Reviews are useless: how to evaluate an investment advisor

Looking up reviews online is a natural instinct when choosing a financial or investment advisor. It makes sense. That’s how we choose restaurants, hotels, and products on marketplaces. At first glance, it may seem the same. But in investing, things work differently.

Results here are a function of time, discipline, and the risks taken. Not a single good or bad decision. Over short periods, the same advisor can simultaneously have a satisfied client who benefited from a strong market and a dissatisfied one who entered right before a drawdown.

And neither of these reviews tells us anything about the quality of the work.

But that’s only part of the issue.

In proper wealth management practice, reviews simply don’t exist. Who, in their right mind, would go online and write, “I came to Vladimir with $1 million, we invested in X, everything is great, highly recommend”? Or let potential clients ask about the results of our work directly?

We rarely discuss money even with close friends and family. Publicly sharing details of one’s capital, decisions, and results is even less likely. And I do not consider it appropriate to ask clients to do so.

Where there are many reviews, a different logic is usually at work. That’s mass market and marketing.

A separate category is “trader rankings” and “project reviews.”

The model is simple. Traffic is generated, doubt or negativity is introduced — and then a “solution” is offered from supposedly “verified traders.” The goal is conversion. That’s their business.

And in general, what do “trading” and “projects” have to do with financial or investment advisory?

What remains

If you remove reviews, rankings, and all that noise, the question becomes: what should you actually look at? I would suggest four factors.

First — formal credentials. Education, qualifications, professional memberships, operating within a legal framework, publications in reputable business media. This does not guarantee quality. But it significantly reduces the probability of a serious mistake.

Second — independence. If an advisor earns money by selling products, they have an incentive to sell. This is not a matter of ethics. It is simply the structure of the business. Ask your advisor this uncomfortable question — and listen carefully to the answer. Free advice is almost always the most expensive.

Third — process logic. Professional work with capital is not built around instruments. It begins with formalizing:

• where you are
• where you want to get to
• what constraints exist

Only after that do instruments appear.

If the conversation immediately starts with “what to buy,” I would approach that with caution.

Fourth — cost. In global practice, a reasonable benchmark is around 1% of capital per year for comprehensive advisory work. It may feel unusual compared to “free” solutions from banks, brokers, and asset managers. But it is important to understand that in investing, you always pay. The only question is whether you see the cost.

My clients do not leave public reviews. And I do not ask them to. Not because there is nothing to show. But because working with capital is deeply personal. It is not something you would discuss publicly online.

Choosing an investment advisor is not about trusting someone else’s opinion. What matters far more is understanding how the process works. A few hours spent figuring this out are often far cheaper than years spent correcting mistakes.