All Advisor Tools

Would your RIA’s AI use survive an SEC or state exam? A deterministic self-assessment across the six exam-surface domains an examiner probes when a firm uses AI — AI in marketing (20, gate), books & records for AI outputs (20, gate), supervision & written policies (18, gate), vendor AI oversight (16), client disclosure & Form ADV (14), AI communications capture (12) — marked 0/1/2 on your own evidence for a 0-100 score banded EXAM-READY / OPEN FINDINGS / EVIDENCE GAP. A dispositive domain evidence gate forces EVIDENCE GAP when any of the three gate domains is zero — so a firm can score 73 and still be EVIDENCE GAP with books-and-records at zero. Portfolio rolls up to the worst branch (ALL EXAM-READY AS DESCRIBED / FINDINGS TO CLOSE / DEFICIENCY LIKELY) with the domain to fix first where a domain is short. Date-agnostic and people-blind. Runnable Python engine + workbook + assessment & remediation playbooks + a 5-firm sample. Grades a firm’s evidence file, renders no legal ruling, scores no person. Not legal advice.

Seventy percent of RIAs run an AI meeting notetaker and regulators treat an ungoverned one like an unauthorized texting app. This tripwire grades each tool/deployment on six weighted controls — client consent before capture and human review before notes enter the record are gate controls — for a 0-100 score and DEFENSIBLE / SHORTFALL / EVIDENCE GAP per tool, with a worsen-only gate: either gate control at zero forces EVIDENCE GAP no matter the score. The firm rolls up to its worst tool (ALL DEFENSIBLE AS DESCRIBED / GAPS TO CLOSE / STOP AND FIX). Runnable Python engine + workbook + audit & remediation playbooks + a 5-tool sample. Grades the process, never a person; renders no legal ruling and takes no position on whether AI summaries are books-and-records. Not legal advice.

Grade every testimonial, endorsement, and paid promoter under SEC Marketing Rule 206(4)-1. Mark each arrangement on six weighted controls — required disclosures clear & prominent (gate) and a written promoter agreement (gate only for a compensated, over-de-minimis, non-affiliate promoter) plus compensation/conflicts disclosed, bad-actor screen, claims substantiated/net shown, and ad-copy recordkeeping — for a 0-100 score and COMPLIANT / SHORTFALL / EVIDENCE GAP per arrangement. A conditional worsen-only gate fires exactly where the rule requires it, so an identically-marked de-minimis twin stays COMPLIANT while the compensated one fails. Campaign rolls up to its worst arrangement (ALL DOCUMENTED AS DESCRIBED / GAPS TO FIX / PULL OR FIX). Runnable Python engine + workbook + audit & remediation playbooks + a 6-arrangement sample. Grades the arrangement, never a person; renders no legal ruling and confirms no compliance status. Not legal advice.

Would your advisory firm and its clients survive your exit — planned or sudden? A deterministic self-assessment: mark six continuity dimensions 0/1/2 on evidence — written succession plan (18), named & ready successor (20, tripwire), continuity/contingency agreement (18, tripwire), client-relationship transferability (16), funding & valuation (14), operational readiness (14) — for a 0-100 score banded SECURE / EXPOSED / NO SUCCESSION. A dispositive kill-chain tripwire forces NO SUCCESSION only when the firm has neither a ready successor nor a continuity agreement — the intersection where clients have nowhere to go — and releases the moment either half clears, so it always names the cheapest fix. Portfolio rolls up to the worst firm (ALL SECURE AS DESCRIBED / GAPS TO CLOSE / CONTINUITY AT RISK). Runnable Python engine + workbook + assessment & continuity playbooks + a 5-firm sample. Grades a firm’s continuity posture, never people, and drafts no documents. Not legal, financial, or investment advice.

Roughly $84 trillion is moving to the next generation and most heirs leave the advisor who served their parents. This Radar reads your advisory book (AUM, primary-contact age band, heir-relationship depth) and computes how much AUM is in transfer motion, how well that at-risk pool is covered by an engaged next generation, and a 0-100 book continuity score banded SECURE / AGING / EXPOSED. A worsen-only aging-book trigger forces EXPOSED when a single household is material (15%+ of the book), 75+, and has no heir named — the exact pattern an acquirer discounts. Names the one heir to engage first where AUM is uncovered. Runnable Python engine + workbook + audit & heir-engagement playbooks + a 6-household sample. Scores the book, never a person; not legal, tax, or investment advice.

Is your advisory firm’s referral engine systematic or running on luck? A deterministic diagnostic — the grade-it companion to the build-it Advocacy Engine. Mark six dimensions 0/1/2 on evidence — ask cadence & triggers (18, growth), centers-of-influence pipeline (20, growth), advocacy identification (16), tracking & attribution (14), compliance & disclosure (20, gate), reciprocity & nurture loop (12) — for a 0-100 score banded SYSTEMATIC / LEAKY / AD HOC. Two worsen-only overrides catch what a score hides: a compliance-zero gate (a compensated arrangement without agreement or disclosure evidence forces AD HOC) and a no-engine floor (no ask AND no COI pipeline forces AD HOC). Portfolio rolls up to the worst firm (ALL SYSTEMATIC AS DESCRIBED / GAPS TO CLOSE / RUNNING ON LUCK) with the fix-first dimension where a dimension is short. Runnable Python engine + workbook + assessment & build-up playbooks + a 5-firm sample. Grades a referral system, never people, and rules on no specific arrangement. Marketing-Rule-aware, not legal advice.

Your prospects don’t vanish — they leak at one stage. A deterministic diagnostic for the sales / consultation funnel: enter the real head count at each stage (inquiry → discovery booked → held → qualified → presented → client) and it computes the actual conversion at every step, marks each ON TARGET / LEAKING / SEVERE against your own editable target, and, where a stage is leaking, names the constraint — the EARLIEST severe leak, because an upstream leak starves every stage downstream (so the show-up step, not the numerically-worse close, is the fix). A dead-stage gate forces HEMORRHAGING when a step passes nobody. Funnel verdict FLOWING / LEAKING / HEMORRHAGING plus a dollar estimate of closing the constraint to target from your own client value — no invented lift. Runnable Python engine + workbook + measurement & leak-fix playbooks + a worked sample. Grades a funnel, never people. Not financial advice.

Compute the max cost-per-lead before a source loses money — from your own client value and close rate — then read every paid source PROFITABLE / THIN / UNDERWATER against your line. Zero-close gate + 10-lead data floor. Example: a $14/lead source reads UNDERWATER at zero closes; $6,000/mo to reallocate.

A one-afternoon role-based AI micro-brief for advisors: five quizzed lessons scored CLEARED / REVISIT / REPEAT, with an advance gate where the weakest module gates the whole brief. Recommends nothing and scores no clients; every draft routes through firm review. One .xlsx, deterministic.