A recent Fidelity report showed that a significant portion of investors over 65 moved at least some of their money out of stocks between February and May in response to the turmoil created by the pandemic. The fear and anxiety over the sudden and severe economic uncertainty pushed many investors to dramatically reduce their risk. And unfortunately, once investors take risk off the table, and the market sharply rebounds… there’s no “good” time to get back in. Which in turn has left some advisors asking how they can work with clients who are still stuck sitting on a pile of cash and are now resistant to the idea of re-investing into equities now that they’ve gone up (or in some cases, are unwilling to reinvest into anything at all!?)?

In our 41st episode of Kitces and Carl, Michael Kitces and client communication expert Carl Richards discuss various ways advisors can approach the conversation when a client is resistant to the very idea of taking back on any risk, especially from a market that feels like it’s ‘gotten away’ from them, how to determine if any sudden changes are only in response to recent temporary circumstances (or are more permanent in nature), and why advisors have to be so clear about the services they provide and who they best provide them for.

As a starting point, it’s important to note that just because someone has the financial capacity to take on risk and get back into the markets, doesn’t mean that they should, or that they even need to. Because, for some, their goal all along might have been to get to a point where they don’t have to take on risk, and after working hard for decades, they can get off the “more” treadmill. After all, investing is just one of several levers that are available to help clients reach their goals… it’s just that advisors (understandably) are focused on that one lever in particular, not only given the industry’s long history of providing the investing public with access to the capital markets, but that, especially with the more recent move towards the AUM model, it’s hard for advisors to pay the bills if there’s no “A” to “M” (which means we must be cautious of our own inherent bias towards keeping clients invested!)!

Yet, for clients who do have a reason (and need) to invest to meet their goals, and yet remain extremely risk-averse, there are essentially two approaches. The first is to use a more prescriptive approach, leveraging data and logic to demonstrate the long-term value that investing presents. While that more heavy-handed approach might work for a subset of clients, more often though, the better tack is to engage clients in a co-creative process that begin with a statement of values, which help define goals, and ultimately end out in an action plan in support of those fundamental values. As a result, advisors can help clients circle back around to (or even reevaluate) their values and goals, and walk them through possible trade-offs they might have to make.

Other approaches include having a conversation around why money is important in the first place (because sometimes there’s enough cash on hand to satisfy a fundamental why, and actually defining that can help calm their nerves about letting the rest work for them), and discussing whether or not changes to their savings and investing goals are permanent (as temporary, mid-course adjustments can be managed by incrementally moving back towards the original plan).

Sometimes, though, it turns out that a client just simply does not want to assume any risk whatsoever, which ultimately means that advisors need to get comfortable with the limitations of the advice model (and least if their AUM model means they can’t work with clients who want to stay in cash!), and understand that there are some clients who may need help with planning but don’t want/need the AUM-based services that many advisors provide (and make their livings from).

At the end of the day, there isn’t a one-size-fits-all approach for every investor, but in general, the best approach for risk-averse clients is to go upstream to find the root cause of any sudden changes, review values and goals to make sure everyone is on the same page, and then have a discussion around potential trade-offs that need to be made to implement any changes. By coming to the conversation with a positive mindset, and an objective of reaching a better understanding of a client’s goals (and why they feel that being in cash is helping them achieve those goals… or not?), advisors can serve their needs to the best of their ability… even if that may lead to the ultimate realization that the client isn’t a good fit?

Read More...

Developing trust is one of the most important things financial advisors can do to establish lasting relationships with their clients. For which developing a comprehensive financial plan is often an opportunity not only to deliver value as a financial advisor but to deepen client trust by demonstrating the advisor understands them in the first place. Once clients have stepped into the proverbial Cone Of Trust, though, does a client really want (or need) to review and discuss a full-blown financial plan? Or would they rather just be told, very simply, what they specifically need to do to meet their goals and solve their problems?  Alternately, is it still preferable for clients to review their plan in depth so that they might better understand where they are today and how decisions they make now will affect their plan in the long run… no matter how complex or lengthy their financial plan might be (and how much trust they’ve already imbued with from their financial advisor?)?

In our 14^th episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and financial advisor communication expert Carl Richards explore the various functions that a physical financial plan deliverable plays in the financial planning (and client relationship trust-building) process, share their viewpoints on how written financial plans can be used effectively to help clients, and discuss what ultimately matters most for clients, regardless of whether their financial plan is one page or requires a 2” binder and color-coded tabs.

Generally speaking, there are two (if not more) camps when it comes to the usefulness and structure of financial plans. Some advisors feel that detailed financial plans give a false sense of security by predicting future outcomes with unwarranted certainty; instead, these advisors prefer to establish trust and develop empathy without using the financial plan as a central conversation tool. Once a strong connection is formed, and they understand the client’s core issues and concerns, they often find it easy to discuss “good” behaviors the clients can follow to avoid mistakes and stay on track and do so using simple terms that apply to and make sense for the client. Interestingly, the level of trust that clients have in their advisor may often influence the degree of understanding they want/need to derive from their advisor, and/or their willingness to accept the recommendations being provided, based on the financial planning discussions they have together.

Other advisors, meanwhile, prefer to develop and discuss a detailed plan with clients and feel that their clients appreciate the clarity a good plan provides for their current financial situation, and that clients value understanding how different outcomes of important decisions considered today (such as funding education, modifying spending habits, and retiring early) will affect their overall financial picture years into the future. This is especially important because clients often fail to realize the powerful impact small changes in behavior and compounding growth can have on saving goals. Not to mention that delivering the financial plan itself can often be part of the trust-building process… as clients may not be willing to take the plan recommendations unless they’re also backed up by a thorough analysis (even if the client won’t read the analysis once they see it’s there and trust that it’s been done).

In the end, the key point is simply that advisors can use financial plans as effective tools for helping clients stay on track and make smart decisions, and that different advisors have their own distinct styles of conveying this feedback. Clients, too, are unique, and they have different preferences about how much of a full plan they want to see. Regardless of how advisors create and implement financial plans, though, clients need to be confident that their advisor is competent and that their recommendations are credible… which means either in advance of developing the plan or as part of the plan delivery process itself, it’s still essential to first establish real trust in the client relationship.

Read More...