Kitces.com - Advancing Knowledge in Financial Planning

Weekend Reading For Financial Planners (October 24–25)

October 23, 2026 01:47 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of “Weekend Reading For Financial Planners” – this week’s edition kicks off with the news that a recent survey indicates that investor trust in human-provided investment advice increased, while trust in Artificial Intelligence (AI)-powered investment advice declined, compared to the prior year’s results. Further, the survey found that while relatively younger clients were more likely to trust AI-provided advice than their older counterparts, this group also experienced a sharp drop in trust in AI advice during the past year (perhaps as they have more exposure to its strengths and weaknesses?). Which, altogether, suggests that investors appear to continue to impose a ‘trust penalty’ on AI advice platforms, giving human advisors the opportunity to lean into what they do best, from building trust in personal relationships to giving clients the sense that they maintain control in the relationship.

Also in industry news this week:

The IRS recently finalized rules for the car loan interest deduction introduced in the One Big Beautiful Bill act, offering financial advisors the opportunity to add value by helping clients determine whether they might qualify for it and, at a broader level, whether financing a new car purchase is the best course of action given their personal circumstances

A survey indicates that individuals with a financial advisor are much more likely to have a plan in place to address a potential long-term care need and shows how the impact of care responsibilities (both in terms of time and money) can frequently fall on loved ones

From there, we have several articles on tax planning:

Why ‘filling up’ a client’s current tax bracket isn’t always an optimal strategy when it comes to making (partial) Roth conversions

The circumstances when a client might want to incur more taxes this year in return for a lower tax bill down the line (and the hurdles advisors might have to overcome to implement a related planning strategy)

An analysis of the expected after-tax accumulation of traditional versus Roth retirement account contributions and how it relates to the variance of the ultimate results

We also have a number of articles on practice management:

A five-step framework for handling fee objections, from acknowledging the prospect’s concerns to giving them room to make a decision

A one-sentence response advisors could use when prospects hesitate about an advisor’s fee that avoids the appearance of defensiveness and allows for a deeper investigation of the prospect’s underlying concerns

How financial advisors can communicate (the necessity of) fee increases with a value-centric, client-based approach

We wrap up with three final articles, all about the benefits of experimentation:

How financial advisors can help clients prepare for retirement and other goals by encouraging experiments that allow them to see what the future might be like without going all in

How engaging in experiments could be more effective (and productive) compared to setting major (challenging) goals in many parts of life, from careers to health and relationships

Why failure can be a competitive advantage for firms that are willing to experiment, be open to feedback, and apply the lessons of ‘failed’ initiatives

Enjoy the ‘light’ reading!

Beyond Google Reviews: A Two-Pronged Online Review Approach Balancing Marketing Impact With Compliance

October 21, 2026 07:02 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Marketing, Regulation & Compliance

When clients search for a new advisor, they often look for signals of competence and trust. In the world of AI-powered tools and search engines, clients can easily find nearly-endless options for advisors, but determining whom to trust – even enough to schedule an introductory call – is a tall order. Many clients opt to ask friends for a recommendation, but nearly everyone looks to the general public as well – that is to say, to client reviews. And since the 'modernized' SEC Marketing Rule became effective in 2021, advisors can now use testimonials from current clients and other related parties, provided that the advisor gives appropriate disclosures. That said, implementing reviews as an advisory firm can add an extra layer of complexity and compliance work, leaving many advisors to wonder if the proverbial 'juice' is worth the squeeze.

In this article, Whit Lanier, co-founder of Amplify Reviews (an RIA review-verification and publishing platform), and Kent Keister, founder of Reliant Compliance (an RIA compliance firm), discuss how advisors can implement client reviews in a sustainable, balanced manner. According to Amplify Reviews' own 2026 State of Testimonial Marketing report, 79% of top RIAs still aren't actively using testimonials or online reviews in their marketing, in part due to compliance complications or concerns. Yet at the same time, prospective clients increasingly rely on online reviews and other tools to evaluate their providers (and Google gives an outright search boost to highly-rated businesses). The challenge, then, is finding an approach that maximizes the marketing benefits of online reviews while remaining compliant with SEC requirements.

For most firms, receiving reviews is generally not a compliance issue; the greater challenge is soliciting reviews while remaining in compliance. For example, advisors must have a reasonable basis to demonstrate that third-party rating systems allow favorable and unfavorable feedback equally, without being designed to produce a predetermined result. An advisory firm must ask all clients for feedback, not just satisfied ones, and document the process by which they opted to ask for these reviews.

Of course, advisors are also balancing clients' own preferences and practicality. For example, while positive Google Reviews can strengthen a firm's visibility, many clients may not be comfortable publicly admitting that they have a financial advisor (or an advisor with a high minimum, for example) – and it isn't possible to post an anonymous Google review. As such, firm owners may solicit anonymous testimonials through third-party software, which can be displayed on their site. Through this approach, advisors sacrifice some Google search return visibility, but may gain an increased number of client reviews.

In short, relying exclusively on either Google or a third-party channel inevitably means sacrificing some combination of marketing reach, client participation, and compliance flexibility. As such, advisors may benefit from a two-pronged strategy that combines both Google Reviews and anonymous testimonials, allowing advisors to yield the benefits of both channels while maintaining flexibility to accommodate client preferences. Each firm's exact approach will vary based on client temperament as well as the team's own capacity. For example, one firm may send clients a single review request offering a choice between leaving a Google review and submitting a testimonial for the firm's website. A different firm can first collect website testimonials, then invite all respondents to post on Google (regardless of their rating). A third firm may opt to conduct several campaigns several months apart. While the exact approach may vary, the key is to have a transparent, consistent, and unbiased process.

Ultimately, the key point is that building a strong online reputation doesn't require advisors to choose between maximizing marketing impact and maintaining compliance comfort, especially for advisors that can combine the broad visibility of Google reviews with more anonymized third-party options. All of this can contribute to helping prospective clients gain a fuller picture of whom to hire – and increase their trust in the advisor, all before they even reach out!

And if you want to go deeper on this topic, hear directly from the author on the Financial Advisor Technician podcast.

Winning Clients And Moving ‘Upmarket’ By Being Confident In Telling Your Value Story: #FASuccess Ep 512 With Chris Smith

October 20, 2026 07:06 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Financial Advisor Success Podcast

Welcome everyone! Welcome to the 512th episode of the Financial Advisor Success Podcast!

My guest on today's podcast is Chris Smith. Chris is the founder of PSBLTY, a brand strategy, design, and implementation firm that works with financial advisors, teams, and firms.

What's unique about Chris, though, is how he works with advisors to create a more effective discovery process that closes more clients and helps advisors move upmarket.

In this episode, we talk in-depth about how Chris views leadership as a key element of the discovery process (as prospects want to know where the process is heading and how the advisor will guide them), why Chris believes the key to the initial meeting with a client is for the advisor to spend the vast majority of the time listening to the client (and then synthesizing and reflecting their comments back to them), and how Chris finds that closing the first meeting with an “assertive assumption”, rather than asking if the prospect has any questions, increases the chances the prospect will schedule a second meeting.

We also talk about how Chris views the second meeting with a prospect as an opportunity for the advisor to share planning insights and a strategy to move forward (spending most of the time during the meeting speaking themselves, unlike during the initial meeting), why Chris warns against going too deep in terms of analysis at this point to avoid creating confusion in the prospect’s mind, and the scripts Chris uses at the end of this second meeting to invite the prospect to become a client.

And be certain to listen to the end, where Chris shares how he got his start in the financial advice industry after working in commercial real estate (and finding that many of the same prospect communication techniques transfer over well), how Chris has identified a major difference between growing and scaling his own business (along with the importance of tracking key business metrics), and how Chris finds that a business can only grow as fast as its founder is willing to develop their leadership skills.

So, whether you’re interested in learning about how to structure that second meeting around planning insights and strategy without overwhelming the prospect, the scripts Chris uses to invite prospects to become clients, and how his background in commercial real estate shaped his approach to prospect communication, then we hope you enjoy this episode of the Financial Advisor Success podcast, with Chris Smith.

Why Profitability Matters For Client Service: Using Per-Client Revenue To Identify When To ‘Graduate’ Clients

October 19, 2026 07:03 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Practice Management

While working as a financial advisor can be attractive based on the ability to make a positive difference in clients’ lives, at the end of the day it is a business and the source of a firm owner’s livelihood. Amidst this backdrop, it’s important for firm owners to pay close attention to their profitability, as it not only helps determine their current-year income but also can serve as a buffer against adverse events (such as a major market downturn, a client lawsuit, or a regulatory action) that could massively disrupt the business.

In this guest post, Matthew Jarvis and Micah Shilanski, who now coach advisors through The Perfect RIA platform based on practices they successfully implemented in their own firms, discuss how advisors can measure their true profitability, create a client-by-client revenue report, and determine when it’s time to ‘graduate’ clients who are no longer a good fit (as well as how to approach this difficult conversation).

To calculate their profitability, a firm owner can start by determining their "True Gross", or the total amount of money paid by clients, which includes not only financial planning fees, but also investment fees, platform fees, fund expenses, etc. (to get a picture of the total amount a client is willing to pay for the stack of services the advisor offers). Next, the advisor can calculate their "True Net", which is all of the money that flows through to the advisor’s tax return from their practice (which could be some combination of wages, profits, owner’s distributions, guaranteed payments, etc). Finally, the owner can determine their profitability by dividing their True Net by their True Gross, aiming for at least 30% profitability – with 50% being ideal.

With a profitability figure in hand, firm owners can next use a "Red/Yellow/Green report" to sort their client base by revenue and identify clients who aren’t meeting the firm’s revenue-per-client targets. This exercise involves listing all client households, all revenues collected for each household over the last 12 months, and the assets managed by the firm. After determining the (ideal and realistic) per-client revenue target that they would like to reach, the advisor can then better identify those whose revenues already meet the desired target ("green" clients), those who fall between the ideal client revenue figure and one-half of this amount ("yellow" clients), and those whose revenues fall below one-half of the ideal amount.

"Green" clients are ideal and will be good candidates to remain with the firm going forward. "Yellow" clients can be given an ‘upgrade or graduate’ discussion, where they are given the opportunity to pay a fee that better reflects the value the advisor provides – or to find an advisor better suited to their needs. "Red" clients, with few exceptions (e.g., keeping 5 of these clients for every 100 in the firm’s client base), get put on the ‘graduation’ list, with the advisor offering a specific and authentic rationale for no longer being able to serve them and providing a way for them to find an advisory home that better fits their situation.

Ultimately, the key point is that while it can be tempting for firm owners to assume that they have healthy profitability (particularly when market performance is strong and buoys fees), it’s a valuable practice to take stock of the firm’s true profitability – to ensure sufficient cushion to protect against future contingencies, and to identify ways to increase profit margins into the future.

Weekend Reading For Financial Planners (October 17–18)

October 16, 2026 02:00 pm 0 Comments CATEGORY: Weekend Reading

Enjoy the current installment of "Weekend Reading For Financial Planners" – this week’s edition kicks off with the news that a survey by Vanguard of investors on its platform found that many of those who have engaged with Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools for money management or planning actually value their (human) advisor more because of these interactions, with very few indicating the opposite. Further, while the broader pool of investors surveyed appeared to largely use AI for quick (and free) answers to questions, there was significant discomfort amongst respondents when it comes to letting AI act on their behalf. Which suggests that while the ultimate level of ‘competition’ from AI for human advisors continues to develop, advisors who are able to lean into what makes them human (e.g., forging a deep understanding of their clients’ situations) as well as serving as a trusted source of information and reliable actor when it comes to executing decisions could see greater interest from prospects and loyalty from clients in the years ahead.

Also in industry news this week:

The Social Security Administration announced this week that the annual cost of living adjustment for 2027 will be 3.6% (though potential changes to shore up the Social Security system could end up playing a larger role in seniors’ long-term finances)
Congress has passed legislation that would change the names of key ages related to claiming Social Security benefits, linking them more closely to the size of benefits received

From there, we have several articles on Required Minimum Distribution (RMD) planning:

10 common RMD mistakes (and how financial advisors can help clients avoid them), from challenges in correctly coordinating RMDs across accounts to errors made when leveraging the ‘still working’ exception
The pros and cons of taking RMDs at the beginning, end, or throughout the year
Why the mechanics of taking RMDs for recently inherited IRAs can differ by custodian and lead to challenges for beneficiaries

We also have a number of articles on investment planning:

An analysis of historic asset class performance when bond yields spike suggests that while there tends to be short-term pain for longer-maturity Treasuries, there could be some light at the (unknown) end of the tunnel
Why investors might consider rebalancing at a time of higher bond yields and when many portfolios likely have veered from their target asset allocation
While some investors might be tempted by the current yields offered by longer-maturity Treasuries, cash-like instruments could provide a more attractive risk-reward balance for assets needed to cover shorter-term expenses

We wrap up with three final articles, all about being a better conversationalist:

While some individuals dislike ‘small talk’, research suggests it can provide professional and community-building benefits
Strategies to make yourself easier to talk to, from making a clear introduction to offering intriguing details about your life
13 questions advisors can use to better get to know new clients and their planning needs

Enjoy the ‘light’ reading!

When Keeping Your Options Open Is Riskier Than Making A Commitment: Kitces & Carl 201

October 15, 2026 07:06 am 0 Comments CATEGORY: Kitces & Carl Podcast

Kitces & Carl Ep Keeping Your Options Open

One can argue that financial planning is, at its core, about navigating different choices and trade-offs. Some decisions can have outsized practical, financial, and emotional impacts, such as when to retire, quit a job, or start a business. Succeeding and failing will each bring high consequences, and many people opt to "keep their options open"… but does that, too, have a cost?

In this 201st episode of Kitces & Carl, Michael Kitces and Carl Richards discuss the comparative advantages to making a decision vs. keeping one's options open – and when it may make sense to commit.

A lot has been said about "sampling" different lifestyles – as a low-stakes example, it is helpful to rent a paddleboard a few times before buying one. Similarly, it can be helpful to spend a prolonged amount of time in the country or city a person wants to live in. But sometimes, trying to keep "all options open" means that no progress is actually made; in other words, a person stays stagnant. Sometimes, while an ‘irrevocable' decision can be daunting, it can also lead to greater happiness than a safer, reversible choice. The reality is that while we all need to hedge decisions at times, there is a case to be made for committing and ‘burning' the proverbial bridge that needs to be crossed. In committing to something, we also give ourselves permission to dedicate our energy to it – which can yield greater results than the less committed decision to "leave doors open".

Alternatively, it may be worth evaluating the energy spent analyzing (and over-analyzing!) different decisions, compared to the energy of commitment. For example, if someone has ten units of energy, how much of that energy should be spent analyzing the pros and cons of a decision? How much that of energy should be spent ‘making' the decision the right one? For some decisions, it can genuinely be worth spending a prolonged amount of time deliberating, but often, it may be worth it to ‘simply' make a decision and keep moving.

In client conversations, advisors can not only provide a complete view of their financial flexibility and options, but also help clients think through the emotional side of these decisions. For example, advisors can ask, what if the ‘default' option were to disappear? What would the client do instead? Ultimately, the advisor may also end up as an accountability partner when a client has been stuck in deliberation for a prolonged amount of time. Even something as simple as flagging that a client has been in a state of indecision for a prolonged period of time can be helpful.

Ultimately, the key point is that while some decisions are challenging (and intimidating!) to make, as the saying goes, not making a choice is still a choice. The question to advisors – and their clients – is, what to do with their limited time, attention, and other capital. With some level of continual curiosity and momentum, advisors and their clients can gradually right-size their lives to discover what they truly want!