Churned and burned

I'm a tax attorney, so I see a lot of other people's finances.

The ones I see that work with a financial advisor are, without exception, paying at least 1% of AUM in fees to be in higher-costs funds that underperform the index funds in the long run. To make matters worse, the financial advisors choose tax-inefficient funds and take their fees in the most tax-inefficient way possible. I have also found that many do not understand the nuances of self employed retirement plans or the backdoor Roth.

In my view, there are a few problems with the industry. First, most financial firms hire salespeople and then teach them finance, instead of hiring people who already know finance. I know a LOT of morons working in Edward Jones shops and the like, who are charming but ultimately don't understand the back end of the products they sell. My ex worked for two of the large regional banks in my area, and she had a degree in communications.

She knew (and knows) nothing about finance, but instead was hired because her family is wealthy and gets referral business from old neighbors and classmates. She couldn't even pass the Series 7, but the banks thought she could work in trust management. I talk to clients and financial advisors all the time who don't understand the difference in tax efficiency between mutual funds and ETFs, or the mechanics and reasons of a 1031 exchange, or what the tax incentives actually look like in various types of accounts, or the merits of a solo 401k vs a SEP IRA.

When you only have a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail. Second, the incentives are rarely aligned in the middle of the market or below. Helping a 24 year old set up and fund their Roth IRA is probably not worth your time on the front end unless you're getting an outsized commissions, which ultimately cost the client more money than needed for someone with a small account.

I feel like we may be getting shafted by our financial advisor and unsure what to do next.

Some background info: My brother and I inherited a $1 million that was put in a trust in 2018. Since my brother and I were young and dumb, my mom was appointed as the caretaker of the trust and she gave it to here trusted financial advisor to invest/manage until we wanted it transferred. He manages other family funds as well (529s), including her retirement. So we thought it was fine. This amount basically makes up all of our assets.

Cut to now, I’m in mid 20s, my brother is slightly younger, and it’s time to transfer and split the trust. We go to meet this financial advisor, and we were thinking, hey he probably didn’t preform as well as the market, but there should be some gains here. We both thought we were going to stay with him and maybe just tweak our portfolio. Then the meeting happened, and I feel like we’re getting f*cked. I’m not financially literate though, and so I would really appreciate others perspectives to see if I am being crazy.

Reasons why I think we may be getting reamed:

• Over 6 years our total gains on our $1 million principal is $100,000One of the main reasons it’s that low is because, for the last 6 years, the portfolio has consistently been 70 % CDs and 30 % no cost basis at & t stock my grandparents bought in the 80s.
• He has our money invested this way because he swears the market is going to crash. Yeah, he has been timing the market INCORRECTLY for 6 YEARS. I asked if he would do anything differently at this point and he said no b/c it’s going to crash this year. I asked him what would his investment strategy be if it doesn’t crash this year, and he said it will crash and did not give me a straightforward answer.
• When I asked him what commission he was getting off a portfolio like this, he tried to tell me none since it’s not a fund like ETFs(which he gets 1%). After some persistence he finally told me he gets commission from the bank for every CD he buys/sells. Idk if that’s normal so any insight here is great. My mom’s portfolio that he manages is diverse and is mainly stocks and index funds. She is about to retire, yet he puts her in a riskier portfolio than us. And for us, with longer outlooks, he puts all our funds in cds because he swears the market will crash. If he really thought the market will crash, why didn’t he push for my mom to reinvest more of her funds in cds as well? This really bothers me and maybe there is something I am missing here, as I know little about investing. So please let me know.
• He spent the whole meeting talking about how the market will crash, showing as data and graphs as proof. This data is all public info, and I understand where he could be drawing conclusions like this, but if you’re wrong for 6 years, you’re wrong for 6 years. He went on for 40 minutes before I had to push the conversation towards our actual portfolio. Idk why but this really rubbed me the wrong way.

There is maybe more, but this is what I have for now. I asked him to call me once the first cd is up so we can discuss what to do with it, and he called today. I honestly feel like I should just ask him to transfer the funds to me and I’ll put it in an index fund. But this puts us in a situation where every time a cd is up I’m slowly transferring. Idk what to do.

I understand I was an idiot for not taking agency in this situation earlier. But all I can do at this point is focus on the now. My brother is more financially illiterate than me and my mom gets defensive when I start asking questions. So, what do you make of this? Am I reading this wrong or is he screwing us? If he is screwing us, from a range of incompetent to malicious, how bad?

Long story short, recently saw a Financial Planner as I was about to make my first home purchase. It was a stressful time and I was looking to consult a professional to make sure I could afford long-term. I'm not financially illiterate but I'm not an expert, especially with things like forecasting how finances can affect my future long-term. In retrospect, I really should have seemed multiple planners but ended up going with the one due to time restrictions in the property search (pre-approval and the like).

This planner wasn't exactly badly reviewed. The process seemed legit, starting off with an SOA (Statement of Advice) being issued and a good amount of questions and direction from me. I wasn't quite sure what this document would entail but basically, it had some basic general advice (skewed a little bit) followed by switching my super to their fund and buying some life insurance through them. I got the piece of paper with this advice and found out that they would cost 11% of my total super to engage for the entire year which is huge. There was more content of disclaimers than actual advice. Probably only 3 pages of actual numbers.

Basically, after a year of engagement, I'd be worse off financially than if I hadn't engaged them at all. I should have read between the lines but this wasn't clear during the engagement phase.

Anyway, I coughed up the amount for the SOA (a month's salary) because I had signed for it, but I feel like they shouldn't have engaged me if I was going to be financially worse off after their services. The percentages weren't made clear until the advice was issued which was basically a glorified fee proposal.Anyway, let this be a warning to you all to really hone in on what you're getting if you do seek it and decide if it's not something you can figure out yourself. It was a waste of time and money for me and can't help but feel I was tricked as I'm not an expert in this field. I've put it down to a hard lesson learnt.