Summary
- Fisher Investments caters more to high-net-worth individuals, while Edelman Financial Engines is better suited for investors with more modest capital investment amounts.
- Both firms charge fees calculated according to AUM.
- Edelman's technology-driven approach focuses on retirement planning, while Fisher Investment is better suited to investors who prefer active management.
Looking for a financial advisor?
Edelman Financial Engines vs. Fisher Investments: What’s the difference?
Edelman Financial Engines, headquartered in Santa Clara, California, serves a broad range of investors, including many through workplace retirement plans, combining digital tools with access to financial advisors.
Fisher Investments, headquartered in Plano, Texas, targets high-net-worth investors, typically with $1 million or more, and provides discretionary portfolio management based on its firm-wide investment strategy.
The key difference is Edelman is more broadly accessible, while Fisher focuses on wealthier investors seeking managed portfolios.
Are Fisher Investments and Edelman Financial Engines fiduciaries?
Yes. Both Fisher Investments and Edelman Financial Engines act as fiduciaries when providing investment advice, meaning they must put their clients’ interests first.
Fisher Investments vs. Edelman Financial Engines: Fees
The fee comparison changes significantly with portfolio size. Fisher charges 1.50% below $1 million, with its standard schedule falling from 1.25% to 1% as assets increase.
Edelman starts higher at 1.75%, but its tiered wrap fee falls more sharply, reaching 0.50% for larger portfolios. It also bundles financial planning, investment management and trading into the wrap fee, although fund expenses remain separate.
For you, the headline rate matters less than your portfolio size and what services you actually need, particularly as Edelman’s fee falls more quickly at higher asset levels.
Fisher Investments vs. Edelman Financial Engines: Minimums
Edelman has a much lower entry point, with most wrap-program clients able to start from $5,000. Fisher typically targets investors with $1 million or more, although smaller relationships may be accepted at a higher fee.
Is Fisher Investments or Edelman Financial Engines better?
The main trade-offs are cost, accessibility and level of support. Fisher offers dedicated portfolio management but requires more assets to get started, while Edelman gives more investors access to advice but costs and advisor access can vary by service.
Pros of Fisher Investments
- Personalized investment strategies tailored to high-net-worth clients.
- Global investment opportunities, allowing for greater diversification.
- No trading commissions or inactivity fees.
- Fisher Investment careers are available globally.
Cons of Fisher Investments
- Higher fees compared to industry averages.
- The minimum investment requirement is $500,000, which may exclude smaller investors.
Pros of Edelman Financial Engines
- Available to a wider range of investors, including smaller portfolios.
- Comprehensive financial planning services, often integrated with workplace retirement plans.
- Competitive fees for smaller portfolios.
Cons of Edelman Financial Engines
- Edelman has higher fees than some other providers.
- Additional fees may apply for certain services, increasing overall costs.
Fisher Investments vs. Edelman Financial Engines: Online and mobile access
Both firms offer online and mobile access. Fisher’s app and portal focus on portfolio performance and account information, while Edelman’s app includes financial planning tools, progress tracking and workplace retirement accounts.
Edelman offers more planning features digitally, while Fisher is more investment-focused.
Fisher Investments vs. Edelman Financial Engines: Investment strategies
Fisher Investments uses active management, with globally diversified portfolios adjusted based on its market outlook and individual client needs.
Edelman Financial Engines takes a more planning-led approach, combining technology with personalized advice to build diversified portfolios around long-term goals, particularly retirement.
Fisher Investments vs. Edelman Financial Engines: Customer service
Both firms offer access to financial professionals, but their models differ. Fisher provides a dedicated contact for ongoing portfolio support, while Edelman combines digital tools with access to human advisors.
Edelman reviews are generally positive about its digital tools and advisor access, although the level of personal support depends on the service you use.
Edelman Financial Engines or Fisher Investments: Which should I choose?
Both Fisher Investments and Edelman Financial Engines rank among Unbiased’s top 10 financial advisor firms.
- Choose Edelman Financial Engines if you have a smaller portfolio or want financial planning alongside investment management at a lower entry point.
- Choose Fisher Investments if you have around $1 million or more and want dedicated portfolio management built around an active investment strategy.
If neither fits, Unbiased can match you with an SEC-regulated financial advisor based on your needs.
Frequently asked questions
Are Fisher Investments and Edelman Financial Engines good companies?
Both can be good choices for the right investor. Fisher stands out for dedicated portfolio management for wealthier clients, while Edelman offers broader financial planning, workplace retirement support and access to advisors at more than 140 locations.
How do Fisher Investments and Edelman Financial Engines invest differently?
Fisher follows Ken Fisher’s active-management philosophy, while Edelman combines technology-driven investing with financial planning and human advice.