I never hear Clark talk about Fisher Investments. Any input about them would be helpful. My husband is thinking about switching our retirement accounts from Edward Jones to Fisher. Although Fisher charges 1.5 % in fees (vs Edward Jones 1%), he feels the added fees that Edward Jones charges with trades etc., offsets the extra half percent Fisher charges.
Thanks in advance.
PS: We are already drawing from our IRA accounts
My husband and I are dealing with the same decision. We have had our retirement accounts for 20 years with Edward Jones. We are concerned about many overlapping Mutual Funds. We are now considering switching to Fisher. We are in our mid 60s. Would appreciate any thoughts on this. Thank you.
They advertise a lot on LinkedIn (at least that’s where I see them), in case you’re wondering what they do with all those fees they collect. I have no personal experience with them.
If you’re making enough trades to offset a 0.5% difference in fees, you’re doing it wrong. If it were me, I’d be moving to Fidelity or Vanguard, investing in something with 0.10% fees or lower, and making trades no more than once per year.
… Hmmm… I wonder if the interest in Fisher Investment services has anything to do with recent market performance and the increased Fisher ads I’ve seen on TV lately.
Ask Fisher for proof of performance results as weighted per a portfolio and clientele age and risk attributes. Vanguard has advisor services that are less than 1%. I think they are 0.30% of your account value -ie- $3000 annual cost for a $1 million portfolio. If Fisher is asking for 100+ more basis points to manage your portfolio, ask them what you get for that. And yes, 100 basis points is why Ken Fisher is a billionaire.
Look at Schwab and Fidelity…
Does one of those have an office near you.
I assume with Edward Jones, that is important to you.
I have not been in a Brokerage office in probably 20 years.
Fidelity has no trade fees. Their telephone support is excellent.
BTW, I wondered about Fisher’s slogan… “We do better when you do better.” Just what does that mean? I wondered if the rate dropped during down years???
Well when you do better you have a larger account for them to take their 1.5 percent… nothing special about that… True of virtually every Mutual Fund.
To add to the above comments- Vanguard and Schwab have both the advantage of lower advisory fees and likey higher returns from using index funds rather than actively managed funds. There have been many studies of market returns that show a disadvantage to using actively managed funds.
A 2021 SPIVA report look at the performance of all active funds compared to index funds: “in 16 out of 17 domestic equity fund categories, and in 3 out of 4 international equity categories, a majority of institutional accounts underperformed over a 10-year period.”
A 2022 SPIVA report looked at how the small percentage of of actively managed fund that did well for 1 year did over the next 2 years; “Of the actively managed equity funds whose 12-month performance placed them in the top quartile (25%) of their respective category as of June 2020, not a single fund maintained its top-quartile(25%) performance over the next two 12-month intervals.”
U.S. Persistence Scorecard Mid-Year 2022 - SPIVA | S&P Dow Jones Indices.
IMO, anything is better than Edward Jones. The may charge lower fees but they put you in high cost products that have loaded fees and other underlying fees. They will also churn your account. After a few years, they will put you into another account and get their commission again. This is coming from a former insurance agent that has dealt with Ed Jones.
I would run, not walk away from Ed Jones. You are most likely paying all sorts of fees you didn’t know about.
I’ve seen them a lot on Fox News and Lifetime when I watch Golden Girls - not a political thing but a demographic thing - seen it on YouTube as well so they’re focusing on the 55+ demographic. Yes some YouTube is promoted towards early Gen Xers and late baby boomers so I’d expect them to advertise on shows that have reverse mortgage ads too
I’ve heard something that said Friends are older now than the Golden Girls were when they first aired.
They are in the “problem awareness” stage of the sell cycle, (convince the prospect they have a problem.)
Next step is to develop that problem into a bigger and more serious problem in the prospect’s mind.
Then you present possible solutions, (your products,) to solve the prospect’s problem. At this stage you try and transition to the role of a “expert consultant,” to help the person solve their problem.
And then together, “we,” (the salesman and the prospect) find a Goldilock’s solution to solve the prospect’s serious problem.
Then it’s "thank goodness, we found the thing that will save you from financial disaster… “just sign right here.”
Lesson: Don’t buy anything till you’re sure you have a problem worth the price of the proposed solution.
Which is the same for every investment with every company. It’s not inaccurate, but kinda misleading, as if they’re the only company that does this.
For fee-based brokers it’s more a case of we do better when you churn your assets. And given the many shifts in customer vs stockholder loyalty many publicly-held entities have displayed over he past few decades, I would question your observation as it relates to them as well.