Six things to compare
1. Representation model
Ask whether the firm represents the advisor, a receiving firm, or both sides of the market. An exclusive mandate, preferred relationship, or narrow channel focus is not automatically a problem, but it should be disclosed before recommendations are framed as a broad search.
2. Real market access
A long logo list does not prove useful access. Ask which firms the recruiter has worked with recently, which advisor profiles those firms will consider, and where the recruiter has enough context to reach the right decision-makers.
3. Compensation and conflicts
Understand who pays the recruiting firm, when a fee is earned, and whether compensation varies by destination or transaction type. A clear answer lets the advisor evaluate the recommendation with the right context.
4. Confidentiality process
Confidentiality is not a promise. It is a permission process. Confirm what information is collected, where it is stored, when identifying details are shared, and whether the advisor approves every introduction first.
5. Decision method
Ask to see how the firm turns discovery into a shortlist. Every option, including the current platform, should face the same criteria so a polished pitch or large upfront package does not control the comparison.
6. Follow-through and accountability
Clarify who coordinates diligence, tracks open questions, documents trade-offs, supports negotiation, and helps prepare for transition. The quality of the work after an introduction often reveals whether the firm provides advice or access alone.
Comparison matrix
| Category | Weak signal | Strong signal |
|---|---|---|
| Representation | Relationships and incentives are vague. | The firm explains whom it represents and how that shapes the search. |
| Market access | A large logo list without recent examples. | Relevant access for the advisor's model, size, and goals. |
| Compensation | The fee model is minimized or deferred. | Payment source, timing, and potential conflicts are explicit. |
| Confidentiality | Informal assurances. | Permission-based sharing with clear controls. |
| Decision process | Introductions begin before criteria are defined. | Current and prospective firms use the same documented scorecard. |
| Follow-through | Responsibility fades after the meeting. | Named support continues through diligence and execution. |
How Continuum uses this lens
Continuum uses the 6C Alignment Framework to compare platforms, buyers, and succession paths across Culture, Community, Compatibility, Capability, Compensation, and Capital. The same criteria are applied before the financial advisor recruiting process narrows to firm meetings.
Compensation disclosure: Advisors do not pay Continuum for platform transition work. If an advisor joins a new firm through Continuum, the receiving firm compensates Continuum. That relationship should be understood alongside every recommendation. For a broader comparison, see how Continuum differs from a typical recruiting firm.
Editorial standard: Continuum publishes practical, platform-agnostic education for financial advisors. Content is reviewed for clarity and real-world usefulness and is not legal, tax, or compliance advice.