Kim Sandy Eichler ^* Elizabeth Schwab

• The Chicago School of Professional Psychology, Chicago, United States

The mini review assesses the value propositions of robo-advisors through the lens of behavioral finance. Despite their promise of data-driven, rational investment strategies, robo-advisors may not fully replicate the personalized service of human financial advisors or eliminate human biases in decision-making. A content analysis of 80 peer-reviewed articles and publications was conducted, focusing on the intersection of financial technology and behavioral finance. Literature was retrieved using The Chicago School University Library's OneSearch and the EBSCO host database, with key terms including "robo-advisor," "investment behavior," "risk tolerance," "financial literacy," and "affective trust." The review identifies four key limitations of robo-advisors: (1) their inability to replicate the service-relationship of human advisors; (2) the presence of human bias in supposedly rational algorithms; (3) the inability to minimize market risk; and (4) their limited impact on improving users' financial literacy. Instead, robo-advisors temporarily compensate for a lack of financial knowledge through passive investment strategies. The findings suggest that integrating behavioral finance principles could enhance the predictive power of robo-advisors, though this would introduce additional complexities. The review calls for further research and regulatory measures to ensure that these technologies prioritize investor protection and financial literacy as they continue to evolve.