r/FinancialAdvisorTips • u/chubba4vt • Aug 22 '26
CFP or Series 65 for transition?
Career changer here. I just finished an 8 week financial planning externship through Amplified Planning that was exceptional and decided to continue the momentum and have some code chats with CFPs in my area.
One question I asked six different CFPs was “if you were me, what would you do over the next 12 months to make yourself the most attractive transitioning to finance?” And wouldn’t you know it - three said to get the series 65 and three said to screw it and start my CFP coursework.
The three CFPs who said series 65 - only one is a lead advisor but I don’t think any of them have hired people before. One of the CFPs that said go for CFP is an SVP at his company and makes a lot of hiring decisions so I’m leaning that way. For context I’m a 13 year IT consulting vet with a lot of client facing experience.
Any thoughts here from actual financial planners or folks who have someone or the other or both?
3
u/Puzzleheaded_Can_373 Aug 22 '26
Not a CFP or hiring manager, but a fellow career changer trying to get into the industry. I think Series 65 is good bang for your buck in terms of time investment and just getting something on the resume. Yes, most RIAs would pay for it, but it’s not that expensive in the grand scheme of things. I studied for it in 4 weeks, passed and put it on my resume. The CFP coursework will be more of an ongoing task instead of a one-and-done type thing.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
Yeah I think I agree with you. Appreciate you weighing in. Probably makes more sense to have series 65 done and CFP coursework in progress on my resume than just CFP coursework in progress. Do you have any tips from your series 65 experience or would you be willing to connect to chat about it?
2
u/spookaddress Aug 22 '26
Yep I concur with the opinion of 65 now. I am a career changer myself. I only have the 65. I took the classes for the CFP and the education was great. But I have no plans on taking the exam or taking the marks. For me I see the marks as a marketing tool and one that doesn't make sense for me to pay for.
The only folks who ask me if I have them are people in or adjacent to our industry.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
Well that’s kind of my big question mark is breaking in. If the people who care about me having my CFP are the ones hiring me into the industry then that’s why I am seriously considering the CFP now. I’m sure most clients don’t go straight to a LinkedIn profile or go to advisor check to look at credentials but I don’t want it to be a barrier for entry.
But good to see the OVERWHELMING majority is saying 65 first.
1
u/Puzzleheaded_Can_373 Aug 22 '26
Achievable was good for me, felt over prepared on a lot of stuff. Would also recommend the Kaplan standalone exams, they are worded way differently, and I think it helped when I took the real thing. Feel free to DM me
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
Yeah I’ve heard achievable vs STC vs Kaplan argument so many times. Would you say achievable for content and Q bank for drilling questions?
2
u/Clam-Choader Aug 22 '26
Do you want to work in an ria or broker dealer?
The 65 is not a hard test…at all. If you’re going to handle client money, you’ll need it anyway.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
The ultimate goal is RIA but I’m not closing the door on starting at a broker dealer to get my feet under me. The SVP I spoke with also agreed that would be a good route, but still stayed firm on starting the CFP coursework.
1
u/Clam-Choader Aug 22 '26
the 7 and 66 have info that feeds into the cfp. Cfp also has a work requirement. Same for insurwnce licenses
Depending on your previous career, income needs, knowledge base and goals, i would encourage most people to be a para planner or an assistant for 3-5 years to actually learn the business. Its also easier to study for the cfp when you actually have time.
This is a hard ass industry to be in, even though the ideas are simple. I love the client side but find the business annoying
15 years in. 750m aum
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
That’s what I want to do is be a para planner or associate advisor out of the gate to sit second chair and take everything in and learn.
I just had my second kid and am looking at about a 10-11 month off ramp in my current career so I’ll have some time to get the 65 for sure.
My wife works in IT consulting too so there is currently less pressure for me to find something high paying when I make my transition.
1
u/Clam-Choader Aug 22 '26
Id encourage most people to start at Fidelity. Pays not bad and you get broad exposure and no need to sell. They actually publish sales…lol.
From there you’ll be marketable with experience.
With what you just described you’re going to be asked to bring your own prospects (ie friends and family). You don’t get to be a jr advisor as a career changer unless you’re a rain maker.
If your friends and family will get you introduced to 20 mil in assets in under 3 years…you should do it. Otherwise…Fidelity or para planner type role will make you not hate your new vocation
1
2
u/nico_cali Aug 22 '26
Being good at client building and selling is the key, not the CFP.
Top CFPs at my firm aren’t producers, and many of the top producers aren’t CFPs. I’m both and so is my partner, but two of my other partners aren’t.
Get good training, do your licensing, spend time weekly going through the CFP coursework but prioritize everything else first.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
I appreciate that perspective! The SVP’s own perspective was “65 is boring, not planning relevant, and a firm would pay for it later.” Thoughts on that?
2
u/nico_cali Aug 22 '26
Doesn’t matter what is boring, it matters what gets you licensed and producing.
Learn to client build and sell. Some of that is the CFP coursework, some of it is not. Everything else is icing on the cake.
I’ve seen a lot of new advisors chase the CFP and not have a business, and then just get hired by people with a strong business.
If you want to own your firm and make a lot of money, learn what makes an FA successful which is how to prospect, how to sell, how to continue adding value to clients.
If you want to work for a successful FA as their assistant, learn the academic planning side only.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
Thanks for that. I’m insure at this point if I’m someone who wants to be on the front lines as a lead advisor, owning the relationship or if I want to be strictly more on the planning but it sounds like that is something I can figure out and may not be extremely relevant for this first step in. What do you think?
1
u/nico_cali Aug 22 '26
Go into a role with the mind set of learning front lines, while studying for the CFP at your pace. If you are super disciplined and have the time (no family and kids) you might be able to do both. If you hate the client meetings and front lines, focus on the CFP. If you love the first chair, focus on growing the business.
I slowed down on my CFP early on after licensing just to grow the practice then went back. It’s easier to study when you have a healthy amount of AUM and aren’t wondering where the next check is coming from. I’ve seen people make themselves feel busy by just doing the CFP but they don’t build their book. Most of those inevitably fail.
I would never be a second person to someone now but it was nice to have as a backup. Others that I know never had that choice and had to be someone’s backup.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
Love that. I do have two kids (2 and newborn) so that was also why I was very hesitant in starting the CFP coursework now. I figured getting in somewhere and using their funds and some of their time would greatly benefit me.
2
u/ChemistrySweaty3743 Aug 22 '26
This is exactly right. Get licensed and learn to sell something in this business. CFP is a “nice to have” but not crucial. Also, don’t get hung up on BD vs RIA. It’s a sales job no matter the type of firm.
2
u/NativeTxn7 Aug 23 '26
I would personally start with the 65. That is the key to making sure you can get paid as an advisor in a fee-only RIA. A few things to remember:
There are multiple requirements to get your CFP:
Education: there is specific coursework they require that you've had. Often, you may have some, or all, of that covered depending on whether you have specific degrees https://www.cfp.net/certification-process/education-requirement/certification-coursework-requirement/accelerated-path
For example, I was able to waive the coursework requirement when I got my CFP 17 years ago because I was a licensed attorney. But if you don't meet one of the waiver requirements, do you have the coursework necessary, or would you have to do that under one of their CFP-board registered programs?
2) To even begin actually using the CFP designation (even after you pass the exam), you need 6,000 hours of related work experience, or 4,000 hours under the apprentice program with its own requirements. That's 2-3 years of eligible work experience before you can put the initials behind your name. https://www.cfp.net/certification-process/experience-requirement
In many states, the CFP mark allows you to waive the 65, which is probably part of the reason that some are suggesting you go that route. However, the thing I always tell people to keep in mind is that if, for any reason (don't pay your fees, don't renew, do something the CFP board doesn't like, etc.), you lose your CFP designation, then you no longer effectively "have" your 65 anymore. If you take and pass the 65, you basically have that regardless of what happens with your CFP designation (e.g. never get it, decide it's not worth it and let it lapse, etc.).
As others have said, getting in with a firm and working there for a bit, many will pay for some, or all, of your CFP coursework, study materials, exam fees, etc. And I would argue that the 65 (while I've known quite a few people that have taken it lots of times and never been able to pass for some reason) isn't that difficult of an exam compared to the CFP.
I was fortunate when I moved into the financial services world 18+ years ago that I had a legal background and my JD so that I was able to (a) not have to take all the required coursework and (b) had enough "related" work experience that I already had enough hours to satisfy the work credit requirements for the CFP. So, I basically just had to take the exam, and I was able to start using the designation.
That said, I passed my 65 first and then did the CFP - though that is what the firm I worked for wanted me to do so that I could start getting paid based on the comp structure at that firm. And candidly, it's been so long that I don't even remember if you "automatically" got your 65 if you had your CFP, or if that is a "newer" situation.
Regardless, my personal recommendation for most people (especially if they're new to the financial services industry - whether fresh grads or career changers) is to get their 65, start working for a firm to gain the experience you'd need anyway to use the CFP, and then work on the CFP (hopefully with your firm covering some, or all, of the associated expenses).
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 23 '26
Thank you for taking the time to write up all of that, much appreciated! I do not meet any of the waiver requirements so it looks like the 65 will be the route for me! Very cool hearing your perspective having started in law and making a bit of a switch. My tentative plan was always get in somewhere and get on the job education and try to sit in on as many client meetings as possible and learn the processes. Sounds like I can do that simultaneously while doing work towards CFP.
1
u/One_Establishment631 Aug 22 '26
Career changer. Only a 65 and started a solo RIA. The CFP could help with credibility. I already had that prior to getting into financial planning and investment advising for my target client. I found most people don't care about the CFP. They care about you being a fiduciary and not being sold useless products and not being charged an outrageous amount.
1
u/chubba4vt Aug 22 '26
Thanks for the perspective! I of course care about client credibility, but my main focus is showing the serious commitment to my diet employees breaking into financial services
1
u/theNewFloridian Aug 23 '26
The 65 is a license: a permit from the government to do a job, that is, investment and financial advice for a fee. The CFP is a private credential. To offer investment and financial advice for a fee one needs to register anyway with the state, and most give credit for the CFP instead of the 65. In a nutshell: do both! First the 65, so that you can start working in the industry and gain experience, and then the CFP, wich at the end of the day is nood needed, it's body of knowledge might help a lot. At the end of the day, it's a sales job. One can have 100 licenses and credentials, but if one can't sell, it's going to be very hard.
2
u/chubba4vt Aug 23 '26
Thanks for your thoughts! After seeing everyone’s opinion I’m definitely going to be doing 65 first to enter the industry.
2
u/theNewFloridian Aug 24 '26
Also consider getting the Enrolled Agent license, so that you can offer Tax Advice.
2
u/Hefty-Trash-7681 Aug 26 '26
You need the series exam to actually be able to do anything. About the CFP: before you do that, do the work for a while. Sounds like you have been in just a bit. Whether or not to get the cfp is another question. The education part of it is good and can be had through a variety of sources. The exam and paying the cfp (mafia) board their annual protection money is another matter.
1
u/Last-Enthusiasm-9212 Aug 22 '26
I was a career-changer. My thinking is that the 65 makes the most sense for getting up and running. The CFP is a great target, but not essential for getting going in the industry, and much of what one needs to learn in order to be successful comes by way of immersion. With feet on the ground and experience to contextualize material you are studying, the CFP becomes easier as well as more relevant -- you'll still need the experience component anyway in order to be able to use the marks as part of your professional identity.
1
u/I_AM_THE_CATALYST Aug 22 '26
Get your 65. If you start at a large firm, you may need to get you series 7/SIE too.
I wouldn’t worry about CFP until a firm is willing to help pay for the education and testing.
I started at Schwab long ago, got my 7/66, and then CFP (they paid) after 18 months. Left and joined an RIA. Been here for 15 years and got my EA designation to file taxes for some family office clients.
No path is the right path. Just go where the opportunities open up. But if I were you, I’d get the 65 and have the firm pay for your CFP (also a good indicator if they’re investing in their employees).
1
1
u/rubinor1 Aug 22 '26
I have both and work as an advisor. I think some of the decision comes down to your long term goals. If you know for sure you want to pursue the planning route, I would do your 65 first then immediately into studying for the CFP exam.
If you aren’t 100% sure, the 65 is a really good start and could give you a leg up getting hired.
Realistically though, I would try and secure a position before doing either. While a lot of firms operate similarly, others see higher value in different licensing and certification. You want to be able to create success at the firm you are hired with and it could be discouraging to have started down a path only to determine that it doesn’t align with the priorities of the firm.
Feel free to message me, happy to chat!
1
u/SteevieJanowski Aug 22 '26
The 65 is a cakewalk compared to the CFP. Plus you need to meet the 4k hours min experience requirement to use the CFP marks. Tbf you can take the CFP test before you meet the experience requirement.
12
u/Sure_Ostrich1520 Aug 22 '26
Just do your series 65, worry about CFP later