Destiny Wealth Partners, LLC

Tavares, Florida

Recognition Disclosures

Investment advisory services offered through Destiny Wealth Partners, LLC, an SEC Registered Investment Advisor

Barron’s Magazine – America’s Top 1200 Advisors

Barron’s is a registered trademark of Dow Jones & Company, L.P. All rights reserved. Advisors who wish to be ranked fill out a 102-question survey about their practice. Barron’s verifies that data with the advisors’ firms and with regulatory databases and then applies its proprietary rankings formula to the data to generate a ranking.

The formula features three major categories of calculations: (1) Assets (2) Revenue (3) Quality of practice. In each of those categories we do multiple subcalculations.

For instance, Barron’s takes into account not just the amount of assets an advisor manages, but also the type of assets—are they private-wealth assets or institutional? If they’re institutional, are they for a foundation or an endowment or are they corporate assets? They measure the growth of an advisor’s practice and their client retention. They also consider a wide range of qualitative factors, including the advisors’ experience, their advanced degrees and industry designations, the size and shape of their teams, their charitable and philanthropic work and, of course, their compliance records. Investment returns are not a component of the rankings because an adviser’s returns are dictated largely by the risk tolerance of clients.

Ruggie Wealth Management is not an affiliate of Barron’s.  Ruggie Wealth Management applied for consideration, and the result was independently granted.

Ruggie Wealth Management is unaware, nor has Barron’s published the number of nominees considered for the award ranking or the percentage that received the applicable rankings.

Barron’s does not require membership or payment in order for award participants and/or applicants to be considered for an award designation. Moreover, neither Ruggie Wealth Management nor any other participating advisors paid a fee to be eligible for “America’s Top 1200 Advisors.”

Ruggie Wealth Management is unaware of any undisclosed facts that could potentially invalidate the appropriateness of the ranking. By virtue of disclosing this ranking, Ruggie Wealth Management is disclosing favorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked above other advisors) and unfavorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked below other advisors).  The rankings may not be representative of any one client’s experience because of the way in which it is calculated. The rankings are independently granted. Inclusion on the Barron’s Lists is absolutely not indicative of Ruggie Wealth Management’s future performance, or any future performance pertaining to its clients’ investments; should not be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that they will experience a certain level of results if Ruggie Wealth Management is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services; and should not be construed as a current or past endorsement of Ruggie Wealth Management by any of its clients.

Forbes “Best-in-State Wealth Advisors

2021 Methodology

This year’s Best-In-State Wealth Advisors list spotlights more than 4,000 top advisors across the country who were nominated by their firms—and then researched, interviewed and assigned a ranking within their respective states and markets.

Ruggie Wealth Management is not an affiliate of Forbes or Shook Research.  Ruggie Wealth Management applied for consideration, and the result was independently granted.

INSIDE THE RANKINGS

Each advisor—selected by SHOOK Research—is chosen based on an algorithm of qualitative and quantitative criteria, including:

• In-person interviews
• Industry experience
• Compliance records
• Revenue produced
• Assets under management

The Forbes ranking of Best-In-State Wealth Advisors, developed by SHOOK Research, is based on an algorithm of qualitative criteria, mostly gained through telephone and in-person due diligence interviews, and quantitative data. Those advisors that are considered have a minimum of seven years’ experience, and the algorithm weights factors like revenue trends, assets under management, compliance records, industry experience and those that encompass best practices in their practices and approach to working with clients. Portfolio performance is not a criteria due to varying client objectives and lack of audited data. Neither Forbes or SHOOK receive a fee in exchange for rankings.

The Research Process

SHOOK scours the financial services industry—banks, brokerages, custodians, insurance companies, clearing houses and others for nominations. SHOOK accepts advisors who meet pre-determined minimum thresholds and acceptable compliance records.

Unlike other advisor rankings, SHOOK is not a “robo-ranker”—numbers such as production and assets don’t tell the whole story, especially when much of the data is self-reported. SHOOK Research creates rankings of role models—advisors that are leading the way in offering best practices and providing a high-quality experience for clients. A focus on both quantitative and qualitative factors, including telephone and in-person meetings, is imperative.

SHOOK Research is the only rating firm that interviews advisors via telephone and in person at advisor’s location.

Basic Requirements

• 7 years as an advisor.
• Minimum 1 year at current firm, with exceptions (acquisitions, etc.).
• Advisor must be recommended, and nominated, by Firm.
• Completion of online survey.
• Over 50% of revenue/production must be with individuals.
• Acceptable compliance record.

Quantitative

• Revenue/production; weightings assigned for each.
• Assets under management—and quality of those assets—both custodied and a scrutinized look at assets held away. (Although individual numbers are used for ranking purposes, we publish the entire team’s assets.)
• Client-related data, such as retention.
• Portfolio performance is not a factor; audited returns among advisors are rare, and differing client objectives provide varying returns.

Qualitative

• Telephone and in-person meetings with advisors (if an in-person meeting cannot be accomplished, exceptions are considered in which the interview will occur after a ranking has been published).
• Advisors that exhibit “best practices” within their practices and approach to working with clients.
• Compliance records & u4s. Some “dings” can be overlooked (e.g., firm or product failure beyond the scope of an advisor’s due diligence; the older a ding, the less we look). Since there are many gray areas, the SHOOK team is willing to listen to a Firm that is willing to stand behind the advisor with written support from leadership.
• Advisors that provide a full client experience:
• Service model
• Investing process
• Fee structure (higher % of fee-based assets earns more points)
• Breadth of services, including extensive use of Firm’s platform and resources (eg, liabilities)
• Credentials (years of service can serve as proxy).
• Use of team & team dynamics
• Community involvement
• Discussions with management, peers, competing peers
• Telephone and in-person meetings
• U4/Compliance Issues

The following conditions will be considered in order to lessen weightings infractions

• Infractions that are denied or closed with no action.
• Complaint arose from a product, service or advice initiated by a previous advisor or another member or former member of team.
• Length of time since complaint.
• Complaints related to product failure not related to investment advice (some limited partnerships, adjusted-rate securities, etc.).
• Complaints that have been settled (must be proven) to appease a client who remained with the advisor for at least one year following settlement date.
• Complaints that are proven to be meritless.
• Actions taken as a result of administrative error or failure by firm.

Once an advisor’s compliance rating falls into a tenable category, the following conditions must be met.

1. An advisor’s rating must be among SHOOK’s highest qualitative measures including in-person interview.
2. Letters of recommendation from firm.

Ranking Algorithm

The algorithm is designed to fairly compare the business practices of a large group of advisors based on quantitative and qualitative elements. Data are weighted to ensure priorities are given to dynamics such as preferred “best practices”, business models, recent business activity, etc. Each variable is graded and represents a certain value for each measured component. These data are fed into an algorithm that measures thousands of advisors against each other.

Ruggie Wealth Management is unaware of any undisclosed facts that could potentially invalidate the appropriateness of the ranking. By virtue of disclosing this ranking, Ruggie Wealth Management is disclosing favorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked above other advisors) and unfavorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked below other advisors).  The rankings may not be representative of any one client’s experience because of the way in which it is calculated. The rankings are independently granted. Inclusion on the Forbes’ Lists is absolutely not indicative of Ruggie Wealth Management’s future performance, or any future performance pertaining to its clients’ investments; should not be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that they will experience a certain level of results if Ruggie Wealth Management is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services; and should not be construed as a current or past endorsement of Ruggie Wealth Management by any of its clients.

SHOOK Disclosures

SHOOK is completely independent and objective and does not receive compensation from the advisors, Firms, the media, or any other source in exchange for placement on a ranking. SHOOK is funded through conferences, publications and research partners. Since every investor has unique needs, investors must carefully choose the right Advisor for their own situation and perform their own due diligence. SHOOK’s research and rankings provide opinions for how to choose the right Financial Advisor. Portfolio performance is not a criterion due to varying client objectives and lack of audited data. Remember, past performance is not an indication of future results.

For more information, please see www.SHOOKresearch.com.

Financial Times 300 Top Registered Investment Advisors Methodology [Note: FT 300 has ceased it’s rankings]

 To ensure a list of established companies with substantial expertise, The Financial Times examines the database of RIAs registered with the US Securities and Exchange Commission and selects those that reported $300m or more in assets under management (AUM). The Financial Times’ methodology is quantifiable and objective. The RIAs have no subjective input. The FT invites qualifying RIA companies — more than 2,000 — to complete a lengthy application that gives them more information.

They add this to their own research into RIA practices, including data from regulatory filings. In 2018, the most recent year of the Ruggie Wealth Management ranking, some 760 RIA companies applied and 300 made the final list. The formula the FT used to grade advisers was based on six broad factors and calculates a numeric score for each company. Areas of consideration include adviser AUM, asset growth, the company’s age, industry certifications of key employees, SEC compliance record and online accessibility.

The reasons for these criteria are as follows:

• AUM signals experience managing money and client trust.
• AUM growth rate can be a proxy for performance, as well as for asset retention and the ability to generate new business. We assessed companies on one- and two-year growth rates.
• Companies’ years in existence indicates reliability and experience of managing assets through different market environments.
• Compliance record provides evidence of past client disputes — a string of complaints can signal potential problems, for example.
• Industry certifications (CFA, CFP, etc.) show the company’s staff has industry knowledge and signals a professional commitment to investment skills.
• Online accessibility demonstrates a desire to provide easy access and transparent contact information. AUM comprised approximately 70 to 75 per cent of each adviser’s score, while asset growth accounted for 15 to 20 per cent. Additionally, the FT caps the number of companies from any one state, based roughly on the distribution of millionaires across the US. We present the FT 300 as an elite group, not a competitive ranking of one to 300. This is a fair way to identify the industry’s elite advisers while accounting for the companies’ different approaches and different specializations. The research was conducted for this report by Ignites Research, an FT sister publication.

Ruggie Wealth Management is unaware of any undisclosed facts that could potentially invalidate the appropriateness of the ranking. By virtue of disclosing this ranking, Ruggie Wealth Management is disclosing favorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked above other advisors) and unfavorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked below other advisors).  The rankings may not be representative of any one client’s experience because of the way in which it is calculated. The rankings are independently granted. Inclusion on the FT 300 List is absolutely not indicative of Ruggie Wealth Management’s future performance, or any future performance pertaining to its clients’ investments; should not be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that they will experience a certain level of results if Ruggie Wealth Management is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services; and should not be construed as a current or past endorsement of Ruggie Wealth Management by any of its clients.

The Financial Times does not require membership or payment in order for award participants and/or applicants to be considered for an award designation. Moreover, neither Ruggie Wealth Management nor any other participating advisors paid a fee to be eligible for the “FT 300.”

Financial Advisor (FA) Magazine Top RIAs

 FA’s RIA survey is a ranking based on assets under management at year end of independent RIA firms that file their own ADV with the SEC.

FA’s RIA ranking orders firms from largest to smallest, based on AUM reported to them by firms that voluntarily complete and submit FA’s survey by their deadline. They do their best to verify AUM by reviewing ADV forms. To be eligible for the ranking, firms must:

• Be independent registered investment advisors and file their own ADV statement with the SEC
• Provide financial planning and related services to individual clients
• Have at least $500 million in assets under management as of December 30 of the year prior to the ranking to be included in the print edition of Financial Advisor magazine’s 2021 RIA survey.  Firms with under $500 million are included in FA’s expanded online RIA survey.

Corporate RIA firms and investment advisor representatives (IARs) are not eligible for this survey. A corporate RIA is a registered investment advisor most often formed by a broker-dealer that files an ADV with the SEC. Advisors who are affiliated with the broker-dealer or other entity’s corporate RIA may offer investment advice. They are considered Investment Advisor Representatives (IARs) of the corporate RIA. All of the assets under management of the IARs are included in the corporate RIA’s ADV filed with the SEC.

Ruggie Wealth Management is unaware of any undisclosed facts that could potentially invalidate the appropriateness of the ranking. By virtue of disclosing this ranking, Ruggie Wealth Management is disclosing favorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked above other advisors) and unfavorable ratings (to the extent that Ruggie Wealth Management is ranked below other advisors).  The rankings may not be representative of any one client’s experience because of the way in which it is calculated. The rankings are independently granted. Inclusion on the FA Top RIAs is absolutely not indicative of Ruggie Wealth Management’s future performance, or any future performance pertaining to its clients’ investments; should not be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that they will experience a certain level of results if Ruggie Wealth Management is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services; and should not be construed as a current or past endorsement of Ruggie Wealth Management by any of its clients.

 FA Magazine does not require membership or payment in order for award participants and/or applicants to be considered for an award designation. Moreover, neither Ruggie Wealth Management nor any other participating advisors paid a fee to be eligible for the “Top RIAs.”