Hi Fellow Automated Millionaires,

I recently realised that alot of my friends are investing here a bit there a bit, with this advisor, with that bank and then with other company advisor. Nothing much wrong with that except that it will be quite difficult for the client to achieve a certain percentage of return. Though it is good to diversify our money, at the same time, if the money is handled by 5 different person, it's like going in 5 different direction!

So is handling the investment by 1 single person is better than 5? To me, to have 1 person handling sounds more logical. Because, unless this 5 person talk to each other how to help you, the client, otherwise they won't know what is the other 4 person is doing! Hence, how is it possible for the investment to achieve a certain percentage of return?

Take an example, if Advisor A sees that commodities is an upward trend and equities is a downward trend, Advisor A would naturally switch funds from equities to commodities. Relationship Manager B sees the same trend and does the same switch (which is highly impossible - because banks charge for the switch, but for this example let's say the bank doesn't charge). Advisor C, who obviously doesn't communicate with A and B, will do the same thing. In this simple scenario, instead of diversifying the investment, the entire portfolio is now a concentrated, high risk one as most of the money are on commodities. But of course, this example is kind of extreme, at the same time, one can't deny the fact that scenario similar to this with variation happens :)

With just 1 Advisor working on your money, he/she knows how much to switch and knows how to plan your finances well as the advisor know all about your finance and risk tolerance. Of course, the Advisor must be trustworthy and puts the client's interest as first priority :)

Best Regards,
Max Tay - The Automated Millionaire