Avagance works from your client record. ChatGPT works from whatever you paste into it.
ChatGPT is a genuinely good general assistant, and plenty of advisers already use it. The problem isn't the writing, it's everything around the writing: it has no view of your client record, no audit trail, no sign-off gate, and no answer for where UK client data ends up. Here is the comparison, capability by capability.
Avagance vs ChatGPT, capability by capability
ChatGPT column is a considered best-read of public product information as of July 2026, not an audit.
| Capability | Avagance | ChatGPT |
|---|---|---|
| Meetings & capture | ||
| AI note-taker (Teams / Zoom / Meet) | ||
| In-person capture (mobile, in-room) | ||
| Auto-populate fact-find from notes | ||
| Follow-up email drafting | ||
| Vulnerability & soft-fact signals in capture | ||
| Advice & reports | ||
| Suitability report generation | ||
| Annual review packs | ||
| Whole-of-market product research to advice | ||
| Cashflow planning built in (no separate subscription) | ||
| Two-way cashflow sync (Voyant) | ||
| In-platform market analysis & research | ||
| Editable agentic canvas (beyond export) | ||
| Paperwork & provider admin | ||
| Letter of authority generated in platform | ||
| Letter of authority sent from the platform | ||
| Provider forms filled in platform | ||
| E-signature + document automation | ||
| Compliance & control | ||
| Automated compliance check (Consumer Duty / COBS) | ||
| Single fail-closed send-gate + four-eyes | ||
| Firm rule packs (firm-specific rules) | ||
| Firm-level oversight + FCA audit trail | ||
| Reproducible output (same case, same result) | ||
| Client & practice intelligence | ||
| Conversational assistant across all client data | ||
| Opportunity / risk detection engine | ||
| Client vulnerability register (FG21/1) | ||
| Firm-wide knowledge base (RAG) | ||
| Per-client agentic workspace | ||
| Client-comms authoring (newsletters, letters) | ||
| Platform & reach | ||
| CRM / back-office integration | ||
| Voice assistant (talk to the AI) | ||
| Voice-driven task execution and navigation | ||
| Native adviser mobile app | ||
| Agentic architecture (multi-step, tool-using) | ||
| Data & security | ||
| Built for UK regulated client data | ||
| Your client data is not used to train shared models | ||
Where Avagance goes further than ChatGPT
- AI note-taker (Teams / Zoom / Meet)
- In-person capture (mobile, in-room)
- Auto-populate fact-find from notes
- Vulnerability & soft-fact signals in capture
- Whole-of-market product research to advice
- Cashflow planning built in (no separate subscription)
Which one is right for you
ChatGPT for general thinking, summarising public material and non-client drafting. Avagance for anything that touches a client file, a recommendation or a regulator.
What each one costs
| Avagance | ChatGPT | |
|---|---|---|
| Model | Per-firm subscription, adviser and support seats | Per user, per month |
| Amount | £350/mo solo practice, £600/mo for 2 advisers | Published per-user pricing on openai.com |
| Terms | 30 days free, then annual | Monthly or annual, self-serve |
| Guarantee | 30-day money-back on the founding cohort | None for advice outcomes |
| Client data | UK regulated-firm system, not used to train shared models | Check your plan: consumer tiers may train on inputs by default |
Competitor pricing is what the provider publishes, or "not published" where it is not. Avagance pricing is the list price on our own pricing page.
Moving from ChatGPT, step by step
- Keep it for what it's good atNobody has to delete ChatGPT. Keep using it for general thinking and non-client work.
- Stop pasting client dataThe moment a real client fact goes into a general assistant, you've a data protection question to answer. Draw that line first.
- Move the client work acrossFact-finds, suitability, reviews and client comms run in Avagance from the client record, so nothing gets pasted anywhere.
- Keep the evidenceEvery draft, every change and every human approval is recorded, which is the part a chat window can never give you.
ChatGPT, in one read
A strong general reasoning and drafting tool with no knowledge of your firm. Every task starts by pasting context in, output varies run to run, and nothing is recorded as evidence. Useful for thinking out loud and for non-client work. Not a system for running regulated advice.
Avagance vs ChatGPT: common questions
Can I use ChatGPT as a financial adviser?
You can use it as an assistant, not as the adviser. It can't hold regulatory accountability, it has no view of your client record, and its output varies between runs. Anything that becomes a personal recommendation still needs a qualified human to own it.
Can we just use ChatGPT to draft suitability reports for a fraction of the price?
You can draft with it, but you pay the difference back in checking. It works from what you paste rather than from the client record, so someone assembles the inputs by hand, verifies every figure, and leaves no audit trail behind. That's where the cost reappears.
Is it safe to put client data into a general assistant?
Treat it as a data protection decision, not a convenience one. Check where the data is processed, whether your plan trains on inputs, who inside your firm can access the history, and whether you could evidence any of that to the ICO. Purpose-built tools for regulated firms answer those questions in writing.
What does Avagance do that ChatGPT can't?
Work from your actual client record, generate and send a letter of authority, fill provider forms, run cashflow planning and market research on the same data, enforce a fail-closed sign-off gate, and keep an audit trail of who approved what.
Can we use both?
Yes, and most firms will. The line worth drawing is client data: general assistant for general work, Avagance for anything that touches a client file.
See it against your own stack.
Join the waiting list and walk the nine-hole tour. Waiting-list joiners get 14 days of full access when we open.