Assets Under Management Fee
Legacy context
The preserved pages of Olympus Financial Advisors survive as an archive of a former investment adviser that no longer operates or accepts clients here. Its old site included calculators such as Cash Flow Analysis and an Additional Wealth eValuator, alongside keywords like fee-based planning, asset allocation, and estate planning. Those tools were educational illustrations, not offers of service. The firm’s historical materials also referenced SEC registration and Form ADV, which described the adviser’s status at the time rather than any current registration. That archive leads naturally to the phrase “assets under management fee.” In advisory practice, AUM fees are typically calculated as a percentage of the market value of assets a firm manages for a client. The percentage may vary by account size, asset type, or service level, and the fee is usually billed periodically—monthly or quarterly—based on the account’s value at that time. Because AUM fees rise and fall with asset values, they differ from flat or hourly charges. Historical filings and disclosures once explained how such fees were structured, but those documents belong to the former firm and should not be read as current terms. PLAIN TEXT ARCHIVE NOTE — OLYMPUS FINANCIAL ADVISORS Legacy host: olympusfinancialadvisors.com Query focus: assets under management fee
Purpose and limits of this note
This note is prepared for readers who are checking the preserved public pages of a former firm's website. It is an archival finding aid, not advice, not an offer, and not a statement of any current registration or service. Nothing here should be read as a recommendation to [omitted], to hire any person, or to rely on any figure as current. Where the preserved excerpts do not address a point, this note says so plainly rather than filling the gap.
What the phrase means in general archival terms
In the ordinary language of the advisory business, an "assets under management fee" is a charge computed as a percentage of the value of assets a firm manages for a client. The percentage is typically applied on a schedule, and the resulting dollar amount is billed periodically. The phrase is a pricing concept, not a promise of results. In an archive, the phrase matters because it tells a reader what kind of pricing model a firm publicly described, and whether the preserved pages actually disclose a rate, a schedule, or a billing method.
What the preserved pages show
The preserved excerpts are largely page headers, titles, and keyword metadata rather than full body text. The keyword metadata on the cash flow analysis page includes the terms "fee based planning," "fee-based planning," and "fee based planning scottsdale" [1]. The same page's keyword list also includes "financial advisor scottsdale," "financial advisor phoenix," and "financial advisor paradise valley," among other location and service terms [1]. A second preserved page carries a similar keyword set, again including "fee based planning" and "fee-based planning" [2]. Those keyword strings are the closest the preserved excerpts come to the subject of fees. They indicate that the site's own metadata used fee-based planning language. They do not state a rate, a percentage, a breakpoint schedule, a billing frequency, or a [omitted] size. The calculators page is preserved only as a title and head markup, showing the page title "Olympus Financial Advisors : Calculators" [4]. The cash flow analysis page appears twice in the preserved set, once under a calculator title [1] and once under a content identifier with the same calculator title [3]. Neither excerpt includes the calculator's body text, inputs, or outputs. The affiliates page is preserved as a title, "Affiliated Offices - Olympus Financial Advisors" [5]. The associates page is preserved as a title, "Associates - Olympus Financial Advisors" [6]. Neither excerpt contains fee language.
What the preserved pages do not show
On the specific question of an assets under management fee, the preserved excerpts are silent. There is no disclosed percentage, no tiered schedule, no stated billing cycle, and no stated method of calculating the fee base. There is no statement of whether any fee would be charged in advance or in arrears. There is no statement of whether fees would be deducted from the account or billed separately. The preserved excerpts also do not state any dollar amount of assets under management. No client counts appear. No performance figures appear. No account minimums appear. No advisory agreement terms appear. Readers should treat all of those as absent from the record rather than as zero or as implied. The preserved excerpts likewise do not identify a custodian, a clearing arrangement, or a specific fee schedule document. If such a document existed on the site, it is not among the excerpts provided here.
How to read the fee-based language that does appear
The appearance of "fee based planning" and "fee-based planning" in keyword metadata [1][2] is a signal about the vocabulary the site used, not a disclosure of terms. Keyword metadata is written for search indexing. It is not a fee schedule and it is not a client agreement. A reader who wants to know what a firm actually charged would ordinarily look for a Form ADV brochure, a written fee schedule, or a client agreement. None of those documents appear in the preserved excerpts. It is also worth noting that "fee-based" and "fee-only" are not the same phrase, and the preserved excerpts do not resolve which, if either, the firm used in its body text. The metadata shows the hyphenated and unhyphenated forms of "fee based planning" [1][2]. That is all the record shows on this point.
Other preserved page titles and what they suggest
The presence of a calculators section [4] and a cash flow analysis calculator [1][3] suggests the site offered self-directed planning tools. A cash flow analysis tool typically asks a user to enter income and expense figures to project surplus or shortfall. That is a general description of the tool type, not a statement about this firm's version of it, because the preserved excerpts do not include the tool's body content. The presence of an affiliated offices page [5] and an associates page [6] suggests the site described a network of offices and personnel. The excerpts do not state how many offices or how many associates, and this note does not supply a number.
Practical guidance for archive readers
If you are checking this former firm's public archive for fee information, the honest finding is that the preserved excerpts do not answer the question. The record shows fee-based planning vocabulary in metadata [1][2] and shows that the site had a calculators section [4], a cash flow analysis page [1][3], an affiliated offices page [5], and an associates page [6]. The record does not show a rate, a schedule, a billing method, an asset total, or a client count. Readers who need fee terms for any advisory relationship should obtain them from the firm's own current written disclosures, not from a preserved marketing page. For a former firm, the appropriate archival conclusion is simply that the preserved pages are silent on the specific assets under management fee question, and that no inference about rates or asset totals should be drawn from the absence.
Summary of citations used
Fee-based planning vocabulary in metadata: [1], [2]. Cash flow analysis calculator page: [1], [3]. Calculators section: [4]. Affiliated offices page: [5]. Associates page: [6]. All other points above are either general explanation or explicit statements that the preserved record is silent.
This page is an archival note for informational purposes only. It does not offer representation, evaluate claims, or create a professional relationship.