By: Thomas Schulte | Director of Financial Planning
A lot of people come to us familiar with the term “comprehensive financial planning.” They might say, “I’m working with a comprehensive financial planner right now.” However, we use the term “fully integrated financial planning.”
The best and worst part about fully integrated financial plans is that no one really knows they exist. When people hear “comprehensive”, the word choice makes it sound like the highest level of service. That said, we find that most advisors that claim to be comprehensive have noteworthy gaps in their plan.
What does this look like? This might be the simplest comparison I can offer.
When we talk about comprehensive planning, it suggests a complete view of your financial world. Investments, taxes, estate planning, insurance, and the rest.
The problem that we see (particularly for high-net-worth families) is that the client is still the one responsible for coordinating all of the different silos.
When you think about high-net-worth families, there’s typically no advocate sitting there saying, “You speak with your insurance agent every couple of months, your investment advisor and your estate planning attorney every six months.” Without someone taking ownership of this role, it’s fully dependent on you, the client.
The idea that all of these decisions are made in a silo is something that hasn’t been addressed before, and the marketplace doesn’t necessarily know a fully integrated option exists.
What we’re trying to provide is integrated financial planning in which the client sits next to us as their advocate. This way, they don’t have to decipher all the information and recommendations they’re getting from the different professionals in their lives. Your time is most valuable when it’s focused on wealth building.
What would change if your advisor took more ownership for protecting and advancing your financial priorities?
