The world of financial advice is a curious place, where decisions that impact your wealth are often made with the same discernment as choosing a sandwich at lunch—except the sandwich shop might be a bit more transparent about what you’re actually getting. Let’s delve into the peculiar habits of financial advisers when it comes to selecting investment strategies, and what this tells us about the state of the advice industry today.
Clients With Less Than £100,000: Retail Multi-Asset Funds for You!
If you have less than £100,000 to invest, congratulations—you’re likely to be ushered towards a retail multi-asset fund. It’s the adviser’s equivalent of saying, “Here, have this off-the-shelf product; it’s good enough for you.” These funds are readily available, diversified, and you can access them directly without paying those pesky intermediating fees that platforms and advisers love so much.
But here’s the kicker: Advisers, in many cases, don’t want to deal with clients who have less than £100,000 to invest. It’s like walking into a fancy restaurant with a fast-food budget. Most advisers will kindly direct you to the nearest exit, or at best, point you towards the DIY investment section. After all, why waste time on a small fry when they could be chasing whales?
Over £500,000? Discretionary Fund Managers Are at Your Service
Now, if you’re fortunate enough to be sitting on more than £500,000, you’ll find yourself in the hands of a Discretionary Fund Manager (DFM). Why? Because at this level, things get complicated—tax loss harvesting, stock-level filtering, and all those other fancy terms that justify hefty fees come into play. It makes sense, right? After all, you’ve got a lot of money, and with great wealth comes great complexity, apparently.
The real question, though, is whether this complexity is genuine or just a way to add layers of mystique to the process, thereby justifying the fees. After all, DFMs don’t come cheap. But hey, if you’ve got the cash, what’s a few extra percentage points in fees?
The Middle Ground: The Mysterious Third Party Centralised Investment Proposition
For those in the middle—those with more than £100,000 but less than £500,000—the adviser often takes the path of least resistance: outsourcing to a third-party centralised investment proposition. It’s as if they’re saying, “We could do the wealth management, but we’d rather let someone else handle it.” Which begs the question: If they’re not managing your assets, what exactly are they doing for their fees?
Ah, the fees. Let’s not forget that 90% of advisers facilitate the deduction of fees directly from assets under management (AUM), according to the FCA. But if they’re not managing the assets, how do they justify this fee in a value-for-money assessment? It’s a bit like paying a chef to cook your meal, only to find out he ordered takeout on your behalf. Intriguing, isn’t it?
Financial Planning Without Asset Management: What’s Left for Advisers?
Now, if we strip away the asset management and just leave the financial planning, what’s left for the regulated financial adviser to do? Why not let the client become their own financial adviser? The financial planner could still do the planning—without actually recommending an investment. After all, the UK market is awash with low-cost, well-diversified retail multi-asset funds that are readily accessible and auto-rebalanced based on risk budgets. Who needs an adviser when you’ve got Google?
But if we follow this logic, the role of the regulated financial adviser becomes rather redundant, doesn’t it? They would be left to draft fancy reports, offer advice on how to spend less on avocado toast, and perhaps occasionally remind you to update your will. It’s a bleak future, but one that raises an important question: If the market is commoditised and low-cost solutions abound, what real value do advisers add?
Conclusion: A Glimpse Into the Future
So, what does the future hold for the advice industry? Will advisers evolve into something more, or will they become the equivalent of expensive concierge services—nice to have but not really necessary? As more and more investors become savvy and self-reliant, the industry may need to do some soul-searching. After all, if the only thing standing between a client and a well-diversified portfolio is a few clicks on a website, one has to wonder: What’s the point of all the middlemen?
In the end, perhaps the biggest takeaway is that advisers, like the rest of us, are simply navigating a world where convenience often trumps complexity, and where the lines between value and cost are becoming increasingly blurred. Now, that’s something to chew on.
Comments