Structure first
Start with role, authority, compensation, custody, and communication. Those facts usually explain more than a broad label does.
Factual comparison pages for households evaluating advisory structure, compensation, fiduciary administration, and fit.
Relationship Fit
01How a bank trust department and a fee-only investment adviser can serve different jobs, and what questions help you decide which relationship structure fits.
Compensation
02Definitions, compensation sources, legitimate use cases, and review questions for comparing fee-only and fee-based advisory relationships.
A household comparing advisory options needs to know who accepts which role, what authority is granted, how compensation works, and where responsibility begins and ends. Those facts make the fit question more useful than a broad label.
Start with role, authority, compensation, custody, and communication. Those facts usually explain more than a broad label does.
The useful question is which structure fits the job: administration, portfolio management, family coordination, compensation clarity, or a mix of services.
A practical review centers on service agreements, Form ADV, fee schedules, custody paperwork, trustee-role documents when relevant, communication practices, and product disclosures. Those sources show what the relationship actually covers.
Service agreements, Form ADV, fee schedules, custody paperwork, trustee-role documents when relevant, and product disclosures should answer more than a slogan can.
Every advisory relationship should be evaluated on role clarity, total cost, investment authority, communication, tax coordination, and fit with the household facts.
The Portfolio Fit Assessment and contact form are the next steps when the relationship questions are specific enough to review.