Wealth Management


The DOL rule is the nightmare of many financial advisors. Described as “Byzantine”, it is confusing, litigious, full of loopholes, and generally speaking, a hassle. Most advisors seem to hope the SEC will draft up its own rule and come up with something better. Charles Goldman, a senior wealth management figure and CEO of AssetMark, says that the solution for the SEC may very well be to simply extend the Investment Advisors Act of 1940 to every individual providing paid advice. Its is a simple rule which protects clients by obligating advisors to disclose conflicts of interest and put their client’s interests ahead of their own. The SEC already has the administrative arm in place to enforce the rule, unlike the DOL, which relies on lawyers and courts.

FINSUM: A disclosure-based rule governing all types of accounts would be vastly superior, in our opinion, to the current rule. Hopefully the SEC moves in this direction.


The comment period of the DOL’s most recent delay of the fiduciary rule has been getting, as usual, some very strongly worded comments. But one of the most interesting things to emerge has been the fissure between RIAs’ view of the delay, and the opinion of broker-dealers. B-Ds are loudly in support of the delay, but RIAs say that pushing the rule farther out is likely to lead to confusion and additional costs for investors. Financial Engines, the giant RIA which manages over $100 bn, remains steadfastly in support of the rule, saying "A robust conflict-of-interest rule will help to promote the trend toward high-quality, low-cost, technology-based financial services and products that will make unconflicted advice increasingly cost-effective for advisers and accessible for investors of all means”.

FINSUM: It is very obvious why broker-dealers are in support of a delay, but less obvious why RIAs are against one. Our own view is that RIAs should be happy the rule is being delayed, as the imposition of a weaker fiduciary standard would water down the brand the industry has collectively built for itself.

(New York)

Investing in private equity has long been the exclusive domain of the very wealthy. Over the last decade, the sector has handily outperformed the stock market (9.9% annualized versus 7.5% including dividends), but because it is so hard to invest, many have missed out on those gains. There might be a way to get those returns much more cheaply. The way to do this is to use borrowed money to buy ETFs which hold stocks that are cheaper and smaller than average. Doing so over the last decade would have returned 8.4% per year. The companies in those ETFs tend to be bought by private equity firms.

FINSUM: Considering how low fees are in ETFs, sacrificing a bit of return by using this strategy will ultimately give much higher returns when you count private equity’s fees (~3.5% per annum).

Page 1 of 55

Contact Us



Subscribe to our daily newsletter

We use cookies to improve our website. By continuing to use this website, you are giving consent to cookies being used. More details…