Earlier this year, I launched a crusade to advance “evidence-based investing” as a replacement for “passive investing.” So many of us are chafing against the limp, ill-fitting nature of the latter term, it seemed high time to rally around something better.
While the daily walks on my desk treadmill don’t get me far geographically, I have had the chance to become a virtual adventurer this year, collaborating with a number of Canadian advisors who share my passion for advancing evidence-based investing (formerly known as “passive”). I’ve found it fascinating to learn more about the common values we share, as well as some of our differences. For example, aside from our Canadian friends’ proclivity to pronounce “about” like it’s hiking footwear, did you know:
“Fee-only” vs. “Fee-based” – NAPFA controversies aside, in the U.S., we refer to advisors as “fee-only” when their sole source of compensation is client fees, with no third-party incentives. “Fee-based” generally means an advisor is receiving fees as well as other possible payments. Watch your wording in Canada! There, “fee-based” refers to advisors we think of as fee-only here in the U.S., while a Canadian “fee-only” (or “fee-for-service”) planner offers hourly financial planning and little else. Continue reading “Evidence-Based Investing, Canadian Style”→