The stack
Four companies. Three of them are one stack.
Three of them answer one problem at three layers: you left to own the book, and eighteen months later you are the only person in the firm who knows how the rebalancing, the reporting, and the compliance file fit together. The fourth does not.
Independence should not cost you the infrastructure.
Portfolios at the bottom, because software cannot fix an improvised investment layer. Risk analytics above them, because a strategy a client abandons has not delivered what it was designed to deliver. The platform on top, because most advisors do not want to assemble the pieces. They were not founded in that order: THOR in 2018, the platform in 2020, its first fund in 2022, and the risk engine and Civly in 2026. The biography has the detail.
The four companies
Layer one · Portfolios
THOR Financial Technologies
Systematic strategies delivered as model portfolios and two of three exchange-traded funds; the third is sub-advised. Co-founder and partner. thorft.com
Layer two · Risk
riskDNA AI
Risk analytics that keep tolerance, capacity, and behavior separate rather than collapsing them into one score. Co-founder. riskdna.ai
Layer three · Platform
UX Wealth Partners
The turnkey asset management platform that delivers the rest to independent advisors. Co-founder, president, and chief executive. uxwp.com
The affiliation
These are not four independent bets held at arm’s length. I hold ownership interests in all four: UX Wealth Partners, riskDNA AI, THOR Financial Technologies, and a majority interest in Civly. The UX Wealth platform uses THOR models and riskDNA analytics. Brad Roth is chief investment officer of both THOR and UX Wealth Partners, so the same person runs the investment function at the strategist and at the platform. UX Wealth Partners is paid by the asset managers whose strategies are available on its platform. That is a conflict of interest: the platform earns from the firms whose products an advisor can select on it. riskDNA is free to advisors and funded by asset managers, who receive advisor-level data, and aggregated client data, on how advisors on riskDNA use and position their strategies and whose products are among those it covers. That funding is a conflict of interest.
UX Wealth Partners is itself paid by the asset managers whose strategies are available on its platform. That is a conflict of interest of the same kind, one layer up: the platform earns from the firms whose products an advisor can select on it. Advisors choose from hundreds of models and are not required to use THOR strategies.
What that means for an advisor evaluating any of the three is on the disclosures page. If you are weighing a partnership or an investment, the routes are on the contact page.
Read next
The affiliations in full