Choosing between introducer and partner
A comparison of the two ways to work with Pecunia: the introducer model and the partner model that shares in ongoing assets under management. Who each suits, and how to start as an introducer and move up.
A comparison of the two ways to work with Pecunia: the introducer model and the partner model that shares in ongoing assets under management. Who each suits, and how to start as an introducer and move up.
There are two ways to work with Pecunia. The introducer model is the lighter of the two: you introduce a client and are paid on the business introduced. The partner model is fuller: you share in the ongoing value of the assets E&G comes to manage for clients you introduce. Both keep the regulated advice with E&G, and both keep you inside your own permissions.
The right choice depends on how involved you want to be and how you want to be paid.
Under either model you advise on mortgages and protection under your own permissions, and you introduce the client to E&G for pensions, investments and estate planning. You never give the regulated wealth advice yourself. E&G gives it, documents it and carries the responsibility for it.
The choice between introducer and partner leaves that line where it is. Both keep you introducing and E&G advising. What differs is how deeply you build the wealth side into your firm and how you are paid for it.
You spot that a client needs advice you cannot give, you introduce them to E&G with their consent, and you are paid on the business that introduction produces. Your involvement is largely done once the introduction is made.
It asks you to make introductions at the right moments, with no ongoing servicing role. The commercial terms are agreed individually, and as with any introduction-based arrangement the income depends on clients taking advice.
The introducer model tends to suit brokers who want the wealth conversation available to their clients without changing how they run their firm. If you make introductions occasionally, or your mortgage work keeps you fully occupied, the introducer route fits.
It also suits brokers who want to try the arrangement first. You can begin introducing, see how your clients respond and how the hand-off works in practice, and judge whether there is enough wealth need among your clients to justify anything more involved. A broker with a steady flow of purchase and remortgage cases who wants to help clients with clear gaps, without taking on a new role, fits the introducer model.
You share in the ongoing value of the assets E&G manages for the clients you introduce. As those clients stay advised and their invested wealth grows, the recurring income continues and can grow with it. You stay closer to the relationship over time.
This model builds recurring income in your firm. A share of recurring advice income is the kind of asset a buyer of a financial planning business pays for. The terms are agreed individually, and the income is not guaranteed: it depends on clients investing and staying invested, and on the value of their assets, which can fall as well as rise.
The partner model tends to suit brokers thinking beyond this year's lending. If you care about what your firm is worth when you come to sell, or you want a second income stream that continues when new mortgage business slows, the partner route builds it.
It suits brokers with enough clients, and enough wealth need among them, to make the ongoing share significant, and who are willing to stay involved after the handover. A broker with a large client bank built over years, many of whom now have pensions, savings and estates that have not been reviewed, fits the partner model, which lets the broker share in the value of advising on that wealth.
The practical differences come down to a few things:
The introducer model pays on the business introduced. The partner model shares in the ongoing value of assets under management.
Introducer income is more immediate and tied closely to each introduction. Partner income is recurring and builds over the years a client stays advised.
The introducer makes the introduction and steps back. The partner stays closer to the ongoing relationship.
The introducer model earns you income. The partner model also builds a share of recurring revenue that adds to what your firm is worth.
The regulatory position is the same under both.
Under both models:
You do not have to decide everything at the start. Start with the introducer model, make a few introductions, and see how the wealth conversation lands with your clients. That tells you more than any projection about whether the partner model suits your firm.
When you are ready, you can move to the partner model. The move changes the commercial terms. What you do day to day stays the same: you keep introducing and E&G keeps advising. How introductions already made are treated on moving up is part of the individually agreed terms, and should be settled when you make the change.
The introducer model gives you simplicity and more immediate income, and it asks little of you. It builds less long-term value and gives you a smaller share of what the advice produces over time. The partner model gives you recurring income and a saleable asset, in exchange for staying more involved and accepting that the income is not guaranteed and depends on clients investing, staying and on markets.
These questions help you choose:
You can revisit the answer as your firm changes. Starting as an introducer and moving to partner later is a normal path, and the terms of either are agreed with you individually.
Yes. Starting light and moving up is a normal path. The switch changes the commercial terms, and what you do day to day stays the same. How existing introductions are treated is settled as part of the individually agreed terms.
No. It depends on clients taking advice, investing and staying invested, and on the value of their assets, which can fall as well as rise. The terms are agreed individually and are not a guarantee of income. The introducer model gives more immediate and certain income in exchange for a smaller long-term share.
No. Both models keep you inside your own mortgage and protection permissions. E&G holds the FCA authorisation and gives the regulated advice under it, in both the introducer and partner arrangements.
It depends on your clients and your horizon. The introducer model pays more immediately and more certainly per introduction. The partner model can pay more over time, because it shares in recurring income for as long as clients stay advised, though that income is not guaranteed.
The questions a broker's compliance function, network or PI insurer raises about a wealth partnership, with the answers: the introducer agreement, where the regulated liability sits, what data moves and when, and how you stay inside your permissions.
Read it
Who the E&G advisers are, what their advice covers, and how your client is looked after from the first call onwards.
Read it
From 6 April 2027 most unused pension funds count towards the estate for inheritance tax. What that changes for mortgage clients who planned to pass their pension on, and where an introduction fits.
Read itYour firm keeps the mortgage and protection advice. Equity & General gives the pension, investment and estate planning advice, and a named partnership manager sets the arrangement up with you.