Quote:
Originally Posted by FXMR
Throwing a hard stop at self-directed investments like the $2MM in investable assets as stated above is completely arbitrary. Far too often people get swallowed into the idea that financial planing is black and white when in reality every individual has different requirements.
|
Totally agree.
Quote:
|
If your portfolio consists of a few retirement and taxable brokerage accounts for long term growth, with the wealth of information out there today there is absolutely no need for a financial advisor.
|
This is me.
Quote:
|
Now, begin to mix in more complicated topics such as tax and estate planning, generational wealth, family support, real estate, alternative investments etc. and a good (again, emphasis on this word) financial advisor instantly becomes a lot more valuable.
|
Totally agree. My earlier post about not needing a FA if you've got less than ~$2M in assets is based on the assumption that you don't have additional real estate beyond your home/lake house, you're of a younger age (<60), you're not selling often , and/or you're not getting into "alternative" investments. If you've got a ton of money, investments, assets, property, etc. then yeah, you need a FA for sure. If you're trading/selling often and making lots (and losing lots), then you need at least a tax guy.
I'm assuming most in this thread are the typical American investor that is going for safe, long-term growth and have a 401K or similar through work, maybe a Roth IRA and/or brokerage account, and 3 to 12 months net salary in cash as an emergency fund. If this is you, investing and managing things yourself is freaking easy. As for estate planning, keep your will updated and make your beneficiaries are correct on all your accounts. Easy.
Want to beat 90+% of the investors/fund managers out there? 80-90% in S&P 500 index funds and 10-20% in bond funds. Simple as that.