Listen Now
When I bought my first home in 2010, I was dead set on having a big yard. I got what I wanted. I also got the work that came with it.
At first, mowing took two or three hours. Eventually, I got it down to about 90 minutes. The result was acceptable, but it depended on my calendar and willingness to keep up.
The summer my son Tommy was born, I hired someone named Leo to cut the grass for $35 a week. The lawn looked better, I got my Saturday mornings back, and I stopped carrying the mental weight of “I need to mow” all week.
Years later, we moved to a home with a more complicated yard. Eventually, I found a provider that paid attention to whether the yard was ready instead of mowing simply because Tuesday was on the schedule. They responded quickly and noticed problems.
Then a storm knocked a tree onto our fence. Before I could start collecting quotes and coordinating schedules, the lawn-care provider offered to handle the tree removal and fence repair.
That was the moment the added cost stopped feeling like, “I’m paying more for mowing,” and started feeling like, “I’m paying for someone to own the outcome.”
Different providers may charge different amounts for different levels of responsibility. What mattered to me wasn’t the mowing fee in isolation. It was the responsiveness, reliability, and how much got handled without my involvement.
Financial advice raises the same question: not simply, “What does it cost?” but, “What responsibility does the advisor actually assume?”
Sign up for my newsletter so you can easily reply to my emails with your thoughts or questions for the podcast:
How Financial Advisor Fee Structures Work
Fee-only advisors means the advisor and firm are compensated only by clients rather than through commissions or product sale or other revenue from someone or something other than the client’s fee for advice services. There are three common pricing structures among fee-only advisors: hourly, a flat fee or retainer, and a percentage of assets under management (commonly called AUM). Some firms combine them.
Fee-only tells you where compensation comes from. Hourly, flat fee, and AUM tell you how the bill is calculated. Neither tells you what service will be delivered. Every model creates its own incentives and blind spots.
I should disclose my perspective: I’m an advisor and an owner of a fee-only registered investment advisory firm that primarily uses AUM pricing, so candor about its trade-offs is especially important.
As we compare the models, focus on what gets monitored, what gets handled, and what happens only when you initiate it.
Hourly Financial Advisors: When Paying by the Hour Makes Sense
Let’s start with hourly advice.
Hourly advice is the simplest to understand because it matches how many other professional services work. You pay for time. You get guidance. The meter stops.
Hourly can be an excellent fit when the job is contained and you’re comfortable implementing the recommendations yourself: a portfolio second opinion, a one-time plan, or help deciding where the next dollar should go among cash reserves, debt repayment, a 401(k), Roth IRA, and HSA.
The ideal candidate for hourly advice is typically someone in their twenties who is early in the accumulation phase, or someone who has one or two investment accounts, and little taxable complexity. But complexity—not age—is the real dividing line.
Hourly advice can be a tougher fit during the decumulation phase, when portfolio withdrawals, taxes, Social Security, Medicare, required distributions, and investment decisions interact year after year. It can still work, but it usually requires recurring reviews and a clear understanding of who is monitoring those moving parts between meetings.
There is also a behavioral limitation. If every interaction feels billable, you may hesitate to call before panic-selling—or before a planning opportunity passes (heck, you may not even realize a planning opportunity has come and gone).
So ask: “When do you reach out to me without me asking?” The answer tells you whether the advisor is monitoring for issues or whether recognizing the need for help remains your job.
Flat-Fee Financial Advisors and Retainer Pricing
(I think) The appeal of flat fees is their predictability (and the idea that it is generally fixed or, at most, linked to inflation rather than asset growth). You pay a set amount each month or each year, and the advisor agrees to provide a defined scope of services.
This model often fits households whose financial complexity is high relative to the assets an advisor can manage: think strong income but still-building up savings, significant equity compensation, a private business, or wealth concentrated in a single stock or illiquid holding.
One nuance is that a flat fee tells you how the bill is stated, not necessarily how the firm arrived at it. Some firms use starting or projected AUM as a major input when assessing scope and complexity, or convert an initial AUM calculation into a fixed dollar fee. There’s nothing inherently wrong with that, but you should ask how the fee was determined, what would cause it to change, and how often it is reviewed.
Also, “What’s included?” is an obvious question. But the better questions are about what happens after you sign the agreement. How often is the plan updated? What gets monitored between meetings? What triggers proactive outreach? What access will you have when markets—or your life—change quickly?
A well-run retainer can be every bit as proactive as an AUM relationship. The agreement, staffing, and systems determine that—not the billing label. A vague or understaffed relationship can drift into “plan delivered, then quiet.”
AUM Fees: Paying a Percentage of Assets Under Management
The third model is AUM.
AUM is the most common pricing structure in wealth management. You pay a percentage of the assets the advisor manages, and that percentage often steps down as assets increase.
People criticize AUM because the dollar fee rises with the portfolio—even when the scope and complexity of the work may not rise proportionally. That criticism is fair. But it’s also true that larger portfolios can raise the stakes of tax, implementation, and behavioral mistakes. That said, higher stakes alone do not establish that a proportionally higher fee provides good value.
I think the better criticism of AUM fees is that they can create a conflict when the best advice would reduce the assets being billed—paying down a mortgage, funding a business, or keeping money outside the advisor’s platform. So you might ask an advisor to explain how these decisions are approached if they use AUM fees.
But the biggest reason to criticize AUM fees is when the relationship is a commoditized investment offering without comprehensive planning–at that point an AUM fee can be difficult to justify. So if you hire someone that uses AUM billing, then you’ll want to understand what service and accountability to expect.
Who are the types of people that best fit AUM? AUM tends to fit someone who wants investment management, financial planning, and implementation integrated into an ongoing relationship. Some of the work is steady and easy to overlook: portfolio maintenance, rebalancing, tax-aware implementation, and keeping the plan current. Other value arrives in bursts—during market stress, a job change, a health event, or an inheritance. A well-run firm should be built for both.
But the fee itself does not create that service. The firm’s scope, staffing, and systems do. If AUM is being presented as comprehensive wealth management, ask what the advisor does beyond portfolio construction—including tax planning, retirement distributions, professional coordination, and communication during down markets. Ask about breakpoints and your all-in costs, too.
How to Compare Financial Advisor Fees and Services
When people compare these three models, they tend to make two mistakes.
The first is treating the fee as the product.
The fee is the wrapper. The product is what gets monitored, what gets handled, and what happens when the plan gets tested. Two advisors charging the same amount can deliver very different levels of planning, coordination, and responsiveness. Compare cost and scope together.
The second mistake is assuming you’ll always know when to ask for help. Proactivity matters most in the moments you can’t schedule.
If you don’t know what you don’t know, the cheapest option can get expensive.
Questions to Ask Before Hiring a Financial Advisor
Before hiring anyone, ask four questions:
What services are included—and what is not?
What will you monitor and handle without me asking, and what triggers proactive outreach?
How was my fee calculated, what would cause it to change, and what is my all-in cost?
Does your firm receive compensation from anyone other than clients, and will you act as a fiduciary at all times when advising me?
The right fee model depends on what you need, what you want to remain responsible for, and what you want the advisor to own.
If you’re hiring someone for comprehensive advice, the value should extend beyond managing investments. It should include helping you make better decisions, implement them well, and stay on plan when life gets complicated.
Those four questions are only a starting point. Chapter 11 of my new book, The Perfect Portfolio, includes a more comprehensive checklist for interviewing an advisor, including questions about fees, services, conflicts, credentials, and investment philosophy. To preorder the book and learn more, visit theperfectportfoliobook.com.
Resources:
The Long Term Investor audio is edited by the team at The Podcast Consultant
Submit Your Question For the Podcast
Do you have a financial or investing question you want answered? Submit your question through the “Ask Me Anything” form at the bottom of my podcast page.
Support the Show
Thank you for being a listener to The Long Term Investor Podcast. If you’d like to help spread the word and help other listeners find the show, please click here to leave a review.
I read every single one and appreciate you taking the time to let me know what you think.
Free Financial Assessment
Do you want to make smart decisions with your money? Discover your biggest opportunities in just a few questions with my Financial Wellness Assessment.
Disclosure: This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.
The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Plancorp LLC employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Plancorp LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Plancorp LLC or performance returns of any Plancorp LLC client.
References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.
Please see disclosures here.
