Advisor Dan McConlogue on Riskalyze vs. the Rest of the Pack

Guest Post by Dan McConlogue, AIF
Advisor in Florida

99% of the time, I like what Bob Veres likes and dislike what Bob dislikes. But after reading his recent review of risk analysis tools, I have to say that I’ve found far different results in my practice. 

I’m a month into using Riskalyze with clients, and the results have been tremendous. I’ve tried other qualitative and psychological risk profiling tools, and clients were either confused or aggravated. The conversations were stagnant. 

With Riskalyze, I get fantastic conversations with clients from the results of their assessment. I agree wholeheartedly with Riskalyze’s thinking that by using a six-month sliding chart of potential upside and downside ranges, we really get to where the client’s sensitivity dwells. (Asking me how I feel about risk/return years from now is going to get you one answer…asking how I feel about it within the next 6 months gets a different answer!) 

From there, the most critical part of the process is the conversation with the client about how their portfolio is currently scored, versus their Risk Number. In the seven or eight of these conversations that we’ve had, the typical situation has a client score of 41, while from previous efforts they are allocated at 51. And then the really good stuff kicks in…“can we reasonably expect a portfolio configured at 41 to generate what you will ultimately need to fund your goals? Can you live with this, or with that?”

Beyond that, the retirement map is just a fantastic tool to use “live" with a client. It’s the best I’ve ever seen in 15 years of intense “frog kissing” in searching for meaningful risk analysis software. 

Put me in front of a judge — no problem. Riskalyze is a tremendous tool in its simplicity and elegance, and I’m confident it will get nothing but better with time.