The Proxy Advisor Divergence: What It Means for Listed Companies

The proxy advisory landscape is undergoing its most significant structural shift in decades. What was once a predictable system — where two firms effectively set the governance agenda for most institutional investors — is rapidly fragmenting into something far more complex.

The catalysts are clear. In January 2026, JPMorgan Asset Management became the first major institutional investor to cut all ties with external proxy advisory firms, replacing ISS and Glass Lewis with an internal AI-powered platform called Proxy IQ. Weeks later, Wells Fargo followed suit, building its own proprietary voting infrastructure through Broadridge. These are not fringe players — JPMorgan alone manages over $7 trillion in client assets.

The proxy advisors themselves are adapting. Glass Lewis has announced that by 2027, it will abandon its standard benchmark voting policy entirely, moving instead to customised voting frameworks that reflect each investor's individual stewardship philosophy. ISS is restructuring to offer two distinct governance research services enabling individualised voting decisions. The era of one-size-fits-all benchmark recommendations is ending.

Regulatory pressure is accelerating the shift. The December 2025 executive order directing the SEC and FTC to scrutinise proxy advisory practices, combined with the FTC investigation into potential antitrust violations, has created an environment where reliance on external proxy advice carries new operational and reputational risk.

What this means for companies. The practical implication is significant: a proxy advisor recommendation no longer cascades predictably across a shareholder register. Companies can no longer prepare for an AGM by simply anticipating the ISS or Glass Lewis position. They need to understand how each institutional investor on their register will actually vote — which policies they follow, which proxy advisors they still use (and how), which have gone independent, and what governance positions each one prioritises.

This is precisely the capability gap that VINCIT QSV was designed to fill. The platform cross-references each investor's individual policy positions against a company's governance profile, accounting for delegation relationships, market-specific policies, and the nuanced five-tier spectrum of investor positions. In a world where JPMorgan votes differently from the ISS benchmark, and Glass Lewis no longer has a single benchmark, this individual-level intelligence is not a luxury — it is essential AGM preparation.

Want to see how VINCIT QSV addresses these challenges?

Request a demo to see register-weighted governance intelligence in action.