Most of the hot links that lead to major portions of the Web site, like “Advisor Tools” and “Account Management,” are represented by tiny links on the left of the home page. This to a large extent negates the compatibility of the Web site with mobile devices, since the links are almost microscopic on a mobile screen. I could go on, but let’s just say that the site is difficult to navigate and that it is not mobile-friendly. Advisors would be better served if Jefferson National had one informational site that wasn’t password protected, with information of a general nature, and a separate site containing only advisor tools, one designed around advisor work flows that is easier to navigate.
The model building and trading application is generally OK, but it has a few quirks that bother me. One was that the application would not let me create a model until I had assigned one or more accounts to it. That seemed counterintuitive to me. In most of the software packages I’ve used, you build the models first, then you apply the models to client accounts. The other unusual thing is that you build models directly from the list of mutual funds. Most applications I’ve seen start by building an optimized asset class model, and then users can select the individual investments to fill those asset class slots.
Perhaps the greatest disappointment, however, is the lack of integration. When I asked Jefferson National about it, the company mentioned a few integrations in place and a few in the works. Unfortunately, its definition is different from mine. For example, the company told me the site could integrate with iRebal, but that means iRebal can send trades to Jefferson National. In other cases, there is some ability to send information, like balances, one way, but there is no robust two-way integration. On the portfolio and trading side, this limits the value of the modeling and trading tools. On the account application side, a lack of integration with custodians and/or CRM applications means that forms cannot be prepopulated using client data already available on other systems.
I don’t want to beat up on Jefferson National too much. Unlike many of its competitors, it is making an effort to deliver technology and a positive user experience to independent RIAs. With some constructive feedback from advisors, and with a better understanding of how fee-only advisors’ businesses operate, the company can do a better job offering technology tools that advisors can truly benefit from.
The company deserves a great deal of credit for making the effort to deliver value-added technology tools to advisors in the first place. But for now, let’s just say that it’s a work in progress.