"Goals-based" planning engines lower client friction, than cf-based simulation engines, but both simply aim to illustrate a financial gap to sell a financial product, thus "lead-gen" (credit-karma) "win", precisely during a financially distressing time as 2008.
The mass affluent will be better off realizing the VALUE of WFH and remote work. Mostly in un-financializing their life and time. ("money is time" = REVERSAL of wealth-tech sellers' aims).
the 1% of AUM model will be even less appealing when the mass affluent realize how much better they're off focusing on maximize different life wellness/"wealth" metrics.
Go ahead and simulate working/retiring/living "off-the-grid" or overseas (the model I built). Of course no tools in "goal-based" planning, since they only model cashflows AFTER retirement. And even then the simplistic assumption that living expenses are simply 80% of some current magic #.
Monte-carlo simulations are actually quite a waste of simulations, considering the fundamental problem of "goal-based" planning is that people don't know what their goals are OR the possibilities... (In any case, risk-wise, only need the worst 5-10% of scenarios... and even then "standard deviations" are a joke, since we regularly experience regime shifts (every 3-10 years)).
I built a simulator of different lifestyles. Nomadic ones... And it comes with interesting issues.
- The complexity of potential lifestyles is more difficult to comprehend and consider than how it manifests in ecommerce.
- and so much potential "regret" if financial simulators actually gave one a few hundred simulations of nomadic itineraries, homeownership, expenses, etc.
It's actually fascinating how quickly folks can UN-financialize themselves and spend the rest of the life/time remembering/rewiring that MONEY IS ACTUALLY TIME, ultimately - the most valuable "commodity".
And there are a lot of wealths that are non-financial - think of traffic time, weather, crime, healthcare, etc. Thus nomadic simulations...
Just my 2 cents. :)
Key articles on non-remote FP, from Kitces of course:
You are of course right, most of the financial assessment flow is about getting your money into an ETF portfolio that you hold for 40 years. People are motivated to sell this for the right reason, in thinking it is the "solution". But there are many paths, and some of them involve slow and steady, while others are radical. Cashing out from a startup or crypto investment is radical. Cutting cost and living off the grid is another.
remote work was a radical shift... not only cost of living arbitrage (superior to fashionable F.I.R.E./minimalism movements), but also ability to access world's vast cultural wealth, optimize for climate year-round, avoid traffic/crime of former radically popular US cities, and just as "radical" as all those tourist trips and vacations everyone in the world takes.
Meanwhile former commission brokers, turned "fiduciary" advisors/managers, all too happy to use client's human capital to make up for short-falls in their financial plan. Nothing radical, but just hardly a service to use financial "techniques" of:
- lowering your expenses now
- lowering your expenses in retirment
- working 2-3 years longer
- selling vacation house
- increasing stock exposure
all are insults to injury. except the last one. That's just higher chance of injury...
The future of financial planning will not be in running 1,000 return/st. deviation monte carlos, but in displaying the simply likely POSSIBILITIES first. It's not that hard to model! :) It's not radical, I'd say it's inevitable and all around. Just look at "remote" companies in the small/mid segment. They're fully remote, not even "hybrid" hubris. And displaying possibilities, is of course the right kind of scenario planning and way ahead in all fintech funnels. :) Radical.
"Goals-based" planning engines lower client friction, than cf-based simulation engines, but both simply aim to illustrate a financial gap to sell a financial product, thus "lead-gen" (credit-karma) "win", precisely during a financially distressing time as 2008.
The mass affluent will be better off realizing the VALUE of WFH and remote work. Mostly in un-financializing their life and time. ("money is time" = REVERSAL of wealth-tech sellers' aims).
the 1% of AUM model will be even less appealing when the mass affluent realize how much better they're off focusing on maximize different life wellness/"wealth" metrics.
Go ahead and simulate working/retiring/living "off-the-grid" or overseas (the model I built). Of course no tools in "goal-based" planning, since they only model cashflows AFTER retirement. And even then the simplistic assumption that living expenses are simply 80% of some current magic #.
Monte-carlo simulations are actually quite a waste of simulations, considering the fundamental problem of "goal-based" planning is that people don't know what their goals are OR the possibilities... (In any case, risk-wise, only need the worst 5-10% of scenarios... and even then "standard deviations" are a joke, since we regularly experience regime shifts (every 3-10 years)).
I built a simulator of different lifestyles. Nomadic ones... And it comes with interesting issues.
- The complexity of potential lifestyles is more difficult to comprehend and consider than how it manifests in ecommerce.
- and so much potential "regret" if financial simulators actually gave one a few hundred simulations of nomadic itineraries, homeownership, expenses, etc.
It's actually fascinating how quickly folks can UN-financialize themselves and spend the rest of the life/time remembering/rewiring that MONEY IS ACTUALLY TIME, ultimately - the most valuable "commodity".
And there are a lot of wealths that are non-financial - think of traffic time, weather, crime, healthcare, etc. Thus nomadic simulations...
Just my 2 cents. :)
Key articles on non-remote FP, from Kitces of course:
History of selling products/insurance: https://www.kitces.com/blog/differentiating-next-generation-financial-planning-software-advisor-fintech-differentiation-focus/
Quantifying value (by far the best article in the space): https://www.kitces.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/Kitces-Report-Volume-3-2015-Evaluating-Financial-Planning-Strategies-And-Quantifying-Their-Economic-Impact.pdf
You are of course right, most of the financial assessment flow is about getting your money into an ETF portfolio that you hold for 40 years. People are motivated to sell this for the right reason, in thinking it is the "solution". But there are many paths, and some of them involve slow and steady, while others are radical. Cashing out from a startup or crypto investment is radical. Cutting cost and living off the grid is another.
remote work was a radical shift... not only cost of living arbitrage (superior to fashionable F.I.R.E./minimalism movements), but also ability to access world's vast cultural wealth, optimize for climate year-round, avoid traffic/crime of former radically popular US cities, and just as "radical" as all those tourist trips and vacations everyone in the world takes.
Meanwhile former commission brokers, turned "fiduciary" advisors/managers, all too happy to use client's human capital to make up for short-falls in their financial plan. Nothing radical, but just hardly a service to use financial "techniques" of:
- lowering your expenses now
- lowering your expenses in retirment
- working 2-3 years longer
- selling vacation house
- increasing stock exposure
all are insults to injury. except the last one. That's just higher chance of injury...
The future of financial planning will not be in running 1,000 return/st. deviation monte carlos, but in displaying the simply likely POSSIBILITIES first. It's not that hard to model! :) It's not radical, I'd say it's inevitable and all around. Just look at "remote" companies in the small/mid segment. They're fully remote, not even "hybrid" hubris. And displaying possibilities, is of course the right kind of scenario planning and way ahead in all fintech funnels. :) Radical.