Top 10 of 40 ranked.
Robo Name/Access to Advisors/Financial Planning/Transparency and Conflicts/Features/Customer Experience/Account Minimum/Size and Tenure/Costs/Performance/Total
The table is (sort of) interesting but is it something you would bet your money on?
1. What is the time period for "performance"? How is "performance" quantified?
2. The AAII Journal had a similar table (different characteristics reported though)
3. If they had been in operation from 1998 what would the rankings look like? How would they have managed the various ups & downs over the last twenty years?
4. Do any of them provide a performance guarantee? Very unlikely!!
5. Are the algorithms made known to the customer? Very unlikely
Are robo-advisors part of the solution or are they part of the problem, e.g. accelerating selloffs in a dip
@DEM , this is Barron's 4th annual ranking, so the ranking parameters are still being tweaked.
#1, for ranking purposes, portfolios close to 60-40 were used and 2.5 years was used to get comparative data for most. Performance counted for 45% weight in ranking.
#3 and end-comment, most clients stayed put during the recent decline, but several added new money. New account openings were up significantly during the decline.
Article has several other data.
Of the total $631 billion in robo-advisors, Vanguard has $172 billion, Schwab $47 billion.
It is mentioned that TIAA robo-advisor [TIAA Personal Portfolio, launched June 2017] ranked high but was excluded as it is now closed to new accounts - don't see this mentioned at TIAA website although it is not seen in the TIAA product list.