The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) is considering allowing individual mutual fund distributors to also register as investment advisers, potentially changing how financial advice is delivered to retail investors. The proposal is being examined by a working group reviewing regulations governing mutual fund distribution and investment advice. If adopted, it could allow individual professionals to offer both product distribution and fee-based advisory services, subject to safeguards designed to manage conflicts of interest.
The proposal remains under consideration, and SEBI has not announced a final rule permitting individual distributors to hold both registrations. The debate centres on the difference between selling financial products and recommending investments in a client’s best interests. Mutual fund distributors typically earn commissions from asset management companies, while registered investment advisers generally charge clients fees for advice. Allowing the same individual to operate in both roles could expand access to advice, but it would also raise questions about whether recommendations are influenced by commissions. (LiveMint)
SEBI Reviews Dual Registration for Individual Distributors
According to a LiveMint report published on October 9, 2026, two people familiar with the matter said a SEBI working group was discussing whether individual mutual fund distributors should be allowed to obtain an investment adviser licence.
The review forms part of a wider effort to streamline the regulatory framework for mutual fund distributors and registered investment advisers. At present, non-individual entities can operate distribution and advisory businesses through appropriately structured arrangements, subject to regulatory requirements. Individual professionals face more restrictive separation between the two activities.
The proposed change could give individual distributors greater flexibility to develop their businesses. A distributor who currently helps clients select mutual funds through a commission-based model could potentially add a separate fee-based advisory service if the regulator establishes a framework permitting it.
However, the proposal is not a blanket relaxation of investor-protection rules. Any dual-registration model would need to address how advisers disclose commissions, distinguish advice from product sales and demonstrate that their recommendations are appropriate for clients.
| Area | Current framework | What the proposal could change |
|---|---|---|
| Individual MFDs | Primarily distribute mutual funds and may provide permitted incidental advice | Could potentially obtain an additional RIA registration |
| Individual RIAs | Operate under investment-adviser regulations and fee-based advisory requirements | Could face a revised framework if dual registration is permitted |
| Non-individual entities | Can operate distribution and advisory activities subject to regulatory safeguards | Existing arrangements are part of the framework being reviewed |
| Investor protection | Disclosure and separation requirements help manage conflicts | Additional safeguards may be needed for individuals holding both registrations |
Source: SEBI’s existing regulatory framework and the proposal reported by LiveMint. The potential changes have not been finalised. (LiveMint, SEBI Investment Adviser FAQs)
Mutual Fund Distributors and RIAs: What Is the Difference?
Mutual fund distributors and registered investment advisers both work with investors, but their business models and regulatory responsibilities differ.
A mutual fund distributor helps investors purchase mutual fund schemes and generally receives commissions from the relevant asset management company. These commissions can include trail commissions linked to investors’ continuing holdings, subject to the applicable rules.
A registered investment adviser, by contrast, provides investment advice under SEBI’s Investment Advisers Regulations. RIAs generally charge clients advisory fees under the permitted fee structure and must comply with requirements concerning suitability, disclosures and conflicts of interest.
The distinction is important because the source of a professional’s income can influence how investors evaluate recommendations.
For example, a distributor may receive different commissions from different products or schemes. An investor may therefore want to know whether a recommendation reflects the client’s financial goals or the commercial incentives attached to a particular product.
A fee-based adviser can offer an alternative model in which the client pays directly for advice. However, charging a fee does not automatically guarantee that advice is suitable or unbiased. Investors should still examine the adviser’s qualifications, registration, disclosures and approach to risk.
Why SEBI Is Considering the Change
India has a large network of mutual fund distributors but a comparatively small pool of registered investment advisers. NewsBytes reported that the country has more than 100,000 mutual fund distributors and approximately 1,048 RIAs, highlighting the difference in the scale of the two professions. (NewsBytes)
Allowing individual distributors to obtain RIA registration could potentially encourage more financial professionals to enter the advisory business. Existing distributors already have experience explaining mutual fund products, understanding investor requirements and helping clients navigate investment choices.
A dual-registration route could give some of these professionals an incentive to develop a fee-based advisory practice instead of relying exclusively on distribution commissions.
It could also offer investors greater choice in how they pay for financial guidance. Some clients may prefer a commission-based distribution relationship, while others may want to pay a transparent fee for advice.
Nevertheless, increasing the number of advisers is only one part of improving access to financial guidance. The quality of recommendations, transparency of charges and ability to manage conflicts of interest are equally important.
The Conflict-of-Interest Challenge
The main concern is whether a professional holding both registrations could face incentives to recommend a product that generates commission rather than one that best suits the client.
Consider an investor who wants to build a long-term portfolio. An adviser may have several possible mutual fund schemes to consider. If some products generate distribution commissions while others are recommended through a fee-based advisory arrangement, the professional must make the nature of the relationship clear.
Without strong safeguards, investors could struggle to distinguish independent advice from product promotion.
A dual-registration framework would therefore need to clarify questions such as:
- Whether the same client can receive advisory and distribution services from the same individual.
- How commissions and advisory fees must be disclosed.
- Whether separate client onboarding and records are required.
- How recommendations must be documented.
- What restrictions apply to switching clients between advisory and distribution services.
- How SEBI will supervise compliance and handle complaints.
These are potential design questions rather than confirmed conditions of the proposal. The final requirements, if the regulator proceeds, will depend on the rules it adopts.
SEBI already has requirements intended to separate advisory and distribution activities. Its existing framework includes client-level segregation provisions for investment advisers and their associated distribution activities. A new arrangement would need to clarify how those principles apply to individual professionals. (SEBI regulatory document)
What Could Change for Individual Financial Professionals?
For distributors, the proposal could create a new business opportunity. An individual may be able to serve clients who want product access as well as those who prefer to pay directly for investment recommendations, provided the final framework allows both activities and the professional meets the registration requirements.
It could also encourage distributors to invest in qualifications, compliance systems and financial-planning capabilities. Advising clients involves more than identifying mutual funds: professionals may need to understand risk tolerance, time horizons, financial objectives and the suitability of different investments.
The potential change could be particularly relevant for smaller financial-advisory businesses that do not have the resources to create separate legal entities for distribution and advisory services.
However, dual registration may also bring additional compliance expenses. Advisers could need separate documentation, disclosures, fee records and processes for managing conflicts. Whether the arrangement is commercially attractive would depend on the final rules and the size of the professional’s client base.
What It Could Mean for Mutual Fund Investors
For investors, the proposal could increase the number of professionals offering different ways to pay for investment guidance. A broader pool of advisers may improve access, particularly for people who do not currently have a dedicated financial planner.
But investors should not assume that every distributor will automatically become an RIA or that the proposal will immediately change how recommendations are made.
Even if dual registration is permitted, investors will need to understand the capacity in which a professional is acting. A recommendation made as part of a distribution relationship may have a different compensation structure from advice provided under a fee-based agreement.
Before choosing an adviser or distributor, investors should check the person’s SEBI registration status, understand all applicable charges and ask how conflicts are managed. They should also ensure that recommendations reflect their own financial circumstances rather than relying solely on product rankings or past returns.
How the Proposal Fits SEBI’s Wider Regulatory Review
SEBI has been reviewing several aspects of India’s investment-advice and distribution framework as the financial-services market evolves. The objective is to make the regulatory structure workable while preserving investor protection.
The distinction between distribution and advice has long been a central issue because the two activities serve related but different purposes. Distributors help investors access products, while advisers are expected to provide recommendations under the applicable advisory framework.
The regulator must balance the benefits of a more flexible market with the risk that overlapping roles could make it harder for investors to identify commercial incentives.
The working group’s review could therefore lead to a wider discussion about registration requirements, business models, disclosures and supervision. However, it would be premature to assume that every issue being discussed will become part of a final regulatory change.
The Bigger Picture
SEBI’s proposal could reshape how individual financial professionals serve mutual fund investors. Allowing distributors to pursue investment-adviser registration may expand the range of services they can offer and create another route into the advisory profession.
The central challenge is ensuring that greater flexibility does not weaken the distinction between selling financial products and providing advice. The effectiveness of any final framework will depend on clear disclosures, enforceable conflict-of-interest safeguards and investors’ ability to understand how their adviser is compensated.
Looking Ahead
The next development to watch is whether SEBI’s working group recommends a formal dual-registration framework and whether the regulator subsequently issues a consultation paper or final rules. Details about client segregation, commission disclosure, fee structures and compliance obligations will determine how the proposal works in practice. Until SEBI announces a formal decision, individual distributors should not assume that they can operate as RIAs under a new dual-licence arrangement.
For investors, the potential change could eventually offer more choice in accessing financial advice, but registration and compensation transparency will remain important. The number of advisers alone will not determine the quality of the market. The long-term outcome will depend on whether the regulatory framework allows professionals to operate sustainably while keeping client interests, suitable recommendations and clear disclosures at the centre of investment advice.
Get the day’s top stories in your inbox
One concise email. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.
