Important Disclosures

Award Disclosures

Forbes America’s 2025 Top RIA Firms Ranking:

The Forbes ranking of America’s Top RIA Firms, developed by SHOOK Research, is based on an algorithm of qualitative criteria, mostly gained through telephone, virtual and in-person due diligence interviews, and quantitative data. The algorithm weighs factors like revenue trends, assets under management, compliance records, industry experience and those that encompass best practices and approach to working with clients. Portfolio performance is not a criterion due to varying client objectives and lack of audited data. Neither Forbes nor SHOOK receive a fee in exchange for rankings.

Research Summary (as of October 2024)

We don’t want 300,000 nominations so we set thresholds to minimize the quantity we receive:

  • 50,063 nominations received, based on thresholds
  • 28,522 invited to complete online survey
  • 24,647 telephone interviews
  • 6,781 in-person interviews at advisors’ location
  • 1,596 virtual interviews
  • 33,024 total interviews

*Approximately 20% represent independent advisors.

The SHOOK Process

SHOOK scours the financial services industry for nominations. SHOOK accepts advisors who meet pre-determined minimum thresholds and acceptable compliance records. As of this date, SHOOK has received nearly 46,212 nominations—advisors who meet SHOOK’s thresholds. 25,103 of these nominees have taken an online survey.

Unlike other advisor rankings, SHOOK is not a “robo-ranker”—numbers such as production and assets don’t tell the whole story, especially when much of the data is self-reported. SHOOK Research creates rankings of role models—firms that are leading the way in offering best practices and providing a high-quality experience for clients. A focus on both quantitative and qualitative factors, including telephone and in-person meetings, is imperative.

SHOOK Research is the only ranking firm that interviews firms and advisors via telephone and in person at the firm’s location.

Basic Requirements

  • A minimum of 7 years as an advisor for 1 partner/principal
  • Fully operational as a practice for a minimum of 1 year
  • Must incorporate a fiduciary model
  • Completion of online survey and interview with SHOOK
  • Evaluations focused on wealth management
  • Acceptable compliance record

Quantitative Metrics

  • Revenues
  • Assets under management—and quality of those assets
  • Client-related data, such as retention rates
  • Portfolio performance is not a factor; audited returns among advisors are rare, and differing client objectives provide varying returns

Qualitative Metrics

  • Telephone, virtual and in-person meetings with firms (if an in-person meeting cannot be accomplished, exceptions are considered in which the interview will occur after a ranking has been published).
  • Compliance records. Some “dings” can be overlooked (e.g., firm or product failure beyond the scope of an advisor’s due diligence; the older a ding, the less we look). Since there are many gray areas, the SHOOK team is willing to listen to a firm that is willing to stand behind the advisor with written support.
  • Firms that provide a full client experience: Service model; investing process; fee structure; breadth of services (e.g., liabilities and other wealth management services)
  • Credentials (years of service can serve as proxy)
  • Use of team and team dynamics
  • Community involvement
  • Discussions with management, peers, competing peers

Compliance Issues

The following conditions will be considered in order to lessen weightings infractions:

  • Infractions that are denied or closed with no action
  • Complaint arose from a product, service or advice initiated by a previous advisor or another member or former member of team
  • Length of time since complaint
  • Complaints related to product failure not related to investment advice (some limited partnerships, adjusted-rate securities, etc.)
  • Complaints that have been settled (must be proven) to appease a client who remained with the advisor for at least one year following settlement date
  • Complaints that are proven to be meritless
  • Actions taken as a result of administrative error or failure by firm

Once an advisor’s compliance rating falls into a tenable category, the following conditions must be met:

  • An advisor’s rating must be among SHOOK’s highest qualitative measures including in-person interview
  • Letters of recommendation

Ranking Algorithm

The algorithm is designed to fairly compare the business practices of a large group of firms based on quantitative and qualitative elements. Data are weighted to ensure priorities are given to dynamics such as preferred “best practices,” business models, recent business activity, etc. Each variable is graded and represents a certain value for each measured component. These data are fed into an algorithm that measures thousands of firms against each other.

CNBC America’s 100 Top Financial Advisory Firms Ranking 

CNBC’s Financial Advisor 100 list is determined through a blend of data analysis and editorial review.

As an initial screening, data provider AccuPoint Solutions analyzes core data points from its proprietary database of registered investment advisors, or RIAs, as well as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s regulatory database. Firms that don’t meet CNBC’s proprietary criteria are removed from the list.

This year’s analysis used an initial list of 40,563 RIA firms. The list was eventually cut to 1,015 RIAs that met CNBC’s proprietary criteria.

CNBC sends an extensive email survey to all those firms that meet the initial criteria to gather more details about their practice. CNBC applies a layer of editorial review, clarifying firm entries as needed and verifying responses against the SEC regulatory database and other publicly available resources.

AccuPoint Solutions then applies CNBC’s proprietary weighted criteria to refine the list and rank the firms.

A firm’s inclusion on the list is based solely on this methodology. CNBC receives no compensation from placing financial advisory firms on our list. Additionally, a firm’s or advisor’s appearance on our ranking does not constitute an individual endorsement by CNBC of any firm or advisor.
Data that goes into CNBC’s Financial Advisor 100

AccuPoint Solutions uses a variety of primary data points, either as a minimum baseline or within a range, to eliminate those firms that do not meet CNBC’s requirements. For example, any firm that has a disclosure with the SEC such as a regulatory violation or customer dispute is automatically disqualified from the ranking.

Once the initial list is compiled, weightings are also applied accordingly.

These data points include:

  • Advisory firm’s regulatory/compliance record
  • Number of years in the business
  • Number of certified financial planners
  • Number of employees
  • Number of investment advisors registered with the firm
  • Ratio of investment advisors to the total number of employees
  • Total assets under management
  • Percentage of discretionary assets under management
  • Total accounts under management
  • Number of states where the RIA is registered
  • Country of domicile

CNBC receives no compensation from placing financial advisory firms on our Financial Advisor 100 list. Additionally, a firm’s or advisor’s appearance in our ranking does not constitute an individual endorsement by CNBC of any firm or advisor.

Financial Advisor Magazine’s Annual 2025 Survey and Ranking

Financial Advisor Magazine conducts an annual, voluntary survey of independent registered investment advisors (RIAs) that file their own Form ADV with the SEC and provide financial planning and related services to individual investors. No fee or membership is required to participate. Some items on the questionnaire require data directly from the firm’s Form ADV. The survey evaluates total assets, year-over-year growth in assets, growth in assets per client, and other firm characteristics. Firms are ranked from largest to smallest based on assets under management at year end.

Financial Planning’s Best RIAs to Work For in 2025

This year’s list was compiled through a two-part review of firms across the country. First, financial professionals working inside these organizations were surveyed about leadership, compensation and benefits, communication, training, workplace environment, engagement and overall satisfaction. Separately, researchers examined each firm’s policies, practices, benefit structures, systems and demographics to build a fuller picture of how each workplace operates.

To be eligible, firms had to be registered with the SEC, have at least 10 U.S.-based employees, maintain a physical U.S. location and have been in business for at least one year. Scores from the employee survey and the independent evaluation were combined to create each firm’s final ranking.