Weekend Reading For Financial Planners (June 6–7)

Author: Adam Van Deusen, CFP

Team Kitces

Adam is a Financial Planning Nerd at Kitces.com. He previously worked at a financial planning firm in Bethesda, Maryland, and as a journalist covering the banking and insurance industries. Outside of work, he serves as a volunteer financial planner and class instructor for local and national non-profits.

Read more of Adam’s articles here.

CFP Board Compensation Survey Indicates Advisors With CFP Marks Earn 11% More Than Peers

(Melanie Waddell | ThinkAdvisor)

While the share of advisors with the CFP marks has risen steadily over time, and now numbers more than 109,000 CFP certificants today, relative to an estimated 300,000+ total financial advisors, the reality is that about 2/3 of financial advisors still are not CFP professionals. This means that, for most advisors, the decision to obtain this designation remains an open one. A crucial factor in an advisor's decision  to prepare for the CFP exam – often requiring them to sacrifice evenings and weekends to complete the requisite CFP education coursework (which can take more than a year), and then taking a CFP exam review program, resulting in a cumulative spend of many thousands of dollars – is whether they will actually earn more as a result of doing so.

According to a survey (highlights of which can be found here) conducted by CFP Board (which, admittedly, naturally has an interest in promoting the value of the CFP marks) of 1,624 financial planners (including both CFP certificants and those without the marks), while the median total compensation amongst all financial planners surveyed was $195,000 in 2025 (up from $185,000 in 2024), CFP professionals earn 11% more than their counterparts who do not have the certification (after accounting for factors such as years of experience, company size, and job role).

Total compensation not surprisingly varied by experience and role amongst the full group of planners, with those having more than 20 years of financial planning work experience earning a median of $360,000 (with those with less than 5 years of experience having median total compensation of $115,000) and supervisors of five or more staff members showing median total compensation of $452,135 (with non-supervisors having median compensation of $145,000). Notably, though, CFP Board's results include both profit distributions as owners, in addition to actual salary and other cash compensation for working in the business.

The survey also showed that, in addition to base salaries and incentive compensation, advisory firms typically offer a variety of benefits to their planners, including professional certification or designation dues (received by 93% of respondents), health insurance (92%), and professional association dues (88%). In terms of paid time off, respondents received a median of 20 days per year, as well as a median of 10 holidays (also, 81% of respondents said their firm offers a hybrid or remote work policy, and more than 80% reported access to parental leave).

Overall, 85% of CFP professionals surveyed said they experience personal fulfillment with their careers, with 54% of respondents expressing "very high" fulfillment. Digging deeper into different attributes of work life, 89% of respondents who are CFP certificants rated their career stability a 4 or 5 on a 5-point scale, with 83% saying the same for work-life balance, 80% for career advancement, 80% for professional development, and 75% for compensation.

Altogether, while CFP Board does half a self-interest to promote the success of CFP professionals, their study's findings do mirror previous independent research (including Kitces Research on Advisor Productivity) that CFP professionals tend to earn more than their counterparts without the certification, particularly amongst service advisors for whom the CFP marks appear to increasingly be a hiring signal to employers that supports getting job offers with higher salaries (which "works" as advisors with CFP marks do appear to genuinely be driving more revenue for their firms as well). Similarly, Kitces Research on Advisor Marketing also finds that CFP professionals have lower client acquisition costs as well (i.e., that consumers themselves are increasingly seeking out and preferring advisors with CFP certification over those who do not have the marks).

All of which suggests that there is a strong ROI to the time and money it can take to earn the CFP marks. Though, notably, such benefits are still likely accrue over time (i.e., advisors might not experience a sudden influx of prospect inquiries or a big salary boost immediately after earning the marks, but rather benefit in the long-run from the credibility boost and career progression that can come with being a CFP professional).

Client Satisfaction Is High But Referrals Are Low: Report

(Rob Burgess | ThinkAdvisor)

The financial advice industry has long demonstrated high client retention rates (often well north of 90%), which suggests that clients are largely satisfied with the value they receive for the fees they pay. Nonetheless, while holding onto a client is valuable, so too is receiving referrals from the client (which can be a relatively low-hard-dollar source of new clients and revenue). A recent report suggests, though, that there could be a disconnect between satisfaction and referrals, creating opportunities for proactive firms to drive referral growth going forward.

According to the 2026 Client Intelligence Monitor from wealthtech firm Absolute Engagement (which surveyed 1,000 financial advisory clients with at least $500,000 in investible assets), overall client satisfaction remains high at a score of 93 on a 100-point scale. Responses were also solid for loyalty (92), self-confidence (87) on the same scale, and the report found a strong net promoter score (57). However, other factors suggested potential room for improvement, with respondent perception of value relative to fees paid coming in at 80 out of 100 (with only a third of clients rating it a 5 out of 5), and a score of 35 on the report's Engagement Index. These latter figures might have contributed to the score (46) for the Referral Activation Index, which suggests that satisfaction alone (with 96% of respondents saying they are at least somewhat satisfied) isn't enough to drive referrals.

Altogether, these findings suggest that while advisory firms might feel comfortable given high client satisfaction and retention rates, taking a look at its value proposition (and how it might be enhanced?), considering clients' emotional factors alongside financial outcomes, and finding ways to increase client engagement levels not only could serve as insurance against future waning satisfaction that might lead to client departures, but also could move more clients from being 'merely' satisfied with the service they're receiving to being motivated to recommend their firm to others.

Reg S-P Compliance Deadline Hits For Affected Smaller RIAs

(Patrick Donachie | Wealth Management)

In recent years, financial industry regulators have increasingly recognized the importance of cybersecurity for advisory firms, given that most firms not only hold a trove of their clients' personal data, but often (through discretionary trading or money movement abilities) have power over their clients' money itself.

Amidst this backdrop, the SEC in 2024 adopted amendments to Regulation S-P (which concerns financial firms' use of private client data) that, among other measures, requires covered institutions (including SEC-registered RIAs as well as broker-dealers and certain other financial firms) to "develop, implement, and maintain written policies and procedures for an incident response program that is reasonably designed to detect, respond to, and recover from unauthorized access to or use of customer information".

In addition, the response program will be required to include procedures to notify clients whose sensitive information was or is "reasonably likely" to have been accessed or subject to unauthorized use. Were such an incident to occur, firms would be required to notify their client "as soon as practicable", or no later than 30 days, after becoming aware of the breach. Such a notice would include details about the incident, the breached data, and how affected individuals can respond to the breach to protect themselves. The deadline for RIAs with at least $1.5 billion in Assets Under Management (AUM) to comply with the new amendments hit last December, while the compliance deadline for smaller RIAs arrived on Wednesday this week.

Notably (given that most RIAs rely on third-party software tools in their tech stacks), the rule also extends to third-party vendor relationships, requiring them to have their own incident response protocols and to notify an RIA they work with within 72 hours of becoming aware of a data breach. Which is leading some RIAs to push for language addressing this change to be added to their vendor contracts (given their own obligations to respond quickly and meet client notification obligations), though anecdotal reports suggest some firms are having a hard time getting "reasonable assurances" from service providers that they're properly protecting client information and will be able to meet the notification deadline.

In sum, while firms might be able to address certain tasks to comply with Reg S-P (e.g., creating internal policies, procedures, and an incident response plan) internally, others (e.g., ensuring third-party vendors report data breaches in a timely manner) might require negotiation and new legal assurances. Though ultimately, such efforts (in combination with internal cybersecurity programs that can reduce the chance of a data breach in the first place) could both keep RIAs in line with these updated regulatory requirements and give their clients greater confidence that their data is being protected and that any future incidents will be communicated clearly and handled quickly.

The 4 Risks To Retirement Security

(Chris Heye | Journal Of Financial Planning)

While retirement is often a period of celebration and enjoyment after a successful career, it can be nerve-wracking as well. From a financial perspective, no longer having steady paychecks from work coming in means that income must be generated through other means. Further, this can also be a period of declining health and mental capacity, which can enhance the risks to a successful retirement.

To start, longevity risk presents a particularly thorny problem for retirees, as one's exact lifespan is inherently unknowable, which means that a retiree won't know precisely how long their assets will need to support their lifestyle spending needs. That said, life expectancy can be better estimated using actuarial projections that are then refined for an individual's particular health circumstances (and longevity risk can be mitigated through the use of lifetime income sources, such as Social Security benefits and annuities). Similarly, market risk is a thorny problem given that future returns are unknowable and sequence of return risk can play a major role in determining a portfolio's trajectory throughout one's retirement. Though similar to longevity risk, market risk can be addressed to a certain extent though a combination of portfolio management and retirement income strategies (with understanding the current economic context potentially being helpful as well).

While financial advisors are often focused on these first two risks (in part because there are planning 'levers' that can be pulled to reduce them), other risks that aren't directly tied to investments can also have a major impact on the success of a client's retirement. These include health risk, such as the emergence of chronic medical conditions (which can create the need to pay for long-term treatment) as well as long-term care needs (that can add up to the tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars) when an individual's health deteriorates significantly. Also, retirees face decision risk, or the risk that they will make financial decisions (whether intentional, such as selling off risk assets at a market bottom, or unintentional, such as the potential to be defrauded) that are deleterious to their financial health. Notably, aging can also come with diminished mental capacity, which can magnify this category of risk.

In the end, while retirement is a period of great potential, it can be a tricky time to navigate financially. Which speaks to the value financial advisors can provide, not only in finding ways to address portfolio-related risks, but also to incorporate health risk into a client's plan and to help clients make better financial decisions along the way (perhaps enlisting the help of client family members as well who might identify diminished mental capacity or potential long-term care needs on the horizon?).

Does Working Longer Reduce Mortality?

(Derek Tharp | LinkedIn)

While longevity risk (i.e., the risk that an individual will live longer than expected) is a major concern for retirees (who might be concerned about outliving their assets), so too is mortality risk (i.e., the risk that an individual will die earlier than expected), which can influence the success of a surviving spouse's retirement and, outside the financial implications, presents a risk that an individual (after a lifetime of work) might get to spend less time enjoying their retirement than they might have expected.

Given the presence of mortality risk, some individuals might choose to retire earlier than 'traditional' retirement age, in an effort to 'bank' more years to enjoy in retirement. A problem, though, is that some research has found that early retirement is associated with premature death (suggesting that such a move might backfire on an individual who chooses this route). For instance, one study found that each one-year increase in retirement age is associated with an 11% lower mortality rate (suggesting that a five-year delay in retirement could lead to a 44% lower mortality rate!).

A problem, though, is that such studies can suffer from "immortal time bias", which occurs when individuals studied can't experience the tested outcome during some period of follow-up time. For example, a retirement age study might observe that those who reached age 70 tend to live longer than those who retired at earlier ages; however, these individuals already had an 'advantage' because they made it to that age in the first place (i.e., an individual can't retire at 70 if they died at 65). Using data from the Health and Retirement Study, Tharp finds that the retirement age-mortality relationship weakens meaningfully when correcting for this bias. Further, the association diminishes to the point of being statistically indistinguishable from no effect at all for those who indicated that health was a reason for retirement (as having to retire for health-related reasons could suggest a shorter life expectancy).

In sum, it's difficult to make a causal connection between retirement age and mortality. Which suggests that individuals might instead consider their own circumstances (e.g., how they feel about work, family health history, and financial wherewithal) when making the decision of when to retire, which is a much more personal decision that could benefit from inputs beyond aggregated data sets!

3 Questions To Gauge Retirees' Inflation Risk

(Christine Benz | Morningstar)

After being relatively muted for many years, inflation reared its head again this decade, reminding consumers about the possibility of greater-than-expected price increases over time. Inflation can be particularly worrisome for retirees, as they no longer bring in earned income to mitigate its effects and can see its impact compound over what could be a multi-decade retirement.

For those concerned about inflation (and their advisors), a first step is to consider their particular spending exposures. Given that broad inflation rates are based on a large 'basket' of goods, a particular individual's personal inflation rate might be higher or lower. For example, a sharp rise in health care costs could be particularly impactful on a retiree, while higher child care costs would be more likely to affect younger individuals. By understanding one's spending (and particular categories that are heavily weighted), it can be easier to identify potential risks if those prices were to rise (which might require spending adjustments in other areas).

Next, a retiree might consider how much of their income is inflation-adjusted. For instance, Social Security benefits and Treasury Inflation-Protected Securities (TIPS) yields are designed to increase alongside inflation (that said, the inflation measure used to adjust these income sources might not match a particular individual's personal inflation rate). Certain components of an individual's portfolio might perform well during inflationary periods as well. For instance, commodities as an asset class have tended to perform well amidst inflation (though investors might consider weighing such assets' performance in non-inflationary periods as well).

Finally, an individual assessing their exposure to inflation risk might consider where they are in retirement. For example, "sequence of inflation risk" is particularly acute for recent retirees, as an inflationary spike early in one's retirement can lead to significantly higher costs for what could be 30+ more years (and while those later in retirement can still feel the effects of inflation, they have fewer years to feel its compounding effects).

Ultimately, the key point is that while inflation represents a key retirement risk, it has a varying impact depending on a particular individual's circumstances. Which presents the opportunity for advisors to support clients during (and before!) inflationary periods by assessing their specific exposures and considering potential ways to dampen this risk (e.g., by crafting a portfolio designed to meet the client's goals in a range of potential inflationary environments).

What Happens When Clients Don't Implement The 'Perfect' Financial Plan

(Scott Frank | Listening Deeply)

Many financial planners are master technicians, able to create a plan that meets a particular client's needs across the planning spectrum, from retirement planning to insurance planning. A problem that can occur, though, is getting clients to fully buy into and implement planning recommendations that are made.

For example, Frank once met with a client couple who said they wanted to buy a home, start a family, and make work optional. With these goals in hand, he crafted a plan designed to meet all of them and presented it to the clients. However, even though the clients agreed to the recommendations during the meeting, he found six months later that they hadn't taken any action on it. Which left him wondering what went wrong.

He identified the likely culprit as the "rider" versus "elephant" problem (as described by psychologist Jonathan Haidt), in which his client's conscious, analytical mind (the "rider") might have seen the logic of his planning recommendations, but their "elephant", the unconscious system that actually governs behavior, might not have agreed. One issue is that while his planning process met the needs of the "rider", it wasn't designed to move the elephant, a task that can require digging beneath the surface to uncover the motivations behind particular goals. For instance, instead of starting first with identifying goals, an exploration meeting might not only discuss the specific planning issues that are top-of-mind, but also create space to explore the values that matter most to the client (which could be used to help move the "elephant" when it comes time to implement the plan).

In the end, while a financial advisor might create a 'perfect' financial plan, its value comes from actually being implemented. Which suggests that taking the time to go beneath the surface of a client's stated goals in order to understand the motivations behind them could be an investment that pays dividends through greater client satisfaction (from implementing a plan that their "rider" and "elephant" were both bought into) and, ultimately, better retention!

Why Clients Open Up When They Stop Feeling Examined

(Ari Galper | Advisor Perspectives)

Before they can analyze a client's situation, create a financial plan, and present it back to the client, an advisor has to take time to understand a client's particular circumstances, from their financial 'facts' to their hopes and goals. Which can naturally involve a conversation where the advisor asks the client questions to uncover these data points.

A potential problem, though, is that clients might not feel ready to provide completely transparent, thorough answers to the advisor, particularly if the relationship is still new. Clients might also hesitate if they feel like they are being 'examined' or judged by the questions their advisor is asking, or if they believe the advisor is using the questions to lead them to a particular 'destination' in the conversation. Which can leave the advisor with incomplete 'data' and perhaps lead to a plan that doesn't reflect the client's true motivations.

To address this issue, Galper suggests that patience on the part of the advisor is crucial. Rather than trying to rush to fit a fixed list of questions into a limited meeting time, an advisor might instead give clients spaces to 'think out loud', let clients fill silences that occur during the conversation, and respond in ways that acknowledge what the client said rather than reshaping it towards a particular planning topic the advisor wanted to address.

By creating an atmosphere where clients don't feel like they have to answer a particular question 'well', advisors can encourage clients to open up in ways the client might not have considered coming into the meeting. Which can ultimately give an advisor a better understanding of where the client is coming from, where they seek to go, and how the advisor can help them get there!

Fix, Fine, Flourish: A Framework To Take Clients From (Just) "Fine" Stagnancy To Being Engaged Again

(Meghaan Lurtz | Nerd's Eye View)

When a client first begins working with an advisor, the relationship is often marked with a flurry of onboarding tasks, immediate issues to resolve, and long-term planning goals to establish. However, this heightened activity often settles into a familiar routine over time. And as clients come into monitoring meetings, they may increasingly describe their situation as "fine", with no pressing issues to address. This can shift the advisor into a more passive role, waiting for significant life events – such as job changes, health issues, or financial setbacks – to reignite the client's need for engagement. Yet, while "fine" may seem like a signal of stagnation, it can also present an opportunity for the advisor to reengage the client and reinvigorate the relationship by revisiting goals and exploring new possibilities.

This transition is a core element of the "Fix, Fine, Flourish" financial planning framework. In this model, clients begin in the Fix phase, addressing immediate challenges and stabilizing their financial situation. As their primary concerns are resolved, clients enter the Fine phase, where stability is achieved, but the absence of urgent needs may eventually lead to disengagement. However, by encouraging clients to shift their focus from managing the status quo to reimagining their goals and pursuing new aspirations, advisors can guide them into the Flourish phase – where they pursue goals and aspirations beyond the basics of simply maintaining stability.

Monitoring meetings offer a key opportunity for advisors to nudge clients into the Flourish phase. If these meetings focus solely on tracking progress and reviewing financial updates, discussions may start feeling stagnant. Instead, reframing this meeting to discuss evolving goals and holistic life changes can encourage meaningful engagement. Advisors can ask reflective questions, such as "What's changed in your life since we last met?" or "What changes would make you feel more fulfilled?", to encourage clients to think beyond their current circumstances and think more about new opportunities for growth.

The beauty of the Flourish phase is that it resets the entire Fix, Fine, Flourish cycle. As clients identify new aspirations, they raise new questions and issues to address, returning them to a new Fix phase to move through the cycle again. This iterative process keeps clients engaged, ensuring they view financial planning as an ongoing partnership to help them proactively realize their evolving financial dreams.

Ultimately, the Fix, Fine, Flourish framework provides an organic way to keep clients engaged and focused on realizing meaningful financial goals. By reframing "fine" as a stepping-stone to something greater, advisors can help clients connect the financial planning process to their broader life aspirations. This approach not only strengthens the client-advisor relationship but also helps clients thrive by aligning their finances with the vision of a life well-lived!

When To Be Nice Vs Kind

(Declan Molony | LessWrong)

While the words "nice" and "kind" are sometimes used synonymously, Molony suggests there is a key difference between the two that can be seen in many interactions. While someone is "nice" when they're pleasant to be around and perhaps friendly to others (including strangers), this might not come from a genuine place of warmth or care. On the other hand, someone is "kind" when they genuinely care about another person's wellbeing, even if a short-term action doesn't make the person feel good.

For instance, being polite to a waiter is an example of being nice (as is the reverse of the waiter's friendliness to a customer), as it can make the waiter's day better, but it doesn't involve a deeper level of care. On the opposite end of the spectrum, a parent who denies their child a second candy bar isn't being nice in the moment (as the child might have enjoyed eating it) but is being kind (by thinking ahead and helping them avoid a potential stomachache). Sometimes an individual might act in a way that is neither nice nor kind (which could be neutral, such as not waving when passing by a stranger, or negative, for example when an individual acts like a jerk on purpose). At the other extreme, it's possible to act in a way that is both nice and kind (think Mister Rogers, who not only was friendly to children, but also deeply cared about what they thought and felt).

In the end, the decision of whether to be nice, kind, both, or neither is likely to be situation-dependent. Because while it might seem logical that being nice and kind is the way to go, there are certain to be situations where these two might conflict and discretion can lead to a better outcome in the end. For financial advisors, this could arise when needing to relay 'bad' news to a client (e.g., that their current level of spending is unsustainable); while it might not feel "nice" to the client in the moment, it's displaying "kindness" by showing that the advisor cares about them and the long-run success of their financial plan!

Kindness Can Have Unexpectedly Positive Consequences

(Amit Kumar | Scientific American)

Most people have likely witnessed (or engaged in) a 'random act of kindness' (i.e., taking an action with the primary intention of making the recipient [who doesn't expect it] feel good). Given the benefits of such acts of kindness, Kumar and his research partner conducted experiments to discover what could make individuals do them more often.

The researchers found that those who do random acts of kindness might underestimate the positive feelings they generate in the recipients. While both individuals doing random acts of kindness and those who received them both reported being in more positive moods than normal after these exchanges, recipients both felt significantly better than the "kind" individuals expected and saw the acts as "bigger" than the people performing them did (in part, because the recipients were more likely to focus on the warmth of the actor and action). Notably, this effect worked for acts performed for both friends and family members as well as for strangers. Also, such acts could prove contagious, as one experiment found that individuals were more likely to be generous towards others after been on the receiving end of a kind act.

In sum, this experimental research suggests that random acts of kindness might have a much greater impact (both immediate and downstream) than the person who commits the act might expect. Which could apply both to physical acts (from volunteering to baking a friend a cake for their birthday) and, perhaps more relevant for advisors and their clients, financial ones as well (perhaps encouraging greater charitable giving or generosity towards family members, who might appreciate it more than the donor might expect!).

Be Kind, But Keep Your Integrity

(Lawrence Yeo | More To That)

When looking for a partner or a friend (or parenting a child), kindness is a popular trait to seek out, as being surrounded by people who truly care about you can be quite meaningful. Looking inward, demonstrating kindness to others can lead to better relationships (and create more of them in the first place).

At its best, kindness is an effort to spread compassion and make the world a better place (for those you know and for strangers). On the other hand, an individual might assume they are being kind when they avoid confrontation that could make another person feel bad in the moment. The problem, though, is that this could lead to bad results for the individual, who might be subject to negative behavior from others (who might not realize they are doing it!). Rather than being a "pushover", an alternative approach is to be compassionate towards others while also empowering yourself. Which no doubt can require discernment (for when and how to raise the issue at hand), but could ultimately lead to better outcomes for oneself.

Ultimately, the key point is that while it's admirable to be focused on being kind to others, avoiding confrontation could come at the cost of your own wellbeing over time. Which suggests that knowing the right time to be open and honest with others is a valuable complimentary skill to kindness, and could lead to better outcomes for yourself (while also leaving plenty of room to commit kind acts for friends, family, or strangers!).

We hope you enjoyed the reading! Please leave a comment below to share your thoughts, or send an email to [email protected] to suggest any articles you think would be a good fit for a future column!

In the meantime, if you're interested in more news and information regarding advisor technology, we'd highly recommend checking out Craig Iskowitz's "WealthTech Today" blog.