Ask any paraplanner where their week goes and the answer is rarely “giving advice.” It is writing the documents that evidence it. The suitability report is the clearest example: a single document that can swallow the best part of a day, repeated across every new recommendation and every annual review. Understanding exactly where that time goes is the first step to getting it back — and it is where AI is now making a measurable difference.

This article breaks down the real time cost of writing a suitability report, stage by stage, and shows where AI genuinely helps and where it does not.

How long does a suitability report actually take?

The honest answer is that it varies enormously with complexity — but the hours add up fast.

A straightforward annual review might take somewhere in the region of 45–90 minutes to write up. A new-client suitability report involving multiple objectives, several products or a pension switch can take far longer: a full working day is not unusual for a complex case. Industry commentary and adviser surveys have repeatedly put report writing among the biggest consumers of a paraplanner’s week, with a large share of their time going on producing reports and reviews rather than analysis or client work.

The key point is not the precise figure for any one report; it is the cumulative effect. A firm running hundreds of annual reviews a year, on top of new business, is spending a very large number of hours on documentation — hours that cap how many clients it can serve and how quickly it can respond.

Where the time actually goes

It helps to separate the work into stages, because AI affects each one differently.

Gathering the information. Pulling together the fact find, meeting notes, cashflow output, provider illustrations and research from several systems. This is often the most frustrating part, and — as Ammonite co-founder Rob Harradine has noted — gathering information and structuring it are two different problems.

Structuring and drafting. Turning all of that into a coherent narrative that sets out the client’s needs, the recommendation and why it is suitable. This is the core writing task.

Formatting. Applying the firm’s house style — headings, numbering, sections, tables — so the document looks right. Deceptively time-consuming, and pure overhead.

Tables and calculations. Presenting figures accurately, often rekeyed by hand from other tools.

Checking and compliance. Reviewing the draft against the FCA’s suitability requirements — the client’s demands and needs, why the recommendation is suitable, any possible disadvantages — and the Consumer Duty‘s expectation that the report is clear and supports a good outcome.

Most of these stages are mechanical. Only the last — the judgement about whether the advice and the report are right — genuinely requires a qualified human. That split is exactly why AI can help.

Where AI saves time (and where it should not)

AI is well suited to the mechanical stages. A purpose-built tool can take source material — including a raw meeting transcription, PDFs, Word files, spreadsheets and CSVs — filter out the irrelevant parts, and populate the firm’s template in minutes. It can draft the narrative in the firm’s tone, build tables and run templated calculations in context, and apply the firm’s formatting from the outset, removing the reformatting and rekeying that eat so much time.

What AI should not do is make the suitability decision or replace the final human check. AI can produce confident errors, so a qualified person must review and edit every report and remains responsible for the advice. The time saving comes from collapsing the drafting, formatting and rekeying — not from skipping oversight. Under the Senior Managers and Certification Regime, accountability stays with the firm regardless of how the draft was produced.

The result, done well, is that the hours shift decisively from production to judgement. As Ammonite’s Caroline Duff frames it, the move is “from report writer to advice architect” — less time formatting and copy-pasting, more time on the case in front of you.

What this is worth to a firm

The gains are easiest to see across volume. Ammonite states that its Planbot platform at least halves the time it takes to produce suitability reports and annual reviews, with a complex report able to fall from around six hours to under one. Shaved across a full annual review cycle, that is enough to clear backlogs, respond to clients faster, and — as its founders have argued — materially increase the number of clients a firm can serve without lowering its standards.

It also addresses a quieter cost: the drag on morale and capacity when skilled paraplanners spend their days on repetitive production rather than the analytical work they trained for.

Where Ammonite fits

This time problem is precisely what Ammonite built Planbot to solve. Planbot turns a firm’s own templates into AI-powered documents that a team can populate in minutes and then reviews and edits, keeping the firm in control of the wording, structure, tone and calculations throughout, and exporting in the firm’s own brand and style. Firms can start from their own master templates or ready-made “off the shelf” ones for common documents, and its Quick Build feature turns an existing Word template into a working AI template in a couple of minutes. On data, Planbot stores no client information and never uses it to train AI models, and runs on UK-based Google Cloud.

The perspective behind it is first-hand: Ammonite was founded by Caroline Duff, a Chartered Financial Planner, and Rob Harradine, a Chartered Member of the CISI and former adviser, who between them have written thousands of suitability reports and know exactly where the hours go.

You can see how Planbot works, read about the team behind it, or explore more in Ammonite’s Insights. For wider standards on report writing, the Personal Finance Society’s suitability report writing guide and PIMFA are useful references.

Frequently asked questions

How long does it take to write a suitability report?

It depends heavily on complexity. A simple annual review might take around 45–90 minutes to write up, while a complex new-client report can take the best part of a working day. Across a full book of clients, report writing is one of the largest calls on a paraplanner’s time.

Which parts of report writing can AI speed up?

The mechanical stages: structuring source material, drafting against a template, formatting, and building tables and calculations. Ammonite states Planbot at least halves the time to produce suitability reports and annual reviews by removing this manual work.

Does using AI mean skipping the compliance check?

No. AI produces the draft; a qualified person reviews and edits it and remains responsible for whether the advice is suitable and the report compliant. That human check is the one stage that should never be shortcut.

How much time could our firm realistically save?

The biggest gains come where volume is highest — large annual review cycles and report backlogs. Ammonite states a complex report can fall from around six hours to under one, which compounds significantly across a year’s worth of reviews.

Give your paraplanning team more time for the work that needs their expertise. Ammonite’s Planbot combines AI for paraplanners with flexible Paraplanning software to streamline document preparation while maintaining your firm’s standards. Explore our Suitability report software and discover how AI-powered document generation can reduce repetitive tasks, improve consistency and support faster report production. Book a demo today.