r/Lethbridge • u/chrism1919 • 13h ago
Question How is this company WORLD FINANCIAL GROUP WFG becoming so big in Lethbridge
How is World Financial Group having offices pop up across Lethbridge
HOW IS THIS COMPANY CONTINUING TO FIND MORE VICTIMS AND GROWING SO RAPIDILY.
Unfortunately, I was misled by them and suffered financial losses after investing in their mutual funds and purchasing insurance through them. WFG is a Multi-Level Marketing (MLM) company that operates under the names World Financial Group and World System Builder, although they deny being an MLM.
World Financial Group leadership are snake oil salesmen who recruit and train people to be con artists, ripping off their friends and family. The leadership includes Carl Meldrom and STEVE HOLBROOK who has become a social media star on tik tok and instagram, Bert Bruneau, Kevin Yuen, Steve Holbrook, Real Michaud, Cameron Michaud, Corey Michaud, Kevin Joly, Derrick Germain, Camron Dunbar, Marlise Kelsy, and Brian Kalyn.
The first issue is exposing how bad WFG investments are. The MER is always over 2% and usually involves segregated funds since regulators have cracked down with some soft regulations, but much more needs to be done to prevent consumer rip-offs. Ask a WFG agent or, if you're a client, ask your WFG advisor the following question that will make WFG leadership like Steve Holbrook uncomfortable:
Name a segregated fund or mutual fund (i.e., your "professional money managers") that outperforms any of the following ETFs in an apples-to-apples comparison. What WFG leadership loves to do is teach their agents to lie and mislead, using apples-to-oranges comparisons.
Ask them what type of setup you have: if the segregated or mutual fund you're invested in is 60/40 equity to bond or 80/20 equity to bond. If you have multiple funds, compare each one to the following ETFs to see how badly they perform and what a rip-off World Financial Group is. Ask a WFG agent to provide one fund in an apples-to-apples comparison that beats any of these ETFs, which anyone with $2 can invest in through multiple apps:
if its american equity fund then compare it to the XUU Ishares etf
its canadian equity fund then compare it to XIU Ishares ETF
https://www.blackrock.com/ca/investors/en/products/239832/ishares-sptsx-60-index-etf
if its a Tech fund with nasdaq stocks then compare to XQQ Ishares
if its a balanced fund compare to a 60/40 etf XBAL IShares
if its a growth fund 75/25 to 80/20 to XGRO ETF Ishares
if its a healthcare fund compare to healthcare ETF XHC Ishares
if its a growth fund 100% global equity then compare to XWD Ishares fund
https://www.blackrock.com/ca/investors/en/products/239697/ishares-msci-world-index-et
for any other funds they have, do a apples to apples comparison between the fund and a ishares etf
for any other funds they have, do a apples to
apples comparison between the fund and a ishares etf
You can look up the ETFs or WFG’s segregated or mutual funds on www.morningstar.ca and do a comparison.
HERE IS THE SAD PART: THESE ARE THE ETFs THAT WFG LEADERSHIP INVESTS IN, but they sell BS segregated and mutual funds like Yorkville YAM100 Yorkville Enhanced Protection Class. You really have to go through these funds to see how high the MER is and how poorly they perform in both up and down markets. This fund invests in North American equity, but you could invest in XUU ETF and XIU. In an apples-to-apples comparison, the XUU and XIU ETFs from iShares completely humiliate Yorkville in both up and down markets: https://www.yorkvilleasset.com/en/investments-and-funds/yorkville-enhanced-protection-class/YEPCA/performance
The stupid marketing WFG uses when people bring up ETFs is to claim their "professional money managers" who manage the mutual funds and segregated funds they sell provide downside protection in a down market, and they lie that ETFs don’t. Yet, study after study shows that a passive ETF strategy outperforms active investment strategies of mutual funds and segregated funds in both down and up markets. Ask the WFG agent this question to make them uncomfortable: How can these funds protect you from downside risk better than a passive ETF strategy? The only way they could do so is by predicting the market—which they can't. If they could, they would outperform passive ETF investments. Even Warren Buffett has said that any fund manager who claims they can predict the market and protect you in the short term is essentially full of BS, trying to sell you their funds.
Compare any fund WFG sells to an iShares counterpart ETF in an apples-to-apples comparison, and you will see how badly WFG rips people off and how poor their products are
WFG agents often claim that professional money managers associated with their mutual and segregated funds offer better downside protection in volatile markets, a statement that does not hold up under scrutiny. Study after study demonstrates that passive ETF strategies consistently outperform actively managed mutual funds in both upside and downside markets. To challenge WFG's narrative, ask: How can these funds protect against downside better than a passive ETF strategy? The only conceivable answer involves predicting the market—a skill no manager has reliably demonstrated. Even Warren Buffett has dismissed such claims, stating that fund managers claiming to predict markets are typically engaging in baseless sales tactics.
WFG promotes segregated funds by emphasizing their insurance component, which guarantees 75-100% of the original investment to beneficiaries if the holder passes away while the market is down. However, the cost of this insurance feature—embedded in the high MER—makes it an inefficient choice for most investors.
Example: A 30-year-old woman investing $100,000 in a segregated fund might pay an MER of at least 2%, compared to 0.20-0.60% for an ETF. Over time, these costs compound significantly. For insurance coverage, she could instead purchase a term life insurance policy for $300 annually, providing $500,000 in coverage and saving $700 per year compared to the segregated fund. This approach offers superior financial outcomes for both her and her family while delivering better returns from ETF investments.
Unless someone is uninsurable and deeply concerned about bypassing probate, segregated funds are a financial drain compared to combining ETFs with term life insurance.
PROBLEMETIC NATURE OF THE MOST FAMOUS WFG LEADER IN CANADA AND SOCIAL MEDIA
Steve Holbrook’s leadership exemplifies the
problematic nature of WFG’s multi-level marketing (MLM) model. His downline—trained to focus on recruiting others and selling the “business opportunity” rather than the actual financial products—perpetuates a cycle of misinformation. The promise of “financial freedom” through recruitment masks the poor quality and high costs of WFG’s products.
Holbrook’s claims about WFG’s partnerships are also misleading. Contrary to his statements, every Managing General Agency (MGA) outside the MLM structure has access to the same product providers as WFG but even more products and far more partnerships then WFG. Additionally, WFG’s leadership has been known to prioritize IA and Equitable Life and Yorkville Mutual fund and Segregated fund and Universal Life products due to incentives like luxury trips—a glaring conflict of interest that undermines their claim to act in clients’ best interests.
WFG avoids terms like “mutual funds” and “segregated funds,” instead using “professional money managers” to imply exclusivity. This rhetoric creates the illusion that clients are accessing elite investment opportunities, when in reality they are purchasing underperforming mutual funds and segregated funds with excessive fees.
WFG’s sales pitch—claiming to bypass “middlemen” like banks and directly connect clients to professional managers—is inherently contradictory. WFG itself is a middleman, and the products it offers come with multiple layers of fees.
If you really want to make WFG agents and leadership scared and run away to hide, ask them to provide a universal life policy that WFG has access to that has at least outperformed 4% over a 20-year period. They’ve been selling universal life policies since the late '90s, and the first customers of WFG who purchased these policies can’t really use them for retirement. That tax-free access WFG promotes? Guess what they don’t tell you: the borrowing cost of borrowing against your universal life policy, where the UL is the collateral, is between 12% to 20%.
The average growth for these policies is 4% to 5% over a long period, like 20 years, where you factor in bull markets and bear markets. Once you borrow up to 50% against the UL, you’re forced to move your investments into money markets and can’t borrow any more. Meanwhile, the debt against the policy grows at 12% to 20% while you’re getting less than 1% return, causing the policies to completely collapse.
Also, ask them to compare any universal life investment with an ETF in an apples-to-apples comparison. The investment performance of WFG products, like their universal life investments, is even worse because of the hidden fees. If you really want to make a WFG agent run scared, have them do a comparison of buying term and investing the difference in an ETF within your TFSA versus universal life.
TO CLARIFY WHAT I AM SAYING ABOUT WFG SEGREGATED FUNDS
Segregated funds charge 10 times as much for the insurance component. The selling point of segregated funds is that if you die and the market is down, your beneficiaries will receive 75% to 100% of the original investment. Here is a common-sense strategy: simply buy a term insurance policy. For example, a 30-year-old woman can invest $100,000 in a segregated fund instead of an ETF, which charges a lower MER and performs better in both up and down markets. She may choose the segregated fund for the insurance protection so that if she passes away while the market is down, her family receives the original principal.
Here’s the problem: if she is insurable, this is a poor strategy. The segregated fund will cost at least a 2% MER, compared to an ETF with an MER of 0.20% to 0.60%. Let’s be ultra-conservative and assume she pays only 1% MER for the segregated fund’s insurance protection. She would be paying $1,000 annually, and this cost increases each year on a $100,000 investment. In contrast, she could get a 20-year term insurance policy for $500,000 at just $300 annually, saving $700 per year on insurance alone while receiving five times the coverage.
This approach completely outperforms the segregated fund in terms of performance over 5, 10, 15, 20, or 30 years, offering better upside gains and downside protection. Segregated funds are essentially a scam unless you are uninsurable and concerned about your family receiving your investments if you pass away, while also wanting to bypass probate. Otherwise, the common-sense approach is to buy term insurance. You get five times as much coverage for one-third of the cost and still bypass probate
