MEDICAL ECONOMICS MAGAZINE DISCLOSURE
1998 “The 120 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Award Criteria Summary:
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“To find out, we (Medical Economics) invited close to 100 heads of financial planning professional organization chapters as well as other experts to recommend top advisers. Then, we asked each nominee to fill out an extensive questionnaire that inquired about education, experience, professional accomplishments, areas of expertise, practice size and scope, highest and lowest net worth of clients, and compensation method. We also requested a sample financial plan and a copy of the adviser’s Form ADV, which is filed with the SEC and describes professional background and payment methods.”
“Since the personal-finance field is complex and rapidly changing, we (Medical Economics) emphasized advanced and continuing education (required by some credentialing organizations). Experience counts, so we also looked for advisers who’ve spent at least 10 years directly advising clients—not simply working in the financial industry. Our list does, however, include some advisers who have a few years’ less experience but stand apart from the crowd for other reasons.”
“We (Medical Economics) evaluated the sample financial plans to see whether each adviser was careful and did a comprehensive job. Did he or she provide well-thought-out recommendations, or just pad a binder with generic information?”
“Our (Medical Economics) eyes lit up when we noted advisers whose clients include physicians and other high-income professionals. We felt that an understanding of doctors’ salary issues, medical-school debts, and other health-industry concerns would help planners have insightful advice. Some planners we chose serve on hospital boards, and a number have physician family members.”
“We (Medical Economics) also got a sense of a planner’s clientele, to see whether you’d be a good fit. A planner with no clients having over $1 million net worth may lack experience with doctors who become high earners. Even if you (the reader) currently have little money and high debt, you might eventually outgrow such a planner.”
“Most of the advisers on our (Medical Economics) list work on a Fee-Only basis. This means they have no built-in incentive to sell you (the reader) specific financial products, because they charge an hourly rate, a flat fee, a retainer fee, or a percentage of the assets they invest for you. But we don’t consider commissions inherently evil—as long as you know the adviser receives them. Many top advisers charge fees for some services, such as planning, but earn commissions from age services or insurance sales. However, we shied away from planners whose sole income is from commissions. Too much sales pressure, we felt.”
“We (Medical Economics) use subjective judgement, too. We questioned the diligence of advisers whose brochures are full of spelling errors.”
1999 “Best Financial Advisors for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The criteria for this award was not mentioned in the original magazine.
2000 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“Our (Medical Economics) preliminary list of candidates included those who made the original list, as well as advisers recommended by state and regional accounting and financial planning organizations. We also game considerable weight to your nominations, which we’d solicited in these pages earlier this year.”
“Next, we (Medical Economics) asked all the nominees to fill out an extensive questionnaire covering educational background, credentials, experience, firm size, percentage of doctor clients, affiliations with medical organizations, and noteworthy professional achievements. We also requested a sample financial plan from each person, to get a feel for the depth and customization of advice given to clients. And we asked for a copy of each adviser’s Form ADV, which is filed with the SEC and describes professional background and payment method.”
“To assure that advisers are keeping abreast of laws and developments that could affect a financial plan, we (Medical Economics) looked for advanced credentials and continuing education. We also limited our selection to planner who had worked directly with clients for at least 10 years. With that many years in the business, an adviser would have experienced various market conditions and have watched clients’ financial pictures evolve over time.”
“We (Medical Economics) also homed in on advisers with physician clients and familiarity with the health care field. The more experience a planner had with physician concerns, managed care’s salary impact, and medical school debt, the better. For similar reasons, we limited ourselves to planners who have managed a substantial amount of money and assisted high-income clients.”
“We (Medical Economics) didn’t include advisers who work solely on commission, since that could give them an incentive to push a particular financial product. Many of those on our (Medical Economics) list operate on a Fee-Only basis, so the amount you (the reader) pay doesn’t depend on how you invest. Some, though, still earn commissions for certain services, such as insurance sales.”
“We (Medical Economics) limited our picks to one adviser per firm.”
2002 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“This year, we (Medical Economics) began the selection process by asking you, our readers, to recommend financial advisers you’ve found knowledgeable and insightful. Many of you responded, describing how an adviser had helped you turn around a sticky financial situation or had pointed you toward a sensible path.”
“We (Medical Economics) then invited your (the reader) nominees to take part in our rigorous screening process. Next, we reevaluated candidates from our last list (published in the Aug. 7, 2000 issue) and sought new recommendations from national and regional financial planning organizations.”
“Every candidate filled out an extensive questionnaire covering his or her credentials, educational background, experience, percentage of doctor clients, size of the firm, affiliations with medical organizations, and noteworthy professional achievement. To evaluate the depth and type of advice they give clients, we (Medical Economics) reviewed a sample plan from each individual. We also looked at each adviser’s Form ADV, which is filed with the SEC and describes professional background and payment methods.”
“To whittle the field of qualified candidates, we (Medical Economics) favored those recommended by our readers, and nominees whose interests were more focused on the health care profession. We eliminated advisers who are paid strictly by commission, since we believe that diminishes your (the reader) chances of getting unbiased advice. And to allow us to include as many choices as possible in each geographical area, we made the tough decision to include only one adviser per firm, even though many firms listed have several partners who might qualify for inclusion.”
“Many of the advisers we (Medical Economics) chose have specialized financial planning credentials.”
“Many advisers require that you (the reader) invest a minimum amount with their firm if you want them to manage your investments, and we’ve (Medical Economics) listed those minimum requirements. However, almost all the advisers on our list will draw up a financial plan or consult with you for an hourly or flat fee.”
2004 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“We’ve (Medical Economics) taken on the task for you (the reader), evaluating hundreds of candidates and compiling a list of the 150 best financial advisers for doctors. We started several months ago, with an open call asking you, our readers, for recommendations.”
“We (Medical Economics) contacted those advisers and asked them to fill out questionnaires. We did the same with advisers recommended to us by other financial planners; those who appeared on our previous Best Advisers list (published in out Dec. 9, 2002 issue); and those who learned of our exclusive list and wanted to make us aware of their own qualifications. The questionnaire covered credentials, education, areas of expertise, total assets under management, percentage of physician clients, noteworthy professional achievements, and affiliations with medical organizations.”
“Because our (Medical Economics) initial screening left us with a large number of advisers with strong qualifications, we favored those advisers who had been recommended to us by physicians, and those who limit the amount of compensation they earn from commissions. We believe that the smaller the percentage of commission-based revenue, the greater your (the reader) changes of receiving unbiased advice. In fact, many of the advisers who made our list are “Fee-Only,” meaning they earn no money from commissions.”
“In a few cases, we (Medical Economics) received multiple nominations from the same firm. However, to allow us the greatest geographic reach possible, we made the difficult decision to limit the list to one adviser per firm, even though many of the firms have several partners who qualify.”
“And, finally, we (Medical Economics) plugged each of the adviser’s names into the NASD and SEC databases, to be sure they hadn’t been found guilty of malfeasance. It’s possible that in some instances, a state securities office may have a complaint against a planner; but, we didn’t check down to that level.”
“Nearly all of the advisers we (Medical Economics) chose have specialized financial planning credentials.”
“Most advisers on our (Medical Economics) list will manage your (the reader) portfolio if you’d like, but they may require you to invest a minimum amount of money with them. Some ask for as much as $1 million, although many are flexible and will take less if you’re serious about investing. We made a conscious effort, however, to include advisers who have modest minimums or none at all.”
2006 “Best Financial Advisors for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
As was the case when we (Medical Economics) published our list two years ago, we received multiple nominations from the same firm or brokerage. However, to give us (Medical Economics) the broadest geographic reach-we (Medical Economics) wanted at least one adviser in each state-we made the tough decision to limit our selections to one adviser per firm, even though many firms nominated several qualified partners. By the way, don’t hesitate to call an adviser just because his place of business isn’t near you; most advisers are willing to travel considerable distances to meet with their clients.
Last, but not least, we (Medical Economics) ran each adviser’s name though the NASD and SEC databases, to be sure he or she hadn’t been found guilty of any wrongdoing. That’s comforting to you, of course, but it doesn’t preclude the possibility that a state securities office may have a beef with an adviser; we didn’t drill down that far.
Almost every adviser we chose has some sort of specialized financial planning credentials in addition to an undergraduate degree and, in some cases, an advanced degree (MBAs, for instance, are common to our list). Three credentials that you’ll see often on the list are related to investing and comprehensive planning: Certified Financial Planner (CFP), Chartered Financial Consultant (ChFC), and Chartered Financial Analyst (CFA). A couple of others-Certified Public Accountant (CPA) and Chartered Life Underwriter (CLU)-indicate people who can take care of your tax and insurance needs as well as your investment portfolio. One other credential you’ll see is CPA/PFS, which is an accountant who specializes in personal financial planning.
To maintain these credentials and keep their knowledge current, these professionals may be required to take continuing education. There’s comfort in that, too.
The majority of the advisers on our (Medical Economics) exclusive list will manage your money for you; others will create an investment plan and make recommendations, but leave the execution to you. As you’ll see, most of the folks on our (Medical Economics) list require a minimum amount of investment assets before they’ll accept you as a client. Those minimums can run as high as $1 million, but many advisers are open to smaller amounts if you’re serious about investing and committed to saving regularly. We (Medical Economics) gave preference, however, to advisers with small minimums or none at all. In any case, you should always ask what fees are involved to manage your assets; even advisers that require no minimums may charge annual retainers of many thousands of dollars a year.
Finally, always meet the adviser in person before you agree to invest. It’s important for both parties to determine if your personalities mesh and whether you’ll be able to communicate well with one another. Does the adviser listen closely to your questions, and to your spouse’s? Does he or she have other physician-clients with situations similar to yours? You can find basic information about the adviser, his team, his investment philosophy, and his services from his website-even most advisers in small firms have a website. For instance, you may want only a detailed financial plan, for which you pay a flat rate or an hourly fee, before agreeing to entrust the adviser with a portion or all of your assets.
2007 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The criteria for this award was not mentioned in the original magazine.
2008 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“To help you (the reader) get control of your financial future, Medical Economics offers our annual exclusive list of the 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors.”
“We (Medical Economics) received submissions from excellent advisers across the country, in addition to your (the reader) nominations of advisers whom you recommend to friends and colleagues. From these we assembled a “short” list of hundreds of very strong candidates.”
“To make our (Medical Economics) final determinations, considered the following criteria:”
“Knowledge and Experience: Brainpower and wisdom are mandatory, and we (Medical Economics) looked for advisers with depth of knowledge about a broad range of financial issues. Credentials count, because they show a background of knowledge. Additionally, retaining some certifications (CFP—Certified Financial Planner—for example) requires continuing education. This encourages the adviser to keep up-to-date with financial developments and products.”
“We (Medical Economics) also gave an extra nod to those who specialize in physician business or the medical field.”
“We (Medical Economics) also asked for a minimum of 10 years of experience, although there are some exceptions. Life holds unexpected situations—from bear markets to bank collapses—and so it’s beneficial to rely on someone who has already weathered similar storms.”
“Geography: The advisers selected represent a broad geographic range. In addition, many advisers operate across state line or across long distances.”
“Fee Arrangements: Advisers charge for their services in various ways, including Fee-Only and commission. While there are some outstanding advisers who are fully commission-based, for this list we (Medical Economics) steered clear of commission-only advisers. Investors can expect more objective advice when there is no motivation to direct you (the reader) toward one product over another.”
2009 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“To help you (the reader) get control of your financial future, Medical Economics offers our annual exclusive list of the 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors.”
“We (Medical Economics) received submissions from excellent advisers across the country, in addition to your (the reader) nominations of advisers whom you recommend to friends and colleagues. From these we assembled a “short” list of hundreds of very strong candidates.”
“To make our (Medical Economics) final determinations, considered the following criteria:”
“Knowledge and Experience: Brainpower and wisdom are mandatory, and we (Medical Economics) looked for advisers with depth of knowledge about a broad range of financial issues. Credentials count, because they show a background of knowledge. Additionally, retaining some certifications (CFP—Certified Financial Planner—for example) requires continuing education. This encourages the adviser to keep up-to-date with financial developments and products.”
“We (Medical Economics) also gave an extra nod to those who specialize in physician business or the medical field.”
“We (Medical Economics) also asked for a minimum of 10 years of experience, although there are some exceptions. Life holds unexpected situations—from bear markets to bank collapses—and so it’s beneficial to rely on someone who has already weathered similar storms.”
“Geography: The advisers selected represent a broad geographic range. In addition, many advisers operate across state line or across long distances.”
“Fee Arrangements: Advisers charge for their services in various ways, including Fee-Only and commission. While there are some outstanding advisers who are fully commission-based, for this list we (Medical Economics) steered clear of commission-only advisers. Investors can expect more objective advice when there is no motivation to direct you (the reader) toward one product over another.”
2010 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“How we (Medical Economics) chose our list:”
“We (Medical Economics) based inclusion on the following criteria:”
“Knowledge and experience—Brainpower and wisdom are mandatory, and we (Medical Economics) looked for advisers with depth knowledge about a broad range of financial issues. Credential count, because they show a background of knowledge. Additionally, retaining some certifications (CFP®, Certified Financial Planner, for example) requires continuing education to keep up with financial developments and products. However, we included advisers without credentials based of their years of experience in financial planning.”
“The advisers typically have at least 10 years of professional experience.”
“Geography—The advisers represent a broad geographic range. In addition, many advisers operate across state lines or across long distances.”
“Fee arrangements—Advisers charge for their services in various ways, including Fee-Only and commission.”
“Minimum portfolio—Many well-established advisers require a minimum amount of money under their management.”
“Good standing—We (Medical Economics) checked each applicant against the national databases of the Securities and Exchange Commissions (SEC) and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to confirm that he or she has not been found guilty of any wrongdoing on a national level.”
2011 “The 150 Best Financial Advisers for Doctors”
Published by Medical Economics
Mary McGrath submitted an application to be considered for this award. This publication did not charge an application fee.
Award Criteria Summary:
The following criteria for this award listing was excerpted from the magazine:
“Here are some of the criteria we (Medical Economics) studied to help physician make the best possible decision.”
“Good standing: We (Medical Economics) received submissions from hundreds of advisers across the nation. We checked each one against the national databases of the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) to determine that they had not been found guilty of any wrongdoing on a national level.”
“Background: Each adviser completes an extensive questionnaire covering his or her credentials, experience, membership in professional groups, fee arrangements and minimum portfolio requirements.”
“Qualifications: With some exceptions, the advisers we (Medical Economics) chose have a minimum of 10 years experience. Many advisers have specialized financial planning credentials.”
“Fee arrangements: Fee-Only and commission are the main ways advisers charge for their services. We’ve included both in this survey.”
“Minimum portfolio: Some advisers on our (Medical Economics) list may require that you invest a minimum amount of money, often as much as $1 million, if you (the reader) want them to manage your investments.”