Fisher Investments

Status
Not open for further replies.
One thing Ken Fisher agrees on with many on this board and is that he "hates annuities." Seriously.

A few months ago he was on CNBC and Joe K. gave him a poke in the ribs because it was announced that Fisher reached $100B in AUM. Joe says, "Wow, let's see, 1% of $100B is..." and Ken Fisher changed the subject.
 
target2019 said:
Here is a thread where someone asks questions about moving from F-E-J to Fisher.
https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=263127

The invested assets always become more complicated with an AUM plan. The investor can't see the forest for the trees.
Click to expand...

Great thread from BH's really frames the decision well for those thinking that someone else will do better than the market. It is very unlikely they will beat the market, and the cost to try will be gone from your stash.
 
JoeWras said:
One thing Ken Fisher agrees on with many on this board and is that he "hates annuities." Seriously.

A few months ago he was on CNBC and Joe K. gave him a poke in the ribs because it was announced that Fisher reached $100B in AUM. Joe says, "Wow, let's see, 1% of $100B is..." and Ken Fisher changed the subject.
Click to expand...

Those kind of Assets under management do not show great skills in investing, but are more likely the result of great marketing to the unsuspecting public.
 
I was a client for about two years and was dissatisfied. They do purchase a bundle of stocks for you that you individually own and are based on the particular index that you decide you want to track. Their big push to land my account was how much better they did in down markets than other firms. But, I got slaughtered by riding with them in a down market where they continued to want me to double down. In fact, I felt that all they wanted to do was get their hands on all of my assets instead of what I had placed with them. They wanted me in 100% equities. They kept betting on an up market when it was in a downward mode so it wasn’t a good experience for me.
 
FREE866 said:
Fisher Investments is a good place for people who don't like to invest on their own. They charge .75-1.25% which is actually pretty standard in the industry. I found the 2 books I read by him are excellent. Particularly the one about debunking common investment assumptions.
Click to expand...

I think I'd rather have Vanguard manage mine for .3%
They have great funds that charge super low fees.
 
braumeister said:
Had you ever talked with them about your preferred asset allocation?

That sounds dreadful!
Click to expand...

As a recall, I said that I was looking for a maximum return over a period of more than 10 years (which put me in their 100% equities slot). I fired them in October 2009 after riding down from the October 2007 peak so it was a horrible slice of time to be in stocks. But, again, their big selling point was how Ken Fisher called other "downs" and protected their investors. What particularly irked me was that they prodded for information on my other assets and then worked on me to put more assets under management. It would have been doubly awful had I followed their call for additional equities investment.
 
Bottom line - just not for the majority of folks on this site.
 
RoyDornoch said:
What particularly irked me was that they prodded for information on my other assets and then worked on me to put more assets under management.
Click to expand...

I hear you. Once, quite a few years ago, I was looking for a fee-only FA and finding nothing but % of AUM advisers. There was one I especially recall who pushed very hard and his approach was that he didn't care how much you let him manage -- he insisted on a percent of your total net worth. What frosted me at the time was that I found this guy through NAPFA, which is where many people are advised to look for a fee-only adviser.

Needless to say, I avoided them all.
 
RoyDornoch said:
As a recall, I said that I was looking for a maximum return over a period of more than 10 years (which put me in their 100% equities slot). I fired them in October 2009 after riding down from the October 2007 peak so it was a horrible slice of time to be in stocks. But, again, their big selling point was how Ken Fisher called other "downs" and protected their investors. What particularly irked me was that they prodded for information on my other assets and then worked on me to put more assets under management. It would have been doubly awful had I followed their call for additional equities investment.
Click to expand...

So you told them in 2007 you want maximum return, they put you in 100% stock , then you fired them after 2 years?
 
FREE866 said:
So you told them in 2007 you want maximum return, they put you in 100% stock , then you fired them after 2 years?
Click to expand...

Yes, because the primary reason that I chose Fisher was the ability to make the right call in a down market (which they didn't do during my two years). In my mind, I was paying them to keep me from losing a bunch and I was down more than $1MM when I fired them. However, I continued to own some of my previously-managed stocks so didn't get entirely out of the market. I was convinced that it wasn't worth a 1.25% fee for Fisher to sit idle, request more funds to manage, while value continued to drop. Fisher's asking for more assets despite my sizeable losses caused me to lose confidence (not that I was ever confident that they could beat the S&P 500 by 1.25% over the long run).
 
Wonder if the reason they market so aggressively is a higher level of client churn (turnover) than other financial management firms. Get 'em in, charge high fees, keep them on the books on as long as possible but always have a potential new client waiting in the wings (through marketing) when a current client bails.

Maybe Ken Fisher has figured out that is actually a more profitable business model than keeping long term clients. Good for them, not good for the investor.
 
Once they have your name and address, you will get endless emails and paper mail.
 
RoyDornoch said:
Yes, because the primary reason that I chose Fisher was the ability to make the right call in a down market (which they didn't do during my two years). In my mind, I was paying them to keep me from losing a bunch and I was down more than $1MM when I fired them. However, I continued to own some of my previously-managed stocks so didn't get entirely out of the market. I was convinced that it wasn't worth a 1.25% fee for Fisher to sit idle, request more funds to manage, while value continued to drop. Fisher's asking for more assets despite my sizeable losses caused me to lose confidence (not that I was ever confident that they could beat the S&P 500 by 1.25% over the long run).
Click to expand...

Gotcha....he did call 2000, that I remember

but yeah, the 1.25% is tough to justify. I do, however, like his commentary and as I mentioned in prior post his Debunkery book was the best investment book I've ever read
 
JoeWras said:
One thing Ken Fisher agrees on with many on this board and is that he "hates annuities." Seriously.

A few months ago he was on CNBC and Joe K. gave him a poke in the ribs because it was announced that Fisher reached $100B in AUM. Joe says, "Wow, let's see, 1% of $100B is..." and Ken Fisher changed the subject.
Click to expand...



Hah! Love it...
 
braumeister said:
.... What frosted me at the time was that I found this guy through NAPFA, which is where many people are advised to look for a fee-only adviser.

Needless to say, I avoided them all.
Click to expand...
That's exactly the progression I went through, with several I contacted through NAPFA. Avoided them all.
 
Alas, he's most likely in the group that thinks any publicity is good publicity.
 
If I was going to invest with Fisher, this latest news would not impact my decision.
 
Senator said:
Does it impact his investment performance? Is there any criminal behavior that was discovered?

He made a comparison. No big deal.
Click to expand...

Wow. Graphic evidence that one should never be truly surprised at the diversity of values on display in this forum (or society for that matter).
 
timemoveson said:
Wow. Graphic evidence that one should never be truly surprised at the diversity of values on display in this forum (or society for that matter).
Click to expand...

Maybe he should be thrown in jail? Or put out of business? Or fined $1B?

He said something that is said very often at the non-Billionaire level. Put a microphone in any high-school gym locker, blue collar jobsite or street corner where people just "hang out". You will hear worse.

If I would disassociate people that use that language, or worse, I would never have any tenants.

For years women wanted to be included in the "water cooler" and Locker room conversations. Once they were, they wanted to eliminate it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

L
Nationwide Peak® 10 fixed indexed annuity
Replies
14
Views
1K
mathjak107
M
S
Popular Investment Strategies
2 3
Replies
51
Views
5K
ESRwannabe
ESRwannabe
K
Public brokerage?
Replies
9
Views
943
Kings over Queens
K
T
Selling stocks to buy house
Replies
19
Views
537
Sunset
Sunset
Romer
Looking for an education in looking at a specific stock
Replies
24
Views
2K
DrRoy
DrRoy

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom