Choosing a Financial Planner…Part III: Questionnaires
This week for the first time a prospect actually asked ME to complete a questionnaire to find out more about me and my practice! I was very excited to do so since this shows me that the person has done their homework.
There are a lot of questionnaires out there and it’s important to use one that is asking the questions that matter to you. I’ve linked a few below from a couple financial planning organizations who support a fee-only fiduciary business model: National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (NAPFA) and Garrett Planning Network.
Before using a questionnaire, look it over yourself and think about the answers that you’d like to hear (the long questionnaire from NAPFA has an answer guide). Do you want to work with someone who is not a fiduciary (see previous post on why you should care)? What about if they accept commissions? Is that ok to you if you want to receive all financial planning services and implementation from one person? Or is hourly financial planning or a fixed retainer what you wanted? Do you want a written plan? Do you feel they should be a Certified Financial Planner™ professional if they’re providing a comprehensive plan to you (see alphabet soup post)?
Maybe you’ll want to take questions from all three (and other questionnaires out there) in order to address all your concerns. It’s your money and your goals, make sure you get the answers you need to feel comfortable with who is providing you advice!
National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (fee-only planner network) – Short Questionnaire
National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (fee-only planner network) – Long Questionnaire
Choosing a Financial Planner…Part II: What about the alphabet soup?
When I decided to get into the financial planning industry in the late 90s, I had one designation as my final goal: Certified Financial Planner™ professional. When I first heard that term, I was taking a Personal Finance class at Pierce College and getting my general education out of the way. I was going to school full time and working as a project manager at a multimedia software training company full-time, but I knew that wasn’t the career for me. I was trying to figure out what to do for the rest of my life and I took one semester to explore some alternatives by taking classes in programming, early childhood development and personal finance.
Although I enjoyed all of those classes, I found my passion with personal finance. I realized I could have a career where I worked directly with people to define their goals and create a plan to meet them, then got to dive into the numbers through spreadsheets and analytics which I love, too. Perfect blending of both worlds!
The CFP® is the top designation for financial planning and is the most rigorous to achieve. It requires education through a board-certified program offering a certificate or degree, three years of experience in the field, an agreement to abide by the code of ethics, and successful passing of the 10-hour exam. Then there are 30 continuing education hours required to complete bi-annually.
For those providing comprehensive financial planning, this is really the designation to have. Other designations focus on different specialties within the industry and I’ve outlined some of the others that you may see:
CFA – Charted Financial Analyst – This is the top designation for those that manage money. You’ll often see this designation held by mutual fund managers and by those at firms that specialize in money management. Very rigorous series of exams required to complete.
CIMA – Certified Investment Management Analyst – This designation is not as rigorous as the CFA and is meant for those providing investment advice but assisting individuals in setting their asset allocation and screening money managers or mutual fund managers for those individuals.
CLU – Charted Life Underwriter – For those offering insurance services, this is the designation you may see. This designation requires that a series of classes be completed offered by The American College.
Other designations that are not as rigorous to obtain, but indicate an interest or specialty in different areas:
CDFA – Certified Divorce Financial Analyst – Planners that can assist in the divorce process from a financial perspective to plan and educate for an equitable splitting of the assets.
CCPS – Certified College Planning Specialist – Planners that specialize in planning for college utilizing grants, scholarships, loans, investment options and tax strategies.
There is a smorgasbord of additional financial-related designations (over 80 that I last saw) that you may come across. Be careful about being influenced by the “alphabet soup” after some people’s names. Ask about the requirements for obtaining the designations and the continuing education requirements as well. Honestly, I’ve seen that some designations don’t require that much work to achieve (other than perhaps a large check to the institution administering the designation), and then there isn’t any continuing ed requirement to stay on top of the changes in that area.
What is a “fiduciary” and why do you care?
You may have been hearing or reading more and more about financial advisors being held to a “fiduciary” standard and you probably wondered why that mattered. Up until now, stockbrokers and other advisors at firms receiving commissions (e.g., wirehouses, insurance companies, banks, broker dealers) were held to a “suitability” standard, which meant that they simply needed to recommend investments that were suitable to each client’s situation from a risk and time horizon perspective. In other words, if an investor said that they were risk-averse, then the advisor couldn’t invest in high risk investments (aggressive stocks, high yield bonds) in their account.
To contrast that, Registered Investment Advisors and Certified Financial Planner professionals are held to a “fiduciary” standard meaning that when they advise their clients, they must put their clients’ best interests first. The difference is that if there were two comparable investments with the same objective, one with a high commission being paid to the firm (and the financial advisor) versus another low-cost, no commission fund, a financial advisor held to a “suitability” standard could legally recommend the fund with the higher commission because it was suitable for the client, even if it was not in the client’s best interest due to the high commission! A proposed law would require that all financial advisors be held to the same fiduciary standard. What is interesting is that an article in the Wall Street Journal (WSJ) on July 19th (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124536973514629609.html) reported that these changes to put the client’s best interest first could “upend” Wall Street! I think most people working with a financial advisor already assumed their needs were being put first, even if that was not the case. Fascinating how this change to better the investor’s experience could cause such turmoil!
Another article more recently in the WSJ on August 29, 2009 stated “Wall Street finally has agreed to put its brokers under the tougher fiduciary standard for their dealings with customers. Now a fight looms over how tough that standard will be.” I vote to make it as tough as possible. Investors deserve to know that their interests are always put first.
