Do I have to list every asset type and their relationships, to make a point about a word?
I don't think it is surprising that the word "wealth" is used by a lot of people in different ways.
I was accused of using the word incorrectly as in "Wealth" means only "Rich" people. I was wrong because a lot of "non-Rich" can also manage their "Wealth". Someone in the comments even considered having 5Mil of assets to be NOT Rich, NOT wealthy.
It seemed like in the comments there was push back that just because they are managing their "Wealth" that they are NOT Wealthy, and so don't lump them into that category.
Instead of "Wealth" meaning, long list of asset types.
I think maybe that is the point. If you have enough 'assets' and free time to ponder the concept of "wealth" as units of exchange and the nature of money and future earning power, then you are probably "Rich" to many people.
So if you are needing a software tool to manage your "Wealth" then you probably have more "Money/Assets/Fungible Stuff" than most, like >5% of worlds population, so you could be considered "Rich". Then because you are "Rich", "Wealthy", "Have lot of Money", yes, you can be grouped with "Rich" and people can have opinions on the group of "Rich" people.
So I think it is ok to assume if someone needs tools to manage their "Wealth", that I can assume they are "Wealthy".