Getting ready to cut back at work & hopefully retire in the next 3 years or so. Just curious if the pack thinks it's worth hiring a financial advisor & if so who you would recommend in North or Central MS (retiring in Grenada area). I work in Huntsville & am pretty impressed with one of the advisors available here. Thoughts? I've always managed things myself but at this point I wouldn't mind paying a reasonable fee for advice and/or active management.
OT: MS Financial Advisors
- Thread starter jwtorch
- Start date
Greg Bowen at Edward Jones in Starkville. Well worth what it costs. Their app/web site has a play feature that really allows you to see what a purchase does to you long term. It’ll tell you what you can and can’t do.
I'd be interested in the name of the Huntsville advisor, since I'm retiring soon as well (and staying in Huntsville
) I'm planning to evaluate Vanguard and Boldin (since I already use their Retirement Planner)Cris Wallace with WG Financial. One of my co-workers is using them. Another co-worker likes Keel Point. I'm not really adverse to having one here, but I'd rather have one closer to Grenada. I met one fine MSU grad there that works for Raymond James, & I might end up using him. Just exploring my options.I'd be interested in the name of the Huntsville advisor, since I'm retiring soon as well (and staying in Huntsville
Just make sure to do a fee only advisor
Cannot stress this part enough. Way too many folks getting screwed out of hard earned money by % commission advisors
Is fee based different than fee only? I have seen the ones that do 1% fee a year on total assets.
PooPops and I have started a financial advisement company. You show up, and we pour you a whiskey. Then we pour ourselves a few whiskeys. Then I start doing stuff on FRED, and PooPops starts building colorful graphs. After a couple hours, we’ve convinced you to put all your money into alcohol and patent leather
That is not uncommon but damn that's expensive. Especially when that's a wrap fee and you're also paying fees for the underlying investments. You should be able to do better than that.
That said, I don't have a good answer. I do my own stuff and it's probably not optimal, but $10-20k a year when you're trying to grow your portfolio seems less optimal.
go with a fee based registered investment adviser (fiduciary responsibility to do what is best for the client). avoid brokers (loose responsibility to purchase assets that are characteristic of what the client would buy/what fits their profile). a broker can churn you for fees.
Fee only should be a flat amount for planning and advice. Avoid anything that is based on your trades or investment amount. There is a fiduciary responsibility for fee only advisors to act in your best interest, not for the others.
Percentage based is not necessarily a bad thing. The more they make, the more you make. Just make sure they are paying for their percentage by earning better than average returns
Sit down and read Jack Bogle's Little Book of Commonsense Investing. It took me an afternoon. You are crazy to be paying somebody.
Just be aware you're probably going to get put in so many mutual funds that you're diversified beyond belief. You can easily do this on your own with one or two very diversified, low fee funds at a place like Vanguard.
I'd put some time into understanding prudent asset allocation as you age into retirement and pick a quality fund company with low expense ratios in their funds. And do it yourself. If your assets are high enough you'll get an account representative who will likely be reasonably knowledgeable.
You're just always gonna care way more about your money than anybody else. It's worthwhile to understand what your investments are.
I'd put some time into understanding prudent asset allocation as you age into retirement and pick a quality fund company with low expense ratios in their funds. And do it yourself. If your assets are high enough you'll get an account representative who will likely be reasonably knowledgeable.
You're just always gonna care way more about your money than anybody else. It's worthwhile to understand what your investments are.
A fee-based advisor can charge you a fee based on a percentage of assets but may alternatively charge you on a commission basis. So you need to ask what they plan to do. Fee-only is exactly what it says. They only charge on a percentage of assets
Crypto to the moon or some shlt. I think I'm supposed to hash tag something.*
#We'reAllUsingIntangibleCurrencyAnyway
#We'reAllUsingIntangibleCurrencyAnyway
That's basically the approach I've taken up to this point. Just getting cold feet as I approach retirement
OP, I think when most people in this thread are saying "Fee Only," they mean you would pay the financial advisor an hourly rate for his time. If you are nervous about retirement, it may be worth buying a few hours of a FA's time.
Paying a % of assets under management (which is the model of most FAs) is a huge drag on your returns and completely unnecessary today.
Paying a % of assets under management (which is the model of most FAs) is a huge drag on your returns and completely unnecessary today.
That's basically the approach I've taken up to this point. Just getting cold feet as I approach wretirement
I get it. It sounds like you really just want somebody knowledgeable that you can visit with once or twice a year and ask questions and make sure you're on track. Others here can give better advice than I can on that kind of advisor if that's your route.
I just recently went over some things with a family member and it was beyond ridiculous how many different funds they had been put in by their rep. They probably owned 5,000 different individual investments if you added up all the securities owned across all the funds.
Vanguard charges a lot more than Fidelity for the same funds.
What makes you say that? Vanguard has always been really hard to beat in terms of fund expense ratios.
Checked them and Fidelity on the Wilshire 5000 market index fund and they both show a .56% expense ratio.
Some can. A lot cannot. And then there are some that probably could but don’t and would rather pay someone else bc they don’t want to deal with it. It’s a lot like home repair.
Overall it’s easy to put your money in an index fund or two. The hard part for most is not selling it all at every 10-15% pullback.
Most people make dumb decisions during market volatility. That is worth the fee an advisor charges in itself. They take emotion out of the picture. If you sale assets at the wrong time that can cost you way more than the 1% fee you pay. Just my two cents
I manage about 20% and I pay someone more knowledgeable to manage the other 80%. It gives me the feeling of contributing but I also can’t do anything stupid enough to become a door greeter.
Just buy as many annuities as the salesman pushes on you.
I know several folks who use Edward Jones, generally speaking their returns are lower the S & P 500.
I know several folks who use Edward Jones, generally speaking their returns are lower the S & P 500.
I can’t. I pay an advisor. I have tried to figure out investing and simply don’t get it.
There is a really solid guy in Greenwood who works for Raymond James associates.
good human and good at what he does also
VOO has an expense ratio of 0.03%, FXAIX has an expense ratio of 0.015%. 0.56% is way more than anybody should be paying.
Of course they are lower. To get market returns an advisor has to beat the market by at least what they charge. Almost nobody can do that over any length of time. And if they can I guarantee they are not sitting in an Edward Jones office in Mississippi,
Agree on the investing side. Anybody can put their money into a good target date retirement fund and do better than most financial advisors could ever do. The one place I can see where an advisor could help you is in helping you determine how much you need to be saving while you're working and in tax planning for retirement. That tax planning can get complicated with Roth and regular IRAs and 401(k)s, social security, medicare premiums, medicare supplement plans, etc.
Retirement Calculator
Put your retirement savings, your contributions and your annual return into the retirement calculator, and we'll show you how much you can expect to have when you say goodbye to the 9-to-5.
www.ramseysolutions.com
That is pretty simple. Then it's max Roth, then max out traditional if you can, and then non tax advantaged investing.
It's not quite that simple. It can be better to put money into tax deferred plans in some cases, though I agree as a general rule, Roth's first. And again, the really complicated stuff comes after retirement.Retirement Calculator
Put your retirement savings, your contributions and your annual return into the retirement calculator, and we'll show you how much you can expect to have when you say goodbye to the 9-to-5.
That is pretty simple. Then it's max Roth, then max out traditional if you can, and then non tax advantaged investing.
Tax deferred sounds great when your 40 but when you’re drawing it out it’s a lot less painful drawing it from those accounts where you paid taxes 25 years ago on that money.
We do mostly tax deferred as we have a good amount of W2 and SE income.
Going to talk to a guy in Hsv next month. And I've got a good MSU grad in Gunader that I've talked to once that works for Raymond James.