SOVIRANI STANDARD & ADVICE ACCORD

Financial Advisor Viability Benchmark · Point-Based Scoring Engine v1.0

Market Viability Benchmark

This market audit evaluates operational friction, regulatory compliance readiness, and commercial appetite among licensed financial advisors and agency team leads. Every answer now carries a transparent point value. Responses produce a weighted viability score (0–100), a verdict band, and a prioritised implementation roadmap.

Use the Compile Responses tab to merge multiple exports into one market-level Viability Index. Use Scoring Rubric to inspect or edit every weight and point value.

Privacy: scoring runs entirely in your browser. Nothing is transmitted to a server by default — responses stay on this device until you export them. No client data, policy numbers, or PII should be entered into this form.
Q1 · Operations
On average, how many days or hours per month does your practice/agency lose to client identity verification (KYC), document chasing, and manual onboarding admin?
Pillar A · Pain & Urgency · max 3 pts
Q2 · Compliance
How concerning is the compliance and legal liability of advisors communicating sensitive financial policies over consumer messengers (WhatsApp/Telegram) without verified identity or audit-ready logging?
Pillar A · Pain & Urgency · max 3 pts
Q3 · Lead Gen & Trust
When transitioning inbound leads from public platforms (LinkedIn, social media) to private discussions, what percentage of leads drop off or express hesitation regarding data privacy?
Pillar A · Pain & Urgency · max 3 pts
Q4 · Growth & Automation
Would your practice adopt an automated "Opportunity Radar" that scans your client book in zero-knowledge mode and charges $0.15 ONLY when a verified milestone trigger appears (e.g., CPF SA Shielding at age 54.5, HDB MOP 5-year expiry, Critical Illness coverage gap)?
Pillar B · Core Solution Fit · max 3 pts
Q5 · Usability & Interface
Which primary interface workflow would your advisors and agency team prefer to manage daily client interactions and opportunity alerts?
Pillar D · Adoption & GTM Readiness · max 3 pts · also drives the build-direction branch
Q6 · Revenue Model
As a financial advisor or agency leader, which platform pricing module best balances agency adoption, cash flow predictability, and usage incentives?
Pillar C · Willingness to Pay · max 4 pts · also drives the pricing/GTM branch

Pay-As-You-Go Micro-Service Rates Included Across Tiers:

Base Vault Link: SGD $0.40 / month per active Client Shadow Vault
Pay-on-Match Opportunity Sweep: $0.15 per verified milestone match ($0.00 if no gap; $0.10 rebate routed to client wallet)
Automated SOA Document Scan: $0.10 / document (client-side PII redaction + Schedule of Assets sync)
Micro AI Compliance Script: $0.05 / generation (local SLM compliance-checked outreach script)
Report Generation: $0.50 / export
Investment Forecast Sidecar: $350 / year per advisor seat
AI Inbox Assistant: $30 / year per seat
Video Draft Exports: $6 (720p draft) / $18 (HD final export)
Q7 · Client Value
How valuable is equipping your clients with a free on-device "Shadow Vault" featuring peer-threshold emergency recovery (3-of-6 Horcrux protocol) for unexpected incapacity or estate execution?
Pillar B · Core Solution Fit · max 3 pts
Q8 · Client Micro-Service
How willing would clients be to utilize a $0.10 self-service document scanner that automatically redacts PII on-device and auto-syncs their Schedule of Assets (SOA)?
Pillar B · Core Solution Fit · max 3 pts
Q9 · Compliance Scripts
Would your advisors adopt a $0.05 single-click AI compliance script generator that auto-drafts MAS/FRS compliant outreach messages for off-channel messaging?
Pillar B · Core Solution Fit · max 3 pts
Q10 · Expansion Modules
Which premium expansion modules would your agency be most likely to adopt within the first 6 months of deployment?
Pillar C · Willingness to Pay · 1 pt per selection, max 4 pts (multi-select)

Submit & Score Benchmark Assessment

Your answers are scored locally and produce a viability verdict plus a prioritised implementation roadmap.

Scoring happens in your browser and no name or email is collected. If automatic return is enabled, your anonymous answers are sent to the survey owner on submit; otherwise use Save Scored JSON after submitting and send the file yourself. Q6's free-text proposal field may contain anything you choose to type.

Compile the benchmark cohort

Paste one or more Save Scored JSON exports, the JSON downloaded from your free form inbox (Formspree/Netlify), a JSON array, a single object, or newline-delimited JSON — or pick the exported .json files. The engine recomputes every score from the raw answers using the current rubric, so rubric edits apply retroactively to old responses.

No data leaves this page. Compilation is pure client-side arithmetic.

Scoring structure

Each pillar is normalised to its answered maximum, multiplied by its weight, then weights of answered pillars are re-normalised. This keeps an incomplete response comparable without inventing zeros for unanswered questions.

Formula: Score = 100 × Σ(pillar raw ÷ answered pillar max) × pillar weight ÷ Σ(answered pillar weights). Hard gates then cap the total.

Pillar weights

Question → option → points

Verdict bands

Hard gates (kill switches)

Sample-size confidence

RespondentsConfidenceWhat you may conclude
< 10DIRECTIONAL ONLYAnecdote. Use for interview prompts, never for a build/no-build decision.
10 – 29INDICATIVEEnough to rank features and choose a pilot wedge. Not enough to size revenue.
≥ 30DECISION-GRADE (conditional)Usable only if the sample is not one agency and includes a commitment question.
Instrument caveat: all ten questions measure stated intent, all are positively framed, and none asks for a real commitment or a price objection. Stated intent systematically overstates purchase. Before treating any score as decision-grade, add these four questions: (1) "Would you sign a paid pilot at SGD $X within 60 days? Yes / No / Only at $Y"; (2) "What do you currently pay per advisor per year for CRM + compliance tooling, and when does the contract renew?"; (3) firmographic screening — verified role, agency seat count, client book size, jurisdiction; (4) a reverse/control question — "Which of these modules would you NOT use even if free?" to expose acquiescence bias.