Smart Investing with Brent & Chase Wilsey

July 10th, 2026 | People Missed Dot-Com, Data Centers Next Door, Crypto’s Power Threat , Why Flights Stay Expensive, Deflating the Portfolio Balloon, AI Boom or Bust, Simple vs. Compound Loans & More

Did you ever wonder why so many people didn't get out before the dot-com crash?

It's an important question to ask yourself, especially if you believe you'll know exactly when to get out before any potential correction in today's AI and semiconductor stocks.

 

The reality is that the dot-com bubble burst only 25 years ago. Human nature hasn't changed since then. Investors today are no smarter than investors were back then, and the same emotions that drove the bubble are showing up again. There were four major reasons so many people lost money during the tech bust.

 

The first was that investors stopped focusing on earnings and price-to-earnings ratios. Instead, they justified sky-high valuations by looking at metrics like website traffic, page views, click-through rates, and the number of "eyeballs" on a screen. The assumption was that if revenue kept growing, profits would eventually follow. Many ignored the reality that businesses also have expenses, competition, and execution risk.

 

The second reason was FOMO or the fear of missing out. Between 1995 and 2000, the Nasdaq surged roughly 400%. As people watched friends, coworkers, and investors make fortunes on tech stocks and IPOs, more and more money poured into the market. Institutional investors and retail investors alike stopped worrying about valuations. They simply saw stocks going up and didn't want to miss the ride.

 

The third reason was the belief that "this time is different." You heard it everywhere: "You just don't get it. This is the new economy." Investors argued that traditional valuation metrics no longer mattered because the only thing that counted was gaining market share. Profitability could always come later.

 

The fourth reason was the assumption that capital would never dry up. Few investors paid attention to where companies were getting their money. Many businesses were surviving on venture capital rather than sustainable profits. When funding slowed and investors became more selective, those companies had no profitable business model to fall back on. Many quickly went bankrupt.

 

At the peak of the bubble, investors stopped asking basic questions. What am I paying for this company's earnings? What am I paying for its cash flow? In many cases, there weren't any. Yet investors convinced themselves the speculative frenzy would continue indefinitely.

 

The biggest lesson is a humbling one. We like to believe we'll recognize the top and get out before everyone else. But investors in 2000 believed the same thing. Human psychology hasn't changed, which is why bubbles continue to repeat throughout history.

 

Don’t Build That Data Center in My Backyard

The race to build AI infrastructure is running into an obstacle that many investors probably didn't see coming: local communities.

 

Across the country, residents are protesting and filing lawsuits to stop new AI data centers from being built in their neighborhoods. One of the biggest concerns is something most people never think about, the constant noise. Data centers operate around the clock, with cooling fans, chillers, and backup generators creating a continuous hum 24 hours a day. That may not sound like a major issue until you have to live next to it.

 

New York has become one of the focal points of this debate. While the state has plenty of available land for development, many communities are pushing back. Governor Kathy Hochul is even considering legislation that would place a moratorium on the construction of large data centers in certain areas.

 

Public opinion reflects that growing resistance. According to recent polling, 44% of Americans oppose additional data center construction, while only 21% support it. When the question becomes more personal and whether people would support a data center being built in their own community, opposition jumps to 57%, while support falls to just 14%.

 

Residents also question the long-term economic benefits. Building a data center may create thousands of construction jobs, but once the facility is complete, permanent employment may fall to just 100 to 200 workers. At the same time, these facilities consume enormous amounts of electricity. In some regions served by smaller utilities, a single data center could account for as much as 25% of total power demand, raising concerns about higher electricity costs and increased strain on the grid.

 

The political landscape is becoming more challenging. Lawmakers in states including Arizona, Illinois, and Ohio have restricted or eliminated tax incentives that were previously used to attract data center investment.

 

Even the companies building this infrastructure recognize the growing risk. The hyperscalers are expected to spend nearly $1 trillion on AI infrastructure this year, but increasing public opposition could slow those plans. Nebius Group, for example, warned in its 2025 annual report that rising resistance to data center projects in certain communities could become a headwind for future expansion.

 

Investors have spent a great deal of time focusing on AI demand, chips, and software. However, another risk is emerging that deserves attention: if communities continue saying, "Not in my backyard," the pace of AI infrastructure growth may not be as smooth as many expect.

 

Is Crypto Weakening One of America's Most Powerful Weapons?

One of the United States' greatest geopolitical advantages isn't its military, it's the U.S. dollar.

 

Roughly 90% of global foreign exchange transactions involve the U.S. dollar. That dominance gives the United States enormous leverage. When the U.S. imposes financial sanctions and cuts countries off from the dollar-based financial system, it becomes far more difficult for them to conduct international trade, finance military operations, or access global markets.

 

That advantage is beginning to erode. Countries that have long opposed the United States such as Russia, Iran, and North Korea are increasingly turning to cryptocurrencies to bypass traditional financial channels. According to reports, their use of virtual currencies for cross-border transactions surged from roughly $12.5 billion in 2024 to more than $100 billion in 2025.

 

Crypto gives sanctioned nations another way to move money. It can be used to purchase drones, weapons, military components, and fuel, while also helping finance operations such as smuggling oil and paying suppliers outside the traditional banking system.

 

North Korea has become one of the world's most aggressive crypto thieves, using hacking and other cybercrimes to steal digital assets that can then be converted into funding for its military and weapons programs.

 

Part of the challenge is that cryptocurrency wallets are identified by long strings of letters and numbers rather than names. While blockchain transactions are publicly visible, identifying the person or organization controlling a wallet can be extremely difficult without additional intelligence. That makes enforcement of financial sanctions much harder.

 

Even terrorist organizations such as Hamas have, at times, solicited donations in cryptocurrency, illustrating how digital assets can be used to circumvent traditional financial controls.

 

This is why I believe cryptocurrency has become more than just an investment story, it has become a national security issue.

 

If Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies were to experience a significant decline in value, it would reduce the purchasing power of those holding large crypto reserves, including sanctioned actors that rely on digital assets. While it would not eliminate their ability to use crypto, it could make this alternative financial system less effective and increase the relative importance of the dollar-based financial system.

 

The stronger the role of the U.S. dollar in global commerce, the more effective financial sanctions remain as a non-military tool of foreign policy. With cryptocurrencies becoming more widely adopted, policymakers will need to consider the risk of weakening one of America's most effective forms of economic leverage.

 

Even with oil off its recent peak, you still may not see cheaper airline tickets.

You might assume that with the decline in oil prices, jet fuel costs are also declining, and airlines will pass those savings on to travelers through lower ticket prices. Oil and jet fuel prices have indeed come down, but don't expect airlines to slash fares anytime soon.

 

The reason is simple: demand remains strong. Even after airlines raised fares eight times since the start of the conflict in the Middle East, analysts say the average round-trip domestic ticket climbed roughly 19% to about $638 yet demand barely changed. In other words, consumers have shown they are willing to pay higher prices to travel. If people keep buying tickets, airlines have little incentive to lower fares and give up those higher profit margins.

 

Supply is also likely to remain constrained. Airlines aren't rushing to add flights because keeping capacity tight helps support higher ticket prices. The bankruptcy and downsizing of low-cost carriers such as Spirit Airlines has also reduced competition on many routes, making it easier for the remaining airlines to maintain pricing power.

 

To be fair, airline pricing should be viewed over a longer time horizon. From 2019 through 2025, overall consumer prices rose about 26%, while average airfares actually declined roughly 3.5%. So, despite the recent increases, airline tickets are still relatively inexpensive compared with the broader rise in inflation over the past six years.

 

The bottom line is that lower fuel costs alone don't guarantee lower ticket prices. As long as travel demand remains healthy and airlines keep capacity in check, consumers may not see much relief at the checkout screen.

 

Letting Air Out of the Investment Portfolio Balloon Before It Pops

At one point or another, we've all seen a balloon inflated until it finally bursts. The same thing can happen to an investment portfolio.

 

Watching your portfolio grow is exciting, but every investor knows that markets don't go up forever. The challenge is that no one knows exactly when a portfolio has become too inflated. One of the biggest reasons investors refuse to sell is simple: they hate paying taxes. Believe me, I dislike paying taxes just as much as anyone else. But you should never let the tax bill dictate your investment decisions.

 

Sometimes the smartest move is to relieve some of the pressure in your portfolio before the market does it for you. There are two simple ways to accomplish this: trim oversized positions and sell investments that have become significantly overvalued.

 

The first strategy is reducing concentration risk. If you review your portfolio and discover that a single stock has grown to 10% or 12% of your total assets, it may be time to trim that position back to 7% or 8%. Yes, you'll likely owe capital gains taxes, but you'll also be reducing the risk that one investment can have an outsized impact on your portfolio if it suddenly declines.

 

The second strategy is selling investments that have exceeded your target price and can no longer be justified based on their fundamentals. If the valuation has become stretched and the company's earnings outlook no longer supports the stock price, it may be time to take profits. Again, you'll probably owe taxes on the gain, but remember that capital gains are generally taxed at favorable rates. More importantly, paying a 20% or 25% tax on your profit is often far less painful than watching the entire investment lose 20% or more in value. That 20% decline occurs on the entire position rather than just the gain.

 

No strategy is perfect. You may trim a position only to watch it continue climbing for another year or two. That's part of investing. Risk management isn't about perfectly timing the top, it's about ensuring that no single investment or sector can seriously damage your long-term financial plan.

 

Consistently following a disciplined, conservative approach won't always maximize returns during bull markets, but it can significantly reduce risk over a full market cycle. When the next major correction inevitably arrives, your portfolio should be positioned to withstand it. That makes it far easier to stay invested, avoid emotional decisions, and continue building wealth instead of panic-selling after the damage has already been done.

 

Successful investing isn't just about finding great investments. It's also about knowing when to reduce risk. Sometimes, letting a little air out of the balloon today is the best way to keep it from popping tomorrow.

 

Is AI creating the next memory boom... or setting up the next bust?

SK Hynix just pulled off the largest foreign ADR listing in U.S. history, pricing its American depositary receipts at $149 and raising $26.5 billion. That isn't just a fundraising event, it is fuel for one of the most aggressive semiconductor expansion plans the industry has ever seen.

 

The company is pouring money into new factories, equipment, and advanced packaging capacity around the world. In the United States, SK Hynix is building its first manufacturing facility, a $4 billion advanced packaging plant in West Lafayette, Indiana, expected to be completed in 2028.

 

Back home in South Korea, the spending is even more staggering. SK Hynix plans to invest up to $720 billion expanding memory production, including a $390 billion semiconductor cluster in Yongin. The company has also committed roughly $7.8 billion by the end of 2027 for additional extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography machines, the highly specialized tools needed to manufacture cutting-edge HBM chips. These machines cost as much as $400 million each, are in extremely limited supply, and are only produced by ASML.

The company is even accelerating its expansion timeline by more than a decade, with four new fabrication plants now expected to be completed by 2033.

 

The question investors should be asking isn't whether AI demand is real. It clearly is. The real question is whether the industry is repeating a familiar pattern. Memory has always been one of the most cyclical businesses in technology. Every major technology revolution from the dot-com boom, to smartphones, to cloud computing created a surge in demand for memory chips. Manufacturers responded by rapidly expanding production. Eventually supply caught up, prices collapsed, profits disappeared, and investors who arrived late learned just how brutal the memory cycle can be.

 

Today feels different... but that is often what every cycle feels like while it is happening.

 

SK Hynix's market value has increased more than sevenfold over the past year as AI infrastructure spending has created a shortage of HBM. Revenue nearly tripled between 2023 and 2025 to roughly $65 billion, and Wall Street expects sales to surge again to approximately $235 billion in 2026.

 

Those are incredible numbers. But when major memory producers start announcing massive capacity expansions, history suggests investors should at least consider what happens when today's shortage eventually becomes tomorrow's surplus. AI may create years of strong demand for memory, but the semiconductor industry has a long history of building too much capacity just as demand begins to normalize. The opportunity is enormous, but so is the risk if history repeats itself.

 

Financial Planning: Simple vs Compounding Interest Loans

Many people assume that choosing a simple interest loan over a compound interest loan will dramatically reduce the amount of interest they pay, but in most real-world lending situations, the difference is minimal. The reason is that the power of compounding only becomes significant when a balance grows over time because interest is being added to the principal. With most consumer loans, borrowers either make interest-only payments that keep the principal balance unchanged or make payments that reduce the principal over time. In either case, the interest charged during each payment period is based on the outstanding loan balance at that time, not on an ever-growing balance. Since the loan balance is remaining the same or steadily declining rather than increasing, there is little opportunity for “interest on interest” to accumulate. While compounding can become important if unpaid interest is capitalized and added to the loan balance, that is the exception rather than the rule. For most mortgages, HELOCs, auto loans, personal loans, and similar debt, borrowers should focus far more on the interest rate than on whether the loan is described as using simple or compound interest.

 

Too Many People Are Using Target Date Funds in Their 401(k)

For years, we've discussed the drawbacks of target date funds, including their higher fees and one-size-fits-all approach. Despite those concerns, they remain incredibly popular because they are simple and require very little effort from the investor. According to Vanguard, 61% of 401(k) participants invest in target date funds.

 

On the surface, they sound like the perfect solution. If you plan to retire around 2045, you simply choose the 2045 Target Date Fund and let it manage your investments. The fund automatically adjusts your portfolio over time, gradually reducing your exposure to stocks and increasing your allocation to bonds as you approach retirement.

 

Many investors don't realize how significant that shift can be. By the target retirement date, a target date fund may hold around 50% of its assets in bonds. The adjustments don't stop there. Reaching the target year doesn't mean the fund is liquidated or that you receive your money. Instead, the fund continues along its glide path and could increase its bond allocation to 70% or even 80% over the following years.

 

That approach may have made sense decades ago, but retirement looks very different today. Many people will spend 20 years or more in retirement. Over that length of time, maintaining enough exposure to stocks can be critical to helping your portfolio grow and keep pace with inflation. A portfolio that becomes too conservative too quickly may struggle to provide the long-term growth many retirees need.

 

Another limitation is that target date funds only manage the assets inside your 401(k). They don't take into account your IRAs, brokerage accounts, pensions, real estate, or other investments. As a result, your overall portfolio allocation could end up being far different than what is appropriate for your financial goals.

 

The convenience of target date funds is appealing, but convenience shouldn't replace planning. A successful retirement requires understanding how your money is invested, estimating what your portfolio could be worth when you retire, and developing a strategy for how those assets will be invested throughout retirement, not just until you reach it.

 

Is That Really Your Son or Daughter Calling You?

You know your children's voices. You talk to them regularly. Then one day you get a frantic phone call from your son or daughter. They tell you they've just been in a serious accident. They need $15,000 immediately or they're going to jail. They tell you exactly how to send the money. Without hesitation, you wire the funds because you want to help your child.

 

Unfortunately, you have just been scammed by AI. AI-powered scams are exploding. Reports show AI-related fraud surged more than 1,200% in 2025, and at the current pace, losses from AI scams in the United States could reach $40 billion annually by 2027. Another study found that one in four adults has already experienced an AI voice scam.

 

Your first reaction may be, "That could never happen to me. I don't post anything on social media." But the problem may not be your online presence. It's your children.

 

Many people regularly post videos on social media, and today's AI only needs about three seconds of someone's voice to create a convincing clone. Once scammers have that sample, they can make it sound like your son or daughter is saying almost anything.

 

So how do you protect yourself? If you receive an emergency call asking for money, don't panic. Before sending anything, ask a question that only you and your child would know the answer to. Make it something that has never been shared publicly.

 

For example, ask about a funny childhood memory that only the two of you remember. Don't use information like birthdays, graduation dates, wedding dates, or other facts that could be found online or in public records. Remember with all these data centers there is so much information that is being obtained and saved but used for the wrong purposes.

 

Even better, establish a family safe word or passphrase today. Choose something simple that everyone can remember but that would never appear online.

 

If you ever receive one of these calls, ask for the safe word. If they can't provide it, assume it's a scam until you can verify the situation by calling your child directly or contacting another trusted family member.

 

As AI continues to improve, these scams will only become more convincing. The same technology powering innovation is also giving criminals new tools to exploit unsuspecting families. Stay alert. Verify before you trust. A few extra minutes could save you thousands of dollars and a great deal of heartache.

 

Is It Boom or Bust for Micron?

It is hard to argue with Micron's incredible stock performance. Through July 2, the shares were up 242% year to date and an astonishing 701% over the previous 12 months. Even after recently falling about 22% from their peak, investors are still debating whether the company has much more room to run.

 

The good news is that Micron has locked in 15 new customers under long-term supply agreements, with some contracts extending as long as five years. Many of these agreements include customer deposits, giving the company excellent revenue visibility and reducing uncertainty over future sales. For investors, that is exactly the kind of stability they like to see.

 

But every smart investor should also ask: What is the downside?

 

While those contracts provide a strong foundation, they do not guarantee that demand will remain as strong over the long term. Unless a customer goes bankrupt, the contracts are largely locked in, but technology changes quickly. High prices and limited supply often encourage innovation, and the AI memory market is no exception.

 

Several companies are developing new architectures that reduce or even eliminate the need for high-bandwidth memory (HBM), which has been one of Micron's biggest growth drivers. As companies search for lower-cost and more efficient alternatives, demand for HBM could eventually soften.

 

Nvidia also signaled in June that it is redesigning portions of its upcoming Vera Rubin AI platform to use memory more efficiently. While Nvidia remains a major customer for HBM, improvements in memory efficiency could reduce the amount of HBM required per AI system over time.

 

Meanwhile, newly public chipmaker Cerebras has taken an entirely different approach. CEO Andrew Feldman has said the company's wafer-scale AI chips do not use HBM at all, arguing that it is too expensive and supply constrained. If other AI hardware companies pursue similar designs, it could create additional competition for HBM.

 

None of this means Micron's growth story is over. The company's long-term contracts provide meaningful protection, and AI demand remains exceptionally strong today. However, investors should remember that today's shortages and premium pricing often inspire tomorrow's technological breakthroughs.

 

The question for Micron investors is whether HBM remains the industry standard for years to come or whether innovation eventually reduces the need for it. If demand for HBM begins to slow, Micron's remarkable growth could also begin to moderate.

 

Companies Discussed: Caterpillar Inc. (Ticker: CAT)

July 2nd, 2026 | AI Profit Pressure, Private Equity in Youth Sports, Strategy Bitcoin Trouble, Upper-Middle-Class Financial Worries, Jobs Report, AI Investment Bubble Concerns, Trump Accounts & More

Competition for AI Is Coming From a Surprise Source That Could Pressure U.S. Companies' Prices and Profits 

We tend to focus on the major AI companies in the United States and assume they will be the long-term winners. However, one competitor that cannot be ignored is China. Chinese companies are making rapid progress in artificial intelligence, and they could become a serious challenge to U.S. firms. 

Don’t forget that China is a communist country and the government can put in a lot of capital to win the AI race. That ability to heavily fund AI development could help Chinese companies narrow the gap with, or even surpass, some American competitors in certain areas. 

According to Artificial Analysis, which evaluates the capabilities of large language models, China's Z.ai ranked among the top three globally with its latest model release. Another concern is cost. Z.ai is reportedly offering models at less than half the price of many American rivals. Lower prices could make it easier for the company to gain market share while putting pressure on the pricing and profit margins of U.S. AI companies. 

I certainly don't want to see American companies lose ground to Chinese competitors. However, as investors, we have to evaluate the competitive landscape objectively. U.S. AI companies have already committed hundreds of billions of dollars to infrastructure and development. If competition forces prices lower, it may take much longer for these companies to generate the profits needed to justify today's lofty stock prices and valuations. 

 

The Business of Kids' Sports Is Changing and it May Not Be for the Better 

Private equity has made its way into nearly every corner of the economy, and now it's becoming a major force in youth sports. The Aspen Institute has estimated that youth sports are now a $40 billion industry in the U.S, which is likely why private equity is now targeting the space. That's raising serious concerns about what happens when maximizing investor returns becomes more important than giving kids affordable opportunities to play. 

As private equity firms buy up leagues, tournaments, training facilities, and sports complexes, critics argue the result is less competition, higher registration fees, and fewer affordable options for families. The average cost of youth sports has increased dramatically in recent years, leaving many children priced out of participating simply because their families can't afford it. 

One thing that stands out is that this has become one of the rare issues drawing concern from both Republicans and Democrats in Congress. Burgess Owens, a Republican from Utah and former professional football player, pointed out “Investment is important, but it’s when the mission is our kids, not investors. We’re seeing too much of this. We’re going to lose the soul of our nation if we don’t get this right.” He also acknowledged that while some investors are doing it the right way, bad actors need to be kept out. While there are differences over how to address the problem, there appears to be broad bipartisan agreement that rising costs and reduced consumer choice deserve closer scrutiny. 

Youth sports should be about developing character, teamwork, friendships, and healthy competition, not creating another industry where financial engineering determines who gets to participate. If the trend toward consolidation continues unchecked, more families may find themselves priced out of opportunities that should be available to every child, regardless of income. 

 

Bitcoin Company Strategy Is in Trouble 

Strategy, formerly known as MicroStrategy, changed its name after the company essentially became a leveraged bet on Bitcoin rather than a software business. As management shifted its focus almost entirely to buying Bitcoin, it dropped the "Micro" from its name to reflect that new identity. 

CEO Michael Saylor spent years promoting Bitcoin and telling investors that owning Strategy stock was one of the best ways to benefit from its rise. To finance those Bitcoin purchases, the company repeatedly issued low-interest convertible bonds. 

The next major maturity comes on September 15, 2027, when approximately $1 billion of convertible notes become due. If you're unfamiliar with convertible bonds, they allow a company to borrow money at lower interest rates because investors have the option to convert the bonds into stock instead of receiving cash repayment. For that to happen, however, the stock price must trade well above the conversion price. 

In this case, the conversion price is about $183 per share, about double the current stock price of roughly $90. Unless the stock stages a dramatic recovery, those bonds are unlikely to be converted into shares, meaning Strategy would need to repay the $1 billion in cash. 

The stock has fallen nearly 79% over the past year, and Bitcoin's decline has only magnified the losses. Bitcoin itself has dropped roughly 50% from its peak, falling below $60,000 depending on the day. When Bitcoin was making new highs, investor excitement seemed endless. Now that prices have been cut roughly in half, much of that enthusiasm has disappeared.   

Michael Saylor has also been noticeably absent from major interviews in recent months. Whether that is because demand for his appearances has faded or because the company's performance has made those appearances more difficult is open to interpretation. Strategy stock reached a high of around $473 in late 2024 and now trades near $90. 

We've discussed this company many times before. The concern has always been that Strategy is not creating meaningful operating growth as it is primarily just borrowing money to buy Bitcoin. Unlike a traditional operating company, it is not relying on expanding products or services to drive future earnings. 

At the moment, there does not appear to be a clear catalyst that would significantly lift either Bitcoin or Strategy's stock price. If the shares remain well below the conversion price as the 2027 maturity approaches, investors are likely to become increasingly concerned about how the company will repay its debt. That uncertainty could continue to put pressure on the stock. 

 

Upper-middle-class Americans may not be as financially secure as they would like 

Upper-middle-class Americans, generally defined as households earning between $150,000 and $250,000 per year, may be in a stronger financial position than most, but many are becoming increasingly pessimistic about the future. 

You may be surprised to learn that 86% of upper-middle-class Americans do not believe their children will have a better life than they have. Just seven years ago, in 2019, that figure was only 64%. 

Many upper-middle-class households are also losing confidence in the economic system and the government. They increasingly feel that the odds are stacked against them, making it harder to continue moving ahead financially. In the most recent Wall Street Journal survey, 65% of affluent Americans said they believe the system is rigged against them, more than double the 29% who felt that way in 2017. 

The news isn't much better for the middle class, generally defined as households earning between $65,000 and $235,000 annually. Only 25% said they have been able to save beyond an emergency fund. Roughly one in four also reported carrying credit card debt that they are unable to pay off in full each month. 

Despite these concerns, there has still been significant upward mobility. About 75% of people in today's upper-income group said they now belong to a higher economic class than the one they grew up in. Among middle-class Americans, roughly half said they also grew up in a lower economic class than where they are today. 

Views on higher education are changing as well. About one-third of middle-class Americans no longer believe a four-year college degree is the best path to financial success. Rising tuition costs, growing student debt, and the availability of alternative career paths have caused many to rethink the traditional college route. 

No matter which income group people belong to, there is often a desire to improve their financial situation and move up economically. That ambition is a healthy part of human nature and is often what drives people to work harder, save more, and invest for the future. While constantly striving for more can sometimes make it difficult to feel fully satisfied, the pursuit of improvement can also provide a strong sense of purpose and accomplishment. 

 

Did The Recent Jobs Report Tell the Whole Story? 

At first glance, this weeks jobs report looked fairly uneventful. The U.S. economy added 57,000 nonfarm payroll jobs in June, and the unemployment rate fell to 4.2%. This was below the estimate of 115k, but it does follow three strong months of payroll growth. 

After looking through the report, there are several numbers that raise some important questions. 

The first is the labor force. About 720,000 people left the labor force in June, pushing the labor force participation rate down to 61.5%, the lowest since March 2021. Even more troubling is that if we exclude the Covid-era, it was the lowest labor force participation rate in exactly 50 years. When people stop looking for work, they are no longer counted as unemployed, which can make the unemployment rate appear stronger than it otherwise would. 

Another surprising number was leisure and hospitality, which lost 61,000 jobs. June is typically one of the strongest hiring months of the year for hotels, restaurants, entertainment, and travel-related businesses. The Bureau of Labor Statistics attributed much of the decline to weaker-than-normal seasonal hiring, but it's still worth asking whether this reflects a temporary statistical issue or an early sign that consumer spending is beginning to soften. It is especially strange given the popularity of the World Cup and many speculated this would be a strong sector in the report. Goldman Sachs in particular estimated a gain of 40k in leisure and hospitality before the report was released. 

Then there is the latest JOLTS report. Job openings stood at 7.6 million in May, showing employers are still looking for workers, but the question is if people are actually leaving the workforce can these jobs actually get filled? 

One report never tells the entire story, but these numbers deserve a closer look. Was June simply an odd month because of seasonal adjustments? Or are we beginning to see a labor market that is slowing more quickly than the headline unemployment rate suggests? The next few months of data should help answer that question. 

 

The biggest risk in AI may not be the technology, it may be the economics. 

This week, Bradley Tusk and Ed Zitron raised important questions that investors shouldn't ignore. 

Bradley Tusk (founder and CEO of Tusk Ventures and a venture capitalist) made an interesting observation: investors are treating frontier AI models the same. But China's AI companies are proving that powerful models can be developed much more cheaply and improve much faster than many expected. If lower-cost models continue to narrow the performance gap, AI models could become increasingly commoditized, making it much harder for companies spending hundreds of billions of dollars on infrastructure to earn attractive returns. 

Ed Zitron (author, podcaster and tech industry critic) echoed a similar concern from a different angle. He argues that AI companies are engaged in an expensive arms race, pouring enormous amounts of capital into chips, data centers, and model development without proving that the economics will justify the investment. As he has said, companies are "burning money at an astonishing rate" while investors continue to assume future profits will eventually catch up. 

This also ties into a warning from co-funder and CEO of Palantir Technologies, Alex Karp . He has criticized what he calls "token maxxing"—the idea that success in AI is simply about generating more tokens, building bigger models, and spending more on compute. Karp's point is that producing more AI output doesn't automatically create more business value. The companies that ultimately win will be the ones that solve real customer problems and generate durable profits, not necessarily those that consume the most GPUs or produce the most tokens. 

History shows that revolutionary technologies don't always produce the best investments. The internet transformed the world, but many of the biggest companies of the dot-com era disappeared because expectations got too far ahead of profits. 

AI will almost certainly reshape the economy. The bigger question for investors is whether the companies making the largest investments will ultimately earn the returns the market is expecting—or whether AI models become increasingly commoditized, leaving the biggest winners to be the businesses that successfully apply AI rather than simply build larger models. 

 

Financial Planning: Trump Account Investment Options Released Ahead of $1,000 Seed Funding 

Trump Accounts are expected to receive $1,000 of government seed money as soon as the 4th of July. If you have a child born in 2025 through 2028, you can apply online now at trumpaccounts.gov. This is basically a retirement account with a caveat, contributions can be made on behalf of children even if they don’t have earned income.  However extra contributions are made on an after-tax non-Roth basis so no upfront tax deduction and no tax-free growth. Instead contributions establish cost basis and investment earnings grow tax-deferred, but are ultimately taxed upon withdrawal at ordinary income rates. In practice, this tax deferral benefit is overstated. This week the Treasury Department released 5 investment options: SPYM, IVV, VTI, ITOT, and SPTM. These are virtually all the same investment, a low fee fund that is heavily weighted toward the largest US companies. This means there is no reason to sell or rebalance, so the only real option is to buy and hold.  Buying and holding can also be done in a regular brokerage account with tax deferred until sale, but at the lower, potentially 0%, long-term capital gains rates rather than the higher ordinary income rates. Some planning strategies involve funding the Trump account and later converting it to a Roth. However, those conversions would still trigger tax at ordinary income rates and potentially trigger the kiddie tax, pulling the income into the parent’s tax bracket. Since in every possible situation, the long-term capital gain tax rate is always less than the ordinary income tax rate, a better strategy may be to fund a brokerage account and use the future proceeds to make contributions to Roth accounts which likely could be done tax-free rather than funding a Trump account and eventually making Roth conversions at a higher rate. For this reason, while the $1,000 government seed contribution is worth it, additional voluntary contributions may be less attractive compared to already available alternatives. 

 

Companies Discussed: Meta Platforms, Inc. (Ticker: META) 

June 26th, 2026 | iPhone 18: Pay More, Strong Dollar Returns, Can Google Challenge Nvidia? Dow's Alphabet Warning, Fed Backs Bank Strength, Quantum Computing Explained, Accessing Home Equity & More

Want the New iPhone 18 This September? Be Prepared to Pay More…. A Lot More

The iPhone 18 is expected to be released in just a few months, and if current estimates are accurate, consumers could be facing some serious sticker shock. One of the biggest reasons is the ongoing battle for semiconductor components. The rapid buildout of AI data centers has created enormous demand for memory chips, and data center operators are willing to pay almost any price to secure supply. That is creating challenges for companies like Apple, which rely heavily on DRAM (dynamic random-access memory) and NAND flash storage.

 

According to industry estimates, the cost of 12GB of DRAM used in the iPhone 17 was about $39. For the iPhone 18 Pro, that figure could rise to approximately $145. NAND flash storage costs are also expected to surge. The 256GB of flash storage that cost Apple around $13 in the iPhone 17 is projected to cost roughly $51 in the iPhone 18, an increase of nearly 300%.

 

Apple may also introduce a redesigned camera system that could cost about 50% more than the cameras used in previous models, adding even more pressure to manufacturing costs.

 

Apple currently earns an estimated gross margin of roughly 44% on the iPhone 17. If the company attempts to maintain those margins while absorbing these higher component costs, the price of a high-end iPhone 18 could climb to around $1,300 or more.

 

The big questions are: Will Apple absorb some of these higher costs and accept lower profit margins? Or will consumers decide that the latest upgrade isn't worth the higher price and keep their current phones for another year?

 

Either scenario could create headwinds for Apple's earnings. Lower margins would hurt profitability, while slower upgrade cycles could reduce unit sales. Both outcomes could put pressure on Apple's stock in the months ahead.

 

Bad News: The Dollar Is Strong Again

Some people may read that headline and think, "What's the problem? Isn't a strong dollar a good thing?" Not necessarily. A strong dollar sounds positive, but the reality is more complicated. The U.S. dollar is now at its strongest level since May 2025. While that may feel good on the surface, a stronger dollar can create challenges for the economy.

 

When the dollar rises, American products become more expensive for the rest of the world to buy, which can worsen our trade deficit. At the same time, imported goods become cheaper for Americans. Consumers may enjoy lower prices on foreign products, but it also means more money flows overseas instead of supporting domestic businesses.

 

Over the long term, that can weaken U.S. manufacturing, increase our reliance on imports, and contribute to growing debt levels.

 

What's driving the dollar higher? Two major factors stand out. First, the new Federal Reserve leadership signaled a more hawkish stance at its most recent meeting. Nine of the 19 officials now expect at least one rate hike before year-end. Higher interest rates generally make the dollar more attractive to global investors. Second, the AI investment boom continues to fuel U.S. economic growth. However, the enormous capital required for AI infrastructure is leading companies to borrow heavily to finance those investments. This increased demand for capital competes with U.S. Treasury bonds for investor dollars, which could keep long-term interest rates elevated or even push them higher.

 

The AI boom has already increased speculation and risk in the equity market. Now it may also be creating additional risks in the bond market. Wherever you're investing, make sure you understand the relationship between risk and reward before committing your capital

 

Can Alphabet/Google Take Some of Nvidia's Market Share?

Nvidia currently controls roughly 90% of the AI computing chip market. Whenever a company dominates an industry to that extent, it creates an opportunity for competitors to enter with comparable products at lower prices. That's exactly what Alphabet's Google is attempting to do with its artificial intelligence chips.

 

Google originally developed its custom AI chips for internal use, but it quickly realized there was a much bigger opportunity. With demand for AI infrastructure exploding, Google is now producing more chips and making them available to outside customers.

 

Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang has repeatedly stated, both publicly and privately, that increased competition will not have a meaningful impact on Nvidia's business. But what else can he say? Competition almost certainly will affect Nvidia to some degree. The company may eventually lose some market share and could be forced to lower chip prices to maintain its dominant position.

 

Google has significant financial resources to support its AI ambitions. In western New York, for example, Google reportedly provided a $3.2 billion financial guarantee tied to the Lake Marina AI data center project. Nvidia has used similar strategies in the past to strengthen relationships with customers and partners.

 

This type of financing does concern me. When you provide financing to a company that is also purchasing your products, you take on two risks. If that customer runs into financial trouble, you could lose both future product sales and repayment on the financing arrangement.

 

I also suspect Nvidia has substantial leverage with many of its customers. Companies may worry that reducing purchases from Nvidia today could limit their access to future chip allocations if demand remains strong.

 

Google isn't the only company challenging Nvidia. Competitors such as AMD, Broadcom, and newer entrants like Cerebras Systems are all looking for ways to gain a foothold in the rapidly growing AI chip market.

 

Nvidia stock has delivered incredible returns over the past several years. The question investors should be asking is whether increasing competition and the possibility of future chip oversupply could eventually take some of the shine off Nvidia's valuation.

 

The Dow’s Alphabet Move Is a Sign of Weakness, Not Strength

The Dow Jones is once again proving why it has become one of the most outdated and least useful stock market indexes in America.

 

This week S&P Dow Jones Indices announced that Alphabet will be added to the Dow, replacing Verizon. The financial media is treating it like the Dow is finally modernizing itself for the AI era. I see it differently. This is not leadership. It is not vision. It is not smart index construction. It is the Dow doing what it has done for years: showing up late, after everyone else has already made the money.

 

The Dow is supposed to represent the most important companies in the American economy. But unlike the S&P 500, it is not rules-based. There is no formula, no discipline, no objective threshold that decides who gets in and who gets kicked out. Instead, a committee at S&P Dow Jones decides when the index should change and which companies “feel right” for the list. That sounds harmless until you realize what it really means: the Dow is not a market index so much as a committee-curated museum exhibit that occasionally swaps out an old display piece for whatever has already become impossible to ignore.

 

That is exactly what is happening with Alphabet. Google has been one of the most dominant businesses on earth for well over a decade. It has been central to digital advertising, cloud computing, mobile software, and now artificial intelligence. None of that is new. The AI spending boom did not start yesterday. The Magnificent Seven did not suddenly become important last week. These companies have been driving market returns, corporate profits, and capital spending for years. Yet only now does the Dow decide it needs more exposure to big tech? That is not being ahead of the curve. That is a lagging indicator pretending to be a benchmark.

 

And the timing could not be more ridiculous. Instead of adding these companies before the market fully priced in their dominance, the Dow is adding them after the entire world has piled into the trade. After valuations expanded. After AI enthusiasm exploded. After mega-cap concentration became one of the biggest risks in the market. In other words, the Dow ignored the most important trend in the market for years and is now buying into it once the trade is crowded. The Dow will now hold five of the Magnificent Seven—Alphabet, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, and Nvidia—which together will account for roughly 18% of the index. This is not modernization. That is panic buying in a suit.

 

What makes it even more absurd is that the Dow still uses a price-weighted structure, which is one of the silliest relics in finance. A stock’s influence in the index is determined by its share price, not by the actual size of the company or its economic importance. Think about how insane that is. In a supposedly elite index of America’s biggest companies, weighting is still distorted by something as arbitrary as the sticker price of one share. A stock split can change a company’s importance in the Dow more than a change in its business fundamentals. This also leads to more concentration with high priced stocks like Goldman Sachs accounting for roughly 13% of the entire index and Caterpillar making up around 12%. This compares to low priced stocks like Verizon or Nike which each only currently account for about 0.5% of the index.  

 

So now the Dow wants to have it both ways. It wants the credibility of owning AI and mega-cap tech leaders, but it wants to keep the same outdated structure and the same slow-moving committee process that made it miss the trend in the first place. It wants to look relevant without actually fixing what makes it irrelevant.

Replacing Verizon with Alphabet may make the Dow look smarter for a headline or two, but it actually exposes the problem. The Dow did not identify the future. It waited until the future was obvious, then stapled it onto an old index and called it progress.

 

The truth is the Dow has become a follower, not a leader. It reflects where the committee finally got comfortable going after the move already happened. And by adding more mega-cap tech exposure now, after years of delay, it may be doing exactly what bad investors do: chasing yesterday’s winners while taking on tomorrow’s risk.

 

The Dow is not evolving. It is flailing. And every one of these late-stage reshuffles is a reminder that the most famous index in America may also be one of the least relevant.

 

Fed Stress Test Confirms the Strength of U.S. Bank Balance Sheets

U.S. banks once again came through the Federal Reserve’s 2026 stress test looking structurally strong, even under an intentionally severe economic downturn scenario. The results continue to reinforce one of the most important post-financial-crisis themes: large banks today are built to withstand a shock that would have been destabilizing in prior cycles.

 

The Fed’s hypothetical scenario was deliberately harsh. It assumed a deep global recession with the U.S. economy contracting 4.6% and unemployment rising to around 10%. Housing prices would fall 30% from their current levels, the stock market would plunge 58% and there would be a 39% drop in commercial real estate prices. The framework is designed to test not just mild downturns, but a “worst plausible case” scenario that stresses bank balance sheets across multiple channels at once. Under that scenario, the Fed estimated cumulative losses across the largest 32 banks at roughly $700 billion, with the bulk coming from credit cards, corporate lending, and commercial real estate exposure. Despite those losses, all major institutions remained above required minimum capital levels. Capital ratios declined during the stress period, as expected, but stayed comfortably within regulatory buffers, underscoring how much capital has been built into the system since the 2008 financial crisis and subsequent regulatory reforms.

 

What stands out this year is not just that banks passed, but the margin by which they did so. Even under simultaneous pressure from unemployment, real estate, and equity drawdowns, the system showed the ability to absorb losses while still maintaining lending capacity. That “lend-through-cycle” characteristic is one of the key goals of post-crisis regulation, and the results suggest it is functioning as intended.

 

From an investor perspective, the more immediate implication is capital return. Passing the stress test is effectively the green light for banks to continue deploying excess capital back to shareholders. JPMorgan Chase unveiled a new $50 billion share repurchase program and said it will increase its quarterly dividend 10% to $1.65 per share, subject to board approval. Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo increased their dividends 11% and Morgan Stanley boosted its payout by 15%.

 

Importantly, the Federal Reserve did not materially tighten capital requirements in this round, which removes a potential headwind that some investors had been watching. Instead, capital rules remain broadly stable, allowing banks to operate with predictability in their capital planning. That stability is key, because it supports consistent buyback programs rather than volatile, stop-and-go capital return cycles.

 

Taken together, the results reinforce a familiar but important conclusion: large U.S. banks today are not only capable of surviving severe macroeconomic stress, but they are doing so while generating enough earnings power to continue returning substantial capital through both dividends and buybacks. In a market where macro uncertainty remains elevated, that combination of resilience and shareholder yield continues to be a defining feature of the banking sector.

 

What Is Quantum Computing All About?

Quantum computing is the next big step in the evolution of computing, and there’s no way around it: it’s a complex subject. But it’s also one of the most important technologies being developed today. If your son or daughter is in high school and unsure what they want to study in college, they may want to consider quantum physics, engineering, or computer science with a focus on quantum computing. Over the next decade, the world is going to need far more people who understand this field, whether that means working in quantum research labs, developing software, building hardware, or solving the many engineering problems that still stand in the way of commercial adoption.

 

At its core, quantum computing is different from traditional computing because it uses quantum mechanics rather than classical binary logic. Today’s computers rely on CPUs and GPUs that process information in bits or ones and zeros. Quantum computers use quantum processing units, or QPUs, powered by qubits. Qubits can behave in ways classical bits cannot, which gives quantum systems the potential to solve certain problems dramatically faster than even the most powerful computers we have today.

 

There are currently four major approaches, or architectures, being used to build quantum computers: superconducting, neutral atoms, trapped ions, and photonics. Each has strengths and weaknesses, and no one yet knows which approach will ultimately dominate. But all of them are trying to achieve the same goal: building machines capable of solving problems that are effectively impossible for classical computers.

 

That matters because the upside is enormous. Quantum computers could transform fields like drug discovery, materials science, logistics, finance, and artificial intelligence. They may also eventually be able to crack some of the encryption methods that protect today’s digital world, which is one reason governments are taking the technology so seriously. It’s not just a commercial race, it’s increasingly a national security race as well.

 

And that’s where the geopolitical angle comes in. China has been heavily subsidizing quantum research. The future may not just be defined by military arms races, but by technology races, especially in areas like artificial intelligence, semiconductors, and quantum computing.

 

The financial opportunity is also huge. By 2035, quantum computing is expected to generate roughly $43 billion to $71 billion in revenue. By 2040, some forecasts see that number climbing as high as $850 billion. Those are enormous figures for a technology that is still in its early innings, which helps explain why so much money is flowing into the space. I have to admit, quantum computing is both exciting and a little scary. A technology that can solve problems far faster than today’s computers could open the door to incredible breakthroughs, but it could also create entirely new risks. Then again, that’s true of almost every major technological leap in history. Progress is often uncomfortable at first, but it also has the power to reshape the world in ways we can’t yet fully imagine.

 

Financial Planning: Accessing Home Equity

Homeowners tapped an estimated $47 billion of their roughly $11 trillion of home equity during the first quarter of 2026, the highest first quarter total since 2021. There are three primary ways to borrow against that equity. A cash-out refinance replaces your current mortgage with a larger one, but this generally only makes sense if today's interest rates are similar to or lower than your existing mortgage rate. That is unlikely for homeowners who locked in historically low rates during 2020 through 2022. A home equity loan functions as a second mortgage with its own fixed interest rate and monthly payment, making it a good choice when you need a lump sum for a specific purpose, such as a home renovation. A Home Equity Line of Credit (HELOC) is a revolving line of credit that allows you to borrow only what you need and repay it on your own schedule. While HELOCs typically have variable interest rates, they also provide the greatest flexibility and can make sense in today's interest rate environment. Regardless of which strategy you choose, home equity should be used to improve your overall financial position, such as consolidating high interest debt, funding value-adding home improvements, or purchasing appreciating assets. It should not be used to finance ongoing living expenses or discretionary spending.

 

Companies Discussed: Netflix Inc. (NFLX)

June 19th, 2026 | Mega IPO Mania, Lessons From Bubbles, Private Credit Pressure, Fundamentals Ignored Again, Economy Beats Headlines, Fed's Real Message, Smarter Charitable Giving & More

You Didn’t Get SpaceX? Don’t Worry, There Are Other Mega IPOs Coming

You may feel like everyone got into SpaceX except you, and now you're wondering: Should I buy shares today? Is there something better coming next? The reality is that several other massive IPOs could be coming sooner than many investors realize. At the top of the list are OpenAI, with an estimated valuation of $852 billion, Anthropic, with an estimated valuation of $965 billion, Stripe, with an estimated valuation of $159 billion, and Databricks, with an estimated valuation of $134 billion.

Before you get too excited about these potential offerings, or beat yourself up for missing SpaceX, consider what the historical data tells us. Research examining 1,724 U.S. IPOs between 2011 and 2024 found that the average IPO gained approximately 23% on its first day of trading. However, over the following three years, those same IPOs underperformed the broader market by an average of 25 percentage points.

The study also found that since 1980, companies coming public with at least $100 million in annual sales and a price-to-sales ratio above 40 experienced an average decline of 45% from their first-day closing price.

For current SpaceX shareholders, there could still be a near-term catalyst. Under Nasdaq's fast-entry rules, newly public companies can become eligible for inclusion in the Nasdaq-100 after just 15 trading days. However, both the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones indexes currently maintain a 12-month waiting period before new companies become eligible for inclusion.

If your appetite for risk remains high, you'll likely have opportunities to speculate on OpenAI, Anthropic, Databricks, and other AI-related companies when they eventually go public.

But an interesting question remains: When these AI giants hit the public markets, will investors who bought SpaceX at the IPO decide to sell some of their shares and rotate into the next hot AI opportunity?

There are plenty of unanswered questions, which is exactly why we prefer not to invest based on hype, headlines, or fear of missing out. Instead, we focus on financial fundamentals, valuation, cash flow, and long-term business quality. Exciting stories can drive prices higher for a while, but over time, fundamentals tend to matter most.

 

What Can the Nifty Fifty and Tech Bubble Teach Us About Today's Market?

Every market cycle has a story. In the early 1970s it was the "Nifty Fifty." In the late 1990s it was the internet and technology boom. Today it is artificial intelligence.

The late 1990s we saw the technology boom where the internet was a revolutionary innovation that truly changed the world. Investors were correct about the technology but wrong about what they should pay for it. Companies with little revenue and no profits traded at astronomical valuations. The Nasdaq saw a five-fold increase between 1995 and early 2000.

When the bubble burst, the fallout was severe. The Nasdaq ultimately lost almost 80% of its value. Hundreds of companies disappeared. Even industry leaders such as Cisco, Intel, and Microsoft experienced stock declines of 50% to 90%. Many investors assumed technology would continue growing forever and overlooked the simple fact that stock prices had already discounted years of future success. After peaking in March 2000, it took over 15 years for the Nasdaq to reclaim its previous high in April 2015.

Often times I hear people say this time is different because unlike many internet companies in 2000, today's AI leaders are highly profitable businesses generating enormous cash flow. So, let’s take a look at the Nifty Fifty as another, maybe more similar example.

The Nifty Fifty era was built around the belief that a small group of dominant companies were so good that valuation no longer mattered. Investors piled into stocks such as Coca-Cola, IBM, Xerox, Polaroid, McDonald's, Sears and others. These companies were viewed as "one-decision stocks “buy them and never sell them. Investors would make excuses for the valuations because the businesses were strong. Through 1972, these firms averaged 22% annual earnings growth over the previous five-year period and had great profitability with an average return on equity over 22%. The problem was as enthusiasm grew, valuations expanded dramatically, with many trading at 40 to 60 times earnings despite an economy growing much slower.

Then reality arrived. The 1973-74 bear market combined with inflation, rising interest rates, and an economic recession caused many of these stocks to fall 50% to 80%. The S&P 500 fell over 14% in 1973 and more than 26% in 1974. Most of the companies survived and remained successful businesses, but investors who paid excessive prices often waited a decade or longer to earn satisfactory returns.

Today's AI boom has similarities to both periods. Like the Nifty Fifty, investors are concentrating heavily in a small number of dominant companies. Like the tech bubble, there is widespread excitement surrounding a transformational technology that is likely to reshape entire industries.

However, history reminds us that even great companies can become poor investments when expectations become too optimistic. During every major market cycle, investors eventually discover the difference between a great business and a great stock.

The key lesson from both the Nifty Fifty and the dot-com era is that transformative technologies often live up to their promise. What investors frequently get wrong is the price they are willing to pay for that future growth.

AI may ultimately be every bit as revolutionary as investors believe. The bigger question is whether today's stock prices already reflect much of that future success. As we've learned from previous cycles, when expectations become too high, excellent results may not be enough to satisfy the market.

 

Private Credit Funds Are Facing High Redemption Requests Again This Quarter

For the first quarter of 2026, redemption requests in several private credit funds exceeded the industry-standard 5% quarterly redemption cap.

Second-quarter requests appear to be even higher. BlackRock's flagship private credit fund received redemption requests totaling 13.3% of fund assets, up from 9.3% in the first quarter. BlackRock has indicated it will continue to honor only up to 5% of redemption requests per quarter.

Blackstone is facing a similar situation. Investors requested redemptions equal to roughly 10% of fund assets, and the firm also appears committed to maintaining its 5% quarterly redemption limit.

Cliffwater may be facing the greatest pressure. Its $31 billion private credit fund received redemption requests totaling 17% of fund assets, far above the amount investors can currently withdraw and higher than the roughly 14% that was requested in Q1.

Private credit funds have been dealing with a number of challenges, including rising loan losses, fraud concerns, and significant exposure to software companies. Many software businesses are facing pressure as investors question how artificial intelligence could impact their future growth and profitability.

During BlackRock's last earnings call, CEO Larry Fink stated that institutional investors such as pension funds and insurance companies continue to allocate capital to private credit strategies. I don’t want to call the man a liar, but it does seem strange that with all the problems that private credit is having I would think institutional funds would also be pulling back from investing. One would expect at least some institutional investors to become more cautious as risks increase.

What concerns me most is the continued use of redemption gates. The longer funds limit withdrawals to 5% per quarter, the more investors may worry about liquidity. That concern can become self-reinforcing, leading more investors to submit redemption requests. If that happens, redemption demand could continue to rise in future quarters, creating additional pressure on the industry.

 

Investors Turn a Blind Eye to Fundamentals

For many years, successful investing was built on analyzing company fundamentals. Today, however, there is a growing trend toward speculation and gambling. Many investors simply do not seem to care about valuation or earnings and instead believe stocks will continue to go "to the moon."

Tesla is a good example. Three years ago, Wall Street analysts projected that Tesla would generate $163 billion in revenue by 2025. The actual figure came in far lower at $94.8 billion, more than 40% below expectations. Historically, missing growth expectations by such a wide margin would have been a major disappointment for investors. Yet Tesla shares have risen roughly 59% over the last three years despite falling well short of those revenue projections.

There are other signs of speculation throughout the market. Thirteen years ago, there were only 39 private companies valued at more than $1 billion. Today, there are over 800.

This trend highlights two important developments. First, private companies are staying private much longer, allowing early investors to capture a greater share of the value creation before public investors have an opportunity to participate. Second, investors are assigning much higher valuations to these businesses, many of which have little or no earnings and, in some cases, no positive cash flow at all.

Markets can remain driven by optimism for long periods of time, but eventually fundamentals matter. The challenge for investors is determining when sentiment and speculation have pushed prices too far ahead of reality.

 

Headlines Say Crisis, Economic Data Says Otherwise

The economy continues to show surprising resilience despite concerns surrounding higher energy prices and the conflict involving Iran.

Many investors expected consumers to pull back as gasoline prices surged and headlines focused on geopolitical risks. Instead, economic data suggests the U.S. consumer remains in good shape.

Retail sales in May rose 6.9% from the prior year, exceeding expectations and demonstrating that consumers are still willing to spend despite higher fuel costs. Even excluding gasoline stations, retail sales increased 5.4%, showing that spending strength was broad-based rather than simply a reflection of higher energy prices. Online sales, clothing purchases, restaurant spending, and other discretionary categories all contributed to the gains.

Housing is also showing signs of stabilization. Pending home sales, which measure signed contracts on existing homes, rose 3.8% in May to the highest level in six months. The increase was well above economist expectations and marked a 4.8% improvement from a year ago.

What makes these numbers particularly impressive is that they occurred while mortgage rates remained above 6% and energy prices were elevated because of Middle East tensions. Buyers and consumers appear to be adapting to a higher-rate environment rather than waiting indefinitely for lower borrowing costs.

This does not mean there are no risks. Higher energy prices act like a tax on consumers, and housing affordability remains a challenge. However, the latest retail sales and housing data suggest the economy is far from rolling over.

For investors, this is another reminder that economic fundamentals often matter more than headlines. While markets may focus on wars, oil prices, and geopolitical uncertainty, consumers are still spending, homes are still being purchased, and the economy continues to move forward.

 

The Most Important Part of the Fed Meeting Wasn't the Rate Decision

The Federal Reserve's June meeting marked one of the biggest shifts in Fed communication and leadership in decades.

As expected, the Fed left interest rates unchanged at 3.50%-3.75%, but the details beneath the surface were far more important.

For the first time since 1951, a former Fed chair will remain on the Board after stepping down as chairman. Jerome Powell's decision to stay on as a governor creates an unusual dynamic as new Chairman Kevin Warsh begins reshaping the institution. Historically, outgoing Fed chairs have typically left the Board when their chairmanship ended.

Warsh wasted little time signaling change.

The Fed announced five new task forces that will review key aspects of monetary policy and Federal Reserve operations, including inflation frameworks, the Fed’s balance sheet, its reliance on data sources, and productivity and jobs and the impact of artificial intelligence and other transformative technologies. The reviews are expected to produce recommendations later this year and could shape how the Fed operates for years to come.

Perhaps the most noticeable change was the Fed statement itself. The policy statement was significantly shortened and went from above 300 words recorded in recent meetings to around 130 wors. It also removed much of the forward-looking language that investors had grown accustomed to under previous leadership. Language that suggested a bias toward future rate cuts was eliminated, reflecting a more data-dependent and less guidance-driven approach.

The updated projections were also more hawkish than many expected. Nine of the 18 policymakers who submitted forecasts now expect at least one rate hike before year-end, while the other nine see rates remaining unchanged or moving lower. The result is a Fed that appears deeply divided on the path forward as inflation remains above target.

Another major headline came from Warsh himself. Only 18 of the Fed's 19 policymakers submitted a forecast in the quarterly dot plot, with Warsh confirming that he did not provide one. As a long-time critic of forward guidance, Warsh appears to be signaling that the Fed may gradually move away from one of Wall Street's most closely watched communication tools.

Half of the committee is worried inflation remains too high and believes rates may need to move higher. The other half sees little need for additional tightening. This sets the stage for Warsh’s hope for a “family fight” as he believes more disagreement will lead to a better discussion so the Fed can finally deliver on price stability. While the rate decision itself was unanimous, the projections revealed a growing divide beneath the surface.

The takeaway is clear: while rates didn't move, the Federal Reserve did. A shorter statement, less forward guidance, a chairman who won't publish his own rate forecast, five new policy task forces, and a committee split down the middle on the direction of rates all point to a Federal Reserve that looks very different than it did just a few months ago.

The era of predictable Fed communication may be ending, and markets will have to adjust.

 

Financial Planning: Give More, Pay Less with Appreciated Stock

One of the most tax-efficient ways to support a favorite charity or church is by donating appreciated stock instead of cash. When stock that has been held for more than one year is gifted directly to a qualified charity, the charity receives the full market value of the shares and can sell them without paying tax because it is a tax-exempt organization.

The donor generally receives the same charitable income tax deduction they would have received had they donated cash, while also avoiding the realization of any capital gain. For example, if someone is considering donating either $50,000 of cash or $50,000 of appreciated stock, the charity receives the same economic benefit in either case, $50,000 that can be used to further its mission. Likewise, the donor generally receives the same $50,000 itemized charitable deduction.

The difference is that if the stock was originally purchased for $20,000, donating the shares allows the donor to avoid recognizing the $30,000 capital gain. If the donor still wants to own the investment, they can use the cash that otherwise would have been donated to repurchase the shares, effectively increasing their cost basis from $20,000 to $50,000 and reducing future taxable gains.

 

Companies Discussed: Accenture plc (ACN)

June 12th, 2026 | Can Apple Modernize Siri? Is the Housing Market Normal Again? Inflation Hits Three-Year High, How Long Will the AI Buildout Last? Should You Buy the SpaceX IPO? & More

Can Apple Update the 16-Year-Old Siri?

This week marked Apple's annual Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) in Cupertino, California. One of the biggest storylines is Apple's effort to reinvent Siri, which many users now view as one of the least capable AI assistants on the market…

 

The Housing Market Is Finally Starting to Look Normal Again

For the last several years, the housing market has felt anything but normal. Ultra-low mortgage rates, limited inventory, bidding wars, and rapidly rising home prices created an environment that left many buyers frustrated and many sellers expecting unrealistic prices…

 

Inflation Hits a Three-Year High, But the Details Tell a Different Story

The latest Consumer Price Index (CPI) report showed inflation rising 4.2% year-over-year, the highest reading since April 2023. At first glance, that sounds concerning. But a deeper look shows that the inflation story is being driven largely by a handful of categories, especially energy and travel…

 

How long will the AI buildout cycle really last?

The market has rewarded virtually every company connected to AI infrastructure. Chip manufacturers, networking companies, power providers, cooling suppliers, data center REITs, and cloud providers have all benefited from an unprecedented surge in spending. But history tells us that every capital spending boom eventually slows…

 

SpaceX IPO Finally Come To the Market, Should You Buy Now?

 

Live Market Discussion!

 

Companies Discussed: Docusign, Inc (DOCU), Broadcom Inc. (AVGO), and Viasat, Inc. (VSAT)

 

June 5th, 2026 | What's Fueling the Tech Rally? Car Sales Are Down, May Jobs Report, Return on Homeownership & More

Where is the money coming from that is fueling this technology rally?

No one knows for certain, but there are some concerning signs that suggest many investors may not have the cash to support their positions and are instead relying on borrowed money to drive the rally higher. One metric we continue to monitor closely is margin debt, a potentially dangerous tool that has now reached record levels.

Margin debt hit a record $1.304 trillion in April, an increase of 6.8% from the previous month. On a year-over-year basis, margin debt surged 53.3%, highlighting the growing use of leverage in the market. Looking at US margin debt as a percent of real GDP, it just hit 5.2%. According to FINRA data that is an all-time high and during the dot-com era it was around 2% - 3%.

The risk with margin debt is that when stock prices decline, investors may receive a margin call requiring them to deposit additional funds into their accounts. If they are unable to meet that requirement, their broker can automatically liquidate positions to cover the shortfall. While margin rules vary based on several factors, you could be in hot water if your equity drops more than 25%.

With margin debt at such elevated levels, even a modest setback in the semiconductor or broader technology sector could trigger a chain reaction of forced selling as investors scramble to meet margin calls. Some investors may choose to exit positions before receiving a margin call, particularly if they become uncomfortable with the amount of leverage they have assumed. In those situations, emotions can accelerate selling pressure and amplify market volatility.

Technology and semiconductor stocks are already trading at elevated valuations. Adding substantial amounts of borrowed money to an already expensive market increases the risks and leaves investors vulnerable if market sentiment shifts.

 

Car Sales Are Down, and I Think That's a Good Thing

In 2019, consumers in the United States were buying roughly 17 million cars and trucks each year. This year, vehicle sales are expected to reach only about 16 million. Many consumers complain that new-car prices are simply too high, with the average new vehicle now costing around $50,000. Currently, only about 25% of new vehicles sold in the U.S. are priced between $25,000 and $35,000.

I believe this trend is actually a positive development. For too many years, automakers focused on producing as many vehicles as possible in an effort to gain market share. In the long run, this proved to be a poor business strategy. Over the years, several manufacturers required government bailouts, while others filed for bankruptcy, hurting shareholders, creditors, employees, and communities.

Of course, consumers benefited from this excess production. They could often find heavily discounted vehicles, generous incentives, and large rebates. However, those deals were frequently the result of an unsustainable business model.

Today, automakers, led by executives such as Mary Barra of General Motors, have adopted a different approach. Rather than producing excess inventory simply to increase market share, they are focusing on profitability and financial discipline. What a novel idea for a business. Ultimately, making a profit is the primary objective of any business.

Consumers have already begun adapting to higher vehicle costs. The average age of cars on U.S. roads has climbed to 13 years, up from less than six years in 1970, reflecting a growing tendency to hold onto vehicles longer. As a result, many consumers may need to take better care of their cars and keep them in service for more years, a choice that is often financially prudent anyway. Others may increasingly turn to high-quality used vehicles rather than purchasing new ones.

The industry's renewed commitment to profitability has also made some automakers more attractive investments. Strong cash flow, healthier balance sheets, and improved earnings have created value for shareholders while helping companies avoid the financial distress that plagued the industry in the past.

I do not expect this trend to change anytime soon, and in my view, that is a good thing.

 

The May jobs report delivered another reminder that the U.S. economy remains on solid footing

Employers added 172,000 jobs in May, well above expectations of 80,000, and the broader trend is becoming increasingly encouraging. Over the last three months, job growth has seen gains of 214k, 179k, and now 172k in May, an improvement from the pace we’ve seen really since the beginning of 2025. Rather than slowing, the labor market appears to be finding a sustainable rhythm that balances continued hiring with moderating inflation pressures.

One of the most notable areas of strength continues to be hospitality and leisure. The sector added 70k jobs in May, reflecting resilient consumer spending on travel, restaurants, entertainment, and experiences. Despite concerns that higher interest rates would weigh heavily on discretionary spending, Americans continue to spend on services, supporting employment growth across hotels, restaurants, and tourism-related businesses.

Perhaps the most important takeaway for investors and policymakers is what we're seeing in wages. Average hourly earnings rose 0.3% in May and are up 3.4% over the past year. That may be close to the sweet spot for the economy.

Wage growth is strong enough to support rising household incomes and consumer spending, but not so strong that it creates significant inflationary pressure. For much of the post-pandemic period, policymakers worried that rapid wage gains could fuel a wage-price spiral. Today's data suggests something different: workers are still seeing real income growth while wage inflation has moderated to a level more consistent with long-term price stability.

Taken together, the report paints a picture of an economy that remains healthy. Hiring is outperforming expectations, hospitality demand remains robust, unemployment remains low, and wage growth is providing support to consumers without reigniting inflation concerns.

That's about as close to a "soft landing" as policymakers could have hoped for a year ago.

 

Financial Planning: Return on Homeownership

Homeownership is often viewed as a superior financial decision, while renting is frequently considered "throwing money away." However, the comparison is more nuanced. A $1 million home in San Diego may rent for approximately $4,000 per month, while owning that same home could cost about $7,000 per month after a $200,000 down payment when the mortgage, property taxes, insurance, and maintenance are included. Even after accounting for estimated tax benefits of $1,000 per month and approximately $750 per month of equity from the principal reduction of the mortgage, the effective cost of ownership would still be about $5,250 per month.

In addition, the down payment represents capital that could otherwise be invested and generate returns. When the higher cost of ownership and the opportunity cost of the down payment are considered together, the home would need to appreciate by about 3.5% annually just to produce the same financial outcome as renting and investing the difference.

While homeownership offers benefits such as stability, control, and a fixed payment, future home price growth is likely to be much more modest than it was during the low-interest-rate environment of the past decade with many experts projecting between 2% and 3% per year. As a result, neither renting nor owning is inherently the better financial choice. Both can be effective strategies depending on an individual's goals, time horizon, lifestyle preferences, and overall financial circumstances.

 

Companies Discussed: Boston Scientific Corporation (BSX), Marvell Technology, Inc. (MRVL), The Western Union Company (WU) & AutoZone, Inc. (AZO)

May 29th, 2026 | How Much Growth Is Left for Nvidia? Consumer Cushion Shrinks, SpaceX IPO Mechanics, 401(k) Planning & More

Logic should tell you there may not be much growth left in Nvidia 

Investing has become increasingly emotional for many people, and too often investors stop thinking logically. Could the popular company Nvidia continue climbing higher? Of course it could. But there are logical reasons to believe its future growth may be limited compared to what investors expect today. 

First, consider the company’s market capitalization. As the stock price rises, so does the market cap, which currently sits around $5.2 trillion, depending on the day. To put that number into perspective, $5 trillion is roughly equal to the entire GDP of Japan. With that amount of money, you could buy all the real estate in New York City, London, and Tokyo combined. You could also purchase every major sports franchise in the world several times over. 

So investors should ask themselves: if you are buying or holding Nvidia today, are you expecting the company to double in value anytime soon to more than $10 trillion? Does that really seem realistic? 

Over the last year, Nvidia generated approximately $216 billion in revenue, which is nearly half the size of the entire U.S. consumer technology industry, estimated at $537 billion in 2025. The company’s revenue grew by about 65% year over year. If Nvidia were to repeat that same 65% growth rate in 2026, revenue would increase by roughly $140 billion, bringing total annual sales to around $356 billion. 

To understand how massive that growth would be, only about 25 companies in the entire S&P 500 generate more than $140 billion in annual revenue. In other words, Nvidia would need to add more revenue in a single year than 95% of S&P 500 companies produce in total annual sales. 

None of this means Nvidia is a bad company. In fact, it is an exceptional company doing extraordinary things. However, wherever enormous profits exist, competition inevitably follows. We are already hearing about major technology companies developing their own AI chips, while startups and rival semiconductor firms continue introducing competing products that could eventually take market share from Nvidia. 

Does that mean Nvidia is going to crash? Probably not. Could it happen? Anything is possible in the market. But for long-term investors, the bigger concern may be that future revenue growth simply cannot continue at the pace investors have become accustomed to. If growth slows meaningfully, the stock could experience years of stagnation or disappointing returns. That is the logical case investors should at least consider. 

  

The Consumer Isn’t Breaking, it’s Quietly Running Out of Cushion 

The recent economic data showed that inflation came in line with expectations and much of the shift can likely be attributed to higher energy prices. A bigger concern to keep an eye on is what’s happening to household finances underneath the surface. 

April core PCE, the Fed’s preferred inflation gauge, came in at 3.3% year-over-year, exactly in line with expectations. This was the highest annual level since November 2023. 

At this point, inflation still doesn’t appear to be a crisis story. If energy prices can decline, I believe much of the recent increase in inflation would dissipate and we’d head closer to the Fed’s 2% target.  

While I’d say inflation isn’t a major concern currently, the data suggests consumers are increasingly stretched financially. 

The clearest warning sign is the savings rate. The U.S. personal savings rate fell to just 2.6%, one of the lowest levels seen outside of the immediate Covid reopening period in 2022. The April reading was down from 3.2% in March and 5.8% a year prior. It also marked the lowest savings rate since June 2022 when it hit 2.2%. For perspective, Americans saved about 5-7% from 2010 to the beginning of 2020.  

That gap matters. It suggests consumers are continuing to spend, but they’re doing it with far less financial cushion than they historically had. Spending resilience is increasingly being supported by depleted savings, rising debt usage, and retirement account borrowing rather than excess cash reserves. 

Fidelity reported that 19.2% of workers now have an outstanding 401(k) loan, up from 18.8% a year ago. Meanwhile, hardship withdrawals across retirement plans continue to rise industrywide. Vanguard recently reported that 6% of account holders took hardship withdrawals in 2025, up from 4.8% the prior year and above pre-pandemic norms. 

Retirement accounts are increasingly functioning as emergency liquidity for everyday expenses. Historically, 401(k)s were largely treated as long-term investment vehicles. Now they’re becoming a financial backstop for consumers trying to maintain spending in a higher-rate environment. 

This data continues to point towards the concerns around the K-shape economy. While debt levels remain in check, increased debt balances or more 401k withdrawals could create more longer-term consequences that we should be aware of.  

  

The most important part of the SpaceX IPO may not be the valuation. It may be the mechanics behind the stock itself. 

SpaceX has yet to declare the size of its IPO offering, but it will likely be a single-digit percentage of the company’s total shares outstanding. That matters because float, not just valuation, can determines how violently a stock moves in the early months after an IPO. When demand is huge and supply is constrained, prices can disconnect from fundamentals quickly. If institutions, retail investors, and passive index funds are all competing for a tiny number of available shares, scarcity alone can drive a major rally independent of fundamentals. Nasdaq created a rule in May that shortened the waiting period for megacap stocks to be included in the Nasdaq 100 index to 15 trading days, which is down from as long as a year. There’s also a proposal to shorten the waiting period for S&P 500 inclusion to six months from 12 months and there’s speculation that could be implemented before the SpaceX IPO. If SpaceX is added rapidly to major indexes, passive funds and ETFs may become forced buyers while insiders gradually gain the ability to sell into strength. That creates a setup where institutional demand collides directly with controlled insider supply releases. The result could be extraordinary volatility in both directions. 

The lock-up structure may be even more important than the float itself. SpaceX plans to allow certain shareholders to sell portions of their stock before the traditional 180-day lock-up expires. Restrictions usually apply to existing investors, employees, large institutional investors or people with access to privileged information. Under the proposed structure, some insiders could begin selling as early as after the company’s first earnings report if performance targets are met. Up to 20% of the restricted shares may be sold shortly after the company releases its second-quarter earnings. Another 10% would be unlocked if the stock trades at least 30% above its IPO price. Additional tranches of 7% each are set to unlock at five intervals between 70 and 135 days after the listing, with a further 28% becoming available after a subsequent earnings report. Any remaining restricted shares would be eligible for sale after 180 days. Elon Musk, who holds 85.1% of the voting power and 12.3%  of the economic interest in Class A shares, agreed to a 366-day restriction. 

Historically, unlock events have often been brutal. The Facebook IPO is probably the clearest example. Facebook had an IPO of $38 in May 2012 during one of the most hyped tech IPOs ever. Within three months, the stock had already fallen sharply, but the real pressure came from the lock-up expirations. In August 2012, Facebook’s first major lock-up expiration released 270 million additional shares into the market increasing the publicly tradable share count by roughly 60%. The stock fell more than 6% that day and closed below $20, almost 48% below its IPO price. Interestingly, your returns in Meta/Facebook have been great and investors who bought the stock after its first day of trading are up close to 1,500%, but investors that bought six months later are up close to 2,500%. 

Facebook isn’t the only example. In fact, generally IPOs fizzle out shortly after the hype fades. Jay Ritter, a University of Florida professor, point out the 1,724 U.S. IPOs from 2011 through 2024 had an average first-day pop of 23%, but over the next three years, these stocks lagged behind the market by 25 percentage points. The trend is even more troubling for stocks that trade with a high premium. Since 1980, issuers with trailing annual sales of at least $100 million and a price-to-sales ratio above 40 have seen an average three-year drop of 45% from their first day’s close. 

The psychology behind lock-ups is simple. During the first few months after an IPO, the market is dealing with artificial scarcity. The available supply of stock is intentionally constrained while excitement and media attention are elevated. Once insiders are allowed to sell, the supply-demand balance changes immediately. What makes SpaceX interesting is that management appears to be trying to avoid a single catastrophic unlock day by spreading the selling pressure over time. In theory, that could reduce the probability of a massive one-day collapse like Facebook experienced. But it may also create a different environment where insider selling becomes a continuous overhang rather than one clean reset event. 

The lesson from previous IPO cycles is that the first trade and the long-term investment outcome are rarely the same thing. Stocks with tiny floats and massive narratives can become detached from fundamentals very quickly. Eventually supply catches up. 

  

Financial Planning: Match or Max Your 401(k) 

Many people have heard the advice to contribute enough to their 401(k) to receive the company match, but stopping there can mean leaving one of the most powerful wealth-building tools underutilized. A 401(k) allows investments to grow tax-deferred or tax-free with traditional and Roth contributions, which can significantly improve long-term after-tax returns compared to other investment options. Critics often argue that 401(k) plans have failed to replace traditional pensions, but in many cases the problem is not the structure of the 401(k) itself, it is that people simply have not contributed enough or invested appropriately over time. Not everyone is going to become a real estate mogul, successful entrepreneur, or business owner, and that is perfectly okay. The 401(k) was designed to allow ordinary workers to build extraordinary retirement security through disciplined saving and investing over decades. With consistent contributions, proper investment allocation, and time, a well-funded 401(k) can generate retirement income that exceeds many traditional pension plans while also providing greater flexibility and ownership of the assets. 

  

Companies Discussed: The Home Depot, Inc. (HD), Intuit Inc. (INTU), Ferrari N.V. (RACE) & MGM Resorts International (MGM) 

May 22nd, 2026 | Low P/E Stocks Performing Better in Overpriced Markets? Beer Budget Feeling the Gas Pump? SpaceX IPO, The Breakeven on Social Security & More

Why do low P/E stocks perform better in overpriced markets?

We are currently in a momentum-driven market, and many people are experiencing FOMO, which is the fear of missing out. Much of this is being fueled by AI and technology stocks, where investors are willing to pay almost any price because they believe these industries will continue growing indefinitely and they don’t want to miss the opportunity.

The problem is that high P/E stocks and companies with no P/E since there are no earnings at all already have massive future success priced into them. When the market eventually declines, as it always does at some point, it is often because these high-flying companies miss lofty expectations. That can trigger major selloffs and sharp declines in stock prices.

Low P/E stocks, on the other hand, typically have more modest growth expectations. Because expectations are lower, market downturns often have less impact on these companies. Many low P/E companies are also more mature businesses with stable cash flows, which tend to hold up better during slower economic periods. Examples include companies in consumer staples and financials.

In addition, many low P/E stocks pay dividends, which can help stabilize returns and reduce volatility during uncertain markets.

However, investors still need to be careful to avoid “value traps” which are companies with low P/E ratios that deserve to trade at low valuations. This is why understanding the “E” in the P/E ratio or the earnings is so important. You want to avoid investing in companies with declining businesses and shrinking earnings potential. Think about companies like Polaroid or Blockbuster, which failed to adapt as their industries changed.

It’s also important to remember that market cycles play out over years, not weeks or months. Just because a strategy has worked well for a couple of years doesn’t mean it will continue indefinitely. For example, it took roughly five years for the tech boom to fully unravel during the dot-com bubble.

 

Is Your Beer Budget Feeling the Gas Pump?

If your beer fridge has been looking a little emptier lately, you're not alone and the culprit might not be your willpower. New Nielsen scanner data shows that U.S. beer, hard seltzer, and cider volumes dropped 6.3% year over year through the week ending May 2, both on a two- and four-week trailing basis. This was nearly double the 3% declines seen between November and mid-April.

What's driving it? Analysts at Bernstein are pointing straight at the gas pump. There's a clear negative correlation between gas prices in a given state and beer volume growth, and it's becoming more visible in the data, particularly in markets with the most expensive fuel.

Average U.S. gasoline prices have risen roughly 52% since the start of the Iran war, according to AAA. That's a serious hit to household budgets and it shows. California, with fuel averaging around $6.16 per gallon, saw a 16% decline in beer volumes. Arizona and Texas weren't far behind, posting declines of 10% and nearly 7%, respectively. Convenience stores seem to be seeing the brunt of the decline as they are highly sensitive to gas station traffic and impulse purchases tied to commuting and travel.

Not every brand is suffering equally. Michelob Ultra is holding relatively flat, while Bud Light and Budweiser are posting double-digit volume declines. Boston Beer remains the weakest performer among major brewers.

 

Information is starting to trickle in about the SpaceX IPO

The SpaceX IPO is expected to be the largest initial public offering on record, with the potential to raise $80 billion or more through the stock sale. Based on the information currently available, SpaceX is expected to begin its roadshow around June 4th, which could place the public offering date near June 12th.

The company is expected to trade under the ticker symbol SPCX on the Nasdaq, as well as Nasdaq Texas, which would represent a significant blow to the New York Stock Exchange.

If you plan to read the entire prospectus, be prepared to invest some time. The filing totals 277 pages, not including notes and exhibits. By comparison, a typical IPO prospectus is usually fewer than 200 pages.

Financial data shows that in 2025, SpaceX generated revenue of $18.7 billion, an increase of 33% over the previous year. However, earnings declined sharply, with the company reporting a net loss of $4.9 billion compared with a profit of $791 million in 2024. Unsurprisingly, Elon Musk will serve as CEO.

Goldman Sachs is expected to lead the offering alongside Morgan Stanley, Bank of America, Citigroup, and JPMorgan Chase. Given the size of the deal, it will certainly be interesting to see how all five firms work together. As more important information becomes available, we will continue to keep you updated.

 

Financial Planning: The Breakeven on Social Security

Many people look at their Social Security statement and perform a breakeven analysis to determine how long they would have to live for waiting to claim benefits to pay off. These simple calculations often suggest that claiming at 62 is best if life expectancy is less than around 78, claiming at full retirement age around 67 makes sense if life expectancy is between 78 and 82, and waiting until 70 is best if someone expects to live beyond 82. The problem is that this type of analysis is often too simplistic and can be misleading. Most breakeven calculations only compare the total dollars received at different claiming ages and ignore several important factors. First, Social Security benefits continue to receive annual Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs), whether benefits are started early or delayed. Second, no one truly knows how long they will live, so any breakeven age is really just an estimate. Most importantly, many analyses ignore the time value of money. If someone starts benefits earlier, they may be able to reduce withdrawals from other retirement assets, allowing those investments more time to grow and potentially generate additional future income. When you factor in both Social Security COLAs and the potential return that could be earned on invested assets, the breakeven age often moves much later than people expect. In many cases, it can take well into someone’s 90s or beyond before delaying benefits actually produces a greater overall financial benefit. That does not mean taking benefits early is always the best choice, but it does show that Social Security decisions should be based on an overall retirement income strategy rather than a simple breakeven calculation alone.

 

Companies Discussed: Versant Media Group, Inc. (VSNT), YETI Holdings, Inc. (YETI), IMAX Corporation (IMAX) & Under Armour, Inc. (UAA)

May 15th, 2026 | Fed Inflation Problem Deepens, The Market Is Flashing Warning Signs, Consumers Keep Spending Away, Rental Property Performance & More

The Fed’s Inflation Problem Just Got More Complicated

U.S. inflation accelerated sharply in April, with CPI rising 3.8% year-over-year, the highest reading in nearly three years, as the Iran conflict continued to ripple through global energy markets. Core CPI, which excludes food and energy, also rose to 2.8%, up from 2.6% in March, suggesting inflation pressures are beginning to broaden beyond energy alone.

The biggest driver was oil. Ongoing disruptions around the Strait of Hormuz — one of the world’s most critical oil shipping routes — pushed crude prices sharply higher over the past two months. Gasoline prices surged again in April and are now up 28.4% compared to a year ago. Diesel, jet fuel, utilities, and transportation costs also moved higher. Analysts estimate energy alone accounted for more than 40% of the monthly CPI increase.

Food inflation also remained elevated, rising 3.2% year-over-year. Some categories saw especially sharp increases, including tomatoes (+39.7%) and fresh vegetables (+11.5%). Airline fares were another major outlier, jumping 20.7% from last year as higher fuel costs filtered through the travel industry.

The April inflation report complicates the Federal Reserve’s outlook. Markets had expected rate cuts later this year, but stronger inflation and resilient consumer spending are now pushing those expectations further out. Treasury yields moved higher immediately after the CPI release as investors repriced the likelihood of rates staying elevated for longer.

That said, it’s important not to overreact to a single report. In roughly two weeks, investors will get the PCE (Personal Consumption Expenditures) report, which is the inflation gauge the Federal Reserve watches most closely. Unlike CPI, PCE captures a broader view of consumer spending and adjusts more dynamically as spending habits change.

There are several key differences between the two reports. CPI primarily measures out-of-pocket spending by urban consumers, while PCE also includes rural households and purchases made on behalf of consumers, such as employer-sponsored healthcare and government programs like Medicare and Medicaid. As those costs rise, consumers still feel the impact indirectly.

PCE also better reflects substitution effects — meaning it captures when consumers shift from higher-priced goods to lower-cost alternatives during inflationary periods.

The weighting differences are significant as well. Housing makes up 44.5% of CPI but only 18.1% of PCE. Meanwhile, healthcare represents just 8.4% of CPI compared to 20.6% of PCE.

While the upcoming PCE report will likely also show inflation accelerating, the bigger question is whether this energy shock proves temporary or becomes more persistent. If oil prices remain elevated, energy could continue to be the primary driver behind inflation data for the next several months — and that would make the Fed’s path forward significantly more difficult.

 

The market continues to flash warning signs beneath the surface.

The semiconductor sector, as measured by the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index, has only been this extended above its 200-day moving average twice before in modern history: 1995 and early 2000. Those are not random comparisons. In 2000, semiconductors peaked alongside the final stages of the dot-com bubble, marking a generational top in speculative growth stocks.

In 1995, the outcome was different but still instructive: semiconductor stocks entered their own bear market even as the broader indexes continued grinding higher. Given that semiconductor stocks are now such a large part of the market, I believe it would be hard for the market to rally if this sector entered a bear market.

There was also another warning sign you should be aware of. Last week, the S&P 500 hit another record high while an unusually large number of individual stocks simultaneously registered fresh 52-week lows. Historically, that kind of divergence has rarely occurred outside of major topping periods. As Bespoke Investment Group noted: “Since 1996, the only other period where we saw the S&P at record highs with fewer than 60% of stocks above their 50- and 200-day moving averages was from late 1998 to early 2000.”

That matters because healthy bull markets are typically characterized by broad participation. When indexes rise while fewer stocks carry the advance, it often signals deteriorating internal strength masked by mega-cap concentration.

Today’s market has become increasingly dependent on a handful of AI and semiconductor names to sustain index performance. Valuations across those leadership stocks are being justified by near-perfect expectations: uninterrupted earnings growth, sustained AI capex expansion, and continued multiple expansion despite elevated rates and slowing macro conditions.

That combination leaves very little room for disappointment. None of this guarantees an immediate crash. Markets can remain overextended longer than expected, especially during periods of technological enthusiasm and liquidity-driven momentum. But history suggests these types of extremes tend to appear late in cycles, not early.

The key issue isn’t simply that valuations are expensive. It’s that market breadth, positioning, and sentiment are all increasingly disconnected from the underlying participation beneath the indexes. That’s usually when risk becomes hardest to see — and most dangerous to ignore.

 

Consumers Say They’re Worried, But They Keep Spending

The latest U.S. retail sales report continues to tell a very different story than consumer sentiment surveys. According to the latest Census Bureau retail sales data, overall retail and food service sales remained resilient, with strength in online retail, restaurants, electronics, and discretionary categories. Even after adjusting for slowing momentum from March’s surge, spending activity continues to hold up far better than many expected. Compared to last year, sales climbed 4.9% and even if we back out the gasoline stations where sales climbed 20.9%, sales were still up 3.7%. If we exclude another volatile category in motor vehicle & parts dealers it was up 4.9%.

This divergence matters. Consumers say they feel pessimistic and sentiment surveys confirm it. The University of Michigan consumer sentiment index recently fell to record lows of 48.2 as households reacted to inflation and higher gas prices. It’s important to point out this survey has been around for close to 75 years.

Ultimately, I believe behavior is more important than survey as that is what drives the economy. Behavior still shows people are traveling, eating out, and shopping online. Employment and wage growth continue to support consumption and until the labor market weakens materially, I believe that will remain the case.

Part of the disconnect is psychological. Consumers are reacting to inflation, geopolitical uncertainty, and higher living costs. But at the same time, household balance sheets, labor markets, and asset prices have remained supportive enough to keep consumption moving. As long as spending continues, the broader economy remains on firmer footing than sentiment surveys alone would imply.

 

Financial Planning: How are your Rental Properties Performing?

Rental properties should be reviewed over time just like an investment portfolio, yet many owners focus on a few attractive details rather than critically evaluating the full picture. Looking only at the rent coming in or calculating “net cash flow” using just the mortgage, property taxes, and insurance can create a very different impression than what is actually happening financially. Maintenance, repairs, vacancies, turnover costs, property management, capital improvements, and recurring “one-time expenses” can significantly reduce actual returns over time. That $1,000 per month of cash flow may sound attractive, but it becomes far less impressive if the property has $1 million of equity that could potentially be invested elsewhere. While many real estate investors benefited from rapid appreciation between 2019 and 2022, property values in many areas have recently remained stagnant, causing overall returns to slow considerably. After fully accounting for the true cost of ownership and the opportunity cost of the equity invested, many rental properties have likely underperformed the stock market in recent years despite continuing to generate rental income.

 

Companies Discussed: The Walt Disney Company (DIS), Whirlpool Corporation (WHR),  Shake Shack Inc. (SHAK) & Ford Motor Company (F)

May 8th, 2026 | Bitcoin had a nice April, will it continue? Will Gas Prices Come Back Down? April Jobs Report Changes Everything, When Permanent Life Insurance Isn’t Permanent & More

Bitcoin had a nice April, will it continue

The cryptocurrency gained 12.7% last month, marking its best performance since April 2025. Interestingly, according to CryptoQuant, the 30-day change in outright Bitcoin purchases remained negative throughout April. That suggests the rally wasn’t driven by strong spot demand.

 

Instead, much of the momentum came from something called perpetual futures. Until recently, I wasn’t very familiar with this product, but at its core, it’s another tool that increases risk. Unlike traditional options, these derivative contracts have no expiration date and are designed to let traders speculate on the price movements of an underlying asset.

Perpetual futures have grown rapidly in popularity within the crypto space, largely because they allow for significantly higher leverage—sometimes as much as 100x. That kind of leverage can amplify gains, but it also increases the risk of sharp reversals.

 

Historically, when there’s a divergence between the spot market and the futures market like this, price gains tend not to last once leveraged positions begin to unwind. Where crypto goes from here is anyone’s guess, but piling more leverage onto an already risky asset doesn’t seem like a good idea to me.

 

When Will We See Gas Prices Come Back Down?

No one can predict exactly when gas prices will decline, but many are aware the current prices are being driven higher by the situation with Iran. At this point, the bombing appears to have ended, but much of the country remains heavily damaged. Estimates suggest it could cost Iran nearly $300 billion to rebuild what has been destroyed.

 

The situation has shifted to one in which Iran is slowly being weakened economically because little to no oil is being exported from the country, resulting in a major loss of revenue. Reports estimate these losses at roughly $200 million per day — approximately $6 billion per month or $12 billion over two months.

 

Inflation in Iran is currently estimated to be above 60% and continues to rise as economic conditions worsen. Based on these developments, I still believe we could begin to see oil prices decline sometime around the end of June. If that happens, prices may fall at a fairly rapid pace, and by the end of July consumers could see more normal prices at the gas pump.

 

Lower energy costs would likely help improve overall economic conditions, potentially putting the economy back on track and supporting GDP growth by the end of the year.

 

The April jobs report just threw cold water on the “imminent Fed cuts” narrative.

 

The U.S. economy added 115,000 jobs in April, well above expectations of 55,000, while unemployment held steady at 4.3%. Given little growth in the labor force, only modest job creation is needed to keep the rate steady. Wage growth also remained relatively firm at 3.6% on an annual basis. In short: the labor market is slowing from the breakneck pace of the post-COVID boom, but it is not breaking.

 

That matters because the Federal Reserve has a dual mandate: keep inflation under control & maintain maximum employment.

 

Right now, the jobs side of the equation is giving the Fed room to stay patient. A few months ago, markets were pricing in aggressive rate cuts based on fears that the labor market was deteriorating. This report makes that much harder to justify. Hiring remains positive & layoffs are still relatively contained. Sectors that were strong in the month were healthcare, up 37k jobs; transportation & warehousing, up 30k jobs; and retail trade was up 22k jobs. Areas of weakness were information, down 13k jobs; and federal government, down another 9k jobs.

 

The bigger issue for the Fed now is inflation. Energy prices remain elevated, tariffs are feeding through supply chains, and policymakers are increasingly worried that inflation could stay sticky longer than expected. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee acknowledged on Friday that inflation has been “going the wrong way lately.”

As long as the labor market remains stable, it appears the Fed has little urgency to cut rates.

 

The key takeaway: This wasn’t a “Goldilocks” report for dovish investors hoping for rapid cuts. It was a reminder that the economy is still strong enough for the Fed to prioritize inflation over stimulus. And until unemployment starts rising meaningfully or inflation decelerates, the Fed may have a hard time justifying rate cuts.

 

Financial Planning: When Permanent Life Insurance isn’t Permanent

Cash value life insurance policies should be reviewed regularly because the long-term performance of the policy often changes significantly over time. In many policies, the internal cost of insurance increases every year as the insured ages because the probability of death rises with age. In addition, policies also have other internal expenses such as administrative fees, rider costs, premium loads, and investment management expenses. While policies are commonly illustrated using attractive hypothetical growth rates, those returns can be misleading because they are shown before many of these internal deductions are applied. As the insured gets older and the insurance costs rise, the total internal charges can eventually exceed the policy’s earnings, causing the net growth rate of the cash value to become very low or even negative. When this happens, the policy may begin consuming its own cash value to stay in force. If the cash value becomes depleted, the policy can lapse unless substantially higher premiums are paid later in life. Reviewing these policies proactively is important so there is time to determine whether additional funding is needed, whether benefits should be adjusted, or whether surrendering the policy and accessing any remaining cash value may be the better option before the policy becomes unsustainable.

 

Companies Discussed: GE HealthCare Technologies Inc. (GEHC), JetBlue Airways Corporation (JBLU), The Clorox Company (CLX) & Corning Incorporated (GLW)

 

May 1st, 2026 | Regulators Concerned About Private Credit, Prediction Markets in IRAs Soon? Costco vs Gas Rewards, Sports Team Bubble, IRMAA Costs & More

More regulators are concerned about private credit 

The bad news just keeps coming for the private credit industry. If you’re not sure what private credit is, it is mostly middle market business loans extended by asset managers. People often don’t realize that these asset managers don’t have the same strict supervision that banks have on their loans. Investors may be starting to realize the risk because in the first quarter of 2026, private credit investors requested $20 billion from some of the private credit funds. Unfortunately, they only got a little bit over 50% of what they requested or about $11 billion. This could lead to higher redemption requests above $20 billion in the second quarter as more investors become disenchanted with private loan funds. The Securities Exchange Commission over the past few months has opened several enforcement investigations of large private credit managers. The Treasury department is also requesting information from private fund managers and insurance firms to understand their businesses more. The Securities Exchange Commission is the primary regulator for the private credit industry, but the private funds don’t regularly disclose holdings and don’t reveal much about private credit on the forms that are used by the SEC. It is quite the dilemma for these private credit funds, and I do believe it will continue to get worse because I am confident that the SEC and the Treasury department will find areas that could really hurt the individual investor due to the lack of disclosures. 

 

Could prediction markets be available in your IRA soon?  

Bitwise, Roundhill, and GraniteShares have filed applications with the SEC to launch exchange-traded funds tied to event contracts. If approved, these products could potentially be held in self-directed IRAs. The initial proposals appear relatively narrow in scope, focusing on outcomes like which party wins the White House in 2028 and which party controls the House and Senate after this year’s midterm elections. While these types of products can sound appealing—and successful bets could generate strong returns—they also carry a clear risk: if you’re wrong, you lose your entire investment. 

One of the main concerns is how complex and speculative these instruments are, especially in the context of retirement accounts. Event contracts are fundamentally different from traditional investments like stocks or bonds, and their all-or-nothing nature makes them more like betting rather than than long-term investing. Are we going to soon allow withdrawals from retirement assets in Vegas so people can blay blackjack? The odds may be better there than on some of these “event contracts.” 

There are also broader legal and regulatory questions still being debated. Some states argue that certain event contracts—particularly those tied to sports outcomes—should be classified as sports gambling, which would place them under state jurisdiction rather than the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Tribal groups have also raised concerns, arguing that such products could infringe on their sovereign rights to regulate gambling on tribal lands. 

At the moment, sports-related event contract ETFs are not part of these filings, but that could evolve depending on how the legal landscape develops. If courts ultimately allow these types of products and current applications move forward, it’s possible that similar filings tied to sports outcomes could follow. 

Regardless of how regulation unfolds, it’s important to understand the nature of these products. While they may be packaged as ETFs, their structure and risk profile differ significantly from traditional investments. Anyone considering them should be clear on one point: this is not investing in the conventional sense—it’s a high-risk, all-or-nothing proposition that is really just gambling. 

 

Who offers a better reward program? The big gas stations or Costco? 

When I pull into a Shell gas station, I always see a pitch on the screen about getting up to $0.30 back per gallon. Other stations like Chevron run similar promos, which got me wondering: how many people actually sign up—and are these deals better than Costco’s credit card with 4% cashback on gas? 

Right off the bat, gas station rewards programs feel overly complicated. Once you dig in, you’ll find caps, conditions, and purchase limits that make it tough to consistently get the maximum benefit. In the best-case scenario, you might get around $0.35 off per gallon. If gas is $6 per gallon, that works out to roughly a 5.8% discount. Not bad—but actually hitting that number regularly is another story. 

Costco’s credit card, on the other hand, offers a straightforward 5% cashback at Costco gas stations and 4% cashback at other gas stations (up to $7,000 per year). At $6 per gallon, that’s about $0.24 back per gallon; at $5 per gallon, it’s $0.20. To hit the annual cap, you’d need to buy around 22.4 gallons per week at $6 per gallon, or about 26.9 gallons per week at $5. 

If you’re filling up at a Costco station, the math can tilt even more in your favor. Gas there is often $0.10–$0.30 cheaper per gallon to begin with. Pair that with 5% cashback, and your effective savings climb even further: about $0.25 per gallon at $5 gas, or $0.30 at $6. 

So, when you’re standing at the pump at Shell or Chevron and see an offer for a flashy rewards program, it’s worth pausing. The headline numbers can look appealing, but the real-world value often depends on how much you drive and how closely you follow the program’s rules. For many people, a simple, consistent cashback card—especially one tied to already lower fuel prices—may end up being the better, less stressful option. 

 

Is there a bubble in sports teams? 

We’ve spent plenty of time talking about stretched valuations in stocks, the frenzy in crypto, and the rise of prediction markets—but sports teams may deserve a spot in that conversation too. Valuations across major leagues are climbing at a remarkable pace. 

The NFL is leading the charge, with the average team now valued at $7.65 billion, up from roughly $1 billion in 2010. NBA franchises tell a similar story: the average team is worth $5.52 billion, an 18% jump from just last year. Go back 15 years, and the average NBA team was valued around $369 million—an increase of 1,396%. By comparison, the S&P 500’s roughly 425% return over that same period looks modest. 

Major League Baseball is seeing it too, with the San Diego Padres reportedly finalizing a record sale at $3.9 billion. As prices climb, fewer buyers can afford entry into the top leagues, pushing capital into smaller or emerging sports that may carry more risk. 

Rick Horrow, CEO of Horrow Sports Ventures, highlighted this trend: “Major League Cricket was at $5 million. Now the value’s at $30 million and going higher. Major League Pickleball two years ago was at $5 million. Now the value is at $15 million or higher.”  

Women’s sports are also experiencing rapid growth. The National Women’s Soccer League recently awarded an expansion franchise in Columbus, Ohio for $205 million—a $40 million increase over the fee paid by Arthur Blank (The Falcon’s owner) for Atlanta’s team in November. That deal itself was a sharp jump from the $110 million paid by Denver in January of last year. For perspective, expansion fees were around $2 million as recently as 2022. 

The key question is whether these valuations are supported by underlying fundamentals. While interest is rising—about 1.2 million people watched the NWSL final, up 22% year over year—it still trails far behind the audiences of major leagues. Game 7 of the NBA Finals drew 16.4 million viewers, the World Series drew 25.9 million, and the Super Bowl surpassed 127 million. 

Media rights are central to this dynamic. The NFL signed an 11-year, $111 billion deal in 2021 and is already eyeing further increases. The NBA followed with its own 11-year, $77 billion agreement starting in 2025. If these massive contracts continue to absorb the bulk of media spending, smaller leagues may struggle to sustain their current growth trajectories. 

Most people will never be in a position to buy a sports franchise, but the broader trend is still worth watching and I believe is just yet another example of excessive valuations in today’s markets.  

 

Financial Planning: Understanding the Relative Cost of IRMAA 

IRMAA (Income-Related Monthly Adjustment Amount) is best understood not as a flat cost, but as an additional marginal tax rate layered on top of federal and state income taxes. When your income exceeds certain thresholds, your Medicare Part B and Part D premiums increase, and because the adjustment applies for the entire year once you cross the threshold, even by $1, it creates a “tax cliff.” For example, in 2026 the first IRMAA tier for married couples begins at $218,000 of income. At that point, Part B premiums increase from $202.90 to $284.10 and Part D increases $14.50, resulting in an additional annual cost of $2,296.80. Since this tier spans $56,000 of income (from $218,000 to $274,000), that cost translates to roughly a 4.1% marginal “tax” on income within that range, but only if you fully utilize the entire bracket. If you only exceed the threshold by a small amount, you still incur the full $2,296.80 cost, which means the effective marginal rate on those extra dollars can be extremely high. When layered on top of a 22% federal bracket and 9.3% California tax rate, the true marginal rate is about 35.4% if the bracket is filled, but can be significantly higher if it is not. This framing is critical when evaluating strategies like Roth conversions or large withdrawals, because it highlights that the decision isn’t just about stated tax brackets, it’s about the all-in marginal rate including IRMAA. In practice, this means it is often beneficial to either stay below an IRMAA threshold or intentionally “fill up” the bracket once crossed, ensuring the additional premium cost is spread across the full income range rather than concentrated on just a few dollars. 

 

Companies Discussed: Tractor Supply Company (TSCO), Intel Corporation (INTC) & The Procter & Gamble Company (PG)

April 24th, 2026 | Should the Fed still use the PCE as its inflation guide? The consumer remains strong, New Apple CEO stock gains coming? Is Your Annuity Safe? & More

Should the Fed still use the PCE as its inflation guide?

I’ve talked a lot about the shelter index being misleading when it comes to inflation, especially when looking at the CPI, but the PCE has its flaws as well. The Federal Reserve has a 2% inflation target and uses monetary policy, which includes adjusting the Fed Funds rate, to tackle its dual mandate of maximum employment and stable prices. A big problem I see with the PCE is that healthcare now accounts for roughly 16% to 17% of index. This comes as an aging population led healthcare spending to be the single largest contributor to consumer spending in 2025. It surpassed housing and utilities in early 2023 as the fastest growing category in the PCE and by Q3 of 2025, it contributed nearly a full percentage point to overall economic expansion and accounted for nearly half of all spending growth. While it’s important to keep an eye on healthcare inflation, the Fed’s tools won’t be able to have a major impact on the sector like let’s say the housing sector. So, let’s say inflation stays around 3%, but a large reason for that is healthcare inflation. If the Fed hikes rates, it will have little impact on inflation and in fact it could have a huge negative consequence on other areas of the economy and push us into a recession. A big reason I remain worried about healthcare inflation is labor costs. It doesn’t appear we have enough workers to meet the demand for these jobs. On the positive side, the sector has provided stability and growth when looking at payroll data. In 2025, it added 686,000 jobs, which was more than all the gains in nonfarm payrolls. The question is though, can this continue without substantial wage inflation considering by 2030, we will have more people over the age of 65 than we do that are under18. I’m not sure how exactly we can rein in healthcare inflation, but I don’t believe monetary policy would provide a meaningful solution.

 

Even with all the noise, the consumer remains strong

March retail sales showed a nice increase of 4.0% compared to last year and while gas stations were a large contributor growing 18.1% due to higher gas prices, excluding them from the report still would have resulted in a good increase of 2.9%. The only areas that saw declines in the report were motor vehicle and parts dealers, which were down 2.1%, and furniture and home furnishing stores, which were down 0.8%. Areas of strength included nonstore retailers, which were up 10.1%, electronics and appliance stores, which were up 5.2%, and clothing and clothing accessories stories, which were up 7.2%. Food services and drinking places saw growth slow, but there was still a positive increase of 2.4%. It’s not just the retail sales report that showed strength, Bank of America pointed out debit and credit card spending climbed 4.3% in March, the most in more than three years. While a 16.5% jump in spending at gas stations was a large reason for the increase, there was still “healthy growth” of 3.6% excluding gas. We also heard from Wells Fargo CEO, Charlie Scharf, in an interview with Bloomberg Television and he said the U.S. economy remains “extremely strong” and that loan demand is solid, consumer delinquencies are well controlled, and businesses entered this period in strong financial shape. He also said consumer spending continues to grow between 5% and 7% year-over-year. Even with all the noise, the consumer is what drives the US economy, and it appears people remain resilient in their spending, which is a major reason why I believe the economy remains healthy.

 

Can the new Apple CEO keep the stock gains coming?

With the stock trading at a forward price/earnings ratio of around 32 times, I’ve got to say it’s going to be a very difficult task. Keep in mind over the last 50 years the average forward P/E ratio for the S&P 500 has been between around 15 to 19 times, nowhere near 32. I’m also reminded of a similar situation where a prominent company with such great stock success was taken over by a new CEO and the 16-year return was only 27% including dividends. That company I’m referring to is General Electric when Jack Welch retired and the new CEO Jeffrey Immelt who was handpicked by Jack Welch took over. Things could be different this time when the new CEO of Apple takes over on September 1^st but again given the current valuation it will be difficult. John Ternus is a mechanical engineer and was head of the hardware division. An engineering degree now represents the highest percentage of degrees among Fortune 500 CEOs, exceeding the number of CEOs with an MBA. I do have some question marks around the choice though as there have not been that many new successful products that have come out of Apple. We’ve had the AirPods and the Apple Watch, but they’ve had some major failures with the Vision Pro headset and are trying to build a self-driving car that they lost billions of dollars on. Mr. Ternus, who is 50 years old, is well liked and is said to have a friendly demeanor along with the engineering confidence, but will he have the magic that Tim Cook had finding ways to squeeze more value out of supply chain? Mr. Cook was also a great political negotiator working with President Barack Obama to President Trump and even made deals with China’s president that has kept the company going. Mr. Ternus does have has some big shoes to fill and a large mountain to climb. I just don’t believe Apple will see returns anywhere near the past returns they saw under Cook when he took over in 2011 and the stock grew by roughly 20 times.

 

Your annuity may not be as safe as you think!

Many people that are sold annuities are told by the broker that they are 100% safe and to be frank they would probably say almost anything to collect their big 7% or 8% commission. But the Treasury department has concerns and is talking to state insurance regulators about the large amount of private loans that insurance companies are using in their portfolios. Back in 2024 even the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, which is also known as the NAIC and is the organizing body for regulators for every state in the US, had stated ratings that insurers had on private credit and investments were consistently overinflated. They have since pulled the report from the website. Large redemption requests from individual investors that want to pull their money out of many private loan funds are starting to show up in other areas like pension funds and insurance companies. The insurance industry holds about $6 trillion in invested assets and roughly $1 trillion or about 17% is now in private credit investments. The insurance industry uses what is known as private letter ratings and can also assign a risk score to the investment. In a study that examined 109 private letter ratings that NAIC officials received in 2023, in 106 of those cases the private rating was higher than the NAIC. To make matters worse, 17 of the cases gave an investment grade private letter rating to assets that the NAIC considered junk or below investment grade. It is especially important to look out for the smaller firms that use smaller rating agencies like Eagan – Jones as opposed to your bigger rating agencies. The smaller firms tend to rate things much higher than the NAIC, sometimes as much as three notches higher, which really disguises the risk of what the annuity you hold is invested in. I’ve said for years that we will someday see an insurance company file for bankruptcy and those investors who invested blindly into annuities because of a salesperson’s recommendation will probably be disappointed to see that they lost all their earnings and perhaps even some of the principal. I unfortunately think it’s too late for some of these insurance companies that have invested into risky assets to turn the situation around quickly. 

 

Financial Planning: Traditional or Roth

Choosing between traditional and Roth contributions comes down to one key question: will you be able to withdraw or convert that money at a lower tax rate than your rate today? Traditional contributions work best if the answer is yes, since you get a tax break now and pay less later, while Roth contributions are better if your future tax rate will be the same or higher. Many people enter a lower tax bracket starting at retirement and lasting until required minimum distributions (RMDs) begin at age 75, but this low-tax window is limited. There’s only so much pre-tax money you can withdraw or convert each year before moving into a higher bracket. For example, while working someone may be in the 22% bracket and will drop to the 12% bracket in retirement, giving them some room to access that tax-deferred money at a lower rate. However, the threshold between the 12% and 22% brackets is about $100k of taxable income for joint filers, and other income sources like Social Security and pensions will take up some of that room. If those sources result in taxable income of $50k, then only another $50k can be withdrawn or converted from retirement accounts before being pushed from the 12% bracket back up to the 22% bracket.  If there is $1 million in pre-tax retirement accounts growing at 10%/year, that annual appreciation of $100k is much more than can be converted meaning the account balances would continue to grow. When RMDs begin, the taxable distributions would push income into the 22% bracket or higher and potentially trigger IRMAA. Situations like this are common when retirement account balances are large, and Roth contributions should be heavily considered while working unless the taxpayer is in the highest brackets (32% or above).

 

Companies Discussed: Abbott Laboratories (ABT), PepsiCo, Inc. (PEP) & Avis Budget Group, Inc. (CAR)

April 17th, 2026 | Watching Sports Has Become a Nightmare, Mentioning AI to Increase Stock Prices, Meta Becoming the Digital Ad King, Beware of Income Taxes When Gifting & More

Has watching your favorite sports become a nightmare?

It used to be easy to watch a football game as you generally had maybe two different networks it would be on and it was easy to find. Well, now the promise of streaming, reducing costs and making it easier for people to watch the shows and sports they want when they want has really missed the mark. The list can go on and on of where to watch the football game or sports you want to watch. Maybe the game will be on ESPN, Paramount+, TNT, NBC’s Peacock, CBS or maybe you’ll have to go to Amazon prime or the YouTube channel. It can be very frustrating trying to find the game you want and then you find out you don’t have the right subscription, and you have to pay extra to sign up for it. Well, maybe the justice department is coming to your rescue. Last week it was reported that the justice department is investigating whether the NFL is engaging in anti-competitive tactics that harm consumers. The investigation involves whether having many outlets for sports viewing is costing consumers far more and the NFL is taking advantage of its behemoth size and demand. There is no doubt that sports are getting out of control and just recently the NBA signed a record payday for their media rights. This has opened the door for many other sports, including the NFL, which apparently because of the change in ownership of CBS they may have to negotiate a new contract with the NFL. No doubt in my mind it will be a far higher contract than before. I’m not sure when the last straw will break the camel’s back, but it seems to be getting close as advertisers are starting to back away from the large amount that networks are asking for advertising during the games. It is possible that sports could eventually go to a cost per game because even subscription rates are getting so high that people are not keeping them long-term.

 

To increase your stock price, just mention AI

I’m of course being facetious, but in many cases, it appears that way. This past week, Allbirds, which was a popular shoe company just a few years ago, announced it was pivoting from shoes to artificial intelligence and the stock at one point spiked by more than 700%. A large reason for the craziness is the market cap of the company was tiny at just about $21 million as of Tuesday’s close. When companies are this small there is more room for manipulation and wild swings as fewer capital inflows are needed to drive the stock higher. What is even crazier about this stock is that just a few years ago it was a hot company valued above $4 billion and that was because of excitement around its shoes. The company introduced its debut shoe in 2016 and went public in 2021. As I said they are now making the switch to AI as they closed all their U.S. full-priced stores in February and will be focusing on AI compute infrastructure. Allbirds will be called NewBird AI and in a recent statement they said, “The Company will initially seek to acquire high-performance, low-latency AI compute hardware and provide access under long-term lease arrangements, meeting customer demand that spot markets and hyperscalers are unable to reliably service.” This is just crazy to me, and you must ask what qualifications this company has to make such a drastic shift. I know I will not be investing in this stock!

 

It looks like Meta will become the digital ad king

Meta has been very patient growing its ad sales by establishing substantial user habits with their products like Reels, the microblogging site Threads, and even WhatsApp. All have been very slow to introduce advertisements to their users, but that patience has paid off as worldwide ad growth for Meta increased around 22.1% in 2025 and it’s estimated it will increase another 24.1% in 2026. Because of how large Meta is, it was expected that growth would slow, but that has not happened. Their growth is far higher than Google’s growth, which is projected to be around 11.9%, about the same as last year. The ad revenue numbers are staggering with Meta expected to reach $243.46 billion, about $4 billion more than Google’s $239.54 billion. That growth has not been cheap for Meta as the company uses AI to enhance performance and capital spending is now estimated to be around $135 billion this year. I was also surprised to learn that Google’s share of the US search ad market is expected to only be 48.5%. This would be the first time it’s fallen below 50% in over a decade. There is so much competition out there from AI companies, like OpenAI, and other social media companies, like TikTok, that the ad market is continually changing. When companies compete, consumers generally win, but I’m not sure about investors as the cost of spending on technology has become a very heavy weight for many of these big tech companies. 

 

Financial Planning: Beware of Income Taxes when Gifting

When parents give assets to their children, the income tax impact depends on what’s being gifted. Cash is usually the easiest and most tax-friendly option because there’s no built-in gain. There is no direct income tax to the giver or receiver, but if parents gift things like appreciated stock or real estate, the child receives the original cost basis as well. This means they will owe capital gains tax on all the appreciation when they sell it. In contrast, if the child inherits those same assets after the parents pass away, the basis typically steps up to current market value, wiping out that taxable gain. Because of this, it’s often smarter to gift cash or assets with little appreciation and hold onto highly appreciated assets to pass on at death.

 

Companies Discussed: Levi Strauss & Co. (LEVI), American Airlines Group Inc. (AAL), HP Inc. (HPQ) & Caterpillar Inc. (CAT)

April 10th, 2026 | Smart Glasses vs Smartphones, Too Late to Buy the Dip, Inflation Spike from Iran War, Backdoor Roth IRA Rules & More

Could smart glasses replace the smart phone as the number one consumer device?

If you’re like me, you probably remember the failure of Google Glass, which ended in 2015. Google may have exited the space early considering in 2025 global shipments of smart glasses hit 8.7 million units, which quadrupled 2024’s level. Meta currently holds 85% of the market but realize that Apple, Alphabet/ Google, and Samsung are expected to launch AI equipped eyewear soon. I do wonder if this will hurt or help Apple since people may be buying more smart glasses and less high-end iPhones? There are concerns about privacy and data collection. Currently Meta is facing a lawsuit in the US that is seeking class action status. Seems like Meta can’t get out of the news or the courtroom, but they do state that what the glasses collect stays on the user’s device unless they choose to share it with the company. The smart glasses can see what you see and hear what you hear. You can have a conversation with the glasses the same as if you’re talking to a person. Which means you may look like a crazy person standing there talking to yourself if people don’t realize you have smart glasses on. Companies that would benefit from an increase in manufacturing of smart glasses, excluding the big companies I already mentioned, would include companies such as EssilorLuxottica, which is the owner of Ray-Ban and Meta’s manufacturing partner, Qualcomm, which provides the central processor or the brains of the glasses, and Global Foundries. which takes care of the display technology. It appears this time; smart glasses may become as common as a smart phone in the next few years.

 

Is the market too expensive to buy the dip this time?

With the increasing cost of oil and the turmoil in Iran the markets did see a correction, which is a drop of 10% or more from the peak. People have become so accustomed to just buying the dips without knowing the valuations of what they’re buying, and many will probably do the same thing this time. Unfortunately, dip buying does not always work and given the current valuations, investors could be in for a bad surprise. Even with the recent pull back, the forward price/earnings ratio for the S&P 500 sits at 20 and is still 20% higher than the 20-year average. So even with the dip you’re not buying companies on sale at these levels. Earnings can be adjusted and moved around with accounting rules, which means you’re probably paying more than you believe if you don’t understand accounting. Another indicator to look at is the forward price to free cash flow. This indicator takes out all the accounting craziness of how much some tech companies are spending on capital expenditures for artificial intelligence. Often, I find these two measures converge once the accounting catches up to the heavy capex spending and understanding both earnings and free cash flow is an important balance. The index currently has a forward price to free cash flow of 27.4 and that is nearly 40% above the 20-year average. Smart investors really should stop and think. They should realize they’re paying a lot more for the S&P 500 than they thought. Free cash flow is not an accounting measure, and companies are not required to compute it for you. It’s not that hard to calculate though as you start with cash from operations and then deduct all the capital expenditures. This is where the devil is in the details because this is where you will see how overvalued many tech companies are because of the billions of dollars they’re spending. The big risk here is the return on investment will likely not come very quickly and maybe not at all. This doesn’t mean you shouldn’t invest in stocks as you can still find good quality equities that are generating very good cash flow and that you’re not overpaying for the earnings or the free cash flow. Personally, those are the types of businesses I’m looking for when investing for myself and my clients.

 

Consumer prices spike in March due to Iran war

While it was in line with expectations, the headline CPI rose 3.3% compared to last year. This was the highest annual rate since April 2024, and it was substantially higher than February’s reading of 2.4%. The obvious reason for the increase was the change in oil prices. Energy showed an increase of 12.5%, largely due to a spike of 18.9% in gasoline prices. Month over month gasoline prices climbed 21.2%, which was the largest monthly increase since 1967 when the series was first published. Outside of the energy spike, prices did not look problematic considering core CPI, which excludes food and energy, saw an increase of 2.6% on an annual basis. This was relatively in line with recent months and was 0.1% below the forecast. While the Fed may be able to look through these inflation numbers, if energy remains elevated the concern is it will start to impact core CPI as well. Companies will need to start raising prices to offset their higher expenses due to energy costs. For example, airline fares, which rose 14.9% over the past 12 months would see further pressure. Deutsche Bank estimates that if jet fuel prices stay near current levels for a full year, airlines would have to increase ticket prices by about 17% to offset those cost pressures. Transportation would also be problematic with companies like Amazon, UPS, and FedEx needing to pay more to move goods around the economy. We have already seen the introduction of fuel and logistics surcharges and those will likely climb further if problems persist. On a positive note, the shelter index rose just 3.0% on an annual basis, which was tied for its lowest level since August 2021. As I have mentioned before, I anticipate shelter inflation will continue to decline as the year progresses. Overall, the main takeaway is if this Iran war can be contained and energy prices start to decline, which I think they will, inflation should not be a problem in 2026.  

 

Financial Planning: Reporting a Backdoor Roth IRA

Normally when income is above $236k for joint filers or $150k for single filers, the ability to make Roth IRA contributions is phased out.  A backdoor Roth IRA is a strategy that allows high-income taxpayers to fund Roth IRAs, but it needs to be done correctly.  It is a two-step process that involves making a traditional IRA contribution and then converting that contribution into a Roth IRA.  This can only be done if the account holder does not have any other pre-tax IRAs.  When the initial contribution is made to the traditional IRA, it needs to be reported as a non-deductible contribution.  When the funds are converted, a 1099-r is generated, and as long as the initial contribution was reported correctly, the conversion is not taxable.  The end result is a Roth IRA that can grow tax-free.  While this can be a benefit, it is crucial that everything is reported correctly to prevent filing errors, overcontributions, and amended tax returns.

 

Companies Discussed: ServiceNow, Inc. (NOW), NIKE, Inc. (NKE), RH (RH) & Invesco Ltd. (IVZ)

April 3rd, 2026 | Oil Prices, SpaceX IPO, Jobs Report: What It Means for the Economy, 2026 Tax Payments & More

How much could inflation increase because of surging oil prices?

It is hard to know exactly how much the increase will be, but we do know it will be increasing because since the Iran war started February 28th, a barrel of oil has increased from around $70 a barrel to around $100 a barrel depending on the day. Economists estimate that the March CPI inflation number could be around 3.4% and may hit 4% in April. If the conflict continues through summer and into the fall, we could see inflation hit 5%. While this is a possibility, fortunately, it does not appear that will happen. One would have to go back 20 years to see this type of rapid increase in gas prices. The Fed has been trying for five years to get inflation down to 2% with no success, and it does not appear that it will happen this year, which means interest rate rates will probably remain around the current level for the remainder of this year. This will be tough on the economy because mortgage rates won’t be coming down as we expected, and people may not be doing that remodel on their home because home equity lines will still be high. Some may just say I want to get this done and just go ahead and accept the higher interest rate, but I believe most will choose to continue deferring the project. The good news is, I don’t believe this will last much past May or June because the President knows this would be very tough on the economy and the midterm elections are approaching quickly. So, currently we’re still saying this is a short-term problem and any pullback in good quality businesses that don’t have high valuations is a good buying opportunity.

 

You may finally be able to invest in SpaceX!

Bloomberg and CNBC’s David Faber reported that SpaceX has confidentially filed for an IPO with the Securities and Exchange Commission, also known as the SEC. It’s estimated the company could see a listing around June and that it is seeking a valuation of $1.75 trillion, which would lead to a record public offering. Don’t forget that SpaceX merged with Musk’s X AI, which also owns X and used to be Twitter, back in February. At that time the combined entity was valued at $1.25 trillion. Following a SpaceX IPO, Musk will become the first person to sit atop two separate trillion-dollar public companies. This IPO would also likely help increase Musk’s net worth, which is estimated to be close to $840 billion. Most of Musk’s net worth comes from his estimated 43%stake in SpaceX and 13% ownership of Tesla. I would have to assume this IPO would be well received given all the excitement around space, AI, and Elon Musk. This company is not just built around hype given its contracts with NASA, the Air Force, and Space Force. It also conducted 165 orbital flights over the course of 2025 and operates the Starlink satellite internet service, which runs on a constellation of around 10,000 satellites in lower-earth orbit. With that said, my guess is the stock would push higher in the public markets to lofty levels that would make it dangerous as a long-term investment. There’s also speculation that we could see IPOs for Anthropic and OpenAI this year. I do believe these mega IPOs could cause problems for stocks like Tesla, Nvidia, and Microsoft as there is only so much available capital and investors may sell those positions to a get a piece of these new exciting stocks. This should be an exciting year for the IPO market. 

 

Maybe the labor market isn’t as bad as people think

Coming off a weak February report where payrolls declined by 133k, March showed a nice increase of 178k jobs. Part of the volatility was due to a strike at Kaiser that led to job losses in February, but then a surge of 76k jobs in the health care space in March. Health care continues to be the driving force for the labor market, but construction was strong in the month as the sector added 26k jobs and transportation and warehousing saw a nice increase of 21k jobs. The government sector continues to weigh negatively on the headline number as federal government employment declined by 18k jobs in March. Since reaching a peak in October 2024, federal government employment is down 11.8% or 355k jobs. Financial activities also saw a decline of 15k jobs in the month and the other major sectors like manufacturing, information, and leisure and hospitality saw little change in the month. While I wouldn’t say the labor market is booming, considering the unemployment rate is sitting at 4.3%, which was down from 4.4% last month, I’d say maintaining the labor market at these levels would be extremely healthy for our economy. I remain optimistic that both the labor market and economy will remain in a good spot for the rest of 2026.

 

Financial Planning: Setting Up 2026 Tax Payments

With Tax Day approaching, it’s important to think not just about your 2025 tax return, but also about planning for 2026. In the U.S., taxes must be paid throughout the year either through withholding or quarterly estimated payments, and while your 2025 balance is due April 15, the first estimated tax payment for 2026 is also due on that same day. This matters especially for income like interest, dividends, capital gains, business income, and rental income, which typically don’t have automatic withholding and therefore require estimated payments. If you don’t pay enough during the year, the IRS will charge both interest and underpayment penalties on the shortfall. To avoid interest and penalties, you generally need to pay at least 90% of your current-year tax, 100% of last year’s tax, or 110% of last year’s tax if your AGI is over $150,000.  Since projecting the current year tax can be unreliable when income is variable, a simple way to stay on track is to use last year’s tax as a baseline since it’s known and easy, and if you fall behind, you can catch up by increasing withholdings from wages, pensions, or retirement withdrawals since withholdings are treated as if they were made evenly throughout the year, regardless of timing. 

 

Companies Discussed: Snowflake Inc. (SNOW), Snap Inc. (SNAP), Alcoa Corporation (AA) & Boston Scientific Corporation (BSX)

 

 

March 27th, 2026 | Stagflation and Bank Stocks, Meta and YouTube Court Ruling, Higher Gas Prices and Auto Sales, Crypto and the U.S. Banking System & More

Is the concern of stagflation putting downward pressure on bank stocks?

The term stagflation was first used in 1965 by a British politician. A quick definition for an economy with stagflation is when there is slow economic growth, high unemployment, and high inflation. A scenario like that would put a strain on banks because as people lose their jobs one of the first things they stop paying on are consumer loans like credit cards and personal loans. Banks can also get squeezed because they may have locked in long-term loans at lower rates and because of high inflation, the Federal Reserve could increase short-term interest rates, which would compress margins. The banks also need meet certain liquidity requirements, which could hurt margins even more. On the bright side, this could be a buying opportunity to invest in banks since they are down roughly 9 to 10% since the beginning of the year. The reason I think this could be a good opportunity is manyfold. First off, the high oil prices that are currently causing inflation concerns appear to be a short-term problem and I believe they should start reversing by May or June. Second, employers have slowed down on hiring new people but are reluctant to let employees go because it’s very costly to hire new employees. Third, the economy appears to still be doing well and consumers have already started receiving part of the $50-$60 billion in tax refunds from the Big Beautiful Bill, which should help with consumer spending. This is also the year where agreements from other countries to invest trillions of dollars into our economy should start taking place. In regard to the banks themselves, they’re sitting in a pretty good situation with diversified businesses as your mega banks like JPMorgan and Bank of America have trading houses and global markets that are growing in the low double digits. Some banks expect mid-teens growth in the trading business. Some of the bankers have also said that demand for traditional commercial loans has been improving so far this year. In its most recent data, the Federal Reserve showed commercial industrial loans were up 5% year over a year, which is the largest increase since 2023. As always with investing, you should be looking out at least 2 to 3 years. One other perk is many banks pay a decent dividend around 2% to 2.5% 

 

Meta and YouTube get screwed in court

I was very disappointed to see that a 20-year-old woman, who won in a California court, is set to receive a total of $6 million from Meta and YouTube. Her claim was she was addicted to social media, and it dominated her life for years, which caused mental health issues like anxiety and depression. I’m really getting tired of the legal system in California and the theatrics played by attorneys such as her attorney having a jar of 415 M&M’s saying each M&M represented $1 billion of the near $400 billion in total stockholder equity when looking at Alphabets value. He began to remove one M&M at a time and demonstrated how taking out a few M&Ms did not change the weight of the jar. My feeling is this attorney should go to Hollywood and try to get an acting job. It is disappointing to see how no one wants to take accountability for their actions any longer. They want to blame somebody else and not take responsibility for the fact that she uploaded more than 200 YouTube videos before the age of 10 and had 15 Instagram accounts before she was 15. I do have to ask where were the parents? This could just be the beginning as there are 3000 other similar lawsuits against social media companies that are pending in California courts. I do believe there should be some changes made to the regulatory framework around social media, but this goes too far and is just in my opinion greed from attorneys and people trying to get a free ride. I was glad to see that both companies are appealing the decision, and this will likely continue to move up the court system and may land in the Supreme Court. Meta also lost a case in New Mexico this past week as jurors found that Meta willfully violated the state’s unfair practices. The state’s Attorney General claimed the company failed to properly safeguard its apps from online predators targeting children. It is disappointing to see the number of lawsuits that are going on in our country. Our country was not built on attorneys and lawsuits; it was built on people working hard and taking responsibility for their own actions. I do fear for my grandkids if we continue on this path and wonder what our country will look like in 30 or 40 years. When it comes to investing, I would be very careful in this space, as these cases could set a dangerous precedent for trials to come. There is also a federal trial set to begin this summer in the Northern District of California involving claims by school districts and parents nationwide that apps from Meta, YouTube, TikTok and Snap helped foster detrimental mental health-related harms to young users.

 

Will higher gas prices hurt strong US car sales?
Current US car sales are around 16 million on an annual basis, which is down from 2019 when they were 17 million, but overall, they are still very healthy. The car business has changed from low margin vehicles to more luxury vehicles with higher profit margins and the average price on a new car is now over $50,000. The car buyers themselves have changed with the average new vehicle buyer around 50 years old. This is seven years older than in the year 2000. It’s no surprise, but because of the higher prices for cars, people earning over $150,000 a year account for 42% of the sales. Six years ago, it was just 29%. It was also reported that buyers who have incomes of $75,000 or less are no longer buying new cars because of the affordability. The higher gas prices do not seem to be affecting car sales at this point and according to the manufacturers, they are still saying the buyers remain resilient. However, if gas and oil prices remain at current levels that would then likely put a strain on car sales. Fortunately, at this time, based on many factors, I think by May or June we will start to see the easing of prices at the pump. Also helping US manufacturers is the deductible interest on cars made in the US. There are restrictions on this, but that does also help ease the pain with a little tax deduction. Also, since the President ended the tax credits for electric vehicles, US car manufacturers were able to scrap the losing endeavor of trying to build profitable EVs. With the stock prices for car manufacturers down around 9 to 10%, I believe the investment clouds should be clearing in the next couple of months and investors may have an opportunity to invest in a good US car manufacturer. It’s important to remember that if you step in and buy here, you own a small piece of a large company and don’t worry about the day to day volatility, you should be focusing on where that business will be at least 2-3 years down the road.

 

Should crypto companies be allowed into the United States banking system?

Unfortunately, Jonathan Gould, who is Comptroller of the Currency and is one of the country’s most powerful bank regulators, believes so. He thinks it’s a good idea to let firms like Ripple, Crypto.com and others in this area to become a trust bank. A trust bank is a little bit different than a normal bank because they don’t take deposits or make loans and instead offer other services like safekeeping of various assets. An example of trust banks would be insurance companies and payroll processors. My concern is what the average consumer may think as they could believe that because it’s a trust bank it is automatically insured by the federal government. This is a gray area as some trust banks can have insurance from the federal government, but they do not insure investments like stocks bonds, and cryptocurrencies. The Bank Policy Institute and other banks are against this because it is unclear what these crypto companies would do with bank charters. There is talk that some applicants may want access to the Federal Reserve payment rails, which would allow them to move money between digital currencies and the banking system. My concern is this could jeopardize the strength of our banking system and cause our federal government to be on the hook for some big financial liability in the years to come as some cryptocurrency drops dramatically or fails.

 

Companies Discussed: DICK'S Sporting Goods, Inc. (DKS), Best Buy Co., Inc. (BBY), Signet Jewelers Limited (SIG) & CF Industries Holdings, Inc. (CF)

March 20th, 2026 | Bank Stocks Hit by Private Credit, Youth Sports Boom, Aluminum Prices Surge Beyond Oil, U.S. Oil Inventories Rise, Create a Tax-Free Account for a Child & More

Bank stocks feel the pain from private credit

You may have noticed that the bank stock index is down about 10%, which is more than the S&P 500’s decline of 3% at the beginning of the year. It is estimated that banks made roughly 10% of their total loans to non-depository financial institutions known as NDFIs, which includes private credit companies. It’s also estimated that these types of loans in the past three years have grown from $1.1 trillion to $1.9 trillion. The banking stocks may struggle for a few more months, but the good news is a recent study from the Office of Financial Research found that private funds and BDCs, which are Business Development Corporations, use lines of credit and currently they’ve only used about 50 to 65% of the buying capacity. The tough decision for the banks is do they cut off the line of credit now or do they take on more risk and let those lines of credit increase to 70 or 80%? I feel I hope they stop it now because the risk I think is too great going forward on these private loans. We do hold two banks in our portfolio, which means we may see little to no gain in those stocks in 2026 due to the concerns around private lending. However, we do invest in companies for the long term and understand that difficulties can arise and cause a down year for any company. Long-term I don’t believe this will have a major impact on the financial situation for most of the bigger banks.

 

The big business of youth sports

I remember growing up and wishing for a baseball or maybe a football for Christmas so I could go down the street and play with my friends. Fast forward to today and youth sports are a multibillion-dollar business for companies. The average American family spends $1,000 on sports per child. Whenever there’s an opportunity someone or some business will step in and fill the void, Dick’s Sporting Goods has helped fill this void. Dicks opened back in the 1940s by a gentleman name Richard Stack, who had the nickname, Dick. His grandmother had $300 cash in her cookie jar and that is what Dick used to start a fishing supply shop in Binghamton, New York. There are now more than 700 stores across the country and their newest concept known as Dick’s House of Sport is expected to have around 100 stores by the end of next year. These are mega stores that are 150,000 square feet, which is three times the size of a normal store. In these mega stores you will find batting cages, climbing walls, golf simulators, and even fields to run around to test out your new cleats. Dicks have been doing well considering it saw revenue skyrocket to $14.1 billion last year. This was twice what it was 10 years ago, not a bad feat for any company.

 

It’s not just oil; aluminum prices have been surging!

With the recent war in Iran, the rising price of oil and gasoline has been quite noticeable and has been discussed heavily by various news outlets. One lesser-known impact from the difficulties within the Strait of Hormuz is the price for aluminum has surged. People may not notice it since they don’t necessarily buy aluminum directly, but if the problem persists you could see price increases for your favorite six pack of soda or beer. Outside of packaging, aluminum is also used across electronics, construction, transportation, and solar panels. In 2025, the Middle East accounted for roughly 21% of unwrought aluminum imports, which is the raw, unprocessed metal, and 13% of wrought aluminum imports, which is aluminum that has been mechanically shaped into sheets, rods, or other finished forms. Due to supply concerns, the price of aluminum has now increased to 4-year highs and there are concerns it could push even closer to $4,000 per ton from the current price around $3,400 per ton. Aluminum is the most abundant metal on earth, but production has slowed with locations like Bahrain’s Alba cutting production by 19%, this location is home to the world’s largest smelter. Unlike oil, China could have a huge impact when it comes to producing aluminum. China is already the biggest producer of aluminum, but to try and reduce emissions and prevent overcapacity they keep production constrained. They currently have several idle smelters that could be restarted if they feel aluminum prices are too high. Like we have said with the price of oil, I don’t see this as a long-term problem, but the longer supply is constrained for these input costs, the more problematic it is for inflation.

 

Surprise, US oil inventories actually increased

I know what you’re thinking with the price of gasoline and oil increasing, oil inventories must be declining. Fortunately, that is not the case. If the inventories were decreasing the price of oil and gasoline at the pump would probably be even higher. For the week ending March 13th, crude oil inventories rose by 6.2 million barrels to 449.3 million barrels. This does not include the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). Everyone including the analysts thought for sure there would be a decline and the estimate was for a decline of around 40,000 barrels. Gasoline inventories did fall by 5.4 million barrels to 244.1 million barrels as of March 13th, but that inventory level is still 3% above the five-year average for gasoline inventories. If the inventories remain high, we could see the price of oil and gasoline begin to decline in another couple weeks or so. It will not go back to where it was a month or so ago, but we should hopefully start seeing a decline back to more normal levels soon.

 

Financial Planning: How to Create a Tax-Free Account for a Child

A powerful way to build tax-free wealth for a child is by strategically using the kiddie tax rules with investments that generate qualified dividends and long-term capital gains. Under the kiddie tax, the first $1,350 of investment income is tax-free, and the next $1,350 is taxed at the child’s rate, which for capital gains and qualified dividends is typically also 0%. This means a child can receive up to $2,700 of investment income each year with no federal tax. Income above this level is taxed at the parent’s rate, which may be 15% or 20%. While $2,700 may not seem like much, it can support a surprisingly large portfolio because dividend yields are typically low and capital gains are only recognized when assets are sold. For example, a portfolio with a 2% dividend yield would not generate $2,700 of dividends until it reaches about $135,000. While the account is below that level, capital gain harvesting can be used each year to bring total income up to $2,700, allowing gains to be realized tax-free while increasing the cost basis. Because this involves realizing gains (not losses), there are no wash sale restrictions, and investments can be immediately repurchased. By consistently harvesting gains over time, the child can build a portfolio with minimal tax drag and potentially access those funds later with little to no capital gains tax, especially if they continue the strategy after they are no longer subject to the kiddie tax.

 

Companies Discussed: Super Micro Computer, Inc. (SMCI), SL Green Realty Corp. (SLG), Public Storage (PSA) & The Campbell's Company (CPB)

March 13th, 2026 | Private Credit Woes Continue! Prediction Markets Hitting College Campuses to Find Gamblers, Price of Oil, the IEA Agrees to Historic Oil Release, Gen Z Going Back to the Mall & More

Private credit woes continue!

Investors continue to worry about the private credit market and this week has been filled with troubling news from the sector. According to the Financial Times, Glendon Capital Management said private credit funds run by Blue Owl (OWL) and several of its peers may have understated loss rates in their portfolios, suggesting actual losses could be higher than reported. This has led to concerns around the “true valuation” of these assets. This wouldn’t be surprising given the little clarity that we have for these loans. We also saw JPMorgan Chase take a conservative approach and mark down the value of some loans tied to private credit vehicles. All the negativity has now caused investors to question the long-term viability of this investment, and many are now wanting to redeem their shares. The problem is these companies don’t have to give you all your money back when you ask for it. Blackrock, Morgan Stanley, and Cliffwater all had to curb withdrawals as requests exceeded the pre-existing limit, which normally looks to be around 5%. Looking at Morgan Stanley’s North Haven Private Income fund in particular, redemption requests totaled 10.9% of shares outstanding in Q1 and the fund said it would honor 5% of those requests, which is roughly just 45.8% of each investor’s tender request. This now means those investors have to continue holding the fund until next quarter and can try again at that time to sell additional shares. I also recently learned of a term in the private credit space called Paid in Kind interest, also referred to as PIK. It is essentially an IOU that borrowers give to lenders instead of cash. When this occurs, the borrower’s debt just increases by the interest due rather than the borrower needing to make an interest payment. The crazy thing is that these PIK receipts are still counted as interest income and it counts towards the management fee. An analyst by the name of Ron Kahn, who runs a unit at the Chicago investment bank Lincoln International that does valuations for about a third of all U.S. private credit loans, wondered why private credit companies were showing such few defaults. What he found was lenders were proactively amending loan agreements by allowing PIK interest rather than cash payment so they could avoid default. Lincoln International saw private credit loans with PIK interest rise to 11% at the end of 2025, which was up from 5% in early 2022. There are many concerns in this space right now and I’m sure glad I don’t have any assets in this space!

 

Prediction markets are hitting college campuses to find gamblers
Prediction markets have something FanDuel and DraftKings don’t, access to the 18 to 21-year-olds in college. Gambling is generally limited to adults 21 years or older, however, prediction markets that are run by companies like Polymarket and Kalshi are trades that are regulated as financial derivative contracts by the Commodity Future Trading Commission. This allows anyone 18 years or older to gamble using these prediction markets. Both Kalshi and Polymarket are hitting college campuses across the country and throwing cash around to lure in 18 to 21-year-old students to place bets via the prediction market. They are doing this by using fraternities and even campus clubs to promote their platforms and in some cases, they pay them $10 per each new account they sign up. There was one fraternity who received $30,510 in two weeks which the fraternity used for parties and new furniture. They are also using student influencers as brand representatives to sell other students on the prediction market. These two companies have no shame as they have even used college athletes to influence others to bet on sports with prediction markets.

 

Don’t pay attention to the price of oil on a daily basis
I say that because there’s so much speculation out there and likely the information you receive on the price of oil is useless when you look forward to a few months and maybe even just a few weeks from now. Last week the price of oil surged around 35%, but on Monday after comments from the President that this will not last long in the Middle East, crude oil fell back down to under $85 a barrel. Why is this volatility in the price of oil happening?  Roughly 20% of global oil consumption is exported through the Strait of Hormuz and about 20% liquefied natural gas exports worldwide also pass through the narrow waterway. The United States over the years along with other allies have spent billions of dollars making sure the waterway remains open. At the smallest part it is only 21 miles across and to the northeast there sits, Iran. Officially the waterway is not closed or blocked physically, but there are concerns of going through the strait for fear of being hit by a missile shot from Iran. The other concern is how long this will go on because storage facilities for oil have pretty much reached full capacity and when that happens the producers need to turn off the well in a process known as “shutting in” occurs. When this happens, there can be problems and delays turning the wells back on and some may not regain the original flow. As you can tell, it is not a simple process and it’s not just oil that’s goes through the strait but also liquified natural gas and even large amounts of fertilizer flow through the area as well. I would not recommend making any investment decisions during this time around anything that has to do with oil or even energy for that matter.

 

The International Energy Agency (IEA) agrees to historic oil release

The IEA, which is an organization of 32 member countries primarily with advanced economies in Europe, North America and northeast Asia, agreed to release 400 million barrels of oil from strategic reserves. Currently, IEA members hold more than 1.2 billion barrels of public emergency oil stocks, with a further 600 million barrels of industry stocks held under government obligation. While the strategic release is helpful, it is only a temporary fix considering nearly 20 million barrels passes through the Strait of Hormuz per day in normal times. China also could help with oil prices if it reduced its purchasing or released some of its stockpile. Ahead of the war China was buying oil at an elevated rate and in the first two months of the year, crude imports soared 15.8% compared to a year earlier. It's estimated as of January China had a stockpile of 1.2 billion barrels as well. China has also been continuing to receive oil from Iran and since the war began it's estimated they've received close to 12 million barrels from the country. 

 

Surprise.... Gen Z is going to the mall for in-person shopping!
You may be hearing that younger people don’t go to the mall any longer, but that is not true, it’s just a little bit different than when people went 20 years ago. Gen Z, the generation consisting of 14 to 29-year-olds, shops at the mall but first they check online sources like Instagram and TikTok to see what's in style. According to Nielsen IQ, the global annual retail spending by this generation is expected to be over $12 trillion by 2030. Shoppers between 18 and 24 years old made 62% of their general merchandise purchases in stores last year, but shoppers 25 and older made just 52% of their purchases in person. Some of the reasons given for the in-person preference was that Gen Z does not like to pay the shipping fees along with common sense things like they want to touch the item and see it in person especially if it’s clothing, they want to see how it looks on them. Malls understand this, and many of them have actually set up areas so that the young shoppers can take their selfies in fitting rooms and other areas that are social media friendly. If you’re a salesperson in a retail store and if you’re talking to this generation, you’d better be up to date when it comes to what’s going on in social media. Some salespeople even have a tablet to show shoppers how influencers are styling different items. It is a misconception that this generation is averse to talking to people, but how you talk to them is different. They’d rather get their advice from an influencer or a friend rather than a salesperson.

 

Companies Discussed: The Gap, Inc. (GAP), StubHub Holdings, Inc. (STUB), Delta Air Lines, Inc. (DAL) & Uber Technologies, Inc. (UBER)

March 6th, 2026 | Market Risks You Should Be Aware of, Ivy League Endowments' Dismal Returns, AI Impacting the Labor Market, Tax Hikes & More

Other risks in the market you should be aware of 

 

Since Covid, speculative investments have continued to rise in popularity. We have talked a lot about the risks we see in margin, crypto, private investments, and prediction markets, but now there is new data about the increasing popularity of leveraged funds and options. According to exchange-traded fund manager Direxion, it looks like leveraged and inverse funds, which can be very dangerous investments, saw average daily trading volumes of 1.41 billion in 2025. That’s a gain of more than 130% from 2024 and 250% from 2020, the firm found. For those that aren’t aware of these products, leveraged funds use derivatives to try and boost the return of an asset in up markets, but they also amplify losses in down markets. Inverse funds on the other hand try and produce the opposite performance of the underlying asset. It’s not just these risky tools that have surged though as it is projected that average daily options volume hit 58 million in 2025, which is a roughly 26% increase from 2024 and is more than double the amount seen in 2020. For comparison purposes, stock volume expanded at a yearly pace of 10% between 2020 and 2025, while leveraged funds and options trading saw daily volumes grow at compound annual rates of 29% and 16%, respectively. Part of the reason for the huge increase in the volume for leveraged funds is that the total number of active leveraged funds grew by 50% in 2025, which was the largest annual increase since 2007. Ultimately, there continues to be more and more risk that is finding its way into this market. While it’s great when things are going up, it could create a downturn that is more problematic than many believe is possible. 

 

 

Ivy League Endowments have dismal returns because of private equity

 

 I was concerned when I saw the Ivy League schools, who I thought would be the smartest people in the room, began investing in private equity a few years ago. The results are now in, and the returns are terrible. The best annual return goes to Cornell and for the years 2022 to 2025 they only had an annualized return of 5.7%. They were closely followed by Harvard at 5.5%. The worst performer is an embarrassment as Princeton only had an annualized return of 2.8%. A large reason for the low returns is that the managers of these endowment funds invested heavily in private equity as the category made up 40% or more of the portfolios for schools such as Harvard, Yale and Princeton. The endowment funds have tried to liquidate as much as they can, but the secondary market has been rather weak, and Yale and Harvard were only able to liquidate about $1 billion of their private equity holdings last year. I think we’re in the second or third inning of how bad things will get with private equity and private debt. Unfortunately, many people, including foundations, will have poor performance and probably even some losses. A lesson to all investors, don’t get sucked into a hype investment of any type as eventually the hype disappears and you end up with nothing but dismal returns or losses. 

 

 

Is AI impacting the labor market? 

 

The headlines look concerning as February payrolls showed a loss of 92,000 jobs in the month. This was well below the estimate which was looking for a gain of 50k jobs and January's reading of 126k jobs. January's reading was revised down by 4k, while December saw a major negative revision of 65k jobs and now shows a loss of 17k jobs in the month. Health care employment, which has been such a stable force, showed employment declined by 28k in February. This was largely due to the Kaiser Permanente strike that sidelined 30k workers. The strike has now been resolved, so this should be a big benefit in the March data. Another important factor to remember was the severe weather that likely had an impact on hiring across all sectors in the month. The federal government continued to show declines as payrolls declined by 10k in the month and since reaching a peak in October 2024, federal government employment is down by 330,000, or 11.0 percent. Looking specifically at sectors that could be impacted by AI, information saw a decline of 11k, and the industry has lost an average of 5,000 jobs per month over the prior 12 months. While this looks concerning and I do believe part of this is due to AI, I think a lot of the decline is due to a normalization after rapid hiring post Covid that led to bloated employment and waste at many companies. Another sector that could be impacted by AI/Robots is transportation and warehousing. This sector declined by 11k in February, but a good chunk of the job loss occurred in couriers and messengers, which fell by 17,000. I'm still not seeing robotic delivery trucks out there, so again this could be due to normalization or the weather. With that said, employment in transportation and warehousing has declined by 157,000, or 2.4 percent, since reaching a peak in February 2025. Many of the other major sectors like  

construction, manufacturing, professional and business services, and leisure and hospitality saw little change in the month.  

Overall, there was definitely not much strength in the report. It is important to remember that the employment rate is still healthy at 4.4%, so I'm still not overly concerned about the labor market. With that being said, it is definitely worth watching in the coming months. 

 

 

Financial Planning: Beware of the Tax Hike Above $505k 

 

For married couples with adjusted gross incomes between $505,000 and $606,333, there’s a hidden tax increase caused by the way the state and local tax (SALT) deduction phases out. Below this range, taxpayers can deduct up to $40,400 in state and local taxes. As income rises through this band, that deduction gradually shrinks to $10,000, effectively losing $30,400 of deductions. Put another way, about $100,000 of extra income can increase taxable income by more than $130,000. Households at this level are usually in the 32% federal tax bracket, but because each extra dollar of income also reduces deductions, the real marginal tax rate jumps to roughly 42%. What makes this especially striking is that many people in this range are barely above the 24% bracket, meaning their marginal rate can spike from 24% to 42% over a relatively small income increase. Careful planning ahead can help avoid this sudden tax jump. 

 

Companies Discussed: Planet Fitness(PLNT), Paramount Skydance Corp (PSKY), Old Dominion Freight Line Inc (ODFL), Salesforce (CRM)

February 27th, 2026 | Concerning AI Deals, A Misleading 2025 Trade Deficit, Why Automobile Insurance Is So High, The Goal of Tax Planning & More

These massive AI deals look concerning

The numbers are exciting when companies like Meta or OpenAI announce they'll be purchasing billions of dollars in chips or computing power from companies like Nvidia or AMD, but there always seems to be a catch. Most recently, Meta announced that it entered a multiyear deal with AMD to deploy up to 6 gigawatts of the company’s graphics processing units for artificial intelligence data centers and includes use of AI-optimized central processing units, or CPUs. This deal comes a week after Meta committed to using millions of Nvidia's processors to power its AI expansion. While I have my concerns with all the money Meta is spending, my bigger concern with this new AMD deal is the use of stock warrants. Full details for the deal weren't announced, but we did see the deal includes a performance-based warrant for Meta to acquire 160 million AMD shares, about 10% of the company. The first tranche vests when the first 1GW of Instinct GPUs are shipped. Other tranches vest as Meta, makes purchases to 6GW. Vesting is also tied to stock price thresholds for AMD and technical and commercial milestones for Meta. AMD also struck a similar deal with OpenAI where they received warrants to acquire 160 million shares of AMD and it was tied to deployment and stock price benchmarks. The reason this is concerning is because of the potential dilution and again the circular nature of these deals. Essentially these companies are saying they will spend $30 B buying our products and we will give you $30 B in stock warrants back. Stock warrants give holders the right but not the obligation to buy or sell shares at specific strike price before an expiration date. If they are exercised, it creates new stock, which would dilute current shareholders. Based on what I have seen, the exercise price for these warrants is $0.01. Ultimately, I just don't believe this will end well for all players in this space, and I think there is a lot of money that will be lost by investors. 

 

2025 trade deficit looks deceiving

Some people are saying that the tariffs didn't work because the trade deficit in 2025 only fell to about $901.5 B from just over $903 B in 2024. However, if you break down the numbers quarter by a quarter, it tells a different story. The first three months of the year, there was a $400 billion trade deficit, but each quarter after that it began to decline. In the second quarter, it fell drastically to $180 billion. There wasn't much of a change in the third quarter with a slight drop to $175 billion and then in the fourth quarter there was a drop to $145 billion. We try to explain to people that the US economy at $31.5 trillion is like a big ship in the ocean; it cannot turn quickly. If people would be patient, I think they would see by the end of 2026 there would be further progress and I believe it's possible the trade deficit could see a decline to somewhere around $600-$700 billion based on the fourth quarter of 2025. I know there’s a snafu with the Supreme Court ruling that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which was used in the first quarter last year to implement many of the tariffs, was ruled illegal. But there are other ways to impose tariffs such as section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 or section 301 of the Trade Act that the president used in his first term. Also available is section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962. I don't believe the Supreme Court ruling will lead to an end of tariffs as the Administration will look at these other avenues. One major positive from these tariffs has been the announcements of various trade deals that have resulted in trillions of dollars promised by other countries to build manufacturing and other things in our economy.

 

Why is automobile insurance so high?

Your first thought may be the insurance companies are gouging their customers just to make big profits. First off, insurance companies are generally public companies that have shareholders who would not be investing in their company if it was losing money and not paying dividends. The high cost of premiums is not the insurance companies' fault as in recent years things have really changed. Over the past five years, physical damage costs have increased by 47%. This is because of the higher price of cars and all the extra bells and whistles that add up when there’s damage to a vehicle. Bodily injury claims are up 52% over the last five years because of the vast amount of new personal injury lawyers who have come on the scene and are pushing for higher settlements, even on small fender benders. Around 95% of these cases are settled and do not go to court. Many of your less reputable attorneys know this and hold the insurance companies’ hostage. Either settle up with us now or go to court and spend a lot more money and time. Unfortunately, if you’re a responsible driver that makes your premium payments, you are helping absorb the cost of uninsured and underinsured motorists which is up 72%. I’m not a big person for government regulation, but I do believe governments need to step in and verify that all people on the road have auto insurance and a reasonable amount. There’s a trend starting in Florida, which is tort reform that has reduced litigation, and the top five insurance companies in the state have requested rate reductions of 5.9%. There is something in the auto insurance industry called fender bender litigation and this tort reform would help states like New York, California and other states to prevent insurance companies from having to pay ridiculous settlements for little dings and dents and fake injuries. Wouldn’t it be nice if the state of California passed laws to help consumers to pay less for auto insurance?

 

Financial Planning: What Is the Goal of Tax Planning?

Most people would assume the goal of tax planning is simply to reduce taxes, or even to reduce lifetime taxes, but that should not be the focus.  The true purpose of tax planning is to increase the level of after-tax income by intentionally managing assets and income sources. If the objective were merely to pay less in taxes, the solution would be simple: stop earning money. But earning less would also leave you with fewer resources and less freedom. What people ultimately want is more net income, more access to money, because that provides flexibility, security, and the ability to live life on their terms. Effective tax planning achieves this by building assets and income streams and structuring them in a way that allows you to access them efficiently. This means investing in the right types of assets, placing them in the right types of accounts, adjusting the strategy over time as income and tax laws change, and withdrawing funds at the right time and in the right manner. When you understand that the true purpose of tax planning is to maximize after-tax access to wealth, not merely minimize taxes, you make better decisions that improve your financial life.

 

Companies Discussed: Vulcan Materials Company (VMC), Leidos Holdings, Inc. (LDOS), Packaging Corporation of America (PKG) & Caesars Entertainment, Inc. (CZR)