Hi all, Sorry for the rant - this got to me today and I thought I'd share. Long story short - September last year my 83yr old female neighbour/friend told me she had got a financial adviser. I asked how and she said a lovely young lady came to an "over 65's women interested in investment" day at the local pub. Alert sounded, so I said good for you - it's something I'm interested in so I would like to see the docs/proposal when the adviser prepares it. I finally saw the docs yesterday and was not horrified but very disappointed by what is being proposed. The adviser came to visit her today and I sat in on it. A few key points from her: 1. It's a dangerous time to be invested! 2. She can pick the best active managers, doesn't go for the "best" one from last year but goes for consistent outperformers. 3. There's research evidence showing conclusively that active beats passive. I brought up SPIVA, the mathematics etc. but no that's irrelevant. You need active now because of the "danger" in the market. 4. My neighbour needs to diversify away from Australian shares, so she needs to sell her shares in Aussie blue chip shares (CBA, BHP etc.) and use that money to buy Fidelity Australian Equities Fund.... I queried about why my neighbour would sell her Aussie blue chip shares to buy an index hugging active Aussie share investing fund that charges a whopping fee. Why not just AFIC or an ETF like VAS. Apparently because the Fidelity fund is far superior....Active beats passive. The original plan the "adviser" sent was to diversify internationally, but that didn't happen in the plan she was going to implement. I said I didn't understand why she would shuffle the cards and only improve the diversification to 90% Aus and 10% International, at which the adviser said that it was only 3% international. I said maybe my maths is wrong and made her go through it, she was wrong... She also recommended putting a large component of the money into the Schroder Real Return CPI Plus 5% Fund Wholesale Class: https://www.schroders.com/getfunddocument/?oid=1.9.902961 I did some looking into it and was very unimpressed. My argument is that why would my neighbour invest money into something like that (some junky bonds and fixed interest, 30% shares in Australia and Internationally, lots of cash and fixed interest) with high fees (0.9%) that had no track record of hitting its mandate when she could achieve the same by just adding bonds to her portfolio and tweaking the share investment. Again - active managers are better, dangerous market etc. I then also brought up the large amount of money sitting in the Yarra Enhanced Income Fund: https://www.yarracm.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Yarra-Enhanced-Income-Fund-Direct-Mar-2020.pdf My neighbour has had this for as long as the fund has existed, and the adviser was happy to leave the money there. I said look at the credit rating of the things its invested in, more than half is in BBB- debt or worse. How can you sit there and tell me about risk management and dangerous times and leave a large chunk of money in that fund? She said capital gains tax, so I countered why is this not the first one to go then before selling other shares etc. She tolerated me until then, but that pissed her off. She said she was happy for me to email her and she would provide more information about what we discussed, I said I'm not really interested in the reports she'd said as I'd rather do my own research. I then left saying for me a financial adviser to someone like my neighbour should be trying to make it as simple as possible, and to be a person that my neighbour could contact once a year to discuss re-balancing and whenever she was starting to panic and thinking of doing something stupid and that's it. I went in hoping that maybe she would be receptive to switching to low fee index funds, and making it more simplified and diverse. That was not the case, it was a classic "you need me because I'm the gun fund picker" approach, mixed in with making things seem highly technical and lots of chicanery to make it seem like you needed her. But once I actually questioned the choices it became apparent there was no thought process behind it. Not sure what I hope to achieve with this post - but wanted to get it off my chest! If anyone has any thoughts that I could share with her (not advice as I've told her) I'll show her this thread. I know it's none of my business, but at the same time it is because when you see the sharks circling someone what are you supposed to do? The charge was $4500 a year for nothing except some copy and paste and cursory understanding of her predicament. The "adviser" didn't even take into account spending habits. If my neighbour had enough money to last forever regardless I wouldn't care, but she's right on that borderline where losing $4500 a year to an adviser + paying an extra 0.7%+ in fees for closet indexers and suspect active managers could push her over the edge. She's aiming to spend $65K a year, that's pretty much 10% gone in just management/adviser fees before even getting to accounting fees and CGT events.