Paying Hidden Costs Because your Broker’s not a Fiduciary?

Investors often choose big banks and investment firms over smaller financial advisors because they think the brand name and size makes the service and product offerings better. In actuality, it’s often the reverse.

Unless your firm is a Fiduciary, chances are there are sales quotas and contests for the non fiduciary, “suitability” reps, who are often paid extra to put clients in proprietary funds that are not in the clients’ best interests, but that reap commissions for the brokerage house.

Last Friday the SEC issued a statement announcing that three investment advisers “have settled charges for breaching fiduciary duties to clients and generating millions of dollars of improper fees in the process.” The release goes on to say that “PNC Investments LLC, Securities America Advisors Inc., and Geneos Wealth Management Inc. failed to disclose conflicts of interest and violated their duty to seek best execution by investing advisory clients in higher-cost mutual fund shares when lower-cost shares of the same funds were available.”

And according to an article in Investment News last week, it turns out smaller credit card and savings customers may not have been the only ones who were misled in the Wells Fargo “fake account” scandal. The article states that “according to inside sources, some clients of the bank’s wealth-management division were steered into investments that maximized revenue for the bank and compensation for its employees.”

When will this stop and why would any one continue to do business with one of these non Fiduciary firms?

The big problem is lack of transparency. Most investors don’t understand how the business works and how broker-dealers make their money. That means the investors are, in effect, investing blindfolded. And while there are many good, principled people at the larger firms, because they are not bound by the Fiduciary Standard, there is lots of potential for recommending something that is “almost as good” as the best product for you.

The result is that, according to a survey just released by the CFA Institute, a majority of investors believe that their advisors fail to fully disclose conflicts of interest and the fees they charge. Only 35% of individual investors polled believe that their advisor always puts their clients’ interests ahead of their own and only 25% of the institutional investors who participated in the survey.

April is National Financial Literacy month and one of the most important Financial Lessons investors – and potential investors – can learn this month is what “Fiduciary” means and why it’s so critical to your financial health.

When you’re working with a fee-only Fiduciary, they have sworn to only recommend financial products that are the best for their clients. Most broker-dealers in large wire houses have only agreed to uphold the “suitability” standard, which means they are allowed to recommend investments that are “suitable” – not best – for you but potentially yield a markup for their company or bonus or commission for them.

If you’re unclear about what fees you are paying, share classes you own, or how much your funds are costing you in annual expenses, contact us for a free analysis of your currents investments and the costs associated with them.

Particularly during Financial Literacy Month, make sure your Financial Advisor is working for you.

 

The Imperfect Fiduciary Rule just got Worse

Last Thursday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit struck down the Department of Labor’s Fiduciary Rule, stating that it was “unreasonable’ that brokers handling investors’ retirement savings should be required to only act in clients’ best interest.

Unreasonable for advisors to only act in their clients’ best interests? Let that sink in for a moment…

In a nutshell: it’s still considered acceptable in the financial industry for advisors to give clients advice that is less than the best for the clients when it yields a higher commission for the broker.

In case you were wondering, the plaintiffs challenging the DOL’s Fiduciary Rule were the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the Financial Services Institute, Financial Services Roundtable, and Insured Retirement Institute. None of whom, clearly, are friends to the individual investor.

Because different Courts’ decisions have not been consistent about this Obama Administration effort to protect individual advisors, there is speculation the question will climb at some point to the Supreme Court, so this isn’t over. And while the Fiduciary Rule was not perfect, this is clearly worse.

Meanwhile, what can you as an individual investor do to make sure your interests are not being sacrificed for the benefit of your advisor? Very simple: make sure your advisor is ALREADY a Fiduciary. And if they’re not, switch. Why leave your money in a big brokerage house where conflicts of interest and commissions potentially eat into your gains and your future? Or where – instead of being given the full picture – you’re being steered toward a product that isn’t the best possible choice for you because of brokers’ sales goals or “contests”?

Individual investors have the power to tell the industry that this is unacceptable by voting with their feet (or computers.) Choose an advisor who has sworn to uphold the Fiduciary Standard and ONLY recommend choices that are in your best interest.

Just because the 5th Circuit is willing to settle for less doesn’t mean you should.

 

***

If you’re concerned you’re not getting the fullest picture about what’s right for you and the best, un-conflicted advice, give us a call for a free portfolio review or learn more about our fee-only, Fiduciary approach.

A True Measure of Uncompromised Advice

Do you remember the scene from the movie Matilda when Harry (Danny DeVito) shows his son his dodgy-car salesmanship?

While highly over exaggerated in the film for the sake of comedy, it is true that whenever you buy something from a salesman, you should ask… what’s in it for them?  It’s safe to say that a healthy amount of skepticism should probably be given to anyone trying to sell you a product.  Shouldn’t that advice translate over to the world of investment products as well?

Especially following the financial crisis, the financial services industry is considered among the lowest trusted businesses.  It makes sense.  Individuals tend have a hard-time trusting people who look at making a quick buck for a living.  While that isn’t necessarily the case, it is true that there is a conflict of interest that often exists for many advisors (at wirehouses, independent broker/dealers, and insurance backed firms) who have an obligation to provide a standard of care for their client, but also have a sense of duty to their firms.  Their compensation structure (having sales targets and commission based compensation packages) fundamentally misaligns the interests of both parties. That strikes us as a conflict that is unmanageable and ultimately, comes at the cost of the client.

In the fallout of the financial crisis, regulators have tried to step in over the last decade to ensure that the world of retirement advice acts without conflicts of interest, specifically by holding all financial advisors to a status of “fiduciary.”  It means that these advisors who have potential conflicts of interest will have to increase their disclosures and explain what they do for clients as it relates to advice on retirement assets.  These advisors are upset!  While they might not admit it, they are concerned that this new rule will affect their income.  The increased pressure these advisors are putting on the administration has resulted in the Labor Department seeking an 18-month delay in its implementation.  While the rule is designed to protect the retirement savings of clients, the pushback could ultimately cause the rule to never get implemented.

So again, where do you as a client fall in this equation?  Just how valuable is your “trusted” relationship?

That is where we come in.  At Sherman Wealth Management, we have always been a fee-only fiduciary.  That means while competitors are off arguing about fees, disclosures and conflicts of interest, we already subscribe to the status of “fiduciary” and will remain unaffected by the changes.  We provide uncompromised advice and our compensation is not based on commissions or any salesmanship of a product.  The only thing we are “selling” is our best customized advice for your unique financial situation.  We believe that working with an advisor who is already committed to functioning in your best interest will give you peace of mind about your retirement savings.

Feel free to reach out to us anytime with questions or comments.  Unlike Matilda’s Mrs. Trunchbull, you won’t have to hunt us down.

 

***

The views expressed in this blog post are as of the date of the posting, and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This blog contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.
Please note that nothing in this blog post should be construed as an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase an interest in any security or separate account. Nothing is intended to be, and you should not consider anything to be, investment, accounting, tax or legal advice. If you would like investment, accounting, tax or legal advice, you should consult with your own financial advisors, accountants, or attorneys regarding your individual circumstances and needs. No advice may be rendered by Sherman Wealth unless a client service agreement is in place.

Are You Getting Your Money’s Worth in Financial Advice?

Measuring value

Recent news about a new fiduciary rule has left many folks more confused than ever about fee structures, and concerned about whether they’re getting the best value from their financial advisor’s fees or their brokerage firm’s fee structure. According to a recent podcast from the Wall Street Journal, it’s not only how much you pay – but also what you are paying for – that’s a source of communication breakdown between those clients and their advisors.

While the Department of Labor is pushing to get advisors and brokers to make it easier for clients to understand their fee structures, so far it doesn’t look like many of the bigger firms are taking them up on it.

Since any firm or advisor can claim to be client-driven, transparent, and “fee-based,” how can you be completely sure about what you’re getting and how much you’re paying? If your advisor is fee-based, rather than strictly fee-only, they may be earning commissions when they recommend certain investment products. Obviously, that creates a potential conflict of interest: those advisors have incentives to trade more frequently, and to recommend specific products in order to generate higher commissions for themselves and their firm, whether or not they’re best for you.

One way to avoid uncertainty – and the potential headaches it brings – is to work with a fee-only registered investment advisory firm (RIA). Fee-only RIAs and advisors do not earn commissions so they are not motivated by the frequency of trades, so they are less likely to encourage buying and selling unless it’s the best choice for you. Because RIAs are held to a fiduciary standard, they are legally bound to always – and only – act in your best interest.

Do your advisor’s feed include additional services?

Even if you are working with a fee-only RIA, however, you may be still not getting your full money’s worth. Many clients neglect to take advantage of untapped services that are included in their advisor’s fees, such as tax and estate planning, insurance advice, and financial coaching, among other services. If you’re not sure what additional services your advisor – or the advisors you are considering – provide, ask them. It’s the best way to ensure that there’s an open path of communication and that you are getting the most value out of your wealth management experience.

Only you can decide what kind of fee structure is best for you, what you feel is the appropriate amount to spend on investment management and financial planning, and what additional services are important to you to help you grow your wealth.

If you’re concerned you’re not getting your money’s worth, though, or that you’re paying too much, here are some good questions to ask yourself: How adequately served do you think you are? Are you confused with what services you are getting and what you are paying for? Do you feel valued? Are your goals being met and are you being listened to?

If you’re not satisfied with the answers to any of these questions, remember that you have options. Sherman Wealth Management is proud to be a fee-only independent RIA firm, because we feel it is the best way to meet our ethical standards and guarantee that all potential clients have a simple and cost-effective way to access investment management and financial planning.

Knowing what those options are, and getting clarity in your fee structures – whatever kind of advisor you ultimately choose – will allow you to feel more confident about the decisions you make, now and for your future.

This article was originally published on Investopedia.com

***

The views expressed in this blog post are as of the date of the posting, and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This blog contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.
Please note that nothing in this blog post should be construed as an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase an interest in any security or separate account. Nothing is intended to be, and you should not consider anything to be, investment, accounting, tax or legal advice. If you would like investment, accounting, tax or legal advice, you should consult with your own financial advisors, accountants, or attorneys regarding your individual circumstances and needs. No advice may be rendered by Sherman Wealth unless a client service agreement is in place.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Know the Difference between Fee-only vs. Fee-based Financial Advice?

Fee-Only Financial Planning

Confused about the difference between Fee-Only Financial Planning and Fee-Based planning? You’re not alone. Financial planning jargon can be daunting when you’re just getting started.

Understanding the difference between Fee-Only and Fee-Based, however, is important and could be the key to your long-term planning success.

What is Fee-Only Financial Planning?

Fee-Only financial planners are legally registered as investment advisors and have a fiduciary responsibility to you to create a plan in your best interest. Fee-only advisors cannot accept any compensation as a result of product sales. In other words, they can’t make a commission from specific investments they recommend you purchase. They are paid directly by you – and only by you – either through an hourly fee, a retainer fee, or an agreed-upon percentage of your assets that they manage.

As a result, in most cases, Fee-Only advisors have fewer conflicts of interest. They are more focused on your needs, rather than on selling you specific investments, since their compensation is not determined by sales volume or choice. A Fee-Only advisor will not try to steer you toward commissioned annuities; a Fee-Only planner’s advice must be completely free of attachment to financial products. The role of Fee-Only advisors is to only provide you advice that fits your current financial situation and your goals and therefore not recommend products and services that don’t support that goal and that are not the best choices for you.

What is Fee-Based Planning?

“Fee-Based” is a category the brokerage community has created to take advantage of the success – and attractiveness – of Fee-Only advising. Because the terms sound so similar, it’s easy to think they are similar, but there is a major difference between Fee-Based planning and Fee-Only planning.

In Fee-Based planning, the advisor is compensated with a set percentage of your assets instead of a retainer or a flat hourly fee. In addition to that percentage, Fee-based advisors can also accept commissions from financial products, annuities, and insurance products they sell you. Each time you purchase one of those products, their earnings increase.

This leads to a fundamental conflict of interest. Your advisor wants to earn as much as possible while you want someone to provide honest and trustworthy guidance.

If one fund offers advisors a significant commission and another one doesn’t but is better for you and your financial goals, how likely is it that the advisor will forego the opportunity to earn the commission by recommending the better fund?

That is why the legally-binding Fiduciary Rule that Fee-Only Advisors follow is so important: the definition of a fiduciary relationship is one based on trust.

How to Make Sure Your Advisor is Fee-Only

Before selecting an advisor, ask how and what their compensation plan looks like. Ask them to disclose what their compensation fees are in writing and whether or not they accept commissions. By choosing an advisor who provides Fee-Only services, you stand a greater chance of avoiding any conflicts of interests. Remember, Fee-Based advisors are obligated by their brokers or by specific deals to sell certain products. Fee-Only advisors are under no such requirements and have a legal, fiduciary, obligation to work for you, and you only.

This article was originally published on Investopedia.com

***

The views expressed in this blog post are as of the date of the posting, and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This blog contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.
Please note that nothing in this blog post should be construed as an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase an interest in any security or separate account. Nothing is intended to be, and you should not consider anything to be, investment, accounting, tax or legal advice. If you would like investment, accounting, tax or legal advice, you should consult with your own financial advisors, accountants, or attorneys regarding your individual circumstances and needs. No advice may be rendered by Sherman Wealth unless a client service agreement is in place.
If you have any questions regarding this Blog Post, please Contact Us.

 

 

 

 

Is Your Retirement Advisor a Fiduciary?

Is your Retirement Advisor a Fiduciary?

Do you want a financial professional who is opposed to financial transparency managing your money?

The upcoming and long anticipated proposed rules by the Department of Labor (“DOL”) exposes that very debate, as it seeks to eliminate the ability of financial advisors to profit by selling retirement account products to investors without being held to a “fiduciary standard.”

For those wondering what that means, with a fiduciary standard an advisor must always act in your (their client’s) best interests. A fiduciary standard ensures that the advisor’s duty is to the client only, not the corporation they represent. To the surprise of many, that currently is not always the case. Financial advisors have had the ability to profit (through commissions and high fees) to the potential detriment of their clients. That is exactly what many large financial institutions and insurance companies have done. In fact, the federal government estimates that there are roughly $17 billion dollars of fees generated each year from conflicted advice.

The DOL has made clear –and we agree– that a commission based investment model creates a conflict of interest. Companies with a commission based model operate with an inherent conflict: the pressure to sell products that are more profitable for them and/or their firm can be important factors in how they direct you to invest. For example, an advisor may receive a 5% commission by selling you a fund through their company when you could get a similar product elsewhere without commission. Think of it this way: would you want to work with an accountant who also gets commissions from the IRS? Of course not. You want your accountant to represent your best interests. Would you go to a doctor who makes money each time he prescribes penicillin? No, you want your doctor to prescribe what is right for you. That is the primary reason we stay completely independent and operate as conflict-free, fee-only advisors.

The proposed DOL rule will hopefully begin to fix this issue as it is expected to require a strict fiduciary standard for financial advisors in the context of sales for retirement account products.  This standard will require advisors to certify that they are acting independently and in their client’s best interest, and are not motivated by the prospect of a commission. This has created a firestorm among big insurance companies, broker dealers and other institutional investors who, as we pointed out, don’t typically operate as fiduciaries.

In a letter sent last week to the SEC, Senator Elizabeth Warren, a strong proponent of the proposed DOL rule, pointed out that presidents of Transamerica, Lincoln National, Jackson National and Prudential all have called this proposal “unworkable.”  She commented on the self interest in their position, and the danger in permitting unwitting investors to be guided by non-fiduciaries in the context of their retirement investments.

Why would a rule that requires a financial advisor to act in their client’s best interest create such an uproar? One reason is that unlike Sherman Wealth Management, they are in a commission driven model, and therefore fear that the way they currently serve clients would not meet the standards of this new rule. We hope that because of the conflict a commission driven model creates, that eventually enough pressure from policy-makers like Senator Warren and Labor Secretary Perez will propel this proposed new rule beyond just retirement accounts. In the meantime, think to yourself why anyone would oppose this rule if not for purely selfish reasons?

***

The views expressed in this blog post are as of the date of the posting, and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This blog contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.
Please note that nothing in this blog post should be construed as an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to purchase an interest in any security or separate account. Nothing is intended to be, and you should not consider anything to be, investment, accounting, tax or legal advice. If you would like investment, accounting, tax or legal advice, you should consult with your own financial advisors, accountants, or attorneys regarding your individual circumstances and needs. No advice may be rendered by Sherman Wealth unless a client service agreement is in place.
If you have any questions regarding this Blog Post, please Contact Us.

The Most Important Question You’ll Ever Ask Your Financial Advisor

-1

Does your financial advisor follow the Fiduciary Standard or the Suitability Standard?

If you don’t know the answer without peeking – or calling your Lifeline – you’re not alone. A surprising number of people don’t know what these very important terms mean and whether their advisor is acting in their best interest.

Aren’t all financial advisors required to act in their client’s best interest?

Surprisingly, not all financial advisors are.

Broker-dealers, insurance salesman, and bank and financial company representatives, for instance, are only required to follow a Suitability Standard. That means they must provide recommendations that are “suitable” for a client – based on age for instance, or aversion to risk – but that may or may not be in that client’s best interest.

Having a waiter recommend an expensive chocolate cake that is “suitable” for adults and for someone who is willing to risk trying chocolate with sea salt may not be that critical, in spite of the fact that having fresh strawberries may clearly be in your best interest. But having a financial advisor who is making recommendations primarily based on your age and risk tolerance – and who could be putting their own, or their company’s, financial interests ahead of your interests — could be disastrous for your financial future.

Instead, the Fiduciary Standard, which is the standard for registered investment advisors under state and federal regulations, requires that financial advisor act solely in a client’s best interest when offering financial advice.

Registered Investment Advisors – like Sherman Wealth Management – must follow – and are held to – the Fiduciary Standard. That means that a RIA must put their client’s needs ahead of their own, provide fully-disclosed, conflict-free advice, be fully transparent about fees, and continue to monitor a client’s investments, as well as their changing financial situation.

Here’s a potential scenario that illustrates the differences

Let’s say your broker-dealer has three possible funds to recommend to you. The first is a “suitable” index fund, offered by her own company, which pays her a 6% commission on the sale and charges a 2% annual fee. The second is a similarly suitable index fund that would pay her a 3% commission on the sale and has a 1% annual fee. The third is an index fund that has no sales commission and an annual fee of .5%. Under the Suitability Standard, she can recommend the higher priced fund and still satisfy the standard. Under the Fiduciary Standard, she would be required to recommend the third fund.

This is not to suggest that broker-dealers or others operating under the Suitability Standard don’t look out for their clients.  While many reps who follow the Suitability Standard give their clients excellent advice, they operate with an inherent conflict: the pressure to sell products that are more profitable for them and/or their firm can be important factors in how they direct you to invest.

So go ahead and let the waiter talk you into that chocolate cake (even though you know you’ll feel better tomorrow if you have the strawberries.) But when it comes to your money, think carefully about whose advice you are taking.

 

***

http://www.finra.org/investors/suitability-what-investors-need-know

http://financialplanningcoalition.com/issues/fiduciary-standard-of-care/