The Broker vs Advisor Debate Goes Mainstream

The New York Observer’s Patrick Clark has an article out today on the Suitability vs Fiduciary (or Broker vs Advisor) debate that’s been raging in the investment profession for years now.

Main Street is starting to take an interest in this decidedly Wall Street topic as they should – after all, nowhere is this standard of care issue more relevant than in the accounts of the clients themselves.

I have a quote in the piece, along with some context, below – and they didn’t edit me 🙂 …

As the financial products became more complex, incentives were harder to discern. Mutual funds, for instance, offered varying fee structures, allowing investors to decide how they wished to pay for the product: With an up-front sales charge that took an initial bite out of the principal, or with ongoing fees. An investment adviser registered with the SEC was required to recommend the product in a client’s best interest. A broker-dealer, on the other hand, could offer a client either one.

“If the branch manager tells you one product gets you 3 percent commission and that one gets you 7 percent, it’s the nature of human beings and capitalism and life that you’re going to sell that one,” Josh Brown, author of the blog The Reformed Broker and the book Backstage Wall Street, told The Observer. “There’s nothing illegal about it. As long as the product is suitable for the client, it can be done.”

Mutual funds, Mr. Brown said, are a tame example: “Principal protection funds, high-fee annuities. Private REITs, fucked IPOs, secondary offerings. There’s a litany of shit that you won’t find a fiduciary adviser selling.”

Make sure to click over and read the whole thing, this is important stuff.

Source:

Broken Brokerages: Finance Luminaries Join Fight Over Uniform Fiduciary Standard (NYO)

And read my book to really learn what goes on behind the scenes:

Backstage Wall Street on Amazon

 

 

 

 

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here: https://www.ritholtzwealth.com/advertising-disclaimers

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Bitcoin Era Review 2020 commented on Oct 01

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  2. bitcoin era commented on Oct 01

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  3. Top Agency Hong Kong commented on Oct 10

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  4. replica tag heuer a commented on Dec 08

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Info here to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  5. white leaf commented on Dec 12

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  6. replica rolex commented on Dec 17

    … [Trackback]

    […] Info on that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  7. diamond art commented on Dec 17

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More Information here to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  8. td login commented on Dec 24

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]

  9. replica watches commented on Dec 31

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More to that Topic: thereformedbroker.com/2012/08/22/the-broker-vs-advisor-debate-goes-mainstream/ […]