It seems as if the wirehouse channel has been under siege these last few years. The Wall Street scandals, the market freefall, the loss of client wealth, and the massive mergers among the firms-all have contributed to advisors in the traditional, large-firm channel rushing to the independent world, say some experts.

But what writer Lauren Barack found in this month's cover story "Beating Back the Independents," on page 22 is that this tale is still developing. As the saying goes: "It ain't over till the fat lady sings." And, clearly, the fat lady has not sung. Yes, there are those advisors who are leaving but there are so many others that are staying put or, at least, leaving one wirehouse for another. Barack gives us insight into what the wirehouse behemoths are doing to keep their advisors happy, attract others and, in turn, maintain the bulk of high-net-worth client assets.

What the story shows is that wirehouses can no longer scoff at the other channels that covet their star performers and their customers. Consider the estimates of consulting and research firm, Cerulli Associates. It says that approximately 44% of financial advisors were considered independent in 2009, compared to 41% in 2005. That's only three more percentage points in four years. But, Cerulli doesn't stop there. It also predicts that in just two years, 50% of financial advisors will be independent.

There are reasons for that growth beyond the damage recently done to the reputations of the big firms. The independents and registered investment advisory firms have been improving their offerings to advisors in the last decade-whether it's better technology or greater compliance assistance. No matter what the reason, the competition for the best and the brightest advisors is real.

The top management at Morgan Stanley Smith Barney, Bank of America's Merrill Lynch, UBS and Wells Fargo realizes that their rivals extend beyond their own quartet. LPL, which just filed to go public, is the fifth-largest brokerage firm and it's an independent. What could more of a warning shot across the bow than when a competitor the size of LPL boasts in its initial public offering: "With our focus and scale, we are not only a beneficiary of the secular shift among advisors toward independence, but an active catalyst of this trend." The wirehouses can take comfort in one aspect of the filing. LPL specified that it is focused on helping its advisors serve the market for independent advice, "particularly in the mass affluent market."

Retaining the ideal advisors and the client assets that they manage brings me to the fiduciary standard debate and the results of a survey conducted by Chicago-based Envestnet Inc. In "By the Rules" on page 14, I discuss just how little both advisors and investors understand the different standards for the various advisors. Envestnet, a provider of technology-enabled, Web-based investment solutions and services to financial advisors, found some surprising answers in its survey.

Too many wirehouse reps thought all advisors were subject to the same obligation to act in their clients' best interests. And a mere 12% of those wirehouse advisors surveyed said they were "very familiar" with the controversy surrounding the fiduciary standard. Among other findings that were surprising, advisors thought they did a good job in disclosing how they were paid. Clients didn't see that one quite the same way.

By the way, when investors were asked which professionals they trusted the most to act in their self-interest, doctors grabbed the top spot, followed by accountants. Financial advisors came in third. But there was this bit of good news: Advisors beat out lawyers and car salesmen.

Talk to us: send us an email here.