Fisher Investments

Have a question about your personal investments? No matter how simple or complex, you can ask it here.
Post Reply
Topic Author
BertandErnie
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:01 pm

Fisher Investments

Post by BertandErnie »

I'm new but I've read enough to know this is almost a 4 letter word around here.
Just a question. If there returns over the last 30 yrs are 9.7% after fees and the S&P is up 7% for that same time frame what would the argument be for investing in an index fund vs an actively managed account such as with Fisher.
Just an FYI, the numbers were given to me in their sales pitch. Be civil.
Silk McCue
Posts: 5726
Joined: Thu Feb 25, 2016 7:11 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Silk McCue »

Welcome to Bogleheads!

“Be civil”?

Cheers
jarjarM
Posts: 1458
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by jarjarM »

Well, step 1 is to use the proper index and CAGR. Sp500 CAGR is 11% from 1991 to 2021 (dividend reinvested). Without dividend reinvestment, the CAGR is 8.8%. So a good question would be how was the 7% derived?

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... ion1_1=100
User avatar
Stinky
Posts: 8463
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:38 am
Location: Sweet Home Alabama

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Stinky »

jarjarM wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 4:07 pm Well, step 1 is to use the proper index and CAGR. Sp500 CAGR is 11% from 1991 to 2021 (dividend reinvested). Without dividend reinvestment, the CAGR is 8.8%. So a good question would be how was the 7% derived?

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... ion1_1=100
Interesting.

And the difference between the 11% S&P return and the 9.7% return on the Fisher portfolio is pretty close to the Fisher fee. There may be a little cause and effect going on there.

Very interesting.
It's a GREAT day to be alive! - Travis Tritt
jarjarM
Posts: 1458
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:21 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by jarjarM »

Stinky wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 4:10 pm
jarjarM wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 4:07 pm Well, step 1 is to use the proper index and CAGR. Sp500 CAGR is 11% from 1991 to 2021 (dividend reinvested). Without dividend reinvestment, the CAGR is 8.8%. So a good question would be how was the 7% derived?

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... ion1_1=100
Interesting.

And the difference between the 11% S&P return and the 9.7% return on the Fisher portfolio is pretty close to the Fisher fee. There may be a little cause and effect going on there.

Very interesting.
That's why it would be good to see some of the fine prints of the literature from fisher on exactly how things are calculated and etc.
delamer
Posts: 12263
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 6:13 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by delamer »

There are the issues of risk & volatility.

If the Fisher numbers are accurate, then it’s important to compare the risk taken in the two portfolios.

Generally, the more risk, the higher the reward. But also greater volatility.
One thing that humbles me deeply is to see that human genius has its limits while human stupidity does not. | | Alexandre Dumas, fils
livesoft
Posts: 77560
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 8:00 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by livesoft »

And don't forget taxes where applicable.
Wiki This signature message sponsored by sscritic: Learn to fish.
40 Years' Gatherin's
Posts: 147
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2020 7:39 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by 40 Years' Gatherin's »

Do yourself a favor and forget Fisher Investments or any other actively managed fund. You'll regret it.
All you need to do is Buy & Hold VTSAX or VFIAX for the long-term, and you'll be fine.

Oh, and as my grandpappy used to say: "Reinvest those dividends, boy!"
Jags4186
Posts: 6077
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Jags4186 »

jarjarM wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 4:07 pm Well, step 1 is to use the proper index and CAGR. Sp500 CAGR is 11% from 1991 to 2021 (dividend reinvested). Without dividend reinvestment, the CAGR is 8.8%. So a good question would be how was the 7% derived?

https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... ion1_1=100
lol I was going to say 7% over the last 30 years on the SP500 is off just a lotta bit :wink: It’s real easy to outperform a benchmark when you make up the benchmarks return.

It reminds me of this New York Life whole life insurance brochure which compared a $1,000,000 portfolio invested in the SP500 without a whole life policy and a $1,000,000 portfolio invested in the SP500 with a whole life policy. Well sure, if you have $1mm in investments and a $500k of cash value in whole life insurance, in other words $1.5mm total, you certainly are going to have more money to spend when the market declines than someone who only started with $1mm…
Markus003
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 06, 2021 3:49 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Markus003 »

I cannot give any insight to your question.
But I also talked to Fisher Inv. a few weeks ago. Been doing a lot of my own reading since then.
Their pitch to me was regarding 2008, stock market was down 38%, while their investments were only down 11%.
Implying that they can keep me out of harm's way. I plan to stick with DIY.

Mark
FIre Fighter
Posts: 21
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2018 8:23 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by FIre Fighter »

Sounds from the above that the numbers quoted by Fisher aren’t accurate. Either way, a couple other considerations.

1. Even if they were more successful the last 30 years, how would anyone know if they’ll be more successful in the future? The only thing certain is their fees.
2. Actively managed funds are horrendous when it comes to taxes. All the buying and selling leads to lots of extra capital gains taxes, plus unfavorable dividend tax rates.
pkcrafter
Posts: 15034
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 12:19 pm
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by pkcrafter »

BertandErnie wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:09 pm I'm new but I've read enough to know this is almost a 4 letter word around here.
Just a question. If there returns over the last 30 yrs are 9.7% after fees and the S&P is up 7% for that same time frame what would the argument be for investing in an index fund vs an actively managed account such as with Fisher.
Just an FYI, the numbers were given to me in their sales pitch. Be civil.
Hello B & E,

One problem with your numbers is we don't know where the 9.7% return came from. It's pretty easy to come up with a winning number after the fact. Second problem is the S&P 500 produced better returns than 7%--even without reinvesting dividends.

If you really want a managed account, find a better, cheaper shop than Fisher or Ed Jones.

Welcome to the forum :happy :moneybag
When times are good, investors tend to forget about risk and focus on opportunity. When times are bad, investors tend to forget about opportunity and focus on risk.
solarcub
Posts: 83
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2020 10:09 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by solarcub »

Leaving aside the other objections that have been raised, they are probably cherry-picking the date range to compare. Two investment strategies will never be the same over all time periods, so they pick one that looks good for them. Maybe over 25 years the S&P did better, and also over 35 years, but for the 30 year time span Fisher just happened to do really well. They are giving you the numbers that look best for them.
User avatar
Mullins
Posts: 210
Joined: Wed May 08, 2019 4:38 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Mullins »

My take is, Fisher Investments target market appears to be the unknowledgeable investor to whom being advised to put some money into this kind of mutual fund and that kind of mutual fund is akin to financial savvy worth paying for.

Not that it doesn't have some value, but, you can get it here without the fees. And odds are, without a unnecessary complicated number of funds (as here it's advised usually to simply hold a 2 fund or 3 fund portfolio).

Ken Fisher became a billionaire off the fees he collects. He wrote a column and people took that to mean he's some kind of expert. His marketing aims at people with at least $500,000 (you'll notice all his ads are geared to that) and so to me he's not much more than a particular business model for collecting fees than he is a financially savvy advisor.
User avatar
ruralavalon
Posts: 22057
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:29 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by ruralavalon »

Welcome to the forum :).

BertandErnie wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:09 pm I'm new but I've read enough to know this is almost a 4 letter word around here.
Just a question. If there returns over the last 30 yrs are 9.7% after fees and the S&P is up 7% for that same time frame what would the argument be for investing in an index fund vs an actively managed account such as with Fisher.
Just an FYI, the numbers were given to me in their sales pitch. Be civil.
S&P 500 index funds did much better than the 7% they quoted in their sales pitch if dividend reinvestment is included. Vanguard 500 Index Fund Investor Shares (VFINX) had a Compound Annual Growth rate (CAGR) of 11.02% over the the last 30 years 1991-2021. Portfolio Visualizer.

Active management increases tax liability if the account is a taxable brokerage account.

Fisher has good ads, but also an Assets Under Management (AUM) fee.The fee is 1.25% of assets under management on the first $1 million invested in its equity and blended accounts.

I suggest not using Fisher.
"Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein | Wiki article link:Getting Started
Gabelli2020
Posts: 125
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2020 4:01 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Gabelli2020 »

Fisher is the closest thing to an investment cult that I have seen. Their meetings/seminars are a bit like Scientology with pressure and alternative facts. I wouldn’t trust anything that they say.
hnd
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:43 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by hnd »

my buddy sat through a fisher presentation. he made it seem like their foundation is not around mutual funds. they'll do it in some instances but its all about buying stocks that closely resemble some index. they told him this cuts out the expense ratio. the only charge is the 1.25% to them. He said they will only talk to high net worth individuals (half mil in assets). He said the 'we don't make money if you don't make money" pitch line is basically a pitch for AUM fees.
User avatar
nisiprius
Advisory Board
Posts: 44428
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by nisiprius »

BertandErnie wrote: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:09 pm I'm new but I've read enough to know this is almost a 4 letter word around here.
Just a question. If there returns over the last 30 yrs are 9.7% after fees and the S&P is up 7% for that same time frame what would the argument be for investing in an index fund vs an actively managed account such as with Fisher.
Just an FYI, the numbers were given to me in their sales pitch. Be civil.
Just for starters, that 7% figure is

---> wrong. <---

You can easily verify this for yourself. They are lying to you, although they may be phrasing it in a way that it is not technically false. Without an audio recording of exactly what they said it's hard to know.

The point is what they told you has resulted in your believing Something That Is Not So. So rather than dig deeper, consider that you cannot trust them even on simple matters of objective fact.

An investment of $10,000 in the Vanguard 500 Index Fund, VFINX, over the thirty-year period 1991 through 2020, inclusive, would, today be worth $204,261. That's an average (CAGR = "compound average growth rate," the "average" always used in mutual fund literature) return of 10.58%, not 7%.

Source

Image

To confirm the math, use a calculator, start with $10,000, and key in + 7 % thirty times. It doesn't take all that long. You will get $76,122. Now try it with 10.58%. Uh, OK, I used a spreadsheet to do that one. I got $204,314. So you can clearly see that 7% can't even be close to right, while 10.58% is.

This is no technicality. Fisher is saying you'd have had
$76,122
if you'd invested in the S&P 500,but in reality, in the real world, with real money in a real index fund, you'd have had
$204,361.

Or, you can go to MoneyChimp's S&P 500 calculator and get results from the actual index rather than from a mutual fund:

Image

The difference between 10.58% in the Vanguard fund and 10.72% for the index reflects the cost of the Vanguard fund--it didn't quite give you the full return of the S&P 500. But it came close.

And it gave you 10.58%.

Which happens to be more than Fisher's 9.7%!

Without knowing exactly what Fisher said, it's hard to analyze exactly where they got that 7%. I thought perhaps they were omitting dividends, but, no, it's worse than that.
Last edited by nisiprius on Tue Sep 14, 2021 9:18 pm, edited 4 times in total.
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
hnd
Posts: 669
Joined: Mon Jun 22, 2020 11:43 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by hnd »

when we shopped for advisors before i began to do it myself 2 things became clear :

1. they regularly referenced the s&p500 sans dividends.
2. when it came to showing you different portfolios, all the backtested dates were different. oh that fund, if you looked 2005-2015 it was this. oh that fund? from 2003 to 2015 it was this. oh from 2011 to 2015 it did this. You could in hindsight chalk it up to fund inception dates, but i still remember the funds, they were all older than that.

actually my wife noticed that. i didn't. and after the 4th person basically did it she said something to which they didn't have really anything to say.
Ependytis
Posts: 253
Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2016 11:10 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Ependytis »

I must say these full service brockers must have really good advertising. After all you can verify what they say, so if they are lying, why do you need to ask what people's experience is with them?

I am really surprised by investment fees being around 2%. I assumed with Robo brokers, index funds, and target date funds, no one would be paying that amount. They either don’t understand the long-term effects on their portfolio and or they don’t realize how easy it is to invest in target date funds.

If I was going to recommend an investment for someone that had no interest whatsoever in investing, I would just recommend a target date fund appropriate for their age. This would allow them to funnel all their money into one fund, not have to worry about rebalancing and or tax loss/gain harvesting, and be able to sleep at night.

If someone can’t or won’t choose to invest this way, then they are accepting the consequences of going with a full service broker. All they have to do is look up three things on the Internet: determine the adverse effect of brokerage fees on a portfolio, compare the inferior returns on managed funds to index funds over the long haul, and look up any low-cost brokerage ( Schwab, Fidelity, and or Vanguard) target date fund. If they can’t get behind that, as the saying goes, “You can lead a horse to water but you can’t make them drink“. I can’t imagine the three tasks above would take more than a half hour versus paying $20,000 for every million dollars you have to a full service broker that will likely under perform your target date fund with the same risk.

I have observed, that someone who is emotionally invested in their opinion cannot be convinced with facts. Therefore, the only way to influence someone like this Is to appeal to their emotions. My question would be, “How would they feel in their old age if they ran out of money because of the amount they gave away to a broker?
dbr
Posts: 36933
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 9:50 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by dbr »

People go to advisors because they are scared and because they assume, unfortunately quite wrongly, that investment advice and management can be hired at a fair price* the same as most other professional services. The mantra that in investing you get what you don't pay for is hard to convey.

*I agree there are people out there that provide a professional service at a fair price. They are hard to locate and sort out from the majority and the majority by salesmanship and persuasion may still take the business. I believe that in general investors can't afford to pay what advisors need to make to be in business. Obviously one can dispute that.
likegarden
Posts: 3089
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 5:33 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by likegarden »

15 or so years ago before I went with Vanguard I had asked Fisher Investments for information about their investing and received in the mail a dark and not sharp video of a couple sitting in an advisors office, as some religious organizations might publish. But that by an investing firm and no detailed data about their investing, made me reject Fisher.
CedarWaxWing
Posts: 798
Joined: Sun Nov 02, 2014 12:24 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by CedarWaxWing »

https://www.etf.com/docs/IfYouCan.pdf

I would go to the above link and download that pdf... and read it at least twice... before doing anything a "financial advisor" (usually a salesperson and not a fiduciary) recommends.

Then consider, if you live close to any of the local bogleheads.org chapters, contact them to see if they are going to have a local meeting and would like to go over your Fisher sales information that they gave you... I am pretty sure someone there can point out the sleight of hand in that material, and you might have a nice time with them. :)

https://www.bogleheads.org/wiki/Boglehe ... l_chapters
Last edited by CedarWaxWing on Tue Sep 14, 2021 6:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
dratkinson
Posts: 5485
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Centennial CO

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by dratkinson »

Data point. I paid a lot to learn this from my worthless brother.

"When people lie to you about the things you can see, they will also lie to you about the things you can't see."

The only acceptable course is to avoid them.


Data point. Warren Buffett won a 10-year million-dollar bet against 5 hedge fund companies, by using the method you will learn here.
Search: https://www.google.com/search?q=warren+ ... dollar+bet


Welcome.
d.r.a., not dr.a. | I'm a novice investor, you are forewarned.
User avatar
ruralavalon
Posts: 22057
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 10:29 am
Location: Illinois

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by ruralavalon »

dbr wrote: Tue Sep 14, 2021 5:38 pm People go to advisors because they are scared and because they assume, unfortunately quite wrongly, that investment advice and management can be hired at a fair price* the same as most other professional services. The mantra that in investing you get what you don't pay for is hard to convey.

*I agree there are people out there that provide a professional service at a fair price. They are hard to locate and sort out from the majority and the majority by salesmanship and persuasion may still take the business. I believe that in general investors can't afford to pay what advisors need to make to be in business. Obviously one can dispute that.
I agree.


BertandErnie, to decide if you want or need an advisor see: Chapter 10 – On Your Own or Hire an Advisor. "The great paradox of using an advisor is that you must know some basics in order to evaluate the advice, and once you do, you also know enough to consider doing your own management. If you have gotten this far through the primer, you are already a more knowledgeable investor."

If you want an advisor look for a fee-only advisor or planner who charges by the hour or by the project (not by Assets Under Management, AUM). Try these resources:
1) Garrett Planning Network;
2) National Association of Personal Financial Advisors;
3) Advice-Only Financial.
"Everything should be as simple as it is, but not simpler." - Albert Einstein | Wiki article link:Getting Started
User avatar
Artful Dodger
Posts: 1234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:56 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Artful Dodger »

Short answer. Of course they tell you they’re going to beat the market, but they don’t. They had outsize returns in the late 90s. They slightly outperformed the MSCI index (their benchmark) in 2008 and 2009, and significantly underperformed from 2010 to mid 2013, when I left them.


I posted this a few years ago….

I’ll be happy to share my experience with Fisher.

We were with them 3 1/2 to 4 years from shortly after the last meltdown in 08/09 to early mid 2013. Previous to that I had bought stocks / mutual funds and actively "managed" them. I was looking to simplify and focus on my business. Their sales pitch was they could beat the indexes, and had done so in the past. I believe that they believe their spiel. They had regular investor gatherings close to where we lived, and spent a lot of time explaining how they were investing our money. They did a top down analysis starting with different industry groups and world sectors, then drilled down to the individual stocks in those categories that they thought would out perform. Spared no expense in feeding us and educating us on their outlook. Sometimes, they would have a video feed of Ken Fisher, and he would take questions from the audience. Just so you know, they buy individual stocks, and at the time I was with them, they compared their returns to the MSCI World index. At no time, did they ever talk about asset allocation. I also found out, they pretty much put everyone in the same stocks, so it was almost like being part of a mutual fund. I had around $800k at the time, and I think my AUM fee was 1.5%.

Late 2012, I started doing more investment reading, and it included a small book by Jack Bogle about index investing, and the historical proof of a simple index approach vs active management. I then started to wonder if I was really getting the best results from Fisher. I looked at their results vs the MSCI index, and while there were some up years, in the most recent, they trailed the index by almost 10 points. Add their performance variance to their AUM fees, and I calculated over the time I was with them, I would have been $90k ahead, had I put my money into the US market and International market index funds that I read about in Bogles book. Add in a few idiosyncrasies - (my ROTH which was a hodgepodge of stocks plus a high income fund, outperformed them, and they sold all my Apple stock when I moved to them, then bought it back after it had gone up 150%), and I thought it was time to move. But, by far, the most compelling reason was I would have been so much farther ahead had I simply followed the advice in Bogles book on index investing.

I had to call my Fisher guy, and he spent more time than what was reasonable telling me what a mistake I was making.

I had a long term relationship with Fidelity, and they set up the transfer from Fisher's administrator, to them. I set an asset allocation and moved almost all funds to low cost Fidelity index funds, and some to their managed bond fund. It was the best decision I've made regarding investments. A few years later, I found this board, and it has been a great resource.
User avatar
Stinky
Posts: 8463
Joined: Mon Jun 12, 2017 11:38 am
Location: Sweet Home Alabama

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Stinky »

Artful Dodger wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:28 am Short answer. Of course they tell you they’re going to beat the market, but they don’t. They had outsize returns in the late 90s. They slightly outperformed the MSCI index (their benchmark) in 2008 and 2009, and significantly underperformed from 2010 to mid 2013, when I left them.


I posted this a few years ago….

I’ll be happy to share my experience with Fisher.

We were with them 3 1/2 to 4 years from shortly after the last meltdown in 08/09 to early mid 2013. Previous to that I had bought stocks / mutual funds and actively "managed" them. I was looking to simplify and focus on my business. Their sales pitch was they could beat the indexes, and had done so in the past. I believe that they believe their spiel. They had regular investor gatherings close to where we lived, and spent a lot of time explaining how they were investing our money. They did a top down analysis starting with different industry groups and world sectors, then drilled down to the individual stocks in those categories that they thought would out perform. Spared no expense in feeding us and educating us on their outlook. Sometimes, they would have a video feed of Ken Fisher, and he would take questions from the audience. Just so you know, they buy individual stocks, and at the time I was with them, they compared their returns to the MSCI World index. At no time, did they ever talk about asset allocation. I also found out, they pretty much put everyone in the same stocks, so it was almost like being part of a mutual fund. I had around $800k at the time, and I think my AUM fee was 1.5%.

Late 2012, I started doing more investment reading, and it included a small book by Jack Bogle about index investing, and the historical proof of a simple index approach vs active management. I then started to wonder if I was really getting the best results from Fisher. I looked at their results vs the MSCI index, and while there were some up years, in the most recent, they trailed the index by almost 10 points. Add their performance variance to their AUM fees, and I calculated over the time I was with them, I would have been $90k ahead, had I put my money into the US market and International market index funds that I read about in Bogles book. Add in a few idiosyncrasies - (my ROTH which was a hodgepodge of stocks plus a high income fund, outperformed them, and they sold all my Apple stock when I moved to them, then bought it back after it had gone up 150%), and I thought it was time to move. But, by far, the most compelling reason was I would have been so much farther ahead had I simply followed the advice in Bogles book on index investing.

I had to call my Fisher guy, and he spent more time than what was reasonable telling me what a mistake I was making.

I had a long term relationship with Fidelity, and they set up the transfer from Fisher's administrator, to them. I set an asset allocation and moved almost all funds to low cost Fidelity index funds, and some to their managed bond fund. It was the best decision I've made regarding investments. A few years later, I found this board, and it has been a great resource.
That's an EXCELLENT summary of a Fisher experience.

Thanks for (re)sharing.
It's a GREAT day to be alive! - Travis Tritt
Topic Author
BertandErnie
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Sep 13, 2021 3:01 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by BertandErnie »

Artful Dodger wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 10:28 am Short answer. Of course they tell you they’re going to beat the market, but they don’t. They had outsize returns in the late 90s. They slightly outperformed the MSCI index (their benchmark) in 2008 and 2009, and significantly underperformed from 2010 to mid 2013, when I left them.


I posted this a few years ago….

I’ll be happy to share my experience with Fisher.

We were with them 3 1/2 to 4 years from shortly after the last meltdown in 08/09 to early mid 2013. Previous to that I had bought stocks / mutual funds and actively "managed" them. I was looking to simplify and focus on my business. Their sales pitch was they could beat the indexes, and had done so in the past. I believe that they believe their spiel. They had regular investor gatherings close to where we lived, and spent a lot of time explaining how they were investing our money. They did a top down analysis starting with different industry groups and world sectors, then drilled down to the individual stocks in those categories that they thought would out perform. Spared no expense in feeding us and educating us on their outlook. Sometimes, they would have a video feed of Ken Fisher, and he would take questions from the audience. Just so you know, they buy individual stocks, and at the time I was with them, they compared their returns to the MSCI World index. At no time, did they ever talk about asset allocation. I also found out, they pretty much put everyone in the same stocks, so it was almost like being part of a mutual fund. I had around $800k at the time, and I think my AUM fee was 1.5%.

Late 2012, I started doing more investment reading, and it included a small book by Jack Bogle about index investing, and the historical proof of a simple index approach vs active management. I then started to wonder if I was really getting the best results from Fisher. I looked at their results vs the MSCI index, and while there were some up years, in the most recent, they trailed the index by almost 10 points. Add their performance variance to their AUM fees, and I calculated over the time I was with them, I would have been $90k ahead, had I put my money into the US market and International market index funds that I read about in Bogles book. Add in a few idiosyncrasies - (my ROTH which was a hodgepodge of stocks plus a high income fund, outperformed them, and they sold all my Apple stock when I moved to them, then bought it back after it had gone up 150%), and I thought it was time to move. But, by far, the most compelling reason was I would have been so much farther ahead had I simply followed the advice in Bogles book on index investing.

I had to call my Fisher guy, and he spent more time than what was reasonable telling me what a mistake I was making.

I had a long term relationship with Fidelity, and they set up the transfer from Fisher's administrator, to them. I set an asset allocation and moved almost all funds to low cost Fidelity index funds, and some to their managed bond fund. It was the best decision I've made regarding investments. A few years later, I found this board, and it has been a great resource.
Sounds like you were where I am now. They still use the MSCI World index and the AUM fee is 1.25% for my investment.

Their plan is to pick 50-80 stocks that suit my style of investing and is specific to me. I didn't even buy that one.
It did sound good and I figured if all these people invest with them and have that much money to invest they must be smart.
One of my worries has been where will the market go the next couple of years. I'm 64 and I'm ready to retire yesterday. I don't want a big downturn make me change my plans. I was hoping they would be able to insulate me from those big downturns in the market with their active investing.

Thanks
User avatar
dratkinson
Posts: 5485
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 6:23 pm
Location: Centennial CO

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by dratkinson »

BertandErnie wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:31 pm...

Their plan is to pick 50-80 stocks that suit my style of investing and is specific to me. I didn't even buy that one.
It did sound good and I figured if all these people invest with them and have that much money to invest they must be smart.
One of my worries has been where will the market go the next couple of years. I'm 64 and I'm ready to retire yesterday. I don't want a big downturn make me change my plans. I was hoping they would be able to insulate me from those big downturns in the market with their active investing.
You need bonds in retirement for investment stability.

During a crash:
--Stocks can lose 50-90%.
--Bonds can lose 5-15%.
--Stock/bond crashes are not typically coincidental.

Some retirees report keeping ~5yrs of living expenses in bonds (savings, CDs, mmkt, savings bonds,...) to avoid the sequence of returns risk (SoRR)---the need to sell equities to pay for living expenses during a down market. This assumes most markets recover within 4yrs; there have been notable exceptions. (Refill bonds by selling equities after the market recovers. Search forum for other methods of handling SoRR.)

I don't believe Fisher uses bonds. So you'll need to handle this important part of your retirement investing, for yourself.

If, you must handle the "important part of your retirement investing, for yourself"... then you can handle the rest too.
d.r.a., not dr.a. | I'm a novice investor, you are forewarned.
User avatar
Wiggums
Posts: 4221
Joined: Thu Jan 31, 2019 8:02 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Wiggums »

BertandErnie wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:31 pm Their plan is to pick 50-80 stocks that suit my style of investing and is specific to me.
You don’t want individual stocks. A single index fund would be significantly cheater and we all in one fund! I have the three fund portfolio. Just three funds!
Investors need to be better informed about the costs they pay. “High fund fees can be hazardous to your wealth in the same way that high calories can be hazardous for your health.”
User avatar
Artful Dodger
Posts: 1234
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:56 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Artful Dodger »

This is from a report they sent me. I’d like to post an excel sheet but can’t figure it out. The first column is Fishers return, the second the MSCI World, the last is the Fisher Advantage (+ or - vs the MSCI benchmark). You can see they really did outperform in the mid to late 90s, but not much since. To be fair, I left them in 2013, the report only goes through 2012, and I don’t know what they’ve done since. But, I think it illustrates what Bogle said about Individual Fund outperformance corrects to a mean over time.

Note also their returns during the 2008 downturn. They were down 42.6% vs the MSCI down 40.7%. They beat the benchmark 4% in 2009, 2010 and 2011 were a wash. Then, in 2018 they finished 10.8% below their benchmark. That’s when I made the switch to index funds.

If you’re looking for active management to save you from a market downturn, their record doesn’t justify that assumption. They definitely had the secret sauce in 2000/2001, but were no better than average in 2008. To my knowledge their reported net includes their trading costs, but not their AUM fee.

Again, to be fair, they sent me this. They never tried to hide anything. I think they believed they would win out over the long term. For the period I was a client, they did not.

1995 Fisher Net 38.3 MCSI World 20.7 Fisher Adv 17.6
1996 Fisher Net 20.2 MCSI World 13.5 Fisher Adv 6.7
1997 Fisher Net 22.8 MCSI World 15.8 Fisher Adv 7
1998 Fisher Net 27.7 MCSI World 24.3 Fisher Adv 3.4
1999 Fisher Net 24.7 MCSI World 24.9 Fisher Adv -0.2
2000 Fisher Net -8.5 MCSI World -13.2 Fisher Adv 4.7
2001 Fisher Net 3.2 MCSI World -16.8 Fisher Adv 20
2002 Fisher Net -24.1 MCSI World -19.9 Fisher Adv -4.2
2003 Fisher Net 33.8 MCSI World 33.1 Fisher Adv 0.7
2004 Fisher Net 8.3 MCSI World 14.7 Fisher Adv -6.4
2005 Fisher Net 7.5 MCSI World 9.5 Fisher Adv -2
2006 Fisher Net 15.7 MCSI World 20.1 Fisher Adv -4.4
2007 Fisher Net 17.2 MCSI World 9 Fisher Adv 8.2
2008 Fisher Net -42.6. MCSI World -40.7. Fisher Adv -1.9
2009 Fisher Net 34 MCSI World 30 Fisher Adv 4
2010 Fisher Net 14.7 MCSI World 11.8 Fisher Adv 2.9
2011 Fisher Net -8.2 MCSI World -5.5 Fisher Adv -2.7
2012 Fisher Net 5 MCSI World 15.8 Fisher Adv -10.8
523HRR
Posts: 144
Joined: Tue Mar 11, 2014 8:27 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by 523HRR »

1) Ask the Fisher rep if you can have a hard copy of the pitch materials he/she flipped through quickly for you to take away so that you can review in detail on your own time. Hint: nope.

2) Ask for details of Fisher’s performance specifically throughput the ‘08 financial crisis. Expect a lot of gobbledygook responses. Hint: they rode it all the way down, getting none of their clients out before the bottom.
ebeb
Posts: 76
Joined: Sat Dec 23, 2017 2:18 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by ebeb »

As a real example, my employer moved my 401k account to Fisher Investments 401(K) Solutions (recordkeeping by Ascensus) and here are my returns so far:

2017-02: $115k moved to Fisher from Massmutual 401k
Allocation= Fisher 90% Equity 10% Fixed Income (100)=Fisher U.S. Fxd Inc Coll Fund Class 3 + Fisher All World Eq Coll Fund Class 3

2021-02: Fisher rebalanced the allocation automatically to:
Fisher All World Eq Coll Fund Class 3 45.00%
Fisher U.S. Fxd Inc Coll Fund Class 3 4.00%
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Adm B 3.00%
Vanguard Total Intl Bond Index Adm B 3.00%
Vanguard Total World Stock Index Adm B 45.00%

Current total balance = $221k so seems to be 15.72% annual rate of return which may be slightly lower than S&P500 with dividends included returns from 2017-02 to present I think. I didn't contribute any external amounts since moving to Fisher so this reflects actual return of the initial amount.

One of my gripe is their 401k website don't give an annualized return but only cumulative so if I run the returns from 2016 to today I get
Rate of Return= 126.58% so need to be manually calculated in other words as K&P inner city teacher would say this is "mischievous and deceitful, chicanerous and deplorable" :annoyed
70% VOO | 30% BND
deltaneutral83
Posts: 1961
Joined: Tue Mar 07, 2017 4:25 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by deltaneutral83 »

OP don't feel bad, most of us at some point have fallen for the graphs trick where the offending party does two things: 1) they do not include reinvested dividends for the S&P and 2) they backtest their most successful fund against the index regardless of if it's an appropriate comparison (i.e. you would not compare small caps to the S&P).

Every single firm will have at least one of their 40 equity funds that beats the S&P over 20 years, probably a small cap. I'm not a good basketball shooter but I can sink a three point shot one out of 20 times, every time.
CZjc1330
Posts: 163
Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 12:15 am
Location: Palm Beach , FL

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by CZjc1330 »

Hi
I have been actively studying Fisher in three states since 1992.
Great ads, high-pressure salespersons.
Don't walk away == RUN away.

Buy VTI and forget about Fisher and all the other "managed funds". What's managed is how they overcharge you.
Buy a pair of running shoes AND use them!!
Doctor Rhythm
Posts: 1054
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:55 am

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Doctor Rhythm »

ebeb wrote: Thu Sep 16, 2021 8:42 am As a real example, my employer moved my 401k account to Fisher Investments 401(K) Solutions (recordkeeping by Ascensus) and here are my returns so far:

2017-02: $115k moved to Fisher from Massmutual 401k
Allocation= Fisher 90% Equity 10% Fixed Income (100)=Fisher U.S. Fxd Inc Coll Fund Class 3 + Fisher All World Eq Coll Fund Class 3

2021-02: Fisher rebalanced the allocation automatically to:
Fisher All World Eq Coll Fund Class 3 45.00%
Fisher U.S. Fxd Inc Coll Fund Class 3 4.00%
Vanguard Total Bond Market Index Adm B 3.00%
Vanguard Total Intl Bond Index Adm B 3.00%
Vanguard Total World Stock Index Adm B 45.00%

Current total balance = $221k so seems to be 15.72% annual rate of return which may be slightly lower than S&P500 with dividends included returns from 2017-02 to present I think. I didn't contribute any external amounts since moving to Fisher so this reflects actual return of the initial amount.

One of my gripe is their 401k website don't give an annualized return but only cumulative so if I run the returns from 2016 to today I get
Rate of Return= 126.58% so need to be manually calculated in other words as K&P inner city teacher would say this is "mischievous and deceitful, chicanerous and deplorable" :annoyed
I don’t think the S&P 500 is an appropriate benchmark for your portfolio (whether managed by Fisher or anyone else) - given that it includes 10% bonds and a presumably decent amount of ex-US stocks.
Point
Posts: 404
Joined: Mon Jul 10, 2017 9:33 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by Point »

Off the top of my head you’re kind of guaranteed to get Fisher’s best case scenario from them. And you’ve seen plenty of examples which can beat that right off the bat.
User avatar
ThereAreNoGurus
Posts: 793
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 11:41 pm

Re: Fisher Investments

Post by ThereAreNoGurus »

BertandErnie wrote: Wed Sep 15, 2021 2:31 pm It did sound good and I figured if all these people invest with them and have that much money to invest they must be smart.
It's the opposite really. I've seen this countless times... not only with respect to finance.

Fisher customers are probably very smart within their fields of expertise or experience. Outside of that, probably not so smart.
Think of all the wealthy folks using active management and the majority will not be with outfits that exceed their respective benchmarks.
Trade the news and you will lose.
Post Reply