Financial Advisor Offerings

The future financial adviser will look much more like a pilot. Modern pilots do not manually fly every mile of every journey. The aircraft largely flies itself, with systems constantly monitoring performance, optimising efficiency, and providing alerts and recommendations. Yet despite all of this technology, the pilot remains absolutely critical. The pilot sets the destination. The pilot monitors the instruments. The pilot reassures the passengers. And most importantly, when something unexpected happens, the pilot takes control. No passenger ever boards a plane hoping there is no pilot. They take comfort from knowing someone experienced, calm, and accountable is sitting at the front, watching over the journey and ready to act when it matters. Financial planning is moving in exactly the same direction. AI will increasingly handle calculations, cash flow modelling, product comparisons, and portfolio analysis faster and more efficiently than ever before. This will improve accuracy, increase efficiency, and raise standards across the profession. But clients were never really paying us to operate the machinery. They were paying us for judgement, for reassurance, and for the confidence that someone experienced was helping guide their decisions. Clients will still need a pilot. Someone to help them decide where they are going in life. Someone to keep them calm when markets fall. Someone to apply judgement when circumstances change. And someone to take responsibility. The value will no longer be in manually flying the plane. The value will be in being the person trusted to command it. The advisers who understand this will not compete with AI, they will work alongside it, using it to enhance their advice while continuing to provide the human judgement that clients value most. Just like the very best pilots. #JustRob 🩵 #FinancialPlanning #AI #Professionalism #FinancialAdviser

Over the past eight years at Ellevest, talking to women about money has given me countless insights and some conversations still astound me. Just this past week, I spoke with several highly capable, smart women (think CPAs, tech employees, business owners, women who manage their family's finances) who all shared a similar frustration with their long-time financial advisors. One even used my least favorite description for their experience: "fine." The common thread? Every one of these women had at some point been treated as a secondary participant in their own finances. Here are just a few ways the financial industry continues to miss the mark when working with women: Reinforced gender stereotypes still loom large. One woman told me that while she's in charge of her family's finances, her all-male advisory team subtly sidelined her — and the only time she interacted with a woman at the firm was to "handle paperwork." Lack of active listening. (This one always amazes me.) Advisors need to realize their job is more than just choosing the right allocation. One woman noted that her advisor continued to bring her investments that simply didn't align with her personal values … a clear sign she wasn't being heard. Denied their agency. The entire approach by these advisors pushed women away from their own money decisions. So here's my advice to the financial industry: working with women is not about creating a "pretty deck." It's about fundamentally understanding that women want agency over their money and they want to be active participants in their financial journey. If your clients describe you as "fine," that's a problem.

I'm not sure why it is just happening, but it seems that the mainstream media has finally caught on to the great wealth transfer that has started. Yet, they are still missing one key aspect. For those (like CNBC and CNN) just learning about this trend, it's the passing of some $80-90 trillion of wealth from Baby Boomers to Gen X and Millennials over the next 10-20 years. At Life Insurance Strategies Group, we've been talking about this transfer, and one particular facet of it, for a while. That facet - the new face of wealth. These younger generations are significantly more diverse than prior generations. Meaning more women, people of color and LGBTQ+ people will be making the decisions around wealth. And yet, we still really do not see the financial services industries making the changes necessary to service this new generation of wealth. The result: 👉 70% of women change advisors within a year of their husband passing (according to McKinsey); and 👉 More than 70% of heirs are likely to fire or change financial advisors after inheriting their parents’ wealth (according to Cerulli). Why? These people do not feel heard, understood or valued by advisors. According to research from Fidelity, advisors have reached out to only 13 percent of their clients’ adult-age children. The McKinsey report found that women who switch advisors do so because the advisors never included them in discussions around investing, make them uncomfortable to ask questions, and don't understand their view of investing and risk. This is a pivot point for advisors across financial services. Adapt and thrive. Stay the same and, well, good luck to you.

The cheapest contractor often ends up being the most expensive. We’ve all seen it. Someone picks the lowest bidder for a renovation or a repair and a year later, they’re paying twice the money to fix what went wrong. Now apply that same lens to financial planning. There’s a whole breed of fintech services out there offering “comprehensive financial plans” for ₹10,000 or less. Sounds tempting, right? A small price for peace of mind. But here’s what you actually get: A cookie-cutter plan built off a template An Excel sheet that’s heavy on numbers, light on thinking An intern with 3 months of experience talking to you and plugging in numbers Zero understanding of the client’s behavior, money patterns, or real-life challenges No follow-up, no accountability, no staying power This is not financial planning. This is filling out a form and pretending it means something. Personal finance is personal. A good financial plan is not just math. It’s psychology, adaptability, and coaching. It’s someone helping you stay on course when life throws curveballs. It’s someone who says, “Let’s tweak this, not panic,” when the markets dip. Now compare that with a seasoned MFD (Mutual Fund Distributor) who earns through commissions. Yes, there’s a fee but if they’re good, they more than earn their fee They bring years of market experience They adapt your plan as life changes They guide you when you feel shaky And most importantly, they keep you from making big, emotional mistakes That one nudge to not redeem in a panic? It can pay for 10 years of commissions in a single moment. But many people still chase “cheap.” And then end up with fragmented portfolios, abandoned plans, and no one to talk to when it matters most. Here’s the truth: A good advisor doesn’t cost you money. A bad one does. Why let someone who barely understands human behavior or even seen one market cycle design your financial future?

Most financial advisors can't outperform a low-cost ETF portfolio that costs 10-20 bps to own. In many ways, index funds have effectively "solved" investing. Yet many people continue to delegate their investment management to financial advisors. Why? The answer is simple: people don't hire financial advisors to maximize their investment returns. They hire them to satisfy a broader set of needs that cannot be met by simply owning index funds. This fact emerges from three survey-based studies. A 2020 study on a broad survey of ~3,000 individuals finds evidence that people hire financial advisors to satisfy needs including: -purchasing “peace of mind” -having access to the opinions of an expert -and delegating financial decisions The authors classify investor needs into five categories: -knowledge -trust -personal improvement -delegation -and investment performance They find that the most important need is trust, followed by personal-improvement. The least important is investment performance. https://lnkd.in/entQkMQA This finding aligns with a highly cited theoretical paper - Money Doctors. The authors argue that trust in an investment manager enables investors to take risks, and earn returns, that they might otherwise not obtain. https://lnkd.in/e5vbBWdc In a Morningstar study, 312 responses to the question “Please list some reasons why you hired your advisor...” were analyzed. The top motivations were to alleviate discomfort in handling financial issues, the desire to achieve a specific goal, and behavioral coaching. A similar study from Morningstar analyzed 620 responses to the question “please list some reasons why you continue to have an advisor”. “Discomfort handling finances” - with specific reasons like “peace of mind” and “money makes me nervous” - was the top overall response. Index funds may have "solved" investing, but solved doesn't mean easy. Investing is inherently uncomfortable, emotional, and makes many people nervous. The needs for trust-based peace of mind, expert opinion, and delegation cannot be solved by a financial product.

If you’re a salaried professional in India, you probably think you don’t need a financial advisor. Your EPF is running. SIPs are on. Tax-saving investments? Done by March. But here’s what most miss: It’s not the products that build wealth. It’s the strategy. A good advisor helps you: - Avoid locking into bad insurance-cum-investment traps - Plan for real goals: house, kids, retirement — not just tax savings - Make smarter choices during market crashes and bull runs - Avoid that cousin-recommended “hot tip” that wipes out your bonus And the difference? It’s not small. Two people earning ₹20L a year: One takes random financial decisions. The other follows a clear, disciplined plan with the right advice. 25 years later, the first retires with ₹1.5 crore. The second? ₹4 crore or more. Same income. Same career. Just better guidance. So the real question isn’t “Can I afford a financial advisor?” It’s “Can I afford not to have one?”

Your client's wife has no questions at the end of your meetings. And you've decided that means she doesn't have questions. I need to stop you right there. Because I've been studying this dynamic for over a decade, and what looks like disengagement almost always comes down to one of two things, and they require completely different responses from you. Treating them the same is one of the most expensive mistakes you can make as an advisor. Here's the first one. She doesn't want to say anything that contradicts her husband. In many households, and I'm speaking statistically, not universally, the meeting dynamic has an unspoken hierarchy. She may genuinely disagree, have questions, feel uncertain. But she's not going to surface any of that with him in the room. That's not weakness. That's a read on the room that you need to also be making. Here's the second one. She's afraid of saying something that might make her sound like she doesn't understand finance. And this one breaks my heart a little bit every time I say it, because women are so much smarter than they give themselves credit for, regardless of the topic. But the financial services industry has, for generations, communicated in ways that made women feel like outsiders in conversations about their own money. And so she goes quiet. Now here's where the stakes get real. Cerulli projects that nearly $40 trillion in wealth will transfer to widowed female spouses over the next 25 years. McKinsey has found that 70% of those women leave their advisor within a year of inheriting. Seventy percent. And when I talk to advisors about this, so many of them say some version of: "But Julie, I do invite her. She just doesn't say anything." That's not enough. Inviting her to the meeting is not the same as having a relationship with her. You need to call her independently. Not through him. Not cc'd on an email to him. A direct call. Just you and her. And not to talk about the markets or her portfolio. To say: It's important to me that you and I know each other. Because I want to be a resource for you, whatever is going on, whenever you need it, for any reason at all. That call changes everything for her, and therefore you. If you can't imagine yourself making that call, ask yourself why. And then ask yourself whether you've actually done the work, or whether you've just sent an invitation.

A good advisor won’t make you rich overnight. But they will make sure you don’t run out of money when it matters the most. Last time, I wrote about what advisors can’t do: they can’t predict markets or pick winners consistently. So what your financial advisor can do for you? 1. Build a plan that is yours. Not the market’s, not CNBC’s, not your friends’ or colleagues’. A plan tied to your goals and maintained strategically through life changes. 2. Invest for what can go right. A retirement you don’t outlive. Children educated at the best institutions they qualify for. A legacy that outlasts you. All of it, unaffected by today’s market noise. 3. Stop you from making the big mistakes. Greed at the top. Panic at the bottom. These two erase decades of compounding. An advisor’s first job is to help you avoid these mistakes at all costs. 4. Keep you liquid at all times. Education, retirement income, emergencies - having cash when you need it without killing long-term growth. 5. Support your family beyond investments. Clarity in estate planning. Ensuring ease in wealth transfer. Systems that take the stress off your family when you’re not around. The boring, unglamorous groundwork that decides if your family is secure when you’re not there. 6. Buys you time, energy, and perspective. Because the cost of advice is negligible compared to the cost of your time and energy. Can you do all this yourself? Possible. Is it probable? Absolutely not. That’s the difference. Advice isn’t about chasing returns. It’s about discipline, perspective, and a plan strong enough to carry your family through decades of uncertainty. Everything else is noise.

The most common piece of advice given to mid-senior women who feel undervalued at work is to make yourself more visible. Speak up more. Put your hand up. Make sure the right people know what you’re doing. Own the room. Take up space. And I understand why it gets given. It sounds empowering. It locates agency with the woman. It gives her something to do. But what it’s actually saying is the problem is that the organisation can’t see you clearly. And the solution is for you to work harder at being seen. It makes the woman the variable. The organisation stays exactly where it is. I’ve sat with enough mid-to-senior women to know that most of them are not invisible because they’ve been quiet. They’re invisible because the organisation built measurement systems, recognition structures, and advancement criteria at a time when the workforce looked different, and those systems have a visibility gap baked in that no amount of speaking up will fix. Telling a woman to make herself more visible in that environment isn’t empowering. It’s expensive. It costs her energy, political capital, and eventually the belief that any of it will make a difference. Individual women making themselves louder cannot fix a structural silence. It’s not a confidence problem. It’s a design problem. And design problems don’t get solved by the people they’re failing.

A trend I continuously see: Widowed women firing their financial advisors. Why? Not because they don’t need guidance, but because most advisors (generally men) are so uncomfortable handling grief. Most financial professionals are trained to talk markets, analyze risk, and calculate returns. Most are taught: sell, sell, sell. Time is money--so spending time helping a newly widowed woman process her grief is not seen as a profitable way to spend time. Very few advisors have been trained on how to sit across from a woman who just lost her husband of 50 years and listen. Just listen. So what do these advisors do? They rush through the important conversations and focus on numbers instead of emotions. In the process, they make their client feel unheard, pressured, and dismissed in one of the most difficult times of her life. Nobody should feel rushed into life-altering financial choices while they’re still in shock. Those decisions have long-term consequences. People call me the “Widow Whisperer” because I recognize that widows aren’t just another account to manage. They’re human beings who are grieving. I've gone through the same process myself as a young widow. I know that it takes time, and a gentle approach. I’ve found that sometimes what a woman needs isn’t financial advice, but a cup of tea, some chocolate, and a box of tissues. A safe space where she can breathe before tackling the next steps, together with me. Because, honestly, if an advisor can’t sit with a widow in her grief, why should she trust them with her future?