Skip to content
Connecting live market data
Full board

Money guide

Best Robo-Advisors

Automated portfolio management compared on total cost, service type and what happens in a drawdown.

Last updated: 2026-08-11

Automated investing services do the work most people put off: allocate sensibly, rebalance regularly, and keep contributing.

The right comparison is total cost — the platform fee plus the ongoing charges of the funds it buys — set against what the service actually does for you.

How we chose

Wallcrest shortlists are built from published, verifiable provider documentation and regulatory registers. We do not accept payment for placement or ranking.

Total annual cost
Platform fee plus weighted fund charges, expressed as one number.
Service classification
Whether the firm provides regulated advice, discretionary management, or execution only.
Portfolio construction
Which asset classes are used, how risk levels are defined, and rebalancing rules.
Tax features
Support for tax-advantaged accounts, and loss harvesting where the jurisdiction allows it.
Access to a human
Whether qualified support is available, and at what account size or price.
Exit terms
Cost and time to transfer or liquidate the portfolio.

Comparison of options

These are the attributes we publish for every provider in this category, and exactly how each is defined.

Attributes published for every Best Robo-Advisors provider
AttributeWhat we verifyStatus
RegulationAuthorising regulator and the service type (advice or discretionary management).Verification in progress
Platform feeAnnual management charge on invested assets.Verification in progress
Underlying fund costsWeighted ongoing charges of the funds used.Verification in progress
Minimum investmentMinimum to open a managed portfolio.Verification in progress
Account typesTax-advantaged and general accounts supported.Verification in progress

We're finalising our verified provider data for this category. Wallcrest publishes fees, rates, minimums and terms only after checking them against the provider's own documentation and recording the date we checked. Rather than show unverified figures, we leave this table empty until that work is complete.

“Visit site” buttons are placeholders until commercial relationships exist and are disclosed. No provider has paid for inclusion here, because there is nothing to pay for yet.

See how we review for the verification process.

What to weigh before you choose

In-house funds need scrutiny
A low platform fee paired with expensive proprietary funds is not a low total cost.
The questionnaire is short by design
Complex circumstances — concentrated holdings, cross-border tax, business assets — sit outside what it can assess.

Provider data to submit or correct? Write to our research desk.