Mark K
Elite Member
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2004
- Professional Status
- Certified Residential Appraiser
- State
- Indiana
I feel sorry for anyone that is so financially illiterate that they think that paying someone 1-1.5% of their assets every year is a good idea. A lot of these people can quote you stats on all of their favorite sports teams that they've followed for most of their lives but have no understanding of the financial markets. If you mention ETF, they look at you like a deer in the headlights. They've 'studied' what they think is important and are willing to blindly hand over their money every year to someone who, in most cases, doesn't beat the S&P Index.AI: "Most CFPs and financial advisors use a tiered percentage model, with the annual fee decreasing as assets increase, but 1% is very standard for a $1,000,000 portfolioT
The Vanguard S&P 500 ETF (VOO) is consistently ranked among the lowest-cost S&P 500 index funds, with a current expense ratio of 0.03%"
I get a kick out of Fisher commercials that say....."If you don't make money, we don't make money." They charge 1 to 1.5%.
1% a year for investing 30-years is 30% of 'your wealth' compounded! The really rich buy a bunch of the S&P 500 stocks that mimic the S&P 500 and avoid the capital gains distribution that tends to happen with ETFs. I have a close friend who had a retirement account from a large law firm and the long returns are dismal. I'd almost call it criminal.
BTW, the only company worse than Fisher is Edward Jones. They love nothing more than to call you into their office every year and convince you to 'rebalance' (churn) your portfolio...for the sole intention of running up more commissions in their high-fee mutual funds. No better than snake oil salesmen...or AMCs. You could open a Schwab account, put 50% into an S&P index ETF, 25% into an international etf, and 25% into a high-yield preferred stock fund and do as well as Ed Jones, for virtually no cost.
