When you strive for excellence, people take notice

²Forbes’s Top 100 Wealth Advisors (2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2021)
Forbes list of "America's Top Wealth Advisors" (2018)
The Forbes ranking of America's Top Wealth Advisors, developed by SHOOK Research, is based on an algorithm of qualitative and quantitative data, rating thousands of wealth advisors with a minimum of seven years of experience. Ranking algorithm is based on quality of practice, including: telephone and in-person interviews, client retention, industry experience, review of compliance records, firm nominations; and quantitative criteria, including: assets under management and revenue generated for their firms. Investment performance is not a criteria because client objectives and risk tolerances vary, and advisors rarely have audited performance reports. Rankings are based on the opinions of SHOOK Research, LLC which does not receive compensation from the advisors or their firms in exchange for placement on the ranking. Research Summary (as of August 2018): 25,732 Advisor nominations were received, based on thresholds. 9,596 Advisors were invited to complete the online survey. 7,174 Advisors were interviewed by telephone. 1,503 Advisors were interviewed in-person at the Advisors' location. Final list of the top 250 Advisors was then compiled based upon the quantitative criteria. Klingman and Associates, LLC is not affiliated with Forbes or Shook Research, LLC. This ranking is not indicative of advisor's future performance, is not an endorsement, and may not be representative of individual clients' experience. Neither Klingman and Associates, LLC nor any of its Financial Advisors pay a fee in exchange for this award/rating.

³Inc. 5000 List of the Fastest Growing Private Companies in America (2016)
The 2016 Inc. 5000 is ranked according to the percentage revenue growth when comparing 2012 to 2015. To qualify, companies must have been founded and generating revenue by March 21, 2012. They had to be U.S.-based, privately held, for profit, and independent- not subsidiaries or divisions of the other companies- as of December 21, 2015. (Since then, a number of companies on the list have gone public or been acquired). The minimum revenue required for 2012 is $100,000; the minimum for 2015 is $2 million. As always, Inc. reserves the right to decline applicants for subjective reasons.

⁴FA Magazine’s RIA Rankings (2016, 2017, 2018 and 2022)
Financial Advisor Magazine (FA-Mag) compiled the 2016 and 2017 list of RIA Rankings based on the amount of discretionary and non-discretionary assets under management as reported on Form ADV for the year ended 2015, 2016 and 2017.

⁵Barron’s Top Advisor Ranking: New York (2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and 2022)
Barron’s is a registered trademark of Dow Jones & Company, L.P. All rights reserved. The rankings are based on data provided by over 4,000 individual advisors and their firms and include qualitative and quantitative criteria. Data points that relate to quality of practice include professionals with a minimum of 7 years financial services experience, acceptable compliance records, client retention reports, charitable and philanthropic work, quality of practice, designations held, offering services beyond investments offered including estates and trusts, and more. Financial Advisors are quantitatively rated based on varying types of revenues produced and assets under management by the financial professional, with weightings associated for each. Investment performance is not an explicit component because not all advisors have audited results and because performance figures often are influenced more by clients’ risk tolerance than by an advisor’s investment picking abilities.

⁶Financial Times Top 300 Registered Investment Advisors (2014, 2015 and 2016)
The Financial Times FT 300 Registered Investment Advisors 2016 award had about 55.6% of the 540 advisor applicants being recognized as a Registered Investment Advisor. In 2014 and 2015, roughly 630 applications received; 47.6% (300) were selected for the final list. The FT used the database of RIAs who are registered with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and selected those practices reporting to the SEC that had $300 million or more in assets under management, and no more than 75% of the AUM with institutional clients. Additionally, the firm must be independent (not the RIA arm of a broker dealer for example). Qualifying RIA firms filled out an online application and questionnaire that gave more information about their practices. That information was augmented with their own research on the candidates, including data from regulatory filings. The FT generated an internal score for each applicant based on six broad factors: advisor assets under management, AUM growth rate, the firm’s years in operation, advisors’ industry certifications (CFA, etc.), compliance record, and online accessibility. AUM and asset growth comprise roughly 80 percent to 90 percent of each RIA's score. Additionally, to provide a diversity of advisors, the FT placed a cap on the number of RIA’s from any one state that's roughly correlated to the distribution of millionaires across the U.S.

⁷Financial Times Top 400 Financial Advisors (2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2019 and 2020)
The FT 400 was developed in collaboration with Ignites Research, a subsidiary of the FT that provides specialized content on asset management. To qualify for the list, advisers had to have 10 years of experience and at least $300 million in assets under management (AUM) and no more than 60% of the AUM with institutional clients. The FT reaches out to some of the largest brokerages in the U.S. and asks them to provide a list of advisors who meet the minimum criteria outlined above. These advisors are then invited to apply for the ranking. Only advisors who submit an online application can be considered for the ranking. In 2014, roughly 1,500 applications were received and 400 were selected to the final list (26.6%). In 2015, roughly 1,400 applications were received and 400 were selected to the final list (28.5%). In 2016, roughly 980 applications were received and 400 were selected to the final list (40.8%). In 2019, roughly 960 applications were received and 400 were selected to the final list (41.7%). The numbers for 2013 were not available. The 400 qualified advisers were then scored on six attributes: AUM, AUM growth rate, compliance record, years of experience, industry certifications, and online accessibility. AUM is the top factor, accounting for roughly 60-70 percent of the applicant’s score. Additionally, to provide a diversity of advisors, the FT placed a cap on the number of advisors from any one state that's roughly correlated to the distribution of millionaires across the U.S.

⁹Financial Advisor Magazine’s Top 50 Fastest Growing Firms (2014)
Ranking is based on percentage growth in assets from 2012 to 2013.

¹⁰Barron's is a registered trademark of Dow Jones & Company, L.P. All rights reserved. The ranking is based on information provided by advisor responses. The teams are ranked on a variety of factors, including their size and makeup of the team, the experience levels of key members, the growth of the team's assets and revenues, the credentials and ongoing education of members, and the regulatory records. Financial Advisors are quantitatively rated based on varying types of revenues produced and assets under management by the financial professional, with weightings associated for each. The ranking may not be representative of any one client's experience, is not an endorsement, and is not indicative of the advisor's future performance. Neither Klingman and Associates, LLC nor any of its Financial Advisors pay a fee in exchange for this award/rating. Barron's is not affiliated with Klingman and Associates, LLC.

¹¹The Forbes Next-Gen Wealth Advisors rankings, developed by SHOOK Research, is based on an algorithm of qualitative criterion, mostly gained through telephone and in-person due diligence interviews, and quantitative data. Those advisors that are considered have a minimum of four years' experience, and the algorithm weighs factors like revenue trends, assets under management, compliance records, industry experience and those that encompass the highest standards of best practices. Portfolio performance is not a criterion due to varying client objectives and lack of audited data. Neither Forbes nor SHOOK receive a fee in exchange for rankings

¹²Please see Form ADV for the firm's current Assets Under Management.

¹³The Forbes ranking of Best RIA Firms, developed by SHOOK Research, is based on an algorithm of qualitative criteria, mostly gained through telephone and in-person due diligence interviews, and quantitative data. Firms considered for participation have principals with a minimum of seven years of experience, and the algorithm weights factors including revenue trends, assets under management, compliance records, industry experience, the ability to demonstrate best practices in their approach to working with clients, and their commitment to diversity and philanthropy. Portfolio performance is not a criteria due to varying client objectives and lack of audited data. Research Summary (as of 10/25/2022 ) Out of approximately 36,565 nominations, 150 firms received the award. This ranking is not indicative of an advisor's future performance, is not an endorsement, and may not be representative of individual clients' experience. Klingman & Associates, LLC does not pay a fee in exchange for this award/rating and is not affiliated with Forbes or Shook Research, LLC. Please visit https://www.forbes.com/lists/top-ria-firms/?sh=28a77f5d3cd5 for more info.

¹⁴The Forbes ranking of Top Women Wealth Advisors Best-In-State, developed by SHOOK Research, is based on an algorithm of qualitative data, learned through surveys and interviews conducted by telephone, in-person and virtually to evaluate best practices, such as service models, investing models and compliance records as well as quantitative data, such as revenue trends and assets under management. All advisors have a minimum of seven years’ experience. Portfolio performance is not a criterion due to varying client objectives and lack of audited data. Neither Forbes nor SHOOK receive a fee in exchange for rankings.