Whether a financial advisor wants to team up with another practitioner primarily comes down to how fast they want to grow and the extent they value autonomy.
Processing Content
Hiring another experienced advisor or participating in a merger tends to produce a stronger business structure. That explains why more than half of all advisors — 51% — now operate in teams, according to a report last month by research and consulting firm Cerulli Associates. But not every advisor will want to team up with a counterpart, and teaming is not essential for sustainable expansion. Regardless, the decision marks an important fork in the road for registered investment advisory firms or other advisory practices.
“If they want to grow, then almost everyone eventually will need to decide whether they want to hire, and almost everyone will need to,” said Shauna Mace, head of practice management at wealth management custodian, technology and asset management firm SEI. “Almost nobody can serve hundreds and hundreds of clients well, so if you want to do that well you’re going to want to make a choice.”
However, she described that choice as a bit more nuanced than picking whether or not the practice is seeking to grow, given the array of service providers seeking to do business with advisory teams through outsourcing and software integrations. The embrace of full-scale planning and other services in recent decades outside the traditional, commodified investment management has made it “way more difficult” to be a solo advisor alongside the firm’s head of marketing, compliance, legal, operations, human resources and any number of other areas, according to Mike Byrnes, founder of advisory practice growth strategy firm Byrnes Consulting.
“There are a lot of inefficiencies in having your own business and being a solo practitioner. You have to wear a lot of hats now if you manage your own business, especially if you’re on the independent side,” Byrnes said. “You have your own business, so you have to think like a CEO. … You don’t have the ability to hire all those people, so you have to be that one person who does all those roles.”
READ MORE: When should a financial advisor launch an RIA?
The raw statistical reasons for a team structure
To be sure, solo practitioners remain a sizable force in the industry with successful businesses that tap into external service providers or internal support staff. However, teams’ metrics compared to those of the solo advisors add compelling statistical evidence to the logic that having more than one advisor will generate more business for any advisory practice.
For example:
Average practice assets under management at year-end 2024: teams, $330 million; industry average, $151 million; solo advisors, $95 millionAnnual organic growth: teams, $20.3 million; industry average, $14.7 million; solo advisors, $8 millionAverage client account size: teams, $2.3 million; industry average, $1.7 million; solo advisors, $981,000Average number of client relationships: teams, 393; industry average, 309; solo advisors, 220Practices with specialized staff: teams, 37%; industry average, 24%; solo advisors, 8%Practices with paraplanner or investment personnel: teams, 28%; industry average 18%; solo advisors, 5%Services offered to clients: teams, 7.3; industry average, 7; solo advisors, 6.5Succession plan in place: teams, 79%; industry average, 73%; solo advisors, 66%
The continuing movement toward comprehensive planning and record M&A deals across the industry are driving the adoption of team structures, according to Andrew Blake, an associate director in Cerulli’s wealth management practice. And each of those trends is fueling the need for resources and staff with expertise in planning and other areas. “Financial planning is a fundamental service provided by many advisor practices and is crucial for attracting new clients and encouraging them to utilize a wider range of available services and products,” Blake said in a statement. “Larger advisor teams will require greater support, and firms will need to add resources and hire more specialized staff to make them as efficient as possible.”
READ MORE: The RIA founder’s dilemma: Choose your successor or sell
The advantages and the alternatives to teaming
Team structures also enable easier succession planning without requiring an outside sale, economies of scale through expanded capacity and technology tools, and much better execution of marketing strategies that often fall through the cracks, Byrnes said.
“Because you can have lower costs and be more profitable, you can then invest in your business in a way that will allow you to grow faster. You can get some of the grunt work off your desk,” he said, citing Cerulli’s finding that marketing is third to referrals and centers of influence as a source of organic growth. “That gets to the skills and abilities of financial advisors and what they love to do and what they don’t love to do. Marketing, honestly, is just not what they love to do.”
On the other hand, any number of marketing firms could step up to assist solo practitioners in creating a feasible plan for generating leads. And other service providers, such as custodians, brokerages, offices of supervisory jurisdiction or technology vendors, present further outsourcing options, Mace noted. Another alternative that some advisors are using involves what she described as “a siloed practice” in which two of them share resources or even the same brand while keeping their businesses separate.
In any route, advisors should be “honest and clear about what you’re willing to give up, as well as what you want to gain,” Mace said, pointing out that the silos are a bit like the more commonly used “ensemble” team of staff members supporting an advisor. “It’s like a step toward a multi-advisor practice while maintaining the autonomy of your own book of business.”
READ MORE: For RIAs, minority M&A deals bring liquidity, autonomy — to a point
Key takeaways
For four charts diving into advisor teams and their impact to firms’ businesses and the industry at large, scroll down the page. To read analysis of how RIAs should manage the question of when to hire more advisors, click here.
Note: The below data and quotes come from “Team-Based Advisor Practices Outperform Solo Practices in Growth and Service Offerings,” a December 2025 report by research and consulting firm Cerulli Associates.
A slim but expanding plurality of advisory practices
At 64% across their channels, the largest portion of advisors at wirehouses or hybrid RIAs operate in a team structure with at least one other advisor. While challenges include “too many non-ideal clients and ineffective delegation to staff,” as well training and mentoring junior advisors, teams that have effective communication and complementary relationships can tap into the stronger business that comes from the structure, Cerulli said. “Teaming has gained momentum in the wealth management industry due to its numerous benefits, such as increased advisor productivity, higher organic growth rates, and expanded service offerings. Teambased practices are more likely to employ dedicated professional and administrative staff — covering areas like operations, compliance, and marketing — which fosters greater specialization, creates capacity, and enables deeper service.”
Teams and possible referrals
Referrals still represent the dominant source of organic growth among advisory practices, and more advisors on the same team provides more opportunities for client referrals or agreements with professionals from other fields. “Practice management professionals see joint meetings with clients or prospects as the most effective way for advisors to build mutually beneficial strategic alliances with other professionals,” according to Cerulli.
Fees and the teaming trend
Asset-based fees are gaining a greater share of advisors’ revenue streams, with the portion attributable to expenses tied to managed holdings on pace to rise to 77.6% of their businesses’ topline by 2027 from 73.7% last year. “This upward trend primarily reflects a continued decline in commission-based earnings,” according to Cerulli. “Firms experiencing growth are adopting additional revenue streams by offering clients a broader range of nontraditional collaboration options.”
Big industry implications for teaming decisions
At the end of 2024, the industry’s 289,417 advisors managed $36.1 trillion in retail wealth management assets, with the average advisor handling $125 million — a 12% jump from the prior year. Teams with more than $500 million in client assets are responsible for two-thirds of the industry’s total client holdings, which Cerulli said makes them “the primary target for many asset managers, service providers and firm recruiters.”
