Would appreciate some pointers

Zadumbreion

If an IFA says they are a chartered Financial Planner, should I be able to find them here in the cii website member search?

Are there legitimate reasons why they might not show up in that search?

PS I did try to embed the link to the CII website member search page but the forum wouldn't permit me to yet.

masonic

Zadumbreion said:

If an IFA says they are a chartered Financial Planner, should I be able to find them here in the cii website member search?

Are there legitimate reasons why they might not show up in that search?

PS I did try to embed the link to the CII website member search page but the forum wouldn't permit me to yet.

You mean this one? https://www.cii.co.uk/membership/join-us/chartered/chartered-firm-search/

wjr4

Zadumbreion said:

If an IFA says they are a chartered Financial Planner, should I be able to find them here in the cii website member search?

Are there legitimate reasons why they might not show up in that search?

PS I did try to embed the link to the CII website member search page but the forum wouldn't permit me to yet.

I think if they don’t pay for their membership (they should do to use the title), they would not show up. 

wjr4

numbersrule said:

Zadumbreion said:

numbersrule said:

Zadumbreion said:

 we might prefer to do something completely different, possibly in a context where we're actually doing some good for others.

We ............are not looking for enormous gains. We'd like to beat inflation, obviously, but if we could derive something like £50K pa (extremely rough number) for life before running out of cash, that would probably do us fine.......

Any pointers or opinions would be greatly appreciated - as I said I'm happy to spend the time earning the knowledge but - especially given the short timescales - I want to make sure I don't spend ages looking at the wrong options.

Do you think you might wish to focus on ethical investing?

Haven't really thought about it. My gut instinct would be that right now I am more concerned about protecting this retirement fund whatever it takes, but giving back through our time and skills in the future.

When you select your IFA his first task would normally be to assess your risk tolerance / risk level.  That will help him decide the asset allocation for your portfolio ( ie what proportion is in equities and what proportion in fixed interest or bonds for example ).  
Although you are a business owner it sounds like you do indeed have a low tolerance for risk which may suggest that you are nearer to 40:60 as opposed to 60:40.
Show your IFA this thread as it has started your thoughts formulation.
Be aware that IFAs tend to overestimate Clients' risk tolerance, so you should assume that you may need to remind him of this fact if this becomes obvious based on the risk number from 1 to 7 he assigns to you.

Not all financial advisers are male. 

dunstonh

If an IFA says they are a chartered Financial Planner, should I be able to find them here in the cii website member search?
Are there legitimate reasons why they might not show up in that search?

The PFS is just one of the examination boards.  The list their members.  They do not list non-members who use a different body.
Also, members are not automatically updated on that directory.  The profiles have to be completed by the member.  This includes a tick box in the profile saying they work for a chartered firm.   Although you can be chartered and not work for a chartered firm.

Zadumbreion

masonic said:

Zadumbreion said:

If an IFA says they are a chartered Financial Planner, should I be able to find them here in the cii website member search?

Are there legitimate reasons why they might not show up in that search?

PS I did try to embed the link to the CII website member search page but the forum wouldn't permit me to yet.

You mean this one? 

That website yes, but an individual member search rather than a firm search

numbersrule

wjr4 said:

Zadumbreion said:

numbersrule said:

Zadumbreion said:

Not all financial advisers are male. 

Apologies wjr4

numbersrule

dunstonh said:

Be aware that IFAs tend to overestimate Clients' risk tolerance, so you should assume that you may need to remind him of this fact if this becomes obvious based on the risk number from 1 to 7 he assigns to you.

1 - there is no evidence to back up that statement.   Indeed, the more common statement, and what is very often seen on this site, is that IFAs are more likely to use lower volatility portfolios than DIY investors.
2 - The OP needs to be careful of reading things on the internet and then trying to educate an IFA based on that.  
3 - Every firm uses its own risk scale which could be any range of numbers.  The one that barely anyone uses is the KIID 1-7 scale because it is notoriously unreliable.

Thanks for the feedback dunstonh but I disagree based on my own experiences.
Perhaps your position suggests an alternative view.
But, anyway, leaving experiences aside, there will be a natural unconscious bias on the part of all fee earning IFAs.  Inevitably.  
Using that assumption as a starting point for discussions with IFAs is a safe position.
I am sure OP is capable of educating the IFA about OPs very own risk tolerance.  I am not suggesting the OP educates the IFA about fund selection after all.
There is nothing unreliable about a scale of 1 to 7.  Anyone can understand that irrespective of the basis of KIID.

Zadumbreion

Well finding an IFA is turning out to be a bit of a challenge at the moment. At least those who don't insist on ad valorem payment and are truly independent.

masonic

numbersrule said:

dunstonh said:

Be aware that IFAs tend to overestimate Clients' risk tolerance, so you should assume that you may need to remind him of this fact if this becomes obvious based on the risk number from 1 to 7 he assigns to you.

1 - there is no evidence to back up that statement.   Indeed, the more common statement, and what is very often seen on this site, is that IFAs are more likely to use lower volatility portfolios than DIY investors.
2 - The OP needs to be careful of reading things on the internet and then trying to educate an IFA based on that.  
3 - Every firm uses its own risk scale which could be any range of numbers.  The one that barely anyone uses is the KIID 1-7 scale because it is notoriously unreliable.

Thanks for the feedback dunstonh but I disagree based on my own experiences.
Perhaps your position suggests an alternative view.
But, anyway, leaving experiences aside, there will be a natural unconscious bias on the part of all fee earning IFAs.  Inevitably.  
Using that assumption as a starting point for discussions with IFAs is a safe position.
I am sure OP is capable of educating the IFA about OPs very own risk tolerance.  I am not suggesting the OP educates the IFA about fund selection after all.
There is nothing unreliable about a scale of 1 to 7.  Anyone can understand that irrespective of the basis of KIID.

Most novice investors have a very poor understanding of their own risk tolerance. Unconscious bias is likely to be strongest in them, since it is their skin in the game. One only needs to browse threads on this forum to see that. Thinking dispassionately about one's own investments is a skill that needs to be developed over time. A disinterested third party is at an advantage in this respect. There is a great deal of value in going through a formal risk tolerance profiling process, either electronic or in person. It is not unusual for the results of which to be surprising.

I also think KIID risk scales can be quite unreliable. Two investments in the same 1-7 bin can behave very differently. It's easy to oversimplify after a long period where good consistent returns were made from virtually all investments. Taking this approach would also overlook the fact that combining uncorrelated investments can reduce risk, a portfolio isn't just the average of its parts. There are much better ways to model portfolio risk than looking up where each fund has been placed on a risk scale in its own literature.