- 10,330
Actually, I believe that in order to BE a financial advisor you should be REQUIRED to be a CFP.
(Advocating that one becomes an expert in the financial business via a rigorous educational curriculum and exam process BEFORE EVER being allowed to talk to a client... will no doubt make me super popular around here!!!)
I dont disagree that we need a higher bar for entry. Especially for the "financial advisor" arena.
However, the CFP is hardly the end all be all of designations. The ChFC is a more intensive & comprehensive course than the CFP is. Last I checked, the ChFC has 9 courses compared to 7 with the CFP, and there is only 1 CFP course that is not in the ChFC curriculum.
The CFA is a tougher and longer exam than both the CFP and ChFC combined.
But here is the thing. In most states you cant call yourself a Financial Advisor without having a 65/66 or a certain designation. And the 65 is no cake walk when compared to the 6/63.
Requiring a certification by a private business to do state regulated work is a slippery slope that leads to privately held entities having WAY too much regulatory control.
Then there is the fact that different designations are created for different areas of the business. The CFP makes you a specialist at nothing. It is a generalist designation that gives a small amount of general knowledge about a lot of different things. Im not putting it down, just stating facts.
Last edited: