Wealth Management
(Washington)
Try not to lose your mind, but just when the industry thought the DOL’s fiduciary rule was fully dead and gone, it might be coming back. A financial advisor news site, BenefitsPro, has run a piece covering an obscure court move in North Texas on June 28th where a judge issued an order allowing anyone advising “relief” regarding the DOL rule to let the court know by July 12th. What the order means is that state attorney generals, such as from New York, California, and Oregon, could still step in to try to make a case out of the DOL rule.
FINSUM: Those states already tried to step into the Fifth Circuit Court case, but were refused. It is unclear what they will do here, but it stands to reason that they may make a go of it.
(Washington)
A senior wealth management expert, Scot MacKillop, has just run a piece in Wealth Management, arguing that the SEC has made a big mistake in the drafting of its new rule. The piece carefully employs various SEC statements to show that there is no sound logic for why the regulator created an entirely new two-tier structure for regulating brokers versus advisors. The piece makes clear the idea that if there is no fundamental difference between the service of brokers versus an advisor (something the SEC’s Clayton has said), then why should there be a regulatory difference. The SEC could have simply extended the rule from the Advisers Act of 1940 to also cover brokers.
FINSUM: It is true that simply extending the rules to brokers would have created the littlest amount of confusion amongst clients (one of the stated aims of the SEC). But at the same time, the nature of the relationship between brokers and advisors and their clients is different, so we understand the road the SEC took.
(Washington)
Trump has named his next choice for the Supreme Court—Brett Kavanaugh. Mr Kavanaugh has a long judicial history to review, and by all accounts, he looks like a very friendly pick both for Wall Street and wealth management. He has consistently sided with the interests of financial businesses in his rulings, including rulings against regulators like the SEC.
FINSUM: Obviously all the focus of the media is on Kavanaugh’s impact in a wider sense, but from a purely financial standpoint, he appears to be very anti-regulation.
More...
(New York)
It may have become such a part of your daily routine that you don’t notice it, but new technologies have completely transformed the RIA business. “The revolution in fintech has allowed advisors to now do in minutes what it used to take them all day to do”, says Wealth Management. With all the portfolio management software, robos, and beyond, technology has changed the nature of the business more towards client engagement and offering insights and opinions. One small RIA says new technology means they can grow AUM 10x but only make two new hires.
FINSUM: Technology does seem to have changed the nature of the business by taking out much of the mechanical work. We haven’t seen anybody that is upset with the change.
(New York)
Not only is the broker protocol collapsing underneath the feet of advisors, but a new court ruling has just set a precedent which will likely make it harder for advisors to switch firms. A recent ruling by the Georgia Court of Appeals says that advisors who have agreed in a contract to give advance notice of departure, but then do not, are not covered by the Broker Protocol. The case stemmed from a smaller firm, Aprio Wealth Management, making a claim against a group of advisors who moved to Morgan Stanley. “We’re really pleased with the court-of-appeals ruling on this case … We think it’s a very meaningful decision for small and midsize firms, especially for registered investment advisers that can feel confident they’ll be protected from poaching like happened to us”.
FINSUM: The bottom line of this story seems to be that one needs to make sure to give appropriate notice. However, that is not always be easy as there might be extenuating circumstances.
(New York)
There has been a lot of media attention over the last year about the rise of faith-based and politics-based investing. New ETFs and advisors are currently cropping up to cater to investors who would like to invest based on these principles. However, Barry Ritholtz thinks the concepts may not be a good mix. The author looks at the returns of a popular biblical-based fund and finds that its performance lags broader indices significantly. Ritholtz argues that investors need to check their emotions at the door when investing, which is why this kind of philosophical investing may not create good returns. Ritzholtz says “Do your civic duty on Election Day and vote, go to church on Sundays, but always bring a cool unemotional detachment to investing on Mondays”.
FINSUM: The fees on these types of funds also tend to be much higher, which means that you are losing on both ends. That said, the peace of mind people get from investing in things they feel morally comfortable with may be greater than the expense.