The ‘best’ way to pay for advice

The ‘best’ way to pay for advice
An adviser who’s honest and transparent about compensation, regardless of the model, is bound to engender the trust that advice seekers want most of all.
OCT 10, 2022

In describing their value and expertise, financial advisers often compare themselves to accountants and attorneys. But the way advisers are paid for their services usually is very different from how those other professionals are compensated.

Notably, financial clients rarely expect to receive a bill for meeting with their adviser. Instead, commissions, fees for managing assets and flat fees are the norm, not hourly rates — a pattern resulting from regulation, custom and client preference. Is there a “best” compensation arrangement that most closely adheres to a fiduciary standard?

Three registered investment advisers debated that issue in a panel discussion at a recent Institute for the Fiduciary Standard event. As reported by technology editor Ryan W. Neal, the advisers explained why their particular model — one an AUM fee for clients who want investment management, plus flat fees for those who want financial advice only; one a flat fee; and one based on an hourly fee — best suits clients.

The advisers explained how their fee structure addresses potential conflicts. Hourly fees, for example, may be in the best interest of clients who don’t want a long-term relationship, just help with a particular problem. An AUM approach may be best for those wanting long-term advice and expert advice on complex investments. On the other hand, it may not be best for those who need and want more help with financial planning than with asset management.

CUSTOMER DEMAND

Clearly, the need to meet customer demand is driving advisers to choose a preferred compensation approach. But let’s not forget regulation, which has been setting the ground rules for advice and compensation since the 1930s and 1940s. Regulation Best Interest is but the latest attempt to get “best” right, especially as that applies to mitigating conflicts surrounding advice. Many believe there is still more to be done.

But rather than go down the seemingly bottomless rabbit hole of seeking out the “best,” whether in conflict elimination or compensation, maybe it’s time to concede that conflicts will always exist and that no one compensation approach is always “best.” What’s more, any of several approaches may be optimal in a particular situation if an adviser is completely forthcoming and transparent with clients about why a particular type of compensation is being used, how rks and how much the adviser is making. Disclosure of all that should be short and in plain English, not 30 pages of incomprehensible boilerplate that no one reads or understands because it’s written by lawyers to cover everyone’s hindquarters, not to communicate.

With inflation raging, a recession on the horizon and markets skittish, to say the least, investors need trustworthy advisers more than ever. An adviser who’s honest and transparent about compensation, regardless of the model, and who truly puts the client first beyond the requirements of regulation is bound to engender the trust that advice seekers want most of all.

NASAA leader puts nontraded REITs, adviser fees, Reg BI at top of agenda

Latest News

Finra's Reg BI Enforcement: Is it 'ineffective, costly'?
Finra's Reg BI Enforcement: Is it 'ineffective, costly'?

The industry watchdog's own reports reflect failures to deter "willful" and "repeat" violations, raising a crucial question about the future of regulation.

SEC prepares to back away from defending climate rule in court
SEC prepares to back away from defending climate rule in court

Acting Chairman Mark Uyeda directed SEC staff to initiate a pause in court while the commission awaits a quorum. The SEC may decide to withdraw from defending itself in a lawsuit over last year's climate disclosure rule.

wealth.com welcomes Kathy Wunderli in private wealth push
wealth.com welcomes Kathy Wunderli in private wealth push

The top estate planning platform's veteran hire will lead its legal team's efforts to develop estate planning, tax analysis, and wealth transfer solutions for ultra-high-net-worth clients.

Morgan Stanley loses $843,000 investor claim stemming from 'gold bar' scam
Morgan Stanley loses $843,000 investor claim stemming from 'gold bar' scam

“If Morgan Stanley had called my client’s son, this wouldn’t have happened,” the investor's attorney said.

LPL welcomes $630M sibling advisor duo from Corebridge
LPL welcomes $630M sibling advisor duo from Corebridge

Meanwhile, Ameriprise has bolstered its own ranks as an LPL defector joins its branch channel in California.

SPONSORED Taylor Matthews on what's behind Farther's rapid growth

From 'no clients' to reshaping wealth management, Farther blends tech and trust to deliver family-office experience at scale.

SPONSORED Why wealth advisors should care about the future of federal tax policy

Blue Vault features expert strategies to harness for maximum client advantage.