If you’ve invested money in the stock market over the past 10 or 15 years, you’ve likely felt stressed when looking at your portfolio’s wild dips and swings. It’s easy to feel like you can never make a good decision or overcorrect in the face of a drastic downturn.
This is why we’re so fortunate to have William Malagodi on our team at SHP. He’s our Director of Investment Operations and digs deep into money management so our clients can focus on living and dreaming.
In this conversation, you’ll learn how William survived trial by fire joining the financial industry during the crisis of 2008, why it’s so hard to be a DIY-er in today’s economy, and the scrutiny and due diligence that goes into every transaction with client portfolio construction here at SHP.
In this podcast discussion, you’ll learn:
- The difference between a broker-dealer and a registered investment advisor.
- Why looking at a financial plan isn’t just about investment assets–and how changes to the tax code and other laws impact clients’ plans each and every year.
- What manager selection is and how it plays a role in portfolio construction.
- How we do due diligence when clients make investment requests.
- “Great stocks have bad periods. So, that’s why you never overallocate and you want to be in more of these indexed active mutual funds diversification.” – William Malagodi
Matthew Peck: Well, welcome, everyone, to another edition of the SHP Retirement Roadmap Podcast. I’m your host today, Matthew Peck, joined by Keith Ellis. And we have an extra special guest today who is William Malagodi. He is SHP’s Director of Investment Operations. Now, I know that’s probably a mouthful. It is for me for sure but it’s to help understand what the process or sort of the goal of today is to understand how SHP approaches money management in the amount of work and scrutiny and research that goes into it. And he heads it up. You know, and Bill’s been with us now for over five years and, obviously, we’ll find out a little bit about his background, of course, but it’s really finding out all of the work that goes into it so that our clients can focus more on living and dreaming while we do the hard work of the grunt work in the trenches of managing the market, following the market, which can be very stressful at times, kind of like a Game 7 hockey match, not that that’s on anyone’s mind right now, but you get the point. But without much further ado, Keith, welcome and then, Bill, welcome to the show.
Keith Ellis: Thank you very much.
William Malagodi: Thank you.
Matthew Peck: All right. So, Bill, we love to talk about the beginning. How did you get into the industry? Were you a finance guy in college? I mean, how did it all come together?
William Malagodi: So, it was business administration at Southern New Hampshire University and after a summer working at a golf course after graduation, I got in as a service associate at Morgan Stanley, summer of 2008. So, once September came around, that was one of the most interesting periods to learn about the industry.
Matthew Peck: Pan to the fire.
William Malagodi: Right into the fire. And it’s basically the best way to learn. Now, I’m on the investment side but I was hands-on with the clients as well. So, really seeing that on the forefront just go through one of the worst times in investment history. But to be able to understand that we came out okay and that’s kind of how the market works. We have the ebbs and flows in that we can get through things with proper money management and good advisors.
Matthew Peck: So, that’s interesting. So, literally so you’re just taking all the bullets at that point to all the calls of all the clients. I mean, that was an extremely scary time. In the great financial crisis, it has the initials, the GFC. I mean, people still refer to it. I mean, I think it’ll go down in history. So, you were like taking incoming calls at that point?
William Malagodi: Yes, I was studying for my Series 7, was taking incoming calls from clients with just personal concerns of their market and their financial savings, because that’s, and I know at Morgan Stanley I was a broker-dealer so not the full service of the planning, but just knowing that their investments were going through such a hard period and what would the protection was. And it just kind of shows the difference between a broker-dealer and a registered investment advisor as well.
Matthew Peck: Well, go on. What is that difference? Because I’m sure people are wondering that.
William Malagodi: Again, times have changed but when I was at Morgan Stanley and some of the other broker-dealers, they don’t have the full services like financial planning. So, here at SHP, our team was the investment committee and we’re broken up between traders and analysts. So, normally when you’re at a broker-dealer like Morgan Stanley, your advisor is the analyst. They are the trader. They might have a team of one or two but they’re doing all the work, plus speaking and managing you. So, when you come to a place like here, you have that full team, full service. So, as advisors like yourself, Matt and Keith, you’re able to focus on the clients even more and allow our team, the investment community, to trade the accounts, to complete the analysis and review funds, review these portfolios. So, at the end of the day, your clients are really just focusing on the big-picture goals, not the investments.
Matthew Peck: Well, I think that’s one thing. And, Keith, I’m curious your opinion on it about how much work goes into it. I mean, I think sometimes there are people that are do-it-yourselfers. They follow the market. And I don’t blame them because we follow the market. I mean, it’s like following politics or anything else. I mean, as much as you try to make moves based on it, there’s so much that’s out of your control. But following it is, well, what does Chairman Powell do here and what’s the latest GDP reading? I mean, there’s constant data, constant ebbs and flows, like you were saying, Bill. So, I never blame people for being involved and being hands-on and kind of do-it-yourself portfolio management but at the same time, there is so much work. I mean, you talk about all the people that are on your team. It is a full-time job to construct portfolios, to manage portfolios, to rebalance portfolios. And we’ll certainly be talking about that a little bit today. But I’m just amazed at how much work goes in there. So, Keith, that was an ask. I mean, are you still bumping into people that are just saying, “Oh, I like to do it myself?” Or are people realizing of the scope of work and they would much rather be fishing, for example?
Keith Ellis: Yeah. I mean, I think a little bit of both. But I think as people start to realize the complexities of the market and it was easy for the past 12, 13 years, you know what I mean? Like, from 2009, 2010 on, yeah, there were dips in the market and market went down but it went up pretty rapidly over a long period of time. And now it comes to this point where it’s almost like you could throw a dart against a stock and, boom, okay, it went up, right? Can’t do that anymore. You know, times have changed. We’re no longer at zero interest rates. You know, massive changes have happened in the past 12 to 18 months that has changed the landscape of the market, changed the outlook of the market. So, you’re right, Matt, it does lead to more and more people kind of saying raising their hand and saying, “Okay. This is a lot more complex than I thought it was,” but then you also take on top of that if you look at the past four years, there have been three major laws passed, SECURE Act, SECURE, Act 2, and the Tax Cuts back in 2018.
You know, that to me, if you’re looking at a holistic plan, not to jump down that path but to be able to manage your portfolio is one thing but then to digest, dissect, look at all these different laws that have passed, understand them, and then take a look at your overall full financial picture over the next 10, 15, 20 years and then intergenerationally, I mean, that’s a really, really tough hill to climb for an individual. That’s why at SHP, we created teams just like William said earlier, to support each advisor. So, then when they go in and meet with a family, they can look at their plan holistically and look at everything, both at the beginning meetings when they’re coming on board with SHP but more importantly during the review meetings because we don’t want to be like, “Hey, yeah, your account is up, your account is down, and we’ll see you next year.” No. Like, we want to bring tangible thesis or thoughts or actionable items that better position our clients year in and year out. We believe going forward to each meeting that we sit with them.
Matthew Peck: Well, it’s true too. I mean, think about that. It’s a great point because we want clients, or I’m sorry, we want our advisors of SHP focusing on the client, focusing on their individual situation. Now, certainly following the market is important and we want them to be obviously knowledgeable on what’s happening and what the portfolios are performing and how we’re responding. But at the same time, when they’re sitting with each individual client, we want them focused on the client reaching out to the client. I mean, sometimes it’s certainly not just the financial stuff. I mean, we had a client of mine, actually, two of them just lost their dads. I mean, so being able to reach out to them and be there during very difficult times as well, and just having all of your eyes there, all of our advisors’ eyes on the clients, we feel that it allows for obviously better advice, but certainly a much closer connection. So, let’s take a moment and talk about the amount of work that does go into it. So, Bill, if you don’t mind whether you want to talk on a daily basis or whether it’s an annual scope, do you approach each year differently where you have a calendar or how does investment operations work?
William Malagodi: Yes. So, for the most part, where again, I kind of mentioned a second ago, we’re broken up into two teams on the investment community. We have traders and then we have analysts. So, each one are going to do a little bit of one thing or a combination of both. So, for the most part, our day-to-day, our trading, we’re getting clients in portfolios, we’re taking care of withdrawal needs for supporting Social Security and their other monthly needs. And then for anything after review sessions, if there is going to be a shift to an annuity or a shift to portfolio, we have dedicated traders that are trading every day for our clients. And then on the other side of it, we actually have the true portfolio management as part of the investment committee. This team is really focused on our core portfolios and reviewing the individual funds and everything that would take that portfolio and kind of mirror with what’s happening with the market, how are we able to see this portfolio and then how are we able to basically manage it in the current conditions as well.
So, that team specifically doesn’t really do the day-to-day analysis like that. It’s actually more of we are broken down into weekly meetings and those meetings we have tasked from those meetings and that allows us to review the portfolio whether it’s fixed income, it’s our equity portion, it’s our international. So, we’re all looking at every aspect of a portfolio based upon a meeting that we have from the investment committee that is run by Matt.
Matthew Peck: But when they do that, we’ll certainly talk a lot about that, about how we weight portfolios and tilt and rebalance. But why don’t you walk our audience through something called manager selection? What is manager selection and how does that play a role in portfolio construction?
William Malagodi: Yeah. Manager selection is basically a very simple way to put this is you have two types of investments that we’re going to deploy commonly in SHP portfolio, a mutual fund or ETF. Now, on the ETF side, most of them are going to be passive so the managers were not really focused doing their tracking of benchmark but really manager selection comes with mutual funds and each manager on a mutual fund has specific goals. They have benchmarks and certain things they need to stand parameters for. But for the most part, they’re a little more free to act. So, if we like an asset class and we choose a manager, we have a lot more basically aspects of bullet points to look at as we review these managers because we need to do a due diligence to make sure they’re taking the proper strategy that we reviewed and it’s staying true to our client’s goals. So, it’s really critical that we understand what they’re doing from a quarterly basis and we understand where their managers are, how long they’ve been there, and again, their investment goals as well.
Matthew Peck: Well, let me back up just because you mentioned something. So, just for all of our audience, what is passive investing? What is active investing? Just sort of just define those two terms for people as well.
William Malagodi: Kind of back in the lines with ETFs and mutual funds, most ETFs are passive. They can be active but a passive ETF is basically the portfolio itself, the ETF, the funds that are invested in the product, they’re not going to be rebalancing on a quarterly, semiannual basis. They usually rebalance once a year. Again, this is the funds that are held within the ETF, the exchange-traded fund. So, to us, if we have an asset class like the S&P 500, we know what’s inside that. We do not need to have an active manager. And one huge difference between active and passive managers is cost. So, on a passive ETF, if they’re tracking the S&P, we understand what they’re doing. We don’t need to pay for an active manager to beat the S&P 500.
Matthew Peck: Yeah, exactly. So, just to kind of illustrate that, I mean, think of passive as index based, right? And I’ll kind of talk a little bit about how when we do build the portfolios where we do want to just be index based because how, I mean, we’ve all seen the statistics of how hard it is to beat the S&P 500 on a consistent basis. So, why would we pay extra cost? But like Bill was mentioning, for managers that might not be able to consistently beat the S&P 500 or beat their benchmark. So, now we are talking in terms of, again, manager selection or deciding, okay, do we want an active manager there? Do we want some mutual fund where someone is picking stocks and kind of going to town and ideally beating their benchmark? Or just saying, “No, we’re just going to buy the benchmark,” because, again, consistently they’ve been unable to beat it. But also, to develop a little bit on the manager selection piece too. A lot of people will just say, “Oh, it’s a five-star rating from Morningstar,” or, “It’s a four-star rating from Morningstar. It’s like that’s what their process is.” But there’s so much more to it than that. I mean, how deep do you go into when you look at these mutual funds?
William Malagodi: We go very deep into the mutual fund selection grid. There can be a lot of questions that arise but we are really looking at 25 to 30 data points as we’re doing what we call a fund-to-fund comparison. We’ll take an asset class and then we’ll look at and usually, the star rating is like our baseline and we’ll maybe start looking at 4 to 5-star rated funds to know that we’re only looking at the upper echelon of that asset class. And then from there, we will again, not to go into every data point but from expense ratios to how long the managers, the actual portfolio of managers have been managing that fund. If they’ve only been on there for five years, we don’t know their full investment strategy. But if a portfolio manager has been on the fund for 10 to 15 years, that’s consistency. And then the kind of a big thing to take one little step back from passive versus active is the predictability of the returns. Once you’re in a passive, again, where you use ETF, that’s tracking the S&P 500 so we can predict those returns of that helps us guide easier conversations in the meetings.
And so, we know when we look at our portfolios where we maybe had some misses, if we’re tracking the same thing that we’re striving towards, that was not going to be our misses. That allows us to say, “Hey, this may be an active manager issue. This will be a cause for a review.” So, these are the type of things that we can look at to kind of hone in on an active manager.
Matthew Peck: Okay. So, folks, think of it this way. I mean, step one in this entire process is where should SHP or where should the models, the portfolios be active? Should we have active management in a space, whether it’s large-cap or international or the bond market, or should we have passive, which is just more of the index fund? So, that’s step one. Step two is, okay, let’s say we do choose to be active in that space, whether again, the bond market, the international market, emerging markets, so forth, I mean, all the different asset classes, take your pick. So, if we do decide to be active in there and then we have the second level of scrutiny on who do we want to have there. Because, Keith, you brought up a great point about how we are no longer – we’re in a bear market or whatever you want to call right now that we’re experiencing. And point being is that and I’ll even go back to Bill’s experience at Morgan Stanley in ‘08. When we look at these manager selections, we say, “Okay. Were you there in ‘08 and how did you perform in 2008?” Or if you were a bond market or a bond manager, how did you perform in 2022 in this insane rising interest rate environment that we hadn’t seen in decades?
Keith Ellis: Yeah. This is going to be a pretty good gauge going forward.
Matthew Peck: Yeah, exactly. So, we look, okay, was that manager there during that particular year? And so, as I mentioned, for all the do-it-yourselfers, curious if you get to that level of detail or not but this is part of the work and the amount of research that goes into a well-constructed portfolio and obviously the work we do here at SHP. To change topics a little bit, Keith, I’m curious from an advisor perspective, what’s your interaction with the investment committee? I mean, are clients asking you questions and you going to them or is it a mixture of both, or how often are you interacting just as a general advisor here at SHP?
Keith Ellis: I mean, for the most part, I can guide the clients and I know how the portfolios are constructed because you guys do a really good job of especially your calls, Matt, that you do on a quarterly basis, quite a bit of information is there for us as the advisors but for our clients as well. So, if you’re not taking advantage of Matt’s quarterly market update calls and you want to be a little bit more in touch with your portfolio, I highly recommend that. But we also do monthly meetings where the investment committee comes in and updates us on a lot of the changes or things that you as a team are looking at, even some of the changes that have been implemented. William does a great job of letting us know when they’re going to rebalance and then the result of those rebalances. So, I think a lot of the communication that we have internally between the investment committee and the advisors allows us to really educate the client when we sit with them.
So, for the most part, I’m not interacting too much with the investment committee because you guys are so proactive in regards to getting us what we need as advisors to be able to assist with questions, answers, updates, great data for our clients. Don’t get me wrong, sometimes there’s what we call customized portfolios where a client has held positions for a long period of time. Maybe there’s a lot of capital gains and we want to systematically maybe unwind that or look at or diversify that. So, in regards to certain situations where things come in a little bit more customized, then there’s quite a bit of communication. But for the most part, based on our core portfolios and the amount of due diligence, time, and effort that you guys spend on those, not much needs to be done between us and the investment committee.
Matthew Peck: But let me pick up the customized portion of what you just talked about because a more well-known term is what’s called core and satellite, meaning that we have a lot of clients that will come in. Either they have existing positions, stocks in old companies, or they’ll sit down with us and they’ll say, “Okay. Well, I like those core models. I like a moderate model or a model aggressive model.” But then I like to have a satellite which is an individual stock here or there. So, that falls under what we call customized where, as I said, whether it’s an inherited account or whether a client comes in and says, “Hey, what do you think about Tesla or what do you think about Nvidia or whatever? Take your pick.” Then at that point, there’s a lot more interaction because then the investment committee. So, yeah. Bill, why don’t you walk through that? So, Keith has a client coming in. They’re asking about, “Okay. Hey, should we invest in Johnson & Johnson or what have you?” So, how does the investment…
Keith Ellis: Can I speak to that?
Matthew Peck: Oh, sure. Absolutely.
Keith Ellis: Thank you, William. That’s all I’ll say. William makes us look really smart. The amount of scrutiny, due diligence, and information we get when a client wants to buy a stock, a lot of times I’ll “take the order” and say, “Okay. Well, let us do our job and really dive into this a little bit more for you.” I’ll send that along to William. I’ll give him kind of some notes on my thoughts. “You know, hey, this is how I think this company’s positioned,” because I do a lot of this myself.
Matthew Peck: Absolutely. Yeah. You follow it.
Keith Ellis: This is how I think this company’s positioned but I’d be curious on what we call a full write-up. So, he’ll send that back to me with pages of information in my mind, a lot of due diligence in regards to that. And then at the bottom of it is the basic recommendation, and we might choose to go with that or you might say, “Hey, look, based upon what you’re trying to do in this sector,” is it a sector question, “Hey, I want to be in electric cars. I want to own a charge point.” “Okay. Well, do you want to own charge point or do you want to own this company or this company or this company based upon what we think is going to happen in the future?” So, then William and his team might come back to us and say, “If they want to stay in this sector, they might be better off going with this stock as opposed to the original, or if they’re looking at dividend income and that’s why they bought it. Here’s another recommendation.” So, there’s a lot that goes into that, into those questions that William and his team, and I will say they do a heck of a job for us. They make us look really good.
Matthew Peck: So, yes, Bill, why don’t you explain a little bit about that process? So, a request comes in from Keith or from some of the other SHP Advisors. And then walk us through that. What happens?
William Malagodi: Yeah. We can take a very easy one and just say like, “We got a request to purchase Apple. We want to do a review of Apple first.” So, typically what we’ll kind of do is we’ll take the company and Apple’s a very easy one that we’re all very familiar with it, but we’ll look at just some of the basic data points, where the company positions, what’s going on. We’ll look at past few quarters and then really it’s you go look at the investment but then it’s really the client. The investment is important but then where does that investment fit in? So, if it’s customized, really, for me when I hear customized review, part of me is to say, how can I almost like what’s the easiest way to get this in to feel the client need, but also keep them on track for their plan. Because when you do customize, that’s usually going to kind of throw you a little off track, maybe a little right of the left. But we still want to keep you up to the goal.
So, when we kind of come in, we’re going to, at the very end of a review, provide that summary recommendation but usually tone down the expectation of what we’re trying to do at the clients say, “Yep, I really want to do Apple. I want to put 100K into a stock,” we’re going to come back, look at all your accounts, see where Apple is overall, and then kind of spit back to you and say, hey, here’s your Apple exposure because you don’t own Apple directly. You own index ETFs and active mutual funds but overall, here’s where you own it at this percentage. Now, if you did this, you would increase it to that.” And then we usually come down and try to trim individual stock ownership down to a cap of 5% because you pick up that ownership in these funds. So, when you do that, you’re blindly adding more ‘over-allocating. Apple’s great but right around again that ’08, ‘09 there was a period where Apple was just continually going down.
So, great stocks have bad periods. So, that’s why you never over-allocate and you want to be in more of these indexed active mutual funds diversification. So, when you come through a customized review, I understand, but we are going to try to, again, also recommend a very healthy allocation. We might take that and see that’s not the best for predictable outcomes. Let’s try to tone that down and find a happy compromise.
Matthew Peck: Well, one thing that I would say too just so I’ll kind of provide vocabulary and the little dictionary for all of our listeners. What would Bill and Keith do for that matter? Talking about what’s called stock intersection. So, one thing that one review or analysis that we do is that if you’re a new client or a prospect to SHP and you’re walking through and just want to find out sort of to look under the hood, to find out what you have, we’ll provide what’s called a stock intersection analysis, which is let’s find out what you have. I mean, it may happen exactly what Bill is mentioning. You might have 15 or maybe that might be a little bit high but 10% to 15% in one particular position, not because of or by design, but this mutual fund and that ETF and this fund and all these other portfolio or funds in your account all have a concentrated position. Next thing you know, you might have a very concentrated position. So, an understanding and looking under the hood of when prospects come in, that’s something that we’d certainly take a look at. And certainly, when it comes to our day-to-day portfolio analysis, we’re looking at stock intersection to make sure that we stay diversified because that’s by far certainly a goal of ours, to say the least.
So, again, that’s an extra level of scrutiny. And I would also say, too, there’s an amazing amount of information and data and analysis that’s out there and research that’s out there. One thing that that Bill kind of have you expand upon is one other exercise that we do as the investment committee is that after we construct the portfolios themselves, we’re able to submit them to companies like BlackRock, Fidelity, JPMorgan, etcetera, and they have their own outside portfolio analysis, analyst, CFA, you know, Chartered Financial Analyst take a look at it and then provide feedback to us to say, “Hey, I like what you’ve done here, I don’t like what you’ve done there. Here’s recommendations here and there.” So, I mean, getting that level of research is just fantastic as well because it’s a third party, second, third, fourth set of eyes, whatever you want to say. And it just makes sure that the portfolio that we are constructing from that diversified outlook is as strong and as comprehensive as possible. So, if you don’t mind, walk a little bit through that process to how often does the investment committee look at their portfolios in that way and just, yeah, general thoughts there.
William Malagodi: Yes. This is one of the tasks that our team does that a lot of people, a lot of team members just don’t see because they’re actually not inclined and involved. We’re actually working with the asset managers like JPMorgan, Fidelity, and these are the asset managers, the funds that we use. So, typically, what we’ll do is we’re using it can be anywhere from one a month but we’re trying to take some of the bigger asset managers out there because they have the most resources and they have good teams as well. But like right now, we’re having reviews from Fidelity to review our portfolio. We have JPMorgan next month and First Trust in June. So, we really are just lining up these asset managers because a lot of them are trying to position services for us but what we really need to see is how well our portfolios are working and how well they’re constructed. So, they’ll kind of come in and we have a cadence of, let’s say 5 to 10 asset managers that we use and we usually submit one a month trying to get different viewpoints to see maybe these opinions can drive direction for us, maybe they can help us not predict, but maybe see what the market may do going forward.
So, these are all great tools and pieces of information the client will never see but we can take that data and these recommendations from these managers, take them to the investment committee. And now we have a conversation about all these recommendations from these great asset managers to say, “Hey, this is what we would do to make your portfolio better. Now, we take those best ideas and now we talk about in how we can implement.”
Matthew Peck: Yeah. Again, so this is the type of level of scrutiny that happens in order to, again, give people the confidence to know that these guys are as well-researched and thorough as possible. In the last sort of definition or vocabulary word I’ll give for you guys because Bill mentioned a little bit at the beginning or during our talk today was what’s called an attribution analysis so, again, nerding out here and taking it to that level. But what that is, is an attribution analysis is then a review of the portfolios to see what has performed or underperformed. Was it because of the fact that we allocated too much towards bonds or too much in this sector? Was it because we picked the wrong manager and they outperformed their own benchmark? So, same idea, attribution analysis, when does that work into the process and what did we learn and glean from that step?
William Malagodi: Yeah. The attribution analysis Matt alluded to, it can be a little nerdy at times, but it is. The importance of that information is very critical because we take their reports. Before we start doing a review, we run the attribution analysis. That’s step one. And then when we run the analysis, we review it as a team to see the misses, the gains where we did well because at times this analysis is a timestamp of right now. So, as a team, we look at what we can do to do better and how to adapt for the future. So, we need to look at in multiple ways but that is the timestamp of the review. That’s how we start that. It provides us direction unless there’s a different macro topic. But nonetheless, we use the attribution analysis, see where we can make these portfolios better. So, that’s like step one as a guide to start the review process.
Matthew Peck: So, ladies and gentlemen, you’re getting obviously the idea of how much work that goes into it. And hopefully, we are accomplishing our goal of giving all of our listeners good information but also for any clients of SHP the confidence to know what the team is doing on your behalf. So, I’m using Keith as our prototypical advisor but let’s just say the advisors of SHP are out there in front of the clients, focusing on the clients, communicating what’s happening in the market. Let’s have what our investment committee is thinking, what he or she is thinking as the advisor themselves, and how it then sort of translates to people’s individual situation because we’re all individuals, you know, that line from that old Monty Python movie. But that’s the whole thing we wanted to really get across today. And now if you are not a client of SHP and you are doing it yourself, I mean, I would just ask how much a because certainly everyone’s going to enjoy a little bit but are you taking that steps for things like manager selection, attribution analysis, having third party asset managers such as Fidelity and JPMorgan looking at what you’ve constructed. That’s what you get here. That’s what you get at SHP.
And then I’d like to think I hope at other firms out there but certainly, obviously I have a little bit more knowledge of what happens here, of course. But that’s the concept. That’s what the work that’s happening behind the scenes so that all of the clients of SHP can just be, as I said, whether it’s fishing or just enjoying their lives, living and dreaming as compared to running these spreadsheets, which are quite extensive, to say the least. So, if you are a spreadsheet guy, God bless you or guy or gal, but at the same time, we certainly want people to be doing what they imagined their retirement would be as compared to swimming in numbers per se. But as I wrap up, Keith or Bill, any last thoughts or anything I didn’t cover that you hoped I would?
Keith Ellis: No. Just thanks for joining us, William, and providing some insight both for folks listening in, our clients, in regards to the amount of work and due diligence you guys do. I know my clients really appreciate it. I do. Like I said, you guys make us look good. So, appreciate it.
William Malagodi: Thank you, Keith. And the only thing I can kind of wrap that up with, as Keith was mentioning, how much they interact with us in that kind of like, for me, the best answer Keith gave was that because we don’t maybe talk to every SHP client on a daily basis but our day-to-day clients are the advisors and we’re communicating with them daily. So, if he’s not asking that much from us, that means we’re doing our job. So, he provided the best answer.
Matthew Peck: All right. Well, thanks again, everyone, for joining us and stick around for next time. Be well.Charlie podpostmedia2023-07-25T11:17:36-04:00