For M1 (Financial Software)'s automated investing feature, should we emphasize customization options or streamline the process for faster onboarding?

Introduction

For M1's automated investing feature, we're facing a critical trade-off between emphasizing customization options or streamlining the process for faster onboarding. This decision will significantly impact user acquisition, engagement, and long-term retention. I'll analyze this trade-off by examining the product context, identifying key metrics, designing experiments, and providing a data-driven recommendation.

Step 1

Clarifying Questions (3 minutes)

• Context: Based on the competitive landscape, I'm thinking M1 might be facing pressure from both traditional brokerages and fintech startups. Could you share more about our current market position and main competitors?

Why it matters: Helps tailor our approach to differentiate from competitors Expected answer: M1 is positioned between robo-advisors and self-directed platforms Impact on approach: Would influence the balance between automation and customization

• Business Context: Considering our revenue model, I assume we primarily earn from assets under management. Is this correct, and are there any other significant revenue streams we should consider?

Why it matters: Aligns solution with our primary revenue drivers Expected answer: Primarily AUM-based, with some additional revenue from cash management Impact on approach: Would prioritize features that increase AUM and user retention

• User Impact: I'm thinking our user base might include both experienced investors and newcomers. Can you provide insights into our primary user segments and their typical behaviors?

Why it matters: Ensures we're addressing the needs of our core users Expected answer: Mix of millennials new to investing and more experienced users seeking automation Impact on approach: Would inform the level of guidance vs. customization needed

• Technical: Regarding our current tech stack, I'm assuming we have the capability to implement either option. Are there any technical constraints or ongoing initiatives we should be aware of?

Why it matters: Ensures proposed solution is feasible and aligns with technical roadmap Expected answer: No major constraints, but ongoing work on improving backend scalability Impact on approach: Would consider potential synergies with backend improvements

• Resource: Considering our team structure, I'm guessing we have dedicated product and engineering teams for the automated investing feature. Can you confirm our resource availability for this initiative?

Why it matters: Helps scope the solution based on available resources Expected answer: Dedicated team available, but competing priorities for Q4 Impact on approach: Would tailor recommendation to balance impact and resource constraints