Yeahbut those are the folks least capable of selecting someone suitable. Hopefully such an individual is fortunate enough to get recomended to a suitable FA. I believe strongly that by the time you learn enough to select a suitable FA, you also know enough to DIY. Some may still choose to work with an FA but understanding the details is still important.
I agree completely. I learned a lot from the mistakes (I allowed) my FAs to "commit" in my name. Now that I know what to look for in a FA, I don't need one. Ironic, isn't it?
The only problem being that we have a half-century or more of data showing that stock picking doesn't work. At least with mutual funds the client has a chance at having a diversified portfolio.
I know this thread is from a couple of years back, but I stumbled on it while searching for something else and it really resonated with me. It is incredibly frustrating when you feel like you have to beg just to get an update on your own money.
I had a similar situation with a boutique firm more than a decade ago and pre-retirement. That service used Schwab and when I’d ask about performance reporting, I would be told to go to the Schwab site and figure out how to get the reporting I wanted. I ended up with Vanguard’s Personal Advisor Service for the same fee and have been quite happy with the service. Quarterly reviews are proactively scheduled by my Advisor and I can schedule anything ad-hoc that I need.
Generally speaking, transferring to a new broker doesn’t trigger a taxable event. But it’s still kinda painful.
I know when I used an FA, I always made a meeting appointment for the next quarter before leaving the current meeting. It worked for me.
It's hard to find numbers on the transfer to a different broker. It depends on the funds you are sold. If they are institutional or similar, there can be a very nice tax day for the gov't.
Thus the caveat of “generally speaking”. None of my multiple transfers between brokers have created a taxable event.
Well, generally speaking is your case, but I differ with that.
IDK what's typical but MIL's FA charged 1% of AUM and never called.
I thought that most of the advisors charging 1%+ had gone by the wayside since asset management and trading became so automated. I remember when 2% was considered the norm, but now there are so many in the .3% category, I’m surprised than anyone can command a 1% fee.
There should not be any transaction fees on those stocks and probably not on those mutual funds if they are decent no-load funds that most of us use.
I think that's the equivalent of their MSRP, and they give "discounts" for higher NW or other things to make it seem like a better deal. All I know is that I'm happy I found my fee-only advisor around the time we retired, there has been a lot more uncertainty shifting from accumulation to spend-down, and while I was good at the accumulation part, he is helping me optimize the drawdown phase and do better with the planning for that part, particularly tax planning and Roth conversions.
I just said I'm happy with my choice.
I did the same thing with an inherited brokerage account, and while I tell people who just inherited one to sell it and redistribute the money to match their preferred asset allocation, I am still in some of those positions 10 years later....although that account is going to be the first to be liquidated as we draw down! We did fund a few years of charitable giving via our DAF from AMAT stock that was 95% gains, and there are a few bonds in there with 6-7% rates that I couldn't give up (although one did go under, so maybe I should have?). I also figured it's about 6% of our NW, so even if it turns out to be a horrible idea, I'm OK with that.
