Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with a quick recap of who said what at this week's Financial Services Committee hearing on the Bachus SRO legislation. From there, we take a deep dive into a long series of articles looking at how financial planning is changing. An interview with Rick Kahler explores how financial therapy is being integrated into his practice, and a Morningstar Advisor article looks at how personality types can help predict which kinds of behavioral biases your clients might exhibit. An article by Paula Hogan in the Journal of Financial Planning examines how to integrate financial planning from the economists' perspective - the so-called Life Cycle finance model - with the current world of financial and life planning, with a rising focus on planning for human capital... followed by another article looking at how several planners are being to incorporate human capital planning in their practices. Bob Veres looks at what we can do to ensure that planners really stay focused on planning, and don't allow themselves to be lured by "easier" business models. A panel discussion in Financial Advisor magazine explores how some executives at companies that serve and support advisors see the trends playing out. At the same time, a recent article on The Economist questions whether clients might sometimes seek advice more than they should, and how much advice we seek is really for practical reasons as opposed to psychological ones. And Dick Wagner raises the question of whether it's finally time to push the profession to financial planning 3.0. On a final note, we include a transcript of a recent speech given last weekend by financier investor George Soros in Italy; although a bit of a non-sequitur from the weekend reading theme of changes in the planning profession, the article provides such an amazing look at what's going on in Europe, that it just had to be included. Enjoy the reading!
The Salience of Financial Planning Fees – It’s Not Just About How Much You Charge, But How You Charge
When considering a purchase, we all evaluate the value that we will receive relative to the cost of the transaction. Yet research shows that some methods of payment make us more sensitive to the cost than others - which in turn can distort the cost-benefit analysis and change the decision, but also impacts the ability for sellers to raise prices without changing the buyer's willingness to pay.
For instance, research on toll roads shows that consumers are less sensitive to toll increases when they pay electronically than in cash; similarly, we are more willing to spend money when we pay by credit card than when the cost it made salient by paying in cash. The upshot of highly salient pricing is that it helps to ensure businesses don't raise prices unfairly and abuse their customers; the downside, however, is that it can make it more difficult for honest, fairly priced businesses to attract new clients and grow their revenues due to price sensitivity.
In the financial planning world, this helps to explain the popularity of both commission and AUM models, and the relative difficulties of hourly and retainer fee models - it's not just about how much the firm charges, but also about how the firm charges!Read More...
Research Reveals Cash Reserve Strategies Don’t Work… Unless You’re A Good Market Timer?
Cash reserve strategies that hold aside several years of spending to avoid liquidations during bear markets are a popular way to manage withdrawals for retirees. In theory, the strategy is presumed to enhance risk-adjusted returns by allowing retirees to spend down their cash during market declines and then replenish it after the recovery. Yet recent research in the Journal of Financial Planning reveals that the strategy actually results in more harm than good; while in some scenarios the cash reserves effectively allow the retiree to "time" the market by avoiding an untimely liquidation, more often the retiree simply ends out with less money due to the ongoing return drag of a significant portfolio position in cash. As a result, the superior strategy for those who want to alter their asset allocation through market volatility (the effective result of spending down cash in declines and replenishing it later) appears to be simply tactically altering asset allocation directly, without the adverse impact of a cash return drag. Nonetheless, this still fails to account for the psychological benefits the client enjoys by having a clearly identifiable cash reserve to manage spending through volatility - even though the reality is that it results in less retirement income, not more. Does that mean cash reserve strategies are still superior for their psychological benefits alone, even if they're not an effective way to time the market? Or do total return strategies simply need to find a better way to communicate their benefits and value?
The Problems With Trying To Benchmark Unconstrained Portfolios (Guest Post)
Benchmarking is a standard tool for investors and investment professionals to evaluate the results of an investment manager. In a world of investing within asset classes and style boxes, the benchmarking process is relatively straightforward – any particular investment offering can be easily matched to an appropriate benchmark. In a world of unconstrained, “go-anywhere” style managers, though, the benchmarking process is less certain. Common methods to determine an appropriate benchmark – such as an ex-post regression of what the fund was invested in – can obscure the actions of the manager, for better or for worse. Is the only solution to simply select an arbitrary benchmark and proceed accordingly? Can we eschew a benchmark altogether?
Social Media As Drip Marketing For Financial Planners In The Digital Age
The principles of drip marketing are not new; the concept of marketing by sending a series of messages to prospects over time to build familiarity and remain top-of-mind so that you're likely to be contacted when a need arises has existed for decades. In fact, drip marketing has only gained in popularity as the costs of distribution have declined - from the increasing efficiency of printing postcards, catalogues, and newsletters, to the almost negligible cost of sending messages via email (sometimes taken to its abusive extreme, "spam email"). Unfortunately, though, the challenge of most drip marketing is that it's still very impersonal, and it can often be a challenge to even identify a list of people to whom the messages should be communicated in the first place. Yet the growing world of social media creates the potential to take "drip marketing" to a whole new level, because it is more social - making it more personal and more engaging, with sharing tools to help the people who receive your content to refer you to their friends and family, and for those you want to reach find you!
Weekend Reading for Financial Planners (June 2-3)
Enjoy the current installment of "weekend reading for financial planners" - this week's edition starts off with two articles about the ongoing debate in Washington on the Investment Advisor Oversight Act of 2012 (the so-called "Bachus SRO legislation"), including a scathing report from the Project on Government Oversight on why FINRA would be a poor choice of SRO, and a second article about why in the end there probably won't be any action on the Bachus legislation until next year anyway but it's still important to take it seriously now. From there, we look at a few practice management articles, from an interesting look at how young Generation Y agents are changing marketing and business development in the insurance industry, to the importance of having a good first-six-weeks process in your firm to ensure that your own new Generation Y hires will stick around for the long run, to the importance of choosing the right name for your firm, knowing how to sell to develop your business (even as a professional!), and that the key to growing your business is to deliver an experience that is remarkable - as in, literally, something worth remarking about. There's also an article about whether Veralytic is really a useful tool for advisors evaluating life insurance on Advisors4Advisors (a response to a post on this blog from a few weeks ago), an examination of how advisors have shifted their investments before and after the financial crisis, and a look at how the due diligence burden on really evaluating ETFs has become far more complex with the proliferation of ETF innovation. We wrap up with Bill Gross' latest missive from PIMCO about the Wall Street Food Chain, and how the 1% at the top may be disrupted more than they expect as the global deleveraging process continues. Enjoy the reading!
Linking Academic and Planner Research on Retirement Income
"Planners and academics need to work together to develop a profession with evidence-based practices." That is the message given at the FPA Retreat by Dr. Michael Finke, a professor of personal financial planning at Texas Tech University, and a co-author of mine at the Journal of Financial Planning.
Yet while the Journal of Financial Planning is a great resource, and it has been the go-to outlet for research on retirement planning from the perspective of practicing financial planners, especially regarding safe withdrawal rate strategies, the academic research approaches the retirement challenge from a different perspective and focuses on different tools and strategies.
Ultimately, researchers can use their technical skills to investigate optimal retirement strategies, and practitioners can guide these investigations by suggesting real world constraints and ideas for solutions, and even by sharing in the nitty-gritty process of conducting the research. Let’s encourage these interactions to get rigorous analyses which can be applied to real-world problems.Read More...
The Problem With Essential-Vs-Discretionary Retirement Strategies
In planning for retiring clients, it's crucial to get an understanding of what the client's goals are in the first place - so that recommendations can be made about how to financially secure those goals. In the context of setting a spending goal, a popular delineation is to separate retirement spending into "essential" versus "discretionary" expenses - not unlike "needs" versus "wants" for accumulators - with the idea of using guarantees to secure the essential expenses, and less certain growth assets with some risk to fund the discretionary expenses (since they're 'only' discretionary and not essential, by definition).
Yet in reality, even discretionary spending still constitutes an important part of a retiree's overall lifestyle - the loss of which could be very psychologically damaging. As a result, merely securing the essential expenses of retirement and leaving the rest at risk still, in the eyes of most retirees, would constitute a failure of the overall retirement goal. Instead, clients often choose to ensure that all their spending can be sustained - by continuing to work as long as necessary (as health allows) to secure all of their goals. Does that mean the distinction between essential versus discretionary retirement expenses isn't necessarily helpful after all?
President’s Budget Proposals Take Aim At Popular IDGT Estate Planning Strategy
As the country continues to struggle with its fiscal woes, Congress and the White House are increasingly proposing tax law changes intended to cut down on perceived "abuses" and "tax loopholes" - especially those used by the wealthy. The latest, in the President's Fiscal Year 2013 budget, is a proposal to change to the estate tax laws, requiring any grantor trust to be included in the estate of the grantor (or pay gift taxes if the grantor trust assets are distributed before the grantor's death).
The proposal would kill the popular Intentionally Defective Grantor Trust (IDGT) estate planning strategy, which works specifically by relying on the fact that a trust can be a grantor trust for income tax purposes even while being excluded from the grantor's estate for estate tax purposes - after all, if the grantor trust is automatically included in the grantor's estate, there's no longer any value to make gifts or sales of property to an IDGT.
While the rules are only proposed at this point - and would only apply to trusts created in the future, after the enactment date of any legislation - the fact that the change was proposed at all suggests that the days of IDGT planning strategies may be numbered. Read More...
Building Trust With Potential Clients You’ve Never Met (Yet?)
Good financial planning is typically built upon a personal relationship between the client and the planner, as trust is established to the point that the client is comfortable to share and engage with the planner, and take the advice that is given. Yet the reality is that while it takes time to build trust, it doesn't necessarily have to be built face-to-face. In fact, as personal finance 'celebrities' like Suze Orman have shown, a remarkable amount of actionable advice can be implemented even if the person giving the advice and the person receiving the advice have never met in person at all! So what does it take to begin to establish trust with a prospective client before ever meeting face to face? As Orman demonstrates, the keys are that people work with people, expert credibility is important but not alone sufficient, and trust is built over time through repeated exposure to the planner. And in today's world, the digital age is leveling the playing field; it's not just about being on television or having a radio show anyone, because any planner can begin to build trust with potential future clients, through blogs, e-newsletters, videos, social media, and other channels of the digital world!
