RIAs Are Getting Paid for Growth, Not Just AUM

Record RIA deal volumes are changing how buyers structure transactions and what they’re really paying for. Instead of valuing firms solely on today’s assets, more acquirers are tying a bigger share of purchase price to post‑sale performance, effectively betting on an advisor’s ability to keep growing after the ink dries.  

As Greg Bogich, CEO of AcquireUp, puts it, “Growth isn’t luck, it’s learned.” Firms that can demonstrate predictable new‑client pipelines, whether through educational events, targeted marketing or disciplined data tracking, are commanding stronger, more growth‑weighted earnouts as competition for high‑quality RIAs intensifies. 

CM: What are the key behaviors or systems that separate consistently growing RIAs from the rest? 

GB: The firms that I see are growing consistently are the ones who aren’t guessing. They’re intentional about growth. It all starts with mindset. The best RIAs decide their growth businesses, not lifestyle practices. They also realize that mindset alone doesn’t scale, systems do. They know who they are and what they stand for, they also know who they want for customers, and how to identify, qualify, and close them. 

These firms are the exception. Most practices treat new asset growth like a series of one-off activities, whereas the top firms turn it into a system. It’s a little like the difference between a factory and a farm. Farms are seasonal and can be very unpredictable. Factories are engineered for output. No one running an advisory firm wakes up wanting to think of themselves as a factory foreman, but the discipline is very similar. 

CM: How have earnout structures for RIA deals evolved over the last few years, and what does “growth‑weighted” practically look like today? 

GB: A few years ago, earnouts were usually tied more to retention…you keep the book of business whole, you get paid. Today, they’re increasingly growth-weighted, which means sellers earn into the full valuation by delivering organic growth post-close. 

That frequently means a portion of the deal is paid at close, with the rest tied to things like net new assets, new client revenue, or organic growth rates over the next 2–3 years. You’ll see buyers underwriting to a baseline and then requiring 4–8% organic growth (which excludes market lift to unlock the full earnout). 

So, a firm might sell for a headline number, but only fully realize it if they hit their growth targets. The underlying idea is simple: the more your growth comes from net new assets (not the market), the more valuable your business is.  

CM: When a buyer underwrites post‑deal growth, what specific metrics or patterns are they scrutinizing beyond basic AUM and revenue? 

GB: They’re looking to buy a business with a reliable growth engine and smart buyers are looking under the hood to see how it actually works. 

What they’re really looking for is repeatability and scalability. Is there a defined system for acquiring clients, or is growth dependent on a few relationships and a strong market? RIAs with a clear, consistent process stand out immediately. 

From there, they’re evaluating the components of that engine: 

• Source of growth – organic vs. market-driven  

• Conversion rates – how efficiently prospects turn into clients  

• Client economics – what it costs to acquire a client vs. what they’re worth 

• Concentration risk – how much depends on one advisor  

I think of it like this: anyone can point to speed on the speedometer (AUM growth), but buyers want to understand the horsepower, the transmission, fuel efficiency, etc. The firms that command premium valuations aren’t just growing; they can explain exactly how and why it’s happening and do it again on demand. 

CM: What are the most effective channels you’re seeing RIAs use to build repeatable new‑client pipelines—seminars, centers of influence, digital, something else? 

GB: I’ll fully admit I’m biased here, but the results back it up. 

The most effective channel for building a repeatable new-client pipeline (and new asset growth) are seminars and workshops. When done right, they’re the only way I know of where advisors can consistently control the inputs and the outputs.  Now that doesn’t mean they’re easy, but that’s why AcquireUp exists to help advisors turn the practice of conducting seminars into a science.  

Most other channels come with significant tradeoffs. Custodial leads can get expensive quickly. Lead-buying platforms can feel like a jump ball where speed matters more than value. And referrals or COIs, while valuable, are often more about hope than control.  

There are other ways to grow, but very few that are repeatable, scalable, measurable, and deliver a demonstrable ROI. That’s why seminars and workshops continue to stand out. 

CM: As competition for quality RIAs heats up, how are buyers differentiating themselves for sellers with strong growth stories? 

GB: The obvious answer is that purchase price always matters. Firms with strong growth stories are commanding premium valuations, and buyers know they need to be competitive on multiple to even get a seat at the table. 

But once you get past the headline number, differentiation really comes down to alignment. 

Related to price, we’re seeing more thoughtful use of earnouts, equity rollovers, and incentive plans that give sellers real participation in the upside they help create.  In many instances the buyer isn’t buying their past, they’re investing in their future, and they want the business they’re acquiring to be a part of that ride.    

Culture and operating model matter…a lot. Sellers want to know they won’t be buried in bureaucracy or forced to abandon everything that made them successful in the first place. The best buyers understand something simple: they’re acquiring a growth engine. The last thing they want to do is break it. So price gets you in the door, but alignment and trust are what frequently get deals done. 

CM: What are some of the biggest mistakes advisors make when trying to position their firm for a sale? 

GB: The biggest mistake I see is advisors confusing activity or market lift with real growth. A rising market can make almost any firm look good, same goes for growth through acquisition, but those aren’t the same as organic growth. The mistake is that many sellers don’t fully appreciate that distinction, which can inflate their expectations and lead them to anchor to “headline multiples” that don’t reflect how buyers actually value their business. 

The second mistake is not having a clear, reliable growth engine. Many firms can’t clearly explain where their next client is coming from or how they will consistently generate new business. That makes underwriting future growth difficult. At the end of the day, buyers don’t pay for what happened. They pay for what they believe will happen next. 

CM: For advisors thinking about a sale in the next 2–3 years, what steps should they take today to strengthen their growth story?  

GB: If you’re thinking about a sale in the next 2–3 years, the best advice I can give is simple: start operating like you’re already owned by private equity. 

That mindset changes everything. It forces you to think in terms of accountability, repeatability, and value creation, not activity. When you do that, a few things naturally follow. You build a real growth engine – not one-off tactics, but a repeatable system for generating new clients and assets. And you start to track it rigorously: pipeline, conversion rates, CAC, and exactly what’s driving growth. 

Even if you don’t sell to private equity, you’ll still end up with a better business. One that’s more valuable, more scalable, and better run. The firms that get premium valuations aren’t scrambling to tell a growth story. They’ve been living it, measuring it, and refining it.