FCA Study Reveals 80% of Young UK Investors Trust AI Tools Over Traditional Media

Eight in ten. That’s how many young UK investors have turned to AI for investment advice, per a new Financial Conduct Authority study published July 24, 2026. The survey covered 666 people aged 18 to 40 who either own investments or plan to start within the year. Two-thirds of those respondents use AI tools occasionally or regularly. And the numbers get more complicated from there.

The FCA ran the research through the Attest platform, using a quantitative usage and attitudes format to map out exactly how younger investors are leaning on AI right now. What came back wasn’t just enthusiasm — it was a mix of comfort, misplaced confidence, and some genuinely worrying gaps in basic regulatory knowledge. The kind of gaps that can cost people real money.

The Trust Problem

Fifty-six percent of respondents said they trust AI tools more than traditional media — TV, radio, newspapers. That’s a majority of young investors putting more faith in a chatbot than in a broadcaster. And it’s not hard to see why. AI tools are fast, accessible, and they don’t talk down to you. They’ll decode financial jargon at midnight without a subscription fee.

But here’s where it gets murky. Nearly half of the people surveyed incorrectly believe that AI-generated investment information is regulated. It isn’t. General-purpose AI chatbots sit outside the Financial Conduct Authority’s oversight entirely. The FCA only regulates tools specifically built to provide financial advice — and most of the AI products young investors are using don’t fall into that category at all.

Thirty-eight percent of respondents think it’s acceptable to base investment decisions solely on AI outputs. That’s more than a third of this group treating an unregulated chatbot like a licensed financial adviser. And 32% mistakenly believe they’d be covered by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme or the Financial Ombudsman Service if AI advice turned out to be wrong. They wouldn’t be. Not even close.

So there’s a real gap between how these tools feel and what they actually are. They feel authoritative. They’re not regulated.

What Young Investors Actually Get Right

It’s not all bad news. Seventy-three percent of respondents know that AI can produce inaccurate information. That’s a solid majority who aren’t completely buying the hype. And 86% said they understand the importance of checking the sources AI tools reference before acting on anything. That’s encouraging — it means most of these investors aren’t fully switching their brains off.

Young investors are also using AI in pretty sensible ways on the surface. The study found people are leaning on these tools to research companies, untangle financial jargon, and explore different investment options. Used like that — as a starting point, a research assistant, a way to get oriented — AI is probably fine. Maybe even useful.

The problem is the 38% who’ve crossed the line into treating it as a final word.

See also: CoinShares Proposes 131 Million Share Buyback, But Will Use Full Authority?

Lucy Castledine, director of consumer investments at the FCA, said investors need to stay sharp when using AI for investment research. She said maintaining personal judgment and checking information sources is essential. The FCA’s InvestSmart website, she added, is there to help investors make smarter calls.

Castledine didn’t mince it. The message from the FCA is basically: use these tools, but don’t hand them the wheel.

A Demographic Leaning Hard Into AI

Two-thirds of the surveyed investors said they expect to increase their use of AI tools over the next year. Not maintain — increase. That’s a group that’s already adopted these tools and plans to go further, even as the regulatory picture stays unclear.

It’s worth stepping back for a second. The broader shift here isn’t surprising. Younger generations have grown up with technology that genuinely outperforms older alternatives in most areas of life. Streaming beats cable. Maps apps beat paper. So when an AI tool gives a cleaner, faster answer about dividend yields than a financial segment on morning TV, it feels like a natural upgrade. The instinct makes sense.

What doesn’t transfer cleanly is the assumption that better UX equals better protection. A slicker interface doesn’t mean regulatory oversight. And the FCA study is basically a data snapshot of that exact confusion playing out across 666 people.

The survey covered a diverse group from across the UK. All participants were between 18 and 40. All either currently hold investments or plan to within the next twelve months. It’s a reasonably tight demographic slice, but it’s probably representative of the cohort most likely to be using AI tools for anything financial right now.

And the FCA seems genuinely concerned about what happens as that cohort grows and the tools get more convincing. AI isn’t getting less persuasive. The outputs are getting more polished, more confident-sounding, harder to second-guess. Which makes the regulatory knowledge gap more dangerous over time, not less.

See also: Gemini Secures Exclusive Crypto Event Contracts Deal with Apex for Millions of Investors

The InvestSmart website stays the FCA’s primary tool for pushing back on that — a place where investors can cross-check what they’re hearing from AI against guidance that’s actually been vetted. Whether enough young investors bother to use it is a separate question. The study didn’t say.

What it did say: 86% know they should verify sources. Only 62% seem to understand AI isn’t regulated. That gap — between knowing to check and knowing why it matters — is probably where the real risk lives.

The survey was conducted July 24, 2026, with 666 respondents across the UK.