Nature Lover
Recycles dryer sheets
Seems to be a good deal of piling on here related to the math associated with an AUM approach to financial help. Not arguing the point that with some assumptions, one can do without an RIA or FA (even if a CFP). On the other hand, it does require some assumptions - the most important one being that you don't need the assistance. (And yes, I understand the argument of some who say no one needs the assistance.....but on that I disagree: I think some can benefit from it).
I know plenty of people who are not like most of us, and who benefit greatly, or could benefit greatly from having an advisor. The real question is "does the Advisor add value commensurate with the cost"? For many here, the answer is obviously no (or H##L no). For others, it might be yes...or yes, for a time...or yes, for a partner...or yes, until a partner is gone... or yes, for certain services... (you get the idea ).
Before we can say if it's a good deal (or even a good deal for the moment), we need to understand both the cost and value offered. If hiring someone to "beat the markets", then look to the math. If wanting guidance in other areas, added discipline, less stress about the markets, less or at least appropriate portfolio risk, just a 2nd opinion on critical aspects of financial affairs (insurance, retirement, cash flow analysis and planning, tax planning, etc...). Value can be added in many ways. Many FA's emphasize/sell market beating returns, and I think most of us agree that long-term that's likely not going to happen, simply from the fees drag. But many FA's offer more than investment advice, and/or more in their investment advice. And each of us have different needs.
For that reason, I wanted to simply add this to the comments; as the OP started this saying he'd probably get flogged a bit for bringing up the topic... and the comments, although meaningfully educational, have gotten a bit less even handed of late.
I know plenty of people who are not like most of us, and who benefit greatly, or could benefit greatly from having an advisor. The real question is "does the Advisor add value commensurate with the cost"? For many here, the answer is obviously no (or H##L no). For others, it might be yes...or yes, for a time...or yes, for a partner...or yes, until a partner is gone... or yes, for certain services... (you get the idea ).
Before we can say if it's a good deal (or even a good deal for the moment), we need to understand both the cost and value offered. If hiring someone to "beat the markets", then look to the math. If wanting guidance in other areas, added discipline, less stress about the markets, less or at least appropriate portfolio risk, just a 2nd opinion on critical aspects of financial affairs (insurance, retirement, cash flow analysis and planning, tax planning, etc...). Value can be added in many ways. Many FA's emphasize/sell market beating returns, and I think most of us agree that long-term that's likely not going to happen, simply from the fees drag. But many FA's offer more than investment advice, and/or more in their investment advice. And each of us have different needs.
For that reason, I wanted to simply add this to the comments; as the OP started this saying he'd probably get flogged a bit for bringing up the topic... and the comments, although meaningfully educational, have gotten a bit less even handed of late.