Financial Advisor Industry News Articles

Last week, proposed changes to the Experience requirement for CFP certification quietly took effect, including both the elimination of the Capstone course requirement for CFP exam challengers, and more controversially a change to the definition of what constitutes “experience” for the 3-year requirement to include both direct and indirect support.

What’s significant about the new “indirect support” rule is that, by the CFP Board’s own statements, virtually any job in the entire financial services industry will now qualify as “financial planning experience”, including an employee benefits administrator, a compliance attorney, and even a journalist who simply writes about financial planning topics!

The change is even more significant given the CFP Board’s introduction of the 2-year “apprenticeship” option for the experience requirement in 2012… which means that over the past several years, the CFP experience requirement has slipped from “3 years of financial planning experience” to “2 years of financial planning experience, or 3 years of any job remotely related to the financial services industry”!

Sadly, while the CFP Board’s prior changes to the experience requirement in 2012 included a public comment period, this time the CFP Board acted unilaterally without stakeholder input, as it continues to push aggressively for growth in the number of CFP certificants. And notably, the FPA and NAPFA have remained remarkably silent about the change as well, suggesting the organizations either tacitly support cutting the experience requirement for CFP certificants, or that they have lost any ability as membership associations to hold the CFP Board accountable.

Ultimately, though, perhaps the most ironic aspect of the CFP Board’s change is the fact that it comes after 4+ years – and $40M+ in spending – on a public awareness campaign to communicate to the public that the CFP marks are the highest “gold standard” in financial planning… even as the CFP Board’s growth strategy makes it easier and easier to obtain that standard.

Read More...

Earlier today, CNBC released its second annual list of the "Top 100 Fee-Only Wealth Management Firms" to the public. In cultivating the list, CNBC noted that consumers should "make sure you understand how that [advisor] gets paid, and that means [understanding] fees vs commissions" and that "fee-only financial planners... do not accept any commissions or other compensation based on product sales." Independent RIAs were then ranked based on a "proprietary formula" including assets under management, having staff with professional designations like CFP or CFA, average account sizes, growth of assets, years in the business, and comprehensiveness of advice (even on insurance solutions).

Yet a deeper look at the Form ADV Part 2 disclosures of just the top 10 firms on CNBC's "fee-only" list reveals that 9 out of 10 of them share in insurance commissions, own an insurance agency, or are under common ownership alongside an insurance affiliate to which advisory clients are referred. In other words, 9 out of 10 of CNBC's "Top Fee-Only" firms would not actually be fee-only under the CFP Board's compensation disclosure rules.

Notably, the CNBC list does focus exclusively on registered investment advisers (RIAs), and in most cases the RIA firm does not receive any insurance commissions directly (though it does happen in at least one situation, as RIA status does not technically ban commissions). Nonetheless, in 9 out of 10 cases, the RIA does have a clearly related entity or relationship that generates commissions - to the point that ironically, those "fee-only" firms themselves actually disclose those commissions and the conflict of interest it creates in their own Form ADVs!

Ultimately, the fact that a firm (or its related entities) get commissions doesn't automatically merit any complaints or mean it is a "bad" firm - it's about doing whether the firm does what's right for the client (and is held accountable for it), not how the client pays for it. Nonetheless, this incident suggests that at best, the phenomenon first revealed in the now-infamous Camarda vs CFP Board case - where advisors hold out as "fee-only" based on their RIA but have a commonly owned/related insurance entity to collect commissions anyway - may be far more widespread and common than realized. And in the meantime, these firms are placed in an awkward position with the CFP Board, with its existing precedent in the Camarda and subsequent Goldfarb cases to issue public letters of admonition when commission-and-fee firms hold out as "fee-only" - though notably, in this case there is no evidence that any the firms themselves have ever represented themselves as "fee-only", beyond the unfortunate fact that CNBC has misclassified them as such on its very public list of "Top 100 Fee-Only Wealth Management Firms"!

Read More...

As the Envestnet Advisor Summit gets underway today, CEO Jud Bergman kicked off the event with the big news that financial planning software and PFM provider FinanceLogix is being acquired in a deal reported at $32.5M of cash and stock, plus significant additional options to the upside. The news comes on the heels of Envestnet's acquisition of robo-advisor-for-advisors Upside Advisor just a few months ago.

Relative to other recent deals like Fidelity's acquisition of eMoney Advisor and the Northwestern Mutual purchase of LearnVest - both rumored to be bought for more than $250M each - the FinanceLogix deal is noticeably smaller, but given that the company may have only had 1/5th the market share of eMoney Advisor, seems reasonably in line and suggests that the acquisition interest in integrated financial planning and PFM software solutions remains strong. In fact, with the FinanceLogix purchase, there are virtually no remaining fully integrated planning-plus-PFM solutions available today... so expect to see the major players begin to acquire standalone PFM solutions and 'manually' integrate them instead as the buying frenzy continues.

From the perspective of FinanceLogix, the Envestnet acquisition will give them significant resources to continue to build and iterate the software - which will remain available to existing and new standalone users, even as it is more fully integrated into the Envestnet Advisor Suite. And from the Envestnet perspective, the acquisition suggests that Envestnet is aiming to build the "Holy Grail" of advisor technology platforms, a fully integrated technology stack including CRM, portfolio accounting, and now financial planning software, integrated with a "robo"-style client-facing portal that includes PFM capabilities... and revealing that perhaps Envestnet is not positioning to someday become a competing custodian, but instead simply wants to take the high ground of advisor value-add and deliver the ultimate integrated technology platform of the future for advisors - one that can be used regardless of their underlying (and increasingly commoditized) custodian or broker-dealer relationship.

Read More...

For the second time in just three years, yet another leader of the CFP Board’s Board of Directors has resigned – this time, it’s Chair-Elect Joseph Votava, who is stepping down to dedicate more time to his financial planning practice and his two new grandchildren.

And what’s odd is that while it does happen from time to time that a volunteer leader changes his/her mind about the commitment to leadership, Votava has a 20+ year history of volunteer leadership, as a former chair of the IAFP in the final year before its merger to become the FPA, a chair of the NEFE Board of Trustees, and more. So why would a veteran leader of the financial planning profession choose to capstone his volunteer career with an abrupt resignation as the Chair-Elect of the CFP Board, and was the CFP Board was trying to bury the announcement by quietly revealing it in the second paragraph of its monthly update email?

In fact, Votava’s resignation marks just one of a string of high-profile departures of CFP Board staff and volunteer leadership in the past two years, including its Director of Investigations, its Managing Director of Legal, and the lead counsel of its ongoing lawsuit with the Camardas. Which ultimately raises the question – was Votava’s decision really just triggered by a change of heart and a desire to spend more time with family, or is the reality that there is still trouble brewing with the Camarda case, and no one wants to be in the position of responsibility when the final verdict comes?

Read More...

The first quarter of 2015 has been a record-breaking flurry of merger and acquisition activity in the world of financial advisors, not just amongst advisory firms buying each other, but with acquisitions of the technology companies that serve advisors. In fact, 2015 continues to shape up as a breakout year for advisor FinTech.

The latest news is this week’s announcement that “robo-advisor” LearnVest is being acquired by traditional insurance company Northwestern Mutual for an undisclosed sum. Yet for all the buzz about the robo-advisor movement, the reality is that LearnVest’s business model was actually built around human advisors – it was not a true robo-advisor – and the Northwestern Mutual purchase may have actually been focused more on the software tools that LearnVest built for itself, in particular its integrated Personal Financial Management (PFM) and financial planning software, not the core LearnVest Planning business model.

In fact, with details emerging that LearnVest may have only had a few million dollars of revenue and been far from profitability (or even scaling to profitability) after 6 years of growth, its free PFM app for consumers and supporting integrated planning software for its advisors had a whopping 1.5 million users, giving Northwestern Mutual both a powerful technology tool to leverage across its existing advisor base, and a treasure trove of data on 1.5 million prospective clients to which it can cross-sell financial services products in the future. Which means in the end, LearnVest may simply finish as an example of a company that started out to disrupt the financial services with a unique business model, raised too much capital and created expectations that couldn't be fulfilled, and ended up being sold (out?) as a technology solution pivoted to serve the financial services establishment and its traditional manufacturing and distribution of financial products instead. And now the only questions are: how long will Northwestern keep LearnVest planners in place, and which advisor FinTech solution – PFM or otherwise – will be bought out next?

Read More...

While the financial services industry – and financial advisors in particular – are relatively slow adopters of technology, the world of “Advisor FinTech” is beginning to accelerate, from an explosion in the number of technology vendors serving independent advisors, to the growing number of advisors adopting digital “inbound” marketing, blogging, and social media.

However, while there is a conference dedicated to Advisor FinTech – the Technology Tools for Today (T3) conference, getting underway later this week! – there has never been enough interest in advisor blogging and social media to justify a standalone conference. Until now.

This week, I’m excited to announce that I will be helping to co-organize the first Advisor Symposium on Social Media and Blogging. Running in conjunction with the popular (Personal Finance) Blogger Conference “FinCon”, the Advisor Symposium will launch in September in Charlotte, NC. And notably, we will also be running our first XY Planning Network national conference in the days leading up to the event as well, for those who are interested in learning more about how to serve Gen X and Gen Y clientele effectively and profitably. I hope to see you there!

Read More...

The news this morning is that Fidelity Investments has agreed to acquire financial planning software company eMoney Advisor for an undisclosed sum. The eMoney software is still expected to be available to advisors outside Fidelity – and the company says external integrations and custodial relationships will remain – though it’s not hard to imagine that the tools will likely become available at a discounted rate to advisors who custody with Fidelity in the future.

But the real news of the eMoney acquisition is that from the strategic perspective, it’s not clear if Fidelity was really aiming to acquire financial planning software, or if instead what they really wanted was eMoney’s best-in-breed Personal Financial Management (PFM) tool – a Mint.com style portal that clients can access to see all of their financial information in one place, with the capability to use the portal collaboratively with their advisor. And Fidelity’s new PFM solution can be leveraged in many others ways as well, including offering it to their retail clients, and mining it for a potential treasure trove of big data insights!

In fact, what the eMoney acquisition may ultimately highlight is how woefully far behind other financial planning software tools have lagged in their own capabilities in producing a quality PFM tool for advisors to use with their clients – a PFM solutions gap between eMoney and other financial planning software that has sadly existed for years now. Perhaps with companies like Personal Capital (which built its own high-quality PFM solution) on the rise and now the eMoney acquisition, advisors will finally get the PFM solution we’ve wanted and needed for so long?

Read More...

Last week, the CFP Board launched its new Career Center, an initiative announced last fall as part of the organization’s ongoing efforts to support a pipeline of talent coming into financial planning. And while the effort itself to support the growth of financial planning is admirable, though, the $350-per-job price point of the CFP Board’s new initiative makes it clear the initiative is about financial expansion and growth of the organization as well, continuing its ongoing trek of competing more and more overtly with membership associations like the FPA and NAPFA.

In fact, the CFP Board’s new Career Center raises significant concerns about its ever-growing footprint beyond its scope as a non-profit organization established primary to grant the CFP marks and uphold them as a recognized standard of excellent. After all, while any other organization that offers or launches a financial planning Jobs Board must struggle just to obtain a list of potential CFP certificants just to reach them – which the CFP Board has long refused to share or make available except on a limited or costly basis – the CFP Board will engage in this potentially-highly-profitable endeavor by using its own list of 71,000 CFP certificants (plus not-yet-CFP candidates!) for marketing purposes!

Why has the CFP Board launched a premium Job Board that could generate unrelated business income tax for the organization, and is competing against its supporting membership organizations like FPA and NAPFA, instead of simply supporting them in return?

Read More...

The big news today is that Personal Capital, the financial advisory firm that offers human advisors available to interact virtually with clients utilizing the company’s proprietary Personal Financial Management tools, has crossed the $1B AUM mark.

While often dubbed a “robo-advisor”, the reality as noted above is that Personal Capital does not really belong in the category, as the company actually offers one-to-one relationships between clients and a personal financial advisor (an actual human being) who simply happens to engage with the clients using digital communication tools, making the solution closer to a part-technology part-human "cyborg" advisor than a true "robo" solution.

What’s most notable about Personal Capital, though, is that not only does it function as a technology-augmented human advice platform, but that because it also charges more “traditional” AUM fees (with a starting cost of 0.89% for the first $1M under management), it actually generates significantly more revenue than its pure robo competitors. In fact, while Personal Capital may not be larger than the other “robo-advisor” platforms as measured by AUM, it has in the span of only 3 years actually grown more revenue than all other robo-advisors combined!

Read More...

With the CFP Board's ongoing efforts to continue growth in the number of CFP certificants, the organization has been involved in a number of ongoing initiatives, from its Women's Initiative to bring more females into financial planning, to its decision to convert to a shorter computer-based testing format to make the CFP comprehensive exam less daunting.

In a surprise announcement, though, the CFP Board has just declared that after adding a "Capstone Course" requirement to the CFP curriculum in 2012, and including the requirement for not only new students but also those who are seeking to challenge status for the CFP exam, the organization is now offering to waive the capstone course requirement for challengers who instead simply submit a comprehensive financial plan to be assessed by peer reviewers. In addition, the CFP Board also announced that a wider range of "support" activities will be permitted to count towards the requisite 3-year experience requirement to earn the CFP marks.

While arguably the change to the Capstone course is a positive, the adjustments to the experience requirement may now be opening the door for virtually anyone with a job in the broad financial services industry (or even journalists writing about it) to qualify for "financial planning" experience, despite having absolutely no actual experience being involved in the creation of a financial plan, supporting its delivery, or interacting with a client! And perhaps even more concerning, why is it that both the prior Capstone and Experience requirements were implemented with a lengthy public comment period and process, but the CFP Board now sees fit to change those rules at its own whim?

Read More...