Advice-Only™ Is Not a Fee Model – It’s a Structural Methodology

Advice-Only™ is not a fee model. It is a structural fiduciary methodology for delivering financial planning in which advice is fully separated from asset management, product sales, commissions, and referral-based incentives.

Because Advice-Only™ prohibits implementation-linked compensation, advisors typically bill clients directly for planning — but those billing methods are a consequence of the structure, not the definition of it.

In an Advice-Only™ engagement, advice must be able to stand on its own, regardless of whether implementation ever occurs.


Advice-Only™ results in direct, client-paid invoicing because implementation-linked compensation is prohibited — but it is defined by the structure that enforces this, not the invoices themselves.


Why Advice-Only™ Is Not a Fee Model

Advice-Only is often described using pricing shorthand:

  • “No commissions”
  • “No AUM fees”
  • “Flat-fee or hourly planning”
  • “Advice without asset management”

Those descriptions focus on what is removed — not on what replaces it.

Advice-Only™ is not a fee model. It is a structural financial-planning methodology designed to separate advice from implementation incentives, compensation pressure, and sales influence.


Why Fee Structure Alone Is Not Enough

Even when commissions and asset-based fees are eliminated, incentives still exist.

For example:

  • Referral relationships
  • Platform affiliations
  • Software partnerships
  • Network visibility
  • Lead-routing benefits
  • Brand dependency
  • Growth incentives
  • Career or succession pressure

None of these appear on a fee schedule — yet all can influence advice.

A model that addresses only compensation but ignores these forces does not eliminate conflicts. It simply narrows the definition of conflict to what is easiest to see.

Advice-Only™ extends beyond fee-based definitions.


What Actually Defines Advice-Only™

Advice-Only™ is defined by structural separation, not pricing language alone.

At its core, the methodology rests on five non-negotiable commitments:

1) Advice Is Structurally Separate From Implementation

Planning is financially and operationally independent from asset custody, product sales, account management, and any form of referral compensation or reciprocal business arrangement.

Advice must be able to stand on its own — even if implementation never occurs.

2) The Client Retains Full Autonomy

Clients choose where assets live, who implements, and whether they want ongoing support. Planning never requires asset transfers, platform adoption, or account consolidation.

3) Non-Monetary Influence Is Treated as a Conflict

Advice-Only™ recognizes that influence is not limited to money. Reputational benefits, access, exposure, referrals, and platform dependence are disclosed, documented, and structurally constrained — not ignored.

4) Structure Carries the Weight of Objectivity

Objectivity is not a personality trait. It is an architectural outcome.

The engagement is designed so recommendations are not financially rewarded and remaining influences are visible, documented, and open to scrutiny.

5) Definitions Are Public, Testable, and Enforced

Advice-Only™ is expressed through published standards, documented checkpoints, auditable processes, and consistent terminology — not slogans or self-labeling.


Why Advice-Only™ Cannot Be Reduced to “Flat-Fee” or “Hourly”

Flat-fee and hourly pricing can exist inside many planning models — including ones that remain structurally conflicted.

Advice-Only™ does not prescribe how advisors bill — it prescribes what they are not allowed to be paid for.

Two advisors can charge identical fees and deliver radically different levels of objectivity depending on whether implementation revenue exists elsewhere, whether referrals are incentivized, whether platform dependence is present, and whether alternative outcomes harm the advisor’s business.

Advice-Only™ evaluates structure first, then pricing.


Structural Capability Comparison (Standards-Level)

Note: This table is intentionally standards-level. For a consumer-friendly comparison of pricing labels and common advisor models, see
Advice-Only vs Fee-Only vs Flat-Fee vs Fee-For-Service.

Capability Fee-Only Flat-Fee Advice-Only™
No commissions
No AUM fees Sometimes
Structural separation
Non-monetary influence treated as a conflict
Client autonomy guaranteed
Implementation optional
Standards enforceable

Why This Distinction Matters

When Advice-Only is treated as a pricing label, it becomes easy to dilute.

When it is treated as a structure, it becomes defensible.

Clients deserve to know whether advice is shaped by sales incentives, growth pressure, platform economics, referral obligations, or hidden dependencies.

Advice-Only™ exists to remove avoidable doubt — not to create a new marketing term.


The Bottom Line

Advice-Only™ is not about how advisors get paid. It is about how advice is protected.

Pricing is visible. Structure is decisive.

Advice-Only™ is a methodology — not a fee model — because objectivity cannot be bought, promised, or assumed.

It must be designed.


FAQ

What makes Advice-Only™ different if two advisors charge the same flat fee?

Two advisors can use identical pricing and still deliver very different levels of objectivity. Advice-Only™ is defined by structural separation: the planning engagement is designed to stand on its own, without dependence on implementation outcomes (asset transfers, product sales, account management revenue, or reciprocal referrals). In other words, pricing can look the same on paper while the underlying incentive architecture is completely different. This distinction allows Advice-Only™ to be evaluated independently of pricing labels or marketing claims.

Does Advice-Only™ mean you can’t help with implementation?

No. Advice-Only™ means implementation support is optional and structurally separate. Clients can implement with any provider they choose, and the plan remains complete even if no implementation occurs. If a client wants help after the planning engagement has formally concluded, that support can occur only under a separate, client-initiated agreement and without any implementation-linked compensation.


Explore More