AFG and Connective are separate Australian mortgage aggregators. A broker choosing between them should compare the current commission plan, technology, lender access and exit terms against the way the brokerage operates.
AFG’s proposed acquisition of Connective did not complete. The ACCC did not oppose the proposal in June 2020, but the implementation deed later expired. Each group still has its own membership agreement and broker platform.
Eliminate hours of manual data crunching and focus on building relationships with new clients.
Track My Trail makes it easy for brokers to keep track of lost & gained trail, discover clients who have paid off big chunks of their loans, and identify your most profitable clients.
Get Track My Trail for free today – no credit card required.
Compare Fees and Commission Plans
A mortgage broker should request a current written proposal from AFG and Connective. Model both proposals using the brokerage’s settled volume, trail income and number of users. This gives a better comparison than the headline commission percentage alone.
Connective Commission Plans
Connective currently publishes Maximiser and Variable plans. Maximiser lets eligible members keep 100% of upfront and trail commission under a membership-fee model. This fixed commission approach puts more of the cost in membership fees. Under Variable, the retained share increases with monthly settlement volume.
Use the current Connective proposal for the actual fee, user allowance and commission share. The general aggregator notes and Connective’s aggregator fees page can help you prepare questions, but the signed agreement controls what the brokerage pays.
AFG Commission and Costs
AFG’s proposal should state the brokerage’s share of lender-paid upfront and trailing commissions, along with platform and service costs. Apply the proposed split to a full year of real settlements and trail receipts. Include every user and optional service shown on the quote.
The broader aggregator fees guide and AFG’s aggregator fees page explain the types of charges to check. Confirm the current amount and cancellation treatment in AFG’s written terms.
Compare Network and Lender Access
AFG and Connective are among the larger mortgage broker aggregators in Australia. AFG’s FY25 annual report recorded more than 4,200 brokers and about $63 billion in residential settlements. Connective’s current site states that it supports more than 5,000 brokers and has a panel of more than 70 lenders.
Network size does not show whether a broker can place a specific deal. Ask each group for the lender panel available to the brokerage, then check residential, commercial, asset-finance and business loans separately. Accreditation can depend on experience, business structure and the product being written.
Have you checked your trail book for missing trail?
Track My Trail makes it easy for brokers to keep track of lost & gained trail, discover clients who have paid off big chunks of their loans, and identify your most profitable clients.
Get Track My Trail for free today - no credit card required.
Support for the Brokerage
Compare the support named in each proposal. Check who handles accreditation, file questions and compliance reviews. Ask how Professional Development is delivered and which costs sit outside the base plan.
Marketing support also needs a practical test. Review the templates, consent process and reporting behind any Lead Generation service. Price paid tools separately so they do not distort the commission comparison.
Compare Ownership and Contract Terms
AFG is ASX-listed, so its annual reports provide group financial and operating information. Connective is privately held and publishes member information through its own channels. This difference affects the information available to a broker, but the appointment agreement remains the document that controls fees, trail ownership and notice.
The proposed AFG acquisition of Connective belongs in the history of mortgage-industry mergers and acquisitions. It does not combine the current contracts. Assess the two agreements as separate options.
Trail Ownership and Exit
Read the exit clause before moving a book. Confirm who owns trail, whether trail continues after departure and what happens to pending settlements. Check notice periods, data export and any repayment tied to onboarding support.
Test Suite360 and Mercury Nexus
AFG’s current technology package is Suite360. Its public material includes BrokerEngine Plus for lodgement, customer management and product selection, along with analytics, learning and lender-panel access. Connective’s current platform is Mercury Nexus, which covers client management, compliance, application lodgement and business reporting.
Run the same representative file through both demonstrations. Time data collection, compliance preparation and loan processing. Check whether notes, documents and status updates move through one workflow or need repeat entry.
Ask which CRM systems will hold the client record and how the brokerage can export it. Test user permissions and commission reporting with the staff who will use them. A platform should support the brokerage’s actual process, including post-settlement Customer Service.
Choose Between AFG and Connective
There is no universal winner between AFG and Connective. The better choice is the agreement that gives the brokerage suitable lender access and workable software at the lower total cost, with acceptable trail and exit terms.
Get both proposals in writing. Model twelve months of commission and costs, test one file in each platform and compare the exit clauses before signing an appointment.
