decision, attributing an average annual revenue figure to the review site alone is difficult to quantify. A referral gets you on the shortlist; your reviews help you stay there. The Kitces findings point the same way: high-growth firms are far more likely to design tactics that complement one another (70% versus 44%).

Prospects care about the stories, not the count. Our Voice of the Client study of more than 2,500 client reviews found that 89% focus on relationship quality, planning advice and emotional factors, not investments. Prospects read reviews to learn whether an advisor works with people like them and what the experience feels like. A modest number of thoughtful, specific reviews can do that well. A very large volume of reviews can even raise a question in a prospect’s mind about how much personal attention they can expect.

For larger firms, advisor-level reviews matter most. Clients mention individual advisors by name nearly 25 times more often than their firms, and 96% of reviews that name an advisor or firm name the advisor. Prospects want to understand the experience of working with the person they’ll actually work with, which is why we encourage multi-advisor firms to collect reviews at the advisor level and roll them up to the firm. We explain why in why individual advisor reviews matter for wealth management firms.

How to display reviews on your website, compliantly

• Choose your format. A full review widget that shows every review, newest first, is the simplest approach. A curated carousel of a few reviews can work well on a homepage, but it carries more disclosure obligations. Our guide to displaying financial advisor testimonials on your website walks through both approaches with examples.
• Include the required disclosures. Under the Marketing Rule, testimonials you promote must clearly and prominently disclose whether the reviewer is a client, whether compensation was provided, and any material conflicts of interest. If you feature only selected reviews, make sure prospects can easily see that they aren’t representative and can access your full review history.
• Show your rating, not just your words. High-growth firms are far more likely to display ratings. An average rating and review count give prospects an at-a-glance trust signal.
• Add reviews to advisor bio pages. In multi-advisor firms, prospects often decide on a person, not a firm. Advisor-level review displays put social proof exactly where that decision happens.
• Get compliance sign-off first. Your compliance officer or consultant should approve your review display approach before it goes live.

How Can Financial Advisors Get More Clients to Leave Reviews?

Collecting reviews is where most of the effort lies. Kitces found that advisor time accounts for 64% of the total cost of review-site marketing, compared with just 32% for directory listings, because a review strategy involves encouraging clients to participate, monitoring platforms and putting reviews to work in your marketing.

Among advisors using review sites, 60% proactively encourage clients to leave reviews, 16% monitor platforms without engaging, and 24% take a largely passive approach. Kitces found suggestive evidence that encouraging reviews leads to a larger share of clients participating, but even among advisors who ask, the median share of clients leaving reviews peaks at just 16%. In other words, a consistent process matters more than any single request.

One related finding is worth keeping in mind. Kitces found that repeatedly asking clients for referrals doesn’t increase referral volume and may even reduce it by making clients feel solicited. The same principle applies to reviews: make requests consistent, but low-pressure and easy to decline.

A simple, repeatable review outreach system

• Run one firm-wide invitation each year on a fixed date, such as your firm’s anniversary, and send it to every client so you aren’t cherry-picking.
• Follow up after annual review meetings. A short, personal note within a few days of a meeting, while the conversation is fresh, is the natural moment to invite a review. Make clear that it is entirely optional.
• Ask about the relationship, not investment results. Encourage clients to describe what working with you is like, such as communication, responsiveness and peace of mind.
• Make one team member the owner. The advisor signs the message, but a staff member manages the calendar, the follow-ups and the tracking. That is exactly the kind of delegation Kitces associates with high-growth firms.
• Build it into your systems. Set recurring CRM tasks or meeting-tool workflows that pre-draft the follow-up email for the advisor to review and send.

For templates and timing details, see our guide to ongoing client testimonial outreach for financial advisors. To see the results in practice, read how United Financial Planning Group turns reviews into growth in our Winning with Wealthtender series.

Are Online Advisor Directories Worth It? The Lowest Acquisition Cost in the Kitces Report

Only 18% of advisors use online advisor directory listings, yet the tactic produced the single lowest revenue acquisition cost in the entire study at $0.28, lower even than client referrals ($0.34). Listings also showed a 79% success rate, well above the 55% average. The reason is simple: listings cost relatively little (Kitces puts the typical annual listing fee at roughly $500) and require little advisor time once a profile is built.

High-growth practices are twice as likely to use directory listings (28% versus 14% among actively growing practices), and among practices under $1 million in revenue, high-growth firms are 17 percentage points more likely to maintain listings. Kitces also found that practices using any of the directory platforms examined were more likely to qualify as high-growth than practices using none (33%). Kitces concludes there is little reason for firms actively pursuing growth to skip online directories.

Kitces notes that clients acquired through directories generated about $6,000 in annual revenue on average versus $11,087 across all tactics, and that lead quantity ratings exceeded lead quality ratings across the category. As with review sites, we would be cautious about reading too much into revenue figures attributed to any single tactic, since a directory profile is often one of several touchpoints a prospect uses before reaching out.

Where Wealthtender shows up in the data

Wealthtender was tracked as a directory for the first time in 2026, and 21% of advisors using online listings reported using it. Among Wealthtender users, 46% were high-growth practices, compared with 33% of practices that don’t use directories at all. Advisors rated Wealthtender’s overall value 4.7 on a 10-point scale, third-highest of the seven providers reported, while its ratings for lead quantity (2.3) and lead quality (2.8) were lower.

We think that pattern reflects what Wealthtender is, and isn’t. Wealthtender is not a high-volume lead generator; Kitces notes that SmartAsset, by contrast, scores very high on lead quantity but often requires dedicated staff to sift through leads. As we explain in Is Wealthtender Worth It for Financial Advisors?, Wealthtender works more like a call option on attracting your ideal clients. The value shows up when prospects, including referred prospects, research you online, read your reviews and validate trust before they ever reach out, often without leaving a trackable trail. Inquiries are less frequent, but intent is higher. If you’re weighing models, our SmartAsset vs. Wealthtender comparison lays out the differences.

How to get the most from directory listings

• Choose a few listing platforms with the most impactful digital marketing features (for example, online reviews and niche-specific visibility), rather than spreading thin across every platform.
• Complete every field. Credentials, bio, specialties and FAQs (including ones that address your pricing and fiduciary status) are details prospects use to decide whether you’re a fit. Kitces also found that displaying fee schedules on your website is associated with lower referral acquisition costs and stronger referral-driven growth, because it helps people judge who you serve.
• Keep your information consistent across your website, directories and Google Business Profile. Consistency builds trust with prospects, and it matters for AI search too (more on that below).
• Ask every new client how they found you, and where they checked you out. Many prospects who arrive by referral validate you on a directory or review site first. If you ask through an intake form, make the question multi-select, since most prospects use several resources before reaching out. Capturing every step shows you what’s really working together.

Amplify your reviews on partner directories

Directory profiles become even more persuasive when they carry your client reviews. Through Wealthtender’s partnership with XY Planning Network, announced in September 2026, XYPN’s Find an Advisor directory can now show members’ Certified Advisor Reviews from Wealthtender directly on their profiles, with the required disclosures included, so prospects who find them through XYPN see the same social proof they’d see on Wealthtender. For members, connecting takes about a minute: copy your Wealthtender profile ID into the Wealthtender field of your XYPN Find an Advisor profile, as XYPN’s help center article explains.

We’re exploring partnerships with additional advisor directories. In the meantime, if you’re featured on other directories, reach out to your contacts there and ask whether they can publish your Wealthtender reviews compliantly on your listing. The more places prospects (and AI search tools) encounter consistent, verified client feedback about you, the stronger the signal.

Why a Niche Makes SEO (and Referrals) Work Harder

SEO is one of the most efficient tactics in the study, with a $0.45 revenue acquisition cost and a 52% success rate. But the results depend heavily on specialization. In 2026, niche-focused practices reported a 70% SEO success rate compared with 42% for generalists, a gap that widened from 50% versus 46% in 2024. Kitces explains why: search engines reward differentiation, using keywords to signal authority and areas of expertise.

SEO also amplifies other tactics. Kitces found blogging succeeded for 61% of advisors who supported it with SEO versus just 13% of those who didn’t, and podcasts succeeded for 80% versus 43%. And the benefits of a clear niche extend beyond search. Practices that prominently communicate their niche on their website reported lower referral acquisition costs ($0.06 versus $0.13), likely because clients can more easily recognize who in their network you can help. Among practices under $1 million in revenue, high-growth firms are more likely to be niche-focused (56% versus 41%).

How to put it to work in 2027

• Build dedicated pages for each niche you serve, written in the language your ideal clients use to describe their own situations. Let your clients speak for you there, too: following our guidance on how advisors can compliantly promote client testimonials, you can feature a single testimonial or a curated set from clients who represent that niche, with the required disclosures.
• Create two or three content clusters around your specialties, so your expertise is visible in depth rather than in a single page.
• Name your specialties on every profile, including your directory listings and review profiles.
• Borrow authority from platforms AI search tools and prospects already visit. AI tools lean on trusted third-party sources when they recommend advisors, and prospects visit those same sources to research their options. Wealthtender’s expert Q&A series, including our Large Employer Q&As, put advisors’ answers in front of people searching for help specific to their employer or circumstances. Learn more about how financial advisors can attract employees of large companies.

Is AEO Worth It for Financial Advisors? A Closer Look at the $3.45 RAC

Answer engine optimization, meaning efforts to appear in AI-powered tools such as ChatGPT, Gemini and Google’s AI results, made its debut in the Kitces study. Ten percent of advisors use it, with a 48% success rate that is close to SEO’s 52%. Early adopters are enthusiastic, rating AEO higher in satisfaction than SEO (5.1 versus 4.4). Among advisors pursuing AEO, 72% said ChatGPT generated visibility for them, followed by Gemini (35%), Claude (30%) and Perplexity (20%).

But the cost picture is very different. AEO carries a $3.45 revenue acquisition cost, nearly eight times SEO’s $0.45 and one of the highest in the study. Kitces also observes that relatively few clients appear to be contacting advisors because an AI chatbot recommended them, and raises the open question of whether advisors will get better at AEO as it matures.

Our take: build the foundation before you buy the add-on

We read the gap between AEO and SEO less as a verdict on AI search and more as a reflection of how advisors are pursuing it. Kitces found that 67% of advisors using AEO handle it entirely on their own, compared with 37% for SEO, which suggests many are treating AEO as a separate, time-intensive project. With advisor time as the biggest marketing cost, a standalone AEO initiative can get expensive quickly.

The good news is that much of what AI tools reward is already the work of good SEO and reputation management. Kitces notes that AEO rewards consensus: AI models favor what is consistently reflected across many sources. Clear, specific content about who you serve; consistent information across your website and third-party profiles; verified client reviews; and expert answers published on platforms AI tools already trust all feed both channels at once. As we explain in our guide to answer engine optimization for financial advisors, AEO is not a replacement for SEO, and Google itself says the best practices for SEO continue to be relevant.

Our advice: don’t overspend on AEO as a stand-alone line item. Strengthen your SEO foundation first and let AEO benefit from it.

Low-cost AEO steps that build on SEO

• Check what AI tools say about you. Ask ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity about your name, your firm and your niche, and note what’s missing or inaccurate.
• Add FAQ schema to existing FAQ content on your website so answers are easy for search engines and AI tools to extract.
• Complete and align your third-party profiles, so the same specialties, credentials and service details appear everywhere.
• Collect reviews on platforms that publish structured data, giving AI tools machine-readable signals of client trust.
• See it in action: read how Emily Rassam earns new clients through AI search, then watch our masterclasses on becoming the financial advisor ChatGPT recommends and an SEO and AEO website audit.

The Common Thread: Trust, Intentionality and Tactics That Work Together

Kitces sums up its findings in one idea: successful advisor marketing comes down to building trust. Among high-growth practices, 85% of new clients come either from a transfer of trust (client referrals and centers of influence) or from advisors building trust directly with prospects. For smaller practices without an established brand, Kitces points to professional designations and online directories as credibility signals, and to the social proof of client testimonials as something that helps prospects feel comfortable reaching out.

High-growth firms are also more deliberate. They are more likely to draw on at least three inputs when building a marketing plan (65% versus 49%), to design tactics that complement one another (70% versus 44%), and to have systems for tracking prospects once they arrive (37% versus 25%).

Put those findings together and a clear path emerges. A referral or search result introduces you. Your reviews, profiles and credentials validate you. Your website confirms the fit with clear information about who you serve and what you charge. Each step reinforces the next, and research cited by Kitces found that 44% of referred prospects would move on if they couldn’t find the information they needed. Trust has to be visible before the first call.

Your 2027 Findability Checklist

Use this checklist to turn the Kitces findings into a plan for the year ahead.

Q&A Insights: 2026 Kitces Marketing Research

Source note: Statistics in this article are from The Kitces Report: How Advisors Actually Market Their Services, Volume 2, 2026, published by Kitces Research, Michael Kitces at Nerd’s Eye View. The quoted excerpt is from Sydney Squires, “What Information Prospects Actually Seek When Choosing An Advisor”, Michael Kitces at Nerd’s Eye View. Wealthtender is named in the research and is the publisher of this article.

About the Author

Brian Thorp

Founder & CEO, Wealthtender  ·  Editor-in-Chief

Brian Thorp is the founder and CEO of Wealthtender and serves as Editor-in-Chief. With over 25 years in the financial services industry, including nearly 22 years at Invesco, where he led strategic partnerships with wealth management firms representing more than $100 billion in assets, Brian founded Wealthtender to help people find financial advisors they can trust and make more informed money decisions.

A member of the National Society of Compliance Professionals and its SEC Marketing Rule Working Group, Brian was recognized by WealthManagement.com as one of its “Ten to Watch in 2024” for his work reshaping how financial advisors market their services. He holds a B.B.A. in Finance from The University of Texas at Austin.

Brian and his wife live in Austin, Texas.

Read Brian’s full bio →   ·   Connect on LinkedIn →