A few weeks ago, our article, Scenes from a roboadvice pitch to angel investors, presented a fictitious pitch by a roboadviser startup to venture capitalists. Judging by the thousands of times it has been read, it was passed around much of the roboadvice industry.

A Reader Survey was attached asking questions on the potential attraction of the investment, the features of a good roboadvice offer, who the likely providers of roboadvice will be and the background of the respondents.

We attach the full survey results linked here.

Thanks to all the people who responded. The numbers were not as big as expected due to a dodgy survey link on the first day.

We have opened the full text of the responses because the comments are at least as valuable as the bare statistics.

A few highlights:

• 75% of respondents said they would not invest, while 24% said they would at a lower entry price than the initial valuation. This seems like a promising result for the availability of venture capital at a price.
• The negative comments focus on competitors undercutting the offer and the lack of a ‘moat’.
• The requirements of a good robo offer are extensive, with 88% expecting portfolio allocation recommendations, 62% wanting educational material and 66% investment implementation.
• There was no consensus on who is most likely to succeed in this space, although only 18% responded ‘nobody’.

A software developer advised us last week that he has a list of 41 ‘roboadvice’ offers either in the market or under development in Australia. There will be a lot of activity in this space, in many different forms.

Graham Hand is Editor of Cuffelinks. The Survey is released for general information and no responsibility is accepted for any of the opinions.