Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with an interesting analysis of fiduciary history and the CFP Board's current fiduciary rules for CFP certificants, suggesting that the CFP Board still has a little ways left to go to reach a truly all-encompassing fiduciary standard. From there, we look at an interview in the Journal of Financial Planning with Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman, an exploration by financial planner and researcher Jon Guyton about how the safe withdrawal rate research is holding up for a year 2000 retiree, a study by David Blanchett on the use of variable annuity GMWB riders to support retirement income, a recent study by Harold Evensky (and co-author Shaun Pfeiffer) indicating that active managers may do better in bear markets than bull markets but not by enough to generate consistent alpha over a full market cycle, and a discussion by professor Michael Finke of Texas Tech that the recent Bill Gross article about the "dying cult of equities" may have some validity. There are also a few consumer investment pieces that may be of interest to planners, including a discussion of what "tactical" really means, and some things to watch out for with the recent trend towards managed ETF strategies, along with two strong technical articles, one about new tax planning issues and opportunities tied to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, and the other about how to counsel clients through a short sale or other underwater-mortgage alternatives. We wrap up with an interesting research article suggesting that it's almost impossible for us to convey that we're "warm" and "competent" at the same time - instead, the constraints of our language force us to lean in one direction in how we're perceived, at the direct cost of the other. Enjoy the reading!
As someone who speaks at upwards of 50 conferences every year, I see a wide range of events created for financial planners. Yet unfortunately, the reality is that because there are so many conferences, it can be incredibly difficult to select the right conference, and I am often asked for recommendations about what I think the best conferences are to attend.
Accordingly, I've put together my own list of what I would view as the best-in-class conferences for financial planners (in the US, at least!) in seven categories coming up for 2013: Best Technical Content, Best Technology Content, Best Practice Management, Best for Advanced Practitioners, Best Overall Value, Best Virtual Conference, and Best Overall Financial Planning Conference.
I hope this is useful for you to use as your own guide in selecting events to attend for yourself and/or your staff for 2013!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with a recap of the recent FPA Experience national conference, along with a discussion of the latest research from Cerulli suggesting that the declining market share of wirehouses may actually be accelerating even as we become more distanced from the financial crisis, and a nice overview of the current state of fiduciary rulemaking (or lack thereof) from the SEC. From there, we look at Financial Planning magazine's recent Influencer Awards recognition, a discussion of the FA Insight "Growth by Design" study of how firms are strategically viewing and managing growth, and a wide-reaching interview on safe withdrawal rates from retirement researchers Bill Bengen, Jon Guyton, and Wade Pfau. There are also a few investment articles, including the latest change from Vanguard to further drive down the expenses of ETFs, a recap on the current state and future of actively managed ETFs, and a striking article on asset allocation glidepaths suggesting that rising equity exposure in the years before retirement may actually be more effective than declining equity exposure! We wrap up with a brief article (and associated video) showing how to hide the new "endorsements" feature of LinkedIn (which some have suggested may be a violation of the regulations barring client testimonials), and a profile of a financial advisory firm making an interesting splash in social media with a controversial political video that has generated a whopping 1,000,000 views and 100,000 Facebook fans. Enjoy the reading!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with a response from the CFP Board to the recent challenge about whether their fiduciary standard is "a joke" (not surprisingly, the CFP Board suggests that its standard is no joke), along with an article from the Advisor One blogs by Knut Rostad of the Institute for the Fiduciary Standard suggesting that HighTower Advisors is overstating their lack of conflicts of interest to the detriment of advancing the standard, and another article by Dan Moisand that suggests better regulation of financial planning will ultimately be a necessary step to be fully recognized as a profession. From there, we look at some interesting stats suggesting the fiduciary RIA world is grabbing market share of 401(k) plans just as it has been grabbing market share of retail investment advice, and an article about a planning firm that focuses on career coaching and compensation advice as a core deliverable to clients. There are also a number of technical articles, including a discussion of the emerging investment concept of "risk parity" and why it matters, a look at where and how tactical asset allocation will and won't work, the apparent underutilization of Section 529 college savings plans by financial planners, an analysis of when tax deferral does and does not make sense. and two deep estate planning articles (one focused on estate tax strategies before the end of the year, and the other on recent legal and tax developments over the past year). We wrap up with a lighter article about the importance of body language and what you may be unwittingly communicating in meetings, along with some advice to help ensure you're in the right state of mind heading into a (client) meeting (because if you're not, your body language is going to show it!). Enjoy the reading!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with a surprising interview from Barbara Roper at the Consumer Federation of America, suggesting that given how the SEC is dragging its feet, perhaps FINRA would be the better solution for investor protection after all. Tying into the regulatory theme, we also look at Bob Veres' latest Financial Planning magazine column, suggesting that RIAs should come to the table with their own fresh proposals rather than waging a FINRA vs SEC battle, a recent study by Financial Advisor magazine, Boston Consulting Group, and 3ethos that attempts to benchmark how well advisors currently execute fiduciary best practices (the answer is not as well as we might have hoped and expected), and a disturbing investigation from the SEC into financial advisor and radio personality Ray Lucia that digs deeply into the backtesting models that Lucia used to support his strategies (raising the question about whether other advisors may also have made errors in assumption or process in their own in-house backtesting efforts regarding the strategies they recommend). From there, we look at a few more aspirational articles, including a vision from hiring consultant Caleb Brown about how financial planners may learn their craft in the future, an interview with practice management consultant Angie Herbers about how to develop great employees, and a great checklist for information you should be certain to cover on your website to give prospective clients what they want/need. There's also a nice technical summary of some of the planning implications of the Affordable Care Act in the coming years, some thoughts about where the ETF/ETN industry is heading (notwithstanding the growth, it might still be in the early stages!), and a good explanation and comparison of two different types of P/E ratios and what they tell us about whether stocks are cheap or not. We wrap up with some intriguing new research from Morningstar, suggesting that it's a myth that investors are dumb and pick bad funds; instead, the Morningstar research suggests investors tend to be pretty good at selecting high quality funds, but have a problem in timing the purchase of those funds poorly. Enjoy the reading!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with a fascinating interview with Ron Rhoades where he shares his thoughts about the history of fiduciary and regulation of financial advisors, with some surprising insights, and also look at the recent back-and-forth between incoming FPA CEO Lauren Schadle and American College CEO Larry Barton about the CFP marks and whether there should be one designation for financial planning. From there, we look at a few good articles from Advisor Perspectives, including a list from Bob Veres of the top ten faulty assumptions in financial planning, and a good article by Joe Tomlinson looking at how safe annuity companies are. There are a few retirement articles as well this week, including a look at the "critical path" approach to setting a threshold for when clients can and cannot afford to take risk, a new framework for evaluating various retirement income strategies and alternatives, and an article looking at how disability can threaten retirement success yet may be neglected by advisors (especially for their female clients). There's also an article that presents a good discussion about risk (and the difference between risk and uncertainty), and the latest from John Mauldin showing some surprising employment trends (older workers are actually taking job market share from younger workers!). We wrap up with two very interesting articles - one looking at the dynamics between patients and doctors in providing recommendations that has some striking parallels for what we do as financial planners, and the other exploring some surprising research that demonstrates we actually value the potential for future success more highly than a demonstrated track record of prior success (which may help to clarify why many clients are always so attracted to the next great thing, even when the current thing is working just fine). Enjoy the reading!
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with a number of surprise announcements in industry news, including the early retirement of FPA CEO Marv Tuttle due to family reasons, the decision by incoming NAPFA chair Ron Rhoades to resign his leadership position due to a compliance infraction, and a letter by the CFP Board to the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau suggesting the creation of a ratings system for advisor designations and certifications to help reduce elder abuse. We also look at an article explaining some of the upcoming changes with the CFP Board's new sanction guidelines, a discussion from Advizent's Steve Lockshin about how all advisors must help to raise the industry's low minimum standards, and the conclusion of the Investment Advisor/ActiFi study examining how advisors are being served on practice management issues. Wrapping up, there's an(other) article on the rise of the so-called "Robo Advisors", a discussion of how some stress in your business can actually be a positive but it's important to handle the stress so it doesn't become too much, and a technical discussion of some of the unique tax burdens of MLPs, along with a look at how advisors are adjusting investments for a potential inflationary cycle, and a striking article from Texas Tech's Michael Finke about how aging of the brain may reduce financial literacy in later years. Enjoy the reading!
Financial planners seem to increasingly agree we may be in a "new normal" - an environment where returns are lower, due to a combination of high market valuation, low interest rates, debt deleveraging, and the associated lower economic growth. Accordingly, it has become increasingly popular to reduce long-term return projections for clients from their historical standards. Yet the reality is that while returns may be reduced for the next decade, it doesn't necessarily mean clients will experience low returns for the entirety of their multi-decade retirement, just as those who retired in prior low-return environments like the 1970s may have had a bad decade of returns but an average or even above-average 30-year result. A better alternative may be to model retirement as a sequence of "investment regimes" - extended periods of time that have specific risk and return expectations, followed by subsequent periods of time that have their own expectations. For instance, instead of reducing 30-year returns, clients might look at the impact of having an average return of 5% for the first half of their return, and 15% for the second half, reflecting the market cycles seen throughout history. Could this actually represent a better way to project the risks and opportunities of retirement and develop appropriate spending recommendations?Read More...
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with an interesting Journal of Financial Planning article suggesting that a uniform fiduciary standard would not, in fact, reduce access of the mass market to financial advice or increases costs. We also look at an article from Bob Veres questioning why it is that more independent broker-dealers and registered representatives don't object to the Financial Services Institute's lobbying for FINRA as an overarching regulator for all advisors. From there, we look at several practice management articles, including one up-and-coming RIA custodian Scottrade Advisor Services, another on succession planning, and a discussion of how client communication supports business growth. We also look at a series of technology-related articles, including how to stay safe when using the cloud, a new secure client vault solution, a new retirement income modeling tool to do simplified/expedited basic retirement projections for clients, and a discussion of the incredible return-on-investment that firms see when adopting rebalancing software. We wrap up with a good discussion from John Mauldin of the current plight in Europe, a nice list of social media timesaver tips for those who are looking to dabble or have become active with social media, and an intriguing article from the Harvard Business Review showing how several companies are beginning to increase their sales and growth activity by eliminating commissions for better results. Enjoy the reading!
While we often focus on the long-term return of stocks, the reality is that market growth is very uneven, not just due to volatility, but as markets go through long-term cycles called secular bull and bear markets. In the midst of a secular bull market - such as the one that exploded stock prices upwards from 1982 to 2000 - the optimal investment strategy is fairly straightforward - buy-and-hold, buy more on the dips, and dial up the leverage and risk exposure. In the midst of a secular bear market, though, buy-and-hold tends to merely produce the flat returns associated with the overall markets, and instead concentrated stock-picker portfolios, sector rotation, alternative investments, and tactical asset allocation become more effective. Using the wrong strategies in the wrong investment environment can produce poor results - just as many styles of active management generated little to no value and just became a cost drag in the 80s and 90s, so too does buy-and-hold now generate benchmark returns that may do little to achieve client goals. The ultimate key is to match the investment strategy to the market environment, given that such cycles can persist for 1-2 decades at a time. And notwithstanding the fact that a secular bear market has been underway for 12 years, it appears that the secular bear market still has a ways to go - which means its dominant investment strategies still have many more years to shine.Read More...