A new study from Edward Jones, conducted with Gallup, reveals a striking disconnect in how Americans seek financial guidance. While a vast majority express confidence in professional financial advisors, they are far more likely to turn to their own online research when making money decisions. The survey, which polled more than 5,000 U.S. adults, found that 73% of those who sought guidance in the past year used internet research, making it the dominant channel by a wide margin.
Family members ranked second, cited by 35% of guidance-seekers, followed by professional financial advisors at 32%. News and social media were used by 26%, and friends by 23%. Notably, 19% of respondents said they had used artificial intelligence tools, including chatbots like ChatGPT, for financial guidance—a figure that rises sharply among younger generations.
Despite this heavy reliance on self-directed research, trust in professional advisors remains high. When asked about their confidence in various sources' expertise on money management, 79% of respondents said they had at least some confidence in financial advisors, with roughly one in four expressing a great deal of confidence. Finance professors (64%), family members (62%), and friends or colleagues (54%) also scored well, but only 3% of respondents said they had a great deal of confidence in AI.
The generational divide over AI
Younger Americans are driving AI adoption in financial guidance, but even they remain skeptical of its output. About one in four Gen Z adults and millennials used AI tools for financial guidance in 2026, compared with just 7% of baby boomers. Among millennials, 36% said they have at least some confidence in AI tools, and only 32% of Gen Z adults said the same—meaning the majority of young adults using AI for financial decisions do not fully trust the results they receive.
That skepticism creates an opening for advisors working with younger clients. Gen Z guidance-seekers use professional financial advisors at a rate of just 14%, compared with 55% among baby boomers. The data suggests that younger adults are far more likely to reach for a chatbot than to call an advisor—not because they trust AI more, but because the barrier to entry is lower.
Financial fulfillment and the advisor relationship
The study introduces the concept of financial fulfillment, defined not simply by wealth or income, but by whether a person's financial life supports the way they want to live, including feelings of security, control, and alignment with personal values. The study categorizes adults as financially fulfilled, financially conflicted, or financially stressed.
The findings reveal a striking correlation between financial fulfillment and advisor use. Among financially fulfilled adults who sought guidance, 60% worked with a professional financial advisor. Among those who are financially stressed and seeking guidance, that figure drops to just 14%. It is worth noting that the study does not argue that hiring an advisor causes financial fulfillment—income and net worth alone do not fully explain why some people feel financially secure while others do not. But it does suggest that financially fulfilled adults build a different kind of guidance portfolio, one that more frequently includes professional expertise alongside personal research and peer input.
For advisors, the data reinforces a recurring industry challenge: the clients who could benefit most from professional guidance are often the least likely to seek it. Financially stressed adults instead tend to rely on family (43%) and friends (28%) for advice—informal networks that may lack the expertise to address complex financial situations. This pattern echoes findings from other industry research, such as a TIAA study showing advisors halve retiree regret, yet only 24% of Americans use one.
What the data means for advisors
The study underscores a persistent paradox in the U.S. financial advice market. Americans hold professional financial advisors in higher regard than any other guidance source, yet only about one in three guidance-seekers actually consults one. Meanwhile, nearly one in five turns to AI tools they largely do not trust.
Part of this gap may reflect access and awareness. Working with a financial advisor involves cost, time, and a willingness to engage—barriers that are lower for wealthier, older, and already financially stable adults. The advisor profession has made headway in recent years on transparency and fee disclosure, but the data suggests that awareness of advisor value has not fully penetrated younger and more financially vulnerable segments of the population. As a Western & Southern survey found, many Americans lack basic financial literacy, which may further hinder their ability to seek professional help.
The takeaway is that the trust premium advisors hold is not being fully converted into client relationships. Closing that gap may be one of the more consequential challenges facing the advisory industry in the years ahead. For firms looking to expand their client base, the data suggests that lowering the barrier to entry—whether through digital tools, educational content, or more accessible fee structures—could be key. As Cetera's CEO recently noted, the industry is seeing record recruiting amid rising transition costs, indicating that firms are investing heavily in growth. But the Edward Jones-Gallup data suggests that simply adding advisors may not be enough; reaching the financially stressed and younger demographics will require a different approach.
