It used to be standard for advisors to make money on commission, which led to terrible incentives (read: they are paid to get you into particular investments, which is an incentive to recommend things that make them money even if they are bad for you). This practice is declining, but you still find it at the big banks and brokers. "Fee only" advisors means they only take a fee from you, so they don't have this conflict of interest -- you can find many at Napfa.org .
Even then, though, advisors are biased to recommend things that they can actually do for you, so sometimes they will recommend things that are easier for them ("just use the same portfolio as my other clients") instead of finding what's truly optimal for you.
And that's actually usually okay. The kind of person who never touches their investments and doesn't understand finance is actually better off with an advisor than doing literally nothing -- e.g. sitting in cash, or really dumb investments your aunt recommended -- which is the practically the counterfactual a lot of the time
I read somewhere (but didn't do my own research) Schwab's business model these days, maybe others, is making money off idle customer cash, now that they don't charge trading commissions. They may not want customers to buy anything.
With interest rates up so much, I would guess it is even more lucrative?
