IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/uts/ppaper/2007-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Subjectivity in Judgments: Further Evidence from the Financial Planning Industry

Author

Abstract

Asset allocation is a critical component of portfolio performance and is a significant component of the advice provided by financial plan-ners. The fiduciary obligation of financial planners is to provide investment advice that is appropriate to a client's personal circumstances. Academic research has found evidence of inconsistencies in advice provided by financial advisors. Using a survey of 352 Australian financial planners, the article also finds inconsistencies in a hypothetical asset allocation decision. These inconsistencies may be attributed to the presence of subjective judgment in the decision-making process due to the presence of various psychological factors such as expectations, traits, and biases, the lack of any standardized method for collecting information from clients, and different assumptions, perceptions, and interpretations based on the financial planner's own knowledge, experience, intuitions, and skill sets. The choice of financial planners influences the asset allocation and ultimately the investment returns and outcome.

Suggested Citation

  • David Michayluk & Gerhard Van de Venter, 2007. "Subjectivity in Judgments: Further Evidence from the Financial Planning Industry," Published Paper Series 2007-3, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney.
  • Handle: RePEc:uts:ppaper:2007-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jwm.iijournals.com/content/10/3/17
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Fisher, Patti J. & Yao, Rui, 2017. "Gender differences in financial risk tolerance," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 191-202.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:uts:ppaper:2007-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Duncan Ford). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sfutsau.html .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.