Single family office vs. multi family office: Which is right for you?

Navigating the complex world of wealth management requires careful consideration, especially when it comes to deciding between a single family office vs. a multi family office.

For high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) and ultra-high-net-worth individuals (UHNWIs), choosing the right family office structure can have profound implications for the management, preservation, and growth of family wealth – now and across generations.

This decision impacts more than just costs or services. It shapes how a family approaches succession planning, tax strategy, governance, operational control, and long-term legacy.

Understanding the trade-offs between a single-family office vs. multi-family office also requires evaluating scale thresholds, legal entity considerations, staffing models, and technology infrastructure – each of which influences the scope and efficiency of wealth oversight.

This article will take a closer look at the family office structure to explore the key differences between these two types of family offices to help you determine which might be the best fit for your family's unique needs.

Single family office vs. multi family office: let’s go!

Understanding the basics: Single family office vs. multi family office

When it comes to wealth management, the terms "single family office" and "multi family office" are often thrown around, but what do they really mean? Let's start by breaking down the basics of these two distinct family office structures.

What is a single-family office (SFO)?

A single-family office (SFO) is an entity established to manage the wealth, investments, operations, and affairs of one specific ultra-high-net-worth family. Think of it as a private, bespoke service designed to cater to the unique financial, legal, operational, and lifestyle needs of a single family.

SFOs typically take the form of a private company or trust structure and may include a team of in-house professionals such as a CFO, CIO, tax advisors, legal counsel, and philanthropic coordinators.

SFOs typically handle everything from investment management and estate planning to philanthropy, tax strategy, governance, intergenerational wealth transfer, and even personal services like concierge, security, and family education. The primary advantage of an SFO is the high level of customization, control, and confidentiality it offers, allowing the family to dictate exactly how their wealth is managed and preserved.

What is a multi-family office (MFO)?

On the other hand, a multi family office (MFO) serves multiple UHNW families, pooling resources to offer a broad range of holistic wealth management services. MFOs provide similar services to SFOs – investment management, estate planning, tax optimization, financial reporting, and legacy planning – but on a shared infrastructure and team basis.

MFOs are often institutionalized platforms – either independent firms or offshoots of private banks – designed to offer scalable services while still delivering a personalized experience through dedicated relationship managers.

This structure allows multiple families to benefit from the expertise, systems, and institutional-grade solutions of a family office without bearing the full cost of maintaining one. MFOs often cater to families who want the benefits of a family office but prefer to share the overhead, resources, and access to specialized talent with other like-minded families.

Choosing the right structure for your family

Understanding this fundamental distinction between single-family office vs. multi-family office is the foundation for choosing the optimal model based on net worth thresholds, service complexity, and governance preferences.

Key differences: Multi family office vs. single family office

Customization and control: Multi family office vs. single family office

When comparing a single family office vs. multi family office, one of the most significant differences lies in the level of customization and control over wealth management processes, governance structures, and day-to-day decision-making.

A single-family office is like having a tailor-made suit – crafted to fit perfectly with no compromises. The family has full control over the office’s operations, investment strategies, internal controls, governance policies, and decision-making processes. This control allows for a highly personalized and adaptable approach to managing wealth, with the flexibility quickly adjust strategies in response to changes in family circumstances, markets, or priorities.

In an SFO, families can set their own investment mandates, dictate reporting frequency, hire niche advisors, and establish unique legacy or philanthropic vehicles aligned with family values.

Conversely, a multi-family office offers a more standardized service, akin to buying a suit off the rack, which is then customized afterwards to a certain degree. So, while there’s still room for customization, the services are generally designed to meet the shared  needs of multiple families.

This shared approach means that families may have less direct influence over certain decisions – particularly around operational workflows, investment strategy frameworks, or reporting tools – as the MFO must balance the interests of all the families it serves under one platform.

In most MFOs, core processes such as portfolio construction, vendor selection, and compliance frameworks are centrally governed, though families may have some leeway through bespoke service tiers or dedicated relationship managers.

However, this model can be highly efficient and cost-effective, providing access to top-tier wealth management expertise, institutional research, and robust reporting infrastructure without the need to build and maintain a dedicated internal team or office structure.

Ultimately, the choice between a single-family office vs. multi-family office in terms of control hinges on how much autonomy a family wants – and is willing to pay for – versus how much it values scalability, structure, and shared resources.

Costs and resources: Multi family office vs. single family office

Another critical factor in the single family office vs. multi family office debate is cost, both in terms of initial setup and ongoing operations.

Establishing and maintaining a single-family office can be a significant financial undertaking, but leveraging family office software can help manage these resources more efficiently, potentially reducing overall costs. The family bears all the costs associated with hiring staff, managing investments, compliance, legal structuring, reporting systems, and cybersecurity infrastructure.

These expenses often include compensation for in-house CIOs, legal counsel, tax advisors, estate planners, administrative support, and technology tools such as accounting platforms, CRM systems, and portfolio monitoring software.

These costs can be justified for families with substantial wealth – often above $100 million in net worth – where the benefits of a bespoke, in-house service outweigh the expenses. However, for families with more modest fortunes, the costs of an SFO may not be feasible or efficient.

A 2024 UBS report found that many SFOs operate with annual budgets between $1 million and $5 million, depending on service complexity and geographic footprint.

In contrast, a multi-family office spreads these costs across multiple families, making it a more affordable and scalable option. By pooling resources, MFOs can offer the same level of service as an SFO – but at a fraction of the cost – through shared access to professionals, technology platforms, and investment infrastructure.

Most MFOs offer tiered service levels or modular pricing models, allowing families to scale services according to their needs while avoiding the full fixed costs of standalone staffing and systems.

This cost-sharing model is particularly attractive for families who want access to comprehensive wealth management services – including investment strategy, tax planning, estate coordination, and philanthropy – without the hefty price tag or operational burden of a single family office.

For many families in the $25M-$100M range, the multi-family office model delivers institutional-grade capabilities without compromising financial efficiency.

By pooling resources, MFOs can offer the same level of service as an SFO – but at a fraction of the cost – through shared access to professionals, technology platforms, and investment infrastructure.

Expertise and services: Single vs. multi family office

When it comes to expertise and the range of services offered, the differences between a single family office vs. a multi family office can also be significant – and strategically impactful.

A single-family office is typically staffed by professionals handpicked by the family, chosen for their specific expertise and alignment with the family’s investment philosophy, governance preferences, and long-term goals. This allows for a deep, focused approach to wealth management, with advisors who are intimately familiar with the family’s history, assets, intergenerational dynamics, and philanthropic vision.

SFO teams often include a Chief Investment Officer (CIO), Chief Financial Officer (CFO), General Counsel, tax specialists, estate planners, and family governance consultants, creating a tightly coordinated advisory structure dedicated solely to the family's affairs.

Meanwhile, a multi-family office draws on a broader pool of interdisciplinary expertise, often employing specialists in investment management, tax optimization, philanthropy, legal structuring, lifestyle management, and next-generation education to serve the diverse needs of its multiple clients.

MFOs typically maintain institutional-style teams organized by function – such as investment research, portfolio construction, tax advisory, and client relationship management – with access to proprietary deal flow, alternative investments, and global networks.

While the level of individual attention may not be as intense as in an SFO, the depth and breadth of knowledge available in an MFO can be impressive, especially when combined with shared intelligence from managing multiple wealthy families.

Families benefit from the collective insight, benchmarking capabilities, and multi-disciplinary support of a larger team – which can be particularly advantageous when navigating complex financial landscapes, cross-border planning, or multi-generational wealth transfer.

Choosing between a single family office vs. multi family office in terms of expertise depends on whether your family prioritizes hyper-personalized advice or values access to broad, institutional-grade capabilities delivered at scale.

Making the choice: Which family office structure is right for you?

So, how do you decide between a single-family office vs. multi-family office? The decision ultimately comes down to your family’s unique needs, long-term goals, operational preferences, and available financial resources.

If your family values complete control over your wealth management strategy, and has the scale and capital to support a dedicated in-house team, an SFO might be the best choice.

SFOs are generally most suitable for families with net worths above $100 million, where the benefits of tailored control, privacy, and intergenerational planning justify the setup and operating costs.

The bespoke nature of an SFO ensures that every aspect of your wealth management – from investment mandates and risk frameworks to succession governance and philanthropic vehicles – is tailored to your specific requirements, offering unparalleled personalization, privacy, and strategic alignment.

On the other hand, if your family prefers a more cost-effective approach while still accessing top-tier wealth management services, an MFO could be the ideal solution.

MFOs typically serve families in the $25-$100 million range, although entry points can be as low as $10 million depending on the platform, geography, and service model.

The shared model of an MFO allows you to benefit from institutional-grade investment capabilities, integrated reporting tools, tax optimization, and next-generation support without the significant overhead costs associated with building and running your own office.

Families should also weigh non-financial factors such as governance complexity, geographical dispersion, family dynamics, and technological needs when choosing between a single-family office vs. multi-family office.

Conclusion: Single vs. multi family office – a personal decision

In the end, the single-family office vs. multi-family office choice is a deeply personal one, driven by your family’s financial situation, legacy goals, governance preferences, and the degree of control or collaboration you desire.

Both structures offer distinct advantages, and the right choice will depend on what you prioritize most – be it customization, autonomy, cost-efficiency, operational scalability, or access to multidisciplinary expertise.

An SFO offers unmatched control and confidentiality but requires significant capital and operational oversight. An MFO delivers institutional capabilities and cost efficiency but involves sharing governance structures and service frameworks with other families.

Whichever path you choose, it’s essential to ensure that your family office structure aligns with your broader wealth management strategy and supports your family’s mission across generations.

Evaluating single-family office vs. multi-family office models should also consider long-term succession readiness, tax efficiency, and the ability to adapt to market changes and regulatory shifts.

Whether you’re building from scratch or transitioning from one structure to another, expert advisory support, robust technology infrastructure, and a clear governance framework can ensure that your chosen model delivers lasting value.

Ultimately, the best family office is one that reflects your family’s complexity, ambition, and vision for the future.