Edward Jones Segment/Production Levels
I have been reading these forums for quite some time and always find them interesting. I have seen various postings that mention Edward Jones “segments” with regard to production. Would one of the veterans from Edward Jones mind offering some details about these?
Also, as relates to this, how do these segments match up (roughly) to years of service with the firm? For instance, if someone has been at the firm for 1 year, 3 years, 5 years, etc. you might expect them to be performing at segment X if they are "on track/doing well". Thanks in advance!Seg 0- new in production. Pre PDP
Seg 1-After PDP-$8,000 rolling 4 month average Seg 2-$8,000-15,000 rolling 4 month average Seg3-$15,000-24,000 rolling 4 month average Seg4-$24000-45,000 rolling 4 month average Seg 5-$45,000 +Close, but no cigar.
You are correct up to Seg 3. The hurdles to jump segment are $8K, $15K, $27K, and $40K. You start in Seg 1, and progress from there. You also don't go backwards if you fall from say a $20K 4 month average to a $12K 4 month average. As far as averages go, maybe 12 months for in Seg 1, 18 months in Seg 2. Seg 3 is a pretty substantial jump, so you could be there for a few years. Some FAs never make it to Seg 5.Wow. I'm a dummy. Haven't looked at those requirements in a long long time.
Now isn’t it if you hit a segment you never go down? So lets say you’re doing $20,000 per month and you pop two $750k VAs at 5.5% GDC you are now a Seg 5 for as long as you’re with Jones even as you roll along doing $20,000 per month.
You never lose segments but you must go through them all. So you can’t skip segments, must be in each one for a minimum of 4 months(I think)… But there are production requirements regardless of segment based on 4 month rolling average and time with Jones
Thanks everyone for contributing to this discussion, this was VERY helpful!
As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
You have a low goal if you start from scratch. If you accept a Goodknight which are assets given to you then you have higher goals you must hit, usually by churning the assets you were given in addition to doing the doorknocking that all new reps must do.As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
I am somewhat familiar witht he Goodknight program from having read posts and can understand how/why goals would be different but can you or someone else, speak to specific goals or quotas both for those just starting out, as well as those who have maybe reached a higher level like segment 2/3?
I read a posting on here (don't recall by who) and they remarked they had been with Jones and missed quota one time by $500 and were fired. I doubt this was true but it did make me wonder how strict their goals/quoats are and what steps they take to assist those who are struggling?Couple things have changed recently … you can fall backwards, first of all, from what I understand.
And your goals are individualized; my goal and yours can be completely different based on whether or not I have a GK, or a Legacy, a new-new, whatever. I wouldn't put a lot of emphasis on any of those numbers. They really don't mean crap. Fail to hit your numbers, yes, you are put on "goals" for a time. Consistently fail? Bring your laptop. The RL wants to see you.Ok- i can certain understand that and I think the idea of individualized goals is a great idea so that they can be specific to the situation as you said - new/new, GK, etc. However, that being said, could someone give me some general sense of what these might be? For instance, in the first 6 months/year, what might a “general” goal for production/new AUM be? I understand that if someone is a GK/legacy, etc. they will begin with a set AUM, but what might someone be expected to add to this? What sort of production expectations might a new/new have for their first year?
I am just trying to get a general sense of what is expected as that has been rather hard to come by. I think anyone starting out would want to work hard and strive to outperform any given goal but I am curious what those goals might be and also, from those with experience, are they generally realistic goals? Also, I read someplace (here perhaps, a survey, not sure) that the "average" Jones FA has production of roughly $256K gross per year on an asset base of (on average) $44M and that the "average" Jones account is roughly $90-$100K. Do those figures meet with what the expereiced Jones FA's on here have/are seeing from others?A general sense is what you’ve actually been told, over and over again.
25 serious contacts per day, 125 per week, 500 per month.
Does that seem harsh? Look, I’m not doing terribly. Not a superstar, but alright. My “average” household is $50K and judging by other people that’s about right. But the top 20 people: about $450000.
IF you produced 20K per month, you’d be a seg 3 guy. Unless you are the most motivated seller around, you won’t hit that until 2013 or even 2014. Don’t worry about those numbers, they’ll take care of themselves.
Thanks for your reply. It was not “harsh” just still a a little vague for me.
I am not with Jones, just on the outside looking in, trying to understand it a little better. I am in Sales and have been in sales/sales management for years. I guess coming from a different industry, I just don't quite understand how the sales process in this area is managed. Hence my trying to understand the "quota" for a rookie, vet, etc. To give you an example, this year I will do just over $6M in sales. I knew starting the year that my quota was $4.5M. I understood what my commission rate would be at 100% of quota and what my accelerators would be if I exceeded my quota. I guess I also knew (or had a good sense) of how far "below" this assigned quota I could go and not be asked to leave. That is just what I was looking for in this post. I thought in an industry driven by figures, it might be easy to say that for a new/new, the quota is $50K gross for the first year, for instance. I really don't know, just tossing out a number and I was hoping that a veteran might be able to give me some sense of this. Thanks again for the insights that you have shared everyone. If any of you can offer anything more specific, I would appreciate it.Everybody is different, so set your own goals.
Really, the first goal is to simply survive long enough to figure out what works and what you want to do.
Remember that even if you work for Edward Jones you are your own boss. If you do well, you can write your own ticket and set your owns goals, wherever you are.
The stats on the website are horsesh!t. Here's why: included in those numbers are: newbies, transfer brokers - whether you brought over $5mm or $50mm, new FA's taking over offices - big, small, and in-between, FA's getting Goodknights - big, small, and in-between. So the numbers may be technically accurate, but it's completely distorted based on HOW you get into the business. There is a HUGE difference between a newbie and being a transfer broker bringing over $40mm from ML and taking over an existing office.As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
The stats on the website are horsesh!t. Here's why: included in those numbers are: newbies, transfer brokers - whether you brought over $5mm or $50mm, new FA's taking over offices - big, small, and in-between, FA's getting Goodknights - big, small, and in-between. So the numbers may be technically accurate, but it's completely distorted based on HOW you get into the business. There is a HUGE difference between a newbie and being a transfer broker bringing over $40mm from ML and taking over an existing office.[/quote] Agreed. I think a lot of those numbers posted are recruiting propoganda. I would guess that most of the people in their first 2-3 years would be excited to breach the $120k mark in production if they haven't had some leg up (assets given, transfer in assets, take over existing branch, etc). Unless you have a large amount in savings, have one of those legs up, or are in the top 5% of new producers, be prepared to starve for a few years.[quote=Curious1]As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
You have a low goal if you start from scratch. If you accept a Goodknight which are assets given to you then you have higher goals you must hit, usually by churning the assets you were given in addition to doing the doorknocking that all new reps must do. [/quote] It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN. The churning the assets comment was a bit harsh. I won't go into the inner workings of the GKN compensation plan right now, but all of the GKNs that I know of, when looking back at it, would just as soon have started new/new or taken over an existing office. They said the GKN assets weren't enough to really do much more than give them warm bodies to talk to.[quote=Curious1]As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
[quote=LockEDJ] Couple things have changed recently … you can fall backwards, first of all, from what I understand.
[/quote]
You cannot fall backwards LockEDJ. That still has not changed, or we would have 1/2 of our firm in Segment 1.
[quote=LockEDJ]Couple things have changed recently … you can fall backwards, first of all, from what I understand.
And your goals are individualized; my goal and yours can be completely different based on whether or not I have a GK, or a Legacy, a new-new, whatever. I wouldn't put a lot of emphasis on any of those numbers. They really don't mean crap. Fail to hit your numbers, yes, you are put on "goals" for a time. Consistently fail? Bring your laptop. The RL wants to see you.[/quote] Nothing has changed. You can't fall back segments. Not that it matters at all. Going from one segment to another doesn't change anything except what meetings you go to and what group of people at the home office tracks you.Actually, they ARE ironing out the details of how to make the segments “fluid”, or basically set you back to previous segments if you aren’t performing within your segment. That’s a fact, not speculation. There is a serious problem in the segment 3 area (and segment 4’s performing seg 3 numbers), and too many people have become complacent doing 10-15K per month. Yes, they may “technically” be profitable, but doing 5K annually in profit basically contributes nothing to the bottom line, and there are vast areas where you could have much better performing FA’s replace “warm bodies”.
You have a low goal if you start from scratch. If you accept a Goodknight which are assets given to you then you have higher goals you must hit, usually by churning the assets you were given in addition to doing the doorknocking that all new reps must do. [/quote] It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN. The churning the assets comment was a bit harsh. I won't go into the inner workings of the GKN compensation plan right now, but all of the GKNs that I know of, when looking back at it, would just as soon have started new/new or taken over an existing office. They said the GKN assets weren't enough to really do much more than give them warm bodies to talk to. [/quote] Just some perspective - I got a small Goodknight ($5mm), which basically translated into 3 accounts adding up to $4.5mm (of all-stock). I have made very little off those accounts. I probably have 5-10 Goodknight accounts left (out of maybe 150). I have closed most of them (about 25-50 near-zero balances, and then another huge chunk had a few hundred to a few thousand). I did make a handful of them "real" clients, so it has been nice. However, my standards are pretty high. I looked back at month 36, and my "Meeting" expectations number was about $19K per month. My "minimum" was about $12K. So not HUGE numbers, but those aren't nothing. And in a commission world (they didn't have Advisory my first 2.5 years), nearly all of that is NEW business each month. Doing 12-19K in NEW business per month is not easy. My strategy is to start wrapping a lot of business, and I have at least $5mm in assets identified to do that. But even that only translates into maybe $5500/mo.[quote=BerkshireBull][quote=Curious1]As a follow-up to this, I am curious about the production figures/income figures from the Career web site for Edward Jones. For those not familiar, they give you an income comparison calculator which is great but… In this this calculator they break the groups into 3 segments. The first is a group going between 50 and 100 % of “goal”. The second group is 100-150% of goal and the third group is made up those doing 200% of goal. First, these are pretty wide bands. Second, they never really state what that “goal” is. Obviously, those doing better have earning that reflect this but i would also think that there is a significan difference between someone doing 50% of goal and someone doing 100% of goal. So my next question is simply- what is “goal” and does this goal evolve with tenure with the firm? I saw earlier someone listed a timeframe when someone might be expected to be in certain segments. How does this relate to any goal/quota you are measured against. Also, how is it handled if you are not meeting that goal? Are you put on any sort of a “action plan” for period of time (for instance another 4 months to reevaluate your rolling average)? Thanks for your insights! I have had these questions for some time now and I really appreciate you guys helping me out!
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
Nothing has changed. [/quote] Wrong. Check your facts then get back to me.I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
[quote=Spaceman Spiff]
It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN.[/quote] When my Goodknight numbers went into effect, exceeding goals jumped 56% in one month. Since that's how you make those $7000 bonuses, I'd say the required production is nothing to sneeze at. I've got no excuses for not making bonuses. But I don't think anyone at Jones really makes that clear to GKNs.[quote=LockEDJ][quote=Spaceman Spiff]
It's not like your goals double when you are a GKN.[/quote] When my Goodknight numbers went into effect, exceeding goals jumped 56% in one month. Since that's how you make those $7000 bonuses, I'd say the required production is nothing to sneeze at. I've got no excuses for not making bonuses. But I don't think anyone at Jones really makes that clear to GKNs. [/quote] Milestone bonuses are in place for new/new and legacy FAs. Not some guy that gets 5/10/25 million handed to them and start churning accounts and calling warm leads. I know they are there but they are really going to stretch you to get them and rightly so. Not saying it's easy for a GK but it's EASIER. You need those bonuses a whole lot less than new/new. With that said, I think there should be different grids and payouts for the first 2 years for both type of produces to make it easier to understand and so new/news don't burn out so easily.Volt-
In theory life should be easier for the GKN but really what you have given the goodknight is 2K a month in gross along with 15 hours in customer service.2k in gross is better than zero, yes? Exisiting clients that have not been touched in years are better than no clients, yes?
I know the grass is greener ... but let's be honest. There are a TON of GK and people that got exisiting offices that would have never made it without the leg up. Cold hard truth and good for them but I'd sure like to hear them stop complaining about being given a 1 to 2 year head start. Question for the GKers - Do they push insurance at your training? I have to think that's a heck of a way to leverage those clients.Oh puhleeze. The net effect of GK’s (for me) was about $12000 in GDC over a year’s span - or $5K in my pocket. I also wound up whiffing on three bonus hits; more than $20K.
You tell me which you’d have rather had.
Spiff, not to burst your bubble, but it IS happening. They are just ironing out the details. They will put some sort of positive spin on it, but it's basically to kick slackers in the a$$. I have had two GP's confirm that it is going to happen before year-end. Weddle is not messing around any more. Not that I blame him. I can't believe we have guys 10 years in the business barely doing 10K per month.I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
That, my friend, is one of the many reasons I moved on. I looked at the rolling averages, and looked at the people who were out many years and doing the same production or a very small percentage more than I was and thought…wtf. Do I want to be doing 250k per year at year 10…NO…But the majority between 10-15 years were doing exactly that. We had, out of 55-60 brokers, 5 who I thought wow…but they started in the early 80’s. All of them moved to offices with assets, 1 moved after failing at two locations, into a 40mil office in 1987.
I have seen a lot of mention on here about GK and about taking over existing offices. I understand from what i have read that requirements are different for a GK. What about when you take over an office with existing assets? Are requirements to acheive bonuses, general production, etc. different since you are starting with a fixed amount of assets?
As a follow-up, for those who have taken over an office, how true are the figures between when they asked you to take over an office and when you got into it? I have read elsewhere that some folks have been told they are taking over offices with $X and when they arrive, half the clients are gone, along with half of the assets. Does that happen often or is assuming an existing office a good way to go if it is offered? Also, what does it take in order to be offered such a set up? Thanks!Just my opinion here - but I think a lot of the low producing vets has to do with the A share culture. Until recently they’ve not been able to annuitize their business at all. Hard to run fast all the time. They just got tired and found a pace and income they could live with.
Worry about the same effect for new guys and until they figure out a way to give additional production credit for advisory solutions its going to be an issue.
I recall reading that Advisory Solution (if I am thinking of the right thing) has a fairly high entry threshold compared to the general Jones account. How is Jones planning to reconcile this so that they can move more clients to this annuitized model- or is that an issue for them? I suppose it is a little more FA by FA specific, but still, it seems like it would be in any FA's best interest to try and move business in that direction. Of course that would require a consentration on higher networth accounts, and that seems a little contrary to the Jones bread and butter. Thoughts?
Spiff, not to burst your bubble, but it IS happening. They are just ironing out the details. They will put some sort of positive spin on it, but it's basically to kick slackers in the a$$. I have had two GP's confirm that it is going to happen before year-end. Weddle is not messing around any more. Not that I blame him. I can't believe we have guys 10 years in the business barely doing 10K per month.[/quote] There's no bubble to burst here. I read the same suggbox wire that you did. I didn't call any GPs to confirm it, but I don't doubt it. Still, I'm not wrong on this one. As of right now, you can't move back a segment. That may change later in the year, or go into effect for next year, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm still right, perhaps only on a technicality, but still...[quote=Spaceman Spiff]I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
Are segments used for any purpose other than to denote production level and the associated trainings/meetings one attends? For instance does someone have to be at Seg 4 to be considered for a limited prtnership?
I believe if hit a certain level of profitiablity, you can get LP at segment 3.
Spiff, not to burst your bubble, but it IS happening. They are just ironing out the details. They will put some sort of positive spin on it, but it's basically to kick slackers in the a$$. I have had two GP's confirm that it is going to happen before year-end. Weddle is not messing around any more. Not that I blame him. I can't believe we have guys 10 years in the business barely doing 10K per month.[/quote] There's no bubble to burst here. I read the same suggbox wire that you did. I didn't call any GPs to confirm it, but I don't doubt it. Still, I'm not wrong on this one. As of right now, you can't move back a segment. That may change later in the year, or go into effect for next year, but it doesn't change the fact that I'm still right, perhaps only on a technicality, but still... [/quote] Yeah, we're splitting hairs. I heard about this weeks before that SuggBox wire came out. I am simply saying it IS going to happen, not that it already has.[quote=B24][quote=Spaceman Spiff]I’m not wrong. You can’t fall backwards in segments. Feel free to PM me with some sort of proof that I’m wrong. The only thing I know about that may come close to saying you’re correct is the Suggbox wire that Weddle responded to that suggested that they’re looking at making some changes. However, at this point, they haven’t implemented those changes.
You MIGHT, and that's a very big might, be able to get enough profitability at the upper ends of seg 3 to qualify for LP. Realistically, probably not. And it would only be possible if your office expenses were extremely low. As far as I know, in my region, the only LPs we have who earned their LP in the field were seg 4 when then got their first offering. However, the LP offering would have nothing to do with your segment and everything to do with your profitability and atta boys from your RL.I believe if hit a certain level of profitiablity, you can get LP at segment 3.
Thanks for the insight into the LP process/factors.
I want to tahank everyone who has responded to my initial post and my various questions!Curious are you in the industry? Or looking at going to EJ?
Hi FA
I am not in the industry but have spent the last few years learning bits and pieces. I even went through the CFP education track (5 classes) to aid me personally and with the hope of one day making a transition into the industry. I am currently in sales/sales management with a tech firm and do pretty well, so this is something I am considering as a second career a little further down the line.Focus more on learning the sales/marketing plan aspect of the business, rather than the “investment” aspect if you are trying to learn. It will pay you FAR more dividends down the road.
Great Advice B24- that’s why I have been reading this forum and submitting some questions. I know sales- but not Financial Sales, this is a whole new beast. So I am open to any advice or ideas the group might have. It’s great to read all of these posts and get a sense for what is working and not working for everyone.
Hello all. Does anyone know what the performance requirements are to earn an office as a newbie?
Source URL:https://www.wealthmanagement.com/forums/rookies-trainees/edward-jones-segmentproduction-levels