Wealth Professional forum is the place for positive industry interaction and welcomes your professional and informed opinion.

Notify me of new replies via email
Wealth Professional | 27 Jan 2017, 09:08 AM Agree 0
Increased transparency rules may not go far enough in leveling the advisory playing field
  • Wealth Advisor | 27 Jan 2017, 10:31 AM Agree 0
    Advisors and their Dealers are required to follow the CRM2 Rules as laid out to them. Simple.

    The CRM2 Report on costs is a regulatory initiative to give Canadian investors a report of how much the advisor's dealer is paid. Not how much is paid to the advisor. And not how much the product's costs are.
    For now the Fund Facts document MER percentages will have to suffice until we see CRM3, CRM4, etc.

    I think some industry commentators would like to see the MER (plus other costs) translated to dollar costs for each individual investor.

    I have no opposition to that other than dollars AND percentages have to appear side by side.

    The current cost report however is neither clear, educational or informative. There is only a meaningless dollar number with no comparatives. The information at best, is murky, uninformative and of little value.

    The CRM2 performance report is not much better -another discussion for another time.

    As far as the original question of comparing advisors, what and how are you going to compare? CRM2 mandated start dates are all over the map using different start dates. How are you going to compare anything if the timeframes are different. How are investors going to compare costs when they are staring at only a dollar number? Dollars -in relation to what?

Post a reply