On a recent post of mine in which I was looking for this board's opinions to assist someone who is about to retire, I realized that a Certified Financial Planner can be very different from a Registered Investment Advisor.

I'm assuming the RIA is going to be more involved in investment choices whereas a CFP might tend to be less involved in specific investments but will offer a broader picture of various financial issues such as retirement, budgeting, trusts, etc..

I believe both are fiduciaries.

Does the above info seem accurate?? Anything else noteworthy that should be included in thinking about the difference??

This is essentially correct in the roles and fiduciary duties. That said, the person whom everyone has the highest fiduciary duty to is themselves. Advisors and planners are just that: people who advise and help a person plan. At the end of the day though, they should primarily be educators who lay out all the options, teach you what you need to know, and then you confidently make your own decisions.

I would not trust anyone who said to me, "You need to buy this thing."

Rather, I would want to hear, "These are the pros and cons if you buy this thing. Let's talk tomorrow and let me know if you have other questions or if you want to compare this to something else."

An RIA is authorized to sell/trade investment products. They do not give overall investment advice (although some RIAs are also CFPs...which is different). CFPs take an overall look at your investment portfolio and can/will recommend investments, asset allocations, set savings goals, determine how much you need to retire, and so on. If you want to buy investments like individual stocks, bonds, commodities, etc...you'll either need an RIA or your CFP will have to do this through an RIA...and that relationship is already likely in place.