We help clients get through difficult financial periods, he claimed.
He was, of course, snowing the reporter. Comparing his portfolio to the TSX is not a reasonable comparison. He needed to compare his record to a true standard, a benchmark.
|The benchmark beat the advisor by 5.55%.|
I'm an income oriented investor. For this reason I look for a benchmark designed to track a portfolio with an income bent. One designed for retirees like me. I discovered that over the same period a respected income benchmark was up not down. The annualized return was 4.04 percent.
I like this benchmark. I believe the Financial Post also uses it, or one similar to it, from the same source. I'm sure the senior investment advisor is familiar with this benchmark and I'm sure he makes no reference to it on purpose. His portfolio failed to perform as well as a benchmark.
I have a personal benchmark: The TD Monthly Income fund. I know, it is not a true benchmark. But, it is a balanced fund designed to provide income. It suffers trading costs and other expenses that a benchmark avoids. If I can beat TDB622, I feel like a success.
As you can see, the financial advisor interviewed by The London Free Press also failed to beat this pseudo benchmark. TDF622, unlike the advisor, was in the black.
|The fund's return was 1.9% better than the advisor's.|
Financial advisors are also sales people. It's too bad our reporter wasn't more than a reporter, being a stenographer doesn't count.
Addendum: I didn't give the advisor's name as this is truly a good person. They give a lot of financial support to local charities, for instance. They do a good job, an honest job and they keep their clients happy. But nothing in the article indicates that they are much more than an expensive babysitter for your portfolio. If you don't need a financial babysitter, you probably don't need this advisor.