Advisor | April 2026
Ten years ago, CONSOB replaced the term “financial advisor” with “financial advisor authorized for off-site offerings.” Today, the goal is to make this term exclusive to protect it from misuse by individuals not authorized to practice this profession.
Assoreti proposes to unequivocally define the term “financial advisor” for those registered in the OCF (Organismo di vigilanza e manutenzione dell’albo unico dei Consulenti Finanziari – Supervisory Body for the Maintenance of the Single Register of Financial Advisors). Despite the boasters, it is clear that there are many de facto, competent, and well-prepared financial advisors on the market who work in banks and are not registered in the OCF.
Registration with the OCF is mandatory for anyone providing investment advice or offering financial products in Italy. To do so, you must pass an assessment test, hold a five-year diploma, and meet the integrity requirements, ensuring that your professional skills are aligned with MiFID II standards and Consob directives.
Defending the name “financial advisor” is correct, as long as it does not lead to a crystallization of the role. The market is already moving toward broader, integrated financial and wealth management consultancy: there is a risk of precluding clearly delineated developmental paths.
Protecting the name is necessary, but not sufficient. In a context of low financial literacy and a growing need for guidance, the credibility of the role depends primarily on reputation. Registering the name must be accompanied by a strengthening of communication efforts, both within the system and towards end investors. Clarifying the real, differentiating, and qualifying skills must go hand in hand with formal recognition.
Protecting the role requires a clear common basis, but must not flatten the differences between banks. The sector’s richness lies in the diversity of service models and specializations. The challenge is to combine a shared framework with a real capacity for differentiation, both in terms of service models, within the current expansion of expertise, and in terms of the type of clients served (from retail to private banking).
Many networks use titles generically linked to professional roles, while others have coined more distinctive names, such as Family Bankers at Banca Mediolanum, Financial Wellbankers at Credem, and Wealth Advisory Partners at BNL BNP Paribas.
All of these choices are correct; certainly, strengthening the full recognition of one’s title by distinguishing it from competitors and encouraging its systematic use in communications (for example, on LinkedIn) helps to position oneself more effectively.
While it’s true that what matters is substance—that is, the competence, professionalism, and reputation of the client—it’s equally true that in an era of gurus and fin-influencers proliferating, it’s crucial to identify the aspects that strengthen the value of one title over another.
This applies both to developing targeted communications initiatives within the bank—to strengthen the sense of belonging—and externally, to increase its attractiveness to current and potential clients and professionals from other organizations.
As the ancient Romans said, “nomen omen”: a name is an omen, a wish that indicates a person’s destiny and reflects their unique characteristics.
Nicola Ronchetti