Executive Summary

^{Author: Ludmilla Gomes da Silva dos Anjos — Advisor: João Paulo Augusto Eça}

^{Summary prepared by the ResumeAI tool, an artificial intelligence solution developed by the Pecege Institute focused on synthesis and writing.}

This study examined the association between exposure to digital influencers and financial education behaviors and decision-making in generations X, Y, and Z. The research sought to answer what effects are generated by influencers in the financial formation and investment choices of these generational groups. The investigation started from the premise that technological advancement, accelerated by the covid-19 pandemic, has consolidated digital platforms as central sources of knowledge, including in complex areas such as finance. In this scenario, the digital influencer emerges as an agent capable of shaping perceptions and directing consumption and investment behaviors.

The relevance of the analysis is anchored in the Brazilian scenario, marked by a historical insufficiency in formal financial education (Carvalho and Scholz, 2019). This gap creates a demand for alternative knowledge sources, a space that finance influencers, or “finfluencers”, have occupied. The 3.7% growth in the number of content creators about finance and investments in the second half of 2023 (ANBIMA, 2024) evidences the niche’s expansion. The research is also justified by Brazil’s positioning as the second-largest consumer of social media in the world, where the finance category registered one of the largest growths since 2023 (comscore, 2024), indicating a conducive environment for digital influence.

The Generational Theory provided the framework for sample segmentation, allowing for comparative analysis. The literature defines generations as groups that share socio-cultural experiences and develop distinct worldviews (Okros, 2020). This study adopts the classification by Pokharel and Maharjan (2024), which defines Generation X (1965-1980), Generation Y or Millennials (1981-1996), and Generation Z (1997-2012). This distinction is fundamental, as each cohort possesses a different relationship with technology. Generation Y developed in parallel with technological advancement, while Generation Z is “digital native” (Palfrey and Gasser, 2011), which influences their information consumption patterns.

Previous studies indicate the capacity of influencers to manipulate behaviors and decisions (Walzhofer et al., 2022), with research by Lou and Yuan (2019) and Yuan and Lou (2020) corroborating their persuasive power. In the financial field, the complexity of products and technical language traditionally alienate young people (Koch, 2018). However, the search for free and accessible information on social networks has altered this scenario, especially after the pandemic, which imposed on young people the need for greater understanding of personal finance (Regt et al., 2023). This research, therefore, aligns with suggestions from studies such as those by Andrade and Moura (2023) and Freitas (2021), which call for more empirical investigations to evaluate the practical effects of influencers on investor behavior.

This research contributes to the literature by analyzing the interaction between influencers, financial education, and the particularities of generations X, Y, and Z. The analysis seeks not only to identify the association but also to understand how each group consumes, interprets, and applies financial information from social media. The investigation of content types of interest, investment products, risk profiles, and perception of influencer credibility offers a detailed panorama of a phenomenon with high social and economic impact, especially considering the improvement in Brazilians’ financial health, which reached 56.7 points in 2024, the highest index since 2022 (BACEN, 2024).

This is a descriptive study, with the purpose of manifesting the attributes of a population and defining the relationships between its characteristics (Vergara, 2009). The research is qualitative, as it delves into a reality that is not entirely quantifiable, allowing for an in-depth analysis of the respondents’ perceptions and experiences (Minayo et al., 2002). The combination of these approaches allows for mapping behaviors and understanding the motivations and meanings that individuals attribute to their interactions with digital financial content.

Data collection used a self-administered semi-structured questionnaire, developed based on a literature review. According to Gil (2010), the questionnaire consists of questions answered directly by the respondent, without researcher interference. The instrument included closed-ended questions, to facilitate tabulation, and open-ended questions, to capture the complexity of opinions. The application occurred online, via Google Forms®, from August 3, 2025, to September 8, 2025.

For the distribution, the Virtual Snowball non-probabilistic sampling method was used (Costa, 2008). The link was shared via email and social media, encouraging participants to forward it. Before application, a pre-test was conducted on July 31, 2025, to identify and correct ambiguities or technical issues, ensuring the clarity of the final questionnaire.

From an initial 98 respondents, the final sample was delimited. The first four questions, including the consent form, were mandatory and disqualifying. The inclusion criteria were being over 18 years old and using social media to follow finance content. After the filters, the sample was consolidated into 66 valid respondents. The generational composition was 43 individuals from Generation Y (1981-1996), 17 from Generation Z (1997-2012), and 6 from Generation X (1965-1980). The questionnaire was structured into six blocks with 31 questions, covering demographic data, financial literacy, investment behavior, and social media usage.

The data analysis reveals a sample profile predominantly from Generation Y (65%), followed by Generation Z (26%) and Generation X (9%). This distribution reflects the greater familiarity of younger generations with digital platforms, where Generation Y grew up with the internet (Colet and Mozzato, 2019) and Generation Z is digitally native (Palfrey and Gasser, 2011). Regarding monthly income, 50% of participants fall within the range of 0 to 3 minimum wages. Generation Z was concentrated in the range of up to one minimum wage, while Generation Y exhibited a broader income distribution.

Regarding education, Generation Z predominates among those with complete high school education, consistent with their age group. Generation X is the majority among those with complete higher education, with or without postgraduate studies, distributing themselves between finance-related and other fields of study. Generation Y also presents a high educational level, with a significant portion holding postgraduate degrees, especially in areas related to finance. This educational factor is relevant in the analysis of financial behavior, as suggested by Zhu and Xiao (2021), who associate financial literacy with the acquisition of risky assets.

When investigating interests in financial education, the topic of greatest general interest was “Why/how to invest?”. This was the main theme for Generation Y, while Generation X focused on “Ways to save” and “Expense control”. Generation Z prioritized “Expense control”, reflecting their early financial life stage. In investments, fixed-income products were the main focus for 70% of the sample, followed by the stock market (53%), a consistent pattern across the three generations. The finding corroborates the observation by Regt et al. (2023) regarding the growing interest of younger generations in finance.

The research found that 62% of respondents make some type of investment. The most cited products are fixed income, followed by investment funds and stocks. The main stated objective for investments, regardless of generation, was the formation of a “financial reserve”. Regarding the time horizon, most classify their objectives as medium-term, except for Generation X, which showed a preference for long-term objectives, a behavior associated with future planning (Guzman et al., 2019). The risk profile analysis revealed a predominance of the moderate profile. However, in a hypothetical scenario of higher income, respondents indicated a willingness to migrate to a more aggressive profile, suggesting that risk aversion may be linked to capital constraints.

One of the most significant findings is the direct influence of “finfluencers” on decision-making. A majority of 84.8% of respondents stated they had already made a financial decision based on social media content. Generations Y and Z were the ones who most reported this behavior, aligning with the results of Lucchese et al. (2024). Decisions ranged from adopting spending control practices (Generation Z) to making riskier investments (Generation Y). Generation X demonstrated a more conservative stance, applying knowledge to saving strategies and low-risk investments.

The perception of influencers is ambivalent and reflects critical awareness. The main reasons for following these creators are access to free content, easy-to-understand vocabulary, convenience, and constant updates. However, open-ended responses revealed concern about credibility and conflicts of interest. A respondent from Generation Y highlighted that many influencers “try to sell interesting investments to them, just like a bank manager,” choosing to use the information for planning but assuming the risk of decisions. Generation X expressed concern about scams, while Generation Z warned about the risk of trusting figures who promote an image of easy gains.

Despite the reservations, the positive impact was recognized. A participant from Generation Y, a market professional, highlighted the “supreme importance of the work of a finance influencer” to democratize access to information. Similarly, a member of Generation Z pointed out that, in a country with high debt and little school financial education, influencers play a relevant social role. The analysis on regret showed that Generation Z was the one that least regretted following advice, possibly due to their more conservative decisions. In Generation Y, opinions were divided, with many stating that caution and additional research were crucial to avoid negative outcomes.

The research also revealed that, even with other sources, 57.6% of respondents would primarily turn to videos and influencer publications to learn about a new financial topic. Instagram and YouTube were the preferred platforms for all generations. This data reinforces the central role of social media as the main gateway for financial education for a significant portion of the population, surpassing, in initial preference, traditional channels such as bank managers.

The research examined the association between exposure to digital influencers and financial education and decision-making behaviors among generations X, Y, and Z. The results indicated that influencers play an ambivalent role, acting as vectors for the democratization of financial knowledge and as sources of potential risk.

Generational analysis revealed distinct profiles: Generation X maintains a conservative and pragmatic stance, using social media to reinforce spending control and low-risk investments. Generation Y, with higher education, demonstrates a greater appetite for risk and uses digital content to support more complex investment decisions, albeit with skepticism. Generation Z primarily uses influencers to learn how to manage their personal finances, adopting a cautious stance regarding investments.

It is concluded that the objective was achieved, in which the association between exposure to digital influencers and financial education behaviors was exposed, demonstrating that, although generations X, Y, and Z use social networks to supplement their knowledge, they maintain a critical perception of the benefits and risks involved.

References
^{Andrade, H. F.; Moura, L. R. C. 2023. The impact of digital influencers on consumer behavior in financial investments. Revista de Gestão e Secretariado 14(9): 16245-16272.
Brazilian Association of Financial and Capital Markets Entities [ANBIMA]. 2024. FInfluence: Who talks about investments on social media. 8th Edition. Available at: < https://www. anbima. com. br/pt_br/especial/influenciadores-de-investimentos. htm -7. pdf>. Accessed on: Mar 31, 2025.
Brazilian Association of Financial and Capital Markets Entities [ANBIMA]. 2024. Brazilian Investor X-Ray 7th Edition. Available at: <https://www. anbima. com. br/data/files/9D/52/B3/C7/38C0091004DA0EF8EA2BA2A8/Relatorio-Raio-X-do-Investidor-7. pdf>. Accessed on: Mar 31, 2025.
Central Bank of Brazil [BACEN]. 2024. I-SFB: financial health in the country improved in 2024. Available at: <https://www. bcb. gov. br/detalhenoticia/20387/noticia>. Accessed on: Mar 31, 2025.
Boot, A. W. A.; Hoffmann, P.; Laeven, L. A.; Ratnovsk, L. 2021. Fintech: what’s old, what’s new? Journal of Financial Stability 53(2021): 1-13.
Carvalho, L.; Scholz, R. H. 2019. “You see the basics of the basics, when the class performs”: Scenario of financial education in the school routine. Revista Brasileira de Gestão e Inovação – Brazilian Journal of Management & Innovation 6(2): 103-125.
Cavazotte, F. S. C. N.; Lemos, A. H. C.; Viana, M. D. A. 2012. New generations in the job market: renewed expectations or old ideals? Cadernos EBAPE. BR 10(1): 162-180.
Colet, D. S.; Mozzato, A. R. 2019. “Digital natives”: characteristics attributed by managers to Generation Z. DESENVOLVE: Revista de Gestão do Unilasalle 8(2): 25-40.
Comscore Brazil. 2024. A look at Social media – Insights 2023 x 2024. Available at: <https://www. comscore. com/por/Insights/Apresentacoes-e-documentos/2024/Um-olhar-em-Social-media-Insights-2023-x-2024>. Accessed on: Mar 31, 2025.
Costa, B. R. L. 2018. Virtual Snowball: The use of virtual social networks in the data collection process of scientific research. Revista Interdisciplinar de Gestão Social 7(1): 15-37.
Frame, W. S.; Wall, L.; White, L. J. 2018. Technological Change and Financial Innovation in Banking: Some Implications for FinTech. p. 262-284. In: Berger, A. N.; Molyneux, P.; Wilson, J. O. S. 3rd ed. New York, USA.
Freitas, J. P. C. 2021. An analysis of digitization in personal finance: digital influencers in focus. Course Completion Work (Bachelor in Administration) – Faculty of Administration and Accounting Sciences of the Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Available at: <https://pantheon. ufrj. br/bitstream/11422/16128/1/JPCFreitas. pdf>. Accessed on: Mar 31, 2025.
Guzman, F.; Paswan, A.; Tripathy, N. 2019. Consumer centric antecedents to personal financial planning. Journal of Consumer Marketing 36(6): 858-868.
Jain, N.; Raman, T. V. 2023. The interplay of perceived risk, perceived benefit and generation cohort in digital finance adoption. EuroMed Journal of Business 18(3): 359-379.
Jun, S.; Yi, J. 2020. What makes followers loyal? The role of influencer interactivity in building influencer brand equity. Journal of Product and Brand Management 29(6): 803-814.
Koch, R. 2018. Sparstudie: Austrians invest money in consumption instead of retirement provision. Available at: <https://socialcommunitybanking. wordpress. com/2018/10/31/sparstudie-oesterreicherinnen-stecken-geld-in-konsum-statt-in-altersvorsorge/>. Accessed on: Mar 31, 2025.
Lou, C.; Yuan, S. 2019. Influencer Marketing: How Message Value and Credibility Affect Consumer Trust of Branded Content on Social Media. Journal of Interactive Advertising 19(1): 58-73.
Lucchese, J. L. C.; Potrich, A. C.; Maranhão, K. S.; Goularte, L. B.; Mata, O. K. 2024. How digital influencers are transforming the financial education of university students. Conhecimento & Diversidade 16(44): 84-106.
Minayo, M. C. S.; Deslandes, S. F.; Gomes, R. 2002. Social research: theory, method, and creativity. 21st ed. Editora Vozes, Petrópolis, RJ, Brazil.
Okros, A. 2020. Generational theory and cohort analysis. p. 33-51. In: Okros, A. Harnessing the potential of digital post-Millennials in the future workplace. Springer, Cham.
Palfrey, J.; Gasser, U. 2013. Born digital: Understanding the first generation of digital natives. Basic Books, Philadelphia, PA.
Papandrea, P. J.; Hess, M. H. S. A. 2025. Financial Investments: A Comparative Study Between Fixed Income and Variable Income. Gestão em Análise Journal 14(2): 187-209.
Pokharel, J.; Maharjan, I. 2024. Financial Behavior of Generation Z and Millennials. Journal of Emerging Management Studies 1(2): 148-170.
Regt, A.; Cheng, Z.; Fawaz, R. 2023. Young People Under ‘Finfluencer’: The Rise of Financial Influencers on Instagram: An Abstract. In: Jochims, B.; Allen, J. Optimistic Marketing in Challenging Times: Serving Ever-Shifting Customer Needs. Springer, Cham.
Sanatana, F. M.; Petri, S. M. 2025. Investor Profiles: How Culture and Financial Education Shape Investment Preferences in Brazil and Developed Countries. Revista Aracê 7(7): 35176-35198.
Vergara, S. C. 2009. Research Projects and Reports in Administration. 11th ed. Atlas Publishing House, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Walzhofer, N.; Riekeberg, M.; Follert, F. 2022. From White Collar to Influencer Marketing? How Banks Can Reach Young Customers. International Journal of Financial Studies 10(3): 1-26.
Ye, G.; Hudders, L.; Jans, S.; De Veirman, M. 2021. The Value of Influencer Marketing for Business: A Bibliometric Analysis and Managerial Implications. Journal of Advertising 50: 160-78.
Yuan, S.; Lou, C. 2020. How Social Media Influencers Foster Relationships with Followers: The Roles of Source Credibility and Fairness in Parasocial Relationship and Product Interest. Journal of Interactive Advertising 20(2): 133-147.
Zhu, T.; Xiao, J. J. 2022. Consumer financial education and risky financial asset holding in China. International Journal of Consumer Studies 46(1): 56-74.}

---

Executive summary from the Final Coursework of the Specialization in Finance and Controllership of the MBA USP/Esalq

_{Learn more about the course; click here:}