Etfs vs mutual funds
38 RepliesJump to last post
[quote=Spaceman Spiff] Baba - I understand you weren’t trying to hate, but the comment you made was incorrect.
Jaxson - My apologies for offering you a piece of advice. You are obviously in a much better position than I originally thought. See, I thought you were new to the industry. I thought you didn’t understand the cost differences and performance differences between an ETF portfolio and a mutual fund portfolio. I thought you understood that there are some qualifications you have to meet before you can even sit for the CFP or get reimbursed for it by your current (and evidently temporary) employer. You must already be fully verson on MPT, core/satellite portfolios, turnover, internal trading costs, tracking errors, and all those silly little things. You must already be aware that your options with looking at ETFs within the confines of EDJ are limited.
Perhaps you should do my LP (and your ego) a favor and find out where your original field trainer went. And follow him. Hope you have your BME this month noob. [/quote]
Damn! I think people are starting to get on Spiff’s nerves.
Here’s my $.02, for what it’s worth. If you have qualifications from previous careers, you can still sit for the CFP and applying for the CFA is similar. Ironically, the CFA, while a much more difficult exam, has less strict requirements than the CFP.
If you seek knowledge while building your business and learning, then seek out the CFA. If you are looking for three letters to put after your name, then the CFP will work.
I don’t think that being new prevents you from pursuing those goals. It’s all about balance.
If you have a lot of prospects and you don’t know what you are talking about… I don’t see the good in that.
I think you will run into people who know what they are talking about often more than you do. And being prepared for those meetings will net you larger accounts (I hope that wasn’t too close to giving advice).
No offense - and I’m sure I will be flamed for this - but Jones does not provide that knowledge. The focus is on selling - which it should be, you are a sales rep. But you will not receive investment knowledge by soaking up what you read on JonesLink or listening to Alan Skrainka.
Agreed. On both the getting on my nerves and on the Alan Skrainka comment. Jaxson seems to be a little too big for his britches. He’s either pompous, arrogant, or self confident. I’m not sure which. I have my opinion.
I've voiced my opinion to most everyone that will listen to me at HQ (which is not very many) that Jones does a great job teaching our FAs to prospect and sell, but a horrible job at teaching even the basics of portfolio construction and money management. But, from what I've seen coming from other firms, neither does anyone else. I am of the opinion that if Jones could create a sales force that can get the clients in the doors AND then how to build a better mousetrap, we'd be unstopable. I've even proposed that Jones have a class that actually teaches a crash course in MPT, portfolio construction, portfolio evaluation (for those free portfolio reviews we're always offering), and the science of money management. Not to the level that you might get with the CFP or CFA courses, but more than what you might get if you started with Morgan or Merrill. Can you imagine a sales force that could both doorknock and strategically review existing portfolios to find the flaws and weaknesses? Like I said, unstopable.You must already be fully verson on MPT, core/satellite portfolios, turnover, internal trading costs, tracking errors, and all those silly little things.
Did you mean fully versed on MPT? If so the answer is no. I am not. The only thing I know how to do is skin a buck and run a trout line. That is why I brought this post up. To find different opinions on the two items. If I wanted more I would have asked more. I already have a book of clients through a CPA friend and former college. I had planned on obtaining my CPA license but decided to join a firm for "the best training blah blah blah" My bad decision and now I am dealing with that. But what I am trying to do is become their Financial Advisor. I guess I am asking the wrong questions or asking the wrong way. I know a lot comes from experience and I in no way want to take that from any vets. But I am asking in this post is: I like mutual funds....... I like ETFs....... And lets see where it goes. We will get to the other stuff on another post.Spiff from what I know about your ETF program, is simply that it is asset allocation and rebalances when the allocation gets to far away from the original percentages set.
That is crap. Now if it does something else let us know...[quote=Spaceman Spiff]Agreed. On both the getting on my nerves and on the Alan Skrainka comment. Jaxson seems to be a little too big for his britches. He’s either pompous, arrogant, or self confident. I’m not sure which. I have my opinion.
I am all the above just depends on which gets me what I want. But, from reading posts, I am no where near the most pompous, arrogant, or self confident. There are some on here that make me laugh my a$$ off. It is so funny to read what people say from behind a computer.[quote=Squash1]Spiff from what I know about your ETF program, is simply that it is asset allocation and rebalances when the allocation gets to far away from the original percentages set.
That is crap. Now if it does something else let us know...[/quote] I don't even think they have ETF models. I think all he can do is put ETF's inside a wrap and manage it himself. Could be wrong though. Squash and I are talking about Tactical Portfolios, not necessarily models that lie neatly on the effecient frontier..He can’t move the etfs, without client permission, and can only do so according to set percentages inside the platform… That is what my buddy from EDJ told me
[quote=Spaceman Spiff] Agreed. On both the getting on my nerves and on the Alan Skrainka comment. Jaxson seems to be a little too big for his britches. He’s either pompous, arrogant, or self confident. I’m not sure which. I have my opinion.
I’ve voiced my opinion to most everyone that will listen to me at HQ (which is not very many) that Jones does a great job teaching our FAs to prospect and sell, but a horrible job at teaching even the basics of portfolio construction and money management. But, from what I’ve seen coming from other firms, neither does anyone else. I am of the opinion that if Jones could create a sales force that can get the clients in the doors AND then how to build a better mousetrap, we’d be unstopable. I’ve even proposed that Jones have a class that actually teaches a crash course in MPT, portfolio construction, portfolio evaluation (for those free portfolio reviews we’re always offering), and the science of money management. Not to the level that you might get with the CFP or CFA courses, but more than what you might get if you started with Morgan or Merrill. Can you imagine a sales force that could both doorknock and strategically review existing portfolios to find the flaws and weaknesses? Like I said, unstopable. [/quote]
Yeah. I tried that when I was at Jones - and you have a lot more pull at the HO than I ever did.
I don’t know about the other firms, as far as what they teach, but I’ll take your word for it. It’s likely the leadership at every firm fails their FA’s in this aspect.
Clients really don’t care if you are a good salesman. They just want you to be competent.
The other thing that Jones needs to do, IMHO, is actually charge for a portfolio review. The first time I told someone that I was going to be charging them to come in and sit down with me when I went off on my own, I held my breath, because I thought they were going to laugh in my face and tell me they could go to EJ and get it for free.
But man, I’ve never seen someone fork over a check or credit card so quickly as when I tell people my fees. Not much had changed from when I was at Jones the week before, but if I had offered a “free” review, I don’t think I would have gotten the business.
Hey JAXSON - sorry to hijack your thread.
This will get him fired up, but it's true. They have an outdated investment model that only works well for clients under $25k, or 65 year olds that own 30 year munis.
The way I understand it, we only offer quality investments for the long term investor. So you don’t ever sell your invesment. You just buy more to rebalance. Unless they have 100k and you put them in advisory solutions. But thats way down the road for me. I will not be trained on that until seg 4 or 5 I guess.
I would love to be able to charge for a portfolio review. I’ve had too many tire kickers waste precious hours of my time. Most folks who seriously want my advice will ask how much it will cost. Even if it’s only $100, they feel if they are paying for it, it’s worth it.
I would suggest that in order for clients to feel that you are competent you need to sell them on giving you a shot. EVERYONE in this biz is a salesman. Even the biggest producers out there are, at the very first meeting, nothing but a salesman. Baba - we do have ETF models. They're based on client risk tolerance and accessed through Advisory Solutions. I, like Squash They are simply asset allocation models, not "tactical" models like you describe. I find that "tactical" word to be a bit ironic. Seems to me that if a portfolio were truly tactical, and the manager was truly able to quantify "important signals of potential forthcoming changes in the capital markets" and adjust their portfolios accordingly, the moderate portfolio wouldn't have taken such a beating like the rest of the people out there. Goldman's Strategy funds use that same "tactical" approach. All the tactics in the world didn't save their bacon either. Now, I'm sure they have to stay within certain guidelines for their asset allocation strategy, but to tout yourself as superior because you are a "tactical" money manager to me is a little pretentious. I guess their crystal ball must be a little clearer than everyone elses. So, how does that work? You bring in a client, then outsource their portfolio to some guy in NY? They charge a fee, then you charge a fee on top of that fee? Is that pretty much it? Nice gig. OK, I'm done hijacking poor Mr. Jaxson's post. Tell him where he can go to figure out whether he is an active or passive guy.I use the Moderate and my clients were down 14% last year…those are great conversations. You’re telling me that didn’t add value by being “tactical”…benchmark 60/40 was down 25%. 1100 bps of outperformance isn’t too bad.
jaxson-just sell. the jones system is what it is–mutual fds. I did my 3 years and left. now I do the RIA ETF thing with tactical positioning (we are about 15% in equities now so our clients have not last any more since the quick Oct drop- with the nice rise in futures and gold). I can change 200 clients allocation is 10 minutes with no phone calls. it is TOTALLY apples/oranges/diff world… i.e. work with what you have! it works fine for alot of folks
I echo that, we were down 12% vs the benchmark dow jone moderate down 22%, the 10% difference more than makes up for small added expense..I use the Moderate and my clients were down 14% last year…those are great conversations. You’re telling me that didn’t add value by being “tactical”…benchmark 60/40 was down 25%. 1100 bps of outperformance isn’t too bad.
Riverfront is pretty interesting.Baba
can you mention a few names of active ETF managers? I am doing it myself. I would gladly turn it over to one if i could find one who does what i do, which is very tactical
[quote=iceco1d][quote=Spaceman Spiff]I would love to be able to charge for a portfolio review. I’ve had too many tire kickers waste precious hours of my time. Most folks who seriously want my advice will ask how much it will cost. Even if it’s only $100, they feel if they are paying for it, it’s worth it.
I would suggest that in order for clients to feel that you are competent you need to sell them on giving you a shot. EVERYONE in this biz is a salesman. Even the biggest producers out there are, at the very first meeting, nothing but a salesman. Baba - we do have ETF models. They're based on client risk tolerance and accessed through Advisory Solutions. I, like Squash They are simply asset allocation models, not "tactical" models like you describe. I find that "tactical" word to be a bit ironic. Seems to me that if a portfolio were truly tactical, and the manager was truly able to quantify "important signals of potential forthcoming changes in the capital markets" and adjust their portfolios accordingly, the moderate portfolio wouldn't have taken such a beating like the rest of the people out there. Goldman's Strategy funds use that same "tactical" approach. All the tactics in the world didn't save their bacon either. Now, I'm sure they have to stay within certain guidelines for their asset allocation strategy, but to tout yourself as superior because you are a "tactical" money manager to me is a little pretentious. I guess their crystal ball must be a little clearer than everyone elses. So, how does that work? You bring in a client, then outsource their portfolio to some guy in NY? They charge a fee, then you charge a fee on top of that fee? Is that pretty much it? Nice gig. OK, I'm done hijacking poor Mr. Jaxson's post. Tell him where he can go to figure out whether he is an active or passive guy. [/quote] Spiff, why is it that you and I still don't see eye to eye investment-wise? Your post above would seem to side with me quite a bit! BTW - the Goldman portfolio funds you mention have a target asset allocation. They can then make "tactical shifts' up to 8% per asset class. So if the target allocation for the Commodities Strategy fund in a particular model/fund is 15%, the fund manager can adjust it anywhere between 7% and 23% each quarter. [/quote] I'm not as far off as you think. Sometimes on here I take a lot more than I give. Yesterday was a give back kind of day. I do agree with you for the most part. I still like mutual funds. But, I've been using ETFs with people in Advisory Solutions. The beauty of that program is I can switch back and forth if I choose to do so. Or I can use a mix of both ETFs, index funds, and traditional mutual funds. No, it's not discretionary. I want my clients to at least hear why I'm doing what I'm doing and get their buy in, whether they truly understand it or not. I believe discretionary accounts could open you up to additional legal issues than their non-discretionary counterparts. Nothing like an arbitrator with a grudge to side with a client who got pissed at you because at your discretion moved to 40% international in 2007. Those TAG folks look to be a good outfit. I'm still a little fuzzy with the whole tactical approach and not moving to 100% treasuries in June or July of 2007. If they were modeling out 2-3 years in the equity sector, then surely their models projected a 50% decline in the markets. I also believe the average advisor saying he's using a tactical approach is somewhat dicey. You've got to be really good to be able to pull that one off. And I think there's a fine line between tactical and luck.there are enuf sector specific ETF’s you can run either momentum or reversion-to-mean strategies. The ability to short etf’s is key.
As to why anybody wasn't 100% in T-bills in 2007? Thats such an unbelievably stupid question it doesn;t deserve to be answered.