Research On The Legal Dilemma And And Countermeasures Of The Robo-Advisor Development

Robo-Advisor is a fintech product with data and technology as the core driving force.Based on the basic information of investors’ own financial status and investment demand,the computer system with artificial intelligence is used to give investment Suggestions through algorithm strategy and investment model,and to construct the asset allocation portfolio matching investors’ risk preference.In terms of the essence of Robo-Advisor,it is a comprehensive service body that also engages in securities investment consultation and asset management business.In our country,the development of intelligence interest is still in its infancy,its development mainly face the following problems: first,the securities law and the regulation of investment consulting system and intelligent development trend has obvious lag,embodied in intelligence interest "discretionary account" service is limited by the "securities law" the 161 th,the licensing system and investment consulting licence to hold the reality of the conflict;Second,in the Robo-Advisor mode,the traditional fiduciary duty cannot meet the obligation requirements of the Robo-Advisor operator due to the algorithm black box and the intervention of artificial intelligence,so the content of fiduciary duty in the Robo-Advisor mode needs to be updated urgently.Thirdly,owning to the particularity of the operation mode of Robo-Advisor,the fuzziness of the business boundary and the professionalism of the algorithm bring new challenges to the traditional supervision.Fourth,the service scope of Robo-Advisor extends to the "long tail users" of the capital market,so it is urgent to strengthen the protection mechanism for small and medium-sized investors.In view of the above problems,this paper puts forward corresponding Suggestions based on the development status of Robo-Advisor in China: first,distinguish the long-term perspective and short-term response,analyze from the long-term perspective,modify article 161 of the securities law,and establish the access rules of Robo-Advisor;From the perspective of short-term response,according to the business essence involved in Robo-Advisor,apply for license according to China’s current regulatory rules,and resume the issuance of license;Secondly,from the perspective of preventing interest conflicts and protecting the best interests of investors,the specific contents of fiduciary duty of operators under the mode of Robo-Advisor are clarified.Thirdly,it is suggested that China use regulatory technology to improve the traditional regulatory means,try the "sandbox supervision" scheme to stimulate the innovation of fintech,and at the same time,strengthen the review and filing of Robo-Advisor algorithm.Finally,through perfecting information disclosure system and strengthening investor education to realize the protection of investors.This paper is composed of three parts: introduction,text and conclusion,of which the text is divided into four parts:The first part is about the development status of Robo-Advisor: first,through the practice at home and abroad,the legal definition of Robo-Advisor;Secondly,the essence of Robo-Advisor is asset management from the perspective of reality and necessity.The core of its business should include consulting and advice or/and portfolio management.In other words,only service providers whose main business attributes cover one or both of the above activities are truly Robo-Advisor.At last,the development level of Robo-Advisor in China is analyzed from three perspectives of business scale,business model and intelligent chengdu,and the conclusion is drawn that Robo-Advisor in China is in the stage of "pseudo-intelligence".The second part is about the dilemma of the development of Robo-Advisor in China: it mainly analyzes the reason why the development of Robo-Advisor in China is still in the primary stage of development.Specifically,first,the current investment advisory system hinders the development of Robo-Advisor;Second,the content of fiduciary duty under the mode of Robo-Advisor needs to be updated urgently.Third,the existing regulatory system can not cope with the fuzzy business boundary of Robo-Advisor;Fourthly,it is difficult for traditional supervision methods to deal with the professionalism of algorithms.Fifth,the information disclosure under the Robo-Advisor mode is not in place.The third part is the overseas regulatory experience of Robo-Advisor: this paper analyzes the regulatory documents of Robo-Advisor in Australia,the United States and the United Kingdom,and discusses in detail the overseas regulatory experience of Robo-Advisor and its enlightenment to China.The fourth part is about the path to solve the development dilemma of Robo-Advisor.First,on the basis of optimizing the legal supply,the access threshold of Robo-Advisor is clarified,and the access of Robo-Advisor is analyzed from the perspective of long-term and short-term response.Secondly,from the perspective of preventing conflicts of interest and ensuring the realization of the best interests of investors,the new meaning and specific content of operators’ fiduciousness under the mode of Robo-Advisor are clarified.Thirdly,through the use of regulatory technology,innovation of regulatory ideas and strengthening the recording and review of algorithms,we can realize the effective supervision of Robo-Advisor.Finally,by improving the information disclosure system,we can protect investors’ right to know,protect investors’ interests,strengthen investors’ education and improve their self-protection ability.