It sounds like the original question concerned paid advisory services, but the responses and OP followup seem to be adding sales reps ("local FA") to the mix.
From Schwab:

When we recommend that you buy, sell, or hold securities; pursue a particular investment strategy; or open up a brokerage or IRA account at Schwab, we are acting as a broker-dealer unless otherwise stated at the time of recommendation ...
Schwab can also act as an investment adviser. You will know we are acting as an investment adviser because it is a distinct service that you select, and you will receive a special written disclosure.

While B-D's duties to their customers have been expanded from what they used to be (just "suitability" of investments), these duties are still more limited than what is required of a fiduciary. You may be satisfied with a BD, but you should be aware of the differences.
The industry has done what it can to obfuscate the differences. For example, here's what Fidelity says:

At Fidelity, our representatives are required to provide advice that is in your best interest. This standard of care applies to all accounts and relationships we have with you when we provide advice. Certain regulations specify that the best interest standard is part of a “fiduciary duty.” Other regulations require the best interest standard but do not refer to a fiduciary duty. Fidelity advisors comply with all applicable regulations, including providing advice that is in your best interest.
When providing advisory services, our advisors act in a fiduciary capacity.
When assisting with your brokerage needs, our advisors provide recommendations in your best interest.

That's clear as mud. Here's a page that helps sort out the difference between advisors (fiduciaries) and B-Ds:
https://www.wealthstreamadvisors.com/insights/fiduciary-vs-broker-dealer
Vanguard where your local FA is a "team". Not much experience with FIDO in this regard
If we're talking free services, both Vanguard and Fidelity at best just assign you to a team. They dropped individual contact names from their statements years ago.
If we're talking paid advisory services, Vanguard assigns you an individual adviser at the $500K level.
https://investor.vanguard.com/advice/compare-investment-advice#comparison-chart
Fidelity and Schwab have a wide assortment of paid services and investment offerings. It's easy to confuse the different offerings or miss one type of offering when reading about another.
At the lowest level are robo/hybrid advisors that do not provide customization.
My talks with Fidelity indicated they used many mutual funds in what seems like a computer driven process. Schwab will set up an "Intelligent Portfolio" in the same manner with dozens of ETFs,
Fidelity uses Flex Funds with 0% ER; Schwab doesn't charge anything for its pure robo advisor but makes money off of high allocations to Schwab MMFs.
Moving up the ladder, both companies offer in-house wealth management services (including tax/legacy planning if desired) and referrals to outside RIAs that use the brokerage for holding your managed investments. Services at both firms may build portfolios of individual securities or use funds, or both. The accounts may be discretionary (adviser trades w/o your explicit approval) or non-discretionary. They may be structured as separately managed accounts.
You are looking at an outside wealth management firm, Wealth Enhancement Group, that provides advisory services through its RIAs (Wealth Enhancement Advisory Services?). So it sounds like your question is about this third party and not about Schwab. The brokerage that the firm happens to use (here, Schwab) is likely immaterial. If you're asking about Schwab (and not the RIA), then you might want to also look into the services that Schwab provides.
Here's the disclosure for Schwab's referral service. It describes its referrals thusly:

The Service provides referrals only and terminates once we [Schwab] have referred you to an Advisor. Once a referral has been made, Schwab does not assume any additional duties or obligations to the client from an “investment manager” perspective. ... It is up to you and your Advisor to determine what types of investments are right for you. Any tax, estate planning, accounting, legal or other advice or services other than investment management and any financial planning ... are strictly a matter between you and your Advisor.

https://www.schwab.com/resource/schwab-advisor-network-disclosure-brochure?page=8
Schwab's menu of different advisory services from Intelligent Portfolios (robo advisors) to financial planning:
https://www.schwab.com/transparency/advisory

Catch22, I believe you’re half right regarding FZDXX (FZEXX-muni sister). Yes, you have to purchase like a MF but you do not have to sell to buy. I’ve been using one or both of these MM funds for several years. And never did I have to sell to buy anything. It first checks your core account for sufficient funds, then pulls from FZDXX / FZEXX if necessary.

Certainly can be done, and I'm a fan of doing precisely that. There's a wide variety of items (stocks, CEFs, OEFs, LPs, BDCs, REITs) that throw off distributions, both debt and equity. I have 35% of my portfolio with items targeted purely for growth and the rest is to throw off distributions. One of my regrets is that I should have planted the seeds for those distributions 20 years ago to take advantage of re-investment and the miracle of compounding.

I'm surely glad to have clicked on THIS thread. Thank you, David and David.
Ever since I started out in investing, just beginning my 403b, always self-directed--- I knew I must constantly stay on top of whatever I could get my hands on in terms of information.
THEN, the the job is to draw conclusions which mean something from it all. Yes, I'd bought into the "stocks for the long-run" argument.
But over the years, I saw more and more clearly, that one must be at least a bit fluid and flexible. A refusal to make any changes can indeed spell doom.
Now in retirement, I've got an income stream from both bonds and stocks, but don't need them, so they get reinvested. And EVERYONE'S circumstances are different. Still more stocks than bonds, however. If and when I get into PRCFX from David Giroux, that picture will change over time, but very slowly.

For what interest it holds, I have a phone call coming up with Ms Geritzto talk about what she takes away from this experience and how she's thinking about the firm's next steps.
In some ways it's a classic "not quite enough" story. The performance pattern is exactly what you wanted to see in a risk conscious fund. In years when the market was up (2019, 2020, 2021) this fund generally posted double digit returns. In periods when the market was down this fund generally protected better than its peers.
The exception was the past 12 months when it lagged in both directions.
Since inception the fund has returned 2.5% annually (against 4.7% for its Lipper peer group) but has substantially better standard deviation, downside deviation, down market deviation and Ulcer Index than its peers. But the fund trailed so dramatically in 2019 and 2023 that it became untenable.

So ... the bottom line is that there is no broad advice which can be taken as generally helpful for all time? Uh, okay.
>> Other times stocks will lag bonds, for decades.
When was that, and why was it? The 'decades' part.
I've been studying this site:
https://www.financialsamurai.com/historical-returns-of-different-stock-bond-portfolio-weightings/
As for individual stocks for the long term, which is how I understood the phrase, I came to think over my tech editorial career that tech was moving faster and faster for that to mean much.
I had strongly recommended to me to buy lots of Verizon 35y ago, can't miss, but I had just spent a couple years working at Bell Labs, and was properly wary. My father-in-law long ago worked his entire career at Barnes Group, such a venerable and consistent-dividend outfit that its stock symbol is, yes, B.
If you had held those two for 40+ years you would have done okay, but not like SP500 and with a lot more bumpy drama.

Many government retirement plans offer up to 25% in self directed mutual funds at outside firm such as Fidelity. CA state retirement plans are a mess with agenda that have nothing to do with best risk adjusted return. My wife worked several years for state - I need to move over to something like Fidelity balanced.

To clarify: I was referring to *pensions* that employees only pay into but have no control over how it's invested - those are the places witih the fat allocation to expensive hedge funds/PE black boxes. My state (MD) 403(b) also has the brokerage window where I could dump 0-99% of my 403 now into whatever fund I wanted to offered at TIAA or Fido ... but I'm happy with the one LCV fund I'm in now at TIAA, so I haven't used that.
I could probably buy into one or more 'alternative' type funds that way if I wanted to, but why?

@Tarwheel again I agree completely.
It's also why when I joined my state university system I avoided the pension plan and went for the self-directed 403(b). Many state pensions have huge positions in various (and costly) hedge/PE investments that I want no part of ... plus I don't trust the investing savvy of the political appointees overseeing the pension's investment, many of whom live and die by whatever the Wall Street favorite 'thinking' is at the time regarding allocations.
As I said at the time, if I'm going to lose or make money, I want to be the one responsible for it.
ETA: Somewhat off-topic but IIRC the Nevada State Pension is entirely in Vanguard funds. A WSJ article a few years ago talked about how 'boring' the Pension Chief's job was. :)

Many government retirement plans offer up to 25% in self directed mutual funds at outside firm such as Fidelity. CA state retirement plans are a mess with agenda that have nothing to do with best risk adjusted return. My wife worked several years for state - I need to move over to something like Fidelity balanced.

Yes. I left Matthews after an arrogant prick treated me like dirt on the phone, a handful of years ago. Glad I did.

Do you recall which fund you were invested in at the time?

I had been in MACSX and MAPIX. Then consolidated all into MAPIX.
I was calling---- as were many, many others---- about a missed dividend. Turns out a risky bet went south. The fellow on the phone read a pre-fabricated statement to me about it over the phone. Just a sentence or two.
I said: "Sounds like you're reading from a script to me."
He said: "I AM. I AM reading from a script to you."
I said, "Why would you DO that?" (Why not talk to me like a human being, eh?)
He said: "Listen, this is what was prepared. If you want to redeem your shares and go, you're free to do so!"
...I DID.

PRMTX holds good stocks, but lone manager has been there only four years. Max drawdown -44.69% 2021-22, about same as index

Yes. I left Matthews after an arrogant prick treated me like dirt on the phone, a handful of years ago. Glad I did.

Do you recall which fund you were invested in at the time?

Yes. I left Matthews after an arrogant prick treated me like dirt on the phone, a handful of years ago. Glad I did.

@Tarwheel again I agree completely.
It's also why when I joined my state university system I avoided the pension plan and went for the self-directed 403(b). Many state pensions have huge positions in various (and costly) hedge/PE investments that I want no part of ... plus I don't trust the investing savvy of the political appointees overseeing the pension's investment, many of whom live and die by whatever the Wall Street favorite 'thinking' is at the time regarding allocations.
As I said at the time, if I'm going to lose or make money, I want to be the one responsible for it.
ETA: Somewhat off-topic but IIRC the Nevada State Pension is entirely in Vanguard funds. A WSJ article a few years ago talked about how 'boring' the Pension Chief's job was. :)

@BaluBalu
In addition to RPGAX, TRP uses hedge funds in some of their Spectrum allocation funds, such as TRPBX. In the last two bear markets, TRPBX (which I owned for many years) did not perform any better than most comparable funds. I owned TRPBX for about 20 years, and its performance has steadily declined. I’m not sure exactly when they started using hedge funds, but I think it’s been at least five years and its performance has been below average over that period.
I just checked their website, and TRPBX had about 4% of its holdings in Blackstone hedge fund in 2023, and perhaps others. At times, it’s held as much as 10% in hedge funds, if I recall correctly, or perhaps that’s the amount they limit it too. Anyway, that’s one of the reasons I dropped the fund after many years.
According to the TRP website, RPGAX has about 7.5% in Blackstone and PRSIX about 6%.

"I do not understand the interest in hedge funds. . . . T Rowe Price started allocating about 10% of the holdings in their allocation funds several years ago, and I can discern no improvement in their mediocre returns."
@Tarwheel, could you please share specific TRP allocation fund(s) that invest in Hedge Funds? (I read and re-read your statements several times and am not able to reach a different conclusion.) If you think I misunderstood your statements, please elaborate.

I do not understand the interest in hedge funds. Most of them underperform simple market index funds, and some fail spectacularly. T Rowe Price started allocating about 10% of the holdings in their allocation funds several years ago, and I can discern no improvement in their mediocre returns.

I agree, don't see what value the black box provides.
In my case, I think I'm my own 'alternative' since I don't follow benchmarks or indexes when investing. :)

@msf and @BaluBalu, thank you for your comments on hedged equity funds. Just want to better understand these strategies.
In the past, I have invested small allocation on alternatives and decided they do not add much value while incurring high management fees. Thus I stick with high cash (equivalents) to balance my portfolio better. Certainly this approach has been more predictable in last few years. In the end,I want to have fewer funds for ease of management.

From Citywire - seems Sharat Shroff is finally leaving Pacific Tiger, which has had horrible performance, unable to beat its benchmark for the trailing 3, 5 and 10 year periods. A bit abrupt, this was announced in mid december and he'll be out the door by year end. Sounds like it was urgent to get him out as soon as possible. Tiger is easily matthews biggest fund so a bit surprised there wasn't a smoother and longer transition.
John Paul Lech, lead manager of matthews flagship emerging markets fund is also leaving as well as long time Japan manager Taizo Ishida. Both left Dec 19th.
I thought the last 4 or so years were bad for Matthews, starting with the departure of Kenichi Amaki, Tiffany Hsiao and Beini Zhou, but this has to be the most turmoil I've seen in my 30 years in the business. Word on the street is previous CIO Robert Horrocks was booted late 2023 as well, and the new CIO Sean Taylor is based in Hong Kong and not relocating to the San Francisco headquarters where most of the portfolio managers are based. How that is supposed to work out is beyond me.
What a mess that keeps getting messier. I wouldn't be surprised if we see the rest of Matthews PMs get lifted out soon or leave. I have no idea why they'd stay at this point. Word to the wise...stay clear. This firm could be going to zero very soon.
https://citywire.com/selector/news/matthews-asia-s-pacific-equity-fund-under-review-as-veteran-exits/a2432941

Would the class view it more important to work with an excellent CPA rather than an advisor? I do.
Also, I remember a convo I had with my VP Engr in the late 90s. He and his wife were in their mid 50s at the time and had done well in their careers....told me that he saw an advisor who was like 20 years younger than him and had like 5% personal wealth than he had. VP felt that he should charge for his advice to the FA.... LOL.
Also, it's my firm belief that I would never take financial advice from anyone who didn't have some gray hair and who didn't have very substantial personal wealth.... just like I like my pilots to have some gray hair....

I do not understand the interest in hedge funds. Most of them underperform simple market index funds, and some fail spectacularly. T Rowe Price started allocating about 10% of the holdings in their allocation funds several years ago, and I can discern no improvement in their mediocre returns.