First, there is no "AI" involved in robo-advising. They all use a relatively simple algorithm that assigns predefined weights to customer responses in a simplified questionnaire to determine the target asset allocation. Then they pick plain ETFs to implement each asset class in the portfolio.

Second, many of these robo-advisers will die soon. The reason is that newcomers give out their services for free to gain market share from the more established ones. It is a race to the bottom in fees. Basic asset allocation is already free, and soon periodic rebalancing of the portfolio and the tax-loss harvesting will be free as well (BTW, read Michael Kitces' post on the dubious value of the latter).

Third, for an investor with the same risk profile and goals, each of these robo-adivsers produces a different target portfolio. So much for being a "TurboTax for investments," as some of them tout (TurboTax and similar software produces the same tax return given the same set of inputs). Some of them even recommend half of equity assets in foreign stocks on the premise of world market allocation (good luck with unmanaged currency risks!).

As investors become better and better educated, there is no reason for them to tolerate any fees, whether from robo- or regular advisors. There is simply no reason to let anyone insert themselves between an investor and his/her ETFs, even with a few bps.