How to Make a Merger a Growth Move: A 5-Step Roadmap for Advisory Firms

For many financial advisory firm owners, growth eventually hits a ceiling. Organic client acquisition slows, operational demands pile up, and the question surfaces: what comes next? Mergers have become one of the most effective strategies for advisory firms looking to scale, reduce risk, and build long-term enterprise value. But a merger done poorly can create more problems than it solves. The difference between a merger that accelerates your business and one that stalls it comes down to preparation, process, and the right professional guidance. In a recent SRG webinar, Nicole Frey, CFP®, Director of Team Solutions, and Ryan Grau, CVA, CBA, Director of Valuations, walked through the full merger lifecycle for advisory firms. Below is a summary of the key takeaways. You can also watch the full webinar recording here. Why Advisory Firms Pursue Mergers Advisory firms explore mergers for a range of reasons, and the right motivation depends on where you are in your business lifecycle. Some of the most common drivers include: Faster growth. Rather than relying solely on organic growth, merging with a partner who brings their own book of business can accelerate your trajectory. SRG’s AcquireEdge program helps firms identify and evaluate acquisition and merger opportunities with this goal in mind. Greater scale and efficiency. When two firms combine, revenue may grow at a faster rate as the combined firm expands its client base, referral network, service capacity, and opportunities to capture additional wallet share. Expenses often increase at a slower rate because core infrastructure, technology, compliance, management, and administrative costs can be spread across a larger revenue base, creating margin improvement as the firm scales. Risk reduction and continuity. Sole proprietors face significant key-person risk. Adding a partner means your clients are protected if something happens to you. It also opens the door to better succession planning and contingency planning options. (For more on why contingency planning matters in the context of M&A, see Contingency Planning: A Key to Acquisition Success.) Expanded capabilities. A merger can help you offer new services, diversify your client demographics, enter new geographic markets, or create a one-stop shop by combining with complementary practices like CPA firms. For firms thinking about strategic direction at this level, SRG’s enterprise consulting services can help map the path forward. Talent attraction. In an aging industry, larger combined firms can offer more defined career paths and specialized roles, making it easier to recruit and retain talented professionals. Improved negotiation power. Operating at a larger scale gives you leverage when negotiating vendor contracts, payout grid rates, and fee structures with broker-dealers or custodians. Step 1: Get Your Entity Structure Right Before you start looking for a merger partner, your own house needs to be in order. Your entity structure — the legal form, tax status, and organizational setup of your firm — directly impacts how a merger can be executed. SRG’s entity support services are designed to help firms get this foundation in place. (For a deeper dive, download Your Guide to Proper Entity Structure.) The two most common legal forms in the advisory space are corporations and LLCs. Frey noted that LLCs taxed as partnerships offer significantly more flexibility for mergers. In a partnership structure, a new partner can contribute their book of business in exchange for ownership without triggering a taxable event. In an S-corporation, by contrast, that same contribution is often treated as a sale by the IRS, creating an immediate tax liability even though no cash changed hands. For firms that want the flexibility of an LLC partnership and the FICA tax savings of an S-Corp election, there is a hybrid solution: an LLC taxed as a partnership at the operating level, with each partner holding their interest through an individual S-Corp holding company. It adds complexity, but it gives you the best of both worlds. The takeaway: address your entity structure before the merger conversation heats up. Trying to restructure and merge simultaneously can be overwhelming. If your entity is already in place, SRG’s entity maintenance program ensures your governance documents and compliance stay current as the business evolves. For more on how entity structure supports growth, see Set Your Firm Up for Success — Using Entity Structure to Unleash Growth. Step 2: Define Your Ideal Merger Partner Not every merger is a good merger. As Frey put it during the webinar, a merger is “almost like a marriage, just on a business level.” You want to build trust and rapport before proposing anything formal. Finding the right partner requires honest self-assessment and intentional criteria. Your ideal merger partner should be similar or complementary to your business. Frey recommended evaluating potential partners across several dimensions: Revenue sources and service model compatibility. If one firm operates primarily through in-person client meetings and the other runs on virtual engagement, there needs to be a plan to reconcile those models or you risk losing clients during the transition. Client types and demographics. Complementary client bases can be a strength, but mismatched expectations around client service intensity can become a source of tension. Growth goals. If one partner is aggressively pursuing growth while the other is winding down toward retirement, that misalignment needs to be addressed through compensation structures rather than equity adjustments, which can create IRS audit complications. Once you have identified a potential partner, start by networking through broker-dealers, professional conferences, centers of influence, and business coaches. Build the relationship before introducing formal merger conversations. (For practical guidance on early-stage partnership conversations, see Teaming Advice When Preparing for a Merger.) When the time is right, sign an NDA and begin sharing financial information through a structured due diligence process. At minimum, you should be requesting three years of financial history with a deep dive on the trailing 12 months, a breakdown of the client base (demographics, asset distribution, concentration risk), staffing levels and compensation commitments, any existing equity-sharing or profit-sharing promises, major contract terms and expiration dates, and each owner’s goals — whether growth-oriented or succession-oriented — along with their expected

Financial advisor pay is ‘one of the most powerful strategic levers’ for RIAs

By: Tobias SalingerPublishing Date: March 17, 2026 Far from simply being a recruiting and retention tool, financial advisor compensation plans are turning into important growth and valuation engines, according to succession planning experts. Registered investment advisory firms or other advisory practices must create career paths and pay plans that evolve quickly enough to keep up with industry competition, advisorcareer advancement, geographic factors and the company’s long-term goals, according to a webinar last month on compensation trends led by Julia Sexton, the director of strategic organizational planning at consulting firm Succession Resource Group, and Ryan Grau, the company’s director of valuations. They presented the first of what will become an annual compensation study based on data from the RIAs that use the firm’s services. And the central takeaway revolved around the divergent impact among firms that have taken proactive steps, and those that haven’t. “Today isn’t just about benchmarking numbers,” Sexton said. “It’s about aligning compensation with role, clarity, behaviors, growth objectives and long-term enterprise value, because when compensation is designed intentionally, it becomes one of the most powerful strategic levers that you have in your firm and is so critical to so many transaction and business growth initiatives, succession planning, viability and just the overall cultural and financial health of your business.” On the other hand, Grau jumped in to add, failing to build an effective compensation strategy is “one of the quickest ways to derail value.” To read the full article, please visit: https://www.financial-planning.com/news/financial-advisor-pay-is-a-powerful-strategic-lever-for-rias Disclaimer This article was first published by Tobias Salinger The original article can be found here. All rights to the original content are held by FinancialPlanning.com.

Grow Your Advisory Firm Without Limiting Your Exit Options

Growth builds momentum. It creates new opportunities, expands your client base, and can increase enterprise value. But growth also forces us to build structure. Over time, that structure shapes your future transition options. Decisions around equity, compensation, leadership, client relationships, and governance can either expand your optionality, or quietly limit it. Advisors make decisions about their firm, often without thinking about the downline impact. Without intentional planning, it is easy to paint yourself into a corner through years of choices, and end up with only one viable exit option. Think of it this way: if a client walked into your office with $5 million to invest, but told you they were retiring in six days, you could still help them. But, imagine how much more you could have done if they had come to you five or ten years earlier. The same principle applies to your business and planning for your eventual exit. The firms that get the highest valuations are not simply the fastest growing. They are the ones built to be scalable, transferable, and adaptable, giving them multiple transition options. The Earlier You Start, The More You Control Every business owner will exit at some point. The question is not “if,” but “how,” and how well. The earlier you begin planning, the more control you retain over that outcome: Earlier planning leads to more transition options More options create a stronger negotiating position Better preparation leads to maximum value for the founder This is why the best-prepared firms often begin planning 10 or more years in advance. Without that runway, decisions become reactive. With it, you can build intentionally while preserving flexibility. And regardless of which path you eventually choose, internal succession, merger, private equity partnership, or external sale, the foundation you build today will determine the options available to you tomorrow. Universal Do’s and Don’ts to Preserve Optionality For advisors who are still evaluating their long-term direction, the goal is to have options and remain flexible. That means avoiding decisions that unintentionally lock the business into a single outcome, or making decisions that will provide you options. Across firms, a consistent set of patterns either supports or limits future flexibility. Ownership Structure Do: Understand how your entity structure and equity design impact future transition options. Many firms are operating with the same entity they set up when they first launched, which was adequate at the time. But, what worked then may not serve you now or in the future. As your firm grows, revisit your entity structure to ensure it is still optimal for your short and long-term succession and growth goals. Most of the time, what you had twenty years ago isn’t ideal for where you are today. Don’t: Distribute equity without buyback or bring-along provisions. If you share equity, make sure your agreements preserve the flexibility to steer the business in the direction you choose. Client Relationships Do: Delegate client service work to your team, freeing you up to mentor, train, manage, and grow the business. Also – as you hand off client relationships, ensure you have appropriate protections in place so team members can leave and take your clients. Non-competes are difficult to use and hard to enforce – there are other better ways to protect your practice. Don’t: Overcommit ownership or transition expectations without formal agreements in place. Informal arrangements may feel sufficient today, but they create significant complications during a disagreement or transition event. Financials Do: Maintain clean and clear financials over multiple years and invest in scalable growth. Predictable financials, where the chart of accounts doesn’t shift dramatically year to year, are essential for any planning or transaction process. Know your P&L. Don’t: Compensate employees at levels that undermine owner economics. A common pitfall: team members receiving variable, revenue-based compensation without bearing the risk or downside of ownership. When it comes time for those team members to buy in, the math (especially when risk-adjusted) simply doesn’t work. There is no faster way to decimate your value than to pay your advisors using a percentage of revenue on clients you assigned to them. Organizational Resilience Do: Build a team that allows the business to grow beyond the founder. Gen1 mentors and trains Gen2. Gen1 and Gen2 work to mentor and train Gen3, and so on. Whether you plan to sell internally to your team, or to a competitor, a well-staffed firm that can operate independent of the founder will unlock the best outcomes. Don’t: Assume the right transition option will materialize without preparation or that qualified team members automatically want to be successors. Desire and capability are two different things, and you need both. Legal and Compliance Do: Keep entity documents, employment agreements, and compliance records current. Every team member, especially client-facing advisors, should have a formal agreement in place. Don’t: Wait until due diligence to address gaps. Problems discovered at the ninth inning are far more expensive and stressful to resolve than those addressed years in advance. Understanding the Four Primary Transition Options Most financial service firm transitions pursue one of four paths. Each requires different preparation, timelines, and trade-offs. Internal Succession Typical timeline: 5 to 10 years (from the first sale to the last) Internal succession focuses on transitioning ownership and leadership to the next generation within the firm. To do this effectively, firms must: Recruit and retain quality advisors and leaders Mentor and train employees to become viable successors Develop leadership capabilities over time Implement equity sharing plans as part of the career track Gradually transition client relationships before the founder’s exit One of the most important things to clarify early is your “why.” Internal succession typically prioritizes legacy, continuity, control, and minimizing disruption for clients. It is unlikely to produce the highest value for the founder, compared to an external transaction, but for many founders, value is not the primary goal. “When it comes to internal succession, you should be convicted in the outcome — transferring the business to your successors rather than pursuing an external sale.

Financial Advisor Compensation Guide for Advisory Firm Owners

Compensation is both the engine that drives a service-based advisory firm and the issue that keeps firm owners up at night. Everyone wants to pay their people fairly, but what fair looks like depends on your firm’s size, structure, growth goals, and the roles people actually play on your team. The challenge is that many advisory firms are still running compensation models that were designed for a different era; one where individual production was the primary measure of value and every advisor operated as a standalone business under a shared brand. Those models worked when the industry looked that way. For many firms, the industry no longer does. In a recent episode of The Fine Print Podcast, David Grau Jr. sat down with Julia Sexton, CVA, who leads SRG’s compensation design, employment agreements, and equity sharing services, to walk through the key decisions that firm owners face when redesigning compensation. This article distills that conversation into a practical guide — organized around the decisions you need to make, in the order you need to make them. Start with the Data: Know What the Market Is Actually Paying Before you redesign anything, you need a reliable baseline. Strategy aside, if your compensation is 40% above or below the market for similar roles, you have a problem that no structure can solve. For years, the industry relied on the Investment News / Moss Adams compensation study as the go-to benchmarking resource. It had an interactive dashboard where you could filter by firm size, region, and role. That resource was eventually shuttered, and while it has returned in a free version, it now pulls from government sources rather than industry-specific survey data — making it significantly less reliable for advisory firms. SRG developed its Talent Strategy Report (TSR) to fill that gap. Rather than relying on self-reported survey data, the TSR draws from thousands of valuations performed annually — meaning the compensation data has been vetted, reviewed on calls with firm owners, and confirmed for accuracy before it enters the data set. The report covers compensation by role, firm size, and staffing benchmarks so you can see what peers at similar-sized firms are paying and how they are staffing. A few things worth noting from the data: Location matters less than it used to. With remote work now standard at many firms, geographic premiums have compressed. Compensation for the same role is more consistent across regions than it was five years ago. Firm size does not create as big a gap as you would expect. A lead advisor at a $3 million firm and a $7 million firm often earn similar total compensation — but for different reasons. Smaller firms tend to pay more per person because each person wears more hats and larger firms requiring more bodies are able to specialize more in each role. So maybe at the core, a larger firm is ‘paying more’ for the core duties of the specific role, but the reality is that smaller firms have similar if not the same tasks and responsibilities, just shared across less people – so we don’t see this changing. You should be checking this at least annually. Compensation benchmarking is not a one-time exercise. At minimum, pull updated market data every year — every other year at the outside — to make sure you are staying competitive. The bottom line: any compensation redesign should start with current, reliable data. If you are working from a study that is three years old or based on a survey with a few hundred respondents, you are building on a shaky foundation. Choose Your Model: Grid-Based vs. Ensemble Compensation This is the foundational decision, and it flows directly from a bigger question: what kind of firm are you building? Grid-based (production-based) compensation assigns each advisor a book of business and pays them a percentage of the revenue they manage — typically 30% to 45%. It is simple, familiar, and effective at incentivizing individual production. It is the model that most of the industry grew up on, originating in the wirehouses and migrating to the independent channel as advisors went out on their own. Ensemble (team-based) compensation pays advisors a base salary reflective of their role and responsibilities, with variable bonuses tied to specific goals and behaviors, and potentially a share of firm profits. It is designed to incentivize collaboration, specialization, and enterprise value. The critical insight is that your compensation model will drive behavior whether you intend it to or not. If you pay advisors on individual production, they will optimize for individual production — even if you tell them you want collaboration. You cannot put the incentives in one place and expect behavior in another. About 95% of the teams we talk to say they want to build a collaborative, team-based firm. Yet many of them are still running a production-based compensation model. If that describes your firm, the structure and the strategy are in conflict, and compensation will win that fight every time. That said, grid-based compensation is not inherently wrong. If your firm genuinely operates as a collection of individual practitioners under a shared brand — what we sometimes call a “team in name only” — then production-based pay is aligned with that reality. The problems arise when the stated goal is collaboration and scale, but the compensation model still rewards siloed behavior. Before redesigning anything, be honest with yourself about your firm’s long-term goals and strategy. Are you building an integrated enterprise, or are you running a platform for independent advisors? Either is valid. But the compensation structure needs to match. The Hidden Cost of Grid-Based Compensation Even if a grid-based model made sense when your firm was smaller, it can become a serious liability as you grow. Here is the math that tends to catch firm owners off guard. You assign an advisor 100 households representing $100 million in AUM and $1 million in annual fees. You give them a 30% payout. They earn $300,000. Simple enough.

The Silent Risk Healthy Advisors Never See Coming

Why waiting until you feel ready puts your practice value, clients, family, and successor options at risk—and why the strongest advisory exits happen long before you feel ready. Many advisors believe that as long as they are healthy, active, and fully capable of running their business, there’s no need to think about preparing their practice for sale or building a succession plan. The logic seems straightforward: “I feel great. I’m in control. I have time.” But this belief focuses entirely on the advisor’s current physical state and overlooks a fundamental truth of this industry: practice value, transition readiness, and successor options have nothing to do with how healthy you feel today. The most successful transitions happen years before advisors intend to slow down—not after decline, fatigue, or urgency begin to set in. Feeling healthy may make you feel secure, but it does not eliminate the long-term risks of waiting too long, losing leverage, or being forced into a rushed exit.  Seller Advocacy. Your Sell-Side Partner. Sell Your Book of Business or Financial Advisory Practice with SRG See Service Separate from your own well-being, advisors often forget another uncomfortable reality: unexpected health issues frequently arise not for the advisor, but for the people around them—a spouse, aging parents, children, or even a key employee who carries critical operational knowledge. These events can demand time, attention, and emotional energy, forcing advisors to step back abruptly or reprioritize their life without warning. Even if you are perfectly healthy, life can change your timeline overnight. Feeling healthy today isn’t a reason to delay your succession plan—it’s proof that now is the ideal time to create one while you still have full control, full energy, and full optionality. In the advisory industry, where client relationships, revenue continuity, and risk exposure define the value of the business, waiting until you “need to” is rarely strategic. The truth is clear: Healthy advisors with no urgency are the ones who get the best deals and those who wait unit circumstances force their hand almost always get the worst. The Reality: Health Is Not an Exit StrategyBelow are the core reasons why health—your own or your loved ones’—is not a reliable foundation for your succession timing Being Healthy Today Does Not Protect Future Practice ValueMany advisors assume that as long as they feel physically strong and engaged, their business will remain equally strong. But practice value is tied to stability, not personal wellness. Buyers look for consistent revenue, low transition risk, and a clear, well-orchestrated succession path—not the advisor’s current level of energy. In fact, the healthiest advisors often receive the highest valuations precisely because they have the time and capacity to participate in a thoughtful, well-paced transition. Waiting until health changes or energy declines reduces leverage, constrains options, and introduces uncertainty that buyers notice immediately. Buyer Optionality Shrinks When You WaitWhen you plan early, you have the broadest universe of potential successors—individual buyers, teams, consolidators, RIAs, and strategic partners. This allows you to compare philosophies, personalities, cultures, financial profiles, and deal structures. But as time pressure builds, the buyer pool narrows significantly. Urgency forces advisors to choose the buyer who is available—not the one who is truly aligned. This is why advisors who wait often end up settling for deals that don’t reflect the scale, value, or legacy of the practice they built. Health Issues Among Loved Ones Can Disrupt Your Timeline InstantlyEven if you personally remain healthy, your timeline can be upended by the needs of those closest to you. The most common reasons advisors suddenly accelerate their exit have nothing to do with their own health. They include: a spouse’s unexpected medical diagnosis the need to care for aging parents emergencies involving children the loss of a key employee who carries operational knowledge These situations force advisors to shift priorities quickly. When this happens without a succession plan in place, the result is often panic-driven decision-making, lower valuations, and minimal buyer optionality. Emergency Sales Are the Most Expensive SalesAdvisors who delay planning often find themselves in reactive mode: scrambling to gather documents, explain financial trends, prepare staff, and communicate with clients—all under the pressure of a shortened timeline. Buyers recognize this pressure and adjust terms accordingly. Distressed sales typically produce smaller upfront payments, more contingent structures, reduced negotiating power, and fewer protections for client and staff continuity. The unfortunate reality is that urgency signals vulnerability—and the market responds to vulnerability by lowering value. Preparing Early Doesn’t Mean You’re Leaving EarlyThis point is widely misunderstood. Planning is not retiring. When advisors begin planning early, they gain clarity on valuation, understand their deal options, and learn what steps will actually strengthen their business over the next several years. Early planning also puts structure around the advisor’s role after closing—whether that’s two years of client introductions, part-time involvement, consulting, or an eventual clean break. Planning empowers advisors to shape their legacy while continuing to work at full capacity. Delaying, on the other hand, strips away flexibility and forces decisions to be made from a place of constraint. Early Planning Gives You Control. Late Planning Takes It Away.An advisor who plans early controls the narrative, the timing, the successor selection, the client messaging, and the economics of the transaction. They set the pace. They negotiate harder. They attract better-aligned buyers. And they protect the people who depend on the business—including clients, staff, and family. But when planning begins only after health changes or life intervenes, the advisor’s control diminishes quickly. Urgency becomes the driver. Buyers dictate terms. The timeline compresses. And optionality disappears. Early planning isn’t just advantageous—it’s protective. Are You Ready to Exit? Download SRG’s Seller Readiness eBook Conclusion: Health Is Not a Reason to Wait—It’s the Best Reason to Start Now Feeling healthy and capable does not mean you should delay your exit planning—it means you are at the perfect stage to protect your future. Early planning gives you: maximum value maximum leverage maximum buyer fit maximum time to transition clients maximum options for your role maximum

Mergers and Acquisitions 101: M&A for Financial Advisors

Originally Published on November 18, 2020 What Exactly Is M&A? The term “mergers and acquisitions” (M&A) broadly refers to the process of one company combining with another; however, the method and legality of how these terms are processed are slightly different. Mergers occur when two organizations join together, and both parties remain active and involved on an ongoing basis. This can be done by subsequently forming a new legal entity under a single corporate name, or more simply by an existing advisor joining forces with a peer and contributing his or her book of business in exchange for a proportional share of value in the receiving party’s business. In many cases, mergers occur between two entities of approximately the same size. This allows the two organizations to combine forces and market share instead of directly competing against each other. For instance, in 2015 H.J. Heinz Company and Kraft Foods merged together to establish themselves as one of the largest food and drink companies in the world. After merging, their new business entity was named The Kraft Heinz Company. While this is obviously a much larger transaction, it is indicative of why many advisors consider merging. Acquisitions, on the other hand, are when one company purchases another entity outright and establishes itself as the new owner. This can come in the form of buying another advisor’s book of business (an asset purchase) or alternatively, buying the exiting advisor’s equity in their business. Legally, the target advisor that was acquired no longer exists,  but its brand (name, website, logo, phone number, etc.) may still remain post-sale to ensure the retention of clients. An example of this is when Morgan Stanley MS acquired E*TRADE Financial in 2020 in an all-stock deal worth $13 billion. This effectively solidified Morgan Stanley amongst the leaders in the wealth management industry and gave them more technology assets, customers, and recurring revenue streams. There are a multitude of transaction structures for mergers and acquisitions. A merger may provide each advisor with partial ownership and control of the newly merged organization. Compare that with an acquisition, which results in the selling advisor being retained for a period, but usually as an employee or contractor of the acquiring firm. The lines between merger and acquisition terminology are often blurred in public-facing communications because the goal is to ensure there is a seamless transition from the client’s perspective. Who Deals With Mergers and Acquisitions? The responsibility of who manages the merger and acquisition process may vary depending on the size of the companies involved and their experience with such activities. But, it is a good idea to ensure you have a neutral intermediary, or buy and sell-side representation to usher the deal towards close and ensure all the moving pieces are being managed and discussed. It is also common to have the assistance of external counsel, such as lawyers and accountants, to conduct a final review of the transaction and documents. It is important to ensure that as the owner buying, selling, or merging, that you actively manage your external professional counsel and set clear expectations. This is critical to ensure you don’t spend weeks working with an intermediary and craft a well thought out strategy, only to have your counsel review and begin renegotiating on your behalf, resulting in you losing a deal. Attorneys and CPAs are tremendous resources, but it is most effective to ensure you have a knowledgeable industry expert who works with mergers and acquisitions daily to help the parties make fully informed decisions and avoid reinventing the wheel. Why Do Advisors Merge and Buy/Sell? The reasons for companies pursuing mergers or acquisitions will vary, but most are motivated by improving long-term prospects and potential for their business. Factors to consider when pursuing a merger or acquisition may include the ability to create a competitive advantage, diversify the customer base, expand service offerings, reduce operating costs, expand to new geographies, increase capabilities and assets, and more. In many cases, the reason to move forward with a deal would be a combination of several factors. Here are some of the most common motivations for moving forward with a merger or acquisition: Growth: Mergers and acquisitions can be a shortcut of sorts, allowing a business to expand its operations effectively overnight. Whether looking to merge or acquire strategically (expanding new service offerings for example through a merger or purchase) or economically (merging or acquiring a firm that will add more of the same type of revenue), mergers and acquisitions can quickly increase market share. Eliminate Competition: By merging with or acquiring a target company that is a competitor in an industry, a business can effectively increase their market share and potential customer base. Synergies: Mergers or acquisitions of a complementary business allows companies to combine their strengths, business activities, and differentiators to bolster their offerings and potentially lower costs. How Long Does an Acquisition Take? The acquisition process is detailed and complex; it requires many steps along the way. While each deal is different, acquisitions can often take anywhere from a few weeks (in a best-case scenario) to several months to complete. Much of the timing relies on how well both parties are aligned and how efficiently they are able to work together to move the process along. There are several factors that can impact the timeline of any given acquisition: Decisiveness: The decision-making process can take time. Each owner involved in the transaction wants to have full confidence that this is the best move to make, that the deal is fairly priced, and that there are no better options available. If there is hesitation on either side of the deal, more time and research will likely be needed to help it progress. Complexity: The transaction timeline can be impacted depending on if the target company is generally similar or different to the acquiring company, and also the level of complexity in the business structure of the company being acquired. Management: Willingness for management teams to cooperate can

Financial advisor pay is ‘one of the most powerful strategic levers’ for RIAs

By: Tobias SalingerPublishing Date: March 17, 2026 Registered investment advisory firms or other advisory practices must create career paths and pay plans that evolve quickly enough to keep up with industry competition, advisor career advancement, geographic factors and the company’s long-term goals, according to a webinar last month on compensation trends led by Julia Sexton, the director of strategic organizational planning at consulting firm Succession Resource Group, and Ryan Grau, the company’s director of valuations. They presented the first of what will become an annual compensation study based on data from the RIAs that use the firm’s services. And the central takeaway revolved around the divergent impact among firms that have taken proactive steps, and those that haven’t. “Today isn’t just about benchmarking numbers,” Sexton said. “It’s about aligning compensation with role, clarity, behaviors, growth objectives and long-term enterprise value, because when compensation is designed intentionally, it becomes one of the most powerful strategic levers that you have in your firm and is so critical to so many transaction and business growth initiatives, succession planning, viability and just the overall cultural and financial health of your business.” On the other hand, Grau jumped in to add, failing to build an effective compensation strategy is “one of the quickest ways to derail value.” What do you make? Of course, any pay strategy begins with the basic amount that advisors will collect, and just as with any other profession, they will want to know how their pay compares to peers. Sexton and Grau’s presentation broke down advisor career paths into three general categories: Support advisors (less than five years in the field): Responsibilities include planning and investment tasks and starting to identify possible new clients, and compensation includes base salary, bonus and profit sharing. Service advisors (five to 10 years, CFP mark): Responsibilities include oversight of planning and analysis, delegating tasks to junior members and much more identification of new potential business, and compensation includes a base salary (a fixed amount plus some pay tied to assets under management), a bonus, profit-sharing and so-called phantom equity (deferred compensation carrying some of the same benefits as actual company stock). Lead advisors (10+ years, several certifications): Responsibilities include acting as the primary manager of client accounts, business development and the team’s staffing; compensation includes base salary with AUM-tied pay, a bonus and an equity grant or purchase opportunity. In terms of the dollar value of the compensation for those types of advisors, it varies significantly. Support advisors make total salary and bonus pay of between $50,000 and $85,000 per year with a median of $65,000; service advisors make total salary and bonus pay of between $66,964 and $120,000 per year with a median of $90,000; and lead advisors make total salary and bonus pay of between $108,000 and $235,750 per year with a median of $159,902. Disclaimer This article was first published by Tobias Salinger. The original article can be found here. All rights to the original content are held by financial-planning.com.

Why Relying on Your Broker-Dealer to Sell Your Practice Is a Costly Mistake

Why your broker-dealer is not a neutral partner in your exit, and why home office referrals often fail. Many advisors believe that when it’s time to transition their practice, their broker-dealer’s home office team will actively help them sell their business. After years of interacting with relationship managers, home office consultants, practice management specialists, and OSJ leadership, it’s natural to assume that:  They know your business.  They know your goals.  They care about your success.  They’ll help you find the right buyer when you’re ready.  Seller Advocacy. Your Sell-Side Partner. Sell Your Book of Business or Financial Advisory Practice with SRG See Service Home office representatives often feel like an extension of your practice. They attend your conferences. They support your growth initiatives. They review your business metrics. Some even position themselves as strategic consultants or sounding boards. When they offer to “connect you with a few people,” it can feel like genuine advocacy. This leads advisors to believe: “My home office wants to help me transition successfully, and they will connect me with the right successor when the time comes.”  But this belief is built on a misunderstanding of what the home office is designed to do.  Their job is not to manage your exit.  Their job is not to evaluate buyer fit.  Their job is not to find you the best deal.  And most importantly: Their job is not to represent your interests.  Their job is to retain assets, not to help you leave.  This creates a dangerous  misconception for sellers, because trusting your home office to guide your exit often leads to the exact opposite outcome you want:  poor successor fit  mismatched introductions  delays and false starts  underinformed buyers  reduced valuation  wasted time  stalled transitions  and structural misalignment  In other words: good intentions, bad incentives.  The Reality: Home Office Teams are Not Your M&A Parter While home office professionals may genuinely like you and want to be helpful, their fiduciary duty is to their employer. Not to your sale, not to your clients, not to your employees, and not to your retirement plan.  Below are the key reasons why relying on your broker-dealer to help with your exit strategy is almost always the wrong move.  1. Home Office Professionals Are Incentivized to Retain Assets This is the most important point.  Broker-dealers make money from assets, production, product placement, and technology usage. When you exit your business, the firm risks losing those assets, that revenue, and all associated advisor economics.  So while the home office may want to “support” you, their version of support is very specific: Keep the assets where they are. This is not the same as:  finding you the best buyer  maximizing your valuation  protecting your timeline  aligning culture and client philosophy  ensuring your staff is supported  giving you a clean or flexible exit  Their job is to protect the firm, not enhance your exit strategy.  2. Home Office Referrals Are Strategically Motivated, Not Seller-Centric When a home office representative says: “I know some advisors I can introduce you to,” What they usually mean is: “I know some advisors we want to keep or recruit.”   Home office referrals are based on:  which advisors they want to retain  which advisors are loyal to the BD  which practices are growing  which advisors they want to “strengthen”  which advisors they’re recruiting  which offices they want to protect from leaving  who they believe will keep the most AUM on-platform  These referrals are not based on cultural alignment, client compatibility, operational fit, deal structure preferences, buyer financial readiness, successor experience, or long-term service philosophy. The home office’s job is to recommend buyers who will stay— not buyers who are the right match. This is a conflict of interest hidden behind friendly support.  3. Home Office Introductions Lack Process, Screening, or Qualification The typical home office introduction is typically blind. No valuation review. No practice analysis. No buyer readiness assessment. No disclosure of buyer’s capabilities. No examination of client demographics. No buyer/seller compatibility analysis.  No assessment of culture or service model. No review of deal structure preferences. No financial vetting.  This creates serious problems from awkward mismatches to wasted time to repeated dead ends. Succession Resource Group has supported sellers who received zero meaningful referrals from the home office for months. Others received only one referral, and it was not even close to a fit. Some received referrals that were actually recruiting targets, not actual buyers.  This is not a process, it’s a hope.  Are You Ready to Exit? Download SRG’s Seller Readiness eBook 4. Home Office Support Delays Your Timeline Because home office referrals are sporadic, informal, and unstructured, sellers experience:  long gaps between introductions  buyers who show up unprepared  deals that start but never progress  repeated back-channel conversations  long delays with no traction  stalled negotiations  transitions that fall apart after months of waiting  What feels like “support” often becomes paralysis, not progress. Most advisors lose months, sometimes years, waiting for the home office introduction that will “change everything.” It rarely does.  5. Home Office is a Solid Resource. Just Not One for Finding Your Buyer Home office employees can be extremely useful for: Data gathering Pulling client segment reports Practice diagnostics Compliance guidance Technology updates Preparing transition paperwork Historical production review Team structure analysis But they shouldn’t (and often cannot) conduct a successor search, evaluate buyer financial readiness, maximize your asking price, provide neutral guidance, prepare your business for sale, protect your confidentiality, manage buyer negotiations, structure a deal, or manage your legal risk. They are support partners—not M&A specialists. And they represent the broker dealer— not the seller.  6. Advisor Loyalty to Home Office Creates Delays, Lost Value, and Damages One of the most harmful, yet least discussed, drivers of this myth is advisor loyalty. After years or even decades with a broker-dealer, many advisors feel a moral responsibility to “give the home office the first shot” before involving a professional succession partner like SRG.  It sounds reasonable. “They’ve always supported me. I’ll let them try first, and if that doesn’t work, I’ll bring in a consultant later.”  But this instinct, while emotionally understandable, is structurally dangerous. Here’s why: 1. By the time you realize it’s a bad plan, you’re already in too deep. Home office introductions feel promising at first. A warm conversation here. A possible peer match there. Maybe a potential buyer raises their hand. But because there is no process, no structure, and no vetting, the advisor has already invested months, sometimes a year, has shared superficial practice information, has engaged in

Phantom Equity Plan Options: Liquidation Rights (LR) vs. Appreciation Rights (AR)

Introduction Phantom equity plans allow firms to reward and retain key team members by providing an economic interest in the business without transferring actual ownership. Two of the most common phantom equity structures are Liquidation Rights and Appreciation Rights. While both align incentives with firm value, they differ meaningfully in how value is measured, communicated, and paid. Liquidation Rights (LR) A Liquidation Right provides the participant with a contractual right to receive the full fair market value of a defined number of company shares upon a qualifying event (e.g., sale, retirement, termination without cause), subject to plan terms. In effect, it mirrors ownership economics tied to the company’s overall value at the time of the triggering event, rather than only rewarding value created after the award is granted. Because it is typically event-driven, it is commonly used to support long-term retention and alignment by linking meaningful upside to major transition or liquidity milestones. How Value is Determined Each LR is denominated in shares or units Upon vesting, payout equals: Key features Tracks total enterprise value, not just growth Uses a fixed share/unit count to determine per-share value Includes built-in anti-dilution and adjustment mechanics Paid in cash and treated as compensation (or equity shares, if permitted) Best suited for Long-term reward and retention of senior leaders Succession and retirement-oriented incentives Firms seeking simplicity and alignment with entity-level valuation Appreciation Rights (AR) An Appreciation Right provides the participant with the increase in value of a defined number of units or shares between the grant date and the exercise date. It is designed to reward future growth above a baseline value established at grant, meaning the participant benefits only if the company’s value increases over time. This structure is often used to align incentives with performance and expansion, since payouts are directly tied to appreciation rather than total enterprise value. How Value is Determined Grant date value is established upfront Upon vesting, payout equals: Key features Rewards growth above a baseline value No payout if the company value does not increase Uses a fixed share/unit count to determine per-share value Can be more complex to track over time Paid in cash and treated as compensation (or equity shares, if permitted) Best suited for Performance-driven incentives Growth-stage firms Shorter- to mid-term incentive horizons Side-by-Side Comparison Key Takeaway Both Liquidation Rights and Appreciation Rights are powerful phantom equity tools—but they serve different strategic purposes. Liquidation Rights emphasize stability, clarity, and long-term alignment with enterprise value, while Appreciation Rights emphasize performance and upside growth. The right choice depends on your goals, timeline, and the role you want equity to play in motivating your team.

Succession Planning 101: Steps and Processes for Advisory Companies

Introduction All businesses, regardless of type and size, have an organizational structure that determines how the company is managed on a daily basis. While they may have all the right advisors in place for the current state of the business, it is important for organizations to make sure they have a plan in place to keep the business thriving long-term, regardless of who is at the helm. Succession planning, as both a concept and a strategy, establishes a framework for identifying and developing next-gen talent to replace the founder when she/he exits the business. What Are the Seven Steps for Company Succession Planning? While it may be difficult to predict when a succession event will (or should) take place, it is best to begin the succession planning process early enough to construct a thorough and seamless plan that facilitates both the qualitative and quantitative parts of the process. While seven to ten years before the founder’s retirement are ideal for internal succession, or two to four years for a merger/sale, timelines are often much shorter. Unforeseen events within a company, health issues, and changes-of-heart can occur, even for the steadiest of businesses and owners. This underscores the importance of defining a strategy and committing that plan to writing as soon as possible. Even if there is no inkling that changes are imminent, it is critical to begin with the end in mind since no one lives forever. Here are seven key steps to succession planning to keep in mind: 1. Determine Objectives and Clarify the Owner’s Vision: The preferred outcome for succession planning may be different for each individual business, however, the goal for most will be for the business to continue to thrive with the next generation of advisors at the helm. It is crucial to have clarity on the primary objectives within a succession plan. This could include objectives such as improved retention, sustaining long-term growth, identifying successors for key positions, defining how the plan will be funded and taxed,, and creating business continuity. 2. Identify Key Positions and Leadership Requirements: A succession plan should clearly account for the integral roles that are critical for organizational success. An assessment of the career trajectory for the employees may inform the priority each role has within a succession plan and who will assume the duties of the founder upon his/her exit. If planned retirements are in place, a succession plan can be executed with even more focus and precision. For all key positions, it should be determined what the primary skills, knowledge, and qualifications are required to do the job effectively and ensure that a business continues to run smoothly with the next generation of leadership. 3. Evaluate Organization for Potential Candidates: The organization may already have several key employees with high potential that should be considered as part of the succession plan. By identifying and developing employees to meet the requirements of leadership positions in the company, a business can proactively plan for a succession event and give employees more incentives in the process. If the firm lacks such candidates, developing an alternative strategy as a back-up is critical. 4. Create a Development Process: Organizations should always be investing in the career development of internal talent within the company. However, in the midst of succession planning, this becomes even more important. Succession choices should have a plan in place for training and development to help them grow into viable candidates for leadership roles in the organization. A company may consider having these employees take part in mentorship programs, rotating jobs within the organization, or even furthering their education with courses that will help develop a relevant skillset for the long-term goals of the succession-planning process. 5. Look Externally: While there is significant value in working to develop employees for key roles in the future, an organization should have an open mind and be willing to look elsewhere for a successor/buyer. In some cases, the best candidates for stepping into an ownership role may be found externally. External candidates may already have the necessary experience, knowledge, and qualifications to help fulfill a successful transition. This may be especially valuable in instances where the succession planning period begins on short notice with an urgency to fill a key management role. In most situations, however, a thorough assessment of both internal and external talent is part of an effective succession planning process. 6. Communicate and Implement the Transition Plan: Once the succession plans have been established, it is important to begin communicating the plan to all key stakeholders involved since this takes time. If internal employees will be the successors, they should be aware of the plan and career development path ahead of them. This open communication will also give the employees an opportunity to verify that they are interested in working towards the ownership role within the company and understanding what that means. Once the key employees are on board, the development process should begin with long-term succession in mind. Trial runs can also be beneficial for helping employees test the waters of their future role. This could include shadowing, gradually taking on relevant responsibilities, or even filling in when the owner(s) are out of the office. As the date for the founder’s eventual retirement gets closer, it is a good idea to have some extended and planned absences so the next generation has an opportunity to fill the leadership role before the founder(s) are gone for good. 7. Formalize Plan Documentation: Since succession planning requires various forms of transition and financial implications, it is important to make sure to formalize the process through supporting documentation, including a formal valuation beforehand. The succession planning will likely include the detailed written plan as well as the agreements with key employees and shareholders. In addition to these agreements, company records and documentation should be well organized to help facilitate a seamless transition within the company. As the succession planning documents are formalized and the career development of the key employees or candidates