Short answer: A single family office (SFO) serves one family exclusively, giving maximum control, privacy, and customization at a high fixed cost. A multi-family office (MFO) serves several families and shares staff and infrastructure, which lowers cost and broadens access to expertise in exchange for less exclusivity and customization.
SFO vs MFO at a glance
| Single Family Office (SFO) | Multi-Family Office (MFO) | |
|---|---|---|
| Serves | One family only | Multiple families |
| Control | Complete | Shared / standardized |
| Privacy | Highest | Good, but shared staff |
| Customization | Fully bespoke | Menu of services |
| Cost | High fixed cost borne by one family | Lower; cost shared across families |
| Staffing | Dedicated in-house team | Shared professionals |
| Typically suits | Families with roughly US$100M+ in investable assets | Families who want family-office services without the fixed overhead |
When a single family office makes sense
A dedicated SFO is usually justified once a family has enough wealth to absorb the fixed cost of an in-house team — commonly cited at around US$100 million or more in investable assets, though many SFOs serve families with far more. The payoff is total control, privacy, alignment, and the ability to tailor investing, governance, and lifestyle services precisely to the family.
When a multi-family office makes sense
An MFO lets a family access professional investment management, reporting, tax, and estate coordination without building and staffing an office. Costs are shared across client families, making it practical below the SFO threshold — at the cost of some exclusivity and bespoke control. A virtual family office (VFO) is a third option that coordinates outsourced specialists for an even leaner setup.
Explore TFOA’s research on the multi-family office model and how to create a single family office, or see the family office statistics. To join a peer network of single family offices, see membership.
