A marketplace is very good at one job and completely unable to do another. It can line up scope, location, experience, languages, service model and fees so you can compare them. It cannot tell you who is best.
That is not a flaw in the design, it is the nature of the thing. Profiles rest on information that was supplied and then verified. Platform checks support your due diligence, but they cannot guarantee future conduct, personal suitability or investment outcomes. And where paid placement, referral arrangements or badges are in play, the basis for them should be visible to you rather than inferred.
So use it for the part it is good at. Build a shortlist, then go and have your own conversation. Confirm the FSP and authorisation independently. Then compare each advisor's competence against your actual problem, and ask about provider range, remuneration, conflicts and continuity.
Try this now
Pick three comparison fields that genuinely matter for your situation, and two questions no profile could ever answer. Ask every shortlisted advisor the same two questions, so you are comparing answers rather than impressions.
Ask your advisor
- Which client situations do you handle most often?
- What will the first engagement include and cost?
- What falls outside your scope?
- Are you paying or receiving a benefit connected to this introduction?
A marketplace organises choices. It should preserve client judgment rather than disguise promotion or popularity as professional suitability.