Australia’s financial adviser population stands at 15,120, down 439 over the 12 months to 11 June 2026, according to analysis of official data by Padua Wealth.
The figures suggest the long-running decline in adviser numbers may be beginning to moderate, with adviser numbers broadly stable since mid-January.
Much of the annual decline was concentrated in several distinct periods, including adviser departures around the end of the 2024-25 financial year and the introduction of new education requirements at the start of this year.
Key adviser numbers
- Advisers as at 11 June 2026: 15,120
- Advisers as at 11 June 2025: 15,559
- Net change over 12 months: -439
- Financial year-to-date change: -49
- New entrants who commenced and remain on the ASIC Financial Advisers Register: 546
Colin Williams, Padua Wealth Data Manager, said: “Adviser numbers fell by 374 during the final two weeks of June 2025 as many exited the industry or prepared to move licensees.
“The first two weeks of July 2025 saw a partial recovery of 163 advisers, although the four-week transition period still resulted in a net decline of 211.”
Data shows that from 1 July to 15 December 2025, adviser numbers increased by a net 219 before falling by 330 between 15 December 2025 and 15 January 2026 following the introduction of new education requirements. Since mid-January, numbers have increased by 32 advisers.
Limited-advice sector drives losses
Williams said the largest contributor to the industry’s decline was the accounting-based limited-advice segment.
“Licensees providing limited or restricted SMSF advice recorded a net loss of 281 advisers during the year, representing about 63 per cent of the total market decline,” he said.
The sector accounted for less than 3% of advisers at the beginning of the period, with 445 advisers as at 11 June 2025. Just 164 advisers remain in the segment.
Williams said adviser numbers were likely to remain volatile through the end of June and into July.
He said key factors to watch included further departures from the remaining accounting limited-advice cohort, adviser retirements, licensee switches and ongoing consolidation among smaller licensees.
Licensee movements
The number of licensees also declined over the year.
- New licensees established: 100
- Licensees ceased: 120
- Net change: -20
Among the 100 new licensees:
- 61 have a single adviser
- 19 have two advisers
- 14 have three to four advisers
- Six have between five and nine advisers
The focus on education standards misses the actual bottleneck. The Professional Year is what kills the pipeline.
I'm a 47-year-old professional with over 20 years in superannuation and life insurance. I've led corporate client teams, serviced major employer accounts, and delivered financial wellbeing programs at scale. Half of that was on the insurer side, across group and retail life, in claims, underwriting, product and distribution. RG146 compliant since 2013. I'm halfway through a Graduate Diploma of Financial Planning, sitting on a 93% average (high distinction). I understand risk assessment, product structures, and the insurer/fund/member relationship. I want to do insurance-led advice, because I can see how underserved it is.
Then I started looking for a PY placement.
The placements barely exist. The ones that do mostly want you to spend two or three years in an entry-level support role first, before they'll even consider putting you through a PY that can then run 18 months on its own. So you're looking at four or five years on a junior salary before you're a fully authorised adviser.
I can't live on $50K to $60K for three to four years. Not as a single person, let alone supporting a family. Most established professionals can't. The only people who can absorb that are uni graduates still living at home. That's fine, the profession needs them. But it means anyone with real-world experience and a career to leave behind is locked out by the maths, not the merit.
I understand the intent behind the PY. Supervision matters. But as it works today, it's a near-impossible barrier for exactly the kind of experienced career-changers this profession says it wants. Loosen the degree rules all you like. If the PY stays structured this way, nearly all of my cohort will have no choice but to walk away.
I approached this transition deliberately. I was on board for the cost of the education, the exam, and the 12-month professional year. I was under no illusion it would be easy. I knew it would take perseverance and grit, and I believed it was worth the effort.
What I understand now is that there are barriers no amount of perseverance or grit can get you through. I wanted to bring my institutional knowledge into the advice relationship, specifically to help and educate everyday Australians on making informed decisions about their protection needs.
I keep hoping someone will recognise this and propose a solution. A one-time amnesty for a cohort of experienced new entrants, maybe. Something that makes the PY hurdle achievable for people coming from established careers. Without a change like that, I might have no choice but to walk away myself.
Comments are closed.