DealHub vs Salesforce CPQ for RIA Fee Schedules

Say a typical tiered schedule charges 1% on the first $1 million, 0.75% on the next $2 million, and 0.5% above that, a blended rate rather than a single flat percentage. DealHub's tiered pricing configuration can calculate a blended rate across breakpoints and show the client the effective all-in percentage, not just the top-line tier. Salesforce CPQ supports tiered and volume pricing through its price rule and block-pricing features, which map reasonably well onto breakpoint fee schedules once an admin has built the specific tier structure a firm actually uses.

When a client has an individual account, a joint account, and a trust, most RIAs combine those assets for breakpoint purposes rather than pricing each account separately, since combining them usually gets the client into a lower blended rate faster. DealHub can link multiple account records to one household quote so the breakpoint calculation reflects total household assets. Salesforce CPQ can do this too, but it depends on how account hierarchy is modeled in the underlying CRM data; if individual, joint, and trust accounts aren't already linked as related records, the householding calculation won't happen automatically.

A fee schedule shown to a prospective client should be consistent with the fees described in the firm's Form ADV Part 2A, since a mismatch is a compliance finding waiting to happen, not just a client-relations problem. Neither DealHub nor Salesforce CPQ knows what's in your ADV; that alignment is maintained by whoever owns compliance, typically by locking the fee-schedule template so reps can't edit the actual rate tiers, only apply the discounts the firm has pre-approved. Both tools support locking specific fields while leaving others editable, and that's the configuration worth getting right before any rep quotes a prospective client.

Keep the fee schedule consistent with the disclosure using these controls:

• Lock the fee-tier structure in the quote template so reps cannot edit the tiers themselves.
• Give reps control only over which pre-approved discount, if any, applies to a given household.
• Have whoever owns compliance compare the template against the fee description in Form ADV Part 2A whenever either one changes.
• Set a defined ceiling on discretionary discounts and route anything beyond it through approval.

Firms often allow a modest discount off the standard AUM schedule for a large account, a referral relationship, or an employee of an existing institutional client, and that discretion needs a defined ceiling so it stays a controlled exception rather than an informal negotiation that varies advisor to advisor. DealHub's approval routing can cap how far an advisor can discount before a compliance or supervisory review is triggered, keeping every exception documented. Salesforce CPQ's discount-approval chains work the same way once the threshold is configured; the risk in either tool is a firm never actually setting that ceiling and simply trusting advisors to use judgment, which is exactly the kind of inconsistency an examiner looks for during a routine audit.

Many RIAs now offer flat-fee financial planning as a standalone service or bundled with AUM management for clients below the asset minimum for full management. DealHub can quote a flat planning fee and an AUM-based line on the same proposal, showing a prospective client both options side by side. Salesforce CPQ handles the flat planning fee easily as a one-time or subscription product; the more relevant question for either tool is whether it can clearly show a client the difference between a one-time planning engagement and an ongoing management relationship without conflating the two into one number.

Say a household has $900,000 in an individual account and $250,000 in a trust account, combining to $1.15 million, just past the $1 million breakpoint where the rate drops from 1% to a blended rate incorporating the 0.75% second tier. Quoted separately, the individual account alone would stay at the higher single-account tier and the client would never see the benefit their combined assets actually qualify for. In this example, a household-aware quote shows the blended effective rate, just under 0.95%, and the dollar amount that saves the client compared with per-account pricing, which is often the single clearest way to demonstrate the value of consolidating assets with the firm rather than leaving accounts scattered elsewhere.