Seems like they’re all turning into financial advisors. So that leads me to ask, do you have an advisor, or do you manage your own money?
Manage my own. Technology makes it very efficient to do so
don’t be so mesmerized by the “financial advisor” title. Most of them are likely glorified insurance salesmen who will fail in a couple years
I manage my own
i recognize these guys are far from the cfa type. for those i know, it’s alarming they are in a position to manage the wealth of main street. as a 23 year old building wealth, i’m curious to know the proportion of charterholders who skip this medium altogether
I manage my own. Calling these boys advisors is just complete BS. But “Financial Product Hustler” doesn’t quite ring well for clients I guess. Some of the advice I’ve seen put to friends and family over the years is quite frankly shocking.
Manage my own. Unless you are an 85 year old widow who can’t use a computer, there is no need to use a financial advisor.
standards are pretty low to get into the business.
Managing money isn’t easy for everyone. We’ve all done a lot of academic work which helps us understand what’s going on in the markets and how to plan,but the majority of the population doesn’t know anything about finances. Financial advisors have a real role to play in helping these people, unfortunately, 95% of them are not qualified, 3% of them should not be let near people’s finances, and maybe 2% are worthy of the trust put into them. From personal experience, explaining how money works to the average joe is pretty frustrating work when it’s second nature to you.
For the investment part of things, it’s fine to do it on your own if you are someone who has done the CFA exams and understands what’s going on. But remember that there are other things to consider: insurance, trusts, charitable giving as a method of wealth preservation, tax planning, etc… There is some value in a good financial advisor for considering non-investment issues that still impact your financial well-being and how to plan for them.
The challenge is that people who are just trying to push products are given the title of “financial advisor”, so it’s hard to know who’s any good or not. The mistake that guys like us make is to assume that because we have at least as good or a better grasp of the investment issues, those guys have no value to offer, but financial planning involves more than just markets and investments.
^Amen, Brother BChad. I know what a “sleazy financial advisor” is, because that’s how I got into the business. And most of the “financial advisors” of the world don’t know much about finance, and they don’t give much advice.
If I want tax planning, I’d go to a CPA, not an advisor. Similarly with trusts I’d see a trust lawyer. Most of us have the background to understand the best application of these tools if we took the time to. We just need help around the edges, like on specific law or tax issues. If someone wants to outsource this to a salesman, do so at your own risk. I’d only ever seek advice from someone that has a fiduciary duty in providing it. Advice from an “financial advisor” isn’t worth a penny.
I have 2 advisors (though they work with me free). Checks and balances kids.
^ No one works for free.
If you’re wealthy enough, you would work with a team of people that all specialize in these different areas. No one here needs an FA to manage their $50k IRA. But there are major advantages to working with a single office for all your needs. You just need to have about $500k in investable assets before anyone will consider you for a client.
^ Nope, it’s a “I help you you help me relationship.” They give their advice and I kick them referrals. It’s easy to refer folks when I trust them both completely. I still have custody of all my assets, but they offer financial advice as i need it.
I’m not currently in the business of selling investment advice, so I’m not really up to speed on such thing. However, I know a lot of people who tout the “fiduciary” thing, and a lot of people say “you need to find someone who has the fiduciary standard, instead of the old ‘suitability’ standard.”
In reality, I bet “fiduciary” is actually a pretty low bar, and there’s probably not much difference between “suitability” and “fiduciary”.
Unsure about this. I realize these family office shops exist, however, I’d fear groupthink and them being jack of all trades, master of none. I’m a big believer in checks and balances and feel there is danger in uniformity.
I can manage those relationships myself without paying their fees. I also then have the luxury of chosing my own experts. In fact the more money I have, the higher the fee is, and the more sense it makes for me to run my own affairs.
^^What’s wrong with “jack of all trades, master of none”? I mean, a static asset allocation, an IRA, and an irrevecoable living trust is the same thing, whether one person does all the work or you spread it out across three different people? And none of these things are particularly complicated, either. It’s not like you have to be a “master” to understand any of them.
@CvM - A family office is an extreme example. As much as you rag on them, you could find a HNW team at Northwestern Mutual that could provide all those services. The idea is each person is a field expert, so there is none of the whole “jack of all trades…” thing going on.
@geo - you actually pay way less in fees if you keep everything under one roof. And, the more money you have the lower the bps you’d pay out. The absolute dollar amount would be higher of course, but the fee charged would be lower. There are economies of scale when it comes to deciding who handles your wealth. As far as picking your own experts, there are enough of them out there I’m sure you could find a team that fit your needs if you shopped around.