Fee-Only Vs Fee-Based Planning: Understanding the Differences for Long-Term Success

Fee-Only Vs Fee-Based Planning: Understanding the Differences for Long-Term Success

Confused about the difference between Fee-Only and Fee-Based planning? You’re not alone. Financial planning jargon can be daunting when you’re just getting started.
 

Understanding the difference between Fee-Only and Fee-Based, however, is important and could be the key to your long-term planning success.

What is Fee-Only Financial Planning?
 

Fee-Only financial planners are legally registered as investment advisors and have a fiduciary responsibility to you to create a plan in your best interest. Fee-only advisors cannot accept any compensation as a result of product sales. In other words, they can’t make a commission from specific investments they recommend you purchase. They are paid directly by you – and only by you – either through an hourly fee, a retainer fee, or an agreed-upon percentage of your assets that they manage.

As a result, in most cases, Fee-Only advisors have fewer conflicts of interest. They are more focused on your needs, rather than on selling you specific investments, since their compensation is not determined by sales volume or choice. A Fee-Only advisor will not try to steer you toward commissioned annuities; a Fee-Only planner’s advice must be completely free of attachment to financial products. The role of Fee-Only advisors is to only provide you advice that fits your current financial situation and your goals and therefore not recommend products and services that don’t support that goal and that are not the best choices for you.

What is Fee-Based Planning?
 

“Fee-Based” is a category the brokerage community has created to take advantage of the success – and attractiveness – of Fee-Only advising. Because the terms sound so similar, it’s easy to think they are similar, but there is a major difference between Fee-Based planning and Fee-Only planning.

In Fee-Based planning, the advisor is compensated with a set percentage of your assets instead of a retainer or a flat hourly fee. In addition to that percentage, Fee-based advisors can also accept commissions from financial products, annuities, and insurance products they sell you. Each time you purchase one of those products, their earnings increase.

This leads to a fundamental conflict of interest. Your advisor wants to earn as much as possible while you want someone to provide honest and trustworthy guidance.

If one fund offers advisors a significant commission and another one doesn’t but is better for you and your financial goals, how likely is it that the advisor will forego the opportunity to earn the commission by recommending the better fund?

That is why the legally-binding Fiduciary Rule that Fee-Only Advisors follow is so important: the definition of a fiduciary relationship is one based on trust.

How to Make Sure Your Advisor is Fee-Only
 

Before selecting an advisor, ask how and what their compensation plan looks like. Ask them to disclose what their compensation fees are in writing and whether or not they accept commissions. By choosing an advisor who provides Fee-Only services, you stand a greater chance of avoiding any conflicts of interests. Remember, Fee-Based advisors are obligated by their brokers or by specific deals to sell certain products. Fee-Only advisors are under no such requirements and have a legal, fiduciary, obligation to work for you, and you only.

Brad Sherman
Advisor
Twitter Email

Brad Sherman is a financial advisor and the founder and president of Sherman Wealth Management, LLC, an independent, fee-only, boutique Registered Investment Advisor that make ... Click for full bio

Alternative Beta Strategies: Alpha/Beta Separation Comes to Hedge Funds

Alternative Beta Strategies: Alpha/Beta Separation Comes to Hedge Funds

Written by: Yazann Romahi, Chief Investment Officer of Quantitative Beta Strategies, J.P. Morgan Asset Management

A quiet revolution is taking place in the alternatives world. The idea of alpha/beta separation has finally made its way from traditional to alternative investing. This development brings with it a more transparent, liquid and cost-effective approach to accessing the “alternative beta” component of hedge fund return and a new means for benchmarking hedge fund managers.

The good news for investors is that the separation of hedge fund return into its components—rules-based alternative beta and active manager alpha—has the potential to shift investing as we know it. These advancements could democratize hedge funds and, at long last, make what are essentially hedge fund strategies available to all investors—even those who aren’t willing to hand over the hefty fees often associated with hedge fund investing.

A benchmark for alternatives


With respect to traditional equity investing, we have long accepted the idea that there is a market return, or beta—but this hasn’t always been the case. Investors used to assume that to make money in the stock markets, one needed to buy the right stocks and avoid the wrong ones. The idea of a market return independent of skilled stock selection seemed ridiculous to most market participants. Yet today, we would never invest in an active manager’s strategy without benchmarking it against its respective beta.

Interestingly, hedge fund managers have been held to a different standard. Investors have been much more willing to accept the notion that hedge fund strategy returns are pure alpha, and that their investment returns are based entirely on the skill of the fund manager. That notion explains why investors have been willing to accept a “two and twenty” fee structure just to access what has been perceived as one of the most sophisticated and powerful investment vehicles available.

In thinking about the concept of beta, consider its precise definition—the return achievable by taking on a systematic exposure to an economically compensated risk. In traditional long only equity investing, the traditional market beta has been further refined as a number of other risks have been identified that are commonly referred to as “strategic beta.” These include factors such as value, momentum, quality and size. But no one ever said that these risk factors must be long-only.

Over the past decade, as more hedge fund data became available, academics began to disaggregate hedge fund return into two components: compensation for a systematic exposure to a long/short type of risk (alternative beta), and an unexplained “manager alpha.” What they found is that a significant portion of hedge fund return can be attributed to alternative beta. That fact has turned the tables on how we look at hedge fund return. With the introduction of the alternative beta concept, hedge fund managers will have to state their results, not just in terms of total return, but also as excess return over an alternative beta benchmark.

Merger arbitrage—an alternative beta example


The merger arbitrage hedge fund style can be used to illustrate the alternative beta concept. In the case of merger arbitrage, the beta strategy would be the systematic process of going long every target company, while shorting its acquirer. There is an inherent return to this strategy because the target stock price typically does not immediately rise to the offer price upon the deal’s announcement. This creates an opportunity to purchase the stock at a discount prior to the deal’s completion. The premium that remains is compensation to the investor for bearing the risk that the deal may fail.

Active merger arbitrage managers can add value by choosing to invest in some deals while avoiding others. Therefore, their benchmark should be the “enter every deal” strategy, not cash. In fact, the beta strategy explains the majority of the return to the average merger arbitrage hedge fund. And it doesn’t stop there. Other hedge fund styles that can be explained using alternative beta include equity long/short, global macro, and event driven. Note that the beta strategy invests in the same securities, using the same long/short techniques as the hedge fund strategy. The difference is that the beta strategy is a rules-based version that can become the benchmark for the hedge fund strategy. After all, if a hedge fund strategy cannot beat its respective rules-based benchmark (net of fees), an investor may be wiser to stick to the beta strategy.

Implications for investors


What does all this mean for the end investor? Hedge funds have traditionally been the domain of sophisticated investors willing to pay high fees and sacrifice liquidity. Alpha/beta separation in the hedge fund world means that investors can finally choose whether to buy the active version of the hedge fund strategy or opt for the passive (beta) version. Hedge fund strategies can be effective portfolio diversifiers. Now, through alternative beta, virtually all investors can access what are essentially hedge fund strategies in a low cost, liquid, and fully transparent form. For investors who haven’t had prior access to hedge funds, this could be welcome news. Not only can investors look at an active hedge fund manager’s strategy and determine how it has done compared to the systematic beta equivalent, they can also invest in ETFs that encapsulate these systematic strategies.

When looking at one’s traditional balanced portfolio today, there are plenty of questions around whether the fixed income portion will achieve the same level of diversification it has provided in the past. After all, with yields still low, there is little income return. Additionally, the capital gains that came from interest rate declines are likely to reverse. With fixed income unlikely to adequately fulfill its traditional role in portfolios, there is a need to find an alternative source of diversification. This is where alternative strategies may help. For investors seeking to access diversifying strategies in liquid and low-cost vehicles, alternative beta strategies in ETF form are one option.

Looking for an alternative to enhance diversification in your portfolio?


For investors looking to further diversify their overall portfolio, JPMorgan Diversified Alternatives ETF (JPHF) seeks to increase diversification and reduce overall portfolio volatility through direct, diversified exposure to hedge fund strategies using a bottom-up, rules-based approach.

Learn more about JPHF and J.P. Morgan’s suite of ETFs here

DISCLOSURE

Call 1-844-4JPM-ETF or visit www.jpmorganetfs.com to obtain a prospectus. Carefully consider the investment objectives and risks as well as charges and expenses of the ETF before investing. The summary and full prospectuses contain this and other information about the ETF. Read them carefully before investing.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management
Empowering Better Decisions
Twitter Email

See how ETFs differ from other investment vehicles, learn how to evaluate them, and discover how ETFs can be used effectively to achieve a diversity of investment strategies. ... Click for full bio