How do you recruit experienced mortgage brokers?

By understanding what stops them, not just what attracts them. The barrier is rarely the offer; it is trail ownership, the income gap during a move, lender reaccreditation lag and restraint clauses. FinTalent researches a candidate's contractual landscape before the approach and builds a transition plan around the specific risk they are carrying.

Why won't experienced brokers switch?

MPA's 2025 Brokers on Aggregators survey found 79% of brokers are extremely unlikely to switch aggregators, up from 74% the year before. For commission brokers the handcuff is trail; for salaried brokers it is the 60-to-90-day income gap. FinTalent treats that 79% as a rolling number and times approaches to when a broker's circumstances actually shift.

What happens to a broker's trail book when they move?

It depends on the contractor's agreement, the agreement holder's arrangement with the aggregator, and often both, which is why trail ownership is rarely black and white. Deals fall over when nobody clarifies it until the resignation conversation. FinTalent surfaces the trail question early so it shapes the transition plan rather than killing the deal late.

Do restraint clauses stop brokers from moving?

Sometimes. Non-compete and restraint clauses vary wildly; some are unenforceable, some have real teeth, and a six-month restraint over a concentrated client base is a genuine barrier. FinTalent checks a candidate's contractual position early, because restraint terms discovered late waste everyone's weeks.

Is it easier to recruit experienced brokers or develop new ones?

Both work; doing neither and hoping fails. The experienced pool is harder to recruit from than five years ago, while the new-entrant pool is the largest it has ever been. FinTalent works both angles, targeted approaches to the movable 21% and a pipeline of new entrants developed internally.

79% of brokers won't move. Here's what it takes to recruit the other 21%.

To recruit an experienced broker, you have to understand what is stopping them, not just sweeten what is on offer. For most, the barrier is not money; it is trail they cannot afford to leave behind, a 60-to-90-day income gap, lender reaccreditation lag, or a restraint clause. Solve the risk, not just the pitch, and the one in five who will move becomes reachable.

The bottom line: Four in five experienced brokers will not switch, and the barrier is rarely the offer. FinTalent recruits from this pool by mapping a candidate’s trail, contract and restraint position before the approach, then building a transition plan around the specific financial risk they are carrying.

I spoke to a broker before Christmas who had been approached by three different brokerages towards the end of the year. Every one of them offered more money, better tech, better support and stronger business longevity. Across the board, they were clearly better options than where he was.

He didn’t move. Because if he left on his terms, his trail stayed behind, and he couldn’t justify walking away from it.

According to MPA’s 2025 Brokers on Aggregators survey, 79% of brokers said they are extremely unlikely to switch aggregators. That is up from 74% the year before. Four out of five brokers have no interest in moving. The question is not whether you can recruit experienced brokers. You can. The question is whether you understand what is actually stopping the one in five who are considering it.

Why won’t commission brokers move? Trail is the handcuff.

The barriers to moving are different depending on how a broker is structured, and most principals treat every broker the same in recruitment conversations. They shouldn’t.

A commission based contractor who has been building their book for three to five years faces a specific problem: what happens to it when they leave? It depends on the contractor’s agreement with the agreement holder, the agreement holder’s arrangement with the aggregator, and sometimes a combination of both. Trail ownership, client ownership, clawback periods, buyout clauses. These sit across multiple documents that were often signed years ago and not revisited since. It is no accident that the advantages of commission-only broking come bundled with this exact complexity.

The conversations about trail do happen during recruitment. But they are rarely conclusive early on, because the answer is often genuinely unclear. Contractor agreements in this industry are not always black and white. A broker might believe they own their trail outright, only to discover on closer reading that their agreement holder retains a portion, or that the aggregator’s terms override what was agreed at the brokerage level. I have heard of deals falling apart at the eleventh hour because nobody clarified the trail position until the resignation conversation forced it.

If you are a principal trying to recruit an experienced commission broker, the trail question needs to surface early. Not to solve it immediately, but to understand the complexity of what that person is navigating. The brokerages that recruit well from this pool take the time to understand the candidate’s specific contractual landscape and build a transition plan around it. That might mean offering a guaranteed base income for the first 6 to 12 months while they rebuild. It might mean structuring an earn out that replaces lost trail over time. What it cannot be is a vague assurance that “it’ll work itself out.”

What stops a salaried broker moving?

A salaried broker faces a completely different calculation. Their income is predictable. They know what hits their account every fortnight, and the risk of moving is typically not about trail. I say typically, because there are some big businesses out there offering trail to their salaried brokers, but only a handful can afford to.

Most salaried brokers considering a move to a commission based brokerage will face a period, usually 60 to 90 days, where their income drops significantly. They have left their salary. Their new pipeline has not yet converted. Settlements take time. Even a broker who starts generating activity immediately will not see commission income for weeks or months. For a salaried broker with a mortgage, a family and school fees, that gap is not theoretical. It is the reason they stay put even when they are unhappy.

The brokerages that successfully recruit salaried brokers are the ones that bridge that gap explicitly. A guaranteed retainer for the first three months. A sign on payment structured against future commission. A base plus commission model during the transition period. The mechanic matters less than the principle: you are asking someone to take a financial risk by joining you, and you need to acknowledge that risk with something more concrete than “you’ll earn more once you’re settled.”

There is another barrier that cuts across both commission and salaried brokers. Lender accreditation and reaccreditation take time. Some lenders process it in days. Others take weeks. During that period, the broker cannot write loans with those lenders. For a broker who has built their workflow around a specific panel, that lag is not just an inconvenience. It is lost income and disrupted client service at the exact moment they are trying to prove their value in a new environment.

How do restraint clauses block a broker’s move?

There is a third category that principals often overlook entirely. Brokers who are locked in by non compete or restraint clauses. These vary wildly across the industry. Some are unenforceable. Some carry genuine teeth. A broker who wants to move but has a six month non compete with a 20 kilometre radius faces a real practical barrier, especially if their client base is geographically concentrated.

Understanding a candidate’s contractual position before you invest weeks in a recruitment process saves everyone time. It is a question that should be asked early, not discovered late, particularly with the non-compete landscape shifting.

What do principals who recruit well do differently?

None of this means recruiting experienced brokers is impossible. It means it requires more than a job ad and a conversation about commission splits.

The principals that recruit well from the existing talent pool research the candidate’s current structure before making an approach. They understand the web of agreements that sit between a broker, their agreement holder and their aggregator early in the conversation. They quantify what the candidate stands to lose, not just what they stand to gain, and they build transition plans that address the specific financial risk of moving, whether that is trail, salary gap or contractual restraint.

The 79% loyalty figure is real. But it is also a rolling number. Circumstances change. A broker whose aggregator just removed three lenders from the panel might suddenly be in the 21%. A salaried broker whose franchise just changed its commission structure might be reconsidering. A commission broker approaching retirement might want an equity pathway that their current brokerage cannot offer. Timing matters more than pitch. Being in front of the right broker at the moment their circumstances shift is worth more than the best offer presented six months too early.

The bigger picture

There is also a supply side reality worth acknowledging. Banks cut approximately 8,000 jobs in 2025. CBA raised banker bonus caps from 50% to 80% specifically to slow the flow of bankers into broking. 1,200 new to industry brokers entered through MFAA pathways in FY25 alone.

The experienced broker pool is harder to recruit from than it was five years ago. The new entrant pool is larger than it has ever been. The smartest principals are working both angles. They are making targeted, well structured approaches to the 21% who might move, while simultaneously building a pipeline of new entrants who they develop internally. Either approach works. Doing neither and hoping someone lands on your desk is the strategy that fails.