Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's reading kicks off with a "no-news" article... that after four months since the CFP Board's "fee only" controversies began, there are still not yet any formal talks amongst NAPFA, the FPA, and the CFP Board about how to resolve the differences in compensation definitions, or address the fact that a number of FPA and NAPFA members appear to be currently out of compliance with the current rules.
A number of other practice-management and industry-related articles are highlighted this week as well, including: the first practice management study released by the FPA's new Research and Practice Institute which found that only 46% of financial planners even have a retirement plan for themselves; a renewed push by the Financial Planning Coalition (along with AARP, CFA, IAA, and NASAA) to advocate for legislation to assess user fees on RIAs to enhance oversight (in lieu of allowing FINRA or another SRO to take over); rising scrutiny by the SEC on so-called "reverse churning" where advisors put clients into AUM fee arrangements but have so little trading that clients may be charged far more than they would have been by just staying in a commission-based account; new fees that many custodians are charging to advisors who try to trade away to get better price execution on ETF trades; and an announcement by BrightScope that its Advisor Pages offering will now be free to advisors who want to update the essential information, with premium features available for those who want to pay more to further engage in marketing through the platform.
From there, we have a several more technical financial planning articles this week, including an analysis by Wade Pfau comparing variable withdrawal rate strategies from Jon Guyton and David Blanchett, a look at how recent changes for reverse mortgages may make them less appealing to financial planners even as reverse mortgages are becoming more recognized in research as a financial planning tool, and a look at how for many financial advisors their health insurance premiums may go up next year as premiums are shifted to be based on each plan participant's individual age (which means older advisors who saved on premiums by having younger employees who brought down the average age of the plan will no longer enjoy such savings).
We wrap up with three interesting articles: the first looks at how some big trends, from industry consolidation and pressured profit margins to generational shifts and technology will threaten advisors to "adapt or die" (with lessons from Blockbuster video as an example of a company that failed to recognize their own industry trends and adapt accordingly); the second is a satire article from Vanguard announcing new "AlphaBet" ETFs as a demonstration how simple data mining and research biases can create new ETF products that have no reasonable expectation of sustaining their results (advisors beware of backtest-based new ETF offerings!); and the last is a discussion from the NY Times of Britain's new "Ministry of Nudges" that is applying behavioral finance and research principles to help better implement government policies, with some very notable successes. Enjoy the reading!