Fee-Only Financial Planning in Silicon Valley

The financial services industry uses a lot of language that sounds reassuring but means very little. “Comprehensive planning.” “Client-focused advice.” “Trusted partner.” One term, however, has a specific, verifiable definition that carries real weight: fee-only.

For Silicon Valley professionals navigating concentrated stock positions and some of the highest income tax rates in the country, the distinction between a fee-only advisor and other compensation models is not a matter of preference. It is a matter of whose interests are being served when your advisor makes a recommendation.

This guide explains what fee-only means, why it matters in particular for technology professionals in Silicon Valley, what it actually costs, and how to verify that an advisor you are considering genuinely meets the standard.

The National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (NAPFA) defines a fee-only financial advisor as one who is compensated solely by the client. No commissions. No referral fees. No revenue-sharing arrangements with product providers. No compensation from any third party in connection with the financial advice given.

This is a narrower definition than it might appear. Many professionals describe themselves as “fee-based,” which is a different and less restrictive standard. A fee-based professional charges client fees but may also earn commissions on products they recommend or sell. The two terms are often used interchangeably in marketing materials, but they describe fundamentally different compensation structures with different implications for objectivity.

It is worth understanding what fee-only is — and what it is not. Fee-only describes how a professional is paid. It does not, by itself, describe the regulatory standard that governs their advice. That is a separate question, addressed below.

Used loosely, the term “advisor” can describe almost anyone selling financial products. Used carefully by regulators, and by clients who know what to ask, it means something very specific.

A registered investment adviser, or RIA, is held to the fiduciary standard. That means recommending what is genuinely best for the client, disclosing conflicts of interest, and placing the client’s interests ahead of the firm’s own, not as a courtesy, but as a legal obligation.

A broker-dealer operates under a different standard. Since 2020, that standard has been the SEC’s Regulation Best Interest, or Reg BI. Reg BI requires broker-dealers to act in the client’s best interest at= the moment of a recommendation, but the obligation is narrower than the ongoing duty applied to an RIA. A broker-dealer can satisfy Reg BI while recommending a product that earns them a commission, as long as the recommendation clears the bar.

Many financial professionals are dually registered, meaning they’re licensed as both an investment adviser representative and a broker-dealer representative. They wear both hats. The standard that applies to any given recommendation depends on which hat they’re wearing at that moment. Acting as an investment adviser, they are a fiduciary. Acting as a broker-dealer representative, they are operating under Reg BI, and they may be earning a commission on the trade.

Where compensation enters the picture

A dually registered professional can charge advisory fees on one side of the relationship and earn product commissions on the other. Even when the advisory portion is fiduciary-governed, the broader relationship can carry the same conflicts of interest that fee-only is designed to remove.

A fee-only RIA has no broker-dealer affiliation. No commissions. No product sales. No third-party compensation of any kind. The fiduciary standard governs every recommendation, and the compensation structure removes the incentive to recommend products for reasons that have nothing to do with the client.

For Silicon Valley professionals weighing significant decisions such as RSU diversification, ISO exercise timing, deployment of liquidity event proceeds, both questions carry weight. The fiduciary standard governs how advice must be given. The fee-only model governs how the advisor is paid. They are not the same question, and both are worth asking.

The fee-only distinction is relevant for any investor, but it carries additional weight for Silicon Valley technology professionals for several reasons.

Complexity creates more decision points.

The more complex a financial situation, the more opportunities a financial professional  has to steer recommendations in ways that benefit themselves rather than the client. RSU vesting decisions, ISO exercise timing, QSBS eligibility analysis, and concentrated stock diversification all require judgment calls that can look similar to a client, whether or not they are genuinely objective.

The dollar amounts are larger.

Silicon Valley compensation packages frequently include equity grants worth hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars over a career. At those magnitudes, even small conflicts of interest in product recommendations compound into meaningful differences in long-term outcomes.

Product recommendations are more consequential.

A financial professional whose compensation depends on the products selected may have a different vantage point on that decision than one whose compensation does not.. For clients evaluating whether to deploy significant liquidity events into investment products, this conflict is directly relevant.

California taxes amplify the cost of poor advice.

With California’s top marginal income tax rate of 13.3% and capital gains taxed as ordinary income, the tax implications of financial decisions in Silicon Valley are more severe than in most of the country.

One of the most persistent misconceptions about fee-only financial planning is that it is more expensive than commission-based advice. The commission-based model often feels free because there is no visible invoice. The cost is embedded in the products being recommended and paid over time, frequently without the client’s full visibility.

The three primary fee structures used by fee-only advisors are as follows.

AUM-Based Fees

The advisor charges a percentage of assets under management annually. Industry averages run from approximately 0.5% to 1.25% for accounts above $1 million, with fees typically declining as asset levels increase.

On a $3 million portfolio at 1% annually, the advisory fee is $30,000 per year. Over ten years, assuming 7% annual portfolio growth and a consistent 1% advisory fee, the cumulative cost of the advisory fee approaches $415,000 in fee payments. The AUM model aligns the advisor’s revenue with portfolio growth, but the fee scales with the portfolio regardless of whether the complexity of the client’s planning needs increases proportionally.

Flat Annual Retainer

The client pays a fixed annual fee, typically ranging from $5,000 to $25,000 or more, depending on the complexity of the engagement and the firm. The fee does not change as the portfolio grows. For clients with large portfolios and relatively stable ongoing planning needs, this model can be substantially more cost-effective than AUM-based pricing over time.

Hourly or Project-Based Fees

Some fee-only planners charge by the hour or by project, which can be appropriate for clients who need targeted advice on a specific situation rather than ongoing comprehensive planning. Hourly rates for CFP professionals typically range from $200 to $400 or more.

A Simple Comparison

The table below illustrates the cumulative advisory fee difference between an AUM-based model and a flat retainer for a $3 million portfolio over ten years, assuming 7% annual growth.

The AUM model is not inherently inappropriate; many clients find value in the alignment it creates. The point is that the cost difference between models is significant and worth understanding before selecting an advisor.

Because “fee-only” and “fee-based” are so frequently conflated in marketing materials, verification through primary sources is essential.

NAPFA membership is the most reliable indicator of genuine fee-only status. NAPFA requires all members to sign a fiduciary oath and to adhere strictly to the fee-only compensation standard. NAPFA’s advisor search at napfa.org is searchable by location and specialty and covers the Silicon Valley and broader Bay Area region comprehensively.

Form ADV Part 2, filed by all registered investment advisers with the SEC or state securities regulators, discloses the firm’s compensation arrangements in specific, legally binding language. This document is publicly searchable atadviserinfo.sec.gov. Look specifically for the section describing how the advisor is compensated and any conflicts of interest. If an advisor earns commissions or referral fees of any kind, it will appear here.

CFP Board’s verification tool at cfp.net confirms whether an advisor holds the CFP designation in good standing and discloses any disciplinary history.

FINRA BrokerCheck at brokercheck.finra.org is useful for identifying whether an advisor holds a broker-dealer registration in addition to their RIA registration, which may indicate the potential for commission-based compensation alongside advisory fees.

Are you fee-only, and can you confirm that in writing? Ask for a written statement that the advisor receives no compensation from any third party in connection with their recommendations.

Are you a NAPFA member? NAPFA membership requires adherence to the fee-only standard and fiduciary oath, making it a reliable third-party confirmation of the claim.

Do you or your firm receive any referral fees, revenue sharing, or compensation from custodians or product providers? Even advisors who consider themselves fee-only may have arrangements that represent indirect compensation. Ask directly.

What is your exact fee structure, and what does it include? Get a clear, itemized answer that distinguishes advisory fees from custodial fees, fund expense ratios, and any other costs.

How are you compensated if my financial situation changes significantly? If an advisor earns more when you move assets into a new account or product, that is relevant information.

Are you a fiduciary at all times? Some advisors are fiduciaries only in certain capacities. You want an unambiguous, unqualified yes.

Summitry is a fee-only registered investment adviser based in the Bay Area, focused on financial life planning for technology professionals across Silicon Valley and the broader region. The firm does not accept commissions, referral fees, or any third-party compensation. Its revenue comes entirely from client fees.

Summitry’s advisors operate as fiduciaries, meaning every recommendation the firm makes is evaluated against the standard of what is genuinely best for the client, without the influence of product incentives or third-party compensation arrangements.

Measured against the criteria this guide recommends for evaluating fee-only advisors, here is where Summitry stands:

• Compensation: Fee-only. No commissions, no revenue sharing, no third-party compensation of any kind.
• Fiduciary standard: Fiduciary at all times for all clients.
• NAPFA affiliation: Summitry advisors are members of NAPFA, subject to the fiduciary oath and fee-only standard required for membership.
• Regulatory transparency: Summitry’s Form ADV Part 2 is publicly available at sec.gov and discloses the firm’s compensation structure and any conflicts of interest.
• Silicon Valley focus: The firm’s client base is concentrated among Bay Area technology professionals, with deep familiarity with the equity compensation, tax, and financial planning challenges specific to this region.
• Tax-aware planning: While Summitry coordinates with clients’ external CPAs on tax preparation, advisors incorporate tax implications into financial planning recommendations as a standard part of the engagement.
• Equity compensation expertise: Summitry has experience across all forms of equity compensation, including RSUs, ISOs, NQOs, ESPPs, QSBS, and pre-IPO equity, as well as concentrated stock diversification strategies.
• Estate and charitable planning: The firm coordinates estate and charitable planning for clients and works directly with clients’ attorneys to ensure alignment across all planning disciplines.

Prospective clients are encouraged to evaluate Summitry alongside other fee-only advisors using the questions and verification steps above.

• NAPFA Advisor Search at org: The definitive directory for fee-only advisors, searchable by location and specialty
• XYPN Advisor Search at com: A network of fee-only planners, many of whom specialize in technology professionals and equity compensation
• SEC Adviser Info at sec.gov: Verify any RIA’s registration status and read their Form ADV Part 2 before engaging
• CFP Board’s Advisor Search at net: Confirm CFP certification status and check for any disciplinary history

When conducting your search, be specific about what you are looking for. Filter for fee-only, not fee-based. Confirm NAPFA membership where possible. Read the ADV Part 2 before your first meeting. The verification process takes less than an hour and is the most important due diligence step a prospective client can take.

This material is intended for general informational purposes only, and should not be construed as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice. It does not consider the specific investment objectives, tax, and financial condition or needs of any specific person. To the extent that this material concerns tax matters, it is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by a taxpayer for the purpose of avoiding penalties that may be imposed by law. Investing involves the risk of loss, including loss of principal. Any examples are meant for illustrative purposes only and do not represent actual clients or their experiences. There can be no guarantee that experiences will be similar to those used as examples in this article and some may experience negative results. Prices are not taken from actual stock prices and are designed to make the example clear and simple to understand. The securities identified and described do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold or recommended for client accounts. The reader should not assume that an investment in the securities identified was or will be profitable.