A degree of panic among advisers took hold at the end of 2026 that a looming education deadline could see a mass exodus of advisers from the profession, with the FAAA and ASIC both warning that 2,300 advisers may not have been able to provide advice as result.
As it turned out, this “mass exodus” never really eventuated, with far fewer advisers exiting than expected. One person who found some of the estimates initially to be a little overblown was Forte Asset Solutions principal Steve Prendeville.
“I never shared the view that we were going to see a mass exodus of advisers because of the education deadline,” Prendeville said on the latest episode of the ifa Show Podcast.
A major factor that shaped Prendeville’s opinion on this was his position as a self-described “sellers advocate”.
“When businesses came to market and we asked the obvious question — why are you selling — education simply wasn’t the driver.”
He added: “There was an expectation that we’d see a wave of businesses being forced to sell, but that just didn’t eventuate. The reality was that most of the business owners who might have been exposed had already dealt with that risk well before the deadline arrived.”
A big reason for this he highlighted was the succession planning many practices had in place, muting the need for forced sales and averting the “mass exodus”.
“What we saw instead was that many of those advisers had already transitioned away from being hands on the tools,” he explained.
“They’d moved into management roles, governance roles, or ownership-only positions, and they’d already brought through the next generation of advisers.
“In many cases, minority shareholders or senior advisers had already been introduced, so by the time we got to the education deadline, there wasn’t a pressure point forcing a transaction.”
Expanding on this, Prendeville highlighted that in terms of M&A volumes, they did not see a sudden oversupply, with the flow of transactions remaining stable.
“The absence of a forced seller dynamic has kept valuations relatively stable, because businesses are selling when they choose to, not because they have to.”
He did, however, explain where the exits did influence the market: “Where we did see exits was more at the employed adviser level, particularly advisers who had already been thinking about retirement and saw the education deadline as a natural point to step away.”
“That sort of movement doesn’t typically translate into distressed M&A — it shows up more as internal succession, seat movement, or consolidation within existing groups,” he added.
Overall, Prendeville believes this will lead to a 2026 where the M&A market is driven by growth strategy rather than fear or urgency.
“The big takeaway is that the industry absorbed the shock. And when that happens, M&A becomes about growth and alignment, not survival.”
To hear more from Steve Prendeville, tune in here.
