If you don’t think you need a financial advisor, then show me your multimillion dollar portfolio.
Show me the success of your DIY effort.
About 11 years ago I realized I was an idiot and I should amend my ways; I was around 1.4x my salary in retirement at age 36 and not much more than that in net value.
I ramped from a 3% retirement savings rate (plus 3% match) to my current 20-ish % savings rate (depends on if bonuses count--on base salary alone it's about 28% with corporate matching). I cannot figure out Fidelity's cost basis bit, probably because several years ago my account was with Schwab, so I have no idea what the real growth was. But after 11.5 years of effort, ramping my savings rate each year, I'm at 4.8x base salary in retirement (matches being aged 48) (and means I almost have 5x what I started with from 11 years ago) and crossed the fabled million dollar net worth (but let's be clear, too much of that is the recent run-up in housing values). In about 5 years I should be hitting $1M in retirement savings and at that point, finding an FA might be wise, to deal with future RMD concerns and doing rollovers to mitigate that problem. And for advice for when I should rebalance into something like 70/30 stocks/bonds, or 60/40, or if I want to use a bucket approach.
For now, it's all (mostly) low cost expense ratio S&P 500 funds. It's risky in its own way (>90% stocks) but at the same time, it's diversified (FBGRX, FSPGX, JLGMX, VSGIX with FPIPX tossed in). If I am to make up for lost time (which I can't) I have to leave it in aggressive growth well into my 50's. Plus with retirement being 20 years off... no reason to not be aggressive.
Unfortunately I doubt that I'll cross the $4M I would like to have for retirement; in the end, I have to live with the consequences of my mistakes. Still. Aiming for about 15x my salary at retirement (15 times my salary when I get to the end, 20 years from now, not 15x what I make today). If I only get $3M maybe that won't be so bad, it should be still past the old 10x recommendation that I think is now outdated.
I was not smart in my 20's and I doubt that I ever had a positive net worth until my 30's. Just cared that I could make it week to week--not that I was ever hurting, just that, I didn't have a care for the future.
Paying 1% AUM per year, I'm dubious if that would have helped the cause. If anything I'd be worried that an FA would try to convince me to save less. Right now I can't afford to replace a missing car (have 5 months emergency savings but nothing outside it); we avoid eating out and don't take vacations. My spare money goes to paying for college for my son. With a daughter going to college next year, all the more money worries for the next 4 or 5 years. Then I get to worry about paying off my house... it never ends.
Something that makes me sad is that my base salary, inflation adjusted, is only 7% higher than 11 years ago. I need to get off my duff and figure out a higher income (but that means changing jobs, longer commute, who knows what). But. Point of that is, I did not double my income during that time. I did not need an FA to tell me to "spend less, save more". I just needed to read basic advice and to execute on it. And that's my point. The first 10 years or so is basically no growth from interest, it's all the money one puts in. Real growth doesn't start until the second decade--and if you think an advisor is needed at that time, that's fine, I can see the argument. But until then, there's a wealth of knowledge free for the taking.
