A critique of financial advice

August 31, 2011

Dan Ariely has a post called “Asking the right and wrong questions” about financial advisors.  It starts off with:

For the most part, professional financial services rely on clients’ answers to two questions:

  1. How much of your current salary will you need in retirement?
  2. What is your risk attitude on a seven-point scale?

In his research he found that the typical answer to the first question was 75%.  Digging deeper, it became apparent that that number came from a common-knowledge rule of thumb, not from introspection.

The research project elicited that information in another way and came up with a different number.  Have a guess what it was.

One more quote before you go off to check your guess:

So we have an industry that asks one question it’s giving the answer to, and a second question that assumes that people can accurately describe their risk attitude (which they can’t). This saddens me because, while I think that financial advisors are overpaid for the service they provide, in principle they could contribute much more, and they could even deserve their salary. But only if they start offering a more useful service, one that they are in the perfect position to provide.

Subscribe to the Portfolio Probe blog by Email

Leave a Reply

Related posts

  • November 9, 2010

    The game ARORA (A random or real array) is a website that gives you two time series at a time. Your job is to guess which series is real [...]

  • October 28, 2010

    We'll get to "antisocial" via a look at a chapter in The Future of Finance from the London School of Economics. The chapter in question is "Why are financial [...]

  • October 26, 2010

    This arrives via Marginal Revolution. But note that there is a check mark missing: Psychic fund management.