Month: June 2017

5 common mistakes when working with an advisor

Special to the Financial Independence Hub

Canadians are often faced with complex and nondescript investment products that can be overwhelming.  As such, most people need professional advice. With personal recommendations as one of the most common forms of referrals, selecting the right advisor should also be based on qualifications, fees that won’t gouge, and the advisors autonomy to act in the best interest of the customer.

However, many people are now spending a significant amount of time surfing the web and seeking advice online, where it can be difficult to distinguish expert advice from the inept.

In Canada, 96% of registered advisors are “dealing representatives,” which means they are salespersons not legally required to look after your best interests. On the other hand, just over 4,000 advisors are registered in categories where they must act as true fiduciaries and are legally required to deliver clients advice that must be in their best interest. While there are many financial advisors who look after their clients in the same way as true fiduciaries and deliver exceptional support and guidance, there are a whopping 118,000-plus advisors who do not have to adhere to such standards.

As an investor in search of an advisor, your goal should be to find the right person to help you reach your future financial goals. While you can correct a poor choice down the road, you would have wasted valuable time and may have actually suffered financial setbacks. It is therefore paramount you avoid the following mistakes:

Mistake #1

Don’t fall for the opening pitch. No matter how enticing the discussion and no matter how obvious the initial set of benefits are, chances are you are only seeing one side of the equation. No one wants to reveal their warts, especial right off the bat. So take your time to establish a rapport with the advisor. Trust comes with knowledge and clarity so make your first appointment about gathering information and creating a connection.

Mistake #2

If investments and products are the first subject of conversation before attempting to build a profile of you and your family, take a pass. Remember you are looking for someone that can give you personalized advice and not a canned spiel or off-the-shelf solution. If the advisor starts talking about investments before understanding your fears then you should think twice.

Mistake #3

If the advisor starts spouting off jargon or buzz words, look to the nearest exit. Like most clients it is not your life long ambition to be fully versed in all things financial. You have a real life, with other priorities that require your focus and energy. After all isn’t that why you are seeking out an advisor in the first place? So demand straight talk without the mumbo-jumbo.

Mistake #4

Seek out a written and understandable set of recommendations. An unintelligible proposal is bad, but no proposal is even worse. Remember you want to avoid the sales pitch pressure. What better way to do that than having something tailor-made for your circumstances and then have the time to mull over the material before making a decision. It should be comprehensible, straightforward and written in plain English.

Mistake #5

You should be the one talking, not the advisor. Too often sales-first advisors talk too much and cannot be interrupted because they are pushing their agenda. Instead, they should be asking you questions; listening to your responses and providing concise answers given your requirements and needs. Verbal diarrhea should make you sick.

Your task is simple. Avoid falling for these mistakes. Ask yourself: “Have I experienced any of these mistakes?” If your answer is either “yes” or “I’m not sure” then perhaps change is necessary. Just remember you should never assume everything will be okay. Don’t assume it will be better down the road. Don’t assume your advisor understands your goals because you may find that only one of you is actually in it for the long haul.

 

June 29, 2017

Written by: Chris Ambridge

Source: http://findependencehub.com/5-common-mistakes-working-advisor/

Motivated to Perform

How do you motivate people? Countless studies have indicated the same basic fact: people are not usually motivated by money alone. Of course everyone needs money to sustain their lifestyle and plan for the future, but it is often other factors that compel employees to come in each day and do good work to help their organizations succeed and their clients prosper. Likewise, the sense of satisfaction that advisors receive when they help clients achieve their financials goals trumps the remuneration they receive. Any payment system where rewards are based on the quality of service is a good one.

On the other hand, sometimes a select few receive tremendous rewards regardless of results produced. We see examples of these situations all the time in the business section of the newspaper. In these cases incentives have little chance of producing any lasting positive effects. If clients are left paying and paying without seeing results then the problem is exacerbated. Incentives need to be aligned.

The truth is that many investments provide little added value and once people realize that the Emperor is not wearing any clothes, they will eventually become extinct.

There are myriad of financial products available. Mutual funds are the most convenient form of investing as investors can allocate among different asset classes based upon different qualitative and quantitative parameters, not just performance. To really understand the industry you have to understand how fund companies and their portfolio managers get paid and for what. The concept of “pay-forperformance” among mutual fund managers barely exists; in fact, if there is one thing fund managers are not paid for, as a general rule, it is performance.

A ground breaking new study, “Are Mutual Fund Managers Pa id for Investm e nt Skill?” (February 2017 Ibert, Kaniel, Van Nieuwerburgh and Vestman), used publicly available tax returns of 529 mutual fund managers in Sweden to show the interests of fund companies and their portfolio managers are very much aligned; but the connection between the mutual fund managers and investors is muddled.

In a nutshell, they discovered that there was a very weak relationship between pay and performance, but a very strong relationship between pay and the size of the mutual funds as measured by fee revenue. This makes sense because most mutual funds charge a flat fee on assets under management, so as assets grow the managers remuneration climbs along with it. Compensation was only weakly related to superior manager investment performance.

The study found no evidence that positive performance by a manager in a given year drove an upswing in funds under management in that year or the year after. However, fund managers were rewarded more for running additional funds or for taking over management of different funds with higher fees. The best performing fund managers are paid slightly better than the worst, but successful asset gathering was better rewarded. Consequently, closet indexing is becoming more rampant since performance and salaries are loosely connected. The real problem is while fund managers are protecting their own careers, clients are paying for active management to get indexlike results; minus the fees of course.

It is hard to blame investors who throw up their hands and just buy ETFs. Thankfully there is a true pay-forperformance model offered by Provisus Wealth Management for clients and their advisors on the Transcend platform that is set to revolutionize the investment landscape. Transcend’s novel spin on performance fees is to use them as way to present an attractively low base fee of 0.25% on equity funds to clients (lower than the fees charged by most equity ETFs in Canada). If the fund performs better than the benchmark, a performance fee equal to 20% of the fund’s performance above the benchmark will be charged. Operating on the philosophy that it will earn its fees when client portfolios outperform industry benchmarks, the firm is redefining the nature and delivery of financial services and directly aligning its interests with the clients. Pay-for-Performance™ will be a critical part of the compensation landscape going forward. Not because today’s investors need to be bribed to move their money into these types of vehicles. But, rather it will be because a static, inflexible, unchanging fixed fee strategy with no connection to the results achieved will be at distinct competitive disadvantage in a world as unpredictable and fast changing as ours.

Don’t Sell In May; Settle In

Stock investors often hear about “sell in May and go away” around this time of year. It implies that investors should sell their stocks in early May and buy them back in late October at a lower price. Since 1968 the S&P/TSX Index has risen an average of 8.0% (including dividends) from November to April but added only 1.5% from May to October. Interestingly enough, the “sell in May and go away” phenomenon appears to be universal across international stock markets.

Investors should be cautious about trying to trade around this phenomenon though. First, you would have to get two decisions right: the sell and the buy, which is extremely difficult. Second, the negative months in Canada were not that bad in absolute terms, so buying back the stock often cost you more. And finally, there have been multiple periods with good returns during the summer months (less than half of these months had negative returns).

Besides this phenomenon should be taken with a grain of salt, since most of the weakness was triggered by unpredictable events such as: Brexit last year; the Chinese equity market meltdown in 2015; the OPEC triggered oil price collapse in 2014; the world financial market selloff in 2008; and so on. All these were summer and early fall events.

In fact the really only bad month is September which, as seen in this chart, has posted an average decline of 0.38%. Only two other months, June and October, show any average loss. September is the worst month as the market fell more than 54% of the time, while over the same 49 year period stocks have only declined 42% of the time. October, feared as the crash month, shows an average loss of 0.11%, but it is the most volatile month. At the head of the pack was December with an average gain of 2.42% which was far better than the famed January effect.

Theories for September’s weakness are abundant: there is less money flowing into investments in the latter half of the year as bonuses and tax refunds came in early and frequently go into RRSPs; investors begin to pay more attention to investments after a summer off; and psychologically, when the leaves turn, vacations end and the days get shorter, there is a tendency for impatient investors to get rid of shares they had been thinking about selling. Then again it could be no more complicated than the fact that there are only 12 months in the year and there has to be a best and a worst one. Some month had to be September.

History shows investors could be better off rotating, rather than retreating. Investing in cyclical sectors (Consumer Discretionary, Energy, Health Care, Industrials, IT & Materials) from November to April and then gravitating toward defensive groups (Consumer Staples, Financials, Telecom & Utilities) from May to October could be rewarding. As the data to the left shows, the defensive stocks held up better between May and October, but only Utilities did better.

Reading too much into past trends can be a mistake however. The September market downturn is ultimately just a sort of emotional malaise. It is interesting to note that September’s negative seasonal bias is much less pronounced in years when the market is up year-to-date, as is the case this year.

MARKET DATA

This report may contain forward looking statements. Forward looking statements are not guarantees of future performance as actual events and results could differ materially from those expressed or implied. The information in this publication does not constitute investment advice by Provisus Wealth Management Limited and is provided for informational purposes only and therefore is not an offer to buy or sell securities. Past performance may not be indicative of future results.

While every effort has been made to ensure the correctness of the numbers and data presented, Provisus Wealth Management does not warrant the accuracy of the data in this publication. This publication is for informational purposes only.

Going Independent

Transitioning to a Financial Planning Model

This document is for advisors who are contemplating an independent business model for greater professional freedom, deeper client relationships and the financial rewards of owning a business.  It is organized into the following sections: Why Advisors Go Independent; The Economics of Independence; Putting Together a Plan; and Choosing a Platform.

 

Why Advisors Go Independent

 

Personal Freedom – Many advisors understand that their success flows from their own skills and abilities, not the resources and reputation of their dealer. For these advisors, independence offers the freedom to control, and retain more earnings and build equity in a business that could eventually be worth millions.

 

A Client Centric Service – Having built a book over many years you are now in a position to focus on your best relationships and perhaps attract new clients by providing unbiased, trustworthy advice, together with a compensation structure which is in sync with customer needs.

 

Clients Losing Trust in Institutions – Clients are choosing independent advisors more frequently because they believe they are more objective. Clients may be happy with their advisors but mistrustful of large dealers or the industry as a whole. Independence eliminates concerns of a parent company that could potential be associated with a scandal, tainting the image of the service. Clients who were once attracted by the name of a major dealer are now recoiling because of the negative publicity.

 

Conflict of Interest Resolution – Although the pressure to sell proprietary products has abated at many firms, some advisors acknowledge “subtle encouragement” to offer specific products.  Independent advisors aren’t under pressure to sell in-house products and have greater freedom to discuss the services and strategies which are in the best interest of their clients.

 

Compliance Restraints – Advisors are finding it harder to do business due to increasing regulation as a result of the financial crisis, dot com bust, scandals, frauds and firm failures.  Financial planners are able to look at the big picture on behalf of their clients while outsourcing compliance responsibilities to other providers to shoulder the majority of the burden.  

 

Independence Can Be Lucrative – Many advisors have already moved toward a fee based platform by running their own firm within the payout structure of a larger institution but they could be leaving money on the table. Advisors who transfer this same business model to an independent platform can, depending on how they manage expenses, have the opportunity to significantly increase their income.

Independent advisors are also building equity in their business. A successful independent advisory firm may exceed 25% operating profit margin after fairly compensating the owners and meeting overhead expenses. The profitability of independent firms creates a transferable cash flow stream. The industry press has reported numerous acquisitions at valuations from 1.5 to 3 times annual revenues or between 6 and 10 times earnings. An advisor with $1 million in annual fees could, by taking the business independent, create an asset worth between $1.5 and $3 million, a portion of which may be tax free in Canada.

 

The Industry Is Embracing the Fee Based Model – The fee based model provides a predictable revenue stream to the advisor, who continues to serve the account throughout the year and across market cycles, which in turn aligns interests with the client. When fees are based on assets under management, the advisor has an incentive to increase revenues by growing client assets. Independent advisors enjoy greater flexibility in setting client fees which helps them to become more competitive and manage their practices more effectively.

 

Advisors Want to Control Their Professional Future – Of all the reasons advisors choose to go independent, autonomy is perhaps the biggest lure. Independent advisors who have an entrepreneurial spirit want greater independence. The independent advisor model gives them the Theyfreedom to create their own value proposition.

 

The Economics of Independence

The transition to an independent platform is highly dependent upon having sufficient resources and a detailed transition plan. There are organizations that can simplify the process but the initial step must be to understand the economics of independence for your circumstances.

Independent advisors typically retain 100% of their revenue but at the same time assume the expenses of their own office. A detailed plan is required to ensure that after paying rent, utilities, insurance, software, marketing, administrative salaries and other business expenses you end up with a profitable firm. Results vary primarily by expense management and your client profile. Advisors that serve smaller household accounts tend to be less profitable than their peers. When turning independent, advisors must always remember that in addition to serving clients they are also running a business.

An advisor’s outlook on independence may also be influenced via forgivable loans from their dealer which were taken on as a signing bonus.  Focusing on such loans may be shortsighted because with independence, the financial rewards come from building your own business. Clients are generally considered to belong to the dealer but under the independent model your clients are truly the foundation for building equity. When you are ready to retire, the business can be sold for a multiple of revenues or income.

Then there is the risk of moving from a firm where the payout seems consistent to an independent model where expense management becomes a significant concern. Becoming independent also involves a number of other issues beyond the fundamental economics.

 

Putting Together a Plan

Initially, you should evaluate your existing clients to:

  • determine which clients are a good fit for the independent business model
  • the likelihood that they will move with you
  • the timing of asset transfers
  • the subsequent implications for cash flow

You will also need to craft a very compelling value proposition to clearly explain why you are making the move and the benefits of continuing the relationship.

Once you have identified potential clients and their portfolios you will need to:

  • Thoroughly understand the terms of any non-compete and confidentiality agreements that you have with your dealer
  • Assess the implications of changing from a commission based to a fee based business, including how to handle trailer fees
  • Consider the clients’ portfolios that may hold proprietary investment products of the dealer and the tax or expense implications of liquidating them
  • Become familiar with the types of assets that can be easily transferred from one financial institution to another

Once your potential asset base has been determined you can start on your business plan:

  • Service model – the types of services you want to provide at the start, and as you grow
  • Target market – determine the ideal client profile, including age, geography, minimum account size, and investment needs
  • Your strengths – a list of the your competitive differentiators and value added capabilities
  • Location – the site for the new business, and whether the firm will share, lease, or own the premises
  • Timeline – key steps and dates for getting started and for managing the firm on an ongoing basis
  • Revenue projections – first year revenue and profit targets, including sources of revenues and projected cash flow – knowing that not all of the clients will necessarily be part of the practice on day one, and fees are typically paid quarterly in arrears
  • Budget – a first year budget for major expenses
  • Insurance – ensure proper coverage

With a fundamental plan sketched out, you can add more detail at the next stage which includes the assessment of other service providers.

  • Strategic planning – create a business plan and think through the strategic considerations of the change
  • Technology and client reporting – seek out turnkey portfolio data management and client performance reporting
  • Business set-up – create a workplace that will welcome clients and motivate employees
  • Marketing – design a sound marketing strategy that broadcasts the value of the services to the target audience

 

Choosing a Platform

As you can see there are many steps involved in becoming independent but it is possible to find support from outside firms. Unfortunately, too many advisors spend too much time inefficiently trying to do everything from asset allocation to writing investment policy statements, performance reporting, investment selection, customer service and day-to-day business operations. It’s little wonder they feel exhausted at the end of the day.

Many functions can and should be delegated. The value-added services that you should consider outsourcing include:

  • Client management and compliance– CRM technology, client profiling, KYC requirements, investment policy statements and asset allocation
  • Investment management – manager due diligence, research, rebalancing, overlay portfolio management and access to institutional managers
  • Account administration – account opening paperwork, setting up accounts, monitoring transfers and overseeing the ongoing administration of accounts
  • Performance monitoring – data aggregation, reconciliation and performance reporting
  • Operations – billing, compliance tools and online account access
  • Market and manager analysis – manager reviews, quantitative evaluations and performance comparisons
  • Training and education support – newsletters, industry insight and product support

The platform you choose should allow you to remove the burden of cumbersome, complicated back office responsibilities and gain access to a one stop shop of investment services and professionals. It should reduce the resources you allocate to in-house asset management, where it is increasingly difficult to gain a competitive edge relative to the big, specialized players and it should maximize your capacity to provide the highest level of personal service possible to clients.

In the final planning stage, you should evaluate potential platform providers.  Here are some questions you should ask when conducting this crucial assessment:

  • Product value – Does the platform’s product solution create real value for my firm and my clients? Does the platform provide incentives to sell certain products? What is the platform’s breadth of manager/investment selection?
  • Service value – Does the platform provide education on business building issues? Does the platform offer technical support on a range of topics that may be of interest to clients? What is the platform’s reporting capacities?
  • Personnel value – Besides helping advisors with the day-to-day running of their firm, how well does the platform help advisors think strategically, grow their business and increase their income?
  • Image value – How experienced is the platform’s management team and what are their areas of expertise? What are the platform’s investment philosophy and process like?
  • Time costs – How rapidly can the relationship begin and how soon will it make a difference? What are the platform’s service quality and responsiveness like?

Keep in mind that the platform should provide a level of service you cannot find elsewhere. If the platform is employee owned, it can empathize with small business owners. Additionally, they should offer a state of the art platform that allows the advisor to stand out from a service perspective.

Advisors need to counter growing threat of robo-advisors

As new research shows robo-advisors are gaining traction among clients, advisors should find ways to use these tools as well as provide the unique services that set them apart.

As robo-advisors present a growing threat to traditional financial services firms, financial advisors should find ways of using these tools in their practices and focus their efforts on services that cannot be replaced by technology, according to several investment industry insiders who spoke at the Independent Financial Brokers of Canada’s (IFB) Spring Summit in Torontoon Thursday.

“[Robo-advice] is going to become more and more prevalent,” said Chris Ambridge, president and chief investment officer at Provisus Wealth Management Ltd. and president of Transcend Private Client Corp., an online platform and a subsidiary of Provisus, both based in Toronto.

Ambridge pointed to recent statistics from Strategic Insight showing that assets under management at Canadian robo-advisors jumped by 44.6% to $1.07 billion at the end of the first quarter (Q1) of 2017 from $743 million in the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2016. During that same period, the number of accounts surged by 56.1% to 46,149 from 29,572, while the number of clients rose by 55.2% to 33,757 from 21,752.

The size of those accounts, however, is shrinking. At the end of Q1, the average account size was $23,274, down from $25,126 in Q4 2016.

Nevertheless, research suggests that a growing number of clients are choosing robo-advisors over traditional advisors. Ambridge presented the results of a recent survey showing that 30% of investors believe robo-advisors do a better job than human advisors, and 72% of clients under the age of 40 said they are comfortable working with virtual advisor.

But it’s not only millennials who are making the switch. The average age of a robo-advisor client is 44, Ambridge said: “You would think it’s all millennial people who are just starting off, but it’s not.”

In addition, the survey shows that of the affluent clients who had switched firms in past two years, 45% went to a robo-advisor.

The shift to robo-advisors is being driven in part by consumers’ growing preference to transact digitally, but also by a lack of trust in the financial services sector, Ambridge said. In fact, 70% of the clients surveyed said they question the trustworthiness of financial services professionals.

“Trust in financial services is not at an all-time high,” he said. “In fact, it’s pretty low, quite frankly.”

For advisors, this means that taking the time to build solid relationships and earn clients’ trust is more important than ever, Ambridge said.

Instead of viewing robo-advisors as a threat, advisors should focus on the factors that differentiate them from those online services, countered Ron Fox, chairman and CEO of Toronto-based Glidepath Portfolio Services Inc.

“The human financial advisor is not going anywhere,” he said. “Technology cannot replace you, because the reasons why people value your service have nothing to do with technology.”

Specifically, technology could never replace the empathy and reassurance that clients get from their advisors Fox said. However, he noted that advisors can use technology to improve the services they provide.

“Technology is facilitating customized and enhanced levels of service that weren’t accessible to most in the past,” said Fox.

Specifically, advisors should utilize technological tools to help with tasks that can be done more quickly and more affordably by computers, such as asset allocation and systematic portfolio rebalancing, Ambridge said.

“Don’t spend a lot of time on things that computers can do better,” he said. “All you’re doing is wasting your time.”

That allows advisors to focus on the value-added personalized advice that computers cannot offer, such as comprehensive financial planning, tax planning and helping clients build a legacy, he said. Advisors should also strive to offer a variety of different asset classes and products to differentiate their offerings from those available online.

Embracing technology to automate some of the administrative tasks that previously consumed advisors’ time and resources can also help advisors be more profitable, added Robert Frances, chairman and CEO of Montreal-based Peak Financial Group.

By Megan Harman | June 01, 2017 15:20

http://www.investmentexecutive.com/-/advisors-need-to-counter-growing-threat-of-robo-advisors?

Advisors need to counter growing threat of robo-advisors

As new research shows robo-advisors are gaining traction among clients, advisors should find ways to use these tools as well as provide the unique services that set them apart.

 

As robo-advisors present a growing threat to traditional financial services firms, financial advisors should find ways of using these tools in their practices and focus their efforts on services that cannot be replaced by technology, according to several investment industry insiders who spoke at the Independent Financial Brokers of Canada’s (IFB) Spring Summit in Torontoon Thursday.

“[Robo-advice] is going to become more and more prevalent,” said Chris Ambridge, president and chief investment officer at Provisus Wealth Management Ltd. and president of Transcend Private Client Corp., an online platform and a subsidiary of Provisus, both based in Toronto.

Ambridge pointed to recent statistics from Strategic Insight showing that assets under management at Canadian robo-advisors jumped by 44.6% to $1.07 billion at the end of the first quarter (Q1) of 2017 from $743 million in the fourth quarter (Q4) of 2016. During that same period, the number of accounts surged by 56.1% to 46,149 from 29,572, while the number of clients rose by 55.2% to 33,757 from 21,752.

The size of those accounts, however, is shrinking. At the end of Q1, the average account size was $23,274, down from $25,126 in Q4 2016.

Nevertheless, research suggests that a growing number of clients are choosing robo-advisors over traditional advisors. Ambridge presented the results of a recent survey showing that 30% of investors believe robo-advisors do a better job than human advisors, and 72% of clients under the age of 40 said they are comfortable working with virtual advisor.

But it’s not only millennials who are making the switch. The average age of a robo-advisor client is 44, Ambridge said: “You would think it’s all millennial people who are just starting off, but it’s not.”

In addition, the survey shows that of the affluent clients who had switched firms in past two years, 45% went to a robo-advisor.

The shift to robo-advisors is being driven in part by consumers’ growing preference to transact digitally, but also by a lack of trust in the financial services sector, Ambridge said. In fact, 70% of the clients surveyed said they question the trustworthiness of financial services professionals.

“Trust in financial services is not at an all-time high,” he said. “In fact, it’s pretty low, quite frankly.”

For advisors, this means that taking the time to build solid relationships and earn clients’ trust is more important than ever, Ambridge said.

Instead of viewing robo-advisors as a threat, advisors should focus on the factors that differentiate them from those online services, countered Ron Fox, chairman and CEO of Toronto-based Glidepath Portfolio Services Inc.

“The human financial advisor is not going anywhere,” he said. “Technology cannot replace you, because the reasons why people value your service have nothing to do with technology.”

Specifically, technology could never replace the empathy and reassurance that clients get from their advisors Fox said. However, he noted that advisors can use technology to improve the services they provide.

“Technology is facilitating customized and enhanced levels of service that weren’t accessible to most in the past,” said Fox.

Specifically, advisors should utilize technological tools to help with tasks that can be done more quickly and more affordably by computers, such as asset allocation and systematic portfolio rebalancing, Ambridge said.

“Don’t spend a lot of time on things that computers can do better,” he said. “All you’re doing is wasting your time.”

That allows advisors to focus on the value-added personalized advice that computers cannot offer, such as comprehensive financial planning, tax planning and helping clients build a legacy, he said. Advisors should also strive to offer a variety of different asset classes and products to differentiate their offerings from those available online.

Embracing technology to automate some of the administrative tasks that previously consumed advisors’ time and resources can also help advisors be more profitable, added Robert Frances, chairman and CEO of Montreal-based Peak Financial Group.

 

By Megan Harman | June 01, 2017 15:20

http://www.investmentexecutive.com/-/advisors-need-to-counter-growing-threat-of-robo-advisors?

 

Meet the team: Our President

Chris is Transcend’s President and the heart and soul behind the company. To say he’s passionate about revolutionizing fees in the investment industry is a gross understatement. “[I] believe that linking investment management fees to the quality of performance achieved is a good way to align our clients’ interests with ours, ensuring that we are successful when our clients are successful”. He’s the kind of guy you always want on your team. Read on for more about Chris:

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 1.21.11 AM

What is your favourite investment strategy?

You have to look at the big picture of your life. It depends where you are, what you’re trying to accomplish and what your individual goals are. A square peg in a round hole will never work.

If you had to choose, what is your one piece of personal finance advice or your “motto”?

I like to say, “a rut is just a shallow grave with both ends kicked out”

No matter what kind of financial rut you’re in…if your investment portfolio is a mess and doing nothing for you, there’s always strategy to make an easy fix and a positive change.

What is the best part of being on the Transcend team?

The diversity of what we offer, seeing and learning new things constantly, and never experiencing the same thing day in and day out. The thought-provoking opportunities I face every day keeps it interesting.

What’s your next big finance goal?

Honestly, just to continue to build on what I’ve already accomplished. Eventually it adds up!

I’m more about current consumption than far-off dreaming. It’s not about where you’re going but how you get there.

 

If I were a client, why would I want to work with you?

Because I’m exceptionally witty.

But seriously, were a very personable, service-oriented firm and we’re not full of ourselves. We always deliver on what we say we’re going to do.

Do you consider yourself conservative or a risk-taker?

You have to take risks occasionally, but always keep one foot close to the sidelines.

 

At what point would you tell someone they need professional finance help?

The best time is when you’re thinking about making a change

Going from debt-mode to accumulation mode, single person to a couple or family? Seek the help of an advisor.

 

 In your opinion, what’s the biggest financial fail someone can make?

Relying on rumours and peoples suggestions (hot stocks, anyone?)

Don’t be a trend-follower – there’s no quick fix. If you want a quick fix, buy a lottery ticket or go to the casino.

 

What were some early leadership lessons for you?

When I had my first job, I was always dumbfounded by how little I actually had in the bank.

Spending and consumption seemed important until I realized it wouldn’t get me anywhere. Everything changed when I created a temporary budget. It might seem a little boring, but it’s pay me now or pay me later.

 

If you could have lunch with any three people, living or dead, who would they be?

The French philosopher Voltaire, the Hunchback of Notre Dame and Walt Disney.

 

Meet the team: Our Managing Director

Ryan is our client expert, dealing with customers and investors on a daily basis, helping them reach their financial goals. He’s not afraid to roll up his sleeves and get down to business. Despite his busy schedule, he’s always smiling and, more importantly, making others smile. Read on for more about Ryan.

Screen Shot 2017-06-01 at 1.04.45 AM

What is your favourite investment strategy?

My strategy involves staying patient, sticking to my financial goals, and staying the course even when times are turbulent.  Slow and steady wins the race.  Also, consistent monthly contributions.

If you had to choose, what is your one piece of personal finance advice or your “motto”?

Invest for success!  Or be debt free.  

What is the best part of being on the Transcend team?  

Being a part of a team that is revolutionizing the Canadian investment industry by creating the first Pay-for-Performance™ fee structure.  Literally the most client-friendly fee structure in Canada!

What is your biggest personal finance goal for yourself?

Saving for a comfortable retirement and the ability to provide for my family.  

If I were a client, why would I want to work with you?

Fees are based more on merit and the performance of our portfolio managers rather than fees based solely on asset size.  I’m always looking out for the best interests of our clients.  Also, we’re very nice!

Do you consider yourself conservative or a risk-taker?
In order to produce better than average returns we must be willing to absorb additional risk.  While I’m not a conservative investor, I only take calculated risks using plain vanilla strategies and avoiding sectors and products I don’t fully understand.  

At what point would you tell someone they need professional finance help?

When I meet them.  No matter who you are, we can all use help.  Be it a coach, guide, or mentor.  Different ideas and perspectives help us become more aware!

In your opinion, what’s the biggest financial fail someone can make?

The biggest financial fail is someone who believes that they can do just fine without some type of plan.  The second biggest failure is someone who doesn’t stick to the plan once it’s created.  

What were some early leadership lessons for you?

You have better production and results when you work as a team.

If you could have lunch with any three people, living or dead, who would they be?

Abraham Lincoln, Winston Churchill, and Rodney Dangerfield