Twenty-Four Percent Less, REALLY?!

Here's the shocking truth regarding your portfolio:  The single largest factor determining your NET return per annum is probably the FEE you pay. (Asset allocation is the second "biggie", but I'm assuming that even the "bail-out boys" don't mess that one up for you.)

Please have a gander at the NET return differential, based upon historical figures, for two of FSBW's portfolios and an IDENTICAL account held at a major brokerage:

Our Lowest Risk Portfolio (Avg Annual Gross Return of 8.99%)

Account Value W/FSBW's .5% Fee   W/TARP Firm's 2% Fee

Start                              100                                      100

After 5 Years             150                                       140

After 10 Years          226                                       196

After 20 Years          510                                       386       

Due to compounding, one invested dollar, subject to the 8.99% historical annual return growth rate of our Low Risk Portfolio grows to $3.86, if your Advisor charges 2%, which is fairly standard.  That same dollar, with an identical 8.99% gross return/annum, grows to $5.10 with FSBW’s fee.  This calculates to a 24.3% difference in your account value.  Recall that this assumes IDENTICAL returns with each provider:  FSBW and your local TARP firm.

Our Highest Risk Portfolio (Avg Annual Gross Return of 10.72%)

Account Value W/FSBW's .5% Fee   W/TARP Firm's 2% Fee

Start                              100                                      100

After 5 Years             179                                      165

After 10 Years          265                                      231

After 20 Years         700                                      532    

If your portfolio returns 10.72% per annum (as our High-Risk Portfolio has done historically), your dollar becomes $7.00 over 20 years with FSBW, but only $5.32 with your 2% Advisor.  (A similarly stunning 24 % LESS in your account and in the broker and firm’s coffers!)

Investing with FSBW is terrifically more-cost efficient, would produce a superior result and you would have the added benefit of dealing with someone you know, like and trust.  Why continue to over-pay for under-performance (which, due to compounding, significantly increases that same under-performance)?

Respectfully Submitted,

Robert C. Broderick, Jr., Esq.

Principal

FSB Winchester Asset Management

7 Kendall Street

Winchester, MA 01890

617.538.4317

robert.broderick@FSBWinchester.com

www.FSBWinchester.com